Ecol Appl. 2014 Jan;24(1):158-68. doi: 10.1890/13-0585.1.
In tropical regions where forests have been replaced by agriculture, the future of biodiversity is increasingly dependent on the presence of remnant forest patches and on-farm tree cover within agricultural landscapes. While there is growing evidence of the importance of tree cover within agricultural landscapes, most studies have been conducted in a single landscape, making it difficult to ascertain whether the conservation value of different types of tree cover can be generalized across landscapes. To explore whether use of different forms of tree cover by birds is consistent across landscapes, we compared the number of individuals, species richness, and diversity of birds associated with different forms of tree cover in four agricultural landscapes in Central America, using a standardized methodology and sampling effort. In each landscape, we compared bird assemblages in six tree cover types (secondary forests, riparian forests, forest fallows, live fences, pastures with high tree cover, and pastures with low tree cover). We observed a total of 10 723 birds of 283 species, with 83-196 species per landscape. The specific patterns of bird species richness, number of individuals, and diversity associated with tree cover types varied across the four landscapes, but these variables were consistently higher in the forest forms of tree cover (riparian forests, secondary forests, and forest fallows) than in non-forest habitats. In addition, forest forms of tree cover had distinct species composition from non-forest forms in all landscapes. There was also consistency in the use of different types of tree cover by forest birds across the four landscapes, with higher richness and number of individuals of forest birds in forested than non-forested forms of tree cover, and more forest bird species in pastures with high tree cover than in pastures with low tree cover. Our findings indicate that riparian and secondary forests are consistently of higher value for bird conservation (particularly for forest species) than live fences and pastures with tree cover. Consequently, agricultural and land use policies that promote the retention of secondary and riparian forests and increase tree cover within pastures would greatly benefit bird conservation, regardless of the landscape in which they are applied.
在森林已被农业取代的热带地区,生物多样性的未来越来越依赖于残余森林斑块和农业景观中的农田树木覆盖。虽然越来越多的证据表明农业景观中树木覆盖的重要性,但大多数研究都是在单一景观中进行的,因此很难确定不同类型的树木覆盖的保护价值是否可以在景观之间推广。为了探索鸟类对不同形式的树木覆盖的利用是否在景观之间一致,我们比较了中美洲四个农业景观中六种不同类型的树木覆盖(次生林、河岸林、林休闲地、活篱笆、高树覆盖的牧场和低树覆盖的牧场)与鸟类个体数量、物种丰富度和多样性的关系,使用了标准化的方法和采样力度。在每个景观中,我们比较了六种树木覆盖类型(次生林、河岸林、林休闲地、活篱笆、高树覆盖的牧场和低树覆盖的牧场)中的鸟类组合。我们总共观察到了 10723 只鸟类,283 个物种,每个景观的物种数量为 83-196 种。与树木覆盖类型相关的鸟类物种丰富度、个体数量和多样性的具体模式在四个景观中各不相同,但这些变量在森林形式的树木覆盖(河岸林、次生林和林休闲地)中始终高于非森林生境。此外,在所有景观中,森林形式的树木覆盖都有别于非森林形式的树木覆盖。森林鸟类对不同类型的树木覆盖的利用也具有一致性,森林鸟类在森林形式的树木覆盖中的丰富度和个体数量都高于非森林形式的树木覆盖,在高树覆盖的牧场上的森林鸟类物种也多于低树覆盖的牧场上。我们的研究结果表明,与活篱笆和带树覆盖的牧场相比,河岸林和次生林对鸟类保护(特别是对森林物种)具有更高的价值。因此,促进次生林和河岸林的保留以及增加牧场树木覆盖的农业和土地利用政策将极大地有益于鸟类保护,而不论其应用于何种景观。