ELECTRONIC SUPPORTING INFORMATION
A landscape ecological approach identifies important drivers of
urban biodiversity
Tabea Turrini and Eva Knop
University of Bern, Institute of Ecology and Evolution, Department of Community Ecology,
Baltzerstrasse 6, CH-3012 Bern, evaknop@gmx.ch
Tables:
S1. Study sites.
S2. Buffer overlap.
S3. Temperature-, CN ratio-, and NDVI values.
S4. Post-hoc analyses
Figure S1: Visual overview of a) study locations and b) within-city design.
SI 1
region
city
inhabitants
distance
urb.-agri. [m]
nr. sites
within-city level
nr. sites
ecosystem level
veg.-rich
veg.-poor
urb.
agri.
Zurich
373'000
18’500
6
6
12
3
Basel
163'000
17’000
6
6
12
3
Geneva
187'000
36’500
6
6
12
3
Bern
124'000
12’500
3
3
Locarno
15'000
13’000
3
3
Chur
34'000
15’500
total
nr. sites
total
3
3
45
18
63
Table S1. Number of inhabitants of the cities in which urban study sites were located in the year 2010 (data
source: Federal Statistical Office (FSO) of Switzerland, numbers rounded to the nearest 1’000), distance
(rounded to the nearest 500 m) between center point of urban and center point of agricultural sites per region,
and number of sites in the six cities and six agricultural areas. One site represents one tree in an independent
landscape sector. ‘veg.’ – ‘vegetation’, ‘urb.’ – ‘urban’, ‘agri.’ – ‘agricultural’.
SI 2
site ID
region
ecosystem
% overlap
1
Zurich
urb.
2
2
Zurich
urb.
0
3
Zurich
urb.
12
4
Zurich
urb.
0
5
Zurich
urb.
0
6
Zurich
urb.
0
7
Zurich
urb.
0
8
Zurich
urb.
0
9
Zurich
urb.
10
10
Zurich
urb.
0
11
Zurich
urb.
0
12
Zurich
urb.
0
13
Zurich
agri.
0
14
Zurich
agri.
0
15
Zurich
agri.
0
16
Basel
urb.
0
17
Basel
urb.
0
18
Basel
urb.
0
19
Basel
urb.
0
20
Basel
urb.
0
21
Basel
urb.
0
22
Basel
urb.
0
23
Basel
urb.
0
24
Basel
urb.
0
25
Basel
urb.
0
26
Basel
urb.
0
27
Basel
urb.
0
28
Basel
agri.
12
29
Basel
agri.
12
30
Basel
agri.
0
31
Geneva
urb.
0
32
Geneva
urb.
0
33
Geneva
urb.
0
34
Geneva
urb.
0
35
Geneva
urb.
0
36
Geneva
urb.
0
37
Geneva
urb.
0
38
Geneva
urb.
0
39
Geneva
urb.
0
40
Geneva
urb.
0
41
Geneva
urb.
0
42
Geneva
urb.
0
43
Geneva
agri.
5
SI 3
44
Geneva
agri.
45
Geneva
agri.
0
46
Bern
urb.
27
47
Bern
urb.
11
48
Bern
urb.
17
49
Bern
agri.
38
50
Bern
agri.
24
51
Bern
agri.
38
52
Chur
urb.
21
53
Chur
urb.
21
54
Chur
urb.
5
55
Chur
agri.
10
56
Chur
agri.
10
57
Chur
agri.
0
58
Locarno
urb.
20
59
Locarno
urb.
20
60
Locarno
urb.
0
61
Locarno
agri.
0
62
Locarno
agri.
0
63
Locarno
agri.
0
Mean
5
5.1 ± 9.4 SD
Table S2. Overlap of 500 m buffer areas in urban and intensively managed agricultural ecosystems. ‘% overlap’
indicates the per cent (rounded to the nearest whole number) to which the total area of the 500 m buffer overlaps
with other buffer areas. ‘urb.’ – urban, ‘agri.’ – agricultural.
SI 4
ecosystem
urb.
agri.
whole dataset
data subset
temperature [°C]
CN ratio
NDVI
a priori vegetation-rich (18 sites in 3 large cities)
18.6 ± 0.2
24.6 ± 0.7
0.59 ± 0.01
a priori vegetation-poor (18 sites in 3 large cities)
19.0 ± 0.1
21.1 ± 0.6
0.34 ± 0.02
all sites in the 3 large cities (36 sites)
18.8 ± 0.1
22.8 ± 0.5
0.46 ± 0.02
all sites in the 3 small cities (9 sites)
18.8 ± 0.6
21.2 ± 1.1
0.50 ± 0.02
all urban sites (45 sites)
18.8 ± 0.1
22.8 ± 0.5
0.47 ± 0.02
all rural sites (18 sites)
17.7 ± 0.3
20.8 ± 0.6
0.72 ± 0.01
all 63 sites
18.5 ± 0.2
22.0 ± 0.4
0.54 ± 0.02
Table S3. Mean (± SE) temperatures at the study sites, CN ratios of the host tree leaves, and mean NDVI values
for the time period June-August 2011 of landscape sectors surrounding study sites in a 500 m radius. ‘urb.’ –
urban, ‘agri.’ – agricultural.
