1 / 26

Example of promising results from functional agrobiodiversity in Estonia

Example of promising results from functional agrobiodiversity in Estonia. Iiri Selge Agricultural Research Centre 2nd European Seminar on European Learning Network on Functional AgroBiodiversity 24 - 25 September 2009, Frick, Switzerland. P olicy frame to halt the biodiversity loss.

mohawk
Download Presentation

Example of promising results from functional agrobiodiversity in Estonia

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Example of promising results from functional agrobiodiversity in Estonia Iiri Selge Agricultural Research Centre 2nd European Seminar on European Learning Network on Functional AgroBiodiversity 24 - 25 September 2009, Frick, Switzerland

  2. Policyframe to halt the biodiversity loss EU Common Agricultural Policy axis 2 ‘Improving the environment and the countryside through land management’ Agri-environment scheme (AES)

  3. Where do our expertise come from? To get feedback about the impacts of AES, monitoring and evaluation is implemented The independent evaluator for the RDP 2004-2006 AES and for Axis II measures of Estonian RDP 2007-2013 is Agricultural Research Centre

  4. Science Farmer Improvement Innovation Knowledge Policy How the rings form a chain?

  5. Science Farmer Improvement Innovation Knowledge Policy How the rings form a chain?

  6. Evaluation data is collected through existing databases, farm visits and through special studies on indicators: • SOIL • Soil organic matter and soil fertility • Soil fertility (pH, K, P) • Soil nutrient dynamics • WATER • Nutrient balance • Pesticide use • Water quality • LANDSCAPE • Change in the landscape structure in terms of point, linear and area elements • General upkeep (visual appearance) of the farm • BIODIVERSITY • Farmland birds • Bumble bees • Earthworms, soil microbes • Vascular plants • SOCIO-ECONOMIC • Family farm income • Share of organic products sold as “organic” • Environmental awareness

  7. Methodology: Since 2006, 66 monitoring farms each year Transect method (3 x June-August) Bumble bee species, abundance and flower density is noted down Monitoring is carried out every year by Estonian University of Life Sciences Bumble bees

  8. Shannon’s diversity index of bumble bees, 2006-2008 The Shannon’s diversity index of bumble bees was significantly lower in farms not joined with agri-environment support scheme (SAPS) than in organic farms (OF) or farms with environmentally friendly (EPS) production

  9. The significance of flower density to bumble bee indicators, 2006-2008

  10. The correlation between bumble bee indicators andthe average area of arable fields in 2007 • In 2007 a significant negative correlation was found between: • the number of bumble bees and the average area of arable fields • the number of bumble bee species and the average area of arable fields The number of bumble bees and bumble bee species decreased remarkably after the average area of arable fields reached 5-6 ha

  11. Many fields are ploughed to roadside – flowering field and road edges are missing (food resource to bumble bees and parasitoids who control the number of pests)! Pollinators need food resource from early spring to late autumn! 11

  12. Not only are the field study results important, it is even more important – how to make use of those data? Does the information reach to the policy designer?

  13. Field larger than 20 ha Public road 2 – 5m wide strip

  14. How to bring the knowledge to the farmers? Stick and carrot?

  15. Is the consultancy service the only source for spreading the knowledge? In the frame of RDP AE support in Estoniathere arecompulsory trainings for the farmers. Intrigue farmers – what nature can do for them?

  16. Conservation and enhancement of biodiversity in the agroecosystem – diverse field margins, mosaic landscape Recent science results

  17. Pterostichus • Harpalus • Amara • Bembidion There are 52 species of ground beatles found in Estonian crops (Luik et al 2005). The most common are specimens from genera.

  18. Diverse field margins are enhancing antagonists of plant pests in the crop (1)

  19. Diverse field margins are enhancing antagonists of plant pests in the crop (2) Mean (± SE) number of parasitized M. aeneus larvae per oilseed rape plant in winter oilseed rape fields in Estonia, 2005. Veromann et al. 2006. The impact of field edges on the incidence of Meligethes aeneus Fab. larvae and their parasitisation in spring and winter oilseed rape. Agronomy Research, vol. 4, 447–450.

  20. Diverse field margins are enhancing antagonists of plant pests and diseases in the crops

  21. Mixed cropping is avoiding or decreasing the colonization of the pests and diseases and offering new habitats for beneficial organisms

  22. Mixed cropping of carrots and garden beans increased the number of carabids and decreased the damage of carrots

  23. Cropping system has an impact on pests and their natural enemies abundance on the crop Mean abundance (± SE) of old and new generation of the pest M. aeneus per trap on Pilsu Farm, Tartu County, 2003–2005. Veromann et al. 2008. Do cropping system and insecticide use in spring oilseed rape affect th eabundance of pollen beetles (Meligethes aeneus Fab.) on the crop? International Journal of Pest management, 54:1, 1–4.

  24. Mean number of carabids per pitfall trap (A) and key parasitoids of M. aeneus per yellow water trap (B) in spring oilseed rape fields in minimised (MIN) and standard (STN) cropping systems in the Pilsu Farm, Tartu County in 2005 A B Luik, et al. 2006. A comparison of the pests, parasitoids and predators on winter and spring oilseed rape crops in Estonia. Proceedings of International Symposium of Integrated Pest Management in Oilseed Rape, Göttingen, 3-5 April 2006.

  25. Science  practical value Importance of innovation A chain is only as strong as its weakest link

  26. Thank you for attention! Contacts: Agricultural Research Centre Iiri Selge, iiri.selge@pmk.agri.ee More information: http://pmk.agri.ee/pkt University of Life Sciences Eve Veromann, eve.veromann@emu.ee

More Related