Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Gagic, Vesna
dc.contributor.author Hulthen, Andrew D.
dc.contributor.author Marcora, Anna
dc.contributor.author Wang, Xiaobei
dc.contributor.author Jones, Laura
dc.contributor.author Schellhorn, Nancy A.
dc.coverage.spatial Queensland
dc.coverage.spatial Australia
dc.date.accessioned 2019-06-11T12:54:51Z
dc.date.available 2019-06-11T12:54:51Z
dc.date.issued 2019-06-06
dc.identifier doi:10.5061/dryad.0ft1474
dc.identifier.citation Gagic V, Hulthen AD, Marcora A, Wang X, Jones L, Schellhorn NA (2019) Biocontrol in insecticide sprayed crops does not benefit from semi‐natural habitats and recovers slowly after spraying. Journal of Applied Ecology.
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10255/dryad.218006
dc.description 1. To enhance biological pest control in crop fields, it is recommended to increase semi-natural area on farm and decrease insecticide spraying. While the benefits of semi-natural area for biocontrol in unsprayed fields are often demonstrated, it remains largely unknown if there are any benefits in real world, commonly sprayed crops. 2. Here, we explored the combined effects of semi-natural field margins and insecticide spraying on pest (cotton bollworm) egg predation in 53 Australian cotton fields and semi-natural field margins across two years. We used predation experiments close to field edges to exclude functional groups of predators depending on their spatio-temporal activity (diurnal vs. nocturnal and ground vs. canopy dwelling) and digital cameras to record natural enemy taxa responsible for predation. 3. Ground predation was substantially higher than canopy predation and its magnitude in unsprayed crops with semi-natural margins was similar to that within semi-natural areas. In contrast, semi-natural field margins did not benefit biocontrol in sprayed crop fields and did not influence recovery rate of biocontrol after spraying. 4. Within ground-dwelling predators, one dominant taxon contributed the most to biocontrol at a particular time and place. However, the dominant predator-prey interactions changed between day and night and fields with and without margins, thus indicating increased importance of additional predator taxa with increasing spatio-temporal scales. 5. Synthesis and applications: Overall, our results show that semi-natural margins benefit pest control only in unsprayed fields. Spraying at different time (e.g. during night) would not reduce the negative effects of insecticides because it would affect complementary group of nocturnal natural enemies that exert equally high biocontrol as diurnal ground-dwelling predators. We highlight the need for management recommendations to simultaneously consider pros and cons of within field spraying and surrounding semi-natural habitats to maximize their benefits in high input conventional production systems.23-May-2019
dc.relation.haspart doi:10.5061/dryad.0ft1474/1
dc.relation.haspart doi:10.5061/dryad.0ft1474/2
dc.relation.haspart doi:10.5061/dryad.0ft1474/3
dc.relation.haspart doi:10.5061/dryad.0ft1474/4
dc.relation.haspart doi:10.5061/dryad.0ft1474/5
dc.relation.isreferencedby doi:10.1111/1365-2664.13452
dc.subject biological pest control
dc.subject ecosystem service
dc.subject ecological intensification
dc.subject pest suppression
dc.subject Helicoverpa
dc.subject cotton
dc.subject selection effect
dc.subject insecticides
dc.title Data from: Biocontrol in insecticide sprayed crops does not benefit from semi-natural habitats and recovers slowly after spraying
dc.type Article
dc.contributor.correspondingAuthor Gagic, Vesna
prism.publicationName Journal of Applied Ecology
dryad.dashTransferDate 2019-07-20T01:52:33.263+0000

Files in this package

Content in the Dryad Digital Repository is offered "as is." By downloading files, you agree to the Dryad Terms of Service. To the extent possible under law, the authors have waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this data. CC0 (opens a new window) Open Data (opens a new window)

Title Data from sprayed fields
Downloaded 2 times
Description Experimental data (egg predation) from sprayed fields from seasons 2015/2016 and 2016/2017.
Download Data from sprayed fields.csv (36.42 Kb)
Details View File Details
Title Data from unsprayed fields
Downloaded 1 time
Description Experimental data (egg predation) from unsprayed fields from season 2015/2016
Download Data from unsprayed fields.csv (11.39 Kb)
Details View File Details
Title Data from camera recordings
Downloaded 2 times
Description Pest egg removal data recorded by digital cameras, season 2016/2017.
Download Data from camera recordings.csv (1.785 Kb)
Details View File Details
Title Pitfall data 2015_2016
Downloaded 1 time
Description Pitfall data, season 2015/2016
Download Pitfall data 2015_2016.csv (10.02 Kb)
Details View File Details
Title Pitfall data 2016_2017
Downloaded 2 times
Description Pitfall data, season 2016/2017
Download Pitfall data 2016_2017.csv (3.656 Kb)
Details View File Details

Search for data

Be part of Dryad

We encourage organizations to: