Paper · 2014 · Epsilon Archive for Student Projects (University of Southampton)

Assessing the effects of agroforestry practices on biological control potential in kale (Brassica oleracea acephala) plantations in Western Kenya

Solène Guenat

6
claims
15
verbatim quotes
5
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Agricultural intensification and extension at the expense of forests are known to have a negative impact on biodiversity and ecosystem services. In Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), agriculture provides livelihoods for most of the population and forestry is an important additional income. Agroforestry practices may help to compensate for loss of biodiversity. Pests are an important constraint to agricultural production and their biological control is affected by environmental degradation. Management practices such as alteration of the field micro-environment and increases in landscape complexity can be efficient non-chemical methods for reducing pest damage. In this study, I examine how the implementation of agroforestry influences biological control in kale (Brassica oleracea var. acephala) plantations in Western Kenya. Twenty fields, either shaded or open, were selected at four settlements in the Trans-Nzoia district of Kenya. Landscape complexity was defined as the percentage of wooded vegetation within a 50 m radius. Pesticide use, mulching practices and the amount of rainfall were recorded as additional explanatory variables. Predation was assessed by (1) egg removal rates, (2) bird exclusion, and (3) predation marks on plasticine caterpillars. Activity density of ground-dwelling predators was assessed with pitfall traps and foliage-dwelling pests and predators were counted on the plants. Aphid parasitism rates were also estimated by counting live aphids and aphid mummies. The effect of shade and landscape complexity, pesticide use, mulching and rainfall was tested by running generalized linear models and selecting the best models based on Akaike Information Criterion adjusted for small sample-sizes. Presence of shade-trees at the local field level was found to be effective in reducing population of both surveyed pests and in increasing aphid parasitism rates and caterpillar predation by birds. Neither the proportion of wooded vegetation in the landscape nor the interaction between local shade and landscape scale tree cover were retained as significant explanatory variables. However, pesticides negatively influenced aphid abundances, predator abundances and egg removal rates while positively influencing caterpillar populations. I conclude that in kale agro-forestry systems of Western Kenya, local management of shade is effective in increasing biological control of pests, but I found no evidence that the proportion of trees in the landscape is important. This can be explained by the small-scale of the analysis and should be investigated with larger scale and stronger differences between agroforestry versus conventional systems. The negative effect of pesticides is also important to note and should be further investigated in order to improve the sustainability of farming practices.

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 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Shade-trees at the local field level reduced the population of both surveyed pests in kale fields compared with open fields.

Treatment
Presence of shade-treese0
Interactor
pestse0pest
Outcome
population of both surveyed pestse0
Direction
reducinge0
Comparator
opene2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica oleracea var. viridis
Brassica oleracea var. viridis · TaxonAnn Perry · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Presence of shade-trees at the local field level was found to be effective in reducing population of both surveyed pests and in increasing aphid parasitism rates and caterpillar predation by birds”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1727–1923 · show in text ↑
e1

“kale (Brassica oleracea var. acephala)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 756–794 · show in text ↑
e2

“either shaded or open”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 840–861 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Shade-trees at the local field level increased aphid parasitism rates in kale.

Treatment
Presence of shade-treese0
Interactor
aphide0pest
Outcome
aphid parasitism ratese0
Direction
increasinge0
Comparator
opene2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica oleracea var. viridis
Brassica oleracea var. viridis · TaxonAnn Perry · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Presence of shade-trees at the local field level was found to be effective in reducing population of both surveyed pests and in increasing aphid parasitism rates and caterpillar predation by birds”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1727–1923 · show in text ↑
e1

“kale (Brassica oleracea var. acephala)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 756–794 · show in text ↑
e2

“either shaded or open”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 840–861 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Shade-trees at the local field level increased caterpillar predation by birds in kale.

Treatment
Presence of shade-treese0
Interactor
caterpillare0pest
Second interactor
birdsAvese0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
caterpillar predation by birdse0
Direction
increasinge0
Comparator
opene2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica oleracea var. viridis
Brassica oleracea var. viridis · TaxonAnn Perry · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Presence of shade-trees at the local field level was found to be effective in reducing population of both surveyed pests and in increasing aphid parasitism rates and caterpillar predation by birds”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1727–1923 · show in text ↑
e1

“kale (Brassica oleracea var. acephala)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 756–794 · show in text ↑
e2

“either shaded or open”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 840–861 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Neither the proportion of wooded vegetation in the landscape nor the interaction between local shade and landscape tree cover were retained as significant explanatory variables.

Treatment
proportion of wooded vegetation in the landscapee0
Outcome
significant explanatory variablese0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica oleracea var. viridis
Brassica oleracea var. viridis · TaxonAnn Perry · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Neither the proportion of wooded vegetation in the landscape nor the interaction between local shade and landscape scale tree cover were retained as significant explanatory variables”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1925–2107 · show in text ↑
e1

“kale (Brassica oleracea var. acephala)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 756–794 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmixedmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pesticides negatively influenced aphid abundances, predator abundances and egg removal rates in kale.

Treatment
pesticidese0
Outcome
aphid abundances, predator abundances and egg removal ratese0
Direction
negatively influencede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica oleracea var. viridis
Brassica oleracea var. viridis · TaxonAnn Perry · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“pesticides negatively influenced aphid abundances, predator abundances and egg removal rates while positively influencing caterpillar populations”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2118–2263 · show in text ↑
e1

“kale (Brassica oleracea var. acephala)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 756–794 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pesticides positively influenced caterpillar populations in kale.

Treatment
pesticidese0
Interactor
caterpillare0pest
Outcome
caterpillar populationse0
Direction
positively influencinge0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica oleracea var. viridis
Brassica oleracea var. viridis · TaxonAnn Perry · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“pesticides negatively influenced aphid abundances, predator abundances and egg removal rates while positively influencing caterpillar populations”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2118–2263 · show in text ↑
e1

“kale (Brassica oleracea var. acephala)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 756–794 · show in text ↑

insecticide · pest · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Positive and negative results

29 papers: 22 positive, 7 negative or no effect

6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 22 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

25 papers more in this group

See all 29 papers →

shade · pest · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 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.