Study

Increasing syrphid fly diversity and density in sown flower strips within simple vs. complex landscapes

  • Published source details Haenke S., Scheid B., Schaefer M., Tscharntke T. & Thies C. (2009) Increasing syrphid fly diversity and density in sown flower strips within simple vs. complex landscapes. Journal of Applied Ecology, 46, 1106-1114.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Create uncultivated margins around intensive arable or pasture fields

Action Link
Farmland Conservation

Plant nectar flower mixture/wildflower strips

Action Link
Farmland Conservation
  1. Create uncultivated margins around intensive arable or pasture fields

    A replicated, controlled study in summer 2006 in north Germany (Haenke et al. 2009) found that species richness and abundance of hoverflies (Syrphidae) during the wheat peak-ripening stage was higher in naturally developed grass strips (3 m wide, seven sites) than in wheat-wheat boundaries (seven sites) and within the wheat fields adjacent to the margins (seven sites), but lower than in sown flower strips (seven sites each). Hoverfly density and species richness increased with increasing amount of arable land at smaller scales (0.5 and 1 km around site) but not at larger scales (2 and 4 km). This was true for all hoverflies and all aphid-eating hoverfly species. Margins were located along a gradient of different habitat complexities in the surrounding landscape, ranging from 30% to 100% arable land. Hoverflies were captured by sweep netting (one sweep per footstep) along 100 m transects.

  2. Plant nectar flower mixture/wildflower strips

    A replicated, controlled study in June and July 2006 in north Germany (Haenke et al. 2009) found more hoverflies (Syrphidae) and hoverfly species in broad (12-25m wide) and narrow (3-6 m) sown wildflower strips (7 sites each) than in grassy margins (3 m-wide, 7 sites), wheat-wheat boundaries (7 sites) and within wheat fields adjacent to the margins (7 sites). Hoverfly density and species richness (total hoverflies and aphid-eating hoverflies) also increased with increasing amount of arable land around the site at smaller scales (0.5 and 1 km) but not at larger scales (2 and 4 km). Margins were located along a gradient of habitat complexities in the surrounding landscape, ranging from 30% to 100% arable land. Hoverflies were sampled by sweep netting (one sweep per footstep) along 100 m transects.

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 18

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust