This page has only limited features, please log in for full access.
There is an increasing interest in assessing livestock breed contributions to ecosystem services (ES) and including this knowledge in decision making. However, this task has been limited due to the complexity of the multidimensional relationship between livestock diversity and ecosystem services. In this work, we elaborate on the livestock breed characteristics central to developing a comprehensive approach to livestock breed inclusion in the ecosystem services framework. Thus, we explore the multidimensional nature of livestock breeds, i.e., as eco-cultural entities, biodiversity components, and drivers of livestock system heterogeneity and functioning. First, anthropogenic and natural factors have acted jointly to develop breeds as eco-cultural entities. This fact represents an opportunity to move toward farming system sustainability by Nature-Based Solutions and Nature’s Contribution to People paradigms. Second, livestock breeds are components of biodiversity, and as such, can be framed as goods, as final ecosystem services, and as regulators of ecosystem processes. Third, livestock breeds contribute to livestock system heterogeneity and resilience. By integrating these aspects, we might better understand how livestock breeds provide and modulate ecosystem service provision and, therefore, how to improve breed conservation and livestock policies toward farming system sustainability.
Elena Velado-Alonso; Antonio Gómez-Sal; Alberto Bernués; Daniel Martín-Collado. Disentangling the Multidimensional Relationship between Livestock Breeds and Ecosystem Services. Animals 2021, 11, 2548 .
AMA StyleElena Velado-Alonso, Antonio Gómez-Sal, Alberto Bernués, Daniel Martín-Collado. Disentangling the Multidimensional Relationship between Livestock Breeds and Ecosystem Services. Animals. 2021; 11 (9):2548.
Chicago/Turabian StyleElena Velado-Alonso; Antonio Gómez-Sal; Alberto Bernués; Daniel Martín-Collado. 2021. "Disentangling the Multidimensional Relationship between Livestock Breeds and Ecosystem Services." Animals 11, no. 9: 2548.
The next reform of the EU Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) for the period 2021-2027 (currently extended to 2023-2030) requires the approval by the European Commission of a Strategic Plan with environmental objectives for each Member State. Here we use the best available scientific evidence on the relationships between agricultural practices and biodiversity to delineate specific recommendations for the development of the Spanish Strategic Plan. Scientific evidence shows that Spain should (1) identify clear regional biodiversity targets and the landscape-level measures needed to achieve them; (2) define ambitious and complementary criteria across the three environmental instruments (enhanced conditionality, eco-schemes, and agri-environmental and climate measures) of the CAP's Green Architecture, especially in simple and complex landscapes; (3) ensure that other CAP instruments (areas of nature constraints, organic farming and protection of endangered livestock breeds and crop varieties) really support biodiversity; (4) improve farmers' knowledge and adjust measures to real world constraints; and (5) invest in biodiversity and ecosystem service monitoring in order to evaluate how the Plan achieves regional and national targets and to improve measures if targets are not met. We conclude that direct assessments of environmental objectives are technically and economically feasible, can be attractive to farmers, and are socially fair and of great interest for improving the environmental effectiveness of CAP measures. The explicit and rigorous association of assessments and monitoring, relating specific environmental indicators to regional objectives, should be the main criterion for the approval of the Strategic Plan in an environmentally-focused CAP 2023-2030.—Díaz, M. et al. (2021). Environmental objectives of Spanish agriculture: scientific guidelines for their effective implementation under the Common Agricultural Policy 2023-2030. Ardeola, 68: 445-460.
Mario Díaz; Elena D. Concepción; Manuel B. Morales; Juan Carlos Alonso; Francisco M. Azcárate; Ignacio Bartomeus; Gérard Bota; Lluis Brotons; Daniel García; David Giralt; José Eugenio Gutiérrez; José Vicente López-Bao; Santiago Mañosa; Rubén Milla; Marcos Miñarro; Alberto Navarro; Pedro P. Olea; Carlos Palacín; Begoña Peco; Pedro J. Rey; Javier Seoane; Susana Suárez-Seoane; Christian Schöb; Rocío Tarjuelo; Juan Traba; Francisco Valera; Elena Velado-Alonso. Environmental Objectives of Spanish Agriculture: Scientific Guidelines for their Effective Implementation under the Common Agricultural Policy 2023-2030. Ardeola 2021, 68, 445 -460.
