2013
DOI: 10.1111/ele.12173
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Forest bolsters bird abundance, pest control and coffee yield

Abstract: We address criticism that the Transport, Establishment, Abundance, Spread, Impact (TEASI) framework does not facilitate objective mapping of risk assessment methods nor defines best practice. We explain why TEASI is appropriate for mapping, despite inherent challenges, and how TEASI offers considerations for best practices, rather than suggesting one best practice. Our review of alien species risk assessments (RA) (Leung et al. 2012) aimed to synthesise the diverse approaches applied in this field to establish… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

14
294
4
5

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 363 publications
(339 citation statements)
references
References 47 publications
14
294
4
5
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, pollination and pest control services depend on the spatial arrangement of vegetation in the farmscape, where farmscapes with spatial heterogeneity in vegetation types can have higher yields because pollinators and pest predators can access more of the cultivated area of the farmscape [47,53]. However, pests can also rely on noncrop vegetation types to complete their lifecycles; therefore, understanding pest traits could additionally provide valuable insights into ecosystem disservices that can compromise farm yields [54].…”
Section: Opinionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, pollination and pest control services depend on the spatial arrangement of vegetation in the farmscape, where farmscapes with spatial heterogeneity in vegetation types can have higher yields because pollinators and pest predators can access more of the cultivated area of the farmscape [47,53]. However, pests can also rely on noncrop vegetation types to complete their lifecycles; therefore, understanding pest traits could additionally provide valuable insights into ecosystem disservices that can compromise farm yields [54].…”
Section: Opinionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although herbivory did not differ significantly between cacao plantations with different levels of shade or proximities to primary habitats within the landscape, exclosure of bats resulted in a significant decrease in yields, with the effects of bird and bat predation together valued at an astonishing US $730 per ha and year (bat predation was valued at US $520 per ha and year). However, the effects of bat predation on crop pests are not universal: An exclosure study in Costa Rican coffee found that excluding bats alone had virtually no effect on the density or damage caused to beans by the devastating coffee berry borer (Karp et al 2013). Exclosure studies are not suitable to measure the impact of high-flying insectivores, such as molossids.…”
Section: Insectivorous Bats and Pest Limitationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the limited data that exist can demonstrate a vexing degree of divergence in results. For example, bats in Mexican shade coffee have substantial effects on herbivorous insects (Williams- GuillĂ©n et al 2008), while bats in Costa Rican shade coffee had no significant effect on herbivores (Karp et al 2013). In Indonesian cacao agroforestry systems, insectivorous bats strongly contribute to the suppression of many different pest insect groups and crop yield productivity across gradients of local shadetree management and forest proximity within the agricultural landscape (Maas et al 2013).…”
Section: Linking Farm Management Ecosystem Services and Landscape-lmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These results, combined with our field survey data showing that anole abundance is bolstered by reduced agricultural intensification (Figure 7), suggest that anoles may be important biocontrol agents in diversified coffee landscapes, particularly in regions such as Puerto Rico where they are naturally more abundant. Furthermore, these results support several theoretical and field‐based studies suggesting that pest control services decline significantly when generalist predators are removed from coffee agricultural landscapes (Faria, Umbanhowar, & McCann, 2008; Karp, Mendenhall et al., 2013; Karp, Moeller, & Frishkoff, 2013; Perfecto et al., 2004). …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A variety of naturally occurring biocontrol agents against the coffee berry borer have been documented, including ants (Gonthier, Ennis, Philpott, Vandermeer, & Perfecto, 2013; Larsen & Philpott, 2010; Morris, Vandermeer, & Perfecto, 2015; Perfecto & Vandermeer, 2006) and birds (Johnson, Kellermann, & Stercho, 2010; Karp, Mendenhall et al., 2013; Karp, Moeller, & Frishkoff, 2013). In an experiment conducted by Johnson et al.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%