Early‐season plant cover supports more effective pest control than insecticide applications
Growing evidence suggests that conservation agricultural practices, like no‐till and cover crops, help protect annual crops from insect pests by supporting populations of resident arthropod predators. While adoption of conservation practices is growing, most field crop producers are also using more...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Ecological applications 2022-07, Vol.32 (5), p.e2598-n/a |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | n/a |
---|---|
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | e2598 |
container_title | Ecological applications |
container_volume | 32 |
creator | Rowen, Elizabeth K. Pearsons, Kirsten A. Smith, Richard G. Wickings, Kyle Tooker, John F. |
description | Growing evidence suggests that conservation agricultural practices, like no‐till and cover crops, help protect annual crops from insect pests by supporting populations of resident arthropod predators. While adoption of conservation practices is growing, most field crop producers are also using more insecticides, including neonicotinoid seed coatings, as insurance against early‐season insect pests. This tactic may disrupt benefits associated with conservation practices by reducing arthropods that contribute to biological control. We investigated the interaction between preventive pest management (PPM) and the conservation practice of cover cropping. We also investigated an alternative pest management approach, integrated pest management (IPM), which responds to insect pest risk, rather than using insecticides prophylactically. In a 3‐year corn (Zea mays mays L.)–soy (Glycine max L.) rotation, we measured the response of invertebrate pests and predators to PPM and IPM with and without a cover crop. Using any insecticide provided some small reduction to plant damage in soy, but no yield benefit. In corn, vegetative cover early in the season was key to reducing pest density and damage, likely by increasing the abundance of arthropod predators. Further, PPM in year 1 decreased predation compared to a no‐pest‐management control. Contrary to our expectation, the IPM strategy, which required just one insecticide application, was more disruptive to the predator community than PPM, likely because the applied pyrethroid was more acutely toxic to a wider range of arthropods than neonicotinoids. Promoting early‐season cover was more effective at reducing pest density and damage than either intervention‐based strategy. Our results suggest that the best pest management outcomes may occur when biological control is encouraged by planting cover crops and avoiding broad‐spectrum insecticides as much as possible. As part of a conservation‐based approach to farming, cover crops can promote natural‐enemy populations that can help provide biological effective control of insect pest populations. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/eap.2598 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2684210644</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2684210644</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2798-b3da038943176b90f3fc01ba1acfceefa0aaae3c2f9cc9c85e61d9c8738e559b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kM1KAzEQx4MotlbBJ5CAFy9b87FfOZZSP6CgBz3Kks1OcMt2E5PdSm8-gs_ok5i11ZtzmYH58Z_hh9A5JVNKCLsGaacsEfkBGlPBRZQkOTsMM0loRLKUjtCJ9ysSijF2jEY84TEnLB6jl4V0zfbr49OD9KbFtpFth5XZgMO-t9a4zuO1cYBBa1BdvQFswQ9I2znT4O5Vtrhu_bBTdQVYWtvUSna1af0pOtKy8XC27xP0fLN4mt9Fy4fb-_lsGSmWiTwqeSUJz0XMaZaWgmiuFaGlpFJpBaAlkVICV0wLpYTKE0hpFXrGc0gSUfIJutzlWmfe-vBesTK9a8PJgqV5zChJ4zhQVztKOeO9A11YV6-l2xaUFIPHIngsBo8BvdgH9uUaqj_wV1wAoh3wXjew_TeoWMwefwK_AdIkfxw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2684210644</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Early‐season plant cover supports more effective pest control than insecticide applications</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><creator>Rowen, Elizabeth K. ; Pearsons, Kirsten A. ; Smith, Richard G. ; Wickings, Kyle ; Tooker, John F.</creator><creatorcontrib>Rowen, Elizabeth K. ; Pearsons, Kirsten A. ; Smith, Richard G. ; Wickings, Kyle ; Tooker, John F.</creatorcontrib><description>Growing evidence suggests that conservation agricultural practices, like no‐till and cover crops, help protect annual crops from insect pests by supporting populations of resident arthropod predators. While adoption of conservation practices is growing, most field crop producers are also using more insecticides, including neonicotinoid seed coatings, as insurance against early‐season insect pests. This tactic may disrupt benefits associated with conservation practices by reducing arthropods that contribute to biological control. We investigated the interaction between preventive pest management (PPM) and the conservation practice of cover cropping. We also investigated an alternative pest management approach, integrated pest management (IPM), which responds to insect pest risk, rather than using insecticides prophylactically. In a 3‐year corn (Zea mays mays L.)–soy (Glycine max L.) rotation, we measured the response of invertebrate pests and predators to PPM and IPM with and without a cover crop. Using any insecticide provided some small reduction to plant damage in soy, but no yield benefit. In corn, vegetative cover early in the season was key to reducing pest density and damage, likely by increasing the abundance of arthropod predators. Further, PPM in year 1 decreased predation compared to a no‐pest‐management control. Contrary to our expectation, the IPM strategy, which required just one insecticide application, was more disruptive to the predator community than PPM, likely because the applied pyrethroid was more acutely toxic to a wider range of arthropods than neonicotinoids. Promoting early‐season cover was more effective at reducing pest density and damage than either intervention‐based strategy. Our results suggest that the best pest management outcomes may occur when biological control is encouraged by planting cover crops and avoiding broad‐spectrum insecticides as much as possible. As part of a conservation‐based approach to farming, cover crops can promote natural‐enemy populations that can help provide biological effective control of insect pest populations.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1051-0761</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1939-5582</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/eap.2598</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35343024</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hoboken, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>Acute toxicity ; Agricultural conservation ; Agricultural practices ; Animals ; Arthropoda ; Arthropods ; Biological control ; Biological effects ; Conservation ; Conservation practices ; Corn ; Cover crops ; Crop rotation ; Crops ; Crops, Agricultural ; Damage ; Density ; Glycine max ; Herbivores ; Insect Control ; Insecta ; Insecticides ; Insects ; Integrated pest management ; Invertebrates ; IPM ; Neonicotinoids ; Pest Control ; Pest Control, Biological - methods ; Pests ; Plant protection ; Populations ; Predation ; Predators ; Pyrethroids ; Seasons ; soy ; Strategy ; Zea mays ; Zea mays mays</subject><ispartof>Ecological applications, 2022-07, Vol.32 (5), p.e2598-n/a</ispartof><rights>2022 The Ecological Society of America.</rights><rights>Copyright Ecological Society of America Jul 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2798-b3da038943176b90f3fc01ba1acfceefa0aaae3c2f9cc9c85e61d9c8738e559b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2798-b3da038943176b90f3fc01ba1acfceefa0aaae3c2f9cc9c85e61d9c8738e559b3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-1904-3716</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Feap.2598$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Feap.2598$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35343024$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Rowen, Elizabeth K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pearsons, Kirsten A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smith, Richard G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wickings, Kyle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tooker, John F.</creatorcontrib><title>Early‐season plant cover supports more effective pest control than insecticide applications</title><title>Ecological applications</title><addtitle>Ecol Appl</addtitle><description>Growing evidence suggests that conservation agricultural practices, like no‐till and cover crops, help protect annual crops from insect pests by supporting populations of resident arthropod predators. While adoption of conservation practices is growing, most field crop producers are also using more insecticides, including neonicotinoid seed coatings, as insurance against early‐season insect pests. This tactic may disrupt benefits associated with conservation practices by reducing arthropods that contribute to biological control. We investigated the interaction between preventive pest management (PPM) and the conservation practice of cover cropping. We also investigated an alternative pest management approach, integrated pest management (IPM), which responds to insect pest risk, rather than using insecticides prophylactically. In a 3‐year corn (Zea mays mays L.)–soy (Glycine max L.) rotation, we measured the response of invertebrate pests and predators to PPM and IPM with and without a cover crop. Using any insecticide provided some small reduction to plant damage in soy, but no yield benefit. In corn, vegetative cover early in the season was key to reducing pest density and damage, likely by increasing the abundance of arthropod predators. Further, PPM in year 1 decreased predation compared to a no‐pest‐management control. Contrary to our expectation, the IPM strategy, which required just one insecticide application, was more disruptive to the predator community than PPM, likely because the applied pyrethroid was more acutely toxic to a wider range of arthropods than neonicotinoids. Promoting early‐season cover was more effective at reducing pest density and damage than either intervention‐based strategy. Our results suggest that the best pest management outcomes may occur when biological control is encouraged by planting cover crops and avoiding broad‐spectrum insecticides as much as possible. As part of a conservation‐based approach to farming, cover crops can promote natural‐enemy populations that can help provide biological effective control of insect pest populations.</description><subject>Acute toxicity</subject><subject>Agricultural conservation</subject><subject>Agricultural practices</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Arthropoda</subject><subject>Arthropods</subject><subject>Biological control</subject><subject>Biological effects</subject><subject>Conservation</subject><subject>Conservation practices</subject><subject>Corn</subject><subject>Cover crops</subject><subject>Crop rotation</subject><subject>Crops</subject><subject>Crops, Agricultural</subject><subject>Damage</subject><subject>Density</subject><subject>Glycine max</subject><subject>Herbivores</subject><subject>Insect Control</subject><subject>Insecta</subject><subject>Insecticides</subject><subject>Insects</subject><subject>Integrated pest management</subject><subject>Invertebrates</subject><subject>IPM</subject><subject>Neonicotinoids</subject><subject>Pest Control</subject><subject>Pest Control, Biological - methods</subject><subject>Pests</subject><subject>Plant protection</subject><subject>Populations</subject><subject>Predation</subject><subject>Predators</subject><subject>Pyrethroids</subject><subject>Seasons</subject><subject>soy</subject><subject>Strategy</subject><subject>Zea mays</subject><subject>Zea mays mays</subject><issn>1051-0761</issn><issn>1939-5582</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kM1KAzEQx4MotlbBJ5CAFy9b87FfOZZSP6CgBz3Kks1OcMt2E5PdSm8-gs_ok5i11ZtzmYH58Z_hh9A5JVNKCLsGaacsEfkBGlPBRZQkOTsMM0loRLKUjtCJ9ysSijF2jEY84TEnLB6jl4V0zfbr49OD9KbFtpFth5XZgMO-t9a4zuO1cYBBa1BdvQFswQ9I2znT4O5Vtrhu_bBTdQVYWtvUSna1af0pOtKy8XC27xP0fLN4mt9Fy4fb-_lsGSmWiTwqeSUJz0XMaZaWgmiuFaGlpFJpBaAlkVICV0wLpYTKE0hpFXrGc0gSUfIJutzlWmfe-vBesTK9a8PJgqV5zChJ4zhQVztKOeO9A11YV6-l2xaUFIPHIngsBo8BvdgH9uUaqj_wV1wAoh3wXjew_TeoWMwefwK_AdIkfxw</recordid><startdate>202207</startdate><enddate>202207</enddate><creator>Rowen, Elizabeth K.</creator><creator>Pearsons, Kirsten A.</creator><creator>Smith, Richard G.</creator><creator>Wickings, Kyle</creator><creator>Tooker, John F.</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</general><general>Ecological Society of America</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>SOI</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1904-3716</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202207</creationdate><title>Early‐season plant cover supports more effective pest control than insecticide applications</title><author>Rowen, Elizabeth K. ; Pearsons, Kirsten A. ; Smith, Richard G. ; Wickings, Kyle ; Tooker, John F.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2798-b3da038943176b90f3fc01ba1acfceefa0aaae3c2f9cc9c85e61d9c8738e559b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Acute toxicity</topic><topic>Agricultural conservation</topic><topic>Agricultural practices</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Arthropoda</topic><topic>Arthropods</topic><topic>Biological control</topic><topic>Biological effects</topic><topic>Conservation</topic><topic>Conservation practices</topic><topic>Corn</topic><topic>Cover crops</topic><topic>Crop rotation</topic><topic>Crops</topic><topic>Crops, Agricultural</topic><topic>Damage</topic><topic>Density</topic><topic>Glycine max</topic><topic>Herbivores</topic><topic>Insect Control</topic><topic>Insecta</topic><topic>Insecticides</topic><topic>Insects</topic><topic>Integrated pest management</topic><topic>Invertebrates</topic><topic>IPM</topic><topic>Neonicotinoids</topic><topic>Pest Control</topic><topic>Pest Control, Biological - methods</topic><topic>Pests</topic><topic>Plant protection</topic><topic>Populations</topic><topic>Predation</topic><topic>Predators</topic><topic>Pyrethroids</topic><topic>Seasons</topic><topic>soy</topic><topic>Strategy</topic><topic>Zea mays</topic><topic>Zea mays mays</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Rowen, Elizabeth K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pearsons, Kirsten A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smith, Richard G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wickings, Kyle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tooker, John F.