HAL Id: hal-02633093
https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-02633093
Submitted on 27 May 2020
HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- entific research documents, whether they are pub- lished or not. The documents may come from teaching and research institutions in France or abroad, or from public or private research centers.
L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés.
review
Pia Parolin, Cécile Bresch, Christine Poncet
To cite this version:
Pia Parolin, Cécile Bresch, Christine Poncet. Biocontrol plants and functional diversity in biological control of the red spider mite Tetranychus urticae: A review. International Journal of Agricultural Policy and Research, 2015, 3 (4), pp.298-312. �hal-02633093�
International Journal of Agricultural Policy and Research Vol.3 (4), pp. 298-312, April 2015 Available online at http://www.journalissues.org/IJAPR/
http://dx.doi.org/10.15739/IJAPR.041
Copyright © 2015 Author(s) retain the copyright of this article ISSN 2350-1561
Review
Biocontrol plants and functional diversity in biological control of the red spider mite Tetranychus urticae : A
review
Accepted 20 March, 2015
Pia Parolin*, Cécile Bresch
and
Christine Poncet
INRA Sophia Antipolis – Department of Theoretical and
Applied Ecology in Protected Environments and Agrosystems
(TEAPEA); France.
*Corresponding Author E-mail: pia.parolin@sophia.inra.fr
Tel: +33 4 92 38 65 96 Fax: +33 4 92 38 66 77
This review aims at better understanding the employment of biocontrol plants in order to enhance the stability of populations of predatory mites in crop systems, with the ultimate goal to reduce pesticide use and to control pest mites on roses. We analyzed if plant species used in a banker plant system influenced the success in terms of quality of the harvested plant and of pest/predator numbers under greenhouse conditions, aiming at using conditions which correspond to the practice of the local producers in Southern France. The main hypothesis was that the presence of different species of biocontrol plants causes the presence of different numbers of predators and pests with a consequent different impact on crop health in a crop-pest-predator system, depending on the plants’ functional attributes.
Mainly plants with domatia were efficient. They increased the number of predators, stabilized their presence throughout the weeks of experiments, and reduced numbers of spider mites. The function of domatia was analysed through additional experiments which lead to the conclusion that plants with domatia can significantly enhance biological control of the red spider mite, and that especially Viburnum tinus is suited to be employed under the climatic conditions of the Mediterranean area.
Key words: biological pest control, biocontrol plants, banker plants, integrated pest management (IPM), domatia, Neoseiulus californicus, Phytoseiulus persimilis, Tetranychus urticae, Viburnum tinus.
INTRODUCTION
Biological pest management, employed as alternative to chemical control, can rely on the use of beneficial organisms for pest control (Casey et al., 2007, Poncet et al., 2012). Different methods are used to favour the establishment of beneficial organisms such as natural enemies or predators in integrated pest management (IPM) crop systems, depending on the species and their requirements (Bottrell et al., 1998). The employment of biocontrol plants (Parolin et al., 2014a) or secondary plants (Parolin et al., 2012 a, b) raised with the primary crop may enhance pest management purposes under certain circumstances (Warfe and Barmuta, 2004). An increase in species diversity and more importantly in functional diversity and structural complexity of plants is known to
grant a larger range of microhabitat niches, and to enable the persistence of higher species diversity of beneficial organisms (Tylianakis and Romo, 2010).
The following review focuses on the biological control of the red spider mite Tetranychus urticae (Acari:
Tetranychidae), one hundred years after a scientific review on its biology and pest characteristics was published by Ewing (1914). We analyse the role of biocontrol plants (sensu Parolin et al. 2014a) to enhance the stability of the population of different species of predatory mites and protect rose as ornamental crops. Biocontrol plants are plants which are intentionally added to a crop system aiming at the enhancing of crop productivity by pest attraction and/or pest regulation and thus contribute to
Figure 1: Scheme indicating possible interactions between the trophic levels in a system with a crop plant, pest and predatory mites, and a biocontrol plant, in this case a banker plant. The processes of multitrophic interactions are non-exclusive. Solid black lines indicate direct interactions, and white arrows indicate indirect interactions (mediated by another component of the system). Lines with arrows indicate a positive effect in the direction of the arrows, and lines with circles indicate negative effects in the direction of the circles (Original scheme see Parolin et al. 2012b, 2014a).
increasing biocontrol services, which ultimately can lead to increased sustainability of the cropping systems (Parolin et al. 2014a).
