» Articles » PMID: 34688268

European Agroforestry Has No Unequivocal Effect on Biodiversity: a Time-cumulative Meta-analysis

Overview
Journal BMC Ecol Evol
Publisher Biomed Central
Date 2021 Oct 24
PMID 34688268
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Agroforestry is a production system combining trees with crops or livestock. It has the potential to increase biodiversity in relation to single-use systems, such as pastures or cropland, by providing a higher habitat heterogeneity. In a literature review and subsequent meta-analysis, we investigated the relationship between biodiversity and agroforestry and critically appraised the underlying evidence of the results.

Results: Overall, there was no benefit of agroforestry to biodiversity. A time-cumulative meta-analysis demonstrated the robustness of this result between 1991 and 2019. In a more nuanced view silvopastoral systems were not more diverse in relation to forests, pastures or abandoned silvopastures. However, silvoarable systems increased biodiversity compared to cropland by 60%. A subgroup analysis showed that bird and arthropod diversity increased in agroforestry systems, while bats, plants and fungi did not.

Conclusion: Agroforestry increases biodiversity only in silvoarable systems in relation to cropland. But even this result is of small magnitude, and single-study effect sizes were heterogeneous with sometimes opposing conclusions. The heterogeneity suggests the importance of other, usually unmeasured variables, such as landscape parameters or land-use history, influencing biodiversity in agroforestry systems.

Citing Articles

Light distribution at the fruit tree-crop interface and consequences for yield in sloping upland agroforestry.

Pham H, La N, Oborn I, Bergkvist G, Mulia R, Dahlin S Heliyon. 2024; 10(19):e38655.

PMID: 39430501 PMC: 11489345. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e38655.


Using land-use history and multiple baselines to determine bird responses to cocoa agroforestry.

Martin D, Raveloaritiana E Conserv Biol. 2022; 36(4):e13920.

PMID: 35435287 PMC: 9544578. DOI: 10.1111/cobi.13920.


Research on agroforestry systems and biodiversity conservation: what can we conclude so far and what should we improve?.

Boinot S, Barkaoui K, Meziere D, Lauri P, Sarthou J, Alignier A BMC Ecol Evol. 2022; 22(1):24.

PMID: 35240979 PMC: 8896113. DOI: 10.1186/s12862-022-01977-z.

References
1.
. Checklists work to improve science. Nature. 2019; 556(7701):273-274. DOI: 10.1038/d41586-018-04590-7. View

2.
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman D . Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009; 6(7):e1000097. PMC: 2707599. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097. View

3.
Doncaster C, Spake R . Correction for bias in meta-analysis of little-replicated studies. Methods Ecol Evol. 2018; 9(3):634-644. PMC: 5993351. DOI: 10.1111/2041-210X.12927. View

4.
Koricheva J, Kulinskaya E . Temporal Instability of Evidence Base: A Threat to Policy Making?. Trends Ecol Evol. 2019; 34(10):895-902. DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2019.05.006. View

5.
Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C . Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ. 1997; 315(7109):629-34. PMC: 2127453. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629. View