Monastir buying weed
Monastir buying weedMonastir buying weed
__________________________
📍 Verified store!
📍 Guarantees! Quality! Reviews!
__________________________
▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼
▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲
Monastir buying weed
Thank you for visiting nature. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer. In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript. Organic farming is promoted to reduce environmental impacts of agriculture, but surprisingly little is known about its effects at the farm level, the primary unit of decision making. Here we report the effects of organic farming on species diversity at the field, farm and regional levels by sampling plants, earthworms, spiders and bees in fields of randomly selected organic and nonorganic farms in twelve European and African regions. Species richness is, on average, Gains to species richness are partly caused by higher organism abundance and are common in plants and bees but intermittent in earthworms and spiders. Additional, targeted measures are therefore needed to fulfil the commitment of organic farming to benefit farmland biodiversity. Biodiversity is threatened, both at global and regional scales 1 , 2. During the past decades, agriculture has been a key driver of the loss of biodiversity through intensification of existing farmland and conversion of natural land into cropland 3 , 4 , 5. However, farmland also hosts many species that depend on appropriate agricultural management for their survival 6 , 7. Organic agriculture is intended to be a biodiversity-friendly and sustainable farming system 8 and is promoted by many countries as a way of reducing the environmental impacts of agriculture 9. Although debated, better food quality 10 and less environmental impact 11 are persuasive arguments that have encouraged an increasing number of consumers to buy organic products. Organic farming is also considered a key strategy for land sharing, that is, the promotion of biodiversity and food production on the same area of land 5 , 12 , 13 , Evidence generally suggests that organic farming has beneficial effects on biodiversity, but the magnitude of these effects is highly variable 11 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , This is due to two major challenges in quantifying the effects of a farming system on biodiversity. A meta-analysis indicated that organic farming increases species evenness and that organic farming gains to species richness are mainly effects of the abundance of individuals The second challenge is that, while research investigates biodiversity mostly at the field scale, a farmer considers his entire farm when making management decisions Farms are highly diverse in their internal organization and spatial layout, even within the same geographical region and production type. Farming effects at the field level do not necessarily translate directly to the farm or landscape level 12 , 15 , 18 , 19 , Hence, studies at multiple scales are crucial to understanding the impacts of farming systems on biodiversity In a large study on farmland biodiversity, we aimed to quantify the benefits organic farming has on species diversity at field, farm and regional levels across a range of environments from boreal to tropical. The groups were selected to represent different habitat compartments soil, soil surface and above-ground structures , trophic levels, mobility and expected responses to agricultural management 15 , 16 , 19 , 20 , 29 , To cope with the heterogeneity of agriculture, we sampled species in farms in twelve contrasting regions in Europe and Africa using standardized methods Fig. The regions were homogeneous with regard to environmental conditions, and from each region, 12 to 20 farms were randomly selected, approximately half of them certified organic. No additional constraints were set on the nonorganic farms, which could therefore comply with various other statutory or voluntary standards of environmental care This provided us with representative samples of present-day organic and nonorganic farms of a particular production type in every region, thereby avoiding the problematic, and ultimately impossible, exercise of pairing organic and nonorganic farms. The consistent assessment of species diversity across three levels of aggregation identifies decreasing gains to species diversity from field to farm and region and recommends targeted measures for the promotion of farmland biodiversity. Regions with bicolour symbol have mixed land use see Table 1 for details. Region 12 is located in Uganda and not shown on map. Significant differences within regions U -test at 0. The investigated regions represented various production types with a low-to-medium intensity of farming, thus accounting for a relatively large portion of global agriculture Organic farms did not, on average, have a higher number of habitat types or a higher areal proportion of semi-natural elements Fig. As habitats present in each region differed, a comparison at the field level was only possible for the most frequently observed habitats per study region. Depending on the region, the most frequent habitats managed with the primary aim of agricultural production were winter or summer-sown non-entomophilic crop fields, fertile grasslands, vineyards or olive groves Supplementary Table 2. The most frequent nonproduction habitats, for example, managed for access to land, wind shelter or as part of an agri-environmental scheme, were grassy or shrubby strips along field or water edges. Organic farming was beneficial to species richness of plants and bees in production fields in many regions, but differences were rarely significant if tested within each region separately Fig. Across all four taxonomic groups and all regions, This significant positive effect of organic farming on species richness arises from the fact that all groups responded positively, although only the difference in plants was significant. X axes are log-scaled to equalize distances on both sides of parity. Effects were similar if the regionally most frequent individual crops winter wheat or alfalfa were compared Supplementary Fig. These crops were not necessarily present on all farms because details of the crop rotation were not a selection criteria but rather a possible difference between farms. The four regions also showed significant differences in management