Diversified agroecosystem generally sustain wildlife and foster biodiversity conservation because low intensity farming systems mimic attributes of natural systems and thus enhance biodiversity . Wildlife friendly farming include protection of shrub and forest remnants, fallows, crop rotations, grassland strips, low applications of agrochemicals, among others . Most formal scientific knowledge on wildlife friendly agriculture emerged in Europe, North America, and in lesser amounts in Australia and Central America, particularly in agroecosystems such as grasslands, arable crops, coffee and cacao . In Europe, fruit and nut orchards and perennial crops received less but some attention . In a dry cereal farmland in Spain, fallow fields, those with crop residue or legumes, total seed biomass and arthropod biomass were important for bird communities during different biological stages . For example, during wintering bird richness was significant increased by fallows, seed and arthropod biomass . Elsen et al. showed in the Himalayas that low and medium intensity agriculture can harbor high levels of bird richness in particular during winter. In a systematic review Sokos et al. reported for the Mediterranean basin that among the practices that have high positive impact on wildlife at lower economic cost were intercropping, conservation tillage,30 planter pot and organic farming. In Estonia, Marja et al. reported that wildlife friendly farming support higher bird richness in comparison with conventional agriculture. In planning bird friendly management bird traits must be considered.
Bird species differ in breeding habitat use, nesting sites, habitat specialization , climatic and dietary niches, population/meta population size, conservation status, home range, disturbance tolerance, and life history . Integration of ecological, biological and agronomic knowledge is necessary to develop better bird friendly management strategies in agroecosystems. Increasing landscape complexity through diversification within simplified agroecosystems benefits wildlife through creating multiple habitats and niches that allow high levels of biodiversity in comparison with simple conventional monocrops .Benton et al. argue that the lack of structural and temporal heterogeneity in many landscapes is a consequence of intensive agriculture, and the way to restore biodiversity in agroecosystem is enhancing structural heterogeneity via management of non-crops habitats. Non-crop areas create habitat refuges for wildlife in temperate and tropical ecosystems and increasing landscape complexity is an important strategy to provide habitat and food resources . Trees and shrub hedgerows, fallows and residue covered soil, and neighboring native vegetation remnants can be sources of food, shelter, roosting, and nest sites. An agroecosystem can be considered as a matrix among fragments of native vegetation . It has been shown in Neotropical ecosystems that diversified agroecosystems help achieve conservation goals by hosting a rich variety of wildlife . On the other hand, impacts of agronomic management that occur in agroecosystems can affect the temporal and spatial availability of resources and thus impact the connectivity levels and quality of the matrix . The matrix surrounding forest fragments also affects biodiversity.
For example, in Australia a temporal change from agriculture to forest plantation reduced the functional diversity in nearby fragments of native forest over time following the establishment of the plantation. Such temporal changes in the matrix could favor some species to the detriment of others . Tscharntke et al. proposed the hypothesis that landscape complexity level is nonlinearly related to effectiveness for enhancing wildlife in agroecosystems. They predict that the positive effect on biodiversity of planting hedgerows, for example, will be lower in extremely simple or complex landscapes and most effective at intermediate levels of landscape complexity. This hypothesis was supported by a study of multiple taxa conducted in grasslands and annual crop fields in Europe . Batary et al. found via meta-analysis that increasing landscape structural heterogeneity in agroecosystems significantly increased species richness and abundance, but that the hypothesis of intermediate landscape complexity applies to cropland but not to grassland, indicating that management should be tailored for target species and their landscapes. In a study conducted in French vineyards, Barbaro et al. found that biological control by birds was related to the levels of heterogeneity within and surrounding the vineyard, suggesting that high levels of heterogeneity at different scales increased avian insectivores if the ensemble of birds predators remained even and showing the importance of bird functional group approaches for biological control in agroecosystems . In a study of birds in Italian vineyards Assandri et al. found that landscape heterogeneity favor several bird species, some of conservation concern. In terms of spatial configuration, found that intersections of strips of vegetation significantly enhanced bird richness in an Australian agroecosystem. In terms of landscape configuration Belfrage et al. found that small organic farms host significantly more bird species that large conventional farms .
