Data from: Biodiversity in agroforestry systems implemented in tropical ecoregions: A systematic review
Abstract
This is a dataset containing extensive information on agroforestry systems (AFSs) and reference vegetation areas where the diversity of taxonomic groups or growth forms was measured. AFSs and their reference areas are located in tropical ecoregions across de globe, and data were gathered through a systematic review including 92 papers and 294 data sampling sites. We considered each taxonomic group or growth form studied in a sampling site (AFS or reference vegetation area) as an observation, and extracted the following information to the file “Main_data.csv”: location, ecoregion, climate, soil, size, method of biodiversity sampling, and number of species, individuals, and/or biodiversity index found in each AFS and reference area; origin (whether the AFS originated from areas with alternative land use, such as agriculture, pastures, or degraded areas, or in areas with natural vegetation that are converted into productive systems), type (simple or biodiverse), age, crop type, management strategy, presence of nearby natural vegetation areas, distance to nearby natural vegetation areas, type of nearby vegetation, and predominant matrix around each AFS; vegetation type and age of each reference area, and characterization of the forest (primary or secondary, and regeneration stage) in reference areas with forest as the vegetation type; mean diameter at breast height, basal area, canopy cover, number of regenerating tree species or individuals, number of pioneer and non-pioneer tree species, and number of invasive plant species in observations of the tree community in AFSs and reference vegetation areas. The “Main_data.csv” file contains 470 observations. The complete references included in the systematic review can be found in the file “RefID.csv” and the full ecoregion names are presented in “Ecoregion_Olson.csv”.
Dataset DOI: 10.5061/dryad.dr7sqvb8v
Description of the data and file structure
This dataset contains the data used in the article:
Ortolan, E.; Maciel, E.A. & Martins, V.F. Biodiversity in agroforestry systems implemented in tropical ecoregions: a systematic review. Journal of Environmental Management.
Authors:
Ezequiel Ortolan
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Agricultura e Ambiente, Universidade Federal de São Carlos (UFSCar), Araras, SP, Brazil.
E-mail: ziqueortolan@yahoo.com.br
Everton A. Maciel
Chair of Plant Ecology, University of Bayreuth, Universitätsstr. 30, 95447 Bayreuth, Germany.
Departamento de Biologia Vegetal, Instituto de Biologia, Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, SP, Brazil.
E-mail: Everton.Maciel@uni-bayreuth.de
Valéria Forni Martins
Departamento de Ciências da Natureza, Matemática e Educação, Centro de Ciências Agrárias, Universidade Federal de São Carlos (UFSCar), Araras, SP, Brazil.
Departamento de Biologia Vegetal, Instituto de Biologia, Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, SP, Brazil.
E-mail: vmartins@ufscar.br
Comments and requests should be addressed to Ezequiel Ortolan: ziqueortolan@yahoo.com.br. All material is free of use, but I would appreciate being told, and this dataset and the matching paper cited if appropriate.
Files and variables
File: Data.zip
Description:
Main_data.csv: Contains extensive information on agroforestry systems (AFSs) and reference vegetation areas where the diversity of taxonomic groups or growth forms was measured. Each line is an observation, i.e., diversity assessment of a taxonomic group or subgroup, or growth form in a study site (AFS or reference vegetation area). Collums are as follows:
| Collum name | Explanation |
|---|---|
| RefID | Paper identification. The complete references can be found in the file RefID.csv |
| Publication_year | Year in which the paper was published |
| Site_code | Study site identification |
| Site_name | Name of the study site |
| Latitude | Latitude of the study site |
| Longitude | Longitude of the study site |
| Municipality | Municipality where data were collected |
| State_County | State or County where data were collected |
| Country | Country where data were collected |
| Continent | Continent where data were collected |
| Ecoregion_Olson | Ecoregion where data were collected according to Olson et al. (2001). Full ecoregion names can be found in the file Ecoregion_Olson.csv |
| Climate_Köppen | Climate classification for the study site according to the Köppen classification |
| Soil_IUSS | Soil type for the study site according to the IUSS Working Group WRB (2014) classification |
| Size_ha | Size (in hectares) of the area where data were collected |
| Data_year | Year in which data were collected |
| Sampling_method | Brief description of data sampling |
| Material_collected_evaluated | Indicates the material collected or evaluated for biodiversity sampling |
| Taxon_general | Taxonomic group (more general classification) sampled |
| Taxon_growth_form_detail | Taxonomic group (more refined classification) or growth form sampled, as presented in the papers |
| Taxon_sub_growth_form | Grouping of taxonomic groups (more refined classification) or growth forms sampled. Flying insects include bees, butterflies, Diptera, parasitoids, and wasps; soil invertebrates include Collembola, Myriapoda, spiders, termites, and worms; other invertebrates include invertebrates not classified under the previous categories; other plants include plants with growth form other than tree |
| Species_richness | Number of species sampled |
| Abundance | Number of individuals sampled |
| Diversity_index | Diversity index used |
| Diversity_index_value | When a diversity index was used, indicates its value; the index used can be found in collum "Diversity_index" |
| AFS | 1 if the study site is an agroforestry system, 0 if the study site is a reference vegetation area |
| Origin | Indicates whether the paper studied agroforestry system(s) originated from an area with alternative land use (ALU) or natural vegetation (VN) |
| AFS_type | When collum "AFS" is 1, indicates whether the agroforestry system is biodiverse or simple |
| Age_AFS_yr | When collum "AFS" is 1, indicates the age (in years) of the agroforestry system |
| Crop_type | When collum "AFS" is 1, indicates the crop type in the agroforestry system |
| Management | When collum "AFS" is 1, indicates whether the agroforestry system is managed (1) or unmanaged (0) |
| Management_strategy | When collum "AFS" is 1 and collum "Management" is 1, indicates the management strategy in the agroforestry system |
| Proximity | When collum "AFS" is 1, indicates whether there is an area with natural vegetation near the agroforestry system: 1 for yes, 0 for no |
| Distance_m | When collum "AFS" is 1 and collum "Proximity" is 1, indicates the distance (in meters) between the agroforestry system and the area with natural vegetation. The distance 0 indicates that the area with natural vegetation is adjacent to the agroforestry system |
| Natural_vegetation | When collum "AFS" is 1 and collum "Proximity" is 1, indicates the type of natural vegetation near the agroforestry system |
| Matrix | When collum "AFS" is 1, indicates the predominant matrix type surrounding the agroforestry system |
| Vegetation_type | When collum "AFS" is 0, indicates the vegetation type of the reference area |
| Forest_characterization | When collum "AFS" is 0 and collum "Vegetation_type" is forest or Caatinga (which is a dry forest type), indicates whether the forest is primary or secondary |
| Regeneration | When collum "AFS" is 0 and collum "Vegetation_type" is forest, indicates the forest regeneration stage |
| Age_reference_yr | When collum "AFS" is 0, indicates the age (in years) of the reference area |
| DBH_CBH | When trees were measured in the study, indicates whether they were measured for diameter at breast height (DBH) or circumference at breast height (CBH). There are tree measurements in some papers that studied the diversity of taxonomic groups or subgroups, or growth forms other than tree |
| DBH_inclusion_cm | When trees were measured in the study (collum "DBH_CBH" is DBH or CBH), indicates the minimum diameter at breast height (DBH, in centimetres) for tree sampling. The only study that used circumference at breast height (CBH) did not inform the inclusion value (NA). There are tree measurements in some papers that studied the diversity of taxonomic groups or subgroups, or growth forms other than tree |
| DBH_mean_cm | When trees were measured in the study (collum "DBH_CBH" is DBH or CBH), indicates the mean diameter at breast height (DBH, in centimetres) of trees sampled. For the only study that used circumference at breast height (CBH), we transformed the mean CBH to mean DBH. There is one study that did not inform whether trees were measured for DBH or CBH (collum "DBH_CBH" is NA) but provided the mean DBH. There are tree measurements in some papers that studied the diversity of taxonomic groups or subgroups, or growth forms other than tree |
| Basal_area_m2 | Indicates the total tree basal area (in m2) in the study site. There are studies that did not inform whether trees were measured for DBH or CBH (collum "DBH_CBH" is NA) nor the mean DBH (collum "DBH_mean_cm" is NA) but provided the basal area. There are tree measurements in some papers that studied the diversity of taxonomic groups or subgroups, or growth forms other than tree |
| Canopy_cover_% | Indicates the percentage of the study site's area shaded by trees. There are tree measurements in some papers that studied the diversity of taxonomic groups or subgroups, or growth forms other than tree |
| Regenerants_spp | When collum "Taxon_sub_growth_form" is "Trees", indicates the number of regenerating tree species |
| Regenerants_abund | When collum "Taxon_sub_growth_form" is "Trees", indicates the number of regenerating tree individuals |
| Pioneer | When collum "Taxon_sub_growth_form” is "Trees", indicates the number of pioneer tree species |
| Non-pioneer | When collum "Taxon_sub" is "Trees", indicates the number of non-pioneer tree species |
| Invasive | Indicates the number or identity of invasive plant species |
NA indicates that the datum was not given in the original paper.
RefID.csv: Contains the complete references included in the systematic review.
Ecoregion_Olson.csv: Contains the full ecoregion names (with acronyms) according to Olson et al. (2001).
Code/software
No specific sofware is needed to view the raw data. Files are in .csv format.
Access information
Data were derived from the following sources:
From the geographical coordinates of each agroforestry system (AFS) and reference vegetation area studied, we determined their ecoregion according to Olson et al. (2001) using the terrestrial ecoregions dataset available in ArcGIS 10 (ESRI, 2011).
Data on AFSs and reference areas were extracted from:
Ackerman, I. L., Constantino, R., Gauch, H. G., Lehmann, J., Riha, S. J. & Fernandes, E. C. M., 2009. Termite (Insecta: Isoptera) species composition in a primary rain forest and agroforests in central Amazonia. Biotropica. 41, 226–233. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7429.2008.00479.x.
de Aguiar, M. I., Fialho, J. S., de Araújo, F. d. C. S., Campanha, M. M. & de Oliveira, T. S., 2013. Does biomass production depend on plant community diversity? Agroforestry Systems. 87, 699–711. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-012-9590-9.
Amaral, G. C., Vargas, A. B. & Almeida, F. S., 2019. Effects of environmental attributes on the biodiversity of ants under different land uses. Ciência Florestal. 29, 660–672. https://doi.org/10.5902/1980509833811.
Angarita, O., Montes-Correa, A.C. & Renjifo, J. M., 2014. Amphibians and reptiles of an agroforestry system in the Colombian Caribbean. Amphibian and Reptile Conservation. 8, e92, 34–52.
Arias, R. M. & Abarca, G. H., 2014. Fungal diversity in coffee plantation systems and in a tropical montane cloud forest in Veracruz, Mexico. Agroforestry Systems. 88, 921–933. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-014-9736-z.
Arnold, H., Deacon, A. E., Hulme, M. F., Sansom, A., Jaggernauth, D. & Magurran, A. E., 2021. Contrasting trends in biodiversity of birds and trees during succession following cacao agroforest abandonment. Journal of Applied Ecology. 58, 1248–1260. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13869.
Asase, A. & Tetteh, D. A., 2010. The role of complex agroforestry systems in the conservation of forest tree diversity and structure in southeastern Ghana. Agroforestry Systems. 79, 355–368. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-010-9311-1.
Badari, C. G., Bernardini, L. E., de Almeida, D. R. A., Brancalion, P. H. S., César, R. G., Gutierrez, V., Chazdon, R. L., Gomes, H. B. & Viani, R. A. G., 2020. Ecological outcomes of agroforests and restoration 15 years after planting. Restoration Ecology. 28, 1135–1144. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.13171.
Bieng, M. A. N., Delgado-Rodríguez, D., Vilchez-Mendoza, S., López-Sampson, A., García, E., Sepúlveda, N. & Somarriba, E., 2022. Tree diversity in a tropical agricultural-forest mosaic landscape in Honduras. Scientific Reports. 12, e18544. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-21280-7.
Bobo, K. S., Waltert, M., Fermon, H., Njokagbor, J. & Mühlenberg, M., 2006. From forest to farmland: Butterfly diversity and habitat associations along a gradient of forest conversion in Southwestern Cameroon. Journal of Insect Conservation. 10, 29–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-005-8564-x.
Cambui, E. C. B., de Vasconcelos, R. N., Mariano-Neto, E., Viana, B. F. & Cardoso, M. Z., 2017. Positive forestry: The effect of rubber tree plantations on fruit feeding butterfly assemblages in the Brazilian Atlantic forest. Forest Ecology and Management. 397, 150–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2017.04.043.
Cassano, C. R., Barlow, J. & Pardini, R., 2012. Large Mammals in an Agroforestry Mosaic in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest. Biotropica. 44, 818–825. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7429.2012.00870.x.
Caudill, S. A. & Rice, R. A., 2016. Do Bird Friendly® coffee criteria benefit mammals? Assessment of mammal diversity in Chiapas, Mexico. PLoS ONE. 11. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0165662.
Cesar, R. M., Vezzani, F. M., Schwiderke, D. K., Gaiad, S., Brown, G. G., Seoane, C. E. S. & Froufe, L. C. M., 2015. Soil biological properties in multistrata successional agroforestry systems and in natural regeneration. Agroforestry Systems. 89, 1035–1047. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-015-9833-7.
Chandler, R. B., King, D. I., Raudales, R., Trubey, R., Chandler, C. & Arce Chávez, V. J., 2013. A small-scale land-sparing approach to conserving biological diversity in tropical agricultural landscapes. Conservation Biology. 27, 785–795. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12046.
Correia, M., Diabaté, M., Beavogui, P., Guilavogui, K., Lamanda, N. & de Foresta, H., 2010. Conserving forest tree diversity in Guinée forestière (Guinea, West Africa): The role of coffee-based agroforests. Biodiversity and Conservation. 19, 1725–1747. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-010-9800-6.