intensity between organic and nonorganic farms as illustrated by N input, the number of mechanical operation per ha and the number of pesticide applications per ha; Fig. As assessed by hierarchical preferential sampling, organic farms tended to have higher total species richness than nonorganic farms. Gains to total species richness were strongest in Bavarian mixed farms, as well as in olive farms in Extremadura, and were consistently positive in the grassland farms in Obwalden, Hedmark and Wales Fig. These results reflect diminished organic farming gains for biodiversity when observed at the farm level as compared with the field level. A weighted random resampling procedure with the areal proportion of different habitats per farm as weights indicated that organic farming gains to species richness decrease if more of the smaller habitats on the farm are included Fig. The resampling mimicked random species sampling, in which samples are more likely drawn in habitats with a larger areal proportion, in this case, predominantly production habitats. The fading was especially pronounced where organic farming gains to production habitats were large, namely with plants and bees and in regions with arable cropping Fig. Gains to species richness of spiders also tended to decrease with more sampled habitats. Y axes are log-scaled to equalize distances on both sides of parity. Numbers and coloured circles correspond to the twelve regions as displayed in Fig. Organic farming also had no significant effects on abundance or evenness in nonproduction habitats Fig. Numbers on y axis indicate the twelve regions shown in Fig. There were considerable differences in species richness between regions for the four taxonomic groups. However, in the majority of regions, species accumulation curves from samples in organic and nonorganic farms had similar shapes Supplementary Figs 4—7. Extrapolated regional species numbers from these curves differed little between organic and nonorganic farms Supplementary Fig. The evidence from European and African farms suggests substantial organic farming gains to species richness of plants and bees in production habitats in intensive arable regions, which is in agreement with several other studies conducted at the field level 11 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , Organic farming benefits to species richness in production fields increased with regional average nitrogen input, as well as with differences in nitrogen input between organic and nonorganic farms. This agrees with a recent meta-analysis 22 as well as with an investigation in wheat fields, which indicated that organic farming gains in biodiversity are proportional to losses in yield Our finding is in agreement with the few studies that compared organic and nonorganic practices at farm or landscape level and found weaker effects at higher levels of aggregation 12 , In contrast to earlier studies, we aimed at a comprehensive assessment of all habitats affected by farming activities, including nonproductive habitats, such as unpaved tracks or field margins. This allowed us to account for possible differences in habitat composition between farms, which are of crucial importance for biodiversity at farm level 28 , 33 , 34 , Species richness at the farm level is a combination of farming effects at the field level and the composition of farmland habitats on each farm. This interaction is exemplified by comparing data from Extremadura and Veneto. In Extremadura, organic and nonorganic olive groves the production habitat did not differ in species richness because in both farming systems, the primary management is harrowing to control weeds and reduce competition for soil water Herbicides are primarily used to control weed invasion from margins and reduce species richness in nonorganic nonproduction strips of grass and shrubs. Consequently, less species are found in nonorganic than in organic farms. In contrast, herbicide use in nonorganic vineyards in Veneto reduced floral species richness 37 , while the application of natural pesticides and organic weed control may have reduced richness of faunal groups in organic vineyards Similar habitat richness in all farms resulted in higher floral but lower faunal species richness on organic than nonorganic Venetian farms. Habitat composition was taken into account in the resampling procedure, which highlights a continuous decrease in the positive effects of organic farming on plant and bee species richness as more farm habitats are sampled. Such fading from field to farm may be explained by two processes: the regional pool of farmland species may be limited and simply attained faster on organic farms, or additional species in organic production habitats are ubiquitous, invading more easily from boundaries into fields and contribute little to the total species richness per farm. We further calculated the occurrence of each plant and bee species relative to all samples in a region as a measure of species rarity, but did not find organic farming effects on species rarity. This suggests that the higher species richness in organic production fields is mostly due to common species, which contribute relatively little to total farm species richness because they are frequently found in other habitats of each farm. There was a striking correspondence between gains to species richness and organism abundance across all regions and taxonomic groups. Although this is not surprising and is a well-known property of species richness 25 , 30 , 39 , it shows that a higher abundance of individuals is likely the most important effect of organic farming on species richness. Hence, organic farming is not significantly increasing the number of species present in a given number of individuals but sustains a higher number of individuals in a given sampling unit. Investigating species diversity across multiple regions and taxonomic groups using standardized methodology also substantially complements our understanding of the effects of organic farming on biodiversity by showing where there are no significant effects. Most prominently, organic farming contributed little to habitat heterogeneity, which is of key importance for farmland biodiversity 28 , 33 , 34 , Organic and nonorganic farms did not differ in average habitat richness and thereby, in their potential to host exclusive species in any of the investigated regions. Organic farming effects on earthworm and