TY - JOUR

T1 - Crop pests and predators exhibit inconsistent responses to surrounding landscape composition

AU - Karp, Daniel S.

AU - Chaplin-Kramer, Rebecca

AU - Meehan, Timothy D.

AU - Martin, Emily A.

AU - DeClerck, Fabrice

AU - Grab, Heather

AU - Gratton, Claudio

AU - Hunt, Lauren

AU - Larsen, Ashley E.

AU - Martínez-Salinas, Alejandra

AU - O’Rourke, Megan E.

AU - Rusch, Adrien

AU - Poveda, Katja

AU - Jonsson, Mattias

AU - Rosenheim, Jay A.

AU - Schellhorn, Nancy A.

AU - Tscharntke, Teja

AU - Wratten, Stephen D.

AU - Zhang, Wei

AU - Iverson, Aaron L.

AU - Adler, Lynn S.

AU - Albrecht, Matthias

AU - Alignier, Audrey

AU - Angelella, Gina M.

AU - Anjum, Muhammad Zubair

AU - Avelino, Jacques

AU - Batáry, Péter

AU - Baveco, Johannes M.

AU - Bianchi, Felix J.J.A.

AU - Birkhofer, Klaus

AU - Bohnenblust, Eric W.

AU - Bommarco, Riccardo

AU - Brewer, Michael J.

AU - Caballero-López, Berta

AU - Carrière, Yves

AU - Carvalheiro, Luísa G.

AU - Cayuela, Luis

AU - Centrella, Mary

AU - Ćetković, Aleksandar

AU - Henri, Dominic Charles

AU - Chabert, Ariane

AU - Costamagna, Alejandro C.

AU - De la Mora, Aldo

AU - de Kraker, Joop

AU - Desneux, Nicolas

AU - Diehl, Eva

AU - Diekötter, Tim

AU - Dormann, Carsten F.

AU - Eckberg, James O.

AU - Entling, Martin H.

AU - Fiedler, Daniela

AU - Franck, Pierre

AU - van Veen, F. J.Frank

AU - Frank, Thomas

AU - Gagic, Vesna

AU - Garratt, Michael P.D.

AU - Getachew, Awraris

AU - Gonthier, David J.

AU - Goodell, Peter B.

AU - Graziosi, Ignazio

AU - Groves, Russell L.

AU - Gurr, Geoff M.

AU - Hajian-Forooshani, Zachary

AU - Heimpel, George E.

AU - Herrmann, John D.

AU - Huseth, Anders S.

AU - Inclán, Diego J.

AU - Ingrao, Adam J.

AU - Iv, Phirun

AU - Jacot, Katja

AU - Johnson, Gregg A.

AU - Jones, Laura

AU - Kaiser, Marina

AU - Kaser, Joe M.

AU - Keasar, Tamar

AU - Kim, Tania N.

AU - Kishinevsky, Miriam

AU - Landis, Douglas A.

AU - Lavandero, Blas

AU - Lavigne, Claire

AU - Le Ralec, Anne

AU - Lemessa, Debissa

AU - Letourneau, Deborah K.

AU - Liere, Heidi

AU - Lu, Yanhui

AU - Lubin, Yael

AU - Luttermoser, Tim

AU - Maas, Bea

AU - Mace, Kevi

AU - Madeira, Filipe

AU - Mader, Viktoria

AU - Cortesero, Anne Marie

AU - Marini, Lorenzo

AU - Martinez, Eliana

AU - Martinson, Holly M.

AU - Menozzi, Philippe

AU - Mitchell, Matthew G.E.

AU - Miyashita, Tadashi

AU - Molina, Gonzalo A.R.

AU - Molina-Montenegro, Marco A.

AU - O’Neal, Matthew E.

AU - Opatovsky, Itai

AU - Ortiz-Martinez, Sebaastian

AU - Nash, Michael

AU - Östman, Örjan

AU - Ouin, Annie

AU - Pak, Damie

AU - Paredes, Daniel

AU - Parsa, Soroush

AU - Parry, Hazel

AU - Perez-Alvarez, Ricardo

AU - Perović, David J.

AU - Peterson, Julie A.

AU - Petit, Sandrine

AU - Philpott, Stacy M.

AU - Plantegenest, Manuel

AU - Plećas, Milan

AU - Pluess, Therese

AU - Pons, Xavier

AU - Potts, Simon G.

AU - Pywell, Richard F.

AU - Ragsdale, David W.

AU - Rand, Tatyana A.

AU - Raymond, Lucie

AU - Ricci, Benoît

AU - Sargent, Chris

AU - Sarthou, Jean Pierre

AU - Saulais, Julia

AU - Schäckermann, Jessica

AU - Schmidt, Nick P.

AU - Schneider, Gudrun

AU - Schüepp, Christof

AU - Sivakoff, Frances S.

AU - Smith, Henrik G.

AU - Whitney, Kaitlin Stack

AU - Stutz, Sonja

AU - Szendrei, Zsofia

AU - Takada, Mayura B.

AU - Taki, Hisatomo

AU - Tamburini, Giovanni

AU - Thomson, Linda J.

AU - Tricault, Yann

AU - Tsafack, Noelline

AU - Tschumi, Matthias

AU - Valantin-Morison, Muriel

AU - van Trinh, Mai

AU - van der Werf, Wopke

AU - Vierling, Kerri T.

AU - Werling, Ben P.

AU - Wickens, Jennifer B.

AU - Wickens, Victoria J.

AU - Woodcock, Ben A.

AU - Wyckhuys, Kris

AU - Xiao, Haijun

AU - Yasuda, Mika

AU - Yoshioka, Akira

AU - Zou, Yi

N1 - Funding Information: We thank the many growers, field assistants, pest-control advisors, funders, agricultural experiment stations, and researchers who provided access to study sites, technical expertise, labor, and other types of investment underlying the studies in our database. This work was supported through the National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center (SESYNC)—National Science Foundation Award DBI-1052875 for the project “Evidence and Decision-Support Tools for Controlling Agricultural Pests with Conservation Interventions” organized by D.S.K. and R.C.-K. Funding Information: ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. We thank the many growers, field assistants, pest-control advisors, funders, agricultural experiment stations, and researchers who provided access to study sites, technical expertise, labor, and other types of investment underlying the studies in our database. This work was supported through the National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center (SESYNC)—National Science Foundation Award DBI-1052875 for the project “Evidence and Decision-Support Tools for Controlling Agricultural Pests with Conservation Interventions” organized by D.S.K. and R.C.-K. Publisher Copyright: © 2018 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

PY - 2018/8/14

Y1 - 2018/8/14

N2 - The idea that noncrop habitat enhances pest control and represents a win–win opportunity to conserve biodiversity and bolster yields has emerged as an agroecological paradigm. However, while noncrop habitat in landscapes surrounding farms sometimes benefits pest predators, natural enemy responses remain heterogeneous across studies and effects on pests are inconclusive. The observed heterogeneity in species responses to noncrop habitat may be biological in origin or could result from variation in how habitat and biocontrol are measured. Here, we use a pest-control database encompassing 132 studies and 6,759 sites worldwide to model natural enemy and pest abundances, predation rates, and crop damage as a function of landscape composition. Our results showed that although landscape composition explained significant variation within studies, pest and enemy abundances, predation rates, crop damage, and yields each exhibited different responses across studies, sometimes increasing and sometimes decreasing in landscapes with more noncrop habitat but overall showing no consistent trend. Thus, models that used landscape-composition variables to predict pest-control dynamics demonstrated little potential to explain variation across studies, though prediction did improve when comparing studies with similar crop and landscape features. Overall, our work shows that surrounding noncrop habitat does not consistently improve pest management, meaning habitat conservation may bolster production in some systems and depress yields in others. Future efforts to develop tools that inform farmers when habitat conservation truly represents a win–win would benefit from increased understanding of how landscape effects are modulated by local farm management and the biology of pests and their enemies.

AB - The idea that noncrop habitat enhances pest control and represents a win–win opportunity to conserve biodiversity and bolster yields has emerged as an agroecological paradigm. However, while noncrop habitat in landscapes surrounding farms sometimes benefits pest predators, natural enemy responses remain heterogeneous across studies and effects on pests are inconclusive. The observed heterogeneity in species responses to noncrop habitat may be biological in origin or could result from variation in how habitat and biocontrol are measured. Here, we use a pest-control database encompassing 132 studies and 6,759 sites worldwide to model natural enemy and pest abundances, predation rates, and crop damage as a function of landscape composition. Our results showed that although landscape composition explained significant variation within studies, pest and enemy abundances, predation rates, crop damage, and yields each exhibited different responses across studies, sometimes increasing and sometimes decreasing in landscapes with more noncrop habitat but overall showing no consistent trend. Thus, models that used landscape-composition variables to predict pest-control dynamics demonstrated little potential to explain variation across studies, though prediction did improve when comparing studies with similar crop and landscape features. Overall, our work shows that surrounding noncrop habitat does not consistently improve pest management, meaning habitat conservation may bolster production in some systems and depress yields in others. Future efforts to develop tools that inform farmers when habitat conservation truly represents a win–win would benefit from increased understanding of how landscape effects are modulated by local farm management and the biology of pests and their enemies.

KW - Agroecology

KW - Biodiversity

KW - Biological control

KW - Ecosystem services

KW - Natural enemies

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85050686845&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1073/pnas.1800042115

DO - 10.1073/pnas.1800042115

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 30072434

AN - SCOPUS:85050686845

VL - 115

SP - E7863-E7870

JO - Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

JF - Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

SN - 0027-8424

IS - 33

ER -