Effects of landscape structure and habitat type on a plant-herbivore-parasitoid community

By A. Kruess. 2003

171 citations recorded by the source corpus.

The effects of local habitat and large-scale landscape factors on species diversity and species interactions were studied using the insect community in stems of the creeping thistle Cirsium arvense. Thistle abundance was higher in fallows than in crop fields and field margins, with fallows providing 67% of thistle abundance within 15 study areas on a landscape scale. Species richness of the herbivores was positively related with thistle abundance, parasitoid species richness was influenced by habitat type and was positively correlated with herbivore species richness. The abundance of herbivores and parasitoids was affected by local factors such as habitat type and host abundance, but also by landscape factors such as the percentage of non-crop area and the isolation of habitats. The infestation rate caused by the agromyzid Melanagromyza aeneoventris was positively related to percent non-crop area, whereas the parasitism rate of this fly increased with increasing habitat diversity on the landscape scale. For these two interactions and for total herbivore abundance, a scale-dependency of the landscape effects was found. The results emphasize that biological diversity and ecological functions within a plant-insect community are not only affected by local habitat factors but also by large-scale landscape characteristics. Hence, to improve future agri-environmental schemes for biodiversity conservation and biological control large-scale landscape effects and their scale-dependency should be considered.

Subfields: Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Insect Science, Plant Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3d07ad30a6e6ca59bde932c5be7db32bb6c43b29

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

In Insect Science

In Plant Science

Citations in the corpus

Effects of habitat fragmentation at different trophic levels in insect communities (2005, background): “…over several years in the same locations (van der Meijden & van der Veen-van Wijk 1997, van Nouhuys & Hanski 1999, 2002, Eber 2001), over multiple insect generations (Amarasekare 2000b, Cronin 2004), or during one visit or over a season (Antolin & Strong 1987, Zabel & Tscharntke 1998, Kruess 2003).”
Plant-insect interactions in fragmented landscapes. (2004, background): “There is empirical evidence that effects of habitat arrangement on biological control is of considerable importance in simple but not in complex landscapes (89, 114, 159).”
Spatial scale of observation affects α, β and γ diversity of cavity‐nesting bees and wasps across a tropical land‐use gradient (2006, background): “At smaller spatial scales, factors such as habitat type (Kruess, 2003; Weibull et al., 2003); habitat area (Ritchie & Olff, 1999; James & Shine, 2000; Krauss et al., 2003; Summerville & Crist, 2004); management intensity (Klein et al., 2002; Perfecto et al., 2003); and inter- or intraspecific…”
Spider diversity in cereal fields: comparing factors at local, landscape and regional scales (2005, background): “…recognized that not only local factors but also the spatial surroundings of habitat patches may have a strong influence on local diversity and abundance of organisms (Kareiva & Wennergren, 1995; Dauber et al., 2003; Duelli & Obrist, 2003; Jeanneret et al., 2003; Kruess, 2003; Holland et al., 2004).”
Landscape effects on the complex of Bactrocera oleae parasitoids and implications for conservation biological control (2009, background): “First, the importance of connectivity on one side (Cronin 2003), and of spatial extent on the other side (Kruess 2003), should be taken into account when designing ecological infrastructures for conservation biological control.”
Sustainable pest regulation in agricultural landscapes: a review on landscape composition, biodiversity and natural pest control (2006, background): “This is also true for many insect species and, in particular, natural enemies of insect herbivores (Duelli et al. 1999; Klein et al. 2002; Duelli & Obrist 2003; Kruess 2003; Schmidt & Tscharntke 2005b).”
Trophic interactions in a changing world (2004, background): “Habitat fragmentation is in some cases known to have a disproportionately detrimental effect upon higher trophic levels (predators, parasitoids), than lower trophic levels (plants, herbivores), which are more abundant (Kruess, 2003).”
Factors and scales potentially important for saproxylic beetles in temperate mixed oak forest (2007, background): “For instance, the surrounding landscape seems to influence species richness of birds in riparian forests (Saab, 1999); bark beetles in boreal forests (Peltonen et al., 1998); saproxylic beetles in boreal forest (Okland et al., 1996); fungus gnats in temperate forest (Okland, 1996; Okland et al., 200”
Predation on exposed and leaf-rolling artificial caterpillars in tropical forests of Papua New Guinea (2012, background): “…katerina.tvardikova@gmail.com abrupt edges in disturbed areas are associated with higher predator (Didham et al. 1996, Faveri et al. 2008, GonzálezGómez et al. 2006, Kareiva 1987, Saab 1999, Sieving & Willson 1998) or parasite abundances (Doak 2000, but see Kruess 2003) in fragmented forests.”
Landscape composition and configuration differently affect trap-nesting bees, wasps and their antagonists (2014, background): “Interacting species of different trophic levels may respond to different components of agricultural intensification and at different spatial scales (Holland et al., 2004; Kruess, 2003; Tscharntke et al., 2012).”
Insect pests in winter oilseed rape affected by field and landscape characteristics (2008, methodology): “Isolation of OSR fields in the landscape was calculated by using a negative exponential weighting function, where isolation was calculated based on the distances of neighbouring OSR fields to our study field and OSR area of a given spatial scale using the formula: Isolation OSRi 1⁄4 "S(e#OSR areaj)/”
Using functional groups to investigate community response to environmental changes: two grassland case studies (2007, background): “They are, therefore, more vulnerable to the direct and indirect (e.g. habitat fragmentation; Kruess, 2003) effects of any disturbance (Hedlund et al., 2004).”
Up or down in space? Uniting the bottom-up versus top-down paradigm and spatial ecology (2007, background): “…reversed: The natural enemies of many herbivores living in agricultural fields often emanate from surrounding pieces of non-cultivated land, and an increased landscape complexity increases the rates of mortality caused by natural enemies (Marino and Landis 1996, Kruess 2003, Thies et al. 2003).”