Paper · 2015 · Journal of Applied Entomology

Effects of conservation strip and crop type on natural enemies ofDelia radicum

U. Nilsson; L.‐M. Rännbäck; P. Anderson; et al.

9
claims
19
verbatim quotes
9
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Abstract This 3‐year field study investigated the combined effect of floral resources and perennial shelter habitats (i.e. conservation strips), and crop rotation in supporting natural enemies of the cabbages root fly, D elia radicum . Habitat manipulation with conservation strips increased the overall catches of hymenopteran parasitoids. However, conservation strips did not increase parasitism by either of the two dominant parasitoid species, T rybliographa rapae and A leochara bipustulata , in any study year. In fact, higher parasitism was found in control plots in the second year. This could be explained by parasitoid mobility and higher patch detectability, as more plants in the control plots were infested with D . radicum larvae. Conservation strips did not result in increased predation of D . radicum eggs. However, the activity densities of two B embidion species were correlated with egg predation. The species assemblage distribution of epigeal predators was best explained by seasonal period, followed by year and, to a low extent, crop type, while treatment with conservation strips had no effect. However, during the egg laying peak of D . radicum , a higher number of A . bipustulata , an important larval predator was observed in conservation strips during one study year. In conclusion, positive effects of conservation strips were demonstrated for abundance of some natural enemies of D . radicum , but a consistent increase in performance could not be adequately demonstrated due to experimental set‐up, the short timescale and the complex landscape in which our study site was located.

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 9

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Conservation strips increased overall hymenopteran parasitoid catches.

Treatment
conservation stripse0
Interactor
hymenopteran parasitoidse0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
overall catches of hymenopteran parasitoidse0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Brassica oleracea var. capitata
Brassica oleracea var. capitata · TaxonThamizhpparithi Maari · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Habitat manipulation with conservation strips increased the overall catches of hymenopteran parasitoids.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 236–340 · show in text ↑
e1

“cabbages root fly”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 200–217 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Conservation strips did not increase parasitism by Trybliographa rapae.

Treatment
conservation stripse0
Interactor
T rybliographa rapaee0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
parasitisme0
Direction
did not increasee0

Not reportedComparator

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

Brassica oleracea var. capitata
Brassica oleracea var. capitata · TaxonThamizhpparithi Maari · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“conservation strips did not increase parasitism by either of the two dominant parasitoid species, T rybliographa rapae and A leochara bipustulata”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 350–495 · show in text ↑
e1

“cabbages root fly”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 200–217 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Conservation strips did not increase parasitism by Aleochara bipustulata.

Treatment
conservation stripse0
Interactor
A leochara bipustulatae0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
parasitisme0
Direction
did not increasee0

Not reportedComparator

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

Brassica oleracea var. capitata
Brassica oleracea var. capitata · TaxonThamizhpparithi Maari · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“conservation strips did not increase parasitism by either of the two dominant parasitoid species, T rybliographa rapae and A leochara bipustulata”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 350–495 · show in text ↑
e1

“cabbages root fly”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 200–217 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Parasitism was higher in control plots in year two.

Outcome
parasitisme0
Direction
highere0
Qualifier
in the second yeare0
Comparator
control plotse0

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

Brassica oleracea var. capitata
Brassica oleracea var. capitata · TaxonThamizhpparithi Maari · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“higher parasitism was found in control plots in the second year”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 526–589 · show in text ↑
e1

“cabbages root fly”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 200–217 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Conservation strips did not increase predation of D. radicum eggs.

Treatment
Conservation stripse0
Interactor
D . radicume0pest
Outcome
predation of D . radicum eggse0
Direction
did not result in increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Brassica oleracea var. capitata
Brassica oleracea var. capitata · TaxonThamizhpparithi Maari · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Conservation strips did not result in increased predation of D . radicum eggs.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 745–823 · show in text ↑
e1

“cabbages root fly”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 200–217 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Activity densities of two Bembidion species correlated with egg predation.

Interactor
B embidion speciese0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
egg predatione0

Not reportedDirection

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

Brassica oleracea var. capitata
Brassica oleracea var. capitata · TaxonThamizhpparithi Maari · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the activity densities of two B embidion species were correlated with egg predation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 833–916 · show in text ↑
e1

“cabbages root fly”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 200–217 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Seasonal period best explained epigeal predator assemblage distribution, then year and crop type.

Treatment
crop typee0
Outcome
species assemblage distribution of epigeal predatorse0
Qualifier
seasonal period, followed by year and, to a low extent, crop typee0

Not reportedDirection

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

Brassica oleracea var. capitata
Brassica oleracea var. capitata · TaxonThamizhpparithi Maari · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The species assemblage distribution of epigeal predators was best explained by seasonal period, followed by year and, to a low extent, crop type”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 918–1062 · show in text ↑
e1

“cabbages root fly”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 200–217 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Conservation strips had no effect on epigeal predator assemblage distribution.

Treatment
conservation stripse0
Outcome
species assemblage distribution of epigeal predatorse1
Direction
no effecte0

Not reportedComparator

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

Brassica oleracea var. capitata
Brassica oleracea var. capitata · TaxonThamizhpparithi Maari · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“treatment with conservation strips had no effect”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1070–1118 · show in text ↑
e1

“species assemblage distribution of epigeal predators”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 922–974 · show in text ↑
e2

“cabbages root fly”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 200–217 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

More Aleochara bipustulata were observed in conservation strips during one egg laying peak.

Treatment
conservation stripse0
Interactor
A . bipustulatae0biocontrol_agent
Second interactor
D . radicume0pest
Outcome
number of A . bipustulatae0
Direction
highere0
Qualifier
during one study yeare0

Not reportedComparator

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

Brassica oleracea var. capitata
Brassica oleracea var. capitata · TaxonThamizhpparithi Maari · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“during the egg laying peak of D . radicum , a higher number of A . bipustulata , an important larval predator was observed in conservation strips during one study year”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1129–1296 · show in text ↑
e1

“cabbages root fly”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 200–217 · show in text ↑