The Effects of Refuge Size and Number on Acarine Predator-Prey Dynamics in a Pesticide-Disturbed Apple Orchard

1. In apple orchards, the use of pesticides such as pyrethroids for the control of lepidopteran and dipteran pests can severely disturb natural equilibria by killing or repelling acarine predators. After spraying, phytophagous mite populations will often subsequently increase to densities which are...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Journal of applied ecology 1998-04, Vol.35 (2), p.323-331
Hauptverfasser: Lester, P. J., Thistlewood, H. M. A., Harmsen, R.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 331
container_issue 2
container_start_page 323
container_title The Journal of applied ecology
container_volume 35
creator Lester, P. J.
Thistlewood, H. M. A.
Harmsen, R.
description 1. In apple orchards, the use of pesticides such as pyrethroids for the control of lepidopteran and dipteran pests can severely disturb natural equilibria by killing or repelling acarine predators. After spraying, phytophagous mite populations will often subsequently increase to densities which are above economic thresholds. To conserve predator populations we manipulated the size and number of predator refuges. Refuges were made with various sizes of polyethylene sheeting placed over 0, 10, 30, 60 or 100% of the leaves on trees before spraying with the pyrethroid permethrin. 2. At the time of spraying the phytoseiid predator Typhlodromus caudiglans and the stigmaeid predator Zetzellia mali were present in similar densities. The main phytophagous mites present were the tetranychid mites Panonychus ulmi and Tetranychus urticae. After spraying, Typhlodromus caudiglans was virtually eliminated from sprayed leaves, but not from refuge leaves. Recolonization of sprayed leaves by T. caudiglans was slow, probably due to toxic or repellent effects of the pyrethroid residue. Densities of Z. mali were only slightly affected by the pyrethroid, but this species was unable to control tetranychid densities on sprayed leaves in the absence of T. caudiglans. After spraying, P. ulmi and Tetranychus urticae increased on sprayed leaves to densities well in excess of crop economic thresholds, while densities remained low on refuge leaves. 3. The major effect of refuge size was a high positive correlation between entire-tree densities of T. caudiglans and refuge size, and a high negative correlation with P. ulmi densities. The refuge size necessary to control P. ulmi to below economically damaging densities was predicted to be in excess of 60% of each tree. Thus, only 40% of each tree would receive a pyrethroid spray. This is not practical for management purposes as the reduced spray coverage is unlikely to control target lepidopteran and dipteran pests. No significant effects of refuge number were observed. 4. The application of a pyrethroid spray resulted in a major disturbance to natural acarine population dynamics in this orchard for up to 11 weeks after spraying. While refuges were useful in conserving a population of the predator Typhlodromus caudiglans and reducing entire-tree densities of phytophagous mites, the use of refuges may be more valuable when using pesticides with a lower residual effect.
doi_str_mv 10.1046/j.1365-2664.1998.00304.x
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_16549300</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>2405131</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>2405131</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4574-9e86b98ac854825a5268b8a16a51e0b445b23b63cb307314f1b7fb608955ec9d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkE9PGzEQxa2KSg1pv0EPPiBuu9jrP7ElLhGkLQg1UZueLds7Bkeb3WBnBemn7y5BcO1pnjTvvRn9EMKUlJRwebEpKZOiqKTkJdValYQwwsvnD2jytjhBE0IqWihN6Cd0mvOGEKIFYxPUrh8AL0IAv8-4C_gXhP4e8O_4F7Bta_yz3zpIuGvx3NsUW8CrBLXdd6kYxAFfH1q7jT7j2GKLV5D30ccaiuuY931yUOP5btcAXib_YFP9GX0Mtsnw5XVO0Z9vi_XVj-Ju-f3man5XeC5mvNCgpNPKeiW4qoQVlVROWSqtoEAc58JVzEnmHSMzRnmgbhacJEoLAV7XbIrOj7271D32w1dmG7OHprEtdH02VAqu2YBqitTR6FOXc4JgdilubToYSswI2GzMyNGMHM0I2LwANs9D9Oz1hs3eNiHZ1sf8lq9YNVNyvHB5tD3FBg7_XW9uV4tBDPGvx_gmD9Df2zkRlFH2Dwv0ll4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>16549300</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Effects of Refuge Size and Number on Acarine Predator-Prey Dynamics in a Pesticide-Disturbed Apple Orchard</title><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><source>Wiley Free Content</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>Wiley Online Library All Journals</source><creator>Lester, P. J. ; Thistlewood, H. M. A. ; Harmsen, R.</creator><creatorcontrib>Lester, P. J. ; Thistlewood, H. M. A. ; Harmsen, R.</creatorcontrib><description>1. In apple orchards, the use of pesticides such as pyrethroids for the control of lepidopteran and dipteran pests can severely disturb natural equilibria by killing or repelling acarine predators. After spraying, phytophagous mite populations will often subsequently increase to densities which are above economic thresholds. To conserve predator populations we manipulated the size and number of predator refuges. Refuges were made with various sizes of polyethylene sheeting placed over 0, 10, 30, 60 or 100% of the leaves on trees before spraying with the pyrethroid permethrin. 