Apple is considered the most important fruit crop in temperate areas and profitable production depends on multiple ecosystem services, including the reduction of pest damage and the provision of sufficient pollination levels. Management approaches present an inherent trade‐off as each affects species differently. We quantified the direct and indirect effects of management (organic vs. integrated pest management, IPM) on species richness, ecosystem services, and fruit production in 85 apple orchards in three European countries. We also quantified how habit composition influenced these effects at three spatial scales: within orchards, adjacent to orchards, and in the surrounding landscape. Organic management resulted in 48% lower yield than IPM, and also that the variation between orchards was large with some organic orchards having a higher yield than the average yield of IPM orchards. The lower yield in organic orchards resulted directly from management practices, and from higher pest damage in organic orchards. These negative yield effects were partly offset by indirect positive effects from more natural enemies and higher flower visitation rates in organic orchards. Two factors other than management affected species richness and ecosystem services. Higher cover of flowering plants within and adjacent to the apple trees increased flower visitation rates by pollinating insects and a higher cover of apple orchards in the landscape decreased species richness of beneficial arthropods. The species richness of beneficial arthropods in orchards was uncorrelated with fruit production, suggesting that diversity can be increased without large yield loss. At the same time, organic orchards had 38% higher species richness than IPM orchards, an effect that is likely due to differences in pest management. Synthesis and applications. Our results indicate that organic management is more efficient than integrated pest management in developing environmentally friendly apple orchards with higher species richness. We also demonstrate that there is no inherent trade‐off between species richness and yield. Development of more environmentally friendly means for pest control, which do not negatively affect pollination services, needs to be a priority for sustainable apple production.

No abstract

Local agri-environmental schemes, including hedgerows, flowering strips, organic management, and a landscape rich of in semi-natural habitat patches, are assumed to enhance the presence of beneficial arthropods and their contribution to biological control in fruit crops. We studied the influence of local factors (orchard management and adjacent habitats) and of landscape composition on the abundance and community composition of predatory arthropods in apple orchards in three European countries. To elucidate how local and landscape factors influence natural enemy effectiveness in apple production systems, we calculated community energy use as a proxy for the communities' predation potential based on biomass and metabolic rates of predatory arthropods. Predator communities were assessed by standardised beating samples taken from apple trees in 86 orchards in Germany, Spain and Sweden.Orchard management included integrated production (IP; i.e. the reduced and targeted application of synthetic agrochemicals), and organic management practices in all three countries. Predator communities differed between management types and countries. Several groups, including beetles (Coleoptera), predatory bugs (Heteroptera), flies (Diptera) and spiders (Araneae) benefited from organic management depending on country. Woody habitat and IP supported harvestmen (Opiliones). In both IP and organic orchards, we detected aversive influences of a high-quality surrounding landscape on some predator groups: for example, high covers of woody habitat reduced earwig abundances in German orchards but enhanced their abundance in Sweden, and high natural plant species richness tended to reduce predatory bug abundance in Sweden and IP orchards in Spain. We conclude that predatory arthropod communities and influences of local and landscape factors are strongly shaped by orchard management, and that the influence of management differs between countries. Our results indicate that organic management improves the living conditions for effective predator communities.

A multilateral approach that includes both biotic and climatic data was developed to detect the main variables that affect the ecology and population dynamics of woolly apple aphid Eriosoma lanigerum (Hausmann). Crawlers migrated up and down the trunk mainly from spring to autumn and horizontal migration through the canopy was observed from May to August. Winter temperatures did not kill the canopy colonies, and both canopy and root colonies are the source of reinfestations in Mediterranean areas. Thus, control measures should simultaneously address roots and canopy. European earwigs Forficula auricularia (Linnaeus) were found to reduce the survival of overwintering canopy colonies up to June, and this can allow their later control by the parasitoid Aphelinus mali (Haldeman) from summer to fall. Preliminary models to predict canopy infestations were developed.

(1) Habitat management can enhance beneficial arthropod populations and provide ecosystem services such as biological control. However, the implementation of ecological infrastructures inside orchards has a number of practical limitations. Therefore, planting/growing insectary plants in the margins of orchards should be considered as an alternative approach. (2) Here, we assessed the efficacy of a flower margin composed by four insectary plant species (Achillea millefolium, Lobularia maritima, Moricandia arvensis and Sinapis alba), which was placed on an edge of four Mediterranean apple orchards to attract natural enemies of two apple tree aphids (Dysaphis plantaginea and Eriosoma lanigerum). We also characterized the natural enemies present in the aphid colonies. (3) Our results show that the implementation of a flower margin at the edge of apple orchards attracts predators (Syrphidae, Thysanoptera, Araneae, Heteroptera, Coleoptera) and parasitoids. Parasitoids are the main natural enemies present in aphid colonies in our area. (4) The implementation of the flower margins successfully recruited natural enemy populations, and the presence of parasitoids in the surroundings of the orchards increased the parasitism of D. plantaginea colonies.

Conservation biological control could be an alternative to insecticides for the management of the aphid Myzus persicae (Sulzer). To develop sustainable strategies for M. persicae control in peach orchards in the Mediterranean, a 2-yr field experiment was conducted to identify the key predators of the aphid; to determine whether the proximity of insectary plants boost natural enemies of M. persicae in comparison to the resident vegetation; and whether selected insectary plants enhance natural enemy populations in the margins of peach orchards. Aphidoletes aphidimyza Rondani (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) and Episyrphus balteatus De Geer (Diptera: Syrphidae) were the most abundant predators found among sentinel aphid colonies, accounting for 57% and 26%, respectively. Samplings during 2015 yielded twice as many hoverflies in M. persicae sentinel plants close to the insectary plants as those close to the resident vegetation. The abundance of other natural enemies in sentinel plants, depending on their proximity to the insectary plants, was not significantly different in either of the 2 yr. Hoverflies hovered more often over the insectary plants than over the resident vegetation and landed significantly more often on Lobularia maritima (L.) Desv., Moricandia arvensis (L.) DC., and Sinapis alba L. (Brassicales: Brassicaceae) than on Achillea millefollium L. (Asterales: Compositae). Parasitoids were significantly more abundant in L. maritima and A. millefollium. The vicinity of selected insectary plants to peach orchards could improve the presence of hoverflies, which might benefit the biological control of M. persicae.

Fruit thinning is the most important yet difficult practice that drives orchard profitability. High labor costs and difficulty to improve return bloom by hand thinning have left chemical thinning as the main method used by growers. However, unpredictability and safety/environment concerns regarding chemical thinning have set mechanical thinning as a sound alternative. Thirteen field experiments were performed during 2004-2016 in order to evaluate several agents for their use as new thinners, and adjust mechanical thinning on 'Gala', 'Golden Delicious' and 'Fuji'. Olive oil applied at bloom reduced crop load, but russetting was also increased. Therefore, while their use is not advisable for russetting prone cultivars such as 'Golden Delicious', it could be a good thinner for cultivars like 'Red Delicious'. Lime sulfur did not have a consistent thinning effect in our study when applied at bloom. Overall, no differences regarding economic value between hand, chemical, and mechanical blossom thinning were observed, suggesting mechanical thinning as a valid alternative approach. For 'Gala' strains, 6 km•h-1 and 250 rpm with 270 strings was the best configuration to provide an ideal crop load of ~6 fruit/cm 2 of TCSA and an average fruit size of 170 g. For 'Fuji', 5 km•h-1 and 320 rpm with 270 strings provided a crop load in accordance to the optimum range for this cultivar in our conditions. However, combination of mechanical thinning plus chemical treatments might be the ideal strategy for 'Fuji' strains when the initial number of flower clusters per tree is above 500. For 'Golden Delicious' strains, 6 km•h-1 and 230 rpm with 270 strings was the best configuration to provide an ideal crop load within the optimum range. Mechanical thinning timing was also examined at different phenological stages (E2, F1, F2, and G), with no significant differences regarding yield, fruit size or crop load between them. Two prediction models ('Gala' & 'Golden Delicious') were developed to adjust the right tractor and rotational speeds depending on the initial number of flower clusters. The method begins with first calculating the final fruit number needed per tree (crop load for each particular cultivar) in order to achieve the desired yield. Then, tractor and rotational speeds can be determined by the model once knowing the initial number of flower clusters per tree.

No abstract