These findings resulted in suggestions for management in agricultural landscapes, for example creating a network of hedgerows instead of concentrating isolated woody stands . In intensively managed apple orchards in Italy reported the importance of relict patches of forest, scrubland and wetlands for abundance of common European bird species . Mendenhall et al. found that fine-scale elements provide critical habitat for bird communities in Central America, which increased effectiveness of natural reserve area. Terraube et al. also found that species with high conservation value were higher in the interior edges of the forest patches surrounded by an agricultural matrix in France, highlighting the conservation value of these areas. In agricultural landscapes of Switzerland, Bailey et al. reported that connectivity of orchards with natural habitat was more important than orchard size for shaping bird species and richness. Hedgerows are commonly found in agricultural landscapes around the world. Their primary agronomic function is to delimit territories or properties but they also provide wood, wind breaks, habitat for beneficial insects, and soil erosion control, among other services . In terms of biodiversity conservation they serve as habitat for wildlife and native plants . According to , hedgerow size, the presence and numbers of trees, and the floristic richness of the hedgerow is directly related with its quality as bird habitat. Hedgerows play a relevant conservation role in agroecosystems, not only for birds but also for many vertebrates and invertebrates,plastic growers pots in particular when they include microhabitats such as logs, rocks and others that can be sources of burrows . Kross et al. showed that hedgerows and trees can increase the richness and abundance of birds in a temperate alfalfa field, reporting a positive relationship among bird insect pest consumption and hedgerow complexity. For olive orchards, Rey proposed to increase hedgerows and woody vegetation, composed of plant species that provide food resources , and to reduce the amounts of pesticides in the field to enhance conservation of frugivorous birds. Castro-Caro et al. documented the positive effect of hedgerows for insectivorous birds year-round. In agricultural landscapes in central Chile MuñozSáez et al. reported that hedgerows increase significantly bird richness over winter. In contrast, Genghini et al. did not find a positive relationship between hedgerows and bird richness in fruit orchards, which they attributed to the recent planting of the hedgerows in that area. The bird species or groups that are targeted for conservation should be considered for hedgerow management implementation. For example, grassland birds in France showed a negative correlation with hedgerows . In addition to vegetation structures, some birds require hollows and cavities to nest. Nest boxes have increased in popularity in modified landscapes, providing a critical habitat resource for obligate cavity nesters . Le Roux et al. conducted a study evaluating the influence of the size of the entrance hole, the landscape influence and the size of the tree in the occupancy of the nest box.
They found that, in Australia, occupancy of the boxes was higher for medium–large holes, although the majority of species that were using tree boxes were common or invasive species. They also found that the size of the tree where the nest box was placed did not influence occupancy. This study suggests low relevance of nest boxes for harboring endemic or threatened species. In California, use of nest boxes in vineyards was highly effective at increasing abundance and ecosystem services provided by insectivorous birds . However, in a separate study nest boxes did not increase the abundance of woodland forest birds within highly intensive vineyards. Instead, proximity to riparian vegetation increased bird species richness in California vineyard agroecosystems . Other structures considered relevant for wildlife in agricultural lands are ponds and water reservoirs. Casas et al. reported that ponds can be useful as habitat for species with low dispersal abilities. They are also relevant as complementary habitat at the regional level, although the effect of agriculture on bio-geochemical cycles may reduce water quality in comparison with natural water resources thus negatively affecting some bird species. In the same way, it has been reported that the quality of the ponds is related with the levels of aquatic macrophytes and canopy of the surrounding vegetation . Open canopy ponds allow macrophyte plants to grow and increase the richness and abundance of birds, although bird groups respond differently to open canopy ponds. For example, farmland birds have a positive association with open ponds, while woodland birds were positively associated with overgrown ponds more similar to wetlands . Vineyards are spread across different world regions and wine consumption has increased globally. Generally wine grape regions worldwide overlap with highly threatened Mediterranean type ecosystems which are hotspots of endemic biodiversity . Vineyard-driven land use change in these ecosystems is an ongoing threat, in the past and under current climate change scenarios . Avifauna could be impacted not only by land use change to vineyards but also by transition from traditional low-intensity wine grape cropping systems to highly intensified agriculture. Changes include methods of trellising system, grape plant densities, pest management and fertilization regimes . In terms of their impacts on biodiversity, different vineyard management approaches have been proposed in order to enhance wildlife and ecosystem services that include: protection and conservation of native vegetation , planting of flower patches, cover crops, and inter-row crops, use of organic practices, use of bird boxes/ perches, conservation of water resources and restoration of hydrological balance, and soil conservation and erosion control, among others . Some of these practices have resulted in positive outcomes for biodiversity and ecosystem functionality. Landscape heterogeneity and remnants of native vegetation enhance bird richness and patches of bare soil/ grassland were also beneficial for ground dwelling insectivore birds in vineyards . Vineyards can also provide nesting habitat for birds. It has been reported that vineyard training system influences nesting site preference, although breeding success was low in the case of Italian vineyards and likely affected by human activities related to agricultural management . In France, vineyards provide habitat for a breeding population of the highly threatened Lesser Grey Shrike . Bird nest boxes successfully improved habitat for cavity nester birds in vineyards, increasing the population size of Hoopoe in Switzerland and providing habitat for Western Bluebirds and Barn Owls that provided biological control in California, French , and New Zealand vineyards. In terms of cover crops, a case study of vineyards with three different inter-row cover crop managements found that the mechanically managed inter-row cover crop increased bird abundance and richness of song-birds, in particular flycatcher abundance . In Chilean vineyards, founded that bird richness was positively related with ecotones and remnants of native vegetation around vineyards, although this relationship varied by species. Example of agroecological practices implemented in vineyards is presented in Figure 2. Integrating practices at multiple landscape scales, such as the conservation of native vegetation, fragments of native forest within the vineyards . Cover crops between vines, insectary flower strips, birds boxes and bio-dynamic or organic agricultural management are other practices that can have a positive impact on bird communities. Coffee and cacao are two widespread crops in tropical areas. Both crops, managed agroecologically have been shown to contribute directly to biodiversity conservation, crop pest regulation and increased incomes of local farmers . Figure 3 shows the contrasting ecological structure between agroecological shade coffee and sun coffee monocultures. Although coffee and cacao do not contribute to the basic requirements for human diet, they contribute to supplementary nutrition and are profitable for many farmer communities in the global south .