Crop pests and predators exhibit inconsistent responses to surrounding landscape composition

The idea that noncrop habitat enhances pest control and represents a win–win opportunity to conserve biodiversity and bolster yields has emerged as an agroecological paradigm. However, while noncrop habitat in landscapes surrounding farms sometimes benefits pest predators, natural enemy responses remain heterogeneous across studies and effects on pests are inconclusive. The observed heterogeneity in species responses to noncrop habitat may be biological in origin or could result from variation in how habitat and biocontrol are measured. Here, we use a pest-control database encompassing 132 studies and 6,759 sites worldwide to model natural enemy and pest abundances, predation rates, and crop damage as a function of landscape composition. Our results showed that although landscape composition explained significant variation within studies, pest and enemy abundances, predation rates, crop damage, and yields each exhibited different responses across studies, sometimes increasing and sometimes decreasing in landscapes with more noncrop habitat but overall showing no consistent trend. Thus, models that used landscape-composition variables to predict pest-control dynamics demonstrated little potential to explain variation across studies, though prediction did improve when comparing studies with similar crop and landscape features. Overall, our work shows that surrounding noncrop habitat does not consistently improve pest management, meaning habitat conservation may bolster production in some systems and depress yields in others. Future efforts to develop tools that inform farmers when habitat conservation truly represents a win–win would benefit from increased understanding of how landscape effects are modulated by local farm management and the biology of pests and their enemies

Data from: Dead or alive? Sexual conflict and lethal copulatory interactions in long-jawed Tetragnatha spiders

Inter- and intra-sexual selection are important driving forces that lead to diversification of sexual characteristics. Tetragnatha spiders have elongated chelicerae and sexual dimorphism in chelicera length whose magnitude varies among species. Because they use their chelicerae during copulation and as weapons in male–male competition, this divergence reflects repeated inter- and intra-sexual selection. To infer the causes of chelicera length diversity, we examined the roles of the elongated chelicerae in copulatory behaviour of a Tetragnatha species and clarified the interspecific sexual dimorphism of chelicera length in 15 species. The longer chelicerae of female Tetragnatha allowed females to kill males, suggesting female rejection of mating using the elongated chelicerae. Comparisons based on independent contrasts showed that chelicera length was significantly positively correlated between the sexes across species, possibly reflecting sexually antagonistic coevolution of male and female chelicera lengths. However, some species showed male-biased sexual dimorphism, indicating that intra-sexual selection (male competition) may be more important than inter-sexual competition in some species. Our results demonstrate that both inter-sexual and intra-sexual selection led to inter-specific variation in sexual dimorphism of chelicera length in this group

A global synthesis reveals biodiversity-mediated benefits for crop production.

Human land use threatens global biodiversity and compromises multiple ecosystem functions critical to food production. Whether crop yield-related ecosystem services can be maintained by a few dominant species or rely on high richness remains unclear. Using a global database from 89 studies (with 1475 locations), we partition the relative importance of species richness, abundance, and dominance for pollination; biological pest control; and final yields in the context of ongoing land-use change. Pollinator and enemy richness directly supported ecosystem services in addition to and independent of abundance and dominance. Up to 50% of the negative effects of landscape simplification on ecosystem services was due to richness losses of service-providing organisms, with negative consequences for crop yields. Maintaining the biodiversity of ecosystem service providers is therefore vital to sustain the flow of key agroecosystem benefits to society

A genome-wide investigation of the worldwide invader Sargassum muticum shows high success albeit (almost) no genetic diversity

Twenty years of genetic studies of marine invaders have shown that successful invaders are often characterized by native and introduced populations displaying similar levels of genetic diversity. This pattern is presumably due to high propagule pressure and repeated introductions. The opposite pattern is reported in this study of the brown seaweed, Sargassum muticum, an emblematic species for circumglobal invasions. Albeit demonstrating polymorphism in the native range, microsatellites failed to detect any genetic variation over 1,269 individuals sampled from 46 locations over the Pacific-Atlantic introduction range. Single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) obtained from ddRAD sequencing revealed some genetic variation, but confirmed severe founder events in both the Pacific and Atlantic introduction ranges. Our study thus exemplifies the need for extreme caution in interpreting neutral genetic diversity as a proxy for invasive potential. Our results confirm a previously hypothesized transoceanic secondary introduction from NE Pacific to Europe. However, the SNP panel unexpectedly revealed two additional distinct genetic origins of introductions. Also, conversely to scenarios based on historical records, southern rather than northern NE Pacific populations could have seeded most of the European populations. Finally, the most recently introduced populations showed the lowest selfing rates, suggesting higher levels of recombination might be beneficial at the early stage of the introduction process (i.e., facilitating evolutionary novelties), whereas uniparental reproduction might be favored later in sustainably established populations (i.e., sustaining local adaptation).Agence Nationale de la Recherche - ANR-10-BTBR-04; European Regional Development Fund; Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia - SFRH/BPD/107878/2015, UID/Multi/04326/2016, UID/Multi/04326/2019; Brittany Region;info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Data from: Crop pests and predators exhibit inconsistent responses to surrounding landscape composition

