Resumen
Top-down suppression of herbivores is a fundamental ecological process and a critical service in agricultural landscapes. Adoption of bioenergy cropping systems is likely to become an increasingly important driver causing loss or gain of this service in coming decades. We measured natural pest suppression potential in ten model bioenergy crops in a long-term experimental array by deploying plasticine sentinel caterpillar mimics, which record imprints from predator attacks. Cropping systems included three intensive annual row crop systems and a range of simple perennial monocultures and more complex polycultures. We compared attack rates across the ten cropping systems and assessed differences over time within a growing season and between the ground level and canopy. We found strong differences in attack rates across cropping systems, usually with more attacks in perennial crops than annuals. However, outcomes varied in space and time, both within and among cropping systems. Birds and small mammals were responsible for most, and sometimes all, attacks in annual crops and were most important early in the season. Chewing arthropod attacks increased over the course of the growing season and were responsible for most attack events in perennial systems. In late summer there were almost no attacks in annual crop canopies, while attack rates in perennial canopies at the same time were quite high and were carried out almost entirely by chewing arthropods. Our results underscore the lack of trophic complexity in annual bioenergy cropping systems relative to perennials. They also illustrate the dramatic changes in predator activity and predation intensity that occur both seasonally and between the ground and plant canopy. Policies and practices that increase the footprint of annual crops for bioenergy are likely to cause a deficit in pest suppression services at local and landscape scales.
| Idioma original | English |
|---|---|
| Páginas (desde-hasta) | 765-775 |
| Número de páginas | 11 |
| Publicación | GCB Bioenergy |
| Volumen | 15 |
| N.º | 6 |
| DOI | |
| Estado | Published - jun 2023 |
Nota bibliográfica
Publisher Copyright:© 2023 The Authors. GCB Bioenergy published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Financiación
C. Fiser, A. Krudy, H. Eberhard, O. Eschedor and S. Zhou contributed to fieldwork. We thank M. Ferrante for advice on plasticine caterpillar design and logistics. D. Dillard, C. Fiser, N. Wonderlin, and A. Zahorec provided helpful comments on an earlier manuscript draft and assisted with photos used in Figure 2 , and two anonymous reviewers provided helpful comments. This material is based upon work supported in part by the Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Biological and Environmental Research under Award Numbers DE‐SC0018409 and DE‐FC02‐07ER64494, by the National Science Foundation Long‐term Ecological Research Program (DEB 1832042) at the Kellogg Biological Station, and by Michigan State University AgBioResearch. NH was supported during data analysis and manuscript preparation with startup funds provided by the Department of Entomology, College of Agriculture, Food, and Environment, University of Kentucky. C. Fiser, A. Krudy, H. Eberhard, O. Eschedor and S. Zhou contributed to fieldwork. We thank M. Ferrante for advice on plasticine caterpillar design and logistics. D. Dillard, C. Fiser, N. Wonderlin, and A. Zahorec provided helpful comments on an earlier manuscript draft and assisted with photos used in Figure 2, and two anonymous reviewers provided helpful comments. This material is based upon work supported in part by the Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Biological and Environmental Research under Award Numbers DE-SC0018409 and DE-FC02-07ER64494, by the National Science Foundation Long-term Ecological Research Program (DEB 1832042) at the Kellogg Biological Station, and by Michigan State University AgBioResearch. NH was supported during data analysis and manuscript preparation with startup funds provided by the Department of Entomology, College of Agriculture, Food, and Environment, University of Kentucky.
| Financiadores | Número del financiador |
|---|---|
| University of Kentucky College of Agriculture Food and the Environment | |
| Kellogg Biological Station | |
| National Science Foundation Long-term Ecological Research Program | DEB 1832042 |
| U.S. Department of Energy EPSCoR | |
| Office of Science Programs | |
| Biological and Environmental Research | DE‐SC0018409, DE‐FC02‐07ER64494 |
| Michigan State University AgBioResearch | |
| Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center | |
| Department of Entomology, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Michigan State University |
ODS de las Naciones Unidas
Este resultado contribuye a los siguientes Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible
-
Affordable and clean energy
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Forestry
- Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment
- Agronomy and Crop Science
- Waste Management and Disposal
Huella
Profundice en los temas de investigación de 'Pest suppression potential varies across 10 bioenergy cropping systems'. En conjunto forman una huella única.Citar esto
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver