Advertisement

Spatial and Temporal Dynamics of Arthropods in Arable Fields

  • Maarten van Helden
Chapter

Abstract

Pest distribution in an arable field is rarely homogeneous. As for diseases and weeds many different abiotic and biotic factors can induce non-homogeneous or even aggregated distributions. Moreover animal pests are able to respond actively themselves to external factors such as small differences in local habitat quality through their behaviour. The combined effects of variations in plant physiological stage and local climate, arthropod behaviour and population dynamics , and (tri-)-trophic interactions often result in aggregated spatial distributions of the pest, which can evolve over time due to pest-plant interactions. The large number of potential interactions makes it almost impossible to foresee spatial distributions at the field scale. In situ studies on spatial distribution of the pest can be used to reveal (stable) distribution patterns. Then it can be tempted to correlate these to intra-field variation in (plant, climate, etc.) characteristics. Stable (and/or predictable) patterns will certainly not occur for all pests. Some examples are cited, mainly occurring in perennial crops and/or for highly mobile pests. Knowledge of such sustainable patterns can then be used to optimise field monitoring and/or management. However, practical implementation of such knowledge in pest management seems still very limited because of technical (equipment) reasons and impacts on working methods

Keywords

Perennial Crop Flight Speed Field Border Mobile Pest Pest Individual 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Alexander CJ, Holland JM, Winder L et al (2005) Performance of sampling strategies in the presence of known spatial patterns. Ann Appl Biol 146:361–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arrignon F, Deconchat M, Sarthou JP et al (2007) Modelling the overwintering strategy of a beneficial insect in a heterogeneous landscape using a multi-agent system. Ecol Modell 205:423–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bentz JA, Townsend AM (2003) Nitrogen fertilization and use of container-grown maple selections as hosts by the potato leafhopper. J Am Soc Hort Sci 128:821–826Google Scholar
  4. Bongiovanni R, Lowenberg-Deboer J (2004) Precision agriculture and sustainability. Prec Agric 5:359–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bramley RGV (2005) Understanding variability in winegrape production systems – 2. Within vineyard variation in quality over several vintages. Aust J Grape Wine Res 11:33–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carde RT (2008) Insect migration: do migrant moths knows where they are heading? Curr Biol 18:472–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carde RT, Willis MA (2008) Navigational strategies used by insects to find distant, wind-borne sources of odor. J Chem Ecol 34:854–866PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen YG, Ruberson JR (2008) Impact of variable nitrogen fertilisation on arthropods in cotton in Georgia, USA. Agric Ecosyst Environ 126:281–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chojnacka-Ozga L, Ozga W (1998) The air flow direction and speed in the forest edge area. Sylwan 142:65–72Google Scholar
  10. Colvin J, Fishpool LDC, Fargette D et al (1998) Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) trap catches in a cassava field in Cote d’Ivoire in relation to environmental factors and the distribution of African cassava mosaic disease. Bull Entomol Res 88:369–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Couty A, van Emden H, Perry JN et al (2006) The roles of olfaction and vision in host-plant finding by the diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella. Physiol Entomol 31:134–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cowgill SE, Wratten SD, Sotherton NW (1993a) The effect of weeds on the numbers of hoverfly (Diptera, Syrphidae) adults and the distribution and composition of their eggs in winter wheat. Ann Appl Biol 123:499–515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cowgill SE, Wratten SD, Sotherton NW (1993b) The selective use of floral resources by the hoverfly Episyrphus balteatus (Diptera, Syrphidae) on farmland. Ann Appl Biol 122:223–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Daane KM, Williams LE (2003) Manipulating vineyard irrigation amounts to reduce insect pest damage. Ecol Appl 13:1650–1666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dalthorp D, Nyrop J, Villani MG (2000) Foundations of spatial ecology: the reification of patches through quantitative description of patterns and pattern repetition. Entomol Exp Appl 96: 119–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. De Guimaraes AM, Pavan MA, Kurozawa C (1997) Effect of corn windbreaks on the incidence of tospovirus on tomato crop. Fitopatol Brasil 22:142–147Google Scholar
