Home » Addressing the rapid decline of insects means having more insect-eating birds

Addressing the rapid decline of insects means having more insect-eating birds

by simon

The life-histories of insects and vertebrates are coupled. Predator and prey cannot exist without one-another. Species richness is higher in systems with predators [1] because they perform a function of free surplus energy -minimisation, necessary for the integrity of the food chain beneath.

Healthy insect populations depend on healthy songbird populations and decline in the latter (along with other large vertebrates) could be a major contributor to ongoing destabilisation of insect populations globally.

There is increasing and overwhelming evidence for the role of higher-order vertebrates in the functioning of ecosystems. But our obsession with studying “impacts” often leads us to linear conclusions about cause and effect. These can be very misleading, when we separate groups of animals from the overall ecosystem and energy-structure. We might, for instance, imagine that having fewer birds means having more insects. It doesn’t. That’s a linear argument. Under a systems response, the two can’t stabilise without each other.

It’s similar to how a layperson toys with the idea atmospheric carbon causes global warming but we know the real risk is increasing unpredictability of Earth’s weather patterns. It’s climate ‘change’ and instability that is the real threat.

So, when we talk about collapse of insect populations, we aren’t talking about more or fewer insects, we are talking about the destabilisation of an entire ecosystem. In fact, it’s more closely coupled to climate than we have any idea … yet.

To frame the discussion about insect decline in any meaningful way i.e. how it matters to humans, we have to consider the whole system response. In other words, ask: what are the factors that would re-enable insects to thrive?

Clearly one of these is habitat. Grasslands are thousands of times more species-rich on a small scale, than rainforests and in the Czech Republic can have 44 species for every 25 x 25 cm – that’s 7,500 times more species-rich than a hectare of the Ecuadorian rainforest. All over the world, entire grassland habitats went decades ago. Pesticides are unlikely to be responsible for the majority of insect loss as their decline would have started with the transformation of grassland to agriculture – pesticides continue to suppress recovery.

But it was vertebrates, particularly migratory animals, that enabled the ecosystems to diversify in the first place [2]. Light-footed-megafauna, perfectly adapted to savannah grasslands, stimulate growth and selectively graze, which increases plant and animal diversity, amplifying the availability of energy inside the system (removing it, so it isn’t surplus and chaos-forming).

Mosaics of grazing lines, criss-crossing the plains, the application of manure droppings and soft hoof depressions, created niches to support countless other birds and animals. These smaller residents, in turn, amplified nutrient processes at ever decreasing spatial scales, until every square millimetre had maximum energy order, right down to the tiniest microscopic lifeform. If wildebeest didn’t stride through ahead on the African plains, for instance , the scene would not be set, for other animals and insects to follow up.

One of the greatest modern threats to insect ecosystems is the collapse of migratory songbird populations, which have declined by 50% in biomass in just a few decades. Songbirds keep free surplus energy from insects, under control and therefore allow insects to diversify and avoid extinction.

What happens to all that waste energy without songbirds? It gets pushed lower down the trophic food chain but rather than benefiting insects, it generates a form of chaos, similar to climate change but in terms of soil integrity, water retention and various nutrient cycles. When the amount of free energy reaches a certain point, you might get locust plagues, which further strip-mine free surplus energy to the detriment of all other insects. Effectively, without the larger animals, the amount of available nutrient doesn’t decline, it just gets spread out more thinly so it can’t support as much diversity.

In short, the only way to solve this, is to rebuild the food chain. If you want more insects, you’re going to need to recreate the ecosystem structures that made them in the first place. The good news is, that means better food security, more carbon-capture and a more stable climate too ; )


1.  Sergio, F., et al., Ecologically justified charisma: Preservation of top predators delivers biodiversity conservation. Journal of Applied Ecology, 2006. 43: p. 1049-1055.

2. Holdo, R., et al., Plant productivity and soil nitrogen as a function of grazing, migration and fire in an African savanna. Journal of Ecology, 2006. 95: p. 115-128.

patreon banner

You may also like

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Read More