spider richness and abundance were highly region-specific but marginal over all regions. Furthermore, we found significant gains to species evenness in plants in arable fields only, in contrast to a recent meta-analysis based on 81 studies This shows that any evaluation of farming effects on biodiversity requires critical consideration of the investigated taxonomic groups and geographical coverage 22 , Organic farming gains in the two investigated African regions were surprisingly small and did not differ from European regions. Interestingly, plant species richness in both regions tended to be lower in organic than in nonorganic production fields. Due to the costs of organic certification and market access, organic growers may invest more labour in weed control than some of their nonorganic counterparts In addition, inputs to agriculture are relatively low in both regions and, hence, differences between organic and nonorganic management are small Despite substantial variation between taxonomic groups and regions, the majority of the average effects of organic farming on species diversity demonstrate a positive tendency. This is true for most of the nonsignificant effects on species richness, abundance and evenness in productive fields and at farm and regional level. Hence, organic farming tends to sustain species diversity to a higher degree than nonorganic farming by allowing more individuals to survive in a given unit of agricultural habitat. We conclude that organic farming represents a step in the right direction toward preserving farmland biodiversity. Yet, the gains fade at the farm level due to the equilibrating effect of nonproduction habitats, which are similar in both farming systems. Therefore, land sharing by present-day organic farming alone is unlikely to halt the current global decline in farmland biodiversity 1 , Additional land-sparing measures that maintain and increase habitat diversity and quality, such as directed agri-environment schemes 6 , 18 , 27 , set-aside areas 29 , 34 and management contracts for habitats of rare species 7 are urgently needed. Implementation of these measures in organic farming guidelines 8 , 9 should be intensified to boost its performance in terms of promoting farmland biodiversity. Our study highlights that only by means of such targeted measures it is possible to accommodate the dual objectives of food production and biodiversity conservation on farmland. Study regions were selected to reflect major organic farming types in Europe and Africa as well as to be spread across a large gradient of climatic conditions Table 1. To minimize farm selection bias, the regions needed to be as homogeneous as possible with respect to environmental conditions soil, temperature and precipitation , while still containing a sufficient number of organic and nonorganic farms. Basic farm information was obtained from local sources Supplementary Table 1 and specific exclusion criteria were applied to all farms within each study region, for example, a minimum portion of area under arable cropping for farms in regions with mixed land use, a minimum farmed area, a particular livestock type or the cultivation of a particular crop. Hence, sampled farms were representative for a specific combination of region and agricultural types, for example, vine producers in Veneto, but not for all farms in a region. Organic farms were required to have been certified organic for at least 5 years before the study. No additional constraints were set on the nonorganic farms. Out of the eligible farms in each region, 8 to 10 organic and an equal number of nonorganic farms were selected at random Supplementary Table 1. If no agreement was provided by farmers, reserve random selections were used to complete the set. In the Hedmark region, the total number of farms studied was limited to 12 due to sampling time constraints caused by the short growing season and the complex habitat structure. In the entire Gelderland region, only three nonorganic horticultural farms within the study region agreed to participate in the study, in comparison with 11 organic farms. In Homokhatsag, only seven organic farms were available for investigation and in Obwalden, a nonorganic farmer ceased participation during the study. In Veneto, farms had to be selected from three separate vine areas because there were not enough organic farmers within one single area. In Wales and Hedmark, organic and nonorganic farms were selected in pairs because they were located along a geographical and intensity gradient that made it difficult to get an unbiased subset by random sampling. Detailed farm data and management information was gathered during structured interviews with farmers. Counts of mechanical operations included field cultivation, pesticide applications, mowing, turning, bale making and loading. Counts of pesticide applications included natural pesticides. N input, mechanical operations and pesticide applications on fields were totalled and the area-weighted averages per farm were calculated. Gathering of management information in African countries involved more uncertainty than in Europe, especially in multiple cropping systems and the characterization of organic fertilizers. The entire area of each study farm was mapped according to the EBONE methodology, a standard habitat mapping procedure for the European scale 44 , The habitat qualifiers, which characterize individual habitats with respect to their ecological features, include categories specifically related to farming areas. For our study, the method has been adapted with refined GHC definitions to deal with the specific characteristics of farm holdings. In addition, the three dominant plant species were recorded and allowed for comparisons within the regionally most frequent crops. The first step in mapping was the assessment of the farm area, that is, all land managed by a farmer. In the second step, the area was mapped to either areal or linear elements. Third, based on life form and nonlife form categories, a GHC was assigned to every areal and linear element. A farm class farmed and non-farmed land and specific environmental and management qualifiers were attributed to all areal elements. The GHCs and qualifiers were chosen from a limited list using specific rules to avoid potential multiplicity of codes and mosaics, and to provide a lowest common denominator for linking data sets across study regions. The combination of GHCs and qualifiers allowed a specific separation of habitats with distinct species compositions for example, grasslands of different management intensity , while still being general enough for comparison within regions. Across all 12 study regions, the habitat mapping yielded distinct habitats on farmed land, with an average of 26 range of 13—58 in each region and an average of 7. Out of all areal or linear elements of a specific farmed habitat on each farm, one plot was randomly selected. On the selected plots, the species of the four taxonomic groups were sampled in and using standardized protocols Subsamples were immediately transferred to a cool-box. As a taxonomic catalogue of spiders is lacking in the Kayunga region, the region was not sampled for spiders. Domesticated bees were counted in the field but not captured. Each plot was surveyed three times during the growing season, but specific timing depended on local conditions. Organism abundance and species richness at the field level was calculated by summing all individuals and species per plot, respectively. Species evenness was calculated as. Data points without or with only one sampled species were omitted from the evaluation of evenness, as no meaningful values could be calculated. Total species richness at the farm level was calculated by counting all species observed in all the sampled habitats on each farm. Abundance at the farm level was calculated by totalling all individuals in all the sampled habitats on each farm. Presented values therefore still reflect differences in the frequency of plots where 0 and 1 individual was sampled. Total species richness at the regional level was calculated by extrapolating the species-area curves Supplementary Figs 4—7 using the jackknife method of first order Furthermore, moment-based species accumulation curves together with unconditional standard deviations 55 were calculated for all samples collected on organic and nonorganic fields in each region. Differences between organic and nonorganic within individual regions were tested using Mann—Whitney U tests. Because interpreting the significances of these tests is not trivial in light of the numerous comparisons 56 , we relied on mixed-effects models for assessing the impact of organic farming. In these models, farming effects on each metric of species diversity S were calculated for each taxonomic group over all the 12 regions. The model is:. Random intercepts b 2 ij accommodate extra-Poisson variance due to over-dispersion For species evenness, mixed-effects models analogous to equation 2 but with a Gaussian error structure were estimated. As the number of sampled habitats on each farm was not equal across farms, it was incorporated into the models for species richness and abundance at the farm level as a linear covariate x 2 ij 59 , p. The number of samples had no effect at the field level and was omitted from these models. Maximum-likelihood estimation was carried out in R 3. The models over all four taxonomic groups are more complex and, hence, offer several possible structures of random effects. For each metric of species diversity, we started therefore with a complex structure of random effects full model and subsequently simplified it using sequential log-likelihood ratio tests The most parsimonious model was finally used for inference on the overall organic farming gain to species richness. The full model is. The term b 1 j is a random intercept for country j , b 2 jk is a random intercept for the combination of country j and taxonomic group k , and b 3 ij is a random intercept for farm ij. The term b 4 ijk is a random intercept for observations of taxonomic group k in farm ij and accommodates extra-Poisson variance due to over-dispersion Term b 5 ij is a random effect of taxonomic group k within farm ij. The most parsimonious model of species richness and organism abundance at farm level was the full model without random terms b 1 , b 3 and b 4. For individual regions and taxonomic groups, organic farming gains OFGs and losses were calculated as percent difference of organic farms OFs relative to nonorganic farms NOFs. The standard deviation 60 of the OFG is. Organic farming gains and losses across regions and taxonomic groups were calculated based on coefficients estimated from mixed-effect models equations 2 and 3. To assess the diminishing of organic farming gains to species richness from field to farm, we resampled fields according to their proportion of total farm area. Specifically, we generated random sequences of all sampled habitats per farm weighted by their areal proportion 61 , p. This resulted in random sequences of habitats predominantly starting with those habitats with high areal proportions. We then calculated the accumulation of species richness along each sequence and, based on the realizations, the mean accumulation of species richness per farm. Finally, we fitted mixed-effects models for each taxonomic group at each number of sampled habitats using equation 2 and calculated organic farming gains using equation 6. How to cite this article: Schneider, M. Gains to species diversity in organically farmed fields are not propagated at the farm level. Sachs, J. Biodiversity conservation and the millennium development goals. Science , — Butchart, S. Global biodiversity: indicators of recent declines. Rudel, T. Changing drivers of deforestation and new opportunities for conservation. Article Google Scholar. Balmford, A. What conservationists need to know about farming. B Biol. Tscharntke, T. Global food security, biodiversity conservation and the future of agricultural intensification. Kleijn, D. How effective are European agri-environment schemes in conserving and promoting biodiversity? Oppermann, R. Stolze, M. Policy for organic farming: Rationale and concepts. Food Policy 34 , — Brandt, K. Agroecosystem management and nutritional quality of plant foods: the case of organic fruits and vegetables. Plant Sci. Gomiero, T. Environmental impact of different agricultural management practices: conventional versus organic agriculture. Hodgson, J. Comparing organic farming and land sparing: optimizing yield and butterfly populations at a landscape scale. Fischer, J. Conservation: limits of land sparing. Phalan, B. Reconciling food production and biodiversity conservation: land sharing and land sparing compared. Bengtsson, J. The effects of organic agriculture on biodiversity and abundance: a meta-analysis. Fuller, R. Benefits of organic farming to biodiversity vary among taxa. Hole, D. Does organic farming benefit biodiversity? Gabriel, D. Beta diversity at different spatial scales: plant communities in organic and conventional agriculture. Scale matters: the impact of organic farming on biodiversity at different spatial scales. Winqvist, C. Mixed effects of organic farming and landscape complexity on farmland biodiversity and biological control potential across Europe. Food production versus biodiversity: comparing organic and conventional agriculture. Tuck, S. Land-use intensity and the effects of organic farming on biodiversity: a hierarchical meta-analysis. Paoletti, M. Using bioindicators based on biodiversity to assess landscape sustainability. Purvis, A. Getting the measure of biodiversity. Nature , — Crowder, D. Conserving and promoting evenness: organic farming and fire-based wildland management as case studies. Ecology 93 , — Kelemen, E. Land Use Policy 35 , — Does conservation on farmland contribute to halting the biodiversity decline? Trends Ecol. Pelosi, C. The spatial scale mismatch between ecological processes and agricultural management: do difficulties come from underlying theoretical frameworks? Mixed biodiversity benefits of agri-environment schemes in five European countries. Responses of plants, earthworms, spiders and bees to geographic location, agricultural management and surrounding landscape in European arable fields. Herzfeld, T. Why do farmers behave as they do? Understanding compliance with rural, agricultural, and food attribute standards. Land Use Policy 29 , — Conant, R. Patterns and trends in nitrogen use and nitrogen recovery efficiency in world agriculture. Cycles 27 , — Benton, T. Farmland biodiversity: is habitat heterogeneity the key? Aviron, S. Ecological cross compliance promotes farmland biodiversity in Switzerland. Billeter, R. Indicators for biodiversity in agricultural landscapes: a pan-European study. Land use and management effects on carbon and nitrogen in Mediterranean Cambisols. Nascimbene, J. Organic farming benefits local plant diversity in vineyard farms located in intensive agricultural landscapes. The role of earthworms for assessment of sustainability and as bioindicators. Gotelli, N. Quantifying biodiversity: procedures and pitfalls in the measurement and comparison of species richness. Landscape-moderated biodiversity effects of agri-environmental management: a meta-analysis. Chongtham, I. Assessment of the strategies of organic fruit production and fruit drying in Uganda. Rural Dev. Google Scholar. Khedher, M. Strategy of organic market in Tunisia. European Commission, Eurostat. Bunce, R. A standardized procedure for surveillance and monitoring European habitats and provision of spatial data. Dennis, P. Soil Biol. Schmidt, M. Differential effects of landscape and management on diversity and density of ground-dwelling farmland spiders. Banaszak, J. Studies on methods of censusing the numbers of bees Hymenoptera, Apoidea. Westphal, C. Measuring bee diversity in different European habitats and biogeographical regions. Smith, B. Oikos 76 , 70—82 Hurlbert, S. The nonconcept of species diversity: a critique and alternative parameters. Ecology 52 , — R Development Core Team. Heltshe, J. Estimating species richness using the jackknife procedure. Biometrics 39 , 1—11 Colwell, R. Interpolating, extrapolating, and comparing incidence-based species accumulation curves. Ecology 85 , — Gelman, A. Browne, W. Variance partitioning in multilevel logistic models that exhibit overdispersion. A Stat. Zuur, A. Hedges, L. The meta-analysis of response ratios in experimental ecology. Ecology 80 , — Venables, W. Modern Applied Statistics with S Springer South, A. Download references. This work was funded by the European Union through FP7 project BioBio Indicators for biodiversity in organic and low-input farming systems; www. We thank the farmers for access to land and for information on land management. Comments by K. Nascimbene, K. Seipel, M. Suter and M. Winzeler are acknowledged. We are indebted to S. Baldwin, O. Balle, M. Bernhardt, M. Bouvet, S. Buholzer, B. Bunce, C. Centeri, G. Cuendet, Z. Elek, G. Engan, E. Falusi, O. Finch, P. Gillingham, X. Heer, B. Heiner, M. Jerkovich, Z. Kantner, N. Koncz, A. Kwikiriza, L. Lemaire, T. Lord, A. Mjelde, A. Neumayr, F. Pavett, K. Penksza, L. Podmaniczky, R. Pommeresche, B. Putz, N. Richner, F. Schneiter, S. Schwarz, D. Schwenk, N. Stone, O. Szalkovszki, G. Szalma, T. Szederjesi, H. Timmermann, S. Tolhurst, J. Vale, F. Vuillemin, A. Whittington, J. Wilkes and T. Zanetti for assistance in field sampling, taxonomy and data processing. Manuel K. Peter Dennis, Mariecia D. Department of Biology, Padova University, via U. Tiziano Gomiero, Maurizio G. Forestry School, University of Extremadura, Av. Virgen del Puerto 2, Plasencia, , Spain. Box , Kampala, Uganda. You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar. Correspondence to Manuel K. Reprints and permissions. Schneider, M. Nat Commun 5 , Download citation. Received : 12 December Accepted : 19 May Published : 24 June Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:. Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article. Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative. Agronomy for Sustainable Development Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily. Skip to main content Thank you for visiting nature. Download PDF. Subjects Biodiversity. Abstract Organic farming is promoted to reduce environmental impacts of agriculture, but surprisingly little is known about its effects at the farm level, the primary unit of decision making. You have full access to this article via your institution. Multi-community effects of organic and conventional farming practices in vineyards Article Open access 07 June An increase in food production in Europe could dramatically affect farmland biodiversity Article Open access 02 September Farming practices to enhance biodiversity across biomes: a systematic review Article Open access 09 January Introduction Biodiversity is threatened, both at global and regional scales 1 , 2. Figure 1: Management of organic and nonorganic farms in twelve regions on two continents. Full size image. Table 1 Locations and environmental characteristics of the study regions. Full size table. Results Farm structures and management The investigated regions represented various