Effects of Agroforestry on Phytoseiidae Communities (Acari: Mesostigmata) in Vineyards
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Effects of agroforestry on Phytoseiidae communities (Acari: Mesostigmata) in vineyards. A synthesis of a 10-year period of observations Marie-Stéphane Tixier, Anthony Arnaud, Martial Douin, Serge Kreiter To cite this version: Marie-Stéphane Tixier, Anthony Arnaud, Martial Douin, Serge Kreiter. Effects of agroforestry on Phytoseiidae communities (Acari: Mesostigmata) in vineyards. A synthesis of a 10-year period of observations. Acarologia, Acarologia, 2015, 55, pp.361-375. 10.1051/acarologia/20152182. hal- 01276722 HAL Id: hal-01276722 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01276722 Submitted on 19 Feb 2016 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. ACAROLOGIA A quarterly journal of acarology, since 1959 Publishing on all aspects of the Acari All information: http://www1.montpellier.inra.fr/CBGP/acarologia/ [email protected] Acarologia is proudly non-profit, with no page charges and free open access Please help us maintain this system by encouraging your institutes to subscribe to the print version of the journal and by sending us your high quality research on the Acari. Subscriptions: Year 2015 (Volume 55): 300 € http://www1.montpellier.inra.fr/CBGP/acarologia/subscribe.php Previous volumes (2010-2014): 220 € / year (4 issues) Acarologia, CBGP, CS 30016, 34988 MONTFERRIER-sur-LEZ Cedex, France Acarologia is under free license and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons-BY-NC-ND which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Acarologia 55(4): 361–375 (2015) DOI: 10.1051/acarologia/20152182 Effects of agroforestry on Phytoseiidae communities (Acari: Mesostigmata) in vineyards. A synthesis of a 10-year period of observations. Marie-Stéphane TIXIER*, Anthony ARNAUD, Martial DOUIN and Serge KREITER (Received 20 July 2015; accepted 15 October 2015; published online 18 December 2015) Montpellier SupAgro, UMR CBGP INRA/ IRD/ CIRAD/ SupAgro, 755 avenue du Campus International Agropolis (Baillarguet), CS 30 016, 34 988 Montferrier-sur-Lez cedex, France. [email protected] (* Corresponding Author), [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] ABSTRACT — Several species of the predatory mite family Phytoseiidae are of major economic importance for biological pest control in crops, including grapevines. Plant diversification in agrosystems is reported to enhance useful biodiversity and provide ecosystem services. Thus, agroforestry, which consists in co-planting trees and crops, is assumed to be a possible way to ensure regulation of pest outbreaks by phytoseiid mites. This paper investigates the effect of trees (Pinus pinea and Sorbus domestica) within vineyards on Phytoseiidae communities. Five experimental plots were considered, two where vines were co-planted with P. pinea and S. domestica, and three monoculture plots: vines, P. pinea and S. domestica. Sampling was carried out on vines and trees in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2010 and 2012. A higher Phytoseiidae diversity was observed in agroforestry plots than in monoculture plots. Kampimodromus aberrans (replacing T.[ T.] exhilaratus) seemed to colonize these plots 15 years after its plantation, especially when vines were co-planted with P. pinea. Factors affecting these faunistical changes are discussed. Effects on Phytoseiidae densities differed depending on grape cultivar- tree species associations. Factors affecting these interactions are discussed; plant diversity does not simply lead to a higher density and diversity of natural enemies. KEYWORDS — Pinus pinea; Sorbus domestica; Vitis vinifera; Agro-Ecology; Phytoseiidae INTRODUCTION crop physiology and then on associated fauna com- munity (ii) the resource concentration hypothesis Relationship between biodiversity and pest control that states that in diversified crops, specialized her- is of major interest for sustainable crop produc- bivores have less concentrated and unlimited food tion in a framework of agroecological researches supply than in monocultures and (iii) the natural (Philpott 2013; Crowder and Jabbour 2014). In sev- enemies hypothesis that states that in diversified eral meta-analyses (i.e. Poveda et al. 2008; Le- crops natural enemy abundance and diversity are tourneau et al. 2011; Veres et al. 2013), herbivore higher because of more continuous and diversified suppression, enemy enhancement, and crop dam- resource availability (preys, pollen, nectar, refugia, age suppression effects were significantly associ- microhabitats) compared to monocultures (i.e. Root ated with diversified crops. The main ecological 1973; Altieri and Whitcomb 1979; Stamps and Linit mechanisms supporting such outcomes are (i) an 1998; Altieri and Nicholls 2002; Tscharntke et al. effect of crop diversification on microclimate and http://www1.montpellier.inra.fr/CBGP/acarologia/ 361 ISSN 0044-586-X (print). ISSN 2107-7207 (electronic) Tixier M.-S. et al. 2005; Teodoro et al. 2009; Ratnadass et al. 2012; toseiidae communities in these plots (2012) as well Philpott 2013). The present study aims to test the as a synthesis of the previous surveys carried out latter hypotheses applying on the effect of agrofore- for 10 years (Barbar et al. 2009; Liguori et al. 2011). stral management of vineyards on the communi- The two main questions herein assessed at different ties of a predatory mite family: Phytoseiidae. Phy- time scales are: (i) Does agroforestry management toseiidae are well-known predatory mites; several affect Phytoseiidae density and diversity? (ii) Does species control pest mites and small phytophagous agroforestry impact differ according to vine culti- insects in several crops all around the world (Mc- vars and co-planted tree species? Murtry and Croft 1997; McMurtry et al. 2013) in- cluding vineyards (e.g. Kreiter el al. 2000; Serrano et al. 2005; Tixier et al. 2013). Most species are gen- MATERIALS AND METHODS eralist predators feeding on preys but also on alter- native foods as pollen, nectar, mycelium with effi- Studied plots cient reproduction (McMurtry and Croft 1997; Mc- The plots studied are located in the Hérault, Murtry et al. 2013). Various studies deal with fac- Restinclières, located at 15 kms North of Montpel- tors affecting the natural occurrence of such gen- lier (Prades-le-Lez, Hérault, France, 43°43’2.84"N, eralist predators in crops, especially in relation to 3°51’35.95"E). Climate is sub-humid Mediterranean agrosystem diversification. Several authors docu- and soil is predominantly clay and limestone, shal- ment the features of uncultivated areas surrounding low and very stony (Dupraz 2002; Barbar et al. vineyards (i.e. plant composition, structure) that af- 2006). Plots, planted in 1997 in a fallow land dat- fect Phytoseiidae occurrence in those crops (e.g. Al- ing back 35 years (Dupraz, pers. comm.), are very tieri and Letourneau 1982; Boller et al. 1988; Tixier close to each other (maximum 100 meters distant) in et al. 1998; Escudero and Ferragut 1999; Kreiter et al. an area of less than 0.2 km2 within the same climatic 2000, 2002; Zacarias and Moraes 2002; Kreiter et al. conditions and with same uncultivated neighbour- 2005; Tixier et al. 2006a). Plant diversity within plots ing areas predominantly composed of Pinus halepen- is also assumed to affect diversity and Phytosei- sis Miller, Quercus ilex L., Rosmarinus officinalis L., idae density, some herbaceous and flowering plants Rubus sp. and Viburnum tinus L. being favourable to these predators (Flaherty 1969; Coli et al. 1994; Lozzia and Rigamonti 1998; Tixier Five plots corresponding to the following et al. 1998; Kreiter et al. 2000, 2002; Nicholls et al. modalities were considered: monocultural vine, 2001; De Villiers and Pringle 2011; Dhiel et al. 2012; vine co-planted with S. domestica, vine co-planted Moura et al. 2013). The hypothesis herein tested is with P. pinea, monoculture of S. domestica and mono- that vine agroforestry management, i.e. combining culture of P. pinea (Figure 1). In each vine plot (co- trees and vines in a same field, could enhance bio- planted or not), two cultivars (Syrah and Grenache) logical control, by positively affecting Phytoseiidae were sampled. All vine plots considered (agro- communities in a framework of agroecological crop forestry managed and not) were similarly managed protection (Ratnadass et al. 2012). Effects of agro- and treated with pesticides (6-8 chemical treatments forestry on fauna biodiversity have not been fully per year to control downy and powdery mildews studied yet. Impact of agroforestry in viticulture on and Scaphoideus titanus Ball). The current fongicides Phytoseiidae density and diversity remains particu- used were tetranoconazole, benalaxyl, mancozeb, larly poorly investigated. The studies carried out in metirame, pyraclostrobine, copper and tebucona- the county Restinclières, Hérault, France constitute zole and the only insecticide each year used (for a major contribution with a long-term dispositive controlling S. titanus) was chlorpyriphos ethyl.