Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T14:11:33.619Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter Twenty-Three - Natural enemy functional identity, trait-mediated interactions and biological control

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2013

Tobin D. Northfield
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Wisconsin-Madison
David W. Crowder
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, Washington State University
Randa Jabbour
Affiliation:
Department of Plant, University of Maine
William E. Snyder
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, Washington State University
Takayuki Ohgushi
Affiliation:
Kyoto University, Japan
Oswald Schmitz
Affiliation:
Yale University, Connecticut
Robert D. Holt
Affiliation:
University of Florida
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Functional diversity schemes: are they useful?

Recent years have seen great interest in the importance of species richness for the functioning and stability of ecological communities (Ives and Carpenter 2007). Empirical examinations of richness effects typically vary the number of species in experimental treatments and measure resulting ecosystem functions such as biomass accumulation or resource uptake (Naeem et al. 2009). Across trophic levels and communities of many types, a clear pattern has emerged from these experiments: community processes (biomass accumulation, resource uptake, etc.) generally become more efficient when more species are present (Hooper et al. 2005; Cardinale et al. 2006). This pattern is generally attributed to resource partitioning among species, where species differ in ecologically significant ways such that they complement one another (Hooper et al. 2005). For example, in English meadow communities multiple plant species coexist, because different plant species exploit different hydrological conditions (Silvertown et al. 1999). The plants that dominate drought-prone areas are different from those that thrive in flood-prone areas and, presumably, total plant biomass is greatest when both plant groups (drought tolerant and flood tolerant) are present.

A remaining challenge is to effectively predict, a priori, the particular species (or groups of species) that will complement one another. One simplifying scheme that has received considerable attention is the lumping of species into ‘functional groups’. In this functional-group approach, species within a group are relatively similar to one another, and considered ecologically redundant, whereas species in different groups are distinct and complementary (Hillebrand and Matthiessen 2009). This approach gained support from studies suggesting that plant species can be classified into such functional groups (grasses, forbs, legumes and woody plants), and that the number of functional groups is a more effective predictor of ecosystem function than species richness (Diaz and Cabido 2001). For example, in savannah grasslands, plant communities that included C3 grasses, C4 grasses, forbs, legumes and woody plants had greater biomass and plant nitrogen accumulation, and reduced light penetration, than those communities lacking one or more of these groups (Tilman et al. 1997). These authors suggested that competition was greater within than between functional groups, consistent with niche similarity within, but niche differentiation among, groups.

Type
Chapter
Information
Trait-Mediated Indirect Interactions
Ecological and Evolutionary Perspectives
, pp. 450 - 465
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Altieri, M. A.Whitcomb, W. H. 1979 The potential use of weeds in the manipulation of beneficial insectsHorticultural Science 14 12Google Scholar
Barton, B. T.Schmitz, O. J. 2009 Experimental warming transforms multiple predator effects in a grassland food webEcology Letters 12 1317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blossey, B. 1995 A comparison of various approaches for evaluating potential biological-control agents using insects on Biological Control 5 113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cardinale, B. J.Harvey, C. T.Gross, K.Ives, A. R. 2003 Biodiversity and biocontrol: emergent impacts of a multi-enemy assemblage on pest suppression and crop yield in an agroecosystemEcology Letters 6 857CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cardinale, B. J.Srivastava, D. S.Duffy, J. E.Wright, J. P.Downing, A. L.Sankaran, M.Jouseau, C. 2006 Effects of biodiversity on the functioning of trophic groups and ecosystemsNature 443 989CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Collier, T.van Steenwyk, R. 2004 A critical evaluation of augmentative biological controlBiological Control 31 245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crowder, D. W.Northfield, T. D.Strand, M. R.Snyder, W. E. 2010 Organic agriculture promotes evenness and natural pest controlNature 466 109CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davis, A. S.Landis, D. A.Nuzzo, V. 2006 Demographic models inform selection of biocontrol agents for garlic mustard ()Ecological Applications 16 2399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diaz, S.Cabido, M. 2001 Vive la difference: plant functional diversity matters to ecosystem processesTrends in Ecology and Evolution 16 646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finke, D. L.Snyder, W. E. 2008 Niche partitioning increases resource exploitation by diverse communitiesScience 321 1488CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Finke, D. L.Snyder, W. E. 2010 Conserving the benefits of predator biodiversityBiological Conservation 143 2260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaines, H. R.Gratton, C. 2010 Seed predation increases with ground beetle diversity in a Wisconsin (USA) potato agroecosystemAgriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 137 329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, D. G.Pena, J.Franqui, R. 2001 Status of biological control by egg parasitoids of (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) in citrus in Florida and Puerto RicoBioControl 46 61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harmon, J. P.Moran, N. A.Ives, A. R. 2009 Species response to environmental change: impacts of food web interactions and evolutionScience 323 1347CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harwood, J. D.Desneux, N.Yoo, H. Y. S. 2007 Tracking the role of alternative prey in soybean aphid predation by : a molecular approachMolecular Ecology 16 390CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hawkins, B. A.Thomas, M. B.Hochberg, M. E. 1993 Refuge theory and biological controlScience 262 1429CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heimpel, G. E.Jervis, M. A. 2005 Does floral nectar improve biological control by parasitoidsWacker, F. L.van Rijn, P. C. J.Bruin, J.Plant-Provided Food and Herbivore-Carnivore InteractionsNew YorkCambridge University Press267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hillebrand, H.Matthiessen, B. 2009 Biodiversity in a complex world: consolidation and progress in functional biodiversity researchEcology Letters 12 1405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hooper, D. U.Chapin, F. S.Ewel, J. J. 2005 Effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning: a consensus of current knowledgeEcological Monographs 75 3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoy, M. A.Singh, R.Rogers, M. E. 2007 Citrus leafminer, (Lepidoptera: Gracillariidae), and natural enemy dynamics in Central Florida during 2005Florida Entomologist 90 358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ives, A. R.Carpenter, S. R. 2007 Stability and diversity of ecosystemsScience 317 58CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
James, R. R.McEvoy, P. B.Cox, C. S. 1992 Combining the cinnabar moth () and the ragwort flea beetle () for control of ragwort (): an experimental analysisJournal of Applied Ecology 29 589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landis, D. A.Wratten, S. D.Gurr, G. M. 2000 Habitat management to conserve natural enemies of arthropod pests in agricultureAnnual Review of Entomology 45 175CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Letourneau, D. K.Jedlicka, J. A.Bothwell, S. G.Moreno, C. R. 2009 Effects of natural enemy biodiversity on the suppression of arthropod herbivores in terrestrial ecosystemsAnnual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 40 573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Losey, J. E.Denno, R. F. 1998 Positive predator-predator interactions: enhanced predation rates and synergistic suppression of aphid populationsEcology 79 2143Google Scholar
McEvoy, P.Cox, C.Coombs, E. 1991 Successful biological control of ragwort, , by introduced insects in OregonEcological Applications 1 430CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McEvoy, P. B.Rudd, N. T.Cox, C. S.Huso, M. 1993 Disturbance, competition, and herbivory effects on ragwort populationsEcological Monographs 63 55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McFadyen, R. E. C. 1998 Biological control of weedsAnnual Review of Entomology 43 369CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Michaud, J. P. 2002 Classical biological control: A critical review of recent programs against citrus pests in FloridaAnnals of the Entomological Society of America 95 531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millar, L. C.Barbercheck, M. E. 2001 Interaction between endemic and introduced entomopathogenic nematodes in conventional-till and no-till cornBiological Control 22 235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Musser, F. R.Shelton, A. M. 2003 Factors altering the temporal and within-plant distribution of coccinellids in corn and their impact on potential intra-guild predationEnvironmental Entomology 32 575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naeem, S.Bunker, D. E.Hector, A.Loreau, M.Perrings, C. 2009 Biodiversity, Ecosystem Functioning, and Human Wellbeing: An Ecological and Economic PerspectiveOxfordOxford University PressCrossRef
