| Literature DB >> 31344898 |
Teodoro Semeraro1, Elisa Gatto1, Riccardo Buccolieri2, Marzia Vergine3, Zhi Gao4, Luigi De Bellis1, Andrea Luvisi1.
Abstract
This paper is devoted to the analysis of the impact of changes in olive urban forests affected by Xylella fastidiosa on ecosystem services. The focus is on microclimate and thermal comfort evaluated by two indices: the temperature of equivalent perception (TEP) and the predicted mean vote (PMV), which take into account both microclimate parameters and personal factors (heat resistance of clothing and human activity). The work has been carried out through (i) a qualitative analysis of the potential ecosystem services changes caused by temporary transition from olive groves to uncultivated soil, (ii) a study of the potential change of land use from monumental olive groves to other types of use, and (iii) a quantitative analysis on microclimate impact due to the loss of ecosystem services in two selected neighborhoods located in the Apulia region and chosen due to their proximity to the urban context. The analysis revealed that (i) direct effects on ecosystem services are principally linked with regulation functions and cultural services, (ii) a critical loss of cultural value of monumental olive groves occurred in the two neighborhoods, (iii) such a loss may lead to an increase of TEP and PMV, indicating a decrease of thermal comfort in the whole neighborhoods. Thus, it is necessary to plan the replanting policies of the use of the areas affected by X. fastidiosa not only in terms of agricultural planning but also in terms of landscape, urban planning, and human well-being.Entities:
Keywords: ecosystem services; microclimate; numerical modelling; phytopathology; urban forest
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31344898 PMCID: PMC6695699 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph16152642
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Study area: (a) The Province of Lecce in south Apulia; (b) the municipalities of Apulia region are characterized by a core urban mainly surrounded by olive groves, the latter currently strongly affected by X. fastidiosa, (c) the two selected peri-urban neighborhoods characterized by olive groves in the municipalities of Parabita and Matino. In the first case (municipality of Parabita) the olive groves surround the portion of the urban area, in the second case (municipality of Matino) the olive groves penetrate into the urban area.
Functions, goods and services identified for natural and semi-natural ecosystems [43,44,45,46,47] integrated with the potential variation of such services connected with the change of land use from old olive groves to uncultivated land [48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61]. The emoticon ☺ indicates positive alteration, ☹ indicates negative alteration, whereas the symbol = indicates no significant alteration. The number of emoticons gives an estimate of the intensity of the alteration: 1: low alteration; 2: medium alteration; 3: strong alteration.
| Functions | Ecosystem Processes and Components | Ecosystem Services | Variation from Old Olive Groves to Uncultivated Areas | Environmental M atrix Directed and Undirected Affected | Reversible | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gas regulation | Role of ecosystems in bio-geochemical cycles (e.g., CO2/O2 balance, ozone layer, etc.) | UVB-protection by O3 (preventing disease); | ☹☹☹ | Air | Yes | |
| Climate regulation | Influence of land cover and biol. Mediated processes (e.g., DMS-production) on climate | Maintenance of a favorable climate (temp., precipitation, etc.) for human habitation, health, cultivation. | ☹☹ | Air | Yes | |
| Disturbance prevention | Influence of ecosystem structure on dampening env. disturbances | Storm protection (e.g., by coral reefs); | not evaluated | |||
| Water regulation | Role of land cover in regulating runoff and river discharge | Drainage and natural irrigation | = | Soil | ||
| Water supply | Filtering, retention and storage of fresh water (e.g., in aquifers) | Provision of water for consumptive use (e.g., drinking, irrigation and industrial use) | = | Soil | ||
| Soil retention | Role of vegetation root matrix and soil biota in soil retention | Maintenance of arable land; | ☹ | Soil | Yes | |
| Soil formation | Weathering of rock, accumulation of organic matter | Maintenance of productivity on arable land; | ☹ | Soil | Yes | |
| Nutrient regulation | Role of biota in storage and recycling of nutrients (e.g., N, P and S) | Maintenance of healthy soils and productive ecosystems | ☹ | Soil | Yes | |
