Predators do not spill over from forest fragments to maize fields in a landscape mosaic in central Argentina

Ferrante, Marco; González, Ezequiel; Löveï, Gábor L.

doi:10.1002/ece3.3247

Cited by 30 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 72 publications

(100 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, our results showed that the abundance of predatory and omnivorous ground beetles was not higher at forest borders under ag-ricultural influence compared to the forest interiors, assuming that dispersal or spillover of these beetles into neighbouring agricultural field is limited. In correspondence with our assumption, a recent study, using artificial sentinel prey, also indicated little of predator spillover from the native forest remnants to the cultivated matrix in Argentina (Ferrante et al 2017). It seems that the repeated anthropogenic interventions could have negative effect on ecosystem functions at edges, with negative consequences for ecosystem services like pest control.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

Various edge response of ground beetles in edges under natural versus anthropogenic influence: A meta-analysis using life-history traits

Magura¹,

Löveï²,

Tóthmérész³

2019

Acta Zool Acad Sci H

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Edges are on the increase world-wide due to increasing fragmentation and loss of natural habitats. After formation, edges are maintained by various processes (natural vs. continued anthropogenic interventions: forestry, agriculture, urbanization) which influence the reaction of individual species to edge effects (history-based edge effect hypothesis), and this will be reflected in the diversity of assemblages. Diversity, however, is not the most appropriate indicator of the edge effect because species with different traits may respond differently to the edges. To further articulate the history-based edge effect hypothesis, we evaluated the edge effect on one of the most commonly used life-history traits, the feeding habit of ground beetles in forest edges. A meta-analysis based on 28 publications and 422 comparisons showed that natural vs. continued anthropogenic interventions as edgemaintaining processes reflected at the trait level. Abundance of herbivorous, omnivorous, and predatory ground beetle species were all higher in the natural edges than in the forest interiors, while no similar pattern occurred in edges with continued anthropogenic influence. These results suggest that structural and environmental changes at edges sustained by repeated anthropogenic influence adversely influencing ecosystem functions, with negative effects on ecosystem services like pest or weed control.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

Various edge response of ground beetles in edges under natural versus anthropogenic influence: A meta-analysis using life-history traits

Magura¹,

Löveï²,

Tóthmérész³

2019

Acta Zool Acad Sci H

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This has been found over a number of case studies in a review by Samu et al (1999). Predation pressure experiments also indicated a lack of spillover of predators between forested habitats and corn fields (Ferrante et al 2017). Areal woody elements in the present study were plantations, without exemption.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 50%

Linear woody landscape elements may help to mitigate leaf surface loss caused by the cereal leaf beetle

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context Woody semi-natural habitats serve as permanent habitats and hibernation sites for natural enemies and, through spillover processes, they play an important role in the biological control of insect pests. However, this service is also dependent on the amount and configuration of the dominating woody habitat types: linear landscape elements (hedgerows, shelterbelts), and more evenly extended plantations. Relating natural enemy action to the landscape context can help to identify the effect of woody habitats on biological control effectiveness. Objectives In the Central European agricultural landscapes such as in the Hungarian lowlands, where our study took place, woody linear elements are characterised by high, while woody areal elements, mostly plantations, by low biological and structural diversity. In this study, we aimed to determine which composition and configuration of woody linear and areal habitats in the landscape may enhance the effect of natural enemy action on plant damage caused by the cereal leaf beetle (CLB, Oulema melanopus). Methods Herbivory suppression by natural enemies was assessed from the leaf damage difference between caged and open treatments. These exclusion experiments were carried out in 34 wheat fields on plants with controlled CLB infections. The results were related to landscape structure, quantified by different landscape metrics of both woody linear and areal habitats inside buffers between 150 and 500 m radii, surrounding the wheat fields. Results The exclusion of natural enemies increased the leaf surface loss caused by CLBs in all fields. Shelterbelts and hedgerows in 150–200 m vicinity of the wheat fields had a strong suppressing effect on CLB damage, while the presence of plantations at 250 m and further rather impeded natural enemy action. Conclusions Our results indicate that shelterbelts and hedgerows may provide a strong spillover of natural enemies, thus contribute to an enhanced biological control of CLBs.

