Progress report

Progress in Physical Geography 1–17 ª The Author(s) 2018 Agriculture : An Reprints and permission: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav emerging discipline in search DOI: 10.1177/0309133318776493 of a conceptual framework journals.sagepub.com/home/ppg

Liliana Katinas Museo de La Plata, Argentina Jorge V. Crisci Museo de La Plata, Argentina

Abstract The challenge of increasing food production to keep pace with demand, while retaining the essential eco- logical integrity of production systems, requires coordinated action among science disciplines. Thus, 21st- century Agriculture should incorporate disciplines related to natural resources, environmental science, and life sciences. Biogeography, as one of those disciplines, provides a unique contribution because it can generate research ideas and methods that can be used to ameliorate this challenge, with the concept of relative space providing the conceptual and analytical framework within which data can be integrated, related, and struc- tured into a whole. A new branch of Biogeography, Agriculture Biogeography, is proposed here and defined as the application of the principles, theories, and analyses of Biogeography to agricultural systems, including all human activities related to breeding or cultivation, mostly to provide goods and services. It not only encompasses the problem that land use seems scarcely to be compatible with biodiversity conservation, but also a substantial body of theory and analysis involving subjects not strictly related to conservation. Our aim is to define the field and scope of Agriculture Biogeography, set the foundations of a conceptual framework of the discipline, and present some subjects related to Agriculture Biogeography. We present, in summary form, a concept map which summarizes the relationship between agriculture systems and Biogeography, and delineates the current engagement between Agriculture and Biogeography through the discussion of some perspectives from Biogeography and from the agriculture research.

Keywords Agriculture Biogeography, anthropogenic biomes, center of origin, climatic change, Countryside Biogeogra- phy, new discipline

I. Introduction things to different researchers, and thus it has many ‘schools’ or disciplines. Some examples Biogeography attempts to document and are Conservation Biogeography, Dispersal explain spatial patterns of biological diversity and how they change over timeframes ranging from decades to millions of years – from genes Corresponding author: to communities and ecosystems – across gradi- Liliana Katinas, Divisio´n Plantas Vasculares, Museo de La ents of area, isolation, latitude, climate, depth, Plata, Paseo del Bosque s/n, 1900 La Plata, Argentina. and elevation. Biogeography means different Email: [email protected] 2 Progress in Physical Geography XX(X)

Biogeography, Island Biogeography, and Phy- In 2002, Paul Crutzen suggested that we had logeography. Despite the multiplicity of ideas in left the Holocene and had entered the Anthro- the field, Biogeography is characterized by a pocene because of the global environmental central theme or metaphor that provides a cohe- effects of increased human population and eco- sive common reference point for researchers: nomic development. Our world is changing at the concept of relative space (Crisci et al., an increasing pace, with the population pro- 2003). The concept of relative space is jected to reach nine billion by 2050 (FAO, expressed as a relationship among a set of 2012), and rapidly growing global demand for objects; so, there are as many spaces as relation- food, fiber, and biofuels. ships among sets of objects, physical distance Despite the obvious benefits of Agriculture to being one of these spaces (Gatrell, 1983). There people, modern agricultural practices also are numerous spaces of interest to the agricul- brought with them a high environmental impact ture research that may be generated, analyzed, that took humanity at a crossroad. The two inter- and depicted graphically by biogeographical connected problems that we face are the need approaches, such as: geographic space (e.g. for food production and the loss of biodiversity anthropogenic biomes represented by maps); (as one of several environmental issues at con- phylogenetic space (e.g. place of origin of flict with increasing production) in pursuit of domesticates and identification of wild relatives this need. Biogeographical knowledge plays evidenced by ancestor–descendant relation- an important role as a new way to approach the ships); ecological space (e.g. future crop distri- challenge that Agriculture faces today, moving bution predicted by modeling); and time-space the central focus from the natural to rural land- (e.g. time of origin of domesticates using the scapes without a negative connotation. Agricul- molecular clock). Historically, the geographic tural knowledge is needed as a wake-up call for space has been central to Biogeography, but biogeographers to develop new methods for tak- more recently the other spaces are also playing ing up this challenge. Agriculture Biogeography important roles. is an attempt to make discernible problems that Therefore, Biogeography can provide are hidden in the borders of both disciplines. some conceptual tools and methods for Agri- Why make a new branch of Biogeography? culture for generating cross-disciplinary There is growing recognition that new research. However, with very few exceptions, approaches and different types of expertise are the approaches of Biogeography are more needed to renew science and for bridging focused on natural rather than on agricultural divides within disciplines. Any metaphor, con- systems. Here, we propose Agriculture Bio- cept, theory, and new discipline implies a whole geography as a new discipline that embraces that cannot be adequately explained by the this neglected aspect of both Agriculture and reduction to the properties of its parts; nor is it Biogeography. Agriculture Biogeography is the simple sum of those parts. We expect that defined here as the application of the princi- the establishment of Agriculture Biogeography ples, theories, and analyses of Biogeography will promote a community of scholars, who are to agricultural systems, including all human often entrenched in their ways and less willing activities related to breeding or cultivation, to look outside their realm, that will shape new mostly to provide goods and services (e.g. and different kinds of research. Biogeographers crops, poultry, livestock, pets, forestry, aqua- need to acquire more focus and a more positive culture). What is the value in housing Agri- look towards Agriculture to generate new culture and Biogeography under the same approaches involving an efficient use of space. umbrella framework? Agriculture, on the other hand, needs to Katinas and Crisci 3 acknowledge the contributions of Biogeogra- Research Council, ‘Transforming agricultural phy; a quick search of the agricultural depart- education for a changing world’, proposes that ments’ websites of worldwide universities Agriculture should be redefined to include dis- shows that their curricula lack courses on ciplines such as forestry and nutrition, as well as Biogeography. related areas in natural resources, environmen- The interface between Agriculture and Bio- tal science, and life sciences. geography has been crossed often in both direc- Agriculture Biogeography, as one of these tions, a passage signaled more by the use of related disciplines, would constitute a bridge some methods and approaches than by any between Agriculture and Biogeography that sharp demarcation in content. Yet, in spite of encompasses not only the problem that land use this, the degree of direct, collaborative interac- seems scarcely to be compatible with biodiver- tion between agriculture researchers and bio- sity conservation, but also a substantial body of geographers has remained surprisingly limited. theory and analysis involving subjects not The emerging impression is that a scientific strictly related to conservation, such as the whole (Agriculture Biogeography) greatly search for the centers of origin of domesticated exceeds the sum of its parts (Agriculture plus plants and animals and their future distribution. Biogeography). As with any discipline, Agriculture Biogeo- Our aim is to set the foundations of a con- graphy can be characterized by the kinds of ceptual framework of Agriculture Biogeogra- questions its practitioners ask. Some of these phy, define its field and scope, and present questions include the following. some subjects related to the discipline. We will develop two arguments. First, Agriculture ben- 1. Where did the current domesticated efits (conceptually and methodologically) using plants and animals originate from? the methods of Biogeography, mostly already Where were their distribution areas? in use, to improve its practices. Second, Bio- Where were their domestication cen- geography needs to apply a more positive ters? Where were their dispersal routes? vision to agricultural sites in understanding Where can wild species of the current that they are fundamental for food production domesticated plants and animals be and, therefore, for our own species survival. found? These arguments are presented through various 2. How do current agricultural activities subject matters. We wish to focus attention on modify ecosystems and organism the need for deleting the boundaries between distribution? Agriculture and Biogeography in order to pro- 3. Which biogeographical methods can be mote cooperation among specialists with dif- applied to help agricultural practices ferent backgrounds. (e.g. pest control)? Which biogeographi- cal methods can help ameliorate the impact of agricultural practices on the II. The scope of Agriculture environment (e.g. wild species loss, Biogeography habitat fragmentation)? While farming remains a vital and central part 4. How can the dichotomy within Agricul- of Agriculture, what defines 21st-century Agri- ture–biodiversity conservation be over- culture is much broader, encompassing a range come? What biogeographical tools can of natural and social science disciplines (Han- be provided for integrating agriculture delsman and Stulberg, 2016; National Research production into resource conservation Council, 2009). The 2009 report by the National and enhancement? 4 Progress in Physical Geography XX(X)

Figure 1. Diagram of Agriculture Biogeography. The figure shows several approaches of Biogeography applied to agriculture systems in the different scales where Agriculture Biogeography works, and in the different spaces (ecologic, geographic, phylogenetic, time), from the origin of the agriculture to the present and future anthropogenic biomes, including aquaculture. The left–right arrow represents the interaction between the anthropogenic biomes, including aquaculture, with the environmental impacts and global demands. The time-space is represented by an arrow that goes from the origin of agriculture to the present day and future agricultural practices. See text for further explanation.

5. What are the benefits of fragmented Agriculture Biogeography works on long and countryside habitats for wild species short temporal scales and broad and small geo- distribution? graphic scales (Figure 1). It asks about the ori- 6. Where will domesticated plants and ani- gin and past geography of crops, the current mals grow under future climate change regionalization maps that include human activ- constraints? How will the distribution ities, potential working areas for family farm- map of crops change with the introduc- ing, and also about the future areas of crop tion of new technologies (such as geneti- distribution. Acreage alone is not a basis for cally modified organisms), and what will classifying the geographic scale of Agriculture, the consequences be for wild species but the general character of a farm and its labor distribution? supply are the principal ingredients. Large-scale Katinas and Crisci 5 farming would encompass any kind of farming developed as Conservation . Both dis- in which the manager does not carry out the ciplines are concerned with managing species manual work, but confines himself mainly to populations in their habitats, although both have the work of superintendence (Carver, 1911). advanced independently (Letourneau, 1998). Small-scale farming is where the production In a restricted sense, Agroecology studies the of crops and livestock is carried out by the ecological processes in croplands, such as pre- farmer and his family, but where the acreage dator–prey relationships, or the competition is too small to permit advanced machinery, between crops and weeds (Altieri, 1999). Con- which makes it ecologically friendly (Carver, servation Biology addresses the biology of spe- 1911; Kutya, 2012). The geographic scale pre- cies, communities, and ecosystems that are sents, thus, a bidimensional perspective, perturbed, either directly or indirectly, by because Agriculture contains both positively human activities or other agents (Soule´, 1985). and negatively valenced components – that is, Conservation Biogeography is the application ecologically non-sustainable and ecologically of biogeographical principles, theories, and sustainable practices. Agriculture Biogeogra- analyses, particularly those concerned with the phy must provide the tools for these practices. distributional dynamics of taxa individually and On the one hand, it can help agricultural prac- collectively, to problems concerning the conser- tices predict the potential distribution of domes- vation of biodiversity (Whittaker et al., 2005). ticates and pests, proposing intercropping The distribution pattern analysis of the models (e.g. shade coffee production), establish anthropogenic biomes is a clear example of a potential areas for farming or breeding, search subject of Agriculture Biogeography that for wild crop-related species, and enhance the touches on political, social, and economic hospitality of agriculture sites to biodiversity. issues. However, the primary goal of Agricul- On the other hand, Agriculture Biogeography ture Biogeography would not be to engage in must provide the tools to avoid spatially nega- politics or unravel the political forces at work tive effects due to some of the agricultural prac- in environmental management and transforma- tices of large-scale farming that lead to habitat tion, as is the case with Political fragmentation, species loss, and drastic changes (Robins, 2012) or Political Agroecology (De in wild species distribution. We propose that Molina, 2013). Its main goal is to produce biogeographic methods can be integrated into knowledge and apply methods in agricultural farming practices to help solve, or at least ame- systems based on the several kinds of space liorate, some of these problems. that involve organisms; for example, the geo- Agriculture Biogeography has points in com- graphic space. mon with other disciplines, such as Agroecol- Recently, Young (2014) introduced the Bio- ogy (Altieri, 1999), geography of the Anthropocene as a new disci- (Soule´, 