Harvesting the Research: Natural Enemies of Crop Pests Can Replace Insecticides

Discussion in 'First Time Marijuana Growers' started by jainaG, Nov 5, 2015.

  1. http://foodtank.com/news/2015/11/harvesting-the-research-natural-enemies-can-replace-insecticides


    by Emily Nink


    Food Tank spoke with Dr. Mattias Jonsson, lead author of a paper on biological pest control. Biological control of pests is considered a key ecosystem service for the ecological intensification of agriculture.


    The overall message: Biological control can vary according to land use.
    The authors present a conceptual ecological model for quantifying the
    ecosystem service of biological pest control across different production
    schemes in Sweden.


    The research: The model predicted that biological
    control of aphid pests could reduce damage of cereal crops by 45-70
    percent and that landscape complexity would magnify the effectiveness of
    biological control.


    Food Tank (FT): Why is your research relevant for the
    transition to sustainable agriculture? What are two key points of your
    paper?


    Mattias Jonsson (MJ): To reduce the reliance of agriculture on
    chemicals, it is important to provide evidence of the effectiveness of
    alternative approaches to crop protection. Such evidence is often
    lacking for biological control and this has hampered its use. First, our
    production function provides such evidence, by measuring the extent to
    which biological control services can reduce crop losses to pests and by
    showing that the composition of crop and non-crop habitats surrounding a
    field can have a strong influence on efficacy of biological control.
    Second, we hope that our conceptual framework will inspire other
    researchers to summarize the existing knowledge in other agricultural
    systems and develop further knowledge of biological control.


    FT: How would you describe the results of your paper to a layman?


    MJ: Our model shows that in Swedish barley fields, natural enemies of
    aphids can reduce crop damage by more than half. This effect is highly
    dependent on the composition of the surrounding landscape, ranging from
    about 45 percent reduction in landscapes dominated by annual crops to 70
    percent in landscapes with little annual crop cover and a lot of
    grassland.


    FT: Could you explain in laymen's terms the importance of
    mapping biological control over different production systems? How do you
    expect the conceptual model you present in the paper to be adopted
    under different production schemes?


    MJ: Mapping biological control potential in different landscapes can
    help to predict in which parts of the landscape aphid outbreaks are more
    likely to occur. For organic farming, mapping can reveal areas of the
    landscape where conversion to organic agriculture is most likely to be
    successful, due to low risk for pest damage. For conventional
    agriculture, the model can help reduce unnecessary insecticide
    application. This could be achieved by adapting the economic spray
    threshold to different parts of the landscape – it could be higher where
    biological control potential is high and lower where biological control
    potential is low. The model can also help to predict the best locations
    in the landscape to focus conservation management practices such as
    beetle banks or flower strips. Other studies have shown that the effect
    of such measures is likely to be highest in landscapes with relatively
    low effectiveness to biological control.


    FT: How would you explain the effect of landscape complexity
    on biological control to a cereal farmer who is considering diversifying
    his or her farm?


    MJ: Landscapes with a high complexity provide natural enemies with
    alternative food resources and shelter from disturbances. This increases
    both their abundance and diversity. Diversifying crop production can
    definitely contribute, but it is also important to preserve semi-natural
    habitat such as grasslands.


    FT: We found your paper very exciting, because it seems to be
    one of the few that works to value the ecosystem service of biological
    pest control that sustains agricultural productivity. But some people
    say there is no need to assign a value to biological pest control, as it
    is already valued in the “benefit,” or total value of the crop; that
    this is essentially “double counting.” How do you view this claim?


    MJ: It would only be double counting if the value of regulating
    ecosystem services such as biological control were added on top of the
    value of the crop. However, biological control actually contributes
    to the value of crop production. By putting a value on biological
    control we highlight its importance for agricultural production, and by
    relating the value to different types of land uses, we can develop
    advice for sustainable agriculture with a minimized need for insecticide
    application.


    FT: Could the conceptual model have implications for Payment
    for Ecosystem Services (PES) schemes? How will future research improve
    upon your model and integrate it with economic analyses?


    MJ: The conceptual model highlights different processes that
    contribute to the value of biological control. Recommendations developed
    within this conceptual framework can be used to inform PES. Farms
    located in landscapes with high biological control potential might
    receive a higher payment that those located in landscapes with low
    potential for biological control. In the paper we list a number of ways
    in which the model can be improved. Integration of our model with
    economic models could help to relate biological control to other pest
    management options in different regions and landscape contexts. It could
    also include an assessment of the costs and benefits of preserving
    semi-natural grassland and other conservation management options at the
    landscape scale.

    \t\t\t\t\t\t
    \t\t\t\t\t\t


    \t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
    \t\t\t\t\t\tJonsson, Mattias, Riccardo Bommarco, Barbara Ekbom, Henrik G.
    Smith, Jan Bengtsson, Berta Caballero‐Lopez, Camilla Winqvist, and Ola
    Olsson. “Ecological production functions for biological control services
    in agricultural landscapes.” Methods in Ecology and Evolution 5, no. 3
    (2014): 243-252.


    The “Harvesting the Research” series is partly funded by the EU FP7
    project LIBERATION. The LIBERATION project aims to provide the
    evidence-base for the potential of ecological intensification to
    sustainably enhance food security with minimal negative impacts on the
    environment. Food Tank is partnering with the U.N. Food and Agriculture
    Organization to highlight scientific research on ecological
    intensification.
    \t\t\t\t
    \t\t\t\t\t\t
    \t
    \t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
    \t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
    \t\t\t\t
    \t\t\t\t\t\t

     

Share This Page