A special type of biocontrol plants are banker plants (Frank 2010, Huang et al. 2011) which may provide alternative food and shelter for the predatory mites (Pratt
& Croft 2000, Skirvin & Fenlon 2001). Banker plants may sustain a reproducing population of predators and provide long-term pest suppression (Frank 2010, Huang et al. 2011).
In a series of experiments with rose crops in greenhouses in Southern France, the efficient installation of the predatory mites Neoseiulus (Amblyseius) californicus (McGregor) (Arachnidae, Acari, Phytoseiidae) and Phytoseiulus persimilis Athias-Henriot (Phytoseiidae) was tested to control T. urticae. Different interactions are hypothesized between the trophic levels (Figure 1).
Due to the scarcity of clear definitions and categorizations of the effects of plants added to crop systems with the aim to increase predator installation, the knowledge on what was then named “secondary plants”
was summarized and the most commonly used terms were given a clear and distinct definition, and their most important functional characteristics for increased pest management were highlighted (Table 1 and 2, Parolin et al., 2012a, b).
These and other secondary plants may act as efficient biocontrol tools. Therefore the new term “biocontrol
plants” was introduced to deal with such secondary plants which are specifically suited to enhance biological control in integrated pest management (IPM) and which encompasses the aforementioned types of secondary plants.
We defined “biocontrol plants” as “plants which are intentionally added to a crop system with the intent to enhance crop productivity by mutual benefit, pest attraction and/or pest regulation and thus contribute to an increase of the efficiency of biological control systems, which finally leads to increased crop productivity”.
Main questions and hypotheses
The intention was to find local plant species to be used as biocontrol plants to enhance the reproduction and continuous release of mite predators in greenhouses and to understand the mechanisms of their efficiency.
Experimental evidence for the efficiency of banker plants is rare, especially with respect to plant morphology as key function. We analyzed if plant species used in a banker plant system influenced the success in terms of quality of the harvested plant, pest/predator numbers and quality of the banker plants of biological control under greenhouse conditions. This should correspond to the practice of local producers in Southern France.
The main hypothesis was that different species of BP originate different numbers of predators and pests with a
Parolin et al. 300
Table 1. Commonly used terms for secondary plant types and their direct and/or indirect effects on crop plants and pest regulating functions (main function black, secondary functions grey) (Original table see Parolin et al. 2012a).
Effect on: Plant Pests/pathogens Natural enemies
Trophic level: 1st 2nd 3rd
Secondary plant type:
Enhancing nutrition /chemical defense
Repelling Inter-cepting Early
detection Attracting pests away from the crop
Attracting Feeding
(the adults) Maintaining population Companion
Repellent Barrier Indicator Trap Insectary Banker
Table 2. Definition and main characteristics of different types of secondary plants (Original table see Parolin et al. 2012b).
Type of secondary plant Definition Aims Characteristics and functions
Banker plant A banker plant is the plant component of the banker plant system, which, together with alternative food and beneficial organisms, is “a rearing and release system purposefully added to or established in a crop for control of pests in greenhouses or open field” (Huang et al. 2011).
Increase the probability of establishment of beneficial organisms. Sustain a reproducing population of beneficial organisms, within a cropping system, that will provide long-term pest suppression.
Biological control agents are released onto the banker plants and as they reproduce and increase in numbers, they spread out into the rest of the crops, representing a mini-rearing system for the beneficial organisms. An advantage of banker plant systems over augmentative biological control is preventive control without repeated, expensive releases of beneficial organisms (Frank 2010).
Barrier plant Plants are “used within or bordering a primary crop for the purpose of disease suppression"
(Deol and Rataul 1978).
Disease suppression and/or interception of pests and/or pathogens. Reduce spread of diseases or pests.