Nelson, E. H.Matthews, C. E.Rosenheim, J. A. 2004 Predators reduce prey population growth by inducing changes in prey behaviorEcology 85 1853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neuenschwander, P.Hagen, K. S.Smith, R. F. 1975 Predation of aphids in California’s alfalfa fieldsHilgardia 43 53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Northfield, T. D.Snyder, G. B.Ives, A. R.Snyder, W. E. 2010 Niche saturation reveals resource partitioning among consumersEcology Letters 13 338CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pedersen, B. S.Mills, N. J. 2004 Single vs. multiple introduction in biological control: the roles of parasitoid efficiency, antagonism and niche overlapJournal of Applied Ecology 41 973CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Persad, A. B.Hoy, M. A.Nguyen, R. 2007 Establishment of (Hymenoptera: Aphidiidae) in a classical biological control program directed against the brown citrus aphid (Homoptera: Aphididae) in FloridaFlorida Entomologist 90 204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pfannenstiel, R. S.Yeargan, K. V. 2002 Identification and diel activity patterns of predators attacking (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) eggs in soybean and sweet cornEnvironmental Entomology 31 232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qureshi, J. A.Rogers, M. E.Hall, D. G.Stansly, P. A. 2009 Incidence of invasive (Hemiptera: Psyllidae) and its introduced parasitoid (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) in Florida citrusJournal of Economic Entomology 102 247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramirez, R. A.Snyder, W. E. 2009 Scared sick? Predator–pathogen facilitation enhances exploitation of a shared resourceEcology 90 2832CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rathet, I. H.Hurd, L. E. 1983 Ecological relationships of 3 co-occurring mantids, (Saussure), (Saussure), and (Linnaeus)American Midland Naturalist 110 240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenheim, J. A.Glik, T. E.Goeriz, R. E.Ramert, B. 2004 Linking a predator’s foraging behavior with its effects on herbivore population suppressionEcology 85 3362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rypstra, A. L.Carter, P. E.Balfour, R. A.Marshall, S. D. 1999 Architectural features of agricultural habitats and their impact on the spider inhabitantsJournal of Arachnology 27 371Google Scholar
Schellhorn, N. A.Andow, D. A. 1999 Cannibalism and interspecific predation: role of oviposition behaviorEcological Applications 9 418Google Scholar
Schmitz, O. J. 2007 Predator diversity and trophic interactionsEcology 88 2415CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmitz, O. J. 2008 Effects of predator hunting mode on grassland ecosystem functionScience 319 952CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seastedt, T. R.Knochel, D. G.Garmoe, M.Shosky, S. A. 2007 Interactions and effects of multiple biological control insects on diffuse and spotted knapweed in the front range of ColoradoBiological Control 42 345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Settle, W. H.Ariawan, H.Astuti, E. T. 1996 Managing tropical rice pests through conservation of generalist natural enemies and alternative preyEcology 77 1975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sih, A.Englund, G.Wooster, D. 1998 Emergent impacts of multiple predators on preyTrends in Ecology and Evolution 13 350CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silvertown, J.Dodd, M. E.Gowing, D. J. G.Mountford, J. O. 1999 Hydrologically defined niches reveal a basis for species richness in plant communitiesNature 400 61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, B. C. 1971 Effects of various factors on the local distribution and density of coccinellid adults on cornCanadian Entomologist 103 1115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snyder, W. E.Ballard, S. N.Yang, S. 2004 Complementary biocontrol of aphids by the ladybird beetle and the parasitoid on greenhouse rosesBiological Control 30 229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snyder, W. E.Snyder, G. B.Finke, D. L.Straub, C. S. 2006 Predator biodiversity strengthens herbivore suppressionEcology Letters 9 789CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sokol-Hessner, L.Schmitz, O. J. 2002 Aggregate effects of multiple predator species on a shared preyEcology 83 2367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Straub, C. S.Finke, D. L.Snyder, W. E. 2008 Are the conservation of natural enemy biodiversity and biological control compatible goalsBiological Control 45 225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Straub, C. S.Snyder, W. E. 2008 Increasing enemy biodiversity strengthens herbivore suppression on two plant speciesEcology 89 1605CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tamaki, G.Weeks, R. E. 1972 Efficiency of three predators, , and , used alone or in combination against three insect prey species, , and , in a greenhouse studyEnvironmental Entomology 1 258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tilman, D.Knops, J.Wedin, D. 1997 The influence of functional diversity and composition on ecosystem processesScience 277 1300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tscharntke, T.Klein, A. M.Kruess, A.Steffan-Dewenter, I.Thies, C. 2005 Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity: ecosystem service managementEcology Letters 8 857CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tylianakis, J. M.Didham, R. K.Bascompte, J.Wardle, D. A. 2008 Global change and species interactions in terrestrial ecosystemsEcology Letters 11 1351CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tylianakis, J. M.Tscharntke, T.Lewis, O. T. 2007 Habitat modification alters the structure of tropical host–parasitoid food websNature 445 202CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van Emden, H. F.Williams, G. F. 1974 Insect stability and diversity in agro-ecosystemsAnnual Review of Entomology 19 455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wäckers, F. L. 2004 Assessing the suitability of flowering herbs as parasitoid food sources: flower attractiveness and nectar accessibilityBiological Control 29 307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilby, A.Thomas, M. B. 2002 Natural enemy diversity and pest control: patterns of pest emergence with agricultural intensificationEcology Letters 5 353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilby, A.Villareal, S. C.Lan, L. P.Heong, K. L.Thomas, M. B. 2005 Functional benefits of predator species diversity depend on prey identityEcological Entomology 30 497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, J. P.Naeem, S.Hector, A. 2006 Conventional functional classification schemes underestimate the relationship with ecosystem functioningEcology Letters 9 111CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×