Functional agro-biodiversity (FAB) How to maximize pollination and biocontrol services while preserving nature values Felix Wäckers Agri Environment Schemes Agriculture Environment Focus on conservation Agri Environment Schemes Agriculture Environment Focus on ecosystem services €320 billion/year €90 billion/year (Constanza 1997) How to optimize services? Traditional paradigm: Enhance diversity (diversity = stability = services) Does it work? Example biological pest control Andow D.A. (Ann. Rev. Entomol. 36: 561-586) Vegetational diversity and pest control Effects variable • 52% of published studies on agroecosystem diversification report reduced pest populations • 33% had no effect or variable effects • 15% resulted in increased pest populations. How to optimize services? Traditional paradigm: Enhance diversity Functional biodiversity: Selectively enhance diversity Focus on functional groups that provide ecosystem services Targeted landscape management Bottleneck: Lack of nectar and pollen in many crops ConsumerThe impact benefits of nectar sources on biocontrol efficacy 30 Control 1 (N=6) 25 Control 2 (N=5) Nectar 1 (N=6) 20 Nectar 2 (N=6) 15 10 5 average number parasitized caterpillars parasitized number average 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 age wasp [days] Winkler et al., (2006) Biological control agents depending on nectar/pollen feeding. Type Plant- Arthropod examples can be found within: Type of plant Reference feeding food utilised stage Life-history adult Neuroptera: Chrysopidae (green lacewings) nectar, pollen (Stelzl 1991) omnivory Diptera: Syrphidae (hoverflies) nectar, pollen (Hickman et al. 1995) Cecidomyiidae (gall midges) nectar (Opit 1997) Tachinidea (parasitoid flies) nectar (Gilbert and Jervis 1998) Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae, Braconidae, nectar (Jervis 1998) a.o. (parasitoid wasps) nectar (Lewis 1998) Vespidae (social wasps) nectar, fruit (Cuautle and Rico Formicidae (ants) nectar (Beattie 1985) Coleoptera: Meloidae (blister beetles) nectar, pollen juvenile Heteroptera: Pentatomidae (stink bugs) plant-juice Temporal adult Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae, Braconidae, nectar (Jervis 1998) omnivory a.o. (host feeding parasitoids) (Wackers 2003) Coleoptera: Cicindelidae (tiger beetles) seeds (Zerm and Adis 2001) juvenile Araneae: Araneidae (orb web spiders) pollen (Smith and Mommsen 1984) Permanent adult & Acari:Mesostigmat Phytoseiidae nectar (van Rijn and Tanigoshi 1999a) omnivory juvenile (predatory mites) pollen (van Rijn and Tanigoshi 1999b) Heteroptera: Pentatomidae (stink bugs) plant juice (Ruberson et al. 1986) Miridae (mirid bugs) plant juice (Gillespie and McGregor 2000) Geocorinae (big-eyed bugs) plant juice Eubanks & Styrsky, this vol. Anthocoridae (flower bugs) pollen Eubanks & Styrsky, this vol. Neuroptera: Chrysopa, Hemerobiidae nectar, pollen (Stelzl 1991) (brown lacewings) (McEwen et al. 1993) Thysanoptera: Aeolothripidae, Phlaeothripidae leaves, pollen (Kirk 1997) Coccinellidae (ladybirds) nectar (Pemberton and Vandenberg Coleoptera: Carabidae (ground beetles) pollen 1993) seeds (Cottrell and Yeargan 1998) (Goldschmidt and Toft 1997) Targeted landscape management Informed selection of non-crop plants as a multifunctional tool to optimize ecosystem services - Select plants that optimize biological pest control or pollination - Select plants that avoid stimulation of pests - Select plants that generate multiple ecosystem services (Wäckers and van Rijn, 2012) Select plants that optimize biological pest control Choice Longevity (AFLI) Floral Hoverfly Hoverfly Lacewing References parasitoids family species Nectar Parasitoids E. balteatus E. balteatus C. carnea (species) depth Apiaceae Ammi majus 0 + + + - Geneau et al., unpubl. (Microplitis mediator) Apiaceae Coriandrum sativum 0 + + +/- Vattala et al., 2006 (Microtonus hyperodae) Apiaceae Daucus carota 0 +/- + ++ + Winkler et al., 2009 (Cotesia glomerata) Apiaceae Foeniculum vulgare 0 + + + Winkler et al., 2009 (Cotesia glomerata) Apiaceae Heracleum spondylium 0 +/- + +/- Winkler et al., 2009 (Cotesia glomerata) Apiaceae Pastinaca sativa 0 + + ++ +/- Foster & Ruessink, 1984 (Meteorus rubens) Polygonaceae Fagopyrum esculentum 0 + + + + Winkler et al., 2009 (Cotesia glomerata) Boraginaceae Borago officinalis 0 - + ++ - Nilsson et al., unpubl. (Trybliographa rapae) Ranunculaceae Ranunculus acris 0 + + - Kehrli & Bacher, 2008 (Minotetrastichus frontalis) Caryophyllaceae Gypsophila elegans 1 +/- + ++ Asteraceae Matricaria chamomilla 1 +/- + + - Nilsson et al., unpubl. (Trybliographa rapae) Asteraceae Achillea millefolium 1 +/- + +/- - Wäckers 2004 (Cotesia glomerata) Asteraceae L Cichorium intybus 1 - - + Asteraceae Chrysanthemum segetum 2 +/- + + Asteraceae Anthemis tinctoria 2 - +/- +/- Asteraceae Leucanthemum vulgare 2 +/- + - Wäckers 2004 (Cotesia glomerata) Asteraceae Tanacetum vulgare 2 - - +/- Asteraceae Calendula officinalis 3 - - Rahat et al., 2005 (Trissolcus basalis) Asteraceae Centaurea cyanus (+EFN) 3 +/- + ++ +/- Winkler et al., 2009 (Cotesia glomerata) Asteraceae Helianthus annuus (+EFN) 3 + + Asteraceae Cosmos bipinnatus 4 - - +/- + Rahat et al., 2005 (Trissolcus basalis) Malvaceae Malva sylvestris 4 - - - Boraginaceae Phacelia tanacetifolia 4 +/- +/- +/- - Irvin et al., 2007 (Gonatocerus spp.) Fabaceae Medicago sativa 4 - - - Kehrli & Bacher, 2008 (Minotetrastichus frontalis) Fabaceae Vicia sativa (+EFN) 4 - + ++ Geneau et al., unpubl. (Microplitis mediator) Fabaceae Lotus corniculatus 4 - - Selecting plants that avoid stimulation of pests (Winkler et al., 2009) 20 Pest 18 16 14 12 10 survival (days) survival Pieris rapae 8 Cotesia glomerata 6 4 Biological control agent 2 0 Medicago sp. Control (water) Daucus carota Centaurea jacae Origanum vulgareOrnithopus sativus Trifolium pratenseCentaurea cyanus Anethum graveolens Fagopyrum esculentum Selecting plants that generate multiple ecosystem services Pollination Biocontrol Pollinator mix Biocontrol mix Combination (Campbell, Biesmeijer Varma & W & Varma Biesmeijer (Campbell, ä ckers, 2012) ckers, Taking it to the field Large scale biodiversity project in the Hoekse Waard working with conventional growers. Addition of annual and perennial field margins to existing landscape features (polders, dikes, creeks, canal borders). Fruit Orchards (cider, UK) Optimizing Ecosystem Services in Terms of Agronomy and Conservation (ECOSTAC.CO.UK) Growing Wild Beneficial insects in field margins 300 June - Sept 2010 Insects observed in flowering field margin Insects observed in grassy margin 250 200 150 100 Mean insects observed insects Mean 50 0 Hoverflies Bumble bees Parasitoid w asps Ladybirds Beneficial insect group 250 June-Sept 2011 Insects observed in flowering field margin Insects observed in grassy field margin 200 150 100 Mean insects observed insects Mean 50 0 Hoverflies Bumble bees Parasitoid w asps Ladybirds Beneficial insect group Aphids in peas 0.8 70 Aphid % distribution 0.7 % parasitism 60 0.6 50 0.5 40 0.4 30 0.3 % parasitism % 20 0.2 Proportional aphidProportionaldistribution 0.1 10 0 0 08.06 15.06 22.06 29.06 06.07 08.06 15.06 22.06 29.06 06.07 08.06 15.06 22.06 29.06 06.07 CF1 - CF2 - CF3 Sample site and date The positive spiral More beneficials Fewer pests More biodiversity Fewer pesticides Yield impact? wheat (yield in tonnes/ha) 10 9 8 7 6 5 +12% 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 peas (yield in tonnes/ha) 7 6 5 4 +26% 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 carrots (yield in tonnes/ha) 9 8 7 6 +32% 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Focus on benefits to the agricultural industry Functional Biodiversity • Shows that yield and conservation are not conflicting objectives • Helps growers cope with ongoing decline in pollinators and reduced availability of registered agrochemicals • Compatible with current practices • Creates additional economic incentives for farmers to engage in Agri-Environment Schemes • Makes CAP greening a win-win for farmers and nature Spraying Food Supplements Nutrimite 6/11/2014 NutrimiteTM Advice Dosage 500 g / ha / application (0,45 lbs / acre / application) Interval Every 2 weeks N° of applications min. 2-3 times, depending on predatory mite density Application method To dust Use: Better establishment and rapid population growth even before pests arrive! 6/11/2014 Effect Nutrimite in Gerbera Juliette Pijnakker Effect of nutrimite on A. swirskii in Calathea Pijnakker & De Souza, Biobest More with Less Juliette Pijnakker, Biobest Crop: - Cut roses Result: - 2,5 times more predatory mites after 1 x introduction en 3 x Nutrimite as compared to 3 x introductions! Belgium Biobest et al. Bron: J.,Bron: Pijnakker, Thanks Is it worth the bother? Aren’t existing landscape elements enough? Do diverse bird conservation margins benefit biological pest control? Meteorus autographae Parasitoid feeding at a vetch nectary overall sugar levels in Meteorus autographae ug/wesp 40 35 Conclusions 30 25 High diversity field margins for bobwhite 20 quail conservation failed to provide food 15 to a biological control agent and did not 10 enhance biological pest control in the 5 0 adjacent crop. control bobwhite cahaba vetch Parasitoids did clearly benefit from pure stands of cahaba white vetch. Impact on Biocontrol is a function of resource availability (flower suitability), rather than diversity. Parasitoid feeding at a vetch nectary.