1985), and Conservation Biogeography pline, considering that the prevalence of human (Whittaker et al., 2005), but also some unique influences on the biosphere requires rethinking characteristics. Some of the factors these disci- the scope and goals of Biogeography. The plines have in common arise from the fact that Anthropocene is an epoch that presumably ini- they must consider not just biological matters, tiated in the late 17th century, when analyses of but social, economic, and even political issues air trapped in polar ice showed the beginning of as well (Ladle et al., 2011). growing global concentrations of carbon diox- Since the 1970s, applied ecology in agricul- ide and methane (Crutzen, 2002; Kress and tural systems has developed as Agroecology, Stine, 2017). According to Young (2014), addi- whereas applied ecology in natural systems has tional approaches are needed for the assessment 6 Progress in Physical Geography XX(X) and prediction of how new groupings of species biogeographical perspective (e.g. Ellis, 2017; will function ecologically under future climatic Ke´be´etal.,2017;Levisetal.,2017;Zhang and landscape conditions. The point in common et al., 2017). Agriculture Biogeography, in this between Anthropocene Biogeography and Agri- sense, would integrate multiple concepts, meth- culture Biogeography is that they both deal with ods, and theories into the analysis of natural and effects of human actions on organism distribu- human-driven processes, to form a unified con- tion (e.g. Capinha et al., 2015; Drapeau et al., ceptual framework within which to facilitate the 2016; Frishkoff et al., 2016). The former has a transition to a new paradigm. In the following critical view of the global alteration of the bio- sections we delineate the current engagement sphere by man, not only by agricultural activi- between Biogeography and Agriculture. ties. It involves, for example, alterations in global nitrogen, carbon, and water cycles, the planet’s biogeochemistry, and the climatic con- III. Perspectives from ditions because of human-caused increases of Biogeography greenhouse gases. Agriculture Biogeography, We present four subject matters – although, this on the other hand, would focus exclusively on list is by no means exhaustive – that show how the agricultural systems, with the relative space Biogeography contributes to Agriculture playing the central role in the questions that its research: (a) the geographical centers of origin practitioners may ask. of domesticated plants and animals; (b) inva- Agriculture Biogeography does not currently sions and biological control; (c) the impact of have any unique techniques for the collection of climatic change on the future distribution of data and analysis; there is more a set of princi- domesticates; and (d) the test of taxonomic and ples, theories, and methods that are exported biogeographic predictivity. from Biogeography to agriculture research to generate a new perspective on some of the prob- lems that affect Agriculture. Agriculture Bio- 1. The geographical centers of origin of geography would employ practices from domesticated plants and animals Biogeography (e.g. Island Biogeography meth- Some debated questions regarding the evolution ods, climate and ecological niche modeling) of domesticated plants and animals refer to their accompanied by methods from other disciplines geographic origin, their routes of dispersal, and (e.g. multivariate analysis, phylogenetic analy- the number of times domestication has occurred sis, graph theory). for a given crop or livestock. The concept of Figure 2 represents a general framework for crop diversity centers has had an enormous Agriculture Biogeography, as a concept map impact on Agriculture, and led to the develop- (Novak, 2010). It asserts three basic compo- ment of major new research programs. nents: (a) the factors that affect agriculture sys- If one were to search for possible precursors tems; (b) how agriculture systems affect the of Agriculture Biogeography, it would be in the environment (including biodiversity) and peo- works of de Candolle and Vavilov on the centers ple’s lives; and (c) how Biogeography interacts of crop origins. The French–Swiss botanist with the agriculture systems. Alphonse Pyramus de Candolle (1806–1893) A quick search of works published in journals studied the origin of cultivated plants and the mainly related to Biogeography and Agriculture reasons for their geographic distribution. His shows that there is an exponential growth in book Origin of Cultivated Plants (De Candolle, publications related to ancient, current, and 1885) is considered the beginning of crop geo- future agriculture systems employing a graphy. On the other hand, the Russian Nikolai Figure 2. Concept map summarizing the relationship between agricultural systems and Biogeography. The grey rectangle represents the field of Agriculture Biogeography. The topics illustrated are not exhaustive. 7 8 Progress in Physical Geography XX(X)

Ivanovitch Vavilov (1887–1943) developed a Janssens et al., 2016). Ultimately, there is an broad view of the geographical distribution of increase in the integration between phyloge- the phenotypic diversity of individual crops and netic studies and archaeology in the search for their wild progenitors. This knowledge led domestication centers (e.g. Erickson et al., Vavilov (1926) to formulate his theory of geo- 2005; Levis et al., 2017). Archaeological, cul- graphical centers of crop diversity. He realized tural, and genetic evidence is used in the search that each major food crop must have originated for centers of origin of domesticated animals from a central point from which it successfully (e.g. Driscoll et al., 2009; Larson et al., 2014), dispersed, and hypothesized that these centers but biogeographic methods as a tool to search of origin that he recognized (initially five) were for these centers are practically lacking. likely where the genetic diversity of the crop species is highest. Modern phylogeographic studies that com- 2. Invasions and biological control bine phylogenetic and increasingly detailed The biota may naturally move throughout the geographical data for ancestral species, provide world, crossing different barriers, but one con- deep insight into the origin of crops. Also, the sequence of globalization is that, in addition to phylogeographic distributions of old landraces people and products moving across the globe, of globally important plants appear to reflect other organisms have been transported as well ancient human population movements. One (Capinha et al., 2015). Cultivation and breeding example is the case of primitive maize land- patterns themselves are human-driven dispersal races, for which Freitas et al. (2003) showed a pathways that first came to prominence when distinct patterning of allelic distribution across the growth in trade routes between settled agri- the South American continent, apparently cultural communities led to the movement of reflecting the routes of entry from Mesoamer- species in an increasingly organized fashion ica. They also found that this allelic pattern was (Wilson et al., 2008). Some of these alien spe- reflected in archaeological samples of maize cies may become invasive, others may not. collected from Andean regions and the lowland The interpretation of what an invasive spe- tropics of Brazil. cies is changes with the context and perception Molecular studies by Morrell and Clegg of the user of the term. By definition, invasive (2007), based on differences in haplotype fre- species are species that are not native to the quency among geographic regions at multiple ecosystem being considered (NISC, 2006). In loci in barley, led to infer at least two domesti- this context, a non-native domesticate is inva- cations of the crop: one within the Fertile Cres- sive and a native weed or pest is not invasive. cent, and a second 1500–3000 km farther east. But in Agriculture, the term ‘invasive species’ The Fertile Crescent domestication contributed applies to any non-indigenous pest (competi- to the majority of diversity in European and US tors, parasites, predators), weed, plant, insect, barley cultivars, whereas the second domestica- fungus, bacteria, virus, and other disease- tion contributed to most of the diversity in bar- causing agent that can interrupt the production ley from Central Asia to the Far East. They thus of livestock, crops, ornamentals, and rangeland established the geographic space using the phy- (Carter et al., 2004). logenetic space. One way of controlling pests is using biologi- There are also many works that search for cal control, but this cannot be implemented with- the origin and evolution of domesticates using out a biogeographic understanding of the patterns molecular clocks, ancestral area reconstruc- of movements and distribution of the control tion, and diversification rate analyses (e.g. and of the invasive species. Biogeographical Katinas and Crisci 9 methods and research programs involve the fol- It is, therefore, not surprising that attempts at lowing examples. predicting future crop distributions, a biogeo- graphic question, have been received with great 1. Distributional patterns analysis, such as interest. As with the search of domesticated ani- multivariate ordination, similarity mal’s centers of origin, there are almost no indices, or clustering approaches for examples in the literature that deal with their establishing the main geographical future distribution, although there is plenty determinants of naturalized species information on how climate change may affect (e.g. Pysˇek and Richardson, 2006). the occurrence of livestock disease (e.g. Mor- Every time that the geographic range of and, 2015). This is probably because, unlike a species is established (e.g. by means of plants, animals can be moved to shelters or to maps, grids, transects, aerial photo- areas with better climatic conditions. graphs, tables of distribution) and ana- The biogeographic simulation of scenarios lyzed using multiple approaches (e.g. using climate modeling (e.g. Gordon et al., cluster analysis, species abundance and 2000) and ecological niche modeling (e.g. richness analysis, modeling), Biogeogra- Beck, 2013; Hannah et al., 2013; Sala et al., phy is involved. 2000) are examples of these attempts to relate 2. Molecular Biogeography, which inter- Agriculture to environmental changes. Some prets biogeographic relationships and modeling studies include alternative economic genetic similarity within and among the pathways of future development under emerging populations of a given species from its changes in the productivity of food crops (e.g. native and introduced ranges where it is Ewert et al., 2005). These scenarios, however, invasive (e.g. Meekins et al., 2001). are more complex than anticipated and some 3. Island Biogeography for pest control authors (Iizumi and Ramankutty, 2015) empha- strategies, based on the equilibrium size that, besides climate, other factors such as theory of Island Biogeography of cropping area and intensity, and farmer decision- MacArthur and Wilson (1967) (e.g. making and technology, can also modulate how Stenseth, 1981). climate influences the different components of 4. Ecological niche modeling for predict- crop production. ing the spread of invasive species (e.g. Ganeshaiah et al., 2003). 4. Test of taxonomic and biogeographic predictivity The test of taxonomic and biogeographic pre- 3. Climatic change and future domesticates’ dictivity is a biogeographic method that could geographic distribution be considered one of the few methods exclu- By 2050, nine billion people worldwide will sively created for and applied in Agriculture. need to be fed, which, in practice, means that A widely held assumption is that taxonomically agricultural production should increase by 6% related organisms, or those found in geographic per year (FAO, 2012; but see Points of view and proximity, are likely to share traits. This con- Controversies in this paper). For this reason, the cept arises from the knowledge that plant popu- likely impacts of climate change on the agricul- lations are not randomly arranged assemblages tural sector have also prompted concern over the of genotypes, but are structured in space, time, magnitude of future global food production and history, resulting from the combined effects (IPCC, 1996). of mutation, migration, selection, and drift. 10 Progress in Physical Geography XX(X)

Spooner et al. (2009) developed a method to test acknowledging the great diversity of agricultural if traits such as disease and pest resistance can approaches. It does not seem to address and cap- be associated with taxonomically and biogeo- ture the wide variety of agendas that drive Agri- graphically related species to a crop (see also culture and conservation – an agenda that speaks Jansky et al., 2006). A major justification for equally (if not primarily) to those progressive and this research is its assumed ability to predict the ‘counter’ voices that include alternative cultures presence of traits in a group for which the trait and practices, contentious claims, and contesting has been observed in only a representative sub- movements. In the following, we will discuss set of the group. Such predictors are regularly some of these different points of view and con- used by breeders interested in choosing poten- troversies, and subsequently remark on the tial sources of disease and pest-resistant germ- attempts made to conceive of the agriculture sites plasm for cultivar improvement – by GeneBank in a more positive way. managers to organize collection, and by germ- plasm collectors planning to gather maximum diversity (Spooner et al., 2009). Examples of 1. Points of view and controversies application involve the prediction of the pres- There is a growing unease over the tension ence of resistance genes to early blight (caused between the capitalist principle of infinite by the foliar fungus Alternaria solani), (Jansky expansion and the finite supply of natural et al., 2006), and the resistance to the potato resources (Streeck, 2014). Researchers envision virus Y (PVY) (Cai et al., 2011) in wild Sola- differently the changes that should be per- num species for which resistance was observed formed to guarantee a proper supply of food in in related species and its association to geogra- the future. The World Bank (2009) report on phy. Spooner et al. (2009) tested taxonomic how ‘adaptation’ establishes that countries will and biogeographic associations with 10,738 adapt up to the level at which they enjoy the disease and pest evaluations derived from the same level of welfare in the (future) world as literature and GeneBank records of 32 pest and they would have without climatic change. Cur- diseases in five classes of organisms (bacteria, rently, there are contrasting research programs fungi, insects, nematodes, and virus). They focusing on the adaptation to climate change. showed, for example, that ratings for only On one side, there are conservation efforts such Colorado potato beetle (Leptinotarsa decemli- as some key programs of the Convention of neata) and one