@phdthesis{Vogel2022,
  author    = {Vogel, Cassandra Ezra},
  title     = {The effects of land-use and agroecological practices on biodiversity and ecosystem services in tropical smallholder farms},
  doi       = {10.25972/OPUS-29066},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-290661},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Biodiversity is in rapid decline worldwide. These declines are more pronounced in areas that are currently biodiversity rich, but economically poor - essentially describing many tropical regions in the Global South where landscapes are dominated by smallholder agriculture. Agriculture is an important driver of biodiversity decline, through habitat destruction and unsustainable practices. Ironically, agriculture itself is dependent on a range of ecosystem services, such as pollination and pest control, provided by biodiversity. Biodiversity on fields and the delivery of ecosystem services to crops is often closely tied to the composition of the surrounding landscape - complex landscapes with a higher proportion of (semi-)natural habitats tend to support a high abundances and biodiversity of pollinators and natural enemies that are beneficial to crop production. However, past landscape scale studies have focused primarily on industrialized agricultural landscapes in the Global North, and context dependent differences between regions and agricultural systems are understudied. Smallholder agriculture supports 2 billion people worldwide and contributes to over half the world's food supply. Yet smallholders, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, are underrepresented in research investigating the consequences of landscape change and agricultural practices. Where research in smallholder agriculture is conducted, the focus is often on commodity crops, such as cacao, and less on crops that are directly consumed by smallholder households, though the loss of services to these crops could potentially impact the most vulnerable farmers the hardest. Agroecology - a holistic and nature-based approach to agriculture, provides an alternative to unsustainable input-intensive agriculture. Agroecology has been found to benefit smallholders through improved agronomical and food-security outcomes. Co-benefits of agroecological practices with biodiversity and ecosystem services are assumed, but not often empirically tested. In addition, the local and landscape effects on biodiversity and ecosystem services are more commonly studied in isolation, but their potentially interactive effects are so far little explored. Our study region in northern Malawi exemplifies many challenges experienced by smallholder farmers throughout sub-Saharan Africa and more generally in the Global South. Malawi is located in a global biodiversity hotspot, but biodiversity is threatened by rapid habitat loss and a push for input-intensive agriculture by government and other stakeholders. In contrast, agroecology has been effectively promoted and implemented in the study region. We investigated how land-use differences and the agroecological practices affects biodiversity and ecosystem services of multiple taxa in a maize-bean intercropping system (Chapter 2), and pollination of pumpkin (Chapter 3) and pigeon pea (Chapter 4). Additionally, the effects of local and landscape scale shrub- to farmland habitat conversion was investigated on butterfly communities, as well as the potential for agroecology to mitigate these effects (Chapter 5).},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{VogelChungaSunetal.2021,
  author    = {Vogel, Cassandra and Chunga, Timothy L. and Sun, Xiaoxuan and Poveda, Katja and Steffan-Dewenter, Ingolf},
  title     = {Higher bee abundance, but not pest abundance, in landscapes with more agriculture on a late-flowering legume crop in tropical smallholder farms},
  series = {PeerJ},
  volume    = {9},
  journal   = {PeerJ},
  doi       = {10.7717/peerj.10732},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-231491},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Background Landscape composition is known to affect both beneficial insect and pest communities on crop fields. Landscape composition therefore can impact ecosystem (dis)services provided by insects to crops. Though landscape effects on ecosystem service providers have been studied in large-scale agriculture in temperate regions, there is a lack of representation of tropical smallholder agriculture within this field of study, especially in sub-Sahara Africa. Legume crops can provide important food security and soil improvement benefits to vulnerable agriculturalists. However, legumes are dependent on pollinating insects, particularly bees (Hymenoptera: Apiformes) for production and are vulnerable to pests. We selected 10 pigeon pea (Fabaceae: Cajunus cajan (L.)) fields in Malawi with varying proportions of semi-natural habitat and agricultural area within a 1 km radius to study: (1) how the proportion of semi-natural habitat and agricultural area affects the abundance and richness of bees and abundance of florivorous blister beetles (Coleoptera: Melloidae), (2) if the proportion of flowers damaged and fruit set difference between open and bagged flowers are correlated with the proportion of semi-natural habitat or agricultural area and (3) if pigeon pea fruit set difference between open and bagged flowers in these landscapes was constrained by pest damage or improved by bee visitation. Methods We performed three, ten-minute, 15 m, transects per field to assess blister beetle abundance and bee abundance and richness. Bees were captured and identified to (morpho)species. We assessed the proportion of flowers damaged by beetles during the flowering period. We performed a pollinator and pest exclusion experiment on 15 plants per field to assess whether fruit set was pollinator limited or constrained by pests. Results In our study, bee abundance was higher in areas with proportionally more agricultural area surrounding the fields. This effect was mostly driven by an increase in honeybees. Bee richness and beetle abundances were not affected by landscape characteristics, nor was flower damage or fruit set difference between bagged and open flowers. We did not observe a positive effect of bee density or richness, nor a negative effect of florivory, on fruit set difference. Discussion In our study area, pigeon pea flowers relatively late—well into the dry season. This could explain why we observe higher densities of bees in areas dominated by agriculture rather than in areas with more semi-natural habitat where resources for bees during this time of the year are scarce. Therefore, late flowering legumes may be an important food resource for bees during a period of scarcity in the seasonal tropics. The differences in patterns between our study and those conducted in temperate regions highlight the need for landscape-scale studies in areas outside the temperate region.},
  language  = {en}
}