Landscape structure regulates pest control provided by ants in sun coffee farms

Aristizábal, Natalia; Metzger, Jean Paul

doi:10.1111/1365-2664.13283

Cited by 67 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For natural enemies that rely only on resources within farm fields, proximity to seminatural habitats can be irrelevant [40] or even detrimental. For example, pests in sun-grown Brazilian coffee were suppressed by ants adapted to open habitats and, in this case, pest suppression increased at greater distances from forest fragments [41]. Similarly, some parasitoids overwinter in oilseed rape fields, and were more abundant and effective when fields were isolated from forests [42].…”

Section: Connectivitymentioning

confidence: 96%

“…For example, we note that, while six studies documented correlations between natural enemy and pest density (arrow i), without an experimental approach, the relative strengths of landscape predictors and numeric responses between enemies and prey are unknown. Based on [37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45]51,74]. millennia, and change relatively slowly.…”

Section: Figure 2 Viewing Pest Suppression Through the Lens Of Multimentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Predicting Landscape Configuration Effects on Agricultural Pest Suppression

Haan

Zhang

Landis

2020

Trends in Ecology & Evolution

168

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Arthropod predators and parasitoids attack crop pests, providing a valuable ecosystem service. The amount of noncrop habitat surrounding crop fields influences pest suppression, but synthesis of new studies suggests that the spatial configuration of crops and other habitats is similarly important. Natural enemies are often more abundant in fine-grained agricultural landscapes comprising smaller patches and can increase or decrease with the connectivity of crop fields to other habitats. Partitioning organisms by traits has emerged as a promising way to predict the strength and direction of these effects. Furthermore, our ability to predict configurational effects will depend on understanding the potential for indirect effects among trophic levels and the relationship between arthropod dispersal capability and the spatial scale of underlying landscape structure. Landscape Structure Influences Pest Suppression in Crop FieldsIn agricultural landscapes, predatory and parasitic arthropods suppress herbivorous arthropod populations, providing an essential ecosystem service valued at billions of dollars annually [1]. In recent decades researchers have begun to identify factors driving the abundance of natural enemies (see Glossary), pests, and the effectiveness of pest suppression in crop fields, with the aim of designing and managing agricultural landscapes to maximize this and other services [2][3][4][5]. Positive outcomes from enhanced pest suppression could include greater crop yields, reduced pesticide use, and increased arthropod diversity in agricultural landscapes. Arthropod communities in crop fields are influenced by the landscape that surrounds them: on their own, crop fields are unsuitable for some beneficial insects because they are usually monocultures and undergo frequent disturbance. This means that other nearby habitats may be especially important for determining which arthropods colonize farm fields. Most research on how landscape structure influences pest suppression has focused on effects of landscape composition (i.e., amounts of habitat). In general, seminatural habitats can provide natural enemies with resources including food, overwintering habitat, nest sites, and refuge from agricultural disturbance, allowing them to survive and then colonize crop fields to exploit the herbivores that accumulate there [3]. Pest suppression is generally thought to increase when crop fields are surrounded by more noncrop or seminatural habitat. However, while this occurs in some circumstances, the effects of landscape composition on pest suppression overall are inconsistent, varying among systems and organisms [4].Beyond composition, there is also variation in landscape configuration [6]. Multiple lines of reasoning suggest that configurational aspects of landscape structure should affect pest suppression. First, since there is spillover of beneficial organisms along interfaces between habitat patches [7], configurational variables such as patch size, shape, amount of shared edge, and connectivity should influence...

show abstract

Section: Connectivitymentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Figure 2 Viewing Pest Suppression Through the Lens Of Multimentioning

confidence: 99%

Predicting Landscape Configuration Effects on Agricultural Pest Suppression

Haan

Zhang

Landis

2020

Trends in Ecology & Evolution

168

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In an artificial predator community with three ant species, pest suppression was higher than in a community with only one predator ant species; additionally, pest diversity reduced the efficiency of a single predator species at suppressing pest damage but did not limit multiple‐predator communities (Gonthier, Kuesel & Perfecto, 2015). Ants reduced damage caused by coffee pests in landscapes with high forest cover within a 2 km radius, where biodiversity is higher (Aristizábal & Metzger, 2019). Also in coffee farms, the fruit set increases with the diversity of pollinating bees, and this diversity is mediated by the distance to tropical forest (Klein et al ., 2002).…”

