Non-target Effects of Clothianidin on Monarch Butterflies

Monarch butterflies (Danaus plexippus) frequently consume milkweed in and near agroecosystems and consequently may be exposed to pesticides like neonicotinoids. We conducted a dose response study to determine lethal and sublethal doses of clothianidin using a 36-h exposure scenario. We then quantified clothianidin levels found in milkweed leaves adjacent to maize fields. Toxicity assays revealed LC10, LC50, and LC90 values of 7.72, 15.63, and 30.70 ppb, respectively. Sublethal effects (larval size) were observed at 1 ppb. Contaminated milkweed plants had an average of 1.14 ±0.10 ppb clothianidin, with a maximum of 4 ppb in a single plant. This research suggests that clothianidin could function as a stressor to monarch populations

The importance of dung beetles and arthropod communities on degradation of cattle dung pats in eastern South Dakota

Background Dung accumulation in rangelands can suppress plant growth, foul pastures, and increase pest pressure. Here, we describe the arthropod community of dung in eastern South Dakota, and quantify their contributions to dung degradation using an exclusion cage design. Methods Various arthropod community and degradation characteristics were measured in caged and uncaged dung pats over time in early and late summer. Results A total of 86,969 specimens were collected across 109 morphospecies (13 orders) of arthropods, and cages effectively reduced arthropod abundance, species richness, and diversity. Uncaged dung pats degraded significantly faster than the caged pats, with the largest difference occurring within 2 d of pat deposition. Dung organic matter was degraded more slowly (by 33–38 d) in the caged pats than where insects had free access to the pats. Although dung beetles only represented 1.5–3% of total arthropod abundance, they were significantly correlated to more abundant and complex total arthropod communities. Discussion A diverse community contributes to dung degradation in rangelands, and their early colonization is key to maximizing this ecosystem service

Technological Advances to Address Current Issues in Entomology: 2020 Student Debates

The 2020 Student Debates of the Entomological Society of America (ESA) were live-streamed during the Virtual Annual Meeting to debate current, prominent entomological issues of interest to members. The Student Debates Subcommittee of the National ESA Student Affairs Committee coordinated the student efforts throughout the year and hosted the live event. This year, four unbiased introductory speakers provided background for each debate topic while four multi-university teams were each assigned a debate topic under the theme ‘Technological Advances to Address Current Issues in Entomology’. The two debate topics selected were as follows: 1) What is the best taxonomic approach to identify and classify insects? and 2) What is the best current technology to address the locust swarms worldwide? Unbiased introduction speakers and debate teams began preparing approximately six months before the live event. During the live event, teams shared their critical thinking and practiced communication skills by defending their positions on either taxonomical identification and classification of insects or managing the damaging outbreaks of locusts in crops

Implementing IPM in crop management simultaneously improves the health of managed bees and enhances the diversity of wild pollinator communities

Impacts of insecticide use on the health of wild and managed pollinators have been difficult to accurately quantify in the field. Existing designs tend to focus on single crops, even though highly mobile bees routinely forage across crop boundaries. We created fields of pollinator-dependent watermelon surrounded by corn, regionally important crops in the Midwestern US. These fields were paired at multiple sites in 2017–2020 with the only difference being pest management regimes: a standard set of conventional management (CM) practices vs. an integrated pest management (IPM) system that uses scouting and pest thresholds to determine if/when insecticides are used. Between these two systems we compared the performance (e.g., growth, survival) of managed pollinators—honey bees (Apis mellifera), bumble bees (Bombus impatiens)—along with the abundance and diversity of wild pollinators. Compared to CM fields, IPM led to higher growth and lower mortality of managed bees, while also increasing the abundance (+ 147%) and richness (+ 128%) of wild pollinator species, and lower concentrations of neonicotinoids in the hive material of both managed bees. By replicating realistic changes to pest management, this experiment provides one of the first demonstrations whereby tangible improvements to pollinator health and crop visitation result from IPM implementation in agriculture

Implementing IPM in crop management simultaneously improves the health of managed bees and enhances the diversity of wild pollinator communities

Abstract Impacts of insecticide use on the health of wild and managed pollinators have been difficult to accurately quantify in the field. Existing designs tend to focus on single crops, even though highly mobile bees routinely forage across crop boundaries. We created fields of pollinator-dependent watermelon surrounded by corn, regionally important crops in the Midwestern US. These fields were paired at multiple sites in 2017–2020 with the only difference being pest management regimes: a standard set of conventional management (CM) practices vs. an integrated pest management (IPM) system that uses scouting and pest thresholds to determine if/when insecticides are used. Between these two systems we compared the performance (e.g., growth, survival) of managed pollinators—honey bees (Apis mellifera), bumble bees (Bombus impatiens)—along with the abundance and diversity of wild pollinators. Compared to CM fields, IPM led to higher growth and lower mortality of managed bees, while also increasing the abundance (+ 147%) and richness (+ 128%) of wild pollinator species, and lower concentrations of neonicotinoids in the hive material of both managed bees. By replicating realistic changes to pest management, this experiment provides one of the first demonstrations whereby tangible improvements to pollinator health and crop visitation result from IPM implementation in agriculture

Defining and validating regenerative farm systems using a composite of ranked agricultural practices

Background: Ongoing efforts attempt to define farms as regenerative to aid marketers, policymakers, farmers, etc. The approach needs to balance precision with function, and must be transparent, simple, scalable, transferable, incorruptible, and replicable. Methods: We developed practice-based scoring systems to distinguish regenerative cropland and rangeland, and validate them based on whether these scores scaled with regenerative goals on actual farm operations. Study systems included cornfields of the Upper Midwest, almond orchards of California, and rangeland systems of the Northern Plains. Response variables included soil carbon and organic matter, soil micronutrients, water infiltration rates, soil microbial communities, plant community structure, invertebrate community structure, pest populations, yields, and profit. Results: Regenerative outcomes were strongly correlated with our approach to farm scoring. Soil organic matter, fine particulate organic matter, total soil carbon, total soil nitrogen, phosphorous, calcium and sulfur all increased alongside regenerative matrix scores in one or both of the cropping systems. Water infiltration rates were significantly faster in more regenerative almond orchards. Soil bacterial biomass and Haney soil health test scores were higher as cropland incorporated more regenerative practices. Plant species diversity and biomass increased significantly with the number of regenerative practices employed on almonds and rangelands. Invertebrate species diversity and richness were positively associated with regenerative practices in corn, almonds, and rangelands, whereas pest populations and almond yields were unaffected by the number of regenerative practices. Corn yields were negatively associated with more regenerative practices, while almond yields were unaffected by the number of regenerative practices. Profit was significantly higher on more regenerative corn and almond operations. Conclusions: Our scoring system scaled positively with desired regenerative outcomes, and provides the basis for predicting ecosystem responses with minimal information about the farming operation. Natural clusters in the number of regenerative practices used can be used to distinguish regenerative and conventional operations