Early arrival of predators controls Aphis spiraecola colonies in citrus clementines

Abstract

Registro de acceso restringido Este recurso no está disponible en acceso abierto por política de la editorial. No obstante, se puede acceder al texto completo desde la Universitat Jaume I o si el usuario cuenta con suscripción. Registre d'accés restringit Aquest recurs no està disponible en accés obert per política de l'editorial. No obstant això, es pot accedir al text complet des de la Universitat Jaume I o si l'usuari compta amb subscripció. Restricted access item This item isn't open access because of publisher's policy. The full--text version is only available from Jaume I University or if the user has a running suscription to the publisher's contents.

Contribution of predation to the biological control of a key herbivorous pest in citrus agroecosystems

“…The most frequently found natural enemy species during the first generation of A. aurantii are those mainly associated with citrus aphids (Ciancio & Mukerji, ). The first A. aurantii generation coincides with the end of aphid infestations, which is during the first and major citrus flushing period of the year (Gómez‐Marco et al., ). In fact, stenophagous Coccinellidae, Dermaptera and Miridae species associated with aphids had population peaks in this generation, then progressively decreasing in number, whereas Neuroptera and Araneae generalist species that usually do not show a marked prey‐specific density‐dependence (Riechert & Lockley, ; Symondson, ) progressively increased their numbers throughout the growing season as had been previously observed (Monzó et al., ).…”

“…Although these generalist predators may not be the most efficient predators of A. aurantii , our analyses show their importance as potential A. aurantii biological control agents in citrus agroecosystems. The high predation rate of CRS observed during the first generations is therefore attributed to predators which have been traditionally associated with aphid control in citrus clementines (Gómez‐Marco et al., ). This observation unveils the phenomenon of apparent competition between these two key citrus pests, mediated through the action of the shared generalists and stenophagous predator complex (Holt & Bonsall, ).…”

“…The high stability of citrus agroecosystems allows the harbouring of rich complexes of natural enemies with the potential to keep most of the associated phytophagous species under economic injury levels, almost certainly through complex ecological interactions (Ciancio & Mukerji, 2010). Despite this, there are few research projects aimed at disentangling the trophic relationships between these phytophages and their potential natural enemies (Gómez-Marco, Tena, Jaques, & Urbaneja, 2016;Pérez-Sayas et al, 2015). The success or failure of biological control has commonly been attributed to the role of a reduced number of specialist natural enemies (Murdoch, Briggs, & Swarbrick, 2005;Pekas, 2010;Sorribas & Garcia-Marí, 2010).…”

“…The most frequently found natural enemy species during the first generation of A. aurantii are those mainly associated with citrus aphids(Ciancio & Mukerji, 2010). The first A. aurantii generation coincides with the end of aphid infestations, which is during the first and major citrus flushing period of the year(Gómez-Marco et al, 2016).…”

Optimizing aphid biocontrol with the predator Aphidoletes aphidimyza, based on biology and ecology

“…Augmentative release of green lacewings and/or A. aphidimyza did not significantly contribute to the control of Aphis pomi in apple orchards ( Malus domestica ) in the USA . Conversely, naturally occurring A. aphidimyza appeared as the most abundant predator in apple orchards in Nova Scotia, Canada and it was often recorded spontaneously occurring in citrus clementines ( Citrus clementina ) in Spain, playing an important role in aphid control . Additional research is needed to clarify the potential of A. aphidimyza to provide (cost) efficient aphid control in conservation and augmentative biocontrol programs, and identify/remove significant barriers to adoption.…”