Monitoring arthropod diversity in Douro Wine Region vineyards
Alexis Rataux, Cristina Carlos, Fátima Gonçalves, José Aranha,
Josépha Guenser, Fernando Alves, Maarten Van Helden
• UNESCO designated Alto Douro Vinhateiro (ADV) area has legally protected landscapes and contains a significant area of non-crop habitats (e.g. woodland remnants, grassy slopes, or terraces with natural vegetation and dry stone walls).
• Growers and researchers are concerned in understanding how they could improve the presence of natural enemies in cultivated landscapes
• IOBC guidelines: the presence of Ecological Compensation Areas (ECA) must cover at least 5 % of the total farm surface (excluding forest)
Why the interest about Biodiversity in DWR?
39% vineyards 13% olive groves
Alto Douro Vinhateiro (ADV) – 10% of the Douro Wine Region 24960 Ha 250 000 ha
20% scrubland
Ex. Quinta das Carvalhas
(42% of the surface with scrubland)
BIODIVINE – main goals
• To understand the impact of the lanscape on biodiversity
(in particular of some semi-natural elements left in the countryside such as hedges, groves, scrubland)
• To understand how the presence of those elements nearby the
vineyards can enhance the presence of arthropods?
5 different classes of land use (5 habitats), replicated 5 times
• Characterization of the landscape by GIS
Material & methods
1- Scrubland 2- Vineyard
5- Urban
3- Olive groves, 4- olives hedges
• 25 points monitorized in 5 pilot farms (500 ha) located in the ADV area (S. Luíz, Seixo/Bateiras, Carvalhas & Ventozelo)
Experimental Sites
Material & methods
2 types of Traps in each point (5 / habitat)
Combi trap
Pitfall trap
10 weeks of assessment (April-June)
Classification of arthropods by RBA method
Buffer’s radius (m) 50 100 150 200 Global surface (ha) 0,59 2,36 5,32 9,47 Interstitial space (ha) 0,01 0,04 0,09 0,15 Interstitial space (%) 2% 2% 2% 2%
Shannon W. Index for landscape 0,64 0,87 0,97 1,01
Results
Buffer’s radius (m)
Habitats (%): 50 100 150 200
Dirt roads 6,66 6,48 6,35 5,88
Olive hedges 1,58 1,21 1,09 0,95
Olive groves 15,53 10,42 8,15 6,38 Riparian forest 1,81 1,36 1,06 0,96
River 0,30 2,01 3,33 4,61
Sealed roads 2,62 2,07 1,74 1,44
Scrubland 23,80 25,85 24,87 23,13
Urban sites 6,97 4,90 2,70 1,92
Vineyards 39,13 44,03 49,07 53,19
Impact of the lanscape in some natural enemies
Ripys. Scrub Olive
hedge vines Urban Olive
groves
Shannon W. Index
Spiders - / - / - - --
Coccinellidae / / / ++ - - ++ ++
Staphylinid / - / / ++ + ++
Opilion / / / / / + /
/ - non sign.; + - sig. (0,05); ++ - sig. (0,01);
Ripys. Scrub Olive
hedge vines Urban Olive
groves
Shannon W. Index
Spiders / / - / - - -
Coccinellidae / - / / + + +
Staphylinid / / / - / ++ +
Opilion / / / / / + /
/ - non sign.; + - sig. (0,05); ++ - sig. (0,01);
Results
Abundance % Richness %
Total 52187 - 789 -
Combi 46859 89,7 703 89,1
Pitfall 5328 10,2 316 40,1
52187 indiv. , 27 orders identified, 5 classes of Arthropoda
Richness
Araneae 8%
Coleoptera 25%
Diptera 13%
Hemiptera 19%
Hymenopter a 22%
Others 13%
Araneae 3%
Coleoptera 46%
Diptera 20%
Hemiptera 13%
Hymenopte ra 15%
Others 3%
Abundance
90%
10%
Analysis of Order by habitat
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Olive hedges Urban sites Vineyard Scrubland Olive groves Coleoptera Hemiptera Hymenoptera Araneae
Diptera Lepidoptera Others
Combi trap
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Olive hedges Urban sites Vineyard Scrubland Olive groves Coleoptera Hemiptera Hymenoptera Araneae Centipeda Opilion Others
Pitfall trap
Order distribution were different among habitats for both Combi- and Pitfall traps
Coleoptera, Diptera, Hemiptera
Hymenoptera, Spiders
Habitat Abundance
Combi %
Olive Hedges 7523 16,1
Scrubland 12846 27,4
Urban 10893 23,2
Olive groves 7991 17,1
Vineyard 7606 16,2
46859
Abundance
Pitfall % 1135 21,3 756 14,2 1114 20,9 931 17,5 1392 26,1 5328
Global
Abundance %
8658 16,6 13602 26,1 12007 23,0 8922 17,1 8998 17,2 52187
a
b c a b
c c
Scrubland Urban Olive groves Vineyard Olive hedges
Impact of the habitat on the abundance
Scrubland habitat attracted more indiv.
than vineyard or olive hedges
Impact of the habitat on Richness
60%
68% 64% 67%
63%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
haie: 473 urbain: 536 vigne: 507 maquis: 527 verger: 494
Richness / habitat
For arthropods’ richness, the statistical tests did not show any significant differences.
a
a b
a b c
b c
c
a a
a
a
b a
a b b c b c
c a
a b b c
c b c
Scrubland Vines
Urban Olive hedges
Olive groves
