V. K. Brown

Abstract This review examines the direct effects of climate change on insect herbivores. Temperature is identified as the dominant abiotic factor directly affecting herbivorous insects. There is little evidence of any direct effects of CO 2 or UVB. Direct impacts of precipitation have been largely neglected in current research on climate change. Temperature directly affects development, survival, range and abundance. Species with a large geographical range will tend to be less affected. The main effect of temperature in temperate regions is to influence winter survival; at more northerly latitudes, higher temperatures extend the summer season, increasing the available thermal budget for growth and reproduction. Photoperiod is the dominant cue for the seasonal synchrony of temperate insects, but their thermal requirements may differ at different times of year. Interactions between photoperiod and temperature determine phenology; the two factors do not necessarily operate in tandem. Insect herbivores show a number of distinct life‐history strategies to exploit plants with different growth forms and strategies, which will be differentially affected by climate warming. There are still many challenges facing biologists in predicting and monitoring the impacts of climate change. Future research needs to consider insect herbivore phenotypic and genotypic flexibility, their responses to global change parameters operating in concert, and awareness that some patterns may only become apparent in the longer term.

Summary Weeds are major constraints on crop production, yet as part of the primary producers within farming systems, they may be important components of the agroecosystem. Using published literature, the role of weeds in arable systems for other above‐ground trophic levels are examined. In the UK, there is evidence that weed flora have changed over the past century, with some species declining in abundance, whereas others have increased. There is also some evidence for a decline in the size of arable weed seedbanks. Some of these changes reflect improved agricultural efficiency, changes to more winter‐sown crops in arable rotations and the use of more broad‐spectrum herbicide combinations. Interrogation of a database of records of phytophagous insects associated with plant species in the UK reveals that many arable weed species support a high diversity of insect species. Reductions in abundances of host plants may affect associated insects and other taxa. A number of insect groups and farmland birds have shown marked population declines over the past 30 years. Correlational studies indicate that many of these declines are associated with changes in agricultural practices. Certainly reductions in food availability in winter and for nestling birds in spring are implicated in the declines of several bird species, notably the grey partridge, Perdix perdix . Thus weeds have a role within agroecosystems in supporting biodiversity more generally. An understanding of weed competitivity and the importance of weeds for insects and birds may allow the identification of the most important weed species. This may form the first step in balancing the needs for weed control with the requirements for biodiversity and more sustainable production methods.

Assistant professor in the Department of Biology at Western Washington University, Bellingham, Washington 98225-9160 10: Professor at the Laboratoire d'Ecologie de Sols Tropicaux, ORSTOM/Université Paris VI, 32 Avenue Henri Varagnat, 93143 Bondy, France 11: Senior scientist at the Centre for Terrestrial Ecology, Netherlands Institute of Ecology, 6666 ZG Heteren, Netherlands Utrecht, Netherlands 12: Professor at the Department of Environmental Studies, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands 13: Professor at the Institute of Soil Biology, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Na sádkách 7, 370 05 Ceske Budejovice, Czech Republic 14: Professor at the Department of Environmental Science, Policy,and Management, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720-3110 15: Professor at the Center for Microbial Ecology, Michigan State University, 540 Plant and Soil Science Building, East Lansing, Michigan 48824-1325 16: Professor at the Department of Animal Ecology, Justus Liebig University of Giessen, Heinrich-Buff-Ring 26-32 (IFZ), D-35392 Giessen, Germany 2: Professor at the Queen Mary and Westfield College, School of Biological Sciences, University of London, London E1 4NS, United Kingdom 3: Research professor and the director of the Centre for Agri-Environmental Research, Department of Agriculture, University of Reading, Earley Gate, Reading RG6 6AT, United Kingdom 4: Professor of Soil Biology and Biological Soil Quality and director of the Department of Environmental Sciences, Wageningen University, 6700 EC Wageningen, Netherlands 5: Professor at the Centre for Biodiversity and Bioresources, School of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales 2109, Australia 6: Chair, SCOPE Committee on Soil and Sediment Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning, and professor and director, Natural Resource Ecology Laboratory, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 7: Scientist at Landcare Research, Lincoln, New Zealand 8: Research professor in the Institute of Ecology at the University of Georgia, 102 Ecology Annex, Athens, Georgia 30602-2360 9: Professor at the Department of Soil Science and Agricultural Engineering, University of Zimbabwe, Mount Pleasant, Harare, Zimbabwe

Summary The effects of agricultural intensification on biodiversity in arable systems of western Europe have received a great deal of attention. However, the recent transformation of grassland systems has been just as profound. In Britain, the management of grassland has changed substantially in the second half of the 20th century. A high proportion of lowland grassland is managed intensively. The major changes include a doubling in the use of inorganic nitrogen, a switch from hay to silage, and increased stocking densities, particularly of sheep. Structurally diverse and species‐rich swards have been largely replaced by relatively dense, fast‐growing and structurally uniform swards, dominated by competitive species. Most of these changes have reduced the suitability of grassland as feeding and breeding habitat for birds. The most important direct effects have been deterioration of the sward as nesting and wintering habitat, and loss of seed resources as food. Short uniform swards afford poor shelter and camouflage from predators, whereas increased mowing intensities and trampling by stock will destroy nests and young. Increased frequency of sward defoliation reduces flowering and seed set, and hence food availability for seed‐eating birds. The indirect effects of intensification of management on birds relate largely to changes in the abundance and availability of invertebrate prey. The effects of management vary with its type, timing and intensity, and with invertebrate ecology and phenology, but, in general, the abundance and diversity of invertebrates declines with reductions in sward diversity and structural complexity. Low input livestock systems are likely to be central to any future management strategies designed to maintain and restore the ecological diversity of semi‐natural lowland grasslands. Low additions of organic fertilizer benefit some invertebrate prey species, and moderate levels of grazing encourage sward heterogeneity. There is now a need to improve understanding of how grassland management affects bird population dynamics. Particularly important areas of research include: (i) the interaction between changes in food abundance, due to changes in fertilizer inputs, and food accessibility, due to changes in sward structure; (ii) the interaction between predation rates and management‐related changes in habitat; and (iii) the impact of alternative anti‐helminithic treatments for livestock on invertebrates and birds.