AMA StyleMario Díaz, Elena D. Concepción, Manuel B. Morales, Juan Carlos Alonso, Francisco M. Azcárate, Ignacio Bartomeus, Gérard Bota, Lluis Brotons, Daniel García, David Giralt, José Eugenio Gutiérrez, José Vicente López-Bao, Santiago Mañosa, Rubén Milla, Marcos Miñarro, Alberto Navarro, Pedro P. Olea, Carlos Palacín, Begoña Peco, Pedro J. Rey, Javier Seoane, Susana Suárez-Seoane, Christian Schöb, Rocío Tarjuelo, Juan Traba, Francisco Valera, Elena Velado-Alonso. Environmental Objectives of Spanish Agriculture: Scientific Guidelines for their Effective Implementation under the Common Agricultural Policy 2023-2030. Ardeola. 2021; 68 (2):445-460.
Chicago/Turabian StyleMario Díaz; Elena D. Concepción; Manuel B. Morales; Juan Carlos Alonso; Francisco M. Azcárate; Ignacio Bartomeus; Gérard Bota; Lluis Brotons; Daniel García; David Giralt; José Eugenio Gutiérrez; José Vicente López-Bao; Santiago Mañosa; Rubén Milla; Marcos Miñarro; Alberto Navarro; Pedro P. Olea; Carlos Palacín; Begoña Peco; Pedro J. Rey; Javier Seoane; Susana Suárez-Seoane; Christian Schöb; Rocío Tarjuelo; Juan Traba; Francisco Valera; Elena Velado-Alonso. 2021. "Environmental Objectives of Spanish Agriculture: Scientific Guidelines for their Effective Implementation under the Common Agricultural Policy 2023-2030." Ardeola 68, no. 2: 445-460.
Native livestock breeds, i.e. those autochthonous to a specific region, are locally adapted domesticated animals that conserve genetic resources, guaranty food security and provide agroecosystem services. Native breeds are largely threatened worldwide by agricultural intensification and rural areas abandonment processes related to recent changes in production schemes and planning. Yet, our gap of knowledge regarding livestock breed-environment relationships may prevent the design of successful conservation measures. In this work, we analyse the links between livestock diversity -i.e. richness of native breeds- and a selection of environmental factors that express at broad scales, with a temporal perspective. We compare native breeds distributional patterns before and after the agricultural intensification, in the context of land-use change in mainland Spain. Our results confirm the existence of strong associations between the distribution of native livestock breeds and environmental factors. These links, however, weaken for contemporary distributions. In fact, changes in breed distribution reflect a shift towards more productive environments. Finally, we found that the areas having higher breed richness are undergoing land abandonment processes. Succeeding in the conservation of threatened native breeds will require going beyond merely genetic and production-oriented views. Ecological and sociocultural perspectives should also be accounted for as global change processes are determinant for livestock agrobiodiversity.
Elena Velado-Alonso; Ignacio Morales-Castilla; Antonio Gómez-Sal. Recent land use and management changes decouple the adaptation of livestock diversity to the environment. Scientific Reports 2020, 10, 1 -12.
AMA StyleElena Velado-Alonso, Ignacio Morales-Castilla, Antonio Gómez-Sal. Recent land use and management changes decouple the adaptation of livestock diversity to the environment. Scientific Reports. 2020; 10 (1):1-12.
Chicago/Turabian StyleElena Velado-Alonso; Ignacio Morales-Castilla; Antonio Gómez-Sal. 2020. "Recent land use and management changes decouple the adaptation of livestock diversity to the environment." Scientific Reports 10, no. 1: 1-12.