SI 5
Bugs
p.h.
fi.m
richness (log)
LRT p
Δ AIC est. SE
ecos.
NDVI
ecos. × NDVI
l. dens.
12.32 0.000 10.32 0.50 0.14 8.09
5.00 0.025 3.00 0.93 0.40 7.67
/
/
/
/
0.62
0.27
/
4.91 0.027 2.91
temp.
3.33 0.068 1.33
ecos. × temp. 1.04 0.307 -0.96
Beetles
p.h.
fi.m.
richness (log)
LRT p
Δ AIC est. SE
ecos.
NDVI
ecos. × NDVI
l. dens.
/
/
/
6.62
/
/
/
/
/
/
0.010 4.62
Spiders
p.h.
fi.m.
Leafhoppers
p.h.
fi.m.
richness (log)
LRT p
Δ AIC est. SE
ecos.
/
NDVI
/
ecos. × NDVI /
ecos.
NDVI
ecos. × NDVI
CN ratio
/
/
/
0.004 6.09
0.006 5.67
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
evenness
LRT p
1.36 0.46 2.69
3.88 1.35 6.79
/
/
Δ AIC est. SE
0.101 0.69
0.009 4.79
/
/
/
/
4.34 0.037 2.34 -0.06 0.03
0.59 0.442 -1.41
abundance (log)
LRT p
Δ AIC est. SE
evenness (^2)
LRT p
Δ AIC est. SE
0.84 0.32 8.87 0.003 6.87 -0.26 0.08
3.25 0.94 17.76 0.000 15.76 -1.12 0.25
/
/
/
1.80 0.63 4.32 0.038 2.32 -0.36 0.17
0.38 0.538 -1.62
0.204 0.65 -1.80
3.51 0.061 1.51
0.05 0.823 -1.95
abundance (log)
LRT p
Δ AIC est. SE
evenness
LRT p
4.10 0.043 2.10
5.39 0.020 3.39
/
/
/
Δ AIC est. SE
-0.72 0.35 3.05 0.081 1.05
-2.43 1.02 7.82 0.005 5.82
4.51 0.034 2.51
5.22 0.022 3.22 -0.14 0.06 3.34 0.068 1.34
0.04 0.846 -1.96
1.76 0.185 -0.24
0.72 0.395 -1.28
3.10 0.078 1.10
richness
LRT p
evenness
LRT p
Δ AIC est. SE
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
11.98 0.001 9.98
temp.
2.41 0.121 0.41
ecos. × temp. 2.20 0.138 0.20
-0.67 0.25
0.51 0.477 -1.50
0.19 0.660 -1.81
6.43 0.011 4.43
10.73 0.001 8.73
/
/
/
0.74 0.28 7.49 0.006 5.49
temp.
1.45 0.229 -0.56
ecos. × temp. 0.04 0.849 -1.96
temp.
ecos. × temp
abundance (log)
LRT p
Δ AIC est. SE
abundance (log)
LRT p
Δ AIC est. SE
6.62
4.37
/
0.21 0.16 /
0.010 4.62
0.036 2.37
/
/
/
/
0.24 0.625 -1.76
3.28 0.070 1.28
1.36 0.46 /
3.88 1.35 /
/
/
/
/
/
/
-0.20 0.09
-0.63 0.26
1.61 1.04
Δ AIC est. SE
/
/
/
/
1.61 0.205 -0.39
0.36 0.547 -1.64
Table S4. Results of the post-hoc analyses that test whether the inclusion of temperature and of the interaction
temperature × ecosystem improves the best model explaining arthropod diversity (species number and evenness)
and abundance. Transformations of the response variables are indicated in brackets. Bold letters indicate
significant tests, 'fi.m.' – variables included in the final model (for explanation how final model was found see
main manuscript), 'p.h.' – variables included for post-hoc analyses, 'ecos.' – ecosystem, ‘NDVI’ – Normalized
SI 6
Difference Vegetation Index, ‘l. dens.’ – leaf density, ‘temp.’ – temperature, LRT – likelihood ratio test statistic
(Chi), ‘est.’ – estimate of the respective variable in the fi.m., 'SE' – estimate standard error.
SI 7
Figure S1. a.) Geographic position of sixty-three trees included in the study in three large cities (dark orange),
three small (light orange) cities, and six agricultural (magenta) areas within Switzerland. b.) Overview of withincity study design including thirty-six trees within the cities of Zurich, Basel and Geneva.
SI 8