We live amid a global wave of anthropogenically driven biodiversity loss: species and population extirpations and, critically, declines in local species abundance. Particularly, human impacts on animal biodiversity are an under-recognized form of global environmental change. Among terrestrial vertebrates, 322 species have become extinct since 1500, and populations of the remaining species show 25% average decline in abundance. Invertebrate patterns are equally dire: 67% of monitored populations show 45% mean abundance decline. Such animal declines will cascade onto ecosystem functioning and human well-being. Much remains unknown about this “Anthropocene defaunation”; these knowledge gaps hinder our capacity to predict and limit defaunation impacts. Clearly, however, defaunation is both a pervasive component of the planet’s sixth mass extinction and also a major driver of global ecological change.

/pdf/defaunation-in-the-anthropocene-46k054u5cx.pdf

Defaunation in the Anthropocene

Agricultural intensification has resulted in a simplification of agricultural landscapes by the expansion of agricultural land, enlargement of field size and removal of non-crop habitat. These changes are considered to be an important cause of the rapid decline in farmland biodiversity, with the remaining biodiversity concentrated in field edges and non-crop habitats. The simplification of landscape composition and the decline of biodiversity may affect the functioning of natural pest control because non-crop habitats provide requisites for a broad spectrum of natural enemies, and the exchange of natural enemies between crop and non-crop habitats is likely to be diminished in landscapes dominated by arable cropland. In this review, we test the hypothesis that natural pest control is enhanced in complex patchy landscapes with a high proportion of non-crop habitats as compared to simple large-scale landscapes with little associated non-crop habitat. In 74% and 45% of the studies reviewed, respectively, natural enemy populations were higher and pest pressure lower in complex landscapes versus simple landscapes. Landscape-driven pest suppression may result in lower crop injury, although this has rarely been documented. Enhanced natural enemy activity was associated with herbaceous habitats in 80% of the cases (e.g. fallows, field margins), and somewhat less often with wooded habitats (71%) and landscape patchiness (70%). The similar contributions of these landscape factors suggest that all are equally important in enhancing natural enemy populations. We conclude that diversified landscapes hold most potential for the conservation of biodiversity and sustaining the pest control function.

https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/pdf/10.1098/rspb.2006.3530

Sustainable pest regulation in agricultural landscapes: a review on landscape composition, biodiversity and natural pest control

Theoretical developments are helping us to comprehend the basic parameters governing the dynamics of the interactions between generalist predators and their many pest and nonpest prey. In practice, however, inter- and intraspecific interactions between generalist predators, and between the predators and their prey, within multispecies systems under the influence of rapidly changing biotic and abiotic variables are difficult to predict. We discuss trade-offs between the relative merits of specialists and generalists that allow both to be effective, and often complementary, under different circumstances. A review of manipulative field studies showed that in approximately 75% of cases, generalist predators, whether single species or species assemblages, reduced pest numbers significantly. Techniques for manipulating predator numbers to enhance pest control at different scales are discussed. We now need to find ways of disentangling the factors influencing positive and negative interactions within natural enemy communities in order to optimize beneficial synergies leading to pest control.

Can generalist predators be effective biocontrol agents

Knowledge of population growth potential is crucial for studying population dynamics and for establishing management tactics for pest control. Estimation of population growth can be achieved with fertility life tables because they synthesize data on reproduction and mortality of a population. The five main parameters associated with a fertility life table are as follows: (1) the net reproductive rate (Ro), (2) the intrinsic rate of increase (rm), 3) the mean generation time (T), (4) the doubling time (Dt), and (5) the finite rate of increase (lambda). Jackknife and bootstrap techniques are used to calculate the variance of the rm estimate, which can be extended to the other parameters of life tables. Those methods are computer-intensive, their application requires the development of efficient algorithms, and their implementation is based on a programming language that encompasses quickness and reliability. The objectives of this article are to discuss statistical and computational aspects related to estimation of life table parameters and to present a SAS program that uses jackknife to estimate parameters for fertility life tables. The SAS program presented here allows the calculation of confidence intervals for all estimated parameters, as well as provides one-sided and two-sided t-tests to perform pairwise or multiple comparison between groups, with their respective P values.

https://bioone.org/journals/journal-of-economic-entomology/volume-93/issue-2/0022-0493-93.2.511/Statistical-Inference-on-Associated-Fertility-Life-Parameters-Using-Jackknife-Technique/10.1603/0022-0493-93.2.511.pdf

Statistical inference on associated fertility life table parameters using jackknife technique: computational aspects.

The potential harmful effects of non—indigenous species introduced for biological control remain an important unanswered question, which we addressed by undertaking a literature review. There are few documented instances of damage to non—target organisms or the environment from non—indigenous species released for biological pest control, relative to the number of such releases. However, this fact is not evidence that biological control is safe, because monitoring of non—target species is minimal, particularly in sites and habitats far from the point of release. In fact, the discovery of such impacts usually rests on a remarkable concatenation of events. In addition to trophic and competitive interactions between an individual introduced species and a native one, many effects of introduced species on ecosystems are possible, as are numerous types of indirect interactions. Predicting such impacts is no mean feat, and the difficulty is exacerbated by the fact that introduced species can disperse and evolve. Current regulation of introduced biological—control agents, particularly of entomophages, is insufficient. At the very least, strong consideration should be given to the likely impact of both the pest and its natural enemy on natural ecosystems and their species, and not only on potential costs to agriculture, silvi—culture, and species of immediate commercial value.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/info/2265693