pathogen (Potato M carlavirus) Biological Diversity to protect ecosystems, see- are reliably predicted both by host taxonomy and ing Agriculture as a major driver of biodiversity climatic variables. The authors concluded that loss. On the other side, there is an urgency to while it is logical to initially take both taxonomy address agricultural adaptation focusing exclu- and geographic origin into account while screen- sively on benefitting cropping systems and mar- ing GeneBank materials for pest and disease ket risks (e.g. Howden et al., 2007). There are resistances, such associations will hold for only also approaches bringing together science and for a small subset of resistance traits. policy through a focus on sustainable develop- ment as the integrating concept (e.g. Blowers et al., 2012; Phalan et al., 2016). II. Perspectives from Agriculture However, there is not a general agreement in In relation to human action, Biogeography is the argument for producing more for feeding an still strongly focused on the traditional anthro- expanding population. The proponents of food pogenic effects on and looks to Agricul- self-sufficiency (Clapp, 2017), for example, ture as a homogeneous practice without when a country can satisfy its food needs from Katinas and Crisci 11 its own domestic production, clashes with some changes in the societal metabolism toward a economic reasoning and political imperatives. more frugal, sustainable, and convivial lifestyle; Others propose strategies to reduce the waste for example, through organic, agro-ecological of food produced worldwide (Arancon et al., local and traditional farming, or the ‘resource- 2013; Lin et al., 2014) or to meet the future fulness’ that seeks to transform social relations global demand through moderating calorie- in more progressive, anti-capitalist, and adequate diets (Davies et al., 2014). socially just ways (MacKinnon and Derickson, The traditional concept of sustainability, 2012). One possible contribution of Agriculture claiming the need to ‘balance’ conservation Biogeography in these matters is the application with anthropic production, has been changing of methods to predict potential cultivation areas with decades of debate, and the idea of balance in underutilized and neglected local crops that (and cost-benefits analysis) was dismissed by could contribute considerably to food supply. the so-called nested models of sustainability, An application example is the case of some spe- where social, ecological, and economic drives cies of the plant genus Smallanthus (‘yaco´n’) do not weight equally. There was a transition that have been used as food for centuries by the from overlapping-circles models, where sus- Andean inhabitants. Its important nutritional tainability was the intersection of three circles and medicinal value, together with the low eco- representing economy, society, and environ- logical requirements of most of its species, con- ment, to nested-dependencies models (Dop- stitute a very valuable potential crop for family pelt, 2008). In the nested model, the economy farming. An ecological niche modeling study by circle is enclosed within the society circle and Vitali and Katinas (2015) demonstrated that, both are enclosed within the environment cir- taking into account certain temperature and pre- cle, showing that human society is a wholly cipitation constraints, some species of Smal- owned subsidiary of the environment and that, lanthus could be successfully cultivated when without food, clean water, fresh air, fertile soil, planning family farming areas, at very low and other natural resources, it cannot survive. costs. It is the society who decides how it will exchange goods and services and what eco- nomic model it will use. 2. Use, modification, and maintenance of Another controversy arose concerning the natural biomes theoretical frameworks that relate Agriculture Historically, biomes (e.g. steppe, forest, desert, with an historical interpretation of the origins tundra) have been identified and mapped based of the capitalist world economy (Wallerstein, on general differences in vegetation type asso- 1974), and how the inequalities between differ- ciated with regional variations in climate, soil, ent Agricultures in the world have led to the and topography (Olson et al., 2001; Whittaker, extreme impoverishment of hundreds of mil- 1975), most simply defined by mean annual lions of peasants (Mazoyer and Roudart, temperature and mean annual precipitation. 2006). Many scholars envisage that solutions Humans have restructured the biomes for agri- cannotbefoundinmoregrowth–thatis, culture, forestry, and other uses, and global pat- increasing economic growth, more technology terns of species composition and abundance, (such as the adoption of Genetically Modified primary productivity, land-surface hydrology, Organisms), pushing productivity, more free and biogeochemical cycles have all been sub- markets, and more globalization. Some of the stantially altered. The ‘anthropogenic biomes’, alternative proposals include the ‘degrowth’ ‘anthromes’, or ‘human biomes’(e.g. Alessa and (Gomiero, 2017; Illich, 1975) that promotes Chapin, 2008; Ellis and Ramankutty, 2008) are 12 Progress in Physical Geography XX(X) heterogeneous, fragmented, landscape mosaics, become common practice to apply the princi- such as urban areas embedded within agricul- ples of Island Biogeography, comparing com- tural areas, forests interspersed with croplands munity composition in forested and deforested and housing, and managed vegetation mixed areas for human use in plants (Mayfield and with semi-natural vegetation that now covers Daily, 2005), bats (Mendenhall et al., 2014a), more of the Earth’s land surface than natural mammals (Daily et al., 2003), reptiles and ecosystems do. amphibians (Mendenhall et al., 2014b), birds Many researchers have wondered how to (Daily et al., 2001; Wolfe et al., 2015), and integrate the use, on one side, and the mainte- insects (Horner-Devine et al., 2003; Ricketts nance, on the other side, of natural biomes. We et al., 2001). These studies show that the equiv- will present two examples that aim toward this alency of true islands and habitat fragments is goal. One is the view of the value of anthropo- invalid, and results in the incorrect estimates of genic biomes to biodiversity postulated by extinction rates and ecological risks in human- Countryside Biogeography, and the other is rep- dominated ecosystems. Therefore, new models resented by agriculture practices that combine such as the reaction–diffusion model, multispe- natural and anthropogenic biomes. cies metapopulation analyses, and models based Gretchen Daily proposed the concept of on the neutral theory have been proposed to Countryside Biogeography (Daily, 1997), address species–area relationships and demo- related to the idea of sustainability and defined graphy in countryside environments (e.g. Mat- as the study of the diversity, abundance, conser- thews et al., 2016; Pereira and Borda-de-A´ gua, vation, and restoration of biodiversity in rural 2013; Pereira and Daily, 2006). Also, a conser- and other human-dominated landscapes. Ladle vation approach in countryside fragmented and Whittaker (2011) found a relationship areas was applied by Shackelford et al. (2014) between the ideas of Countryside Biogeography to map the costs and benefits of conservation and the concept of ‘reconciliation ecology’. versus production. This conservation effort was proposed by The other example that combines natural and Rosenzweig (2001) as a way to discover how anthropogenic