Section: Interaction Of Services Provided By Social Insects With Envimentioning

confidence: 99%

The ecosystem services provided by social insects: traits, management tools and knowledge gaps

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social insects, i.e. ants, bees, wasps and termites, are key components of ecological communities, and are important ecosystem services (ESs) providers. Here, we review the literature in order to (i) analyse the particular traits of social insects that make them good suppliers of ESs; (ii) compile and assess management strategies that improve the services provided by social insects; and (iii) detect gaps in our knowledge about the services that social insects provide. Social insects provide at least 10 ESs; however, many of them are poorly understood or valued. Relevant traits of social insects include high biomass and numerical abundance, a diversity of mutualistic associations, the ability to build important biogenic structures, versatile production of chemical defences, the simultaneous delivery of several ESs, the presence of castes and division of labour, efficient communication and cooperation, the capacity to store food, and a long lifespan. All these characteristics enhance social insects as ES providers, highlighting their potential, constancy and efficiency as suppliers of these services. In turn, many of these traits make social insects stress tolerant and easy to manage, so increasing the ESs they provide. We emphasise the need for a conservation approach to the management of the services, as well as the potential use of social insects to help restore habitats degraded by human activities. In addition, we stress the need to evaluate both services and disservices in an integrated way, because some species of social insects are among the most problematic invasive species and native pests. Finally, we propose two areas of research that will lead to a greater and more efficient use of social insects as ES providers, and to a greater appreciation of them by producers and decision‐makers.

show abstract

“…The effects of landscape structure and crop management on insects and associated services and disservices have been widely investigated in temperate regions at multiple spatial scales. However, this relationship is understudied in Brazilian agricultural landscapes, where only a handful of recent studies have been reported (Sartuni et al 2016;Librán-Embid et al 2017;Hipólito et al 2018;Aristizábal and Metzger 2018). Assessments in the Neotropics often rely on temperate data even though the effects of landscape elements and crop management on insects may differ between regions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Forest cover enhances natural enemy diversity and biological control services in Brazilian sun coffee plantations

Medeiros

Grandinete

Manning

et al. 2019

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Landscape structure and crop management directly affect insect communities, which can influence agriculturally relevant ecosystem services and disservices. However, little is known about the effect of landscape structure and local factors on pests, natural enemies, and biological control services in the Neotropics. We investigated how environmental conditions at local and landscape levels affect Leucoptera coffeella (insect pest), social wasps (natural enemies), and the provision of biological control services in 16 Brazilian coffee plantations under different crop management and landscape contexts. We considered microclimatic conditions, coffee plantation size, and management intensity at the local level; and forest cover, landscape diversity, and edge density at the landscape level. Pest population, wasp communities, and biocontrol services were monitored in wet and dry seasons when L. coffeella outbreaks occur. We found that the amount of forest in the surrounding landscape was more important for explaining patterns than the local environment, landscape diversity, or landscape configuration. In both seasons, L. coffeella was negatively affected by forest cover, whereas biological control and richness and abundance of social wasps increased with increasing forest cover at multiple spatial scales. Moreover, biological control was positively correlated with wasp abundance during pest outbreaks, suggesting that social wasps are important natural enemies and provide pest control services within coffee plantations. We provide the first empirical evidence that forest cover is important for the maintenance of social wasp diversity and associated pest control services in a Brazilian coffee-producing region.

show abstract

Landscape structure regulates pest control provided by ants in sun coffee farms

Cited by 67 publications

References 51 publications

Predicting Landscape Configuration Effects on Agricultural Pest Suppression

Predicting Landscape Configuration Effects on Agricultural Pest Suppression

The ecosystem services provided by social insects: traits, management tools and knowledge gaps

Forest cover enhances natural enemy diversity and biological control services in Brazilian sun coffee plantations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About