期刊
BIOLOGICAL CONTROL
卷 47, 期 1, 页码 71-76出版社
ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.biocontrol.2008.06.010
关键词
conservation biocontrol; agri-environment schemes; habitat manipulation; generalist predators; wheat; agroecology
资金
- Research Councils UK Rural Economy and Land Use programme
Studies demonstrating the empirical impact of natural enemies on pests and the effect of habitat manipulation are required if farmers are to be persuaded to adopt conservation biocontrol. The relative abundance of different natural enemy guilds were manipulated to investigate their impact on grain aphids (Sitobion avenae) and whether the establishment of wider field margins increased levels of control. The impact of epigeal and flying aphid predators, in isolation and together, on cereal aphids was tested in five fields with standard field margins (ca. 2 m wide) and in five fields with wide margins (ca. 6 m wide). Flying predators alone were as effective as all predators in controlling the grain aphid and reduced aphids by 90% and 93%, whereas epigeal predators alone achieved a reduction of only 40% and 18% in fields with standard and wide margins respectively. Levels of parasitism measured by counts of aphid mummies were relatively low (<= 12%) on all sampling occasions. There was no evidence that the wide field margins increased natural enemies within the adjacent field as measured using pitfall traps, suction sampling and sticky traps. The wide field margins were considered to have no benefit for biocontrol because flying predators capable of moving between fields were primarily responsible or the amount of uncropped land suitable for natural enemies was not a limiting factor in the landscape. (C) 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据