Can linear transportation infrastructure verges constitute a habitat and/or a corridor for insects in temperate landscapes? A systematic review

Anne Villemey; Arzhvaël Jeusset; Marianne Vargac; Yves Bertheau; Aurélie Coulon; Julien Touroult; Sylvie Vanpeene; Bastien Castagneyrol; Hervé Jactel; Isabelle Witte; Nadine Deniaud; Frédérique Flamerie De Lachapelle; Emmanuel Jaslier; Véronique Roy; Eric Guinard; Eric Le Mitouard; Vanessa Rauel; Romain Sordello

doi:10.1186/s13750-018-0117-3

Environmental Evidence

Table 10 Summary of the main effects highlighted in the narrative syntheses

From: Can linear transportation infrastructure verges constitute a habitat and/or a corridor for insects in temperate landscapes? A systematic review

Specific question	Group	Main effects on insect biodiversity	Type of evidence	Susceptibility to bias^b
Q1 habitat/management practices	A: vegetation restoration	+ to NS	6 control-impact studies	6 medium
	B: artificialization of the LTI	− to NS	4 control-impact studies, 1 BACI study	1 low, 4 medium
	C: mowing and grazing	Difficult to synthesize (inconsistencies)	5 control-impact studies, 1 BACI study	1 low, 5 medium
Q2 habitat in LTI verges vs. at proximity	D: Coleoptera in terrestrial LTI verges in comparison with other habitats	Difficult to synthesize (inconsistencies)	10 control-impact studies	6 low, 4 medium
	E: pollinators in terrestrial LTI verges in comparison with other habitats	NS to +	8 control-impact studies	4 low, 4 medium
	F: “unwanted species” in road verges in comparison with other habitats	NS to +	7 control-impact studies	2 low, 5 medium
	G: other groups^a in terrestrial LTI verges in comparison with other habitats	NS to +	10 control-impact studies	6 low, 4 medium
	H: all species in aquatic LTI verges in comparison with other habitats	Not possible to conclude (too few and inconsistent studies)	3 control-impact studies	1 low, 2 medium
Q3 dispersal/management practices	–	No article
Q4 dispersal in LTI verges vs. at proximity	–	Not possible to conclude (too few and inconsistent studies)	2 control-impact studies	2 medium
Q5 habitat/surrounding landscape	I: urbanization in the surrounding landscape	− to NS	7 control-impact studies	3 low, 4 medium
	J: agriculture in the surrounding landscape	− to NS	5 control-impact studies	1 low, 4 medium
	K: natural or protected areas in the surrounding landscape	NS to +	4 control-impact studies	1 low, 3 medium
	L: forested areas in the surrounding landscape	NS to +	3 control-impact studies	2 low, 1 medium
Q6 dispersal/surrounding landscape	–	No article

+ positive effect, − negative effect, NS statistically non-significant effect, NS to + effects mainly statistically non-significant but sometimes positive, + to NS effects mainly positive but sometimes statistically non-significant
^aInsects different from Coleoptera, pollinators and “unwanted species”
^bMedium: study with medium level of susceptibility to bias, low: study with low level of susceptibility to bias

Back to article page