When natural habitat fails to enhance biological pest control – Five hypotheses

Tscharntke, Teja; Karp, Daniel S.; Chaplin‐Kramer, Rebecca; Batáry, Péter; DeClerck, Fabrice; Gratton, Claudio; Hunt, Lauren; Ives, Anthony R.; Jonsson, Mattias; Larsen, Ashley E.; Martin, Emily A.; Martínez‐Salinas, Alejandra; Meehan, Timothy D.; O’Rourke, Megan E.; Poveda, Katja; Rosenheim, Jay A.; Rusch, Adrien; Schellhorn, Nancy A.; Wanger, Thomas Cherico; Wratten, Stephen D.; Zhang, Wei

doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2016.10.001

Cited by 482 publications

(428 citation statements)

References 138 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

402

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, given the set of crops in production, ecologists are seeking means to reduce excess insecticide use by manipulating on-farm and landscape characteristics. Because insect pests and natural enemies often have large dispersal ranges and varied habitat needs, the focus has been on if and when complex landscapes reduce pest abundance or, conversely, if and when simplified landscapes lead to more pest problems (15). However, ecological field studies seeking to inform more sustainable pest control practices face an enormous challenge.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Identifying the landscape drivers of agricultural insecticide use leveraging evidence from 100,000 fields

Larsen

Noack

2017

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agricultural landscape intensification has enabled food production to meet growing demand. However, there are concerns that more simplified cropland with lower crop diversity, less noncrop habitat, and larger fields results in increased use of pesticides due to a lack of natural pest control and more homogeneous crop resources. Here, we use data on crop production and insecticide use from over 100,000 field-level observations from Kern County, California, encompassing the years 2005-2013 to test if crop diversity, field size, and cropland extent affect insecticide use in practice. Overall, we find that higher crop diversity does reduce insecticide use, but the relationship is strongly influenced by the differences in crop types between diverse and less diverse landscapes. Further, we find insecticide use increases with increasing field size. The effect of cropland extent is distance-dependent, with nearby cropland decreasing insecticide use, whereas cropland further away increases insecticide use. This refined spatial perspective provides unique understanding of how different components of landscape simplification influence insecticide use over space and for different crops. Our results indicate that neither the traditionally conceived "simplified" nor "complex" agricultural landscape is most beneficial to reducing insecticide inputs; reality is far more complex.pesticides | biological control | landscape simplification | landscape complexity | crop diversity

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a result, the evidence tying simplified habitats to insecticide use is often specific to one crop and pest combination (e.g., ref. 16) and is equivocal overall (15,17).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying the landscape drivers of agricultural insecticide use leveraging evidence from 100,000 fields

Larsen

Noack

2017

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, non-crop areas can also favour pest colonization (discussed by Tscharntke et al, 2016), thus the effect of a high configurational heterogeneity on pest control remains to be assessed (but see Plećaš et al 2014). …”

Section: At the Landscape Scalementioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial diversification of agroecosystems to enhance biological control and other regulating services: An agroecological perspective

Hatt

Boeraeve

Artru

et al. 2018

Science of The Total Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spatial diversification of crop and non-crop habitats in farming systems is promising for enhancing natural regulation of insect pests. Nevertheless, results from recent syntheses show variable effects.One explanation is that the abundance and diversity of pests and natural enemies are affected by the composition, design and management of crop and non-crop habitats. Moreover, interactions between both local and landscape elements and practices carried out at different spatial scales may affect the regulation of insect pests. Hence, research is being conducted to understand these interdependencies.However, insects are not the only pests and pests are not the only elements to regulate in agroecosystems. Broadening the scope could allow addressing multiple issues simultaneously, but also solving them together by enhancing synergies. Indeed, spatial diversification of crop and non-crop habitats can allow addressing the issues of weeds and pathogens, along with being beneficial to several other regulating services like pollination, soil conservation and nutrient cycling. Although calls rise to develop multifunctional landscapes that optimize the delivery of multiple ecosystem services, it still represents a scientific challenge today. Enhancing interdisciplinarity in research institutions and building interrelations between scientists and stakeholders may help reach this goal. Despite obstacles, positive results from research based on such innovative approaches are encouraging for engaging 2 science in this path. Hence, the aim of the present paper is to offer an update on these issues by exploring the most recent findings and discussing these results to highlight needs for future research.

show abstract

“…In addition, landscape ecology findings indicate very variable effects of landscape complexity on biological control (Bianchi et al 2006). This uncertainty makes it difficult to deliver reliable recommendations (Tscharntke et al 2005) because the effect of natural habitats for biocontrol can vary dramatically and may regularly fail to enhance biocontrol (Tscharntke et al 2016). Moreover, the identified innovation of enclosing fields with nets probably favors an individual strategy, which is opposite to a landscape approach.…”

Section: Speculation: Toward Pest-suppressing Landscape?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Landscape and biodiversity as new resources for agro-ecology? Insights from farmers’ perspectives

Salliou¹,

Barnaud²

2017

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Pesticide reduction is a key current challenge. Scientific findings in landscape ecology suggest that complex landscapes favor insect pest biological control by conservation of natural enemy habitats. A potential agro-ecological innovation is to conserve or engineer such complex landscapes to reduce pesticide use. However, whereas the relevant resources are often well known in most natural resource management situations, potential resources involved in this innovation (natural enemies and the landscape) are not necessarily considered as resources in the eyes of their potential users. From the perspective that resources are socially constructed, our objective was to investigate whether and how these resources are considered by their potential users. To do so, we conducted research in an area specializing in tree-fruit (apple) production in southwestern France. This site was selected for its high pest incidence and high use of insecticides on orchards and, consequently, high stakes involved for any alternative. We conducted 30 comprehensive interviews with stakeholders (farmers and crop advisors) about their pest control strategies to explore their representation of their landscape and natural enemies. Our results show that natural enemies are considered by local stakeholders as public good resources, especially in the context of interventions by public institutions for their conservation, acclimation, and management. Farmers sometimes consider natural enemies as private goods when they can isolate the crop, enclosing it with nets or some other type of boundary. We also show that the landscape was not considered as a resource for biological pest control by conservation, but rather as a source of pests. We advocate for more research on the effects of landscapes on natural enemies, including participatory research based on dialogue among farmers, crop advisors, and scientists.

show abstract

When natural habitat fails to enhance biological pest control – Five hypotheses

Abstract: EditorialIFPRI5; CRP5; A Ensuring Sustainable food production; E Building ResilienceEPTDNon-PRCGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems (WLE

Cited by 482 publications

References 138 publications

Identifying the landscape drivers of agricultural insecticide use leveraging evidence from 100,000 fields

Identifying the landscape drivers of agricultural insecticide use leveraging evidence from 100,000 fields

Spatial diversification of agroecosystems to enhance biological control and other regulating services: An agroecological perspective

Landscape and biodiversity as new resources for agro-ecology? Insights from farmers’ perspectives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

When natural habitat fails to enhance biological pest control – Five hypotheses

Abstract: EditorialIFPRI5; CRP5; A Ensuring Sustainable food production; E Building ResilienceEPTDNon-PRCGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems (WLE

Cited by 482 publications

References 138 publications

Identifying the landscape drivers of agricultural insecticide use leveraging evidence from 100,000 fields

Identifying the landscape drivers of agricultural insecticide use leveraging evidence from 100,000 fields

Spatial diversification of agroecosystems to enhance biological control and other regulating services: An agroecological perspective

Landscape and biodiversity as new resources for agro-ecology? Insights from farmers&#8217; perspectives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Landscape and biodiversity as new resources for agro-ecology? Insights from farmers’ perspectives