2. At the time of spraying the phytoseiid predator Typhlodromus caudiglans and the stigmaeid predator Zetzellia mali were present in similar densities. The main phytophagous mites present were the tetranychid mites Panonychus ulmi and Tetranychus urticae. After spraying, Typhlodromus caudiglans was virtually eliminated from sprayed leaves, but not from refuge leaves. Recolonization of sprayed leaves by T. caudiglans was slow, probably due to toxic or repellent effects of the pyrethroid residue. Densities of Z. mali were only slightly affected by the pyrethroid, but this species was unable to control tetranychid densities on sprayed leaves in the absence of T. caudiglans. After spraying, P. ulmi and Tetranychus urticae increased on sprayed leaves to densities well in excess of crop economic thresholds, while densities remained low on refuge leaves. 3. The major effect of refuge size was a high positive correlation between entire-tree densities of T. caudiglans and refuge size, and a high negative correlation with P. ulmi densities. The refuge size necessary to control P. ulmi to below economically damaging densities was predicted to be in excess of 60% of each tree. Thus, only 40% of each tree would receive a pyrethroid spray. This is not practical for management purposes as the reduced spray coverage is unlikely to control target lepidopteran and dipteran pests. No significant effects of refuge number were observed. 4. The application of a pyrethroid spray resulted in a major disturbance to natural acarine population dynamics in this orchard for up to 11 weeks after spraying. While refuges were useful in conserving a population of the predator Typhlodromus caudiglans and reducing entire-tree densities of phytophagous mites, the use of refuges may be more valuable when using pesticides with a lower residual effect.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0021-8901</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-2664</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2664.1998.00304.x</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JAPEAI</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Science Ltd</publisher><subject>Acari ; Animal, plant and microbial ecology ; Applied ecology ; Arachnida ; Biological and medical sciences ; biological control ; Control ; dispersal ; Ecotoxicology, biological effects of pollution ; Effects of pollution and side effects of pesticides on protozoa and invertebrates ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Integrated pest control ; Leaves ; Mites ; Orchards ; Pesticides ; Phytopathology. Animal pests. Plant and forest protection ; Phytophagous mites ; Population density ; Predators ; Protozoa. Invertebrates ; Pyrethrins ; pyrethroid ; spider mites ; Spraying ; Typhlodromus caudiglans</subject><ispartof>The Journal of applied ecology, 1998-04, Vol.35 (2), p.323-331</ispartof><rights>Copyright 1998 British Ecological Society</rights><rights>British Ecological Society</rights><rights>1998 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4574-9e86b98ac854825a5268b8a16a51e0b445b23b63cb307314f1b7fb608955ec9d3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/2405131$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/2405131$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,1416,1432,27923,27924,45573,45574,46408,46832,58016,58249</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=2327860$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lester, P. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thistlewood, H. M. A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harmsen, R.</creatorcontrib><title>The Effects of Refuge Size and Number on Acarine Predator-Prey Dynamics in a Pesticide-Disturbed Apple Orchard</title><title>The Journal of applied ecology</title><description>1. In apple orchards, the use of pesticides such as pyrethroids for the control of lepidopteran and dipteran pests can severely disturb natural equilibria by killing or repelling acarine predators. After spraying, phytophagous mite populations will often subsequently increase to densities which are above economic thresholds. To conserve predator populations we manipulated the size and number of predator refuges. Refuges were made with various sizes of polyethylene sheeting placed over 0, 10, 30, 60 or 100% of the leaves on trees before spraying with the pyrethroid permethrin. 