Reverting Conservation Reserve Program Lands to Wheat and Livestock Production: Effects on Ground Beetle (Coleoptera: Carabidae) Assemblages
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Entomology Papers from Other Sources Entomology Collections, Miscellaneous 1998 Reverting Conservation Reserve Program Lands to Wheat and Livestock Production: Effects on Ground Beetle (Coleoptera: Carabidae) Assemblages B. Wade French Plant Science Research Laboratory, USDA-ARS, [email protected] Norman C. Elliott Plant Science Research Laboratory, USDA-ARS Richard C. Berberet Plant Science Research Laboratory, USDA-ARS Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/entomologyother Part of the Entomology Commons French, B. Wade; Elliott, Norman C.; and Berberet, Richard C., "Reverting Conservation Reserve Program Lands to Wheat and Livestock Production: Effects on Ground Beetle (Coleoptera: Carabidae) Assemblages" (1998). Entomology Papers from Other Sources. 102. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/entomologyother/102 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Entomology Collections, Miscellaneous at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Entomology Papers from Other Sources by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. COMMUNITY AND ECOSYSTEMS ECOLOGY Reverting Conservation Reserve Program Lands to Wheat and Livestock Production: Effects on Ground Beetle (Coleoptera: Carabidae) Assemblages B. 'VADE FRENCH, NORMAN C. ELLIOTT, Ai'\D RICHARD C. BERBERETI Plant Science Research Laboratory, USDA-ARS, SPA, 1301 N. Western, Stillwater, OK 74075 Environ. Entomol. 27(6): 1323-133.5 (1998) ABSTRACT Highly erodible lands enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program soon will revert to agricultural production. This study was designed to determine the effects of reversion of Con servation Reserve Program lands to wheat and livestock production on ground beetle assemblages. Reversion strategies included no reversion of Conservation Reserve Program grass (unmanaged bluestem), simulated grazing of Conservation Reserve Program grass (managed bluestem), mini mum-tillage practices for wheat production, and no-tillage practices for wheat production. A randomized block experimental design was established with 4 replicates. More ground beetles were captured in pitfall traps in 1995 than in 1996, and abundances within years differed among reversion strategies. Of the 73 ground beetle species collected, 9 species accounted for 61.7% of total abun dance. Abundances of these 9 species differed with respect to reversion strategy. Species diversity and evenness differed among the reversion strategies in 1995, but only evenness differed in 1996. Canonical correspondence analysis showed that annual and monthly variation were the predominant factors in separating ground beetle assemblages. Lack of rainfall may have accounted for a large portion of differences in abundances between years. A partial canonical correspondence analysis showed that simulated grazing and no-tillage wheat were the predominant reversion strategies in separating ground beetle assemblages. These treatments represent disturbance levels intermediate to unmanaged bluestem and minimum-tillage wheat. KEY WORDS Carabidae, insect predators, biological control, Conservation Reserve Program, tillage, wheat THE LOSS OF topsoil due to water and wind erosion is erman 1980, Scheller 1984, Floate et al. 1990, Winder a major concern worldwide (Pimentel et al. 1995). 1990, Ekbom et al. 1992, Holopainen and Helenius The u.s. government established the Conservation 1992, Sunderland et al. 1995). If Conservation Reserve Reserve Program in the 1985 Food Security Act to Program lands revert to pasture for grazing livestock, reduce the amount of topsoil lost from highly erodible an increased level of disturbance to the vegetation and lands (USDA 1996). Farmers were compensated mon soil may occur and may significantly alter assemblages etarily for enrolling their lands in this program. In of ground beetles. If Conservation Reserve Program Oklahoma, 0.5 million hectares are enrolled as Con lands revert to wheat production, complete and servation Reserve Program lands (USDA 1996). An abrupt changes in the vegetation and ground cover ticipated changes in federal farm programs may sig will occur, and this too may alter assemblages of nificantly reduce the acreage in the Conservation ground beetles. Reserve Program and bring this fragile land back into With the reversion to wheat production, tillage agricultural production. Much of this land in Okla practices will dictate the degree of disturbance to the homa will revert to wheat, Triticum aestivum L., and soil and vegetation. Deep tillage of the soil, as is done pasture for livestock production. With