| Waste treatment | Role of vegetation and biota in removal or breakdown of xenic nutrients and compounds | Pollution control/detoxification; | not evaluated | Soil | ||
| Pollination | Role of biota in movement of floral gametes | Pollination of wild plant species; | = | Biodiversity | ||
| Biological control | Population control through trophic-dynamic relations | Control of pests and diseases; | not evaluated | Soil | ||
| Refugium function | Suitable living space for wild plants and animals | Maintenance of biological and genetic diversity (and, thus, the basis for most other functions) | ☹ | Biodiversity | Yes | |
| Nursery function | Suitable reproduction-habitat | Maintenance of commercially harvested species | ☹ | Biodiversity | Yes | |
| Food | Conversion of solar energy into edible plants and | Hunting, game, fruits, etc. | ☹ | Biodiversity | Yes | |
| Raw materials | Conversion of solar energy into biomass for human construction and other uses | Building and Manufacturing (e.g., lumber); | ☹ | Population | Yes | |
| Genetic resources | Genetic material and evolution in wild plants and animals | Improve crop resistance to pathogens and pests; | not evaluated | Yes | ||
| Medicinal resources | Variety in (bio)chemical substances in, and other medicinal uses of, natural biota | Drugs and pharmaceuticals; | not evaluated | Yes | ||
| Aesthetic information | Attractive landscape features | Enjoyment of scenery (scenic roads, housing, etc.) | ☹☹☹ | Population | No | |
| Re-creation | Variety in landscapes with (potential) re-creational uses | Travel to natural ecosystems for eco-tourism and (re-creational) nature study | ☹☹☹ | Population | No | |
| Cultural and artistic information | Variety in natural features with cultural and artistic value | Use of nature as motive in books, film, painting, folklore, national symbols, architect | ☹☹☹ | Population | No | |
| Spiritual and historic information | Variety in natural features with spiritual and historic value | Use of nature for religious or historic purposes (i.e., heritage value of natural ecosystems and features) | ☹☹☹ | Population | No | |
| Science and education | Variety in nature with scientific and educational value | Use of natural systems for school excursions, etc. | ☹☹☹ | Population | No | |
| Habitation | Depending on the specific land use type, different requirements are placed on | Living space (ranging from small settlements to | ☹☹☹ | Population | No | |
| Tourism-facilities | Tourism-activities (outdoor sports, | ☹☹☹ | Population | No | ||
Figure 2Example of eradication activity carried out in the early 2019. The scenarios represent the short- and medium-term transformation considered for the qualitative analysis of the change in ecosystem services caused by X. fastidiosa. (a) Picture of olive trees affected by X. fastidiosa (December 2018), (b) same as (a), but after eradication (February 2019), (c) same as (a) but some months after eradication (April 2019).
Figure 3Geographical position of the ARPA-Puglia meteorological station with indication of the study neighborhoods (Matino and Parabita) (from Google Earth) and their reconstructions in ENVI-met (red rhombus indicate the receptors where data have been extracted for microclimate analysis).
Figure 4Maps showing the presence of urban areas, olive groves and other land uses in the years 1887 and 2016 and relative intersection.
Figure 5Olive trees studied in municipalities of (a) Matino and (b) Parabita with symptoms of disease (“olive quick decline syndrome”, OQDS) severity between level 2 to 3.
Figure 6Air temperature hourly profiles for Matino (left) and Parabita (right) inside the street canyon (top) and within the olive grove (bottom) (see Figure 3 for the position of receptors R1, R2, R3 and R4).
Figure 7Temperature of equivalent perception (TEP) hourly profiles for Matino (left) and Parabita (right) inside the street canyon (top) and within the olive grove (bottom) (see Figure 3 for the position of R1, R2, R3 and R4 receptors).
Figure 8Predicted mean vote (PMV) hourly profiles for Matino (left) and Parabita (right) inside the street canyon (top) and within the olive grove (bottom) (see Figure 3 for the position of R1, R2, R3 and R4 receptors).
Figure 9Spatial distribution of PMV at 15:00 for Matino (top) and Parabita (bottom) inside the street canyon (top) and within the olive grove (bottom) (see Figure 3 for the position of receptors R1, R2, R3 and R4).
Figure 10Conceptual model of management of areas affected by X. fastidiosa.