Landscape Ecology 18: 223225, 2003.

2003 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

223
The implication of past and present landscape patterns for biodiversity
research: introduction and overview
Isabelle Poudevigne
1
& Jacques Baudry
2
1
Landscape Systems Research Group, Facult e des Sciences, Universit e de Rouen, 76821 Mont Saint Aignan, (E-
mail: Isabelle.Poudevigne@univ-rouen.fr)
2
INRA SAD Armorique, CS 84215, 65 Rue de Saint Brieuc, 35042 Rennes C edex, France
Since its development in the early 1980s, the aim of
landscape ecology is to understand both the effects
of spatial patterns on ecological processes and the
development of those spatial patterns. In Europe, hu-
man activities have had a pronounced long term role
in shaping this heterogeneity so that Europe is now
the most modied of any continent (Godron and For-
man 1983). Therefore, research on how humans have
shaped landscapes is of utmost importance (Burel and
Baudry 1999). If changes following the World War II
are a frequent topic, long term changes are also impor-
tant (Berlung 1991) as they have, in interaction with
the physical environment, selected the regional species
pool. Indeed, present co-existence of species in the
landscape is thought to be the end product of a series
of long term responses between species requirements
and environmental gradients of both natural and hu-
man origin (Huston 1994). Despite potential adverse
effects, many long-term human disturbance regimes
have promoted biodiversity. In western Europe, tra-
ditional low intensity agriculture has often promoted
high levels of diversity, or provided relict habitat for
rare or threatened taxa (Green 1990). By analysing
ecological patterns and functioning at large spatial and
temporal scale, landscape ecology offers some of the
most successful examples of the uptake of ecology in
policy or management (Ormerod et al. 2002). If re-
gional approaches are increasing (Surez-Seoane et al.
2002), landscape studies of a lesser extent (few km
2
)
are still dominant.
One of the most important current areas in which the
study of landscape patterns, past and present, offers a
major path of research is in understanding the sustain-
able management of biodiversity. This was the theme
of a meeting of landscape ecologists held in Rouen,
France in October 2001. Our aim with this array of
selected papers from the meeting is to share our out-
look on current European trends and approaches to
landscape ecology.
Patterns of human activities in landscapes, what
heritage?
Cubizolle et al. (2003) give evidence that human ac-
tivities, as early as the Iron age in France, had an
important inuence on plant biodiversity whose reec-
tion we see today. Their analysis of mires in France,
based on radiocarbon dates and pollen analysis, reveal
that some activities such as the building of small dams,
forest clearing, and cattle grazing have favoured peat
inception. Ernoult et al. (2003) provide an analysis
of changes in agricultural landscapes during the last
decades. They do so by proposing two measures of
landscape organisation, i.e., how patterns deviate from
randomness. The rst measure deals with the spatial
relationships among the different categories of land
use intensity that form the landscape mosaic. The sec-
ond measure assess the relationships between land use
patches and the physical environment. They demon-
strate that changes in agriculture have led to more
stochastic patterns.
Assessing the risks to biodiversity
This historical background explains why today many
representative or threatened species are dispersed
through environments, such as farmland, that are in
economic use (Robinson and Sutherland 2002). Un-
fortunately, recent changes in agricultural manage-
ment and intensication have altered subtle equilibria
between biota and patterns of use in both farmed
and natural landscapes even on areas with strong
constraints to development (Poudevigne et al. 2002).
224
Habitat alteration (including habitat loss, degradation
and fragmentation) is now among the major risks
of ecosystem degradation by these human activities
(Whiteld et al. 2002). Many of these empirical stud-
ies seek the variable that at different scales, from
patch to landscapes drive species distribution. Land-
scape ecologists have proposed many measures to
assess the relationship between spatial heterogeneity
and biodiversity in landscapes (Cullinan and Thomas
1992; McGarigal and Marks 1995), but few effec-
tively relate pattern to process (Levin 1992). Classical
metrics remain dissatisfying as correlation between
species diversity indices and heterogeneity indices are
not always meaningful. A step further is to identify
the thresholds to which ecosystems can be modied
without being irreversibly altered (Suter 1993).
Jeanneret et al. (2003) compare the distribution of
carabids, spiders and butteries in two Swiss agri-
cultural landscapes. They conclude that landscape
metrics are of little use, while information on habitat
mosaic provide information. It also appears that the
variables explaining most of the variance in species
distribution are different in the two landscapes, as
are the reactions of the different groups of species.