production types with a low-to-medium intensity of farming, thus accounting for a relatively large portion of global agriculture Species richness in production and nonproduction habitats As habitats present in each region differed, a comparison at the field level was only possible for the most frequently observed habitats per study region. Figure 2: Organic farming gains and losses to species richness in twelve regions. Figure 3: Organic farming gains and losses to species richness fade from field to farm. Figure 4: Organic farming gains and losses to organism abundance in twelve regions. Discussion The evidence from European and African farms suggests substantial organic farming gains to species richness of plants and bees in production habitats in intensive arable regions, which is in agreement with several other studies conducted at the field level 11 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , Methods Study regions and farms Study regions were selected to reflect major organic farming types in Europe and Africa as well as to be spread across a large gradient of climatic conditions Table 1. Hierarchical preferential sampling The entire area of each study farm was mapped according to the EBONE methodology, a standard habitat mapping procedure for the European scale 44 , Metrics of species diversity Organism abundance and species richness at the field level was calculated by summing all individuals and species per plot, respectively. Additional information How to cite this article: Schneider, M. References Sachs, J. Article Google Scholar Balmford, A. Article Google Scholar Tscharntke, T. Article Google Scholar Kleijn, D. Article Google Scholar Oppermann, R. Article Google Scholar Brandt, K. Article Google Scholar Hodgson, J. Article Google Scholar Fischer, J. Article Google Scholar Fuller, R. Article Google Scholar Gabriel, D. Article Google Scholar Winqvist, C. Article Google Scholar Tuck, S. Article Google Scholar Paoletti, M. Article Google Scholar Purvis, A. Article Google Scholar Kelemen, E. Article Google Scholar Pelosi, C. Article Google Scholar Herzfeld, T. Article Google Scholar Conant, R. Article Google Scholar Aviron, S. Article Google Scholar Billeter, R. Article Google Scholar Nascimbene, J. Article Google Scholar Gotelli, N. Article Google Scholar Chongtham, I. Google Scholar Khedher, M. Google Scholar European Commission, Eurostat. Article Google Scholar Bunce, R. Article Google Scholar Schmidt, M. Article Google Scholar Banaszak, J. Google Scholar Westphal, C. Article Google Scholar Smith, B. Article Google Scholar Hurlbert, S. Article Google Scholar Gelman, A. Google Scholar Browne, W. Article Google Scholar Venables, W. Article Google Scholar Download references. Acknowledgements This work was funded by the European Union through FP7 project BioBio Indicators for biodiversity in organic and low-input farming systems; www. Schneider View author publications. View author publications. Ethics declarations Competing interests The authors declare no competing financial interests. Supplementary information. Rights and permissions Reprints and permissions. About this article. Cite this article Schneider, M. Copy to clipboard. This article is cited by How will an increase in organic agricultural area affect land use in Germany? Watson Agronomy for Sustainable Development Search Search articles by subject, keyword or author. Show results from All journals This journal. Advanced search. Close banner Close. Email address Sign up. Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing.
Gains to species diversity in organically farmed fields are not propagated at the farm level
Monastir buying weed
You will be responsible for ensuring all orders are processed in a timely manner, monitor forecasts, supply capacity with vendors and assess the optimum time to place orders in consideration of forecasts, lead times and production schedules. You will manage stock ordering to ensure we carry sufficient stock to avoid stock outs whilst avoiding carrying too much stock to manage cashflow. This role requires you to be a hands-on contributor tackling tactical and more complex issues where analysis of situations and data are required. Manage the procurement process from requisition to delivery, ensuring compliance with company policies and procedures. Closely monitor forecasted material needs Quick effective response to urgent requirements. Schedule and Track orders and ensure timely delivery to all plants. Responsible for maintaining data integrity of safety stocks, purchase order dates, lead times, and other key targets related to the purchasing process. Responsible for minimizing air shipments through accurate order management. Monitor critical metrics to ensure uninterrupted supply of materials for critical operating activities. Manage safety stock levels and process of recommendation to forecasting teams for required adjustments. Identify, assess, and communicate supply disruption risks to your supervisor and key stakeholders. Identifies and often implements plans for continuous operational improvement within the department. Analyzes market trends and develops strategies to optimize procurement processes Manage the procurement process from requisition to delivery, ensuring compliance with company policies and procedures. Identify opportunities for cost savings and process improvements. Stay up-to-date with industry trends, regulations, and best practices. Other duties as assigned. With 56 years of experience and serving 22 countries worldwide, Pens. Depuis 2 semaines sur Keejob. Depuis 3 mois sur Tayara. Depuis 4 mois sur Affare. Depuis 4 mois sur Cava. Depuis 4 mois sur Tayara. We are a worldwide movement of national organizations working with and for communities and individuals. The regional office partners with 15 member associations and is working in 15 countries across the region. Reports to: Program Director Interim Location: Tunis Contract: Full-time Please refer to the attached job description for full details of the consultancy. IPPF offers a wide range of benefits and is an equal opportunity employer. Key tasks 1. To provide technical input and support in the formulation and monitoring of regional policies and innovative programme approaches that support CSE and Youth programmes, as well as a youth centred approach. Remain updated on developments in all technical areas related to CSE and youth programmes in general and in AWR in