Landscape structure and habitat management differentially influence insect natural enemies in an agricultural landscape

Woltz, J. Megan; Isaacs, Rufus; Landis, Douglas A.

doi:10.1016/j.agee.2012.02.008

Cited by 182 publications

(124 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

108

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, high plant diversity in wildflower strips along with a complex landscape was found to increase natural enemy diversity and reduce damages from Lepidoptera on tomato crops (Balzan et al, 2016b). Conversely, no interactions between the presence of wildflower strips and landscape complexity were found on ladybeetle abundance and aphid control in soybean (Glycine max) fields (Woltz et al, 2012). Finally, Sarthou et al (2014) observed that the local habitat structure (especially of grass strips), rather than landscape complexity, affects abundance of a diversity of natural enemies at emergence (i.e.…”

Section: Interactions Between Local and Landscape Scalementioning

confidence: 96%

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

Section: Interactions Between Local and Landscape Scalementioning

confidence: 96%

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

show abstract

“…Service crops may introduce plant diversity (e.g. floral strips) into the vineyards that could shelter natural enemies (Liguori et al, 2011;Woltz et al, 2012). Some authors suggest that this role would be improved if selected service crop species are native plants, which cover a larger flowering period than non-native ones (Fiedler et al, 2008).…”

Section: Regulation Of Pests and Natural Enemiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The distance to which they disperse has consequences for the deployment of floral resources to improve insect natural enemy fitness (Scarratt et al, 2008). Thus, to favour the biological regulation of pests, the landscape scale must also be considered in the design of the agroecosystem (Woltz et al, 2012). To reduce grapevine growth and maintain yield, trade-offs between grape yield and grapevine susceptibility to diseases must be evaluated: Guilpart et al (2017) showed that water stress at flowering was strongly correlated with both grape yield and susceptibility to diseases (powdery mildew and grey mould), suggesting that service crop management could be a relevant lever to drive soil water status and reach win-win situations.…”

Section: Managing a Regulation Service: The Example Of Biological Regmentioning

confidence: 99%

Management of service crops for the provision of ecosystem services in vineyards: A review

Garcia

Celette

Gary

et al. 2018

Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment

178

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Service crops are crops grown with the aim of providing non-marketed ecosystem services, i.e. differing from food, fiber and fuel production. Vineyard soils face various agronomic issues such as poor organic carbon levels, erosion, fertility losses, and numerous studies have highlighted the ability of service crops to address these issues. In addition to their ability to increase soil organic matter and fertility, and reduce runoff and erosion processes, service crops provide a large variety of ecosystem services in vineyards such as weed control, pest and disease regulation, water supply, water purification, improvement of field trafficability and maintenance of soil biodiversity. However, associating service crops with grapevines may also generate disservices and impair grape production: competition for soil resources with the grapevine is often highlighted to reject such association. Consequently, vinegrowers have to find a balance between services and disservices, depending on local soil and climate conditions, on their objectives of grape production and on the nature and temporality of the ecosystem services they expect during the grapevine cycle. This study proposes a review of the services and disservices provided by service crops in vineyards, and a framework for their management. Vinegrowers' production objectives and pedoclimatic constraints form the preliminary stage to consider before defining a strategy of service crop management. This strategy assembles management options such as the choice of species, its spatial distribution within the vineyard, the timing of its installation, maintenance and destruction. These management options, defined for both annual and long-term time scales, form action levers which may impact cropping system functioning. Finally, we underline the importance of implementing an adaptive strategy at the seasonal time scale. Such tactical management allows adapting the cropping system to observed climate and state of the biophysical system during the grapevine cycle, in order to provide targeted services and achieve satisfactory production objectives.

show abstract

“…Encouraging an interactive natural environment with agriculture, either with intercropping or incorporating natural and farming landscapes, has been identified as an opportunity for further research (Letoureau & Bothwell, 2008). Such practices maintain and sustain landscapes to support on-going production (Wratten et al, 2012;Woltz et al, 2012). For example, progressive farmers will keep some land as a natural landscape to support bees and predator insects.…”

Section: Environmental Viabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Agro-ecology attempts to mimic nature by incorporating the complexity of natural systems into farming. Trees can be planted with no food crop value, but instead may be carefully selected to attract predator insects, which feed on the insects that eat food crops (Bigger & Chaney, 1998;Grasswitz & James, 2009;Woltz et al, 2012). The traded benefit is better recycling of nutrients into the soil, improved soil organic health, lower cost inputs, and produce variety per hectare (Lal, 2011;Altieri et al, 2012).…”

Section: Agro-ecologymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Characteristics of Five Food Production Systems and Their Implications for Sustainable Landscapes

Burdock¹,

Ampt²

2018

JAS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a classification of agricultural production systems that we believe characterises the complex interface between agriculture and the landscapes in which they are managed. Farmers have a choice about how they will manage their land, either to exclude inherent environmental complexity or to engage with it, mindful of risks associated with their approach. Adding to this complexity is the interplay between key natural, social, human, physical and financial resources in agricultural systems, highlighting the importance of extending sustainability principles to aspects of ecology, economics and culture. Decisions about agricultural systems hinge on a balance of productive outcomes, on sensitivity to the issues of environmental complexity, on economic grounds including the access to resources, and the socio-cultural needs of the community in which the farmer participates. Further, farm managers will make a choice that both satisfies and suffices (satisfices) against production, ecological efficiencies and resilience outcomes when choosing which food production system to adopt. In this paper, these complexities are analysed against five different agricultural systems on an ecological continuum; from biologically simple industrial systems that minimise interaction with the natural environment, to ecologically complex systems that are closely engaged with their environment. Production viability is a necessary consideration to maintain farming operations but is not sufficient if operational capacity is to be achieved in the long term. This analysis finds that it is also necessary to work with ecological, economic and social complexities, satisficing against productivity, ecological efficiency and inherit system resilience. No one particular farming systems is appropriate in all cases. The farmer's choice may apply a mix of the five different agricultural systems described, allowing for the blending of these attributes in order to sustain rural landscapes.

show abstract

Landscape structure and habitat management differentially influence insect natural enemies in an agricultural landscape

Cited by 182 publications

References 48 publications

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

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

Management of service crops for the provision of ecosystem services in vineyards: A review

The Characteristics of Five Food Production Systems and Their Implications for Sustainable Landscapes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About