This work calls for comparative studies along land-
scape gradients. Milln de la Pea et al. (2003) found
little correlation between the landscape descriptors
they investigated, such as the amount of cropland,
and the richness and species composition of small
mammal communities on agricultural land in western
France. They nevertheless found effects on mammal
demography: intensication of agriculture had re-
duced the density of rare and habitat specialist species
while favouring habitat-generalists. Mennechez et al.
(2003), investigating on the effects of habitat loss and
fragmentation on buttery population functioning with
classical measures, argue that spatial heterogeneity in
their case study affects dispersal more than demog-
raphy. With this organism-centred point of view, the
authors then propose the denition of a new parame-
ter, the minimal patch area needed to establish a local
population in highly fragmented landscapes.
Looking beyond France, in Africa, Fritz et al.
(2003) observe that the extension of agriculture along
rivers in the Mid Zambezi valley, Zimbabwe, impacts
on most wild species. But they also dene a thresh-
old value of eld size above which there seems to
be an acceleration of the decrease in wildlife density
and diversity. Denition of such thresholds may be
an important asset in determining priorities for the
management of degraded ecosystems.
Modelling and eld testing the risks
Rather than synthesising the landscape system with
metrics, some scientists have chosen to model these
systems, in an attempt to capture manageable aspects
of their complexity that are often beyond eld exper-
imentation and assessment (Jaberg and Guisan 2002).
Baudry et al. (2003) model dairy farm landscapes with
a measure which both considers the landscape and
the species. Connectivity is described as a measure of
landscape structure and species characteristics based
on individual area requirements and dispersal distance.
Results reveal that for one farming system, landscape
connectivity remains the same over years (in a 7-year
model experiment), while it is signicantly differ-
ent between two intensive and traditionally extensive
farming systems). This work also suggests the im-
portance of considering the temporal dimensions of
spatial heterogeneity metrics. Similarly, Cousins et al.
(2003) present a model which explores the effects of
grazing frequency and intensity on plant persistence,
and the relative effects of grassland size and pattern.
These models aim at exploring the effects of further
fragmentation and habitat loss on the persistence of
species or plant functional groups. This generation of
models aim to be valuable tools for managers, both to
dene threshold risk values, and do simulations of the
potential impacts of landscape planning decisions.
Most landscape ecology research is based on a cor-
relative approach, mainly because of the scale and
complexity of the landscape systems. Large scale and
in vivo experimentation, because it is either unaf-
fordable or technically unfeasible, is rarely, with few
exceptions (Bradley and Ormerod 2002; Donlan et al.
2002), a possible way of testing hypotheses proposed
by the correlative studies that often characterize land-
scape ecology. Equally, landscape ecologists have so
far rarely moved beyond the realms of pattern among
species and communities. Yet, in that eld, analy-
sis of spatial genetic structuring can yield interesting
possibilities. Arnaud et al. (2003), working the land
snail Helix aspersa, test landscape-based geographical
distance to an isolation by distance model. This analy-
sis allowed them to test the hypothesis that migration
arises along functional pathways such as roadside
verges, hedges or irrigation canal embankments.
225
Acknowledgements
The guest editors would like to thank David Mladenoff
for his support, Steve Ormerod for his enthusiastic
comments, the new born IALE France association
for their participation and the Agence de lEau Seine
Normandie for nancing this special issue.
References
Arnaud, J.F. 2003. Metapopulation genetic structure and migration
pathways in the land snail Helix aspersa: inuence of landscape
heterogeneity. Landscape Ecology 18: 333346.
Baudry, J., Burel, F., Aviron, S., Martin, M., Ouin, A., Pain, G.
and Thenail, C. 2003. Temporal variability of connectivity in
agricultural landscapes: do farming activities help? Landscape
Ecology 18: 303314.
Berlung, B.E. (Ed.) 1991. The cultural landscape during 6000
years in southern Sweden. Ecological Bulletin. Munskgaard
International Booksellers and Publishers. Copenhagen
Bradley, D.C. and Ormerod, S.J. 2002. Long-term effects of catch-
ment liming on invertebrates in upland streams. Freshwater
Biology 47(1): 161171.
Burel, F. and Baudry, J. 1999. Ecologie du paysage: concepts, mth-
odes et applications, Lavoisier. Paris 359 p. Spanish edition.
2002. Ecologia del paisaje, Mundi Prensa. Barcelona. English
edition: in press. Landscape Ecology, Oxford & IBH Publishing
Co., Oxford, UK.
Cousins, S.A.O., Lavorel, S. and Davies, I. 2003. Modelling the
effects of landscape pattern and grazing regimes on the persis-
tence of plant species with high conservation value in grasslands
in south-eastern Sweden. Landscape Ecology 18: 315332.