They are used within or bordering a primary crop. High, tall plants may act as mechanical barriers that reduce the total number of aphids landing on the protected crop (Fereres 2000). A non-susceptible crop can be mixed with the crop to be protected, so that the intercrop provides camouflage, decreases the movement and spread, and possibly also acts as a source of beneficial organisms (Thresh 1982).
Companion plant A companion plant is an intercrop that influences the first trophic level by enhancing nutrition and/or chemical defence of the crop plants. In addition, it might have repelling and/or intercepting effects on pests and pathogens and attract natural enemies, or provide food for natural enemies (Parolin et al. 2012 a).
Enhance the growing conditions
for the crop plants. Plants are grown close to a crop plant in horticulture and agriculture, they directly influence the first trophic level (Kuepper and Dodson 2001; Finch et al. 2003) by (i) enhancing flavour: some plants alter the flavour of other plants, (ii) fixing nitrogen: legumes are able to fix atmospheric nitrogen with Rhizobium bacteria; this is for their own use but also benefits neighbouring plants, (iii) shelter and protection: tall plants may protect other species through shading or by providing a windbreak, (iv) biochemical pest suppression: some plants produce chemicals that suppress or repel pests and protect neighbouring plants (Ode 2006).
Indicator plant Species or variety which makes early detection of pests and pathogens easier, and thus is more cost-effective in detecting pest and disease symptoms on a crop (Parolin et al. 2012 a).
Species or varieties that are more prone to an insect or disease than the desired crop.
May intercept pests.
The plant provides characteristics which enable a pest to establish earlier than on the crops, thus providing enough time for IPM to be installed on the crops.
Table 2. Cont.
Insectary plant An insectary plant is a flowering plant which attracts and possibly maintains, with its nectar and pollen resources, a population of natural enemies which contribute to biological pest management on crops (Parolin et al. 2012 a).
Provide extended season of floral resources for insects (Fiedler et al. 2007). Attract beneficial organisms such as parasitic wasps and hoverflies (Heimpel and Jervis 2005).
Selecting plants which flower from early to late in the season, and/or have specific floral structures, beneficial organisms are attracted by plants with extrafloral nectaries or by flowers with readily accessible pollen and nectaries (Colley and Luna 2000; Ambrosino et al. 2006). Beneficial organisms produced on insectary plants may disperse into the crops and thus protect them from pests (Quarles and Grossman 2002; Heimpel and Jervis 2005;
Pontin et al. 2006).
Repellent plant Intercropping culture which repels pests and/or pathogens thanks to the aversion caused by natural chemical substances emitted by these plants (Parolin et al. 2012 a).
Used to keep pest organisms
away from the main culture. These plants are part of an intercropping culture which repels pests and/or pathogens (Ibrahim et al. 2001) thanks to the aversion caused by natural chemical substances emitted by these plants (Hay 1986; Pfister and Hay 1988; Parolin et al. 2012 a).
Trap plant Plants grown in “plant stands that are, per se or via manipulation, deployed to attract, divert, intercept, and/or retain targeted insects or the pathogens they vector in order to reduce damage to the main crop” (Shelton and Badenes-Perez 2006).
Allow early detection and monitoring of pests and diseases.
Also used as a component of pest suppression strategies (Shelton and Badenes-Perez 2006) because trap plants can be sprayed with pesticides when pests reach high densities on these plants (thus acting as a dead end for pest populations).
Trap plants are more attractive to a particular pest species than the main crop (Murphy 2004;
Jindal et al. 2012), i.e., the pest is concentrated on the trap plants (Lamb 2006). Some types of trap plants can only support low levels of pest survival, thereby giving a similar effect as spraying with insecticides (Khan et al. 2007).
consequent different impact on crop health in a crop-pest- predator system, depending on their functional attributes.
The identification of these attributes was a major goal.
What makes a secondary plant an efficient biocontrol plant, and how can biological pest control be increased without major costs for local producers?
METHODS Choice of plants
The tested crop plants were the ornamental rose (Rosa sonia Meilland var. ‘Sweet Promise’, Rosaceae). Potential species of biocontrol plants were chosen basing on their local origin or their traditional employment as crop plants in the Mediterranean area. We screened the available floras and literature and selected eight plant species (Table 3). We chose species with different physiognomic and morphological characteristics, some with hairy leaves and stems, others with waxy surfaces, and others with domatia.
