IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i22p15068-d972432.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of Water Retention Practices in Forests on the Biodiversity of Ground Beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae)

Author

Listed:
  • Emilia Ludwiczak

    (Department of Entomology, Phytopathology and Molecular Diagnostics, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, 10-719 Olsztyn, Poland)

  • Mariusz Nietupski

    (Department of Entomology, Phytopathology and Molecular Diagnostics, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, 10-719 Olsztyn, Poland)

  • Agnieszka Kosewska

    (Department of Entomology, Phytopathology and Molecular Diagnostics, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, 10-719 Olsztyn, Poland)

Abstract

This study was carried out in an area covered by the “Increasing retention capacity and prevention of floods and droughts in forest ecosystems in lowland areas” land drainage development project. The aim was to evaluate the impact of transformations in a habitat following the project’s implementation on the structure of assemblages of epigeic ground beetles, in the context of the overall trend of decreasing biodiversity. The entomological observations were commenced before launching the planned hydro-technical development at the study area and were repeated 11 years later. During the two years of observations (2008 and 2019), 3311 specimens of ground beetles, representing 89 species, were captured. Water regulation affected the composition of ground beetle assemblages. After the small water retention program had been completed, a quantitative and qualitative decrease in ground beetles was observed. The groundwork for the development caused some disturbances in the habitat, leading to, amongst other things, higher soil moisture, which was conducive to the establishment of ground beetle assemblages other than those observed before the water retention project. After the hydro-technical objects had been constructed, the share of large and small zoophages with higher moisture preferences (hygrophilous species) increased, while the contribution of xerophilous hemizoophages decreased.

Suggested Citation

  • Emilia Ludwiczak & Mariusz Nietupski & Agnieszka Kosewska, 2022. "Impact of Water Retention Practices in Forests on the Biodiversity of Ground Beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-17, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:22:p:15068-:d:972432
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/22/15068/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/22/15068/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ine Vandecasteele & Inés Marí i Rivero & Claudia Baranzelli & William Becker & Ilda Dreoni & Carlo Lavalle & Okke Batelaan, 2018. "The Water Retention Index: Using land use planning to manage water resources in Europe," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(2), pages 122-131, March.
    2. Jennifer M. Sunday, 2020. "The pace of biodiversity change in a warming climate," Nature, Nature, vol. 580(7804), pages 460-461, April.
    3. Spangenberg, Joachim H., 2007. "Biodiversity pressure and the driving forces behind," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 146-158, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hongju Da & Degang Xu & Jufeng Li & Zhihe Tang & Jiaxin Li & Chen Wang & Hui Luan & Fang Zhang & Yong Zeng, 2023. "Influencing Factors of Carbon Emission from Typical Refining Units: Identification, Analysis, and Mitigation Potential," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-17, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zacharoula Kyriazi & Leonor Ribeiro de Almeida & Agnès Marhadour & Christina Kelly & Wesley Flannery & Arantza Murillas-Maza & Régis Kalaydjian & Desiree Farrell & Liam M. Carr & Daniel Norton & Steph, 2023. "Conceptualising Marine Biodiversity Mainstreaming as an Enabler of Regional Sustainable Blue Growth: The Case of the European Atlantic Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-17, December.
    2. Maxim, Laura & Spangenberg, Joachim H. & O'Connor, Martin, 2009. "An analysis of risks for biodiversity under the DPSIR framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 12-23, November.
    3. Chung Nguyen Hoang, 2021. "The Effects of Economic Integration on CO2 Emission: A View from Institutions in Emerging Economies," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 11(2), pages 374-383.
    4. Haberl, Helmut & Gaube, Veronika & Díaz-Delgado, Ricardo & Krauze, Kinga & Neuner, Angelika & Peterseil, Johannes & Plutzar, Christoph & Singh, Simron J. & Vadineanu, Angheluta, 2009. "Towards an integrated model of socioeconomic biodiversity drivers, pressures and impacts. A feasibility study based on three European long-term socio-ecological research platforms," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1797-1812, April.
    5. Mark Anthony Camilleri, 2020. "European environment policy for the circular economy: Implications for business and industry stakeholders," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(6), pages 1804-1812, November.
    6. Andreas E. Fousteris & Eleni A. Didaskalou & Markos-Marios H. Tsogas & Dimitrios A. Georgakellos, 2018. "The Environmental Strategy of Businesses as an Option under Recession in Greece," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-19, November.
    7. Maxim, Laura & Spangenberg, Joachim H., 2009. "Driving forces of chemical risks for the European biodiversity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 43-54, November.
    8. Thomas Wiedmann & John Barrett, 2010. "A Review of the Ecological Footprint Indicator—Perceptions and Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(6), pages 1-49, June.
    9. Rodríguez-Labajos, Beatriz & Binimelis, Rosa & Monterroso, Iliana, 2009. "Multi-level driving forces of biological invasions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 63-75, November.
    10. Nguyen Phuc Canh & Su Dinh Thanh & Christophe Schinckus & Jo Bensemann & Lai Trung Thanh, 2019. "Global Emissions: A New Contribution from the Shadow Economy," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 9(3), pages 320-337.
    11. Spangenberg, J.H. & Douguet, J.-M. & Settele, J. & Heong, K.L., 2015. "Escaping the lock-in of continuous insecticide spraying in rice: Developing an integrated ecological and socio-political DPSIR analysis," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 295(C), pages 188-195.
    12. Omann, Ines & Stocker, Andrea & Jäger, Jill, 2009. "Climate change as a threat to biodiversity: An application of the DPSIR approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 24-31, November.
    13. Canh Phuc Nguyen & Nhi Ai Nguyen & Christophe Schinckus & Thanh Dinh Su, 2018. "The Ambivalent Role of Institutions in the CO2 Emissions: The Case of Emerging Countries," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 8(5), pages 7-17.
    14. Mounir Ben Mbarek & Nadia Ben Ali & Rochdi Feki, 2014. "Causality relationship between CO 2 emissions, GDP and energy intensity in Tunisia," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 16(6), pages 1253-1262, December.
    15. Hou, Wenjuan & Zhang, Xueliang & Wu, Maowei & Yuxin Feng, & Yang, Linsheng, 2022. "Integrating stability and complementarity to assess the accommodable generation potential of multiscale solar and wind resources: A case study in a resource-based area in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(PB).
    16. Brei, Michael & Pérez-Barahona, Agustín & Strobl, Eric, 2016. "Environmental pollution and biodiversity: Light pollution and sea turtles in the Caribbean," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 95-116.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:22:p:15068-:d:972432. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.