Abstract
Polyculture agroforestry is a new sustainable agriculture system modelled on the plant structural and species diversity of native oak savanna. Advocates of the system claim that it will advance conservation goals by providing ecosystem services like habitat provision and carbon sequestration, but also provide localized ecosystem services that benefit farmers. Pest control by wild predators and parasitoids could be an especially valuable service in fruits and nuts, the main cash crops in polyculture agroforestry systems. To understand how diverse agroforestry’s unique traits would affect pest control, I evaluated the response of arthropod pest and natural enemy guilds to variations in shrub layer composition and alley mowing. Shrub composition affected guilds on shrubs but had little effect on arthropods in neighboring apple trees. Pest guilds linked to apple damage were not affected by shrub composition, and pest damage rates were unchanged. Mowing did cause arthropods in groundcover to use shrubs and trees as refuge habitat. However, the shrubs and trees that offered suitable refuge were alternate hosts to pest insects. Mowing thus increased abundance of pests but not enemies, likely resulting in higher rates of pest damage rather than the opposite. I found no evidence that either strategy has potential to improve pest outcomes. Overall, I conclude that pest management in polyculture agroforestry systems is likely to be an obstacle for farmers rather than a boon. This fact should be made clear to potential adopters of the system, and future designs should choose crops that are tolerant or immune to pest damage to the extent possible.
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 12
Claim · model-written summary
Shrub composition affected arthropod guilds on shrubs.
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e0“Shrub composition affected guilds on shrubs”
e1“neighboring apple trees”
Claim · model-written summary
Shrub composition had little effect on arthropods in neighboring apple trees.
- Taxon
- apple trees
Malus domesticae0 - Treatment
- Shrub compositione0
- Outcome
- arthropods in neighboring apple treese0
- Direction
- little effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Shrub composition affected guilds on shrubs but had little effect on arthropods in neighboring apple trees.”
Claim · model-written summary
Shrub composition did not affect apple-damage-linked pest guilds.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- shrub compositione0
- Interactor
- Pest guildse0pest
- Outcome
- Pest guilds linked to apple damagee0
- Direction
- not affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Pest guilds linked to apple damage were not affected by shrub composition”
Claim · model-written summary
Pest damage rates were unchanged with shrub composition.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- shrub compositione0
- Interactor
- Pest guildse0pest
- Outcome
- pest damage ratese0
- Direction
- unchangede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Pest guilds linked to apple damage were not affected by shrub composition, and pest damage rates were unchanged.”
Claim · model-written summary
Mowing drove groundcover arthropods to use shrubs and trees as refuge.
- Taxon
- shrubs and treese0
- Treatment
- Mowinge0
- Outcome
- arthropods in groundcover to use shrubs and trees as refuge habitate0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Verbatim
e0“Mowing did cause arthropods in groundcover to use shrubs and trees as refuge habitat.”
Claim · model-written summary
Suitable refuge shrubs and trees were alternate hosts for pest insects.
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e0“the shrubs and trees that offered suitable refuge were alternate hosts to pest insects.”
Claim · model-written summary
Mowing increased pest abundance.
- Taxon
- apple treesMalus domesticae1
- Treatment
- Mowinge0
- Interactor
- pestse0pest
- Outcome
- abundance of pestse0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mowing thus increased abundance of pests but not enemies”
e1“neighboring apple trees”
Claim · model-written summary
Mowing did not increase natural enemy abundance.
- Taxon
- apple treesMalus domesticae1
- Treatment
- Mowinge0
- Interactor
- enemiese0biocontrol_agent
- Outcome
- enemiese0
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mowing thus increased abundance of pests but not enemies”
e1“neighboring apple trees”
Claim · model-written summary
Mowing likely increased pest damage rates.
- Taxon
- apple treesMalus domesticae1
- Treatment
- Mowinge0
- Interactor
- pestse0pest
- Outcome
- rates of pest damagee0
- Direction
- highere0
- Qualifier
- likelye0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mowing thus increased abundance of pests but not enemies, likely resulting in higher rates of pest damage rather than the opposite.”
e1“neighboring apple trees”
Claim · model-written summary
Neither shrub composition nor mowing showed potential to improve pest outcomes.
- Taxon
- apple treesMalus domesticae1
- Outcome
- potential to improve pest outcomese0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“I found no evidence that either strategy has potential to improve pest outcomes.”
e1“neighboring apple trees”
Claim · model-written summary
The author concludes pest management in polyculture agroforestry will likely be an obstacle for farmers.
- Taxon
- apple treesMalus domesticae1
- Outcome
- pest management in polyculture agroforestry systems is likely to be an obstacle for farmerse0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“pest management in polyculture agroforestry systems is likely to be an obstacle for farmers”
e1“neighboring apple trees”
Claim · model-written summary
Future system designs should select crops tolerant or immune to pest damage.
Verbatim
e0“future designs should choose crops that are tolerant or immune to pest damage to the extent possible.”
The same questions in other papers
pruning · pest · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
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.