Effects of land use on infestation and parasitism rates of cabbage seed weevil in oilseed rape

Kovács, Gabriella; Kaasik, Riina; Lof, Marjolein E.; Werf, Wopke Van der; Kaart, Tanel; Holland, John M.; Luik, Anne; Veromann, Eve

doi:10.1002/ps.5161

Cited by 20 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 70 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A 2-D, landscape level, mathematical kernel approach was used [42] to weigh contributions of different seminatural habitats across a landscape and predict the level of biological control in a focal field on the basis of contributions from different habitats (e.g., SNH) in the surrounding landscape. Outcomes were used to generate pest control heat maps that indicated the level of biological control [18]. As found with the other analyses, there was considerable variability in the findings for the different sentinels and case studies.…”

Section: Approach Based Upon Measurement Of Predation or Parasitismmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Unfortunately, few of the most valuable SNH are supported or are being created through agri-environment scheme funding across Europe [14], see [15,16]. Grassy strips that have some biocontrol potential [17,18] are supported in some countries' agri-environment schemes or are compulsory as buffers for water courses (e.g., in French vulnerable zones). In some countries there has been a focus on creating flower-rich habitats for pollinators that may also be beneficial for some natural enemies, however, more specific habitats designed to support natural enemies, are not supported, with the exception of beetle banks in the UK [19] and wild flower strips in Switzerland [16,20], as far as the authors can ascertain.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Approaches to Identify the Value of Seminatural Habitats for Conservation Biological Control

Holland

Jeanneret

Moonen

et al. 2020

Insects

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Invertebrates perform many vital functions in agricultural production, but many taxa are in decline, including pest natural enemies. Action is needed to increase their abundance if more sustainable agricultural systems are to be achieved. Conservation biological control (CBC) is a key component of integrated pest management yet has failed to be widely adopted in mainstream agriculture. Approaches to improving conservation biological control have been largely ad hoc. Two approaches are described to improve this process, one based upon pest natural enemy ecology and resource provision while the other focusses on the ecosystem service delivery using the QuESSA (Quantification of Ecological Services for Sustainable Agriculture) project as an example. In this project, a predictive scoring system was developed to show the potential of five seminatural habitat categories to provide biological control, from which predictive maps were generated for Europe. Actual biological control was measured in a series of case studies using sentinel systems (insect or seed prey), trade-offs between ecosystem services were explored, and heatmaps of biological control were generated. The overall conclusion from the QuESSA project was that results were context specific, indicating that more targeted approaches to CBC are needed. This may include designing new habitats or modifying existing habitats to support the types of natural enemies required for specific crops or pests.

show abstract

Section: Approach Based Upon Measurement Of Predation or Parasitismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Approaches to Identify the Value of Seminatural Habitats for Conservation Biological Control

Holland

Jeanneret

Moonen

et al. 2020

Insects

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Measures for enhancing conservation biocontrol in crops can include preservation/restoration of adjacent natural and semi-natural habitats, maintaining crop diversity and landscape heterogeneity across spatiotemporal scales, and practicing inter-, under- and cover cropping locally. However, while local- and landscape-scale conservation measures can benefit biocontrol ( Thies and Tscharntke, 1999 ; Li et al, 2014 ; Kovács et al, 2019 ), meta-analyses and models suggest that conserving natural and semi-natural habitats, either locally or at the landscape scale, results in variable success ( Karp et al, 2018 ; Albrecht et al, 2020 ). Moreover, there are several reasons why these measures could fail to enhance biocontrol ( Tscharntke et al, 2016 ; Begg et al, 2017 ).…”

Section: Need For Integrating An Old Concept With New Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Uniting RNAi Technology and Conservation Biocontrol to Promote Global Food Security and Agrobiodiversity

Willow

Cook

Veromann

et al. 2022

Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Habitat loss and fragmentation, and the effects of pesticides, contribute to biodiversity losses and unsustainable food production. Given the United Nation’s (UN’s) declaration of this decade as the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration, we advocate combining conservation biocontrol-enhancing practices with the use of RNA interference (RNAi) pesticide technology, the latter demonstrating remarkable target-specificity via double-stranded (ds)RNA’s sequence-specific mode of action. This specificity makes dsRNA a biosafe candidate for integration into the global conservation initiative. Our interdisciplinary perspective conforms to the UN’s declaration, and is facilitated by the Earth BioGenome Project, an effort valuable to RNAi development given its utility in providing whole-genome sequences, allowing identification of genetic targets in crop pests, and potentially relevant sequences in non-target organisms. Interdisciplinary studies bringing together biocontrol-enhancing techniques and RNAi are needed, and should be examined for various crop‒pest systems to address this global problem.

show abstract

“…In addition to pollinators, parasitoids are another important insect guild in OSR, as they contribute considerably to the biological control of pests (Abram et al 2019;Kovács et al 2019;Ulber et al 2010b;Veromann et al 2010). Hence, the question arose whether applying systemic neonicotinoid insecticides to the lower vegetation layers using dropleg sprayers (Hausmann et al 2019) could target pests in the OSR canopy, while having no or reduced impact on their co-occurring parasitoids.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of insecticide application by dropleg sprayers on pollen beetle parasitism in oilseed rape

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dropleg sprayers apply pesticides below the flower horizon of oilseed rape plants and thus reduce unwanted side effects on pollinating insects. Whether this technique benefits parasitoids of seed and pollen feeding insect pests has not been studied earlier. To answer this question, we first assessed the vertical distribution of pests and parasitoids using a portable aspirator. In addition, parasitism rates of pollen beetle, Brassicogethes aeneus Fabricius (Coleoptera: Nitidulidae), by the larval parasitoid Tersilochus heterocerus Thomson (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae) were compared in conventional and dropleg sprayed fields over four years (2016–2019), using the neonicotinoids thiacloprid and acetamiprid. Our results show that seed and pollen feeders were mainly found in the flowering canopy, while the predominant location of parasitoids was species-specific. Among pollen beetle parasitoids, Phradis interstitialis Thomson (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae) was more abundant below flowering canopy (63% of total catch), whereas T. heterocerus was mainly caught in the flowering canopy (84% of total catch). In the spraying experiments, average parasitism rates of pollen beetles by T. heterocerus ranged between 55 and 82% in the untreated controls. In the dropleg spray treatments, parasitism rates did not differ significantly from control levels, with the exception of thiacloprid application in 2019. In contrast, conventional spray applications resulted in a reduction of parasitism rates by up to 37% compared to the control for at least one of the insecticides in three out of four years. The impact of conventional application differed between years, which may be explained by the temporal coincidence between spray application and the immigration of parasitoids into the crop. We conclude that dropleg spraying exerts lower non-target effects on the main biological control agent of pollen beetle.

show abstract

Effects of land use on infestation and parasitism rates of cabbage seed weevil in oilseed rape

Cited by 20 publications

References 70 publications

Approaches to Identify the Value of Seminatural Habitats for Conservation Biological Control

Approaches to Identify the Value of Seminatural Habitats for Conservation Biological Control

Uniting RNAi Technology and Conservation Biocontrol to Promote Global Food Security and Agrobiodiversity

The effect of insecticide application by dropleg sprayers on pollen beetle parasitism in oilseed rape

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About