DaRocha, W. D., Antoniazzi, R., Delabie, J. H. C., Schroth, G., Fernandes, G. W. & Neves, F. S., 2021. Disentangling the factors that shape bromeliad and ant communities in the canopies of cocoa agroforestry and preserved Atlantic Forest. Biotropica. 53, 1698–1709. https://doi.org/10.1111/btp.13018.
DaRocha, W. D., Neves, F. S., Dáttilo, W. & Delabie, J. H. C., 2016. Epiphytic bromeliads as key components for maintenance of ant diversity and ant-bromeliad interactions in agroforestry system canopies. Forest Ecology and Management. 372, 128–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2016.04.011.
Eggleton, P., Bignell, D. E., Hauser, S., Dibog, L., Norgrove, L. & Madong, B., 2002. Termite diversity across an anthropogenic disturbance gradient in the humid forest zone of West Africa. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment. 90. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809(01)00206-7.
Etana, B., Atickem, A., Tsegaye, D., Bekele, A., de Beenhouwer, M., Hundera, K., Lens, L., Fashing, P. J. & Stenseth, N. C., 2021. Traditional shade coffee forest systems act as refuges for medium- and large-sized mammals as natural forest dwindles in Ethiopia. Biological Conservation. 260, e109219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2021.109219.
Faria, D., Paciencia, M. L. B., Dixo, M., Laps, R. R. & Baumgarten, J., 2007. Ferns, frogs, lizards, birds and bats in forest fragments and shade cacao plantations in two contrasting landscapes in the Atlantic forest, Brazil. Biodiversity and Conservation. 16, 2335–2357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-007-9189-z.
Francesconi, W., Nair, P. K. R., Levey, D. J., Daniels, J. & Cullen, L., 2013. Butterfly distribution in fragmented landscapes containing agroforestry practices in Southeastern Brazil. Agroforestry Systems. 87, 1321–1338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-013-9640-y.
Froufe, L. C. M. & Seoane, C. E. S., 2011. Levantamento fitossociológico comparativo entre sistema agroflorestal multiestrato e capoeiras como ferramenta para a execução da reserva legal. Pesquisa Florestal Brasileira. 31, e67, 203–225. https://doi.org/10.4336/2011.pfb.31.67.203.
Fulgence, T. R., Martin, D. A., Randriamanantena, R., Botra, R., Befidimanana, E., Osen, K., Wurz, A., Kreft, H., Andrianarimisa, A. & Ratsoavina, F. M., 2022. Differential responses of amphibians and reptiles to land-use change in the biodiversity hotspot of north-eastern Madagascar. Animal Conservation. 25, 492–507. https://doi.org/10.1111/acv.12760.
García-Fernández, C. & Casado, M. A., 2005. Forest recovery in managed agroforestry systems: The case of benzoin and rattan gardens in Indonesia. Forest Ecology and Management. 214, 158–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2005.04.013.
Geeraert, L., Aerts, R., Jordaens, K., Dox, I., Wellens, S., Couri, M., Berecha, G. & Honnay & O., 2019. Intensification of Ethiopian coffee agroforestry drives impoverishment of the Arabica coffee flower visiting bee and fly communities. Agroforestry Systems. 93, 1729–1739. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-018-0280-0.
Gonzalez, D. C., Cajaiba, R. L., Périco, E., da Silva, W. B., Brescovite, A. D., Crespi, A. M. L. & Santos, M., 2021. Assessing ecological disturbance in neotropical forest landscapes using high-level diversity and high-level functionality: Surprising outcomes from a case study with spider assemblages. Land. 10, e7. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10070758.
Gomes, D. S., Almeida, F. S., Vargas, A. B. & Queiroz, J. M., 2013. Resposta da assembleia de formigas na interface solo-serapilheira a um gradiente de alteração ambiental. Iheringia Série Zoologia. 103, e2, 104–109. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0073-47212013000200004.
González-Zamora, A., Esperón-Rodríguez, M. & Barradas, V. L., 2016. Mountain cloud forest and grown-shade coffee plantations: A comparison of tree biodiversity in central Veracruz, Mexico. Forest Systems. 25, e055. https://doi.org/10.5424/fs/2016251-07538.
Gómez, V. C. G., Verdú, J. R., Gómez-Cifuentes, A., Vaz-de-Mello, F. Z. & Zurita, G. A., 2018. Influence of land use on the trophic niche overlap of dung beetles in the semideciduous Atlantic forest of Argentina. Insect Conservation and Diversity. 11, 554–564. https://doi.org/10.1111/icad.12299.
Greenler, M. S. & Ebersole, J. J., 2015. Bird communities in tropical agroforestry ecosystems: an underappreciated conservation resource. Agroforestry Systems. 89, 691–704. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-015-9805-y.
Guillemot, J., le Maire, G., Munishamappa, M., Charbonnier, F. & Vaast, P., 2018. Native coffee agroforestry in the Western Ghats of India maintains higher carbon storage and tree diversity compared to exotic agroforestry. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment. 265, 461–469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2018.06.002.
Gutiérrez, J. A. M., Rousseau, G. X., Andrade-Silva, J. & Delabie, J. H. C., 2017. Taxones superiores de hormigas como sustitutos de la riqueza de especies, en una cronosecuencia de bosques secundarios, bosque primário y sistemas agroforestales en la Amazonía Oriental, Brasil. Revista de Biología Tropical. 65, 279–291. http://dx.doi.org/10.15517/rbt.v65i1.23526.
Haggar, J., Pons, D., Saenz, L. & Vides, M., 2019. Contribution of agroforestry systems to sustaining biodiversity in fragmented forest landscapes. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2019.06.006.
Harterreiten-Souza, É. S., Pujol-Luz, J. R., Capellari, R. S., Bickel, D. & Sujii, E. R., 2020. Diversity and Spatial Distribution of Predacious Dolichopodidae (Insecta: Diptera) on Organic Vegetable Fields and Adjacent Habitats in Brazil. Florida Entomologist. 103, 197–205. https://doi.org/10.1653/024.103.0207.
Harvey, C. A., Gonzalez, J. & Somarriba, E., 2006. Dung beetle and terrestrial mammal diversity in forests, indigenous agroforestry systems and plantain monocultures in Talamanca, Costa Rica. Biodiversity and Conservation. 15, 555–585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-005-2088-2.
Hernandez, S. M., Mattsson, B. J., Peters, V. E., Cooper, R. J. & Carroll, C. R., 2013. Coffee Agroforests Remain Beneficial for Neotropical Bird Community Conservation across Seasons. PLoS ONE. 8, e65101. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0065101.
Hoehn, P., Steffan-Dewenter, I. & Tscharntke, T., 2010. Relative contribution of agroforestry, rainforest and openland to local and regional bee diversity. Biodiversity and Conservation. 19, 2189–2200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-010-9831-z.
Jones, D. T., Susilo, F. X., Bignell, D. E., Hardiwinoto, S., Gillison, A. N. & Eggleton, P., 2003. Termite assemblage collapse along a land-use intensification gradient in lowland central Sumatra, Indonesia. Journal of Applied Ecology. 40, 380–391. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2664.2003.00794.x.
Júnior, P. P., Moreira, B. C., da Silva, M. de C. S., Reis Veloso, T. G., Stürmer, S. L., Fernandes, R. B. A., Mendonça, E. de S. & Kasuya, M. C. M., 2019. Agroecological coffee management increases arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi diversity. PLoS ONE. 14, e0209093. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0209093.
Kessler, M., Abrahamczyk, S., Bos, M., Buchori, D., Putra, D. D., Robbert Gradstein, S., Höhn, P., Kluge, J., Orend, F., Pitopang, R., Saleh, S., Schulze, C. H., Sporn, S. G., Steffan-Dewenter, I., Tjitrosoedirdjo, S. S. & Tscharntke, T., 2011. Cost-effectiveness of plant and animal biodiversity indicators in tropical forest and agroforest habitats. Journal of Applied Ecology. 48, 330–339. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01932.x.
Laurindo, L. K., de Souza, T. A. F., da Silva, L. J. R., Casal, T. B., Pires, K., de J., C., Kormann, S., Schmitt, D. E. & Siminski, A., 2021. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal community assembly in agroforestry systems from the Southern Brazil. 76, 1099–1107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11756-021-00700-5.
de Lima, R. F., Viegas, L., Solé, N., Soares, E., Dallimer, M., Atkinson, P. W. & Barlow, J., 2014. Can management improve the value of shade plantations for the endemic species of São Tomé Island? Biotropica. 46, 238–247. https://doi.org/10.1111/btp.12092.
Konopik, O., Steffan-Dewenter, I. & Grafe, T. U., 2015. Effects of Logging and Oil Palm Expansion on Stream Frog Communities on Borneo, Southeast Asia. Biotropica. 47, 636–643. https://doi.org/10.1111/btp.12248.
Korasaki, V., Braga, R. F., Zanetti, R., Moreira, F. M. S., Vaz-de-Mello, F. Z. & Louzada, J., 2013. Conservation value of alternative land-use systems for dung beetles in Amazon: Valuing traditional farming practices. Biodiversity and Conservation. 22, 1485–1499. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-013-0487-3.
Lacerda, F., Miranda, I., Lima, T. T. S., Mafra, N. A., Leão, F. M., do Vale, I., Bispo, C. J. C. & Kato, O. R., 2016. Origin of and resulting floristic composition from seedbanks in agroforestry systems of Tomé-Açu, Eastern Amazon. Weed Research. 56, 219–228. https://doi.org/10.1111/wre.12201.
Lee, R. H., Wang, C. L. W. & Guénard, B., 2020. The ecological implications of rubber-based agroforestry: Insect conservation and invasion control. Journal of Applied Ecology. 57, 1605–1618. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13642.
Lima, S., de Aquino, M. A., Carvalho, F., Velásquez, E. & Lavelle, P., 2010. Relação entre macrofauna edáfica e atributos químicos do solo em diferentes agroecossistemas. Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira. 45, 322–331. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-204X2010000300013.
Lozada, T., de Koning, G. H. J., Marché, R., Klein, A. M. & Tscharntke, T., 2007. Tree recovery and seed dispersal by birds: Comparing forest, agroforestry and abandoned agroforestry in coastal Ecuador. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics. 8, 131–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ppees.2006.10.001.
Machado, D. L., Engel, V. L., Podadera, D. S., Sato, L. M., de Goede, R. G. M., de Moraes, L. F. D. & Parrotta, J. A., 2021. Site and plant community parameters drive the effect of vegetation on litterfall and nutrient inputs in restored tropical forests. Plant and Soil. 464, 405–421. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-021-04964-3.
Mertens, J. E. J., Emsens, W. J., Jocqué, M., Geeraert, L. & de Beenhouwer, M., 2020. From natural forest to coffee agroforest: Implications for communities of large mammals in the Ethiopian highlands. ORYX. 54, 715–722. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605318000844.
Milder, J. C., Declerck, F. A. J., Sanfiorenzo, A., Sanchez, D. M., Tobar, D. E. & Zuckerberg, B., 2010. Effects of farm and landscape management on bird and butterfly conservation in western Honduras. Ecosphere. 1. https://doi.org/10.1890/ES10-00003.1.
Moço, M. K. S., Gama-Rodrigues, E. F., Gama-Rodrigues, A. C., Machado, R. C. R. & Baligar, V. C., 2010. Relationships between invertebrate communities, litter quality and soil attributes under different cacao agroforestry systems in the south of Bahia, Brazil. Applied Soil Ecology. 46, 347–354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2010.10.006.
Moorhead, L. C., Philpott, S. M. & Bichier, P., 2010. Biodiversidad de epífitas en la matriz agrícola de café: Estratificación del dosel y distancia a los fragmentos de bosque. Conservation Biology. 24, 737–746. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01430.x.
Mulia, R., van Hoang, S., Dinh, V. M., Duong, N. B. T., Nguyen, A. D., Lam, D. H., Hoang, D. T. T. & van Noordwijk, M., 2021. Earthworm diversity, forest conversion and agroforestry in Quang Nam Province, Vietnam. Land. 10, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10010036.
Murrieta-Galindo, R., González-Romero, A., López-Barrera, F. & Parra-Olea, G., 2013. Coffee agrosystems: An important refuge for amphibians in central Veracruz, Mexico. Agroforestry Systems. 87, 767–779. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-013-9595-z.
Neita, J. C. & Escobar, F., 2012. The potential value of agroforestry to dung beetle diversity in the wet tropical forests of the Pacific lowlands of Colombia. Agroforestry Systems. 85, 121–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-011-9445-9.
Novais, S. M. A., Macedo-Reis, L. E., Darocha, W. D. & Neves, F. S., 2016. Effects of habitat management on different feeding guilds of herbivorous insects in cacao agroforestry systems. Revista de Biologia Tropical. 64, 763–777. https://doi.org/10.15517/rbt.v64i2.19100.
Ocampo-Ariza, C., Maas, B., Castro-Namuche, J. P., Thomas, E., Vansynghel, J., Steffan-Dewenter, I. & Tscharntke, T., 2022. Trait-dependent responses of birds and bats to season and dry forest distance in tropical agroforestry. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment. 325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2021.107751.
Oke, D. O. & Odebiyi, K. A., 2007. Traditional cocoa-based agroforestry and forest species conservation in Ondo State, Nigeria. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment. 122, 305–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2007.01.022.
Oliveira, A. T. M., Bernardo, C. S. S., Melo, F. R. de, Santos-Filho, M. dos, Peres, C. A. & Canale, G. R., 2019. Primate and ungulate responses to teak agroforestry in a southern Amazonian landscape. Mammalian Biology. 96, 45–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mambio.2019.03.015.
Ottonetti, L., Tucci, L., Frizzi, F., Chelazzi, G. & Santini, G., 2010. Changes in ground-foraging ant assemblages along a disturbance gradient in a tropical agricultural landscape. Ethology Ecology and Evolution. 22, 73–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/03949370903516024.
Oussou, K. H., Assemian, N. G. E., Kouadio, A. L., Tiédoué, M. R. & Rödel, M. O., 2022. The anuran fauna in a protected West African rainforest and surrounding agricultural systems. Amphibian & Reptile Conservation. 16, e298, 1–13.
Pérez-García, O., Benjamin, T. J. & Enrique Tobar, D. L., 2018. Los agroecosistemas cafetaleros modernos y su relación con la conservación de mariposas en paisajes fragmentados. Revista de Biología Tropical. 66, 394–402. http://dx.doi.org/10.15517/rbt.v66i1.29013.
Perry, J., Lojka, B., Ruiz, L. G. Q., Van Damme, P., Houška, J. & Cusimamani, E. F., 2016. How natural forest conversion affects insect biodiversity in the Peruvian Amazon: Can agroforestry Help? Forests. 7, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3390/f7040082.
Pineda, E., Moreno, C., Escobar, F. & Halffter, G., 2005. Frog, Bat, and Dung Beetle Diversity in the Cloud Forest and Coffee Agroecosystems of Veracruz, Mexico. Conservation Biology. 19, 400–410. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00531.x.
Prabowo, W. E., Darras, K., Clough, Y., Toledo-Hernandez, M., Arlettaz, R., Mulyani, Y. A. & Tscharntke, T., 2016. Bird responses to lowland rainforest conversion in Sumatran smallholder landscapes, Indonesia. PLoS ONE. 11. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0154876.
Quansah, G. W., Adu-Bredu, S., Logah, V., Malhi, Y., Eggleton, P. & Parr, C. L., 2022. Termite diversity is resilient to land-use change along a forest-cocoa intensification gradient in Ghana, West Africa. Biotropica. 54, 988–1002. https://doi.org/10.1111/btp.13123.
Rakotomalala, A. A. N. A., Wurz, A., Grass, I., Martin, D. A., Osen, K., Schwab, D., Soazafy, M. R., Tscharntke, T. & Raveloson Ravaomanarivo, L. H., 2021. Tropical land use drives endemic versus exotic ant communities in a global biodiversity hotspot. Biodiversity and Conservation. 30, 4417–4434. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-021-02314-4.
Rembold, K., Mangopo, H., Tjitrosoedirdjo, S. S. & Kreft, H., 2017. Plant diversity, forest dependency, and alien plant invasions in tropical agricultural landscapes. Biological Conservation. 213, 234–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2017.07.020.
Rendón-Sandoval, F. J., Casas, A., Moreno-Calles, A. I., Torres-García, I. & García-Frapolli, E., 2020. Traditional agroforestry systems and conservation of native plant diversity of seasonally dry tropical forests. Sustainability. 12, e4600. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12114600.
Richards, J. H., 2021. Assessing the strength of climate and land-use influences on montane epiphyte communities. Conservation Biology. 35, 1496–1506. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13679.
Rodríguez, C.S., Cognato, A. I. & Righi, C. A., 2017. Bark and Ambrosia Beetle (Curculionidae: Scolytinae) Diversity Found in Agricultural and Fragmented Forests in Piracicaba-SP, Brazil. Environmental Entomology. 46, 1254–1263. https://doi.org/10.1093/ee/nvx160.
Rolim, S. G., Sambuichi, R. H. R., Schroth, G., Nascimento, M. T. & Gomes, J. M. L., 2017. Recovery of Forest and Phylogenetic Structure in Abandoned Cocoa Agroforestry in the Atlantic Forest of Brazil. Environmental Management. 59, 410–418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-016-0800-5.
Römbke, J., Schmidt, P. & Höfer, H., 2009. The earthworm fauna of regenerating forests and anthropogenic habitats in the coastal region of Paraná. Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira. 44, 1040–1049. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-204X2009000800037.
Saleh, S., Schulze, C. H. & Tscharntke, T., 2005. Changes of dung beetle communities from rainforests towards agroforestry systems and annual cultures in Sulawesi (Indonesia). Biodiversity and Conservation. 14, 863–877. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-004-0654-7.
dos Santos, A. M. G., Gatto, A., Oliveira, E. P., Ribeiro, F. P., Hodecker, B. E. R., Bussinguer, A. P. & Ferreira, N. C. d. F., 2022. Diversidade de invertebrados em diferentes usos do solo na floresta da Amazônia. Nativa. 10, 341–350. https://doi.org/10.31413/nativa.v10i3.13020.
Schüepp, C., Rittiner, S. & Entling, M. H., 2012. High Bee and Wasp Diversity in a Heterogeneous Tropical Farming System Compared to Protected Forest. PLoS ONE. 7. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0052109.