biomes is the intercropping to modify and diversify anthropogenic habitats between crops and wild species, fomenting the to harbor a wide variety of species. overlapping distribution of the two systems. The Countryside Biogeography has the goal of promotion of the ‘shaded coffee’ method is a enhancing the hospitality of agriculture sites to good example of intercropping that represents biodiversity. Biologists have paid considerable an advance to the conservation goals (Perfecto attention to the status of the biotas in the et al., 2005). Regional large-scale and detailed ‘islands’ or fragments of natural habitat, such local surveys of birds in the Caribbean, Mexico, as forest patches, and comparably little attention Central America, and Northern South America (beyond the context of pest management) to the revealed that coffee plantations produced under organisms that occupy the highly disturbed the diverse and dense canopy of shades trees of matrix in which those fragments occur, charac- the natural forests support high diversity and terized as countryside habitats (e.g. agricultural densities of birds. These areas constitute an plots, plantation or managed forest, fallow land, important habitat for migratory birds, serve as gardens, and remnants of native habitat dry-season refugia for birds at a time when ener- embedded in landscapes devoted primarily to getic demands are high and other habitats are human activities). By viewing habitat fragments food poor, and provide important nectar and immersed in human-dominated landscapes as insect resources. Likewise, bats and non-flying the equivalent of true oceanic islands, it has mammals have been reported to be richer in Katinas and Crisci 13 species and biomass in this type of coffee plan- forecasts for juvenile and adult trees; it aids the tation than in other agricultural habitats (Per- understanding of how disturbance affects forest fecto and Armbrecht, 2003, and references stand dynamics. herein). Shaded coffee certification programs offer the opportunity to link environmental and economic goals. These sustainable coffees com- IV. Conclusions mand premium prices that have aided certified In this study, we have defined Agriculture Bio- farmers to withstand any eventual crisis and con- geography in broad terms, illustrating the issue tinue producing coffee (Perfecto et al., 2005). with a limited set of topics. By selecting some These practices require the use of biogeogra- themes, we highlighted some topics, but have phical methods such as distributional pattern doubtless thereby neglected others. In general, analyses between the artificial and the natural Biogeography and agriculture research mostly system, which allow comparing the responses of grew theoretically separately. Biogeography is coffee intensification for each taxa on the same still focused on the traditional anthropogenic scale and establishing how yield and species effect on nature, and agriculture research does richness are related in a particular region. Some not seem to acknowledge the contributions that modeling methods (e.g. STICS-CA, Yield- Biogeography has made, is making, and can SAFE, SORTIE/BC) were also developed to make by generating research ideas and methods. incorporate plant mixtures combining agro- A definition of a discipline is an instrument to nomic and ecological concepts for simulating achieve a purpose; therefore, its value rests multispecies plantations, such as native trees entirely on its usefulness. The recognition of with crops (Male´zieux et al., 2009). Ewel Agriculture Biogeography will provide: (a) a (1999) enhanced the role of woody perennial better understanding of the space-centered species in the sustainability of ecosystem func- issues in agricultural sites; (b) a tool for opera- tioning in the humid tropics and proposed tional biogeographical methods to be applied in forest-like agroecosystems. Tree–crop combi- agriculture research; (c) a way to frame scien- nations have a life course that extends in tens tific questions regarding the concept of relative of years, up to a century or more in temperate space in agriculture research; and (d) a tool for areas. For these reasons, full direct experiments researchers to structure and articulate more are not feasible and modeling approaches are a thoroughly space-related issues in Agriculture. requisite. STICS-CA is a modeling approach Protecting wildlife, while feeding a growing (Brisson et al., 2004) that aims to predict the world human population, will require a holistic fate of various tree–crop combinations in vari- approach (e.g. Ericksen, 2008; Ingram et al., ous temperate conditions. Yield-SAFE (Yield 2010). This poses a problem in that some things Estimator for Long term Design of Silvoarable will always be controversial, to some desirable, AgroForestry in Europe; Van der Werf et al., to others indefensible. Agriculture Biogeogra- 2007) is a model for growth, resource sharing, phy has the difficult task of walking on this and productivity in silvoarable agroforestry (i.e. razor’s edge and can perform an important con- the cultivation of trees and arable crops on the tribution through a reasoned, coherent, and same parcel of land) to act as a tool for forecast- organized inclusion of the spatial dimension of ing yield, economic optimization of farming this problem. enterprises, and exploration of policy options for land use in Europe. SORTIE-BC (Coates Acknowledgements et al., 2003) is a model for mixed conifer/hard- We acknowledge Marı´a Jose´ Apodaca, Peter Hoch, wood forests that makes population dynamic Peter Linder, Osvaldo Sala, and Rob Whittaker for 14 Progress in Physical Geography XX(X) the critical reading of the manuscript, and Laura Carter CA, Chalfant JA and Goodhue RE (2004) Invasive Blanco for designing the paper’s Figure 1. We are species in agriculture: A rising concern. Western Eco- also very grateful to the editors and reviewers for nomic Forum 3(2): 1–6. their comments and suggestions. Carver TN (1911) Large-scale and small-scale farming. American Statistical Association 12(93): 488–489. Clapp J (2017) Food self-sufficiency: Making sense of it, Declaration of Conflicting Interests and when it makes sense. Food Policy 66: 88–96. The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of inter- Coates KD, Canham CD, Beaudet M, et al. (2003) Use of a est with respect to the research, authorship, and/or spatially explicit individual-tree model (SORTIE/BC) publication of this article. to explore the implications of patchiness in structurally complex forests. Forest Ecology and Management Funding 186(1–3): 297–310. Crisci JV, Katinas L and Posadas P (2003) Historical The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following biogeography: An introduction. Boston, MA: Harvard financial support for the research, authorship, and/ University Press. or publication of this article: The study was sup- Crutzen PJ (2002) Geology of mankind. Nature 415(3): 23. ported by the CONICET (Argentina) grant PIP Daily GC (1997) Countryside biogeography and the pro- 0729 and the ANPCyT (Argentina) grant PICT vision of ecosystem services. In: Raven PH and Wil- 2012-1683. liams T (eds) Nature and Human Society: The Quest for a Sustainable World. Washington, DC: Committee for References the Second Forum on Biodiversity, National Academy of Sciences and National Research Council, National Alessa L and Chapin III F (2008) Anthropogenic biomes: Academy Press, 104–113. A key contribution to earth-system science. Trends in Daily GC, Ceballos G, Pacheco J, et al. (2003) Countryside Ecology and Evolution 23(10): 529–531. biogeography of Neotropical mammals: Conservation Altieri MA (1999) Agroecologı´a: Bases cientı´ficas para una agricultura sustentable. Montevideo, Uruguay: opportunities in agricultural landscapes of Costa Rica. Nordan-Comunidad. Conservation Biology 17(6): 1814–1826. Arancon RAD, Lin CSK, Chan KM, et al. (2013) Advan- Daily GC, Ehrlich PR and Sa´nchez-Azofeifa A (2001) ces on waste valorization: New horizons for a more Countryside biogeography: Use of human-dominated sustainable society. Energy Science & Engineering habitats by the avifauna of southern Costa Rica. Eco- 1(2): 53–71. logical Applications 11(1): 1–13. Beck J (2013) Predicting climate change effects on agri- Davies KF, D’Odorico P and Rulli MC (2014) Moderating culture from ecological niche modeling: Who profits, diets to feed the future. Earth’s Future 2(10): 559–565. who loses? Climatic Change 116(2): 177–189. de Candolle AP (1885) Origin of Cultivated Plants. New Blowers A, Boersema J and Martin A (2012) Is sustainable York: International Scientific Series, D. Appleton and development sustainable? Journal of Integrative Co. Environmental Sciences 9(1): 1–8. de Molina MG (2013) Agroecology and politics. How to Brisson N, Bussiere F, Ozier-Lafontaine H, et al. (2004) get sustainability? About the necessity for a Political Adaptation of the crop model STICS to intercropping: Agroecology. Agroecology and Sustainable Food Theoretical basis and parameterisation. Agronomie Systems 37(1): 45–59. 24(6–7): 409–421. Doppelt B (2008) The Power of Sustainable Thinking. Cai XK, Spooner DM and Jansky SH (2011) A Test of London: Earthscan Publications Ltd. Taxonomic and Biogeographic Predictivity: Resistance Drapeau P, Villard MA, Leduc A, et al. (2016) Natural to potato virus Y in wild relatives of the cultivated disturbance regimes as templates for the response of potato. Phytopathology 101(9): 1074–1080. bird species assemblages to contemporary forest man- Capinha C, Essl F, Seebens H, et al. (2015) The dispersal agement. Diversity and Distributions 22(4): 385–399. of alien species redefines biogeography in the Driscoll CA, Macdonald DW and O’Brien J (2009) From Anthropocene. Science 348(6240): 1248–1251. wild animals to domestic pets, and evolutionary view of Katinas and Crisci 15

domestication. Proceedings of the National Academy Handelsman J and Stulberg E (2016) Food and agriculture of Sciences of the United States 106(1): 9971–9978. for the 21st century. Available at: https://obama Ellis EC (2017) Physical geography in the Anthropocene. whitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2016/01/13/food-and- Progress in Physical Geography 41(5): 525–532. agriculture-21st-century (accessed 18 April 2018). Ellis EC and Ramankutty N (2008) Putting people in the Hannah L, Roehrdanz PR, Ikegami M, et al. (2013) Cli- map: Anthropogenic biomes of the world. Frontiers in mate change, wine, and conservation. Proceedings of Ecology and the Environment 6(8): 439–447. the National Academy of Sciences of the United States Ericksen PJ (2008) What is the vulnerability of a food 110(17): 6907–6912. system to global environmental change? Ecology and Horner-Devine MC, Daily GC, Ehrlich PR, et al. (2003) Society 13(2): 14. Countryside biogeography of tropical butterflies. Erickson DL, Smith BD, Clarke AC, et al. (2005) An Asian Conservation Biology 17(1): 168–177. origin for a 10,000-year-old domesticated plant in the Howden SM, Soussana J-F, Tubiello FN, et al. (2007) Americas. Proceedings of the National Academy of Adapting agriculture to climate change. Proceedings of Sciences of the United States 102(51): 18315–18320. the National Academy of Sciences of the United States Ewel JJ (1999) Natural systems as models for the design of 104(50): 19691–19696. sustainable systems of land use. Agroforestry Systems Iizumi T and Ramankutty N (2015) How do weather and 45(1–3): 1–21. climate influence cropping area and intensity? Global Ewert F, Rounsevell MDA, Reginster I, et al. (2005) Food Security 4: 46–50. Future scenarios of European agricultural land use I. Illich I (1975) Tools for Conviviality. Glasgow: Fontana/ Estimating changes in crop productivity. Agriculture, Collins. Ecosystems and Environment 107(2–3): 101–116. Ingram J, Ericksen P and Liverman D (2010) Food Secu- Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (2012) World rity and Global Environmental Change. Abingdon and agriculture towards 2030/2050: The 2012 revision. New York: Earthscan Publishers Ltd. ESAE Working Paper No. 12-03. Rome: FAO. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Freitas FO, Bendel G, Allaby RG, et al. (2003) DNA from (1996) Impacts, adaptations, and mitigation of climate primitive maize landraces and archaeological remains: change. Cambridge: Scientific-technical analyses – Implications for the domestication of maize and its contribution of working group II to the IPCC second expansion into South America. Journal of Archae- assessment report, Cambridge University Press. ological Science 30(7): 901–908. Jansky SH, Simon R and Spooner DM (2006) A test of Frishkoff LO, Karp DS, Flanders JR, et al. (2016) Climate taxonomic predictivity: Resistance to white mold in change and habitat conversion favour the same species. wild relatives of cultivated potato. Crop Science 46: Ecology Letters 19(9): 1081–1090. 2561–2570. Ganeshaiah KN, Barve N, Nath N, et al. (2003) Predicting Janssens SB, Vandelook F, De Langhe E, et al. (2016) the potential geographical distribution of the sugarcane Evolutionary dynamics and biogeography of Musaceae woolly aphid using GARP and DIVA-GIS. Current reveal a correlation between the diversification of the Science 85(11): 1526–1528. banana family and the geological and climatic history Gatrell A (1983) Distance and Space: A geographical of Southeast Asia. New Phytologist 210(4): 1453–1465. Perspective. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Ke´be´ K, Alvarez N, Tuda M, et al. (2017) Global phylo- Gomiero T (2017) Agriculture and degrowth: State of the geography of the insect pest Callosobruchus maculatus art and assessment of organic and biotech-based (Coleoptera: Bruchinae) relates to the history of its agriculture from a degrowth perspective. Journal of main host, Vigna unguiculata. Journal of Biogeo- Cleaner Production. Epub ahead of print 19 April graphy 44(11): 2515–2526. 2017. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.237 Kress WJ and Stine JK (eds) (2017) Living in the Anthro- Gordon C, Cooper C, Senior CA, et al. (2000) The simu- pocene: Earth in the Age of Humans. Washington, DC: lation of SST, sea ice extents and ocean heat transports Smithsonian Books, Smithsonian Institution Scholarly in a version of the Hadley Centre coupled model Press. without flux adjustments. Climate Dynamics 16(2–3): Kutya L (2012) Small scale agriculture. Transformer 147–168. 18(1): 38–41. 16 Progress in Physical Geography XX(X)