Aim Wild biodiversity and agrobiodiversity are affected by challenges such as agricultural intensification. However, it is unknown whether or not both components of biodiversity respond similarly to environmental factors and to these challenges. Here, we examine the spatial relationships between the distributions of wild biodiversity and agrobiodiversity, to quantify how and where they covary across the geography. Location Mainland Spain, a European region that harbours high values of both wild and agro‐ biodiversity. Methods We used geographically weighted regression models to analyse the spatial variation in the relationships between the distribution of wild vertebrates and environmental and agrobiodiversity variables. We modelled the spatial gradients in species richness of native terrestrial vertebrates—that is, specific groups of amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals—as a function of local livestock breed richness—that is, bovine, ovine, caprine, asinine, equine and porcine—climate variables and human footprint. Results We found significant covariation between the distribution of native vertebrate species richness and climate, human footprint and livestock diversity. Overall, the association between species richness of the four wild terrestrial vertebrate groups and local livestock breed richness is positive across most of the studied area. However, local breed richness of cattle and sheep breed displays contrasting patterns, where cattle breeds associate positively to most wildlife vertebrates and sheep breeds show negative associations. Main conclusion Wildlife diversity distributions are significantly associated with livestock agrobiodiversity. These spatial relationships are mediated by large‐scale environmental gradients. Since both, wildlife and livestock agrobiodiversity, tend to co‐occur spatially, future strategies for conservation in agricultural landscapes could benefit from integrated approaches.
Elena Velado‐Alonso; Ignacio Morales‐Castilla; Salvador Rebollo; Antonio Gómez‐Sal. Relationships between the distribution of wildlife and livestock diversity. Diversity and Distributions 2020, 26, 1 .
AMA StyleElena Velado‐Alonso, Ignacio Morales‐Castilla, Salvador Rebollo, Antonio Gómez‐Sal. Relationships between the distribution of wildlife and livestock diversity. Diversity and Distributions. 2020; 26 (10):1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleElena Velado‐Alonso; Ignacio Morales‐Castilla; Salvador Rebollo; Antonio Gómez‐Sal. 2020. "Relationships between the distribution of wildlife and livestock diversity." Diversity and Distributions 26, no. 10: 1.
Aim Wild biodiversity and agrobiodiversity are affected by challenges such as agricultural intensification. However, it is unknown whether or not both components of biodiversity respond similarly to environmental factors and to these challenges. Here, we examine the spatial relationships between the distributions of wild biodiversity and agrobiodiversity, to quantify how and where they covary across the geography. Location Mainland Spain, a European region that harbours high values of both wild and agro‐ biodiversity. Methods We used geographically weighted regression models to analyse the spatial variation in the relationships between the distribution of wild vertebrates and environmental and agrobiodiversity variables. We modelled the spatial gradients in species richness of native terrestrial vertebrates—that is, specific groups of amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals—as a function of local livestock breed richness—that is, bovine, ovine, caprine, asinine, equine and porcine—climate variables and human footprint. Results We found significant covariation between the distribution of native vertebrate species richness and climate, human footprint and livestock diversity. Overall, the association between species richness of the four wild terrestrial vertebrate groups and local livestock breed richness is positive across most of the studied area. However, local breed richness of cattle and sheep breed displays contrasting patterns, where cattle breeds associate positively to most wildlife vertebrates and sheep breeds show negative associations. Main conclusion Wildlife diversity distributions are significantly associated with livestock agrobiodiversity. These spatial relationships are mediated by large‐scale environmental gradients. Since both, wildlife and livestock agrobiodiversity, tend to co‐occur spatially, future strategies for conservation in agricultural landscapes could benefit from integrated approaches.
Elena Velado-Alonso. Relationships between the distribution of wildlife and livestock diversity. 2021, 1 .
AMA StyleElena Velado-Alonso. Relationships between the distribution of wildlife and livestock diversity. . 2021; ():1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleElena Velado-Alonso. 2021. "Relationships between the distribution of wildlife and livestock diversity." , no. : 1.