particular, through documentation, networking, and active participation in technical groups. To review, research and prepare briefing sheets, background papers and publications, technical tools and guidelines relating to CSE and Youth programmes. Lead the development of AWR regional youth strategy. Support the AWR youth network plans, activities and meetings. Provide IPPF AWR member associations with full information on the Youth Network and its activities and solicit their proactive support in implementing the youth centred approach, fostering MA youth groups and recruiting network members. Undertake any other reasonable duties as may be requested from time to time. Responsibilities a Staff responsibilities carried out by the job holder The post holder does not have direct responsibility for staff. The post holder also provides materials and updates suitable for Member Associations and external contacts. Knowledge of French is an asset. Notre Dame Mutuelleville. Depuis 2 ans sur Tunisie Travail. Overview of Role: If you are results-oriented with experience driving your team to excellence and seeking the next exciting opportunity in your career, this could be the perfect role for you! You will provide effective guidance, training and direction to our well established sales and customer service teams in order to attain annual goals, expand the customer base, and ensure utmost customer service. As part of the Contact Centre Management team you will work with your senior team on action plans, tracking performance, dashboards, metrics, and promoting a positive environment. The ideal candidate must be results oriented and have experience working in a sales environments driving consistent revenue growth while providing outstanding customer service. This role requires you to be motivated, focused, and continually striving to grow the business. Responsibilities; Directly manage a team of Supervisors, Team leads and overseeing the agent teams by conducting weekly KPI performance reviews, pipeline reviews and through constant coaching, mentoring and motivating. Responsible for the department hiring, training, retention, and succession planning in order to meet company growth targets Mentors Contact Centre Supervisors and Team Leads to further develop their management and business operational skills Develops and aligns workforce strategies to address key business plans and facilitate organizational change initiatives Collaborates with executive management to build the contact center operations strategy and infrastructure in a rapid-growth environment Monitor employee productivity and motivate team to reach daily, monthly and quarterly targets. Create and manage KPIs Implement and maintain a challenging and rewarding incentive program to improve overall performance Provide ad hoc and formal feedback to team, including development feedback Work company-wide to improve business efficiencies and maintain a positive customer experience Ensures policies and procedures are adhered to daily Forecast quarterly and yearly business revenue, driving significant growth year over year Strategize and creatively implement change to continually grow the business Make decisions quickly Ensures Supervisors are listening to calls to assess customer service levels and provides feedback as necessary. With more than 50 years of experience and serving 23 countries worldwide, National Pen provides personalized marketing solutions that help businesses connect with their customers through a personal brand experience. National Pen offers a broad range of personalized promotional products, including writing instruments, stationery, drinkware, bags, gifts, and trade show accessories, and operates via a network of more than 10 facilities across North America, Europe, Africa, and Asia. Notre Dame. We are a worldwide movement of national organisations working with and for communities and individuals. IPPF is actively committed to addressing the sexual and reproductive health and rights needs of people in humanitarian situations wherever they are. Develop the overall capacity on crisis preparedness, response and recovery through remote and in-country support to MAs focused on scaling service delivery, developing strategic partnerships and engaging in advocacy initiatives. Provide programmatic and strategic support to MAs in the preparation, implementation and monitoring of humanitarian programmes. Assist MAs to develop proposals, workplans, budgets and quality reports for humanitarian projects in line with IPPF and donor requirements. Actively participate as a member of the Global Humanitarian Team, to ensure alignment with global strategic initiatives, advocacy priorities and technical approaches related to humanitarian. Build and maintain positive working relations with all members of staff and contacts both within and outside the Federation, and work in close collaboration with other team members to ensure integrated execution of quality and timely humanitarian preparedness, response and recovery activities. Stimulate a learning environment within the regional offices and among MAs, in collaboration with colleagues from the global humanitarian team and other departments to contribute to learning on humanitarian issues. Others Undertake any other reasonable duties as may be requested from time to time. Comment postuler : Interested qualified candidates should send a cover letter and updated CV to awrjobs ippf. Term of Reference 1. AWRO through its relations with 15 member association is overarching efforts to increase access to SRHR services to the most vulnerable populations including adolescents, young people, women, and men. Under the supervision of the program director and the youth remote support officer, the consultant will build an information testing game that uses Verified global accredited SRH information. The consultant will also be invited to lead the testing of the game with the members of Arab World Region Youth Network. Online or in a face-to-face meeting. Deliverables and timelines: The consultant should deliver after the consultancy of 10 days: — By the first 3 days of work, the consultant shall deliver the draft concept, — By the second 3 days of work, the consultant will deliver to questions from the CSE, — By the third 4 days, the consultant shall deliver the full design of the Card Game with an explanatory tool, — A report for the consultancy outcomes shall be provided to IPPF AWRO after 