How Risky is Biological Control

Seven native coccinellid species inhabited alfalfa, corn, and small grain fields in eastern South Dakota prior to invasion and establishment of Coccinella septempunctata L. Six species occurred in all crops, however, Adalia bipunctata (L.) occurred only in corn. The structure of native coccinellid communities differed significantly for years prior to compared with years after establishment of C. septempunctata in fields of the three agricultural crops. Differences in community structure were accounted for mainly by reduced abundance of two species, C. transversoguttata richardsoni Brown and Adalia bipunctata (L.). Annual abundance of C. transversoguttata richardsoni averaged 20-32 times lower during post-invasion years than in years prior to invasion, depending on crop; while annual abundance of A. bipunctata averaged 20 times lower in corn after invasion. Addition of C. septempunctata to the community did not result in a significant increase in total abundance of coccinellids in the crops. Coccinellid abundance in agricultural crops may be limited by the total abundance of prey or by the availability of other requisites in the landscape as a whole. Therefore, introduction of a new species, while resulting in reductions in native species populations, may not increase total coccinellid abundance, and may therefore have no net effect on biological control of aphid pests.

Effects of an invading coccinellid on native coccinellids in an agricultural landscape.

The influence of prey density, within-field vegetation, and the composition and patchiness of the surrounding landscape on the abundance of insect predators of cereal aphids was studied in wheat fields in eastern South Dakota, USA. Cereal aphids, aphid predators, and within-field vegetation were sampled in 104 fields over a three year period (1988–1990). The composition and patchiness of the landscape surrounding each field were determined from high altitude aerial photographs. Five landscape variables, aggregated at three spatial scales ranging from 2.6 km2 to 581 km2, were measured from aerial photographs. Regression models incorporating within-field and landscape variables accounted for 27–49% of the variance in aphid predator abundance in wheat fields. Aphid predator species richness and species diversity were also related to within-field and landscape variables. Some predators were strongly influenced by variability in the composition and patchiness of the landscape surrounding a field at a particular spatial scale while others responded to variability at all scales. Overall, predator abundance, species richness, and species diversity increased with increasing vegetational diversity in wheat fields and with increasing amounts of non-cultivated lands and increasing patchiness in the surrounding landscape.

Influence of within-field and landscape factors on aphid predator populations in wheat

In most autumns on the Northern Plains of the USA, low population densities of several species of cereal aphids feed on seedling winter wheat, Triticum aestivum L., for a month or more. The objective of this research was to determine the influence of that feeding on the growth and yield of ‘Rose’ winter wheat. Experiments were conducted by confining non-viruliferous (barley yellow dwarf virus) greenbug, Schizaphis graminum (Rondani), at precisely maintained population densities of 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 15 aphids per plant, bird cherry oat aphids, Rhopalosiphum padi (L.), at densities of 10 or 15 aphids per plant, or Russian wheat aphids, Diuraphis noxia (Mordvilko), at 5, 10, 15, and 20 aphids per plant on seedling plants for 30 d in an environmental chamber at 10°C (to simulate mean October temperature in the field), 12 h day/night. The results showed that the threshold for significant yield loss under these environmental conditions was at the 10 aphids per plant level for the bird cherry oat aphid and the Russian wheat aphid, and 15 apbids per plant for greenbug. Yield losses caused by any of the aphid species were in the range of 35 to 40% at 15 aphids per plant. Although the visible injury to plants caused by the feeding of the greenbug and the Russian wheat aphid was striking, the bird cherry oat aphid was as damaging to yield as the other two species in this study.

Yield Losses in Winter Wheat Caused by Low-Density Cereal Aphid Populations

Effect of aphids and the surrounding landscape on the abundance of Coccinellidae in cornfields

There is little information available that describes the effects of bird cherry-oat aphids (Rhopalosiphum padi L.) and Barley yellow dwarf virus (BYDV) on cereal plant root systems. This 2-yr field experiment was conducted to determine how spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) root characteristics, shoot characteristics, and grain yield respond to R. padi infestation, BYDV infection, or a combination of R. padi plus BYDV. Treatments were applied at the 2- to 3-leaf stage. When measured at anthesis, plants that received R. padi treatments (300 aphid days) had about a 30% greater total root length (as measured with a minirhizotron) than control plants. Plants that received BYDV as well as those that received R. padi plus BYDV had about a 40% decrease in total root length when compared with the control. Root system characteristics at different soil depths responded differently to BYDV infection across the 2 yr of the study. In the first year, BYDV-infected plants had less root length at all soil depths measured than plants that did not receive BYDV infection. In the second year, which was drier near anthesis, root lengths of both BYDV infected and uninfected plants were similar at the 0- to 18-cm soil depth, while at deeper soil depths, plants that had BYDV infection had less root length than plants that did not receive BYDV infection. Plants that received either R. padi or BYDV had fewer tillers, less tiller height, and less shoot dry weight than control plants. The lack of R. padi x BYDV interaction for above-ground variables suggests that shoots responded to BYDV in a similar manner regardless of whether or not they received R. padi treatment. Treatments consisting of R. padi infestation or BYDV infection reduced individual kernel weight by 8 or 22%, respectively. Infection with BYDV also caused a 53% reduction in the number of kernels per meter of row and a 62% reduction in total grain yield. We conclude that R. padi infestation caused acute injury to spring wheat plants while BYDV caused chronic injury. Most of the dependent variables measured in this experiment responded to BYDV in a similar manner regardless of whether or not the plants received R. padi treatment.

R. W. Kieckhefer

Papers

Effects of an invading coccinellid on native coccinellids in an agricultural landscape.

Influence of within-field and landscape factors on aphid predator populations in wheat

Yield Losses in Winter Wheat Caused by Low-Density Cereal Aphid Populations

Effect of aphids and the surrounding landscape on the abundance of Coccinellidae in cornfields

Root and Shoot Responses to Bird Cherry-Oat Aphids and Barley yellow dwarf virus in Spring Wheat