  17. Decante D, van Helden M (2006) Population ecology of Empoasca vitis (Gothe) and Scaphoideus titanus (Ball) in Bordeaux vineyards: influence of migration and landscape. Crop Prot 25: 696–704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Decante D, van Helden M (2008) Spatial and temporal distribution of Empoasca vitis within a vineyard. Agric For Entomol 10:111–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Decante D, van Leeuwen C, van Helden M (2009) Influence of plot characteristics and surrounding vegetation on the intra-plot spatial distribution of Empoasca vitis. Agric For Entomol 11: 377–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dicke M (1995) Why do plants ’talk’? Chemoecology 5/6:159–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ellington CP (1991) Limitations on animal flight performance. J Exp Biol 160:71–91Google Scholar
  22. Ellner SP, McCauley E, Kendall BE et al (2001) Habitat structure and population persistence in an experimental community. Nature 412:538–543PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fagan WE, Cantrell RS, Cosner C (1999) How habitat edges change species interactions. Am Nat 153:165–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fernandez P, Hilker M (2007) Host plant location by Chrysomelidae. Basic Appl Ecol 8:97–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fievet V, Dedryver CA, Plantegenest M et al (2007) Aphid colony turn-over influences the spatial distribution of the grain aphid Sitobion avenae over the wheat growing season. Agric For Entomol 9:125–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fievet V, Lhomme P, Outreman Y (2008) Predation risk cues associated with killed conspecifics affect the behavior and reproduction of prey animals. Oikos 117:1380–1385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fishpool LDC, van Helden M, van Halder I et al (1988) Controle des populations de Bemisia tabaci sur manioc: comptages en champ et capures par pièges. Proceedings of the International Seminar on African cassava mosaic disease and its control, Yamassoukro, Ivory Coast, CTA, Wageningen, pp 59–70Google Scholar
  28. Gatehouse AG (1997) Behavior and ecological genetics of wind-borne migration by insects. Annu Rev Entomol 42:475–502PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hogendorp BK, Cloyd RA, Swiader JM (2006) Effect of nitrogen fertility on reproduction and development of citrus mealybug, Planococcus citri Risso (Homoptera: Pseudococcidae), feeding on two colors of coleus, Solenostemon scutellarioides L. Codd. Environ Entomol 35:201–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hsu CL, Agnello AM, Reissig WH (2009) Edge effects in the directionally biased distribution of Choristoneura rosaceana (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) in apple orchards. Environ Entomol 38:433–441PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Irvin NA, Scarratt SL, Wratten SD et al (2006) The effects of floral understoreys on parasitism of leafrollers (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) on apples in New Zealand. Agric For Entomol 8:25–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kiss J, Komaromi J, Bayar K et al (2005) Western corn rootworm (Diabrotica virgifera virgifera LeConte) and the crop rotation systems in Europe. In: Vidal S, Kuhlmann U, Edwards CR (eds) Western corn rootworm: ecology and management. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, pp 189–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Krell RK, Pedigo LP, Babcock BA (2003) Comparison of estimated costs and benefits of site-specific versus uniform management for the bean leaf beetle in soybean. Prec Agric 4:401–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kyto M, Niemela P, Larsson S (1996) Insects on trees: population and individual response to fertilization. Oikos 75:148–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lazzaro L, Otto S, Zanin G (2008) Role of hedgerows in intercepting spray drift: evaluation and modelling of the effects. Agric Ecosyst Environ 123:317–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Logan DP (1997) Distribution of eggs and larvae of Childers canegrub, Antitrogus parvulus Britton (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae), in relation to patches of canegrub-damaged sugarcane. Proceedings of the 3rd Brisbane workshop on soil invertebrates, Brisbane, pp 52–55Google Scholar
  37. Lovei GL, Hickman JM, McDougall D, Wratten SD (1993) Field penetration of beneficial insects from habitat islands – hoverfly dispersal from flowering crop strips. Proceedings of the 46th New Zealand plant protection conference, Christchurch, pp 325–328Google Scholar
  38. Mackay PA, Lamb RJ (1996) Dispersal of five aphids (Homoptera: Aphididae) in relation to their impact on Hordeum vulgare. Environ Entomol 25:1032–1044Google Scholar
  39. Martinson TE, Dennehy TJ, Hoffman CJ (1994) Phenology, within-vineyard distribution, and seasonal movement of Eastern grape leafhopper (Homoptera, Cicadellidae) in New-York vineyards. Environ Entomol 23:236–243Google Scholar