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Ecological applications</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Rowen, Elizabeth K.</au><au>Pearsons, Kirsten A.</au><au>Smith, Richard G.</au><au>Wickings, Kyle</au><au>Tooker, John F.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Early‐season plant cover supports more effective pest control than insecticide applications</atitle><jtitle>Ecological applications</jtitle><addtitle>Ecol Appl</addtitle><date>2022-07</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>32</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>e2598</spage><epage>n/a</epage><pages>e2598-n/a</pages><issn>1051-0761</issn><eissn>1939-5582</eissn><abstract>Growing evidence suggests that conservation agricultural practices, like no‐till and cover crops, help protect annual crops from insect pests by supporting populations of resident arthropod predators. While adoption of conservation practices is growing, most field crop producers are also using more insecticides, including neonicotinoid seed coatings, as insurance against early‐season insect pests. This tactic may disrupt benefits associated with conservation practices by reducing arthropods that contribute to biological control. We investigated the interaction between preventive pest management (PPM) and the conservation practice of cover cropping. We also investigated an alternative pest management approach, integrated pest management (IPM), which responds to insect pest risk, rather than using insecticides prophylactically. In a 3‐year corn (Zea mays mays L.)–soy (Glycine max L.) rotation, we measured the response of invertebrate pests and predators to PPM and IPM with and without a cover crop. Using any insecticide provided some small reduction to plant damage in soy, but no yield benefit. In corn, vegetative cover early in the season was key to reducing pest density and damage, likely by increasing the abundance of arthropod predators. Further, PPM in year 1 decreased predation compared to a no‐pest‐management control. Contrary to our expectation, the IPM strategy, which required just one insecticide application, was more disruptive to the predator community than PPM, likely because the applied pyrethroid was more acutely toxic to a wider range of arthropods than neonicotinoids. Promoting early‐season cover was more effective at reducing pest density and damage than either intervention‐based strategy. Our results suggest that the best pest management outcomes may occur when biological control is encouraged by planting cover crops and avoiding broad‐spectrum insecticides as much as possible. As part of a conservation‐based approach to farming, cover crops can promote natural‐enemy populations that can help provide biological effective control of insect pest populations.</abstract><cop>Hoboken, USA</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</pub><pmid>35343024</pmid><doi>10.1002/eap.2598</doi><tpages>12</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1904-3716</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1051-0761 |
ispartof | Ecological applications, 2022-07, Vol.32 (5), p.e2598-n/a |
issn | 1051-0761 1939-5582 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2684210644 |
source | MEDLINE; Access via Wiley Online Library |
subjects | Acute toxicity Agricultural conservation Agricultural practices Animals Arthropoda Arthropods Biological control Biological effects Conservation Conservation practices Corn Cover crops Crop rotation Crops Crops, Agricultural Damage Density Glycine max Herbivores Insect Control Insecta Insecticides Insects Integrated pest management Invertebrates IPM Neonicotinoids Pest Control Pest Control, Biological - methods Pests Plant protection Populations Predation Predators Pyrethroids Seasons soy Strategy Zea mays Zea mays mays |
title | Early‐season plant cover supports more effective pest control than insecticide applications |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T18%3A53%3A39IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Early%E2%80%90season%20plant%20cover%20supports%20more%20effective%20pest%20control%20than%20insecticide%20applications&rft.jtitle=Ecological%20applications&rft.au=Rowen,%20Elizabeth%20K.&rft.date=2022-07&rft.volume=32&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=e2598&rft.epage=n/a&rft.pages=e2598-n/a&rft.issn=1051-0761&rft.eissn=1939-5582&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/eap.2598&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2684210644%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2684210644&rft_id=info:pmid/35343024&rfr_iscdi=true |