Landscape context and management effects on an important insect pest and its natural enemies in almond

Eilers, Elisabeth J.; Klein, Alexandra‐Maria

doi:10.1016/j.biocontrol.2009.07.010

Cited by 60 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Besides the positive effects of natural and semi-natural habitats, these habitats might also promote organisms that influence crop production negatively, either directly by consuming parts or whole crop plants or indirectly by transmitting diseases (Dunn, 2010;Keesing et al, 2010;Blitzer et al, 2012). Insect pests are well known to negatively influence crop production (Oerke, 2005;Eilers and Klein, 2009;Cini et al, 2012;El-Wakeil and Volkmar, 2012) but seed or fruit predation by vertebrates can also lead to losses in crop growth and production (Moran and Keidar, 1993;Ahmad et al, 2011;De Mey et al, 2012). Research was carried out to identify the bird species involved and the extent of crop yield loss and possible control methods (Moran, 2003;Linz et al, 2011;Radtke and Dieter, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

High trees increase sunflower seed predation by birds in an agricultural landscape of Israel

Schäckermann

Weiss²,

Wehrden

et al. 2014

Front. Ecol. Evol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Natural habitats in agricultural landscapes promote agro-ecosystem services but little is known about negative effects (dis-services) derived by natural habitats such as crop seed predation. Birds are important seed predators and use high landscape structures to perch and hide. High trees in agricultural landscapes may therefore drive seed predation. We examined if the presence, the distance and the percentages of high trees (tree height >5 m) and the percentages of natural habitat surrounding sunflower fields, increased seed predation by birds in Israel. At the field scale, we assessed seed predation across a sample grid of an entire field. At the landscape scale, we assessed seed predation at the field margins and interiors of 20 sunflower fields. Seed predation was estimated as the percentage of removed seeds from sunflower heads. Distances of sample points to the closest high tree and percentage of natural habitat and of high trees in a 1 km radius surrounding the fields were measured. We found that seed predation increased with decreasing distance to the closest high tree at the field and landscape scale. At the landscape scale, the percentage of high trees and natural habitat did not increase seed predation. Seed predation in the fields increased by 37%, with a maximum seed predation of 92%, when a high tree was available within 0-50 m to the sunflower fields. If the closest high tree was further away, seed predation was less than 5%. Sunflower seed predation by birds can be reduced, when avoiding sowing sunflowers within a radius of 50 m to high trees. Farmers should plan to grow crops, not sensitive to bird seed predation, closer to trees to eventually benefit from ecosystem services provided by birds, such as predation of pest insects, while avoiding these locations for growing crops sensitive to bird seed predation. Such management recommendations are directing toward sustainable agricultural landscapes.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

High trees increase sunflower seed predation by birds in an agricultural landscape of Israel

Schäckermann

Weiss²,

Wehrden

et al. 2014

Front. Ecol. Evol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Regarding predators, our results reasonably agree with those reported by Benhadi-Marín et al (2011), who pointed out Araneae as the most abundant group, followed by Coleoptera (mainly from Family Coccinellidae), Formicidae, Neuroptera, Hemiptera and Dermaptera. Other authors also report the occurrence of predators belonging to these groups in almond trees (Bolu, 2007;Eilers & Klein, 2009;Yanik et al, 2011;Santos et al, 2012). However, in none of these works the occurrence of predatory Acari, Thysanoptera or Diptera is reported, but Hoy et al (1979) collected phytoseiid mites and predatory thrips in almond orchards, as well as Neuroptera and predatory Coleoptera.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of the families of spiders collected by Benhadi-Marín et al (2011), Philodromidae, Salticidae, Theridiidae, Thomisidae, Araneidae, Oxyopidae and Gnaphosidae were also present in our orchards. Concerning parasitoids, in the work by Eilers & Klein (2009) the families Bethylidae and Encyrtidae comprised the majority of parasitoids collected, with only seven morphospecies captured, whereas we have collected up to 16 families of hymenopteran parasitoids. Regarding the possible natural enemies of M. unicostata, most of the groups reported by different authors (Vessia, 1961;Moleas, 1987) have been collected in our assays, and those that have been proved to feed on this lace bug in the field (Araneae and Anthocoridae) (Moleas, 1987) are well represented in both years of study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Compatibility of organic farming treatments against Monosteira unicostata with non-target arthropod fauna of almond trees canopy