  40. Pasek JE (1988) Influence of wind and windbreaks on local dispersal of insects. Agric Ecosyst Environ 22:539–554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Patzold S, Mertens FM, Bornemann L et al (2008) Soil heterogeneity at the field scale: a challenge for precision crop protection. Prec Agric 9:367–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Reeve JD, Cronin JT, Haynes KJ (2008) Diffusion models for animals in complex landscapes: incorporating heterogeneity among substrates, individuals and edge behaviours. J Anim Ecol 77:898–904PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Robinson KA, Jonsson M, Wratten SD et al (2008) Implications of floral resources for predation by an omnivorous lacewing. Basic Appl Ecol 9:172–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sabelis MW, Janssen A, Diekmann O et al (2005) Global persistence despite local extinction in acarine predator-prey systems: lessons from experimental and mathematical exercises. Adv Ecol Res 37:183–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sabelis M, Janssen A, Pallini A et al (1999) Behavioral responses of predatory and herbivorous arthropods to induced plant volatiles: from evolutionary ecology to agricultural applications. In: Agrawal A, Tuzun S, Bent E (eds) Induced plant defenses against pathogens and herbivores. American Phytopathological Society, St. Paul, pp 269–296Google Scholar
  46. Schmidt MH, Roschewitz I, Thies C, Tscharntke T (2005) Differential effects of landscape and management on diversity and density of ground-dwelling farmland spiders. J Appl Ecol 42:281–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Spencer JL, Hibbard BE, Moeser J, Onstad DW (2009) Behaviour and ecology of the western corn rootworm (Diabrotica virgifera virgifera LeConte). Agric For Entomol 11:9–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Stapleton JJ, Summers CG (2002) Reflective mulches for management of aphids and aphid-borne virus diseases in late-season cantaloupe (Cucumis melo L. var. cantalupensis). Crop Prot 21:891–898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sun X, Yang Q, Sweeney JD, Gao C (2006) A review: chemical ecology of Ips typographus (Coleoptera, Scolytidae). J Forestry Res (Harbin) 17:65–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Szentesi A, Weber DC, Jermy T (2002) Role of visual stimuli in host and mate location of the Colorado potato beetle. Entomol Exp Appl 105:141–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Thies C, Steffan-Dewenter I, Tscharntke T (2003) Effects of landscape context on herbivory and parasitism at different spatial scales. Oikos 101:18–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Thomas CFG, Brain P, Jepson PC (2007) Aerial activity of linyphiid spiders: modelling dispersal distances from meteorology and behaviour. J Appl Ecol 44:1263–1263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Tscharntke T, Bommarco R, Clough Y et al (2007) Conservation biological control and enemy diversity on a landscape scale. Biol Control 43:294–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. van Helden M, Decante D (2001) The possibilities for conservation biocontrol as a management strategy against Empoasca vitis. Bulletin OILB/SROP 24:291–297Google Scholar
  55. van Helden M, Decante D, Papura D (2003) Possibilities for conservation biological control against grape pests in the Bordeaux region. Bulletin OILB/SROP 26:191–196Google Scholar
  56. van Helden M, Fargeas E, Fronzes M et al (2006) The influence of local and landscape characteristics on insect pest population levels in viticulture. Bulletin OILB/SROP 29:145–148Google Scholar
  57. Visser JH, Nielsen JK (1977) Specificity in olfactory orientation of Colorado beetle, Leptinotarsa decemlineata. Entomol Exp Appl 21:14–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Weisz R, Smilowitz Z, Fleischer S (1996) Evaluating risk of Colorado potato beetle (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) infestation as a function of migratory distance. J Econ Entomol 89:435–441Google Scholar
  59. Wermelinger B (2004) Ecology and management of the spruce bark beetle Ips typographus – a review of recent research. Forest Ecol Manag 202:67–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. White AJ, Wratten SD, Berry NA, Weigmann U (1995) Habitat manipulation to enhance biological control of Brassica pests by hover flies (Diptera, Syrphidae). J Econ Entomol 88:1171–1176Google Scholar
  61. Williams IH, Frearson DJT, Barari H, McCartney A (2007) First field evidence that parasitoids use upwind anemotaxis for host-habitat location. Entomol Exp Appl 123:299–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Yudin LS, Tabashnik BE, Mitchell WC, Cho JJ (1991) Effects of mechanical barriers on distribution of thrips (Thysanoptera, Thripidae) in lettuce. J Econ Entomol 84:136–139Google Scholar
  63. Zehnder CB, Hunter MD (2009) More is not necessarily better: the impact of limiting and excessive nutrients on herbivore population growth rates. Ecol Entomol 34:535–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V.  2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.UMR Santé Végétale, University of BordeauxGradignan cedexFrance

Personalised recommendations