SREL Reprint #3890

Complementary effects of supplemental feeding and straw retention on winter biodiversity in rice agroecosystems

Shinyeong Park1,2,3,4, Jae Hyun Kim4, Jesse B. Abrams1,2,3, and James C. Beasley 1,3

1Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, United States
2Center for Integrative Conservation Research, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30605, United States
3Savannah River Ecology Laboratory, University of Georgia, Aiken, SC 29808, United States
4Transboundary Ecological Research Institute, Paju, Gyeonggi-do 10881, Republic of Korea

Abstract: Rice paddies are both major food-production systems and critical winter habitats for wildlife. In the Civilian Control Zone (CCZ) adjoining the Korean Demilitarized Zone (DMZ), post-harvest interventions such as  supplementary grain feeding and straw retention are promoted through agronomic and conservation incentives. These measures differ in ecological scope: feeding provides direct, concentrated energetic subsidies, whereas straw management alters habitat structure and resource bases. We clarified whether these pathways function in complementary or substitutive ways to support resilient, long-term conservation strategies in rice agroecosystems. Using camera traps, we evaluated the effects of three straw treatments (chopped-straw, whole-straw, straw-removed) and supplemental feeding on winter bird and mammal communities across 48 rice fields in the CCZ. Our results demonstrate that feeding produced strong, localized increases in bird abundance and richness, driven mainly by cranes (Grus japonensis and Antigone vipio) and geese (Anser spp.), with limited effects on Shannon diversity or functional structure. Among non-feeding fields, chopped-straw paddies consistently supported higher richness and Shannon diversity than whole-straw or straw-removed fields, while centroid shifts in taxonomic and functional space were modest. Mammal abundance and diversity were largely insensitive to feeding or straw regimes, varying instead with road and forest distance and regional context. Supplemental feeding and straw retention are therefore not interchangeable tools: feeding concentrates a few avian guilds, whereas chopped-straw retention enhances baseline diversity across farmland. Collectively, our findings suggest integrating low-input straw retention with targeted feeding offers a more robust pathway for sustaining winter biodiversity in rice agroecosystems.

Keywords: Rice-based farmlands; Post-harvest field management; Straw treatment; Community composition; Agri-environment; Conservation policy; Payment for Ecosystem Services

SREL Reprint #3890

Park, S., J. H. Kim, J. B. Abrams, and J. C. Beasley. 2026. Complementary effects of supplemental feeding and straw retention on winter biodiversity in rice agroecosystems. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 407(110444).

This information was provided by the University of Georgia's Savannah River Ecology Laboratory (srel.uga.edu).