Sánchez‐Ramos

Marcotegui

Pascual

et al. 2017

Span. j. agric. res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Field trials had shown that 1-2 applications of kaolin and potassium salts of fatty acids combined with thyme essential oil (PSTEO) reduced the abundance of the lace bug Monosteira unicostata (Mulsant & Rey) (Hemiptera: Tingidae), an important pest of almond trees in the Mediterranean region. These products could be useful for the control of this pest in organic production of almonds, but higher number of applications could be necessary. However, the possible detrimental effects on the almond orchard ecosystem should be evaluated. In the present work, the effects observed on the non-target arthropod fauna of the almond trees canopy in those field assays are shown. First, a comprehensive report of the non-target arthropod fauna of the almond tree is provided. Regarding natural enemies, most of the predatory arthropods captured were spiders belonging to different families like Salticidae, Thomisidae, Philodromidae, Theridiidae, Araneidae or Oxyopidae. Other predatory families that appeared in significant numbers were Chrysopidae, Anthocoridae, Aeolothripidae, Coccinellidae, Phytoseiidae, Erythraeidae or Forficulidae. Among parasitoids, the most abundant families were Eulophidae, Scelionidae and Dryinidae. Kaolin reduced the abundance of natural enemies and other non-target arthropods as well as their diversity and number of species. On the contrary, PSTEO only produced a slight reduction in the number of natural enemies, whereas no effect was found on the diversity and species richness. These effects were observed despite the reduced number of applications, so greater effect is expected if its frequency is increased in order to achieve an efficient control of M. unicostata.Additional keywords: kaolin; insecticidal soaps; thyme essential oil; organic almond production; Prunus dulcis; natural enemies Abbreviations used: PRC (principal response curve analysis); PSTEO (potassium salts of fatty acids combined with thyme essential oil). (Tables S1, S2, S3 and S4) accompanies the paper on SJAR's website.

show abstract

“…Natural woodland habitat cover explains significant increases in bee nesting densities, regardless of local habitat characteristics (Goulson et al 2010;Jha and Kremen 2013). Decreases in natural or seminatural habitat cover lead to declines in parasitoid abundance (Eilers and Klein 2009), natural enemy diversity (Chaplin-Kramer et al 2011), and natural enemy activity (Schmidt et al 2008;Schmidt and Tscharntke 2005;Thies, SteffanDewenter, and Tscharntke 2003;Thies & 288 Tscharntke 1999). Likewise, for pollinators, recent meta-analyses indicate that bee abundance is lower with decreasing proportions of natural habitat (Williams et al 2010) and that bee abundance and richness is lower in systems experiencing natural habitat loss (Winfree et al 2009).…”

Section: Landscape Composition: Habitat Type Covermentioning

confidence: 99%

Intersection between biodiversity conservation, agroecology, and ecosystem services

Liere

Jha

Philpott

2017

Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agroecological research has improved our understanding of the drivers and benefits of biodiversity, thus providing the scientific basis needed to achieve agricultural multifunctionality. We review how agroecology has contributed to our understanding of the effects of local and landscape level drivers on beneficial insects, as well as on the ecosystem services they provide. Several syntheses from agroecosystem research indicate that both populations and biodiversity of pollinator and natural enemies decline with increases in local agricultural intensification and that landscape composition and configuration may mediate these local scale effects. Changes in agricultural management may affect predation and pollination services by altering the resource base for natural enemies and pollinators, by altering their species pool, and by modifying their interactions. The effects of these drivers depend on taxonomical or functional groups and landscape context. Studies that directly measure the cascading effects of landscape drivers on pest control and pollination services and plant level benefits are sparse. We propose five research themes to improve our understanding of the interface of agroecology, conservation, and ecosystem service research.

show abstract

Landscape context and management effects on an important insect pest and its natural enemies in almond

Cited by 60 publications

References 25 publications

High trees increase sunflower seed predation by birds in an agricultural landscape of Israel

High trees increase sunflower seed predation by birds in an agricultural landscape of Israel

Compatibility of organic farming treatments against Monosteira unicostata with non-target arthropod fauna of almond trees canopy

Intersection between biodiversity conservation, agroecology, and ecosystem services

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About