4.6 Article

Increased energy maize production reduces farmland bird diversity

期刊

GLOBAL CHANGE BIOLOGY BIOENERGY
卷 6, 期 3, 页码 265-274

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/gcbb.12146

关键词

maize; land-use scenarios; sustainable development; indicator species; farmland birds; species-habitat modelling; biodiversity; climate change; biogas; alternative energies

资金

  1. German Science Foundation (DFG) [GO 1096/2-1]
  2. Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN)
  3. Federal Ministry for Education and Research [03V0217 (prev. 16V0217)]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Producing energy crops as an alternative to fossil fuels in order to reduce CO2 emissions will lead to large-scale changes in agricultural landscapes. Here, we quantify the potential impact of an increase in maize fields on the diversity of farmland birds by means of high resolution (25x25m) land-use scenarios. We generated scenarios in which the area of maize production in Germany increases from presently 2.6 to 2.9, 3.6 and 4.3millionha, corresponding to the energy crop production targets of the German Renewable Energy Act for the years 2020, 2035 and 2050. To test the mitigating potential of conservation measures, each scenario was generated in a standard version and a landscape protection version, with the latter excluding valuable farmland areas from being converted into maize fields. Nine species of farmland birds belonging to the governmental indicator scheme for sustainable land-use in Germany were modelled for the six nation-wide scenarios. The models predicted that only the Northern Lapwing and the Little Owl might profit from extended maize production. Despite this, the total number of breeding pairs of the indicator species was predicted to decline by about 0.4 million breeding pairs in the most intensive scenario. Protection of valuable farmland did not mitigate these negative effects in the models. Our findings suggest that increased production of energy crops conflicts with conservation of biological diversity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据