Cubizolle H., Tourman A., Argant J. Porteret J., Oberlin C. and
Serieyssol K. 2003. Origins of European biodiversity: palaeo-
geographic signication of peat inception during the Holocene in
the granitic eastern Massif Central (France). Landscape Ecology
18: 227238.
Cullinan, V.I. and Thomas, J.M. 1992. A comparison of quantitative
methods for examining landscape pattern and scale. Landscape
Ecology 7: 211227.
Donlan, C., Tershy, J., Bernie R. and Croll, D.A. 2002. Islands
and introduced herbivores: conservation action as ecosystem
experimentation. Journal of Applied Ecology 39(2): 235246.
Godron, M. and Forman, R.T.T. 1983. Landscape modication
and changing ecological characteristics. In: H.A.G. Mooney,
M. (Eds), Disturbance and ecosystems. Springer verlag, Berlin,
Germany, pp. 1227.
Green, B.H. 1990. Agricultural intensication and the loss of habi-
tat, species and amenity in British grasslands: a review of histori-
cal change and assessment of future prospects. Grass Forage Sci.
45: 365372.
Ernoult, A., Bureau, F. and Poudevigne, I. 2003. Patterns of organi-
sation in changing landscapes: implications for the management
of biodiversity. Landscape Ecology 18: 239251.
Fritz, H., Sad, S., Renaud P-C., Mutake, S., Coid, C. and Monicat,
F. 2003. The effects of agricultural elds and human settle-
ments on the use of rivers by wildlife in the mid-Zambezi valley,
Zimbabwe. Landscape Ecology 18: 293302.
Huston, M.A. 1994. The coexistence of species on changing land-
scapes. Biological Diversity 3: 6474.
Jaberg, C. and Guisan, A. 2002. Modelling the distribution of
bats in relation to landscape structure in a temperate mountain
environment. Journal of Applied Ecology 38(6): 11691181.
Jeanneret, Ph., Schpbach, B., Pffner, L. and Walter, Th. 2003.
Arthropod reaction to landscape and habitat features in agricul-
tural landscapes. Landscape Ecology 18: 253263.
Levin, S.A. 1992. The problem of pattern and scale in ecology.
Ecology 73: 19431967.
McGarigal, K. and Marks, B.J. 1995. FRAGSTATS: Spatial pattern
analysis program for quantifying landscape structure. Portland:
USDA Forest Service General Technical Report PNW-GTR-351,
Pacic Northwest Research Station, Portland, Oregon, USA.
Milln de la Pea, N., Butet, A., Delettre, Y., Paillat, G., Morant,
P., Le Du, L. and Burel, F. 2003. Response of the small mammal
community to changes in western French agricultural landscapes.
Landscape Ecology 18: 265278.
Mennechez, G., Schtickzelle, N. and Baguette, M. 2003. Metapop-
ulation dynamics of the bog fritillary buttery: comparison of
demographic parameters and dispersal between a continuous and
a highly fragmented landscape. Landscape Ecology 18: 279291.
Ormerod, S.J., Barlow, N.D., Marshall, E.J.P. and Kerby, G. 2002.
The uptake of applied ecology. Journal of Applied Ecology 39:
17.
Poudevigne, I., Chabrerie, O., Jackson, A., Van der Berg, S.,
Bourcier, J.C. and Alard, D. 2002. Patterns of landscape dy-
namics and their consequences on ecological communities. In
Application of Geographic Information Systems and Remote
Sensing in River Studies. (Edited by R. S. E. W. Leuven, Poude-
vigne, I. and Teeuw, R.M.), pp. 183200. Backhuys Publishers,
Leiden, The Netherlands.
Robinson, R.A. and Sutherland, W.J. 2002. Post-war changes in
arable farming and biodiversity in Great Britain. Journal of
Applied Ecology 39(1): 157176.
Surez-Seoane, S., Osborne, P.E. and Alonso, J.C. 2002. Large-
scale habitat selection by agricultural steppe birds in Spain:
identifying species-habitat responses using generalised additive
models. Journal of Applied Ecology 39(5): 755771.
Suter, G.W. 1993. Ecological risk assessment. Lewis Publishers,
Chelsea, Michigan, USA.
Whiteld, D.P., McLeod, D.R.A., Fielding, A.H., Broad, R.A.,
Evans, R.J. and Haworth, P.F. 2002. The effects of forestry on
golden eagles on the island of Mull, western Scotland. Journal of
Applied Ecology 38(6): 12081220.