reversion to with conventional methods, removes 2::70% of all veg agricultural production, farmers will employ different etative residue from the ground surface, and conse strategies to limit loss of topsoil and regulate pests quently disrupts the life cycles of many species. Con while maximizing wheat and livestock production. servation tillage practices leave 2::30% plant residue on Ground beetles are generalist predators of agricul the soil surface after planting (Gebhardt et al. 1985). tural pests and play an important role in controlling One conservation practice is no tillage, which leaves pests in many agroecosystems (Sunderland and Vick- 2::60% of plant residue on the soil surface after plant ing. Stinner and House (1990) reviewed the effects of 1 Department of Entomology, Oklahoma State University, Stillwa conservation tillage practices on various groups of ter, OK 74078. arthropods and other invertebrates. This article reports the results of research only. Mention of a proprietary product does not consitute an endorsement or a recom The effects of conventional and conservation tillage mendation by the USDA for its use. practices on species diversity and relative abundances 1324 ENVIRONMENTAL ENTOMOLOGY Vol. 27, no. 6 of ground beetle species have been studied widely 1962). Although preceding the full lO-yr enrollment (Tyler and Ellis 1979, Dritschilo and Wanner 1980, period, this study represents the 1st and 2nd yr of Barney and Pass 1986, Weiss et al. 1990, Laub and Luna reversion from Conservation Reserve Program to 1992, Tonhasca 1993, Carcamo 1995, Carcamo et al. wheat or pasture. 1995). Although ground beetle diversity sometimes A randomized complete block experimental design increases with decreased tillage (Stinner and House was used with 4 treatments and 4 replications: unman 1990), other indications are that diversity and abun aged Old World Bluestem, managed Old World dance are not changed (Barney and Pass 1986). In the Bluestem, minimum-tillage wheat, and no-tillage northern Great Plains, ground beetle diversity and wheat. Each block was 92 by 230 m. Each plot within abundance were altered more by some crop rotations a block was 92 by 46 m. Because this is the initial than by tillage practices (Weiss et al. 1990). In central attempt at reverting Conservation Reserve Program Alberta, ground beetle abundance was higher under lands to wheat production in this region, several tech conventional tillage than under conservation tillage niques were used to eliminate Old World Bluestem (Carcamo 1995). from the wheat plots. Due to the sensitivity of this land The effects of grazing on species diversity and rel to erosion, the Old World Bluestem could not be ative abundances of ground beetles has also shown plowed into the soil. Farmers in this region will em mixed results (Rushton et al. 1986, Luff and Rushton ploy similar techniques to revert their Conservation 1988, Morrill 1992, Dennis et al. 1997). In Georgia, Reserve Program lands to wheat and livestock pro ground beetle abundance was not different among duction. During the 1st yr of reversion (1994-1995), grazed and ungrazed grasslands (Morrill 1992). In the Old World Bluestem was burned in May 1994 to England, managed grasslands that included grazing remove previous growth. In July 1994, tillage was ac had lower ground beetle diversity than managed grass complished by undercutting the Old World Bluestem lands that did not include grazing (Luff and Rushton with a 91-cm V-blade sweep. This reduced-tillage 1988). Dennis et al. (1997) found that some species of method contrasts with the no-tillage strategy where ground beetles were captured in greater numbers in no disturbance to the soil occurred except for planting ungrazed grasslands than in grazed grasslands. In con the wheat. Herbicide (1.1 kg- 1 [AI] Iha glyphosate) trast, Dennis et al. (1997) also found that the abun was sprayed to kill the Old World Bluestem in the dance of other species of ground beetles was higher in no-tillage and minimum-tillage wheat plots in August grazed grasslands than in ungrazed grasslands. 1994 and June 1995. Wheat was planted, using a no-till Farmers may encounter new pest problems with drill, in the no-tillage and minimum-tillage wheat plots elimination of the Conservation Reserve Program and in September 1994. For the 1995-1996 season, sweep implementation of crop and livestock production. As tillage was performed on minimum-tillage wheat in generalist predators, ground beetles may play an im June, August, and October. The repeated tillage was in portant role in maximizing agricultural production response to regrowth of Old World Bluestem and (Potts and Vickerman 1974). Our objectives were to weeds. Wheat was planted in the no-tillage wheat and determine the following: (1)