2. At the time of spraying the phytoseiid predator Typhlodromus caudiglans and the stigmaeid predator Zetzellia mali were present in similar densities. The main phytophagous mites present were the tetranychid mites Panonychus ulmi and Tetranychus urticae. After spraying, Typhlodromus caudiglans was virtually eliminated from sprayed leaves, but not from refuge leaves. Recolonization of sprayed leaves by T. caudiglans was slow, probably due to toxic or repellent effects of the pyrethroid residue. Densities of Z. mali were only slightly affected by the pyrethroid, but this species was unable to control tetranychid densities on sprayed leaves in the absence of T. caudiglans. After spraying, P. ulmi and Tetranychus urticae increased on sprayed leaves to densities well in excess of crop economic thresholds, while densities remained low on refuge leaves. 3. The major effect of refuge size was a high positive correlation between entire-tree densities of T. caudiglans and refuge size, and a high negative correlation with P. ulmi densities. The refuge size necessary to control P. ulmi to below economically damaging densities was predicted to be in excess of 60% of each tree. Thus, only 40% of each tree would receive a pyrethroid spray. This is not practical for management purposes as the reduced spray coverage is unlikely to control target lepidopteran and dipteran pests. No significant effects of refuge number were observed. 4. The application of a pyrethroid spray resulted in a major disturbance to natural acarine population dynamics in this orchard for up to 11 weeks after spraying. While refuges were useful in conserving a population of the predator Typhlodromus caudiglans and reducing entire-tree densities of phytophagous mites, the use of refuges may be more valuable when using pesticides with a lower residual effect.</description><subject>Acari</subject><subject>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</subject><subject>Applied ecology</subject><subject>Arachnida</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>biological control</subject><subject>Control</subject><subject>dispersal</subject><subject>Ecotoxicology, biological effects of pollution</subject><subject>Effects of pollution and side effects of pesticides on protozoa and invertebrates</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Integrated pest control</subject><subject>Leaves</subject><subject>Mites</subject><subject>Orchards</subject><subject>Pesticides</subject><subject>Phytopathology. Animal pests. Plant and forest protection</subject><subject>Phytophagous mites</subject><subject>Population density</subject><subject>Predators</subject><subject>Protozoa. Invertebrates</subject><subject>Pyrethrins</subject><subject>pyrethroid</subject><subject>spider mites</subject><subject>Spraying</subject><subject>Typhlodromus caudiglans</subject><issn>0021-8901</issn><issn>1365-2664</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1998</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkE9PGzEQxa2KSg1pv0EPPiBuu9jrP7ElLhGkLQg1UZueLds7Bkeb3WBnBemn7y5BcO1pnjTvvRn9EMKUlJRwebEpKZOiqKTkJdValYQwwsvnD2jytjhBE0IqWihN6Cd0mvOGEKIFYxPUrh8AL0IAv8-4C_gXhP4e8O_4F7Bta_yz3zpIuGvx3NsUW8CrBLXdd6kYxAFfH1q7jT7j2GKLV5D30ccaiuuY931yUOP5btcAXib_YFP9GX0Mtsnw5XVO0Z9vi_XVj-Ju-f3man5XeC5mvNCgpNPKeiW4qoQVlVROWSqtoEAc58JVzEnmHSMzRnmgbhacJEoLAV7XbIrOj7271D32w1dmG7OHprEtdH02VAqu2YBqitTR6FOXc4JgdilubToYSswI2GzMyNGMHM0I2LwANs9D9Oz1hs3eNiHZ1sf8lq9YNVNyvHB5tD3FBg7_XW9uV4tBDPGvx_gmD9Df2zkRlFH2Dwv0ll4</recordid><startdate>199804</startdate><enddate>199804</enddate><creator>Lester, P. J.</creator><creator>Thistlewood, H. M. A.</creator><creator>Harmsen, R.</creator><general>Blackwell Science Ltd</general><general>Blackwell Science</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>C1K</scope></search><sort><creationdate>199804</creationdate><title>The Effects of Refuge Size and Number on Acarine Predator-Prey Dynamics in a Pesticide-Disturbed Apple Orchard</title><author>Lester, P. J. ; Thistlewood, H. M. A. ; Harmsen, R.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4574-9e86b98ac854825a5268b8a16a51e0b445b23b63cb307314f1b7fb608955ec9d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1998</creationdate><topic>Acari</topic><topic>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</topic><topic>Applied ecology</topic><topic>Arachnida</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>biological control</topic><topic>Control</topic><topic>dispersal</topic><topic>Ecotoxicology, biological effects of pollution</topic><topic>Effects of pollution and side effects of pesticides on protozoa and invertebrates</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Integrated pest control</topic><topic>Leaves</topic><topic>Mites</topic><topic>Orchards</topic><topic>Pesticides</topic><topic>Phytopathology. Animal pests. Plant and forest protection</topic><topic>Phytophagous mites</topic><topic>Population density</topic><topic>Predators</topic><topic>Protozoa. Invertebrates</topic><topic>Pyrethrins</topic><topic>pyrethroid</topic><topic>spider mites</topic><topic>Spraying</topic><topic>Typhlodromus caudiglans</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lester, P. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thistlewood, H. M. A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harmsen, R.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><jtitle>The Journal of applied ecology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lester, P. J.</au><au>Thistlewood, H. M. A.</au><au>Harmsen, R.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Effects of Refuge Size and Number on Acarine Predator-Prey Dynamics in a Pesticide-Disturbed Apple Orchard</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of applied ecology</jtitle><date>1998-04</date><risdate>1998</risdate><volume>35</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>323</spage><epage>331</epage><pages>323-331</pages><issn>0021-8901</issn><eissn>1365-2664</eissn><coden>JAPEAI</coden><abstract>1. In apple orchards, the use of pesticides such as pyrethroids for the control of lepidopteran and dipteran pests can severely disturb natural equilibria by killing or repelling acarine predators. After spraying, phytophagous mite populations will often subsequently increase to densities which are above economic thresholds. To conserve predator populations we manipulated the size and number of predator refuges. Refuges were made with various sizes of polyethylene sheeting placed over 0, 10, 30, 60 or 100% of the leaves on trees before spraying with the pyrethroid permethrin. 2. At the time of spraying the phytoseiid predator Typhlodromus caudiglans and the stigmaeid predator Zetzellia mali were present in similar densities. The main phytophagous mites present were the tetranychid mites Panonychus ulmi and Tetranychus urticae. After spraying, Typhlodromus caudiglans was virtually eliminated from sprayed leaves, but not from refuge leaves. Recolonization of sprayed leaves by T. caudiglans was slow, probably due to toxic or repellent effects of the pyrethroid residue. Densities of Z. mali were only slightly affected by the pyrethroid, but this species was unable to control tetranychid densities on sprayed leaves in the absence of T. caudiglans. After spraying, P. ulmi and Tetranychus urticae increased on sprayed leaves to densities well in excess of crop economic thresholds, while densities remained low on refuge leaves. 3. The major effect of refuge size was a high positive correlation between entire-tree densities of T. caudiglans and refuge size, and a high negative correlation with P. ulmi densities. The refuge size necessary to control P. ulmi to below economically damaging densities was predicted to be in excess of 60% of each tree. Thus, only 40% of each tree would receive a pyrethroid spray. This is not practical for management purposes as the reduced spray coverage is unlikely to control target lepidopteran and dipteran pests. No significant effects of refuge number were observed. 4. The application of a pyrethroid spray resulted in a major disturbance to natural acarine population dynamics in this orchard for up to 11 weeks after spraying. While refuges were useful in conserving a population of the predator Typhlodromus caudiglans and reducing entire-tree densities of phytophagous mites, the use of refuges may be more valuable when using pesticides with a lower residual effect.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Science Ltd</pub><doi>10.1046/j.1365-2664.1998.00304.x</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0021-8901
ispartof The Journal of applied ecology, 1998-04, Vol.35 (2), p.323-331
issn 0021-8901
1365-2664
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_16549300
source JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing; Wiley Free Content; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; Wiley Online Library All Journals
subjects Acari
Animal, plant and microbial ecology
Applied ecology
Arachnida
Biological and medical sciences
biological control
Control
dispersal
Ecotoxicology, biological effects of pollution
Effects of pollution and side effects of pesticides on protozoa and invertebrates
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
Integrated pest control
Leaves
Mites
Orchards
Pesticides
Phytopathology. Animal pests. Plant and forest protection
Phytophagous mites
Population density
Predators
Protozoa. Invertebrates
Pyrethrins
pyrethroid
spider mites
Spraying
Typhlodromus caudiglans
title The Effects of Refuge Size and Number on Acarine Predator-Prey Dynamics in a Pesticide-Disturbed Apple Orchard
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-12T23%3A27%3A52IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Effects%20of%20Refuge%20Size%20and%20Number%20on%20Acarine%20Predator-Prey%20Dynamics%20in%20a%20Pesticide-Disturbed%20Apple%20Orchard&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20applied%20ecology&rft.au=Lester,%20P.%20J.&rft.date=1998-04&rft.volume=35&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=323&rft.epage=331&rft.pages=323-331&rft.issn=0021-8901&rft.eissn=1365-2664&rft.coden=JAPEAI&rft_id=info:doi/10.1046/j.1365-2664.1998.00304.x&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E2405131%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=16549300&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=2405131&rfr_iscdi=true