Abstract
Abstract Increasing plant diversity in agroecosystems (i.e. intercropping) has been widely accepted as a means of promoting conservation biological control of mites and insect pests. Nevertheless, the contribution from underlying mechanisms such as the provision of non‐prey alternative food (i.e. pollen and nectar) and shelter have not been properly disentangled; and additionally, it remains unexplored whether the performance of nocturnal and diurnal natural enemies is improved when provided with diverse plant communities. Using open field experiments and a greenhouse microcosm, we investigated whether intercropping collards with parsley could create shelter for natural enemies in the lower stratum (parsley), and whether or not nocturnal and diurnal natural enemies would carry out aphid biological control equally well in this increased plant diversity scenario (intercropping). The results showed that the shelter alone provided by the lower stratum/companion plants (parsley) mediated an increase in the abundance of natural enemies without involving the provision of non‐prey alternative food. However, the biological control of aphids exerted by nocturnal predators was negatively affected by intercropping. The lower stratum (parsley) appeared to hamper the ability of nocturnal predators to reach aphids more quickly on the collard host plants (higher stratum). In total, our findings indicate that intercropping non‐flowering companion plants is likely enough to mediate an increase of natural enemies via shelter provision. In addition, the results suggest that nocturnal predators, or non‐flying predators for that matter, are hampered by complex lower stratum vegetation. Thus, considering natural enemy behaviour and plant characteristics when designing polyculture systems are vital for attaining conservation biological control success.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 4
Claim · model-written summary
Parsley shelter increased natural enemy abundance without alternative food.
- Taxon
- collards
Brassica oleracea var. viridise1 - Treatment
- intercropping collards with parsleye1
- Interactor
- natural enemiese0biocontrol_agent
- Outcome
- abundance of natural enemiese0
- Direction
- increasee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“shelter alone provided by the lower stratum/companion plants (parsley) mediated an increase in the abundance of natural enemies without involving the provision of non‐prey alternative food”
e1“intercropping collards with parsley”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping reduced nocturnal-predator biological control of aphids.
- Taxon
- collarde1
- Treatment
- intercroppinge0
- Interactor
- aphidsAphidomorphae0pest
- Second interactor
- nocturnal predatorse0biocontrol_agent
- Outcome
- biological control of aphidse0
- Direction
- negatively affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“biological control of aphids exerted by nocturnal predators was negatively affected by intercropping”
e1“collard host plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Parsley appeared to slow nocturnal predators reaching aphids on collards.
Verbatim
e0“The lower stratum (parsley) appeared to hamper the ability of nocturnal predators to reach aphids more quickly on the collard host plants”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend accounting for natural-enemy behavior and plant traits when designing polycultures.
Verbatim
e0“considering natural enemy behaviour and plant characteristics when designing polyculture systems are vital for attaining conservation biological control success”
e1“collard host plants”
The same questions in other papers
intercropping · pest · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Positive and negative results
14 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.