5 days from the consultancy mission. French is highly desirable. Support remotely the writing and performance of assigned tasks by the program Director in relation to technical support for program division meetings, reports, proposals and researches. Support the AWR youth network plans, activities and online meetings. Support the Cluster HR Director in designing an internal communication strategy Be responsible for the production and maintenance of online and offline editorial content of all internal communication activities, mainly writing independently but also collaborating with the external communication manager. Google Apps: High level. E-mail Communication: High level. Equipped with intelligent technology, we strive to be one step ahead of the newest trends as we support the customers of over international companies in a variety of industries. From reactive trouble-shooting to active solution-finding. We are the voice of our clients. We are Transcom. Right now, we are growing our virtual footprint in North America and currently hire remote employees in 32 states and 6 Canadian provinces. Proud to be recognized by FlexJobs as 10 on their list of the Top companies to watch for remote work in We are passionate about people and look forward to meeting you! Are you passionate about e-commerce and online payment? Transcom Tunisia is expanding! We invite you to be part of our success. Transcom is looking for A competitive salary. A very interesting bonus system of DT! Paid training. Health and insurance cover DT per year from your first day of training Meal vouchers 6 DT per day worked for the first 3 months 8 DT per day worked after 3 months of work from your first day of training. Guaranteed transport from your first day of training. Wedding bonus DT! Newborn bonus DT! Scholarship bonus TD per child. A continuous development plan and learning environment. Join our Transcom family as a customer advisor We are recruiting customer advisors for inbound calls MENA market for our famous and prestigious client, the world leader in online payments to : Provide superior customer service by responding to customers, using the appropriate communication channel, identify and assess customer needs to achieve customer satisfaction. Attract potential customers by answering questions about products and services. Follow communication procedures, guidelines and policies. Basic knowledge of electronic business. The ability to troubleshoot and manage simple software. Technical and logical thought processes. A problem solving attitude. Knowledge of computer support — Microsoft products, Word, Excel and Outlook Proven customer service skills. Positive, enthusiastic and supportive. Effective keyboarding skills. Ability to take ownership of requests and resolutions. Ability to speak and type. English level C Fluent for customer support. From reactive trouble-shooting to active solution finding. Requirements — Minimum studies: University diploma or degree Business Administration and Management, Economics or similar or equivalent higher qualification. The regional office partners with 13 member associations and is working in 14 countries across the region. We are currently recruiting volunteering trainees in the following fields, who will be located in the Arab World Regional Office in Tunis. Interested qualified candidates should send a cover letter and updated CV to awrjobs ippf. Gaps in knowledge of HIV status are especially large in MENA, where viral suppression and treatment coverage are lower than any other region. The current gaps in HIV services across MENA reflect long-standing challenges, including restrictive sociocultural norms that are mirrored in proscriptive laws and policies, and widespread stigma and discrimination. Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals SDGs will depend on opening space for civil society and community-led organizations, and on linking the HIV response to efforts to achieve universal health coverage, expand social protection systems and enhance access to SRHR. None of this will be possible without stronger commitment from governments and donors, including greater domestic funding and social contracting. Specifically, the consultant will lead the donor mapping process with a view to: 1. Develop a fundraising and donor engagement strategy, including identifying regional specific priorities and activities in need of funding for the coming years. Tasks: 1. To lead on a comprehensive donor scoping exercise that explores opportunities among both organizations traditional donor base as well as opportunities from less traditional sources — such as corporations, private sector and HNWI, particularly in the Gulf Countries. This should include a detailed analysis of donor architecture looking at both national, regional and global levels and an identification of priority issues mapped against both organizations strategic priorities. Opportunities to influence donor priorities should also be identified. To produce a report detailing the results of the donor scoping exercise, including contacts of focal persons and regional specific resource mobilization advocacy. Timeline: It is expected that the work will start in mid-August , with Tasks 1 and 2 completed by early September followed by a discussion with the concerned Directors to review results before the completion of Task 3, which would then be, completed end of September or early October. It is anticipated that the work will take approximately 20 days in total. Please send a short expression of interest that details relevant skills and experience for the task, expected remuneration as well as a confirmation of availability to complete the work as per the timeline detailed. Please send your expression of interest to awrjobs ippf. Le moteur de recherche des petites annonces en Tunisie. Sidi Bannour — km. Buyer Analyst. The north face base camp slide pink primrose DT. IPPF is looking for Consultancy. Transcom is looking for Operations Manager — Fintech Sector. Prix Min. Prix minimum en DT. Prix maximum en DT. Qui sommes nous? Conditions d'utilisation Contactez-nous.
Monastir buying weed
Gains to species diversity in organically farmed fields are not propagated at the farm level
Monastir buying weed
Monastir buying weed
Gains to species diversity in organically farmed fields are not propagated at the farm level
Monastir buying weed
Monastir buying weed
Monastir buying weed
Monastir buying weed