Sharma, K., Acharya, B. K., Sharma, G., Valente, D., Pasimeni, M. R., Petrosillo, I. & Selvan, T., 2020. Land use effect on butterfly alpha and beta diversity in the Eastern Himalaya, India. Ecological Indicators. 110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105605.
Silva, A. E. T., Rocha, V. J. & de Figueiredo, R. A., 2018. Diversidade, similaridade e riqueza de morcegos em área nativa e de sistema agroflorestal na Mata Atlântica, Brasil. Revista Brasileira de Agroecologia. 13, 6–16.
Sistla, S. A., Roddy, A. B., Williams, N. E., Kramer, D. B., Stevens, K. & Allison, S. D., 2016. Agroforestry practices promote biodiversity and natural resource diversity in atlantic Nicaragua. PLoS ONE, 11. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0162529.
de Souza, H. N., de Goede, R. G. M., Brussaard, L., Cardoso, I. M., Duarte, E. M. G., Fernandes, R. B. A., Gomes, L. C. & Pulleman, M. M., 2012. Protective shade, tree diversity and soil properties in coffee agroforestry systems in the Atlantic Rainforest biome. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment. 146, 179–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2011.11.007.
Stürmer, S. L. & Siqueira, J. O., 2011. Species richness and spore abundance of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi across distinct land uses in Western Brazilian Amazon. Mycorrhiza. 21, 255–267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00572-010-0330-6.
Teodoro, A. V., Muñoz, A., Tscharntke, T., Klein, A. M. & Tylianakis, J. M., 2011. Early succession arthropod community changes on experimental passion fruit plant patches along a land-use gradient in Ecuador. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment. 140, 14–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2010.11.006.
Vera-Velez, R., Cota-Sánchez, J. H. & Grijalva, J., 2017. Biodiversity, dynamics, and impact of chakras on the Ecuadorian Amazon. Journal of Plant Ecology. 12, 34–44. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpe/rtx060.
Vieira, A. L. M., Pires, A. S., Nunes-Freitas, A. F., Oliveira, N. M., Resende, A. S. & Campello, E. F. C., 2014. Efficiency of small mammal trapping in an Atlantic Forest fragmented landscape: The effects of trap type and position, seasonality and habitat. Brazilian Journal of Biology. 74, 538–544. https://doi.org/10.1590/bjb.2014.0075.
Viégas, L. B., da Silva, J. M. S., Pala, M. de C. & Piña-Rodrigues, F. C. M., 2019. Restoring ecological functions using agroforestry systems in riparian forests. Floresta e Ambiente. 26. https://doi.org/10.1590/2179-8087.083017.
Villavicencio-Enríquez, L. & Valdez-Hernández, J. I., 2003. Analysis of tree structure in the traditional coffee agroforestry system in San Miguel, Vera Cruz, México. Agrociência. 37, 413–423.
Waltert, M., Bobo, K. S., Kaupa, S., Montoya, M. L., Nsanyi, M. S. & Fermon, H., 2011. Assessing conservation values: Biodiversity and endemicity in tropical land use systems. PLoS ONE. 6. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0016238.
Waltert, M., Bobo, K. S., Sainge, N. M., Fermon, H. & Mühlenberg, M., 2005. From forest to farmland: Habitat effects on afrotropical forest bird diversity. Ecological Applications. 15, 1351–1366. https://doi.org/10.1890/04-1002.
Wanger, T. C., Iskandar, D. T., Motzke, I., Brook, B. W., Sodhi, N. S., Clough, Y. & Tscharntke, T., 2010. Efectos del cambio de uso de suelo sobre la composicíon de la comunidad de anfibios y reptiles en Sulawesi, Indonesia. Conservation Biology. 24, 795–802. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01434.x.
Wurz, A., Grass, I., Lees, D. C., Rakotomalala, A. A. N. A., Sáfián, S., Martin, D. A., Osen, K., Loos, J., Benasoavina, E., Alexis, T. & Tscharntke, T., 2022. Land-use change differentially affects endemic, forest and open-land butterflies in Madagascar. Insect Conservation and Diversity. 15, 606–620. https://doi.org/10.1111/icad.12580.
For our systematic review on biodiversity in agroforestry systems (AFSs) implemented in tropical ecoregions, we searched for papers using the following keywords present in the title: field 1- agroforest*; field 2- diversity OR richness OR abundance; field 3- tropical. We conducted our search in the platforms Periódicos CAPES, Web of Science, Scielo, and Google Scholar. We did not restrict the oldest publication date and we finished our search in July 2023. For a paper to be included in the systematic review, it necessarily had to compare the abundance, richness, and/or diversity index of some taxonomic group or growth form between AFSs and reference vegetation areas located in tropical ecoregions, anywhere in the world. We considered each taxonomic group or growth form studied in an AFS or reference area as an observation and extracted the information provided in Main_data.csv.