show abstract

“…For natural enemies that rely only on resources within farm fields, proximity to seminatural habitats can be irrelevant [40] or even detrimental. For example, pests in sun-grown Brazilian coffee were suppressed by ants adapted to open habitats and, in this case, pest suppression increased at greater distances from forest fragments [41].…”

Section: Connectivitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, we note that, while six studies documented correlations between natural enemy and pest density (arrow i), without an experimental approach, the relative strengths of landscape predictors and numeric responses between enemies and prey are unknown. Based on [37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45]51,74]. millennia, and change relatively slowly.…”

Section: Figure 2 Viewing Pest Suppression Through the Lens Of Multimentioning

confidence: 99%

Predicting Landscape Configuration Effects on Agricultural Pest Suppression

Haan

Zhang

Landis

2020

Trends in Ecology & Evolution

153

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Arthropod predators and parasitoids attack crop pests, providing a valuable ecosystem service. The amount of noncrop habitat surrounding crop fields influences pest suppression, but synthesis of new studies suggests that the spatial configuration of crops and other habitats is similarly important. Natural enemies are often more abundant in fine-grained agricultural landscapes comprising smaller patches and can increase or decrease with the connectivity of crop fields to other habitats. Partitioning organisms by traits has emerged as a promising way to predict the strength and direction of these effects. Furthermore, our ability to predict configurational effects will depend on understanding the potential for indirect effects among trophic levels and the relationship between arthropod dispersal capability and the spatial scale of underlying landscape structure. Landscape Structure Influences Pest Suppression in Crop FieldsIn agricultural landscapes, predatory and parasitic arthropods suppress herbivorous arthropod populations, providing an essential ecosystem service valued at billions of dollars annually [1]. In recent decades researchers have begun to identify factors driving the abundance of natural enemies (see Glossary), pests, and the effectiveness of pest suppression in crop fields, with the aim of designing and managing agricultural landscapes to maximize this and other services [2][3][4][5]. Positive outcomes from enhanced pest suppression could include greater crop yields, reduced pesticide use, and increased arthropod diversity in agricultural landscapes. Arthropod communities in crop fields are influenced by the landscape that surrounds them: on their own, crop fields are unsuitable for some beneficial insects because they are usually monocultures and undergo frequent disturbance. This means that other nearby habitats may be especially important for determining which arthropods colonize farm fields. Most research on how landscape structure influences pest suppression has focused on effects of landscape composition (i.e., amounts of habitat). In general, seminatural habitats can provide natural enemies with resources including food, overwintering habitat, nest sites, and refuge from agricultural disturbance, allowing them to survive and then colonize crop fields to exploit the herbivores that accumulate there [3]. Pest suppression is generally thought to increase when crop fields are surrounded by more noncrop or seminatural habitat. However, while this occurs in some circumstances, the effects of landscape composition on pest suppression overall are inconsistent, varying among systems and organisms [4].Beyond composition, there is also variation in landscape configuration [6]. Multiple lines of reasoning suggest that configurational aspects of landscape structure should affect pest suppression. First, since there is spillover of beneficial organisms along interfaces between habitat patches [7], configurational variables such as patch size, shape, amount of shared edge, and connectivity should influence...

show abstract

Predators do not spill over from forest fragments to maize fields in a landscape mosaic in central Argentina

Cited by 30 publications

References 72 publications

Various edge response of ground beetles in edges under natural versus anthropogenic influence: A meta-analysis using life-history traits

Various edge response of ground beetles in edges under natural versus anthropogenic influence: A meta-analysis using life-history traits

Linear woody landscape elements may help to mitigate leaf surface loss caused by the cereal leaf beetle

Predicting Landscape Configuration Effects on Agricultural Pest Suppression

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About