Ladle RJ and Whittaker RJ (2011) Prospect and chal- North American invasive plant species (Alliaria lenges. In: Ladle RJ and Whittaker RJ (eds) Conser- petiolata, Brassicaceae). International Journal of vation Biogeography. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, Plant Sciences 162(1): 161–169. 263–267. Mendenhall CD, Friskhoff LO, Santos-Barrera G, et al. Ladle RJ, Jepson P and Gillson L (2011) Social values and (2014b) Countryside biogeography of Neotropical Conservation Biogeography. In: Ladle RJ and Whit- reptiles and amphibians. Ecology 95(4): 856–870. taker RJ (eds) Conservation Biogeography. Oxford: Mendenhall CD, Karp DS, Meyer CFJ, et al. (2014a) Blackwell Publishing, 13–30. Predicting biodiversity change and averting collapse in Larson G, Piperno DR, Allaby RG, et al. (2014) Current agricultural landscapes. Nature 509(7499): 213–217. perspectives and the future of domestication studies. Morand S (2015) Impact of climate change on livestock Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the disease occurrences. In: Sejian V, Gaughan J, Baumgard United States 111(17): 6139–6146. L, et al. (eds) Climate Change Impact on Livestock: Letourneau DK (1998) Conservation biology: Lessons Adaptation and Mitigation. India: Springer, 113–122. for conserving natural enemies. In: Barbosa P (ed) Morrell PL and Clegg MT (2007) Genetic evidence for a Conservation Biological Control. San Diego, CA: second domestication of barley (Hordeum vulgare) east Academic Press, 9–38. of the Fertile Crescent. Proceedings of the National Levis C, Costa FRC, Bongers F, et al. (2017) Persistent Academy of Sciences of the United States 27(4): effects of pre-Columbian plant domestication on 3289–3294. Amazonian forest composition. Science 355(6328): National Invasive Species Council (NISC) (2006) Invasive 925–931. Species Definition Clarification and Guidance White Lin CSK, Koutinas AA, Stamatelatou K, et al. (2014) Paper. Washington, DC: Definitions Subcommittee of Current and future trends in food waste valorization for the Invasive Species Advisory Committee (ISAC), US the production of chemicals, materials and fuels: A Department of Interior. global perspective. Biofuels, Bioproducts & Biorefin- National Research Council (2009) Transforming Agricul- ing 8(5): 686–715. tural Education for a Changing World. Washington, MacArthur RH and Wilson O (1967) The Theory of Island DC: Committee on a Leadership Summit to Effect Biogeography. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Change in Teaching and Learning; Board on Agricul- Press. ture and Natural Resources; National Research Council MacKinnon D and Derickson KD (2012) From resilience of the National Academies, National Academy Press. to resourcefulness: A critique of resilience policy and Available at: http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12602.html activism. Progress in Human Geography 37(2): (accessed 18 April 2017). 253–270. Novak JD (2010) Learning, Creating, and Using Knowl- Male´zieux E, Crozat Y, Dupraz C, et al. (2009) Mixing edge: Concept Maps as Facilitative Tools in Schools plant species in cropping systems: Concepts, tools and and Corporations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Elbaum models. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Devel- Associates, Publishers. opment 29(1): 43–62. Olson DM, Dinerstein E, Wikramanayake ED, et al. (2001) Matthews TJ, Guilhaumon F, Triantis KA, et al. (2016) On Terrestrial ecoregions of the world: A new map of life the form of species-area relationships in habitat islands on Earth. BioScience 51(11): 933–938. and true islands. Global Ecology and Biogeography Pereira HM and Borda-de-A´ gua L (2013) Modeling bio- 25(7): 847–858. diversity dynamics in countryside and native habitats. Mayfield MM and Daily GC (2005) Countryside biogeo- In: Levin S (ed) Encyclopedia of Biodiversity. Vol. 5. graphy of neotropical herbaceous and shrubby plants. Cambridge, MA: Academic Press, 321–325. Ecological Applications 15(2): 423–439. Pereira HM and Daily GC (2006) Modeling biodiversity Mazoyer M and Roudart L (2006) A History of World dynamics in countryside landscapes. Ecology 87(8): Agriculture: From the Neolithic Age to the Current 1877–1885. Crisis. London: Earthscan. Perfecto I and Armbrecht I (2003) The coffee agroeco- Meekins JF, Ballard HE Jr, and McCarthy BC (2001) system in the Neotropics: Combining ecological and Genetic variation and molecular biogeography of a economic goals. In: Vandermeer J (ed) Tropical Katinas and Crisci 17

Agroecosystems. Boca Raton: Advances in Agroecol- van der Werf W, Keesman K, Burgess P, et al. (2007) ogy Series CRC, 157–192. Yield-SAFE: A parameter-sparse, process-based Perfecto I, Vandermeer J, Mas A, et al. (2005) Biodi- dynamic model for predicting resource capture, versity, yield, and shade coffee certification. Ecologi- growth, and production in agroforestry systems. Eco- cal Economics 54(3): 435–446. logical Engineering 29(4): 419–433. Phalan B, Green RE, Dicks LV, et al. (2016) How can Vavilov NI (1926) Studies on the origin of cultivated higher-yield farming help to spare nature? Mechanisms plants. Bulletin of Applied Botany and Plant Breeding to link yield increases with conservation. Science 14: 1–245. 351(6272): 450–451. Vitali MS and Katinas L (2015) Modelado de distribucio´n Pysˇek P and Richardson DM (2006) The biogeography of de las especies argentinas de Smallanthus (Asteraceae), naturalization in alien plants. Journal of Biogeography el ge´nero del “yaco´n”: Un cultivo potencial para la 33(12): 2040–2050. agricultura familiar. Revista de la Facultad de Agro- Ricketts TH, Daily GC, Ehrlich PR, et al. (2001) Coun- nomı´a, La Plata 114(Nu´m. Esp. 1, Agricultura Famil- tryside biogeography of moths in a fragmented land- iar, Agroecologı´a y Territorio): 110–121. scape: Biodiversity in native and agricultural habitats. Wallerstein I (1974) The Modem World-System: Capitalist Conservation Biology 15(2): 378–388. Agriculture and the Origins of the European World- Robins P (2012) Political Ecology: A Critical Introduc- Economy in the Sixteenth Century. New York: Aca- tion. 2nd ed. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. demic Press. Rosenzweig ML (2001) Loss of speciation rate will Whittaker RH (1975) Communities and Ecosystems. New impoverish future diversity. Proceedings of the York: MacMillan Publishing Company, Inc. National Academy of Sciences of the United States Whittaker RJ, Arau´jo MB, Jepson P, et al. (2005) Con- 98(10): 5404–5410. servation Biogeography: Assessment and prospect. Sala OE, Chapin III FS, Armesto JJ, et al. (2000) Global Diversity and Distributions 11(1): 3–23. biodiversity scenarios for the year 2100. Science Wilson JRU, Dormontt EE, Prentis PJ, et al. (2008) 287(5459): 1770–1774. Something in the way you move: Dispersal pathways Shackelford GE, Steward PR, German RN, et al. (2014) affect invasion success. Trends in Ecology and Evolu- Conservation planning in agricultural landscapes: tion 24(3): 136–144. Hotspots of conflict between agriculture and nature. Wolfe JD, Stouffer PC, Mokross K, et al. (2015) Island vs. Diversity and Distributions 21(3): 357–367. countryside biogeography: An examination of how Soule´ ME (1985) What is Conservation Biology? Amazonian birds respond to forest clearing and frag- BioScience 35(11): 727–734. Spooner DM, Jansky SH and Simon R (2009) Tests of mentation. Ecosphere 6(12): 1–14. taxonomic and biogeographic predictivity: Resistance World Bank (2009) Economics of Adaptation to Climate to disease and insect pests in wild relatives of cultivated Change. Washington, DC: The World Bank. potato. Crop Science 49(4): 1367–1376. Young KR (2014) Biogeography of the Anthropocene: Stenseth NC (1981) How to control pest species: Appli- Novel species assemblages. Progress in Physical cation of models from the theory of island biogeo- Geography 38(5): 664–673. graphy in formulating pest control strategies. Journal Zhang Y, Wilson JE and Lavkulich LM (2017) Integration of Applied Ecology 18(3): 773–794. of agriculture and wildlife ecosystem services: A case Streeck W (2014) How will capitalism end? New Left study of Westham Island, British Columbia, Canada. Review 87(May-June): 35–64. Agricultural Sciences 8(5): 409–425.