The idea that noncrop habitat enhances pest control and represents a win–win opportunity to conserve biodiversity and bolster yields has emerged as an agroecological paradigm. However, while noncrop habitat in landscapes surrounding farms sometimes benefits pest predators, natural enemy responses remain heterogeneous across studies and effects on pests are inconclusive. The observed heterogeneity in species responses to noncrop habitat may be biological in origin or could result from variation in how habitat and biocontrol are measured. Here, we use a pest-control database encompassing 132 studies and 6,759 sites worldwide to model natural enemy and pest abundances, predation rates, and crop damage as a function of landscape composition. Our results showed that although landscape composition explained significant variation within studies, pest and enemy abundances, predation rates, crop damage, and yields each exhibited different responses across studies, sometimes increasing and sometimes decreasing in landscapes with more noncrop habitat but overall showing no consistent trend. Thus, models that used landscape-composition variables to predict pest-control dynamics demonstrated little potential to explain variation across studies, though prediction did improve when comparing studies with similar crop and landscape features. Overall, our work shows that surrounding noncrop habitat does not consistently improve pest management, meaning habitat conservation may bolster production in some systems and depress yields in others. Future efforts to develop tools that inform farmers when habitat conservation truly represents a win–win would benefit from increased understanding of how landscape effects are modulated by local farm management and the biology of pests and their enemies

Crop pests and predators exhibit inconsistent responses to surrounding landscape composition

The idea that noncrop habitat enhances pest control and represents a win–win opportunity to conserve biodiversity and bolster yields has emerged as an agroecological paradigm. However, while noncrop habitat in landscapes surrounding farms sometimes benefits pest predators, natural enemy responses remain heterogeneous across studies and effects on pests are inconclusive. The observed heterogeneity in species responses to noncrop habitat may be biological in origin or could result from variation in how habitat and biocontrol are measured. Here, we use a pest-control database encompassing 132 studies and 6,759 sites worldwide to model natural enemy and pest abundances, predation rates, and crop damage as a function of landscape composition. Our results showed that although landscape composition explained significant variation within studies, pest and enemy abundances, predation rates, crop damage, and yields each exhibited different responses across studies, sometimes increasing and sometimes decreasing in landscapes with more noncrop habitat but overall showing no consistent trend. Thus, models that used landscape-composition variables to predict pest-control dynamics demonstrated little potential to explain variation across studies, though prediction did improve when comparing studies with similar crop and landscape features. Overall, our work shows that surrounding noncrop habitat does not consistently improve pest management, meaning habitat conservation may bolster production in some systems and depress yields in others. Future efforts to develop tools that inform farmers when habitat conservation truly represents a win–win would benefit from increased understanding of how landscape effects are modulated by local farm management and the biology of pests and their enemies

Data from: Crop pests and predators exhibit inconsistent responses to surrounding landscape composition

AbstractThe idea that noncrop habitat enhances pest control and represents a win–win opportunity to conserve biodiversity and bolster yields has emerged as an agroecological paradigm. However, while noncrop habitat in landscapes surrounding farms sometimes benefits pest predators, natural enemy responses remain heterogeneous across studies and effects on pests are inconclusive. The observed heterogeneity in species responses to noncrop habitat may be biological in origin or could result from variation in how habitat and biocontrol are measured. Here, we use a pest-control database encompassing 132 studies and 6,759 sites worldwide to model natural enemy and pest abundances, predation rates, and crop damage as a function of landscape composition. Our results showed that although landscape composition explained significant variation within studies, pest and enemy abundances, predation rates, crop damage, and yields each exhibited different responses across studies, sometimes increasing and sometimes decreasing in landscapes with more noncrop habitat but overall showing no consistent trend. Thus, models that used landscape-composition variables to predict pest-control dynamics demonstrated little potential to explain variation across studies, though prediction did improve when comparing studies with similar crop and landscape features. Overall, our work shows that surrounding noncrop habitat does not consistently improve pest management, meaning habitat conservation may bolster production in some systems and depress yields in others. Future efforts to develop tools that inform farmers when habitat conservation truly represents a win–win would benefit from increased understanding of how landscape effects are modulated by local farm management and the biology of pests and their enemies