Growth forms ranged from herbs (Eleusine, Lycopersicon) over little structured physiognomy with few free standing leaves (e.g. Capsicum, Sonchus) to very dense canopies with many leaves and many stem bifurcations (e.g. Viburnum).
Two champions
Viburnum tinus and Vitis riparia.
Viburnum tinus is a native plant in Southern Europe, with Mediterranean climate, and Vitis riparia is a commonly raised crop in these regions (Figure 2). These two plant species are well adapted to the local climate, and can easily be grown in open fields and greenhouses in the region, where they can be applied as banker plants for the mentioned species of predatory mites. The disadvantage of Vitis riparia is that it forms long winding plants which grow very big and form strong grips on crop plants and infrastructure. They must be cut and controlled in their growth which is intensive work. It may however be useful for the connectivity of the plants which is essential for the movement of predatory mites in the greenhouse (Casey et al., 2007).
After a first series of experiments, we focused more on Viburnum tinus and its characteristics. A literature review which brings all available knowledge about the biology and its applications together is in preparation.
Pest mite
Two-spotted red spider mites, T. urticae, were reared on rose and bean plants in the laboratory before the
Parolin et al. 302
Table 3. Plants employed in the experiments to serve as banker plants for Neoseiulus californicus (Original table see Parolin et al. 2012c, 2013a).
Species Common name Family woody /
weedy annual /
perennial growth
habit wax
surface glandular
trichomes non- glandular trichomes
domatia Presence and reproduction of Tetranychus urticae
Presence and reproduction of Neoseiulus californicus Capsicum annuum
L. Sweet Pepper Solanaceae weedy A/P subshrub
forb/herb ++ - - - Moderate / proliferates
well (Sarwar et al., 2011) Very low Lycopersicon
lycopersicum Kar.
var. saint pierre
Tomato Solanaceae weedy A/P forb/herb + + + - Low to abundant
(Castagnoli et al., 1999) Avoids Crepis nicaeensis
Balb French Hawk's-
beard Asteraceae weedy A forb/herb + - + - Moderate Moderate
Sonchus oleraceus L. Common
sowthistle Asteraceae weedy A forb/herb + - - - Low Avoids
Eleusine coracana
(L.) Gaertn. Finger millet Poaceae weedy A graminoid - - + - Low Very low
Rosa var. Sonia Rose Rosaceae woody P subshrub + - - - High, proliferates well
(Morandi et al., 2000;
Sabelis, 1990)
Low
Viburnum tinus L. Laurustinus Caprifoliaceae woody P shrub +++ + + + Avoids Very high
Vitis riparia Michx.
var. Gloire de Montpellierclone 1030
Grapevine Vitaceae woody P vine ++ - + + Low High
Figure 2: Viburnum tinus (left), and Vitis riparia (right) in the greenhouse grown in 2l pots and left uncontrolled for 2 months.
Figure 3: Experiment to test the efficiency of 8 plant species as banker plants for rose crops. From Parolin et al. 2013a
Figure 4: Percentage of banker plants bearing more than 5 predators N. californicus on the entire plant in the experiment (left) and bearing eggs of Tetranychus urticae (right) at the end of the experiment (12 weeks). Original graph see Parolin et al. 2013a
experiment started.
Predatory mites
Neoseiulus californicus is a generalist predatory mite that feeds on various arthropods and pollen. The commercial strain Spical® was ordered at Koppert’s. Pollen from Pinus halepensis P. Mill. collected on trees outside the greenhouse was added to all plants at regular intervals in order to avoid food limitation for the predators. The amount of pollen used was little, it was sprayed over the plants.
EXPERIMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS
Experiment 1: “Testing banker plants for biological control of mites on roses” (Parolin et al. 2013a)
We analysed the quality of the rose crops and the responses of the populations of predatory mites N. californicus and pest mites T. urticae to eight species of potential BP with
different morphological structures. In a long-term experiment in a greenhouse which lasted 12 weeks, every banker plant was paired with a rose plant and infested with pest and predatory mites (Figure 3). The measured parameters were vitality and growth of the plants (both, banker and rose crop) and numbers of predators, pests and their eggs.
Reproduction and establishment of the pest and predatory mites differed between plant species as well as plant growth and vitality. The results indicated that out of 8 chosen local plant species, Viburnum tinus and Vitis riparia were the most efficient BP in this combination of pest- predator species. Their presence resulted in best health of the rose crops, highest number of predatory mites and lowest numbers of pests (Figure 4, 5).
Experiment 2: “Multiple choice for mites: first food, then home“ (Parolin et al. 2014b)
The influence of pollen and presence of domatia on the predatory mite N. californicus were analyzed. In
Parolin et al. 304
Figure 5: Mean number (± SD) of pest mites Tetranychus urticae (black bars) and predatory mites N. californicus (white bars) on the selected banker plant species after 12 weeks of experiment (mean number of mite individuals per plant, n = 7 plants per species). Red line: threshold of pest infestation, basing on the definition that plants are classified as infested if more than 5 mobile mites were found on the plant (Casey et al. 2007).
Original graph see Parolin et al. 2013a.
Figure 6: Presence of the predatory mite N. californicus on detached leaves of the 8 plant species with different food options (only prey T. urticae, only pollen, pollen + prey T. urticae put on the leaves), in percent – where 100 % means that at least one mite individual is present on the leaves of one plant species in all eight repetitions. Original graph see Parolin et al. 2014b.
experiments with mites, pollen is frequently added in order to provide alternative food. In an experiment we tested the influence of pollen on the choice of Phytoseiid mites. We offered two food options to the predatory mite N.
californicus, employed to control T. urticae.
On detached leaves in the laboratory we compared the
presence of predatory mites on leaves with pollen and T.
urticae vs. only pollen available as food (Figure 6, 7). We used the leaves of eight plant species which are potential banker plants for this predatory mite species. After 24 hours we counted the mites on the leaves of the different host plants and found huge differences between species of
Figure 7: Presence of the pest mite T. urticae (adults and eggs) on detached leaves of the 8 plant species in percent – where 100 % means that at least one mite individual is present on the leaves of one plant species in all eight repetitions. Original graph see Parolin et al.
2014b.
host plants and between food availability. We did not find eggs of the predatory mites as the duration of the experiment was not long enough. The results of our study indicate that a) if available, the predatory mites prefer to be on the plants where most T. urticae are present (roses and sweet pepper Capsicum annuum), b) if only pollen is available, the two plant species which bear domatia are preferred (Vitis riparia and Viburnum tinus), and c) overall, the predatory mites prefer certain plant species where they can hide – mainly those which bear domatia, even if their prey T. urticae is absent.
Experiment 3: “Presence of arthropod pests on eight species of banker plants in a greenhouse“ (Parolin et al.
2013b)
The installation of spontaneous arthropod species was analysed in a greenhouse experiment with different species of banker plants. Biocontrol plants may attract pests which in turn attack the crop plants. Therefore, we analyzed the presence of spontaneous arthropod species on the 8 species of BP along the experimental period (Parolin et al. 2013b).
Despite all precautions, after 4-8 weeks there were several undesired arthropod species, mostly well-known pests, on the BP in the greenhouse. We documented their installation over a time span of three months. We found 6 species of arthropods, whiteflies Trialeurodes vaporariorum Westwood (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae), rose aphids Rhodobium porosum L. (Hemiptera: Aphididae), gall midges
Feltiella acarisuga Vallot (Arthropoda, Insecta), western flower thrips Frankliniella occidentalis Pergande (Thysanoptera: Thripidae), parasitic wasps Encarsia sp.
(Hymenoptera: Aphelinidae), and predatory mites P.
persimilis Athias-Henriot (Phytoseiidae). The different species of plants attracted different species of arthropods, linked to the specific chemical properties and morphological traits such as leaf hairiness, wax surfaces, or the presence of domatia. The pest arthropods did not reproduce on the available plants in the experimental phase and thus did not represent a problem for the crops. This shows that the mere presence of arthropods in a greenhouse must not seriously affect the crop system as long as there is a certain diversity of plant species present.
It also shows that the 8 chosen species of BP are suitable, under the given conditions, to enhance the crop system without acting as involuntary multipliers for pests.
Also the roses associated to the 8 species of BP differed in their degree of bearing spontaneous arthropod species (Figure 8 A-F, 9 A-D). Whiteflies, gall midges and thrips were present only on roses associated to certain species of BP. Aphids were present on roses associated to all species of BP. The roses associated to Vitis riparia were less infested by other arthropods than those associated to the other species of BP. Only aphids colonized them. This study reveals how a diversified crop system can contribute to a partial ecological equilibrium even in open glasshouse conditions, and that secondary plants in general and banker plants in particular may play an important role in this
Parolin et al. 306
Figure 8 A-F: Percentage of banker plants bearing more than 5 individuals of pest organisms not intentionally introduced into the experiment after three months: (A) >5 individuals of whiteflies, (B) >5 individuals of aphids, (C) 1-3 individuals of gall midges Feltiella, (D) 1-3 individuals of thrips, (E) 1-3 individuals of the parasitic wasp Encarsia sp., and (F) 1-3 individuals of the predatory mite Phytoseiulus persimilis. Original graphs see Parolin et al. 2013b.
context (Frank, 2010; Huang et al. 2011; Parolin et al.
2012c, 2013b).
Experiment 4: “Predatory mites Neoseiulus californicus and Phytoseiulus persimilis chose plants with domatia“
(Bresch et al. in press)
We then subjected the mites to a multiple choice experiment: if predatory and pest mites have the choice between eight species of plants which stand close to each other and are connected by a high number of leaves, twigs and artificial wooden bridges, which plant do they prefer?
There was an infestation with other arthropods which we monitored. We offered the pest and predator organisms 8 species of plants without restrictions of food (pollen thrown in) and moving (bridges built between plants, plants in close touch; four repetitions; Figure 10). All present arthropods had clear preferences for some plants, the distribution was not uniform (Figure 11).
There was a tendency towards a preference of N.
californicus and P. persimilis for three plant species out of the 8 offered. The two predator mites were mostly installed on Rosa, Viburnum tinus and Vitis riparia. We suppose that the heavy infestation of the rose plants with Tetranychus urticae was responsible for the high number of predator mites found on the rose plants because this food supply is highly attractive for the predators. The relatively high number of predators of both species on Viburnum tinus and Vitis riparia is probably related to the fact that these are the only two species among the 8 potential banker plants which possess domatia.
The distribution of pest organisms was not uniform among the 8 plant species. The plants which were least affected by pest species were Viburnum tinus and Vitis riparia. However, with the present data we cannot state whether there is no preference of the pests for these plant species, or if the pests specifically avoid the relatively high number of predator mites present on these two species.
Since all the organisms could migrate to all the plants freely in this experiment, this may indicate that the presence of
Figure 9 A-D: Percentage of roses associated to different species of BP bearing other pest organisms not intentionally introduced into the experiment after three months: (A) whiteflies, (B) aphids, (C) gall midges Feltiella, (D) thrips. Original graphs see Parolin et al. 2013b.
predatory mites is not the determining factor for pest distribution on the plants. It is probably related to the plant characteristics. Spider mites prefer the roses among all other plants, and so do Feltiella, Planococcus and Aphis.
Since Viburnum tinus and Vitis riparia hosted most predators and less or no pests were present on them, out of the chosen 8 species these two are best suited as potential
banker plants for rose crop raising. Predators were easily found in the domatia formed by hairs near the leaf veins where they hide and reproduce.
In a repetition of the experiment using only detached leaves instead of whole plants in order to reduce the number of variables and focus on the available domatia we found similar results to those found on the whole plants,
Parolin et al. 308
Figure 10: Experimental setting with all plants placed in direct contact in a plastic tray. From Bresch et al. in press.
Figure 11: Acarodomatia on the lower leaf side of Viburnum tinus (left) and Vitis riparia (centre).
Acarodomatium on Viburnum tinus with a predatory mite N. californicus (right). From Parolin et al. 2011.
which indicates that the leaves (and not the stems or other parts) were mainly responsible for the presence of mites.
Experiment 5: “Distribution of acarodomatia and predatory mites on Viburnum tinus“ (Parolin et al.
2011)
The banker plants Viburnum tinus and Vitis riparia bear acarodomatia (Figure 11) which proved to be particularly efficient in increasing the installation and propagation of predatory mites and be little affected by additional pests.
Plants of Viburnum tinus were screened for presence and distribution of domatia and predatory mites. A mean number of 26.7 domatia per plant, with high variability between plants, was found (Figure 12). The leaves had a mean of 0.6 domatia per leaf.
Leaf position of domatia on the plant (Figure 13) and exposure to sunlight (light / shade; Figure 14) were not significantly related to the number of domatia present.
N. californicus installed themselves efficiently on V. tinus and reduced the number of the common pest mite T. urticae.
The results indicate that there is a close positive relationship between the distribution of domatia and the presence of the predatory mite N. californicus on V. tinus.
Domatia were found more frequently on old and mature leaves (Figure 15, 16, 17), which is an important factor to take into account in the practical use of V. tinus as banker plant, when considering cutting cycles and the frequency of replacement of the banker plants in a greenhouse system.
DISCUSSION
Our experimental results indicate that the employment of secondary plants added to the crop system is promising for the control of the spider mite under the given circumstances. However, several disadvantages became evident:
Figure 12: Number of domatia per plant on 3 plants of Viburnum tinus. Original graph see Parolin et al. 2011.
Figure 13: Number of domatia on leaves of Viburnum tinus, in relation to leaf position on the plant. Original graph see Parolin et al. 2011.
Figure 14: Number of domatia on leaves of Viburnum tinus (A) in relation to leaf exposure to sunlight and number of predatory mites (B) depending on the exposition to sunlight of Viburnum tinus. Original graph see Parolin et al. 2011.
Parolin et al. 310
Figure 15: Number of domatia on leaves of Viburnum tinus in relation leaf age. Original graph see Parolin et al. 2011.
Figure 16: Number of predators N. californicus in leaves of Viburnum tinus depending on leaf age. Original graph see Parolin et al. 2011.
Figure 17: Number of predators N. californicus in leaves of Viburnum tinus depending on leaf position. Original graph see Parolin et al. 2011.
- The overall employment of banker plants is costly (raising and maintenance of the plants).
- The distribution of predatory mites is reduced in space due to their little size and lacking capability of movement in the third dimension (flying). The employment of woody bridges and a high number of banker plants in the greenhouse could efficiently increase the control of pests (Casey and Parrella 2005) but this is even more cost and maintenance intensive.
- The use of winding plants with domatia such as Vitis sp. was highly efficient but causes problems as the plants grow very big and form strong grips on crop plants and infrastructure. They must be cut and controlled in their growth which is intensive work.
These disadvantages bring up the question of using alternatives to living plants in the system. If domatia are particularly efficient in the propagation and stabilization of populations of predatory mites, can we find alternatives to living plants which mimick domatia and provide the needed shelter for reproduction? A series of experiments is needed to test this. The overall goal is to answer the question if plants with domatia can harbor predators all year round, or if we can find a material to replace living plants with domatia with the aim to enhance the stability and increase of predatory mite populations in IPM greenhouses with crop plants infested by Tetranychus urticae. With this knowledge, the employment of biological control to reduce the presence of the red spider mites on roses may be enhanced and the need for dangerous pesticides reduced, especially given the extreme record of pesticide resistance of T. urticae (Van Leeuwen et al. 2010, Grbic et al. 2011, Dermauw et al. 2013).
REFERENCES
Ambrosino MD, Luna JM, Jepson PC, Wratten SD (2006).
Relative frequencies of visits to selected insectary plants by predatory hoverflies (Diptera: Syrphidae), other beneficial insects, and herbivores. Environmental Entomology 35:394-400.Crossref
Bottrell DG, Barbosa P, Gould F (1998). Manipulating natural enemies by plant variety selection and modification: A realistic strategy? Annu Rev Entomol 43:347-367. Crossref
Bresch C, Ruiz G, Poncet C, Parolin P (under review).
Predatory mites Neoseiulus californicus and Phytoseiulus persimilis chose plants with domatia. J. Mediterranean Ecol.
Casey C, Newman J, Robb K, Tjosvold SA, MacDonald JD, Parrella MP (2007). IPM program successful in California greenhouse cut roses. California Agriculture 61:71-78.
Crossref
Casey CA, Parrella MP (2005). Evaluation of a mechanical dispenser and interplant bridges on the dispersal and efficacy of the predator, Phytoseiulus persimilis (Acari : Phytoseiidae) in greenhouse cut roses. Biological Control 32, 130-136.Crossref
Castagnoli M, Liguori M, Simoni S (1999). Effect of two different host plants on biological features of Neoseiulus californicus (Mcgregor). Int. J. Acarol. 25:145- 150.Crossref
Colley MR, Luna JM (2000). Relative attractiveness of potential beneficial insectary plants to aphidophagous hoverflies (Diptera: Syrphidae). Environ. Entomol.
29(5):1054-1059. Crossref
Deol GS, Rataul HS (1978). Role of various barrier crops in reducing the incidence of cucumber mosaic virus in chilli, Capsicum annum Linn. Indian J. Entomol, 40:261–264.
Dermauw W, Wybouw N, Rombauts S, Menten B, Vontas J, Grbic M, Clark R.M, Feyereisen R, Van Leeuwen T (2013).
A link between host plant adaptation and pesticide resistance in the polyphagous spider mite Tetranychus urticae.
Ewing HE (1914). The common red spider or spider mite.
Oregon Agricultural College. Experiment Station 1883:1- 96.
Fereres A (2000). Barrier crops as a cultural control measure of non-persistently transmitted aphid-borne viruses. Virus Research 71:221-231.Crossref
Fiedler A, Tuell J, Isaacs R, Landis D (2007). Attracting Beneficial Insects with Native Flowering Plants. Michigan State University Extension Bulletin E-2973. 6 pp.
Finch S, Billiald H, Collier RH (2003). Companion planting – do aromatic plants disrupt host-plant finding by the cabbage root fly and the union fly more effectively than non-aromatic plants? Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 109:183-195.Crossref
Frank SD (2010). Biological control of arthropod pests using banker plant systems: Past progress and future directions. Biological Control 52:8-16. Crossref
Grbić M, Van Leeuwen T, Clark RM, Rombauts S, Rouzé P, Grbić V, et al (2011). The genome of Tetranychus urticae reveals herbivorous pest adaptations. Nature 479:487-92.
Crossref
Hay ME (1986). Associational plant defenses and the maintenance of species diversity: turning competitors into accomplices. Am Natural 128:617-641.Crossref Heimpel GE, Jervis MA (2005). Does floral nectar improve
biological control by parasitoids? In Wäckers FL, van Rijn PCJ, Bruin J (Eds.). Plant-provided food for carnivorous insects: A protective mutualism and its applications, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. pp. 267- 304.Crossref
Huang N, Enkegaard A, Osborne LS, Ramakers PMJ, Messelink GJ, Pijnakker J, Murphy G (2011). The banker plant method in biological control. Critical Reviews in Plant Sci. 30:259-278.Crossref
Ibrahim MA, Kainulainen P, Aflatuni A, Tiilikkala K, Holopainen JK (2001). Insecticidal, repellent, antimicrobial activity and phytotoxicity of essential oils with special reference to limonene and its suitability for control of insect pests. Agric. Food Sci. Fin 10:243-259.
Jindal J, Hari NS, Hari JK (2012). Potential of Napier millet, Pennisetum purpureum × P. glaucum, as a trap crop for managing Chilo partellus populations on maize. Int.
J. Pest Manage. 58:1-7. Crossref
Khan ZR, Midega CAO, Wadhams LJ, Pickett JA, Mumuni A (2007). Evaluation of Napier grass (Pennisetum purpureum) varieties for use as trap plants for the management of African stemborer (Busseola fusca) in a push–pull strategy. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 124:201-211. Crossref
Kuepper G, Dodson M (2001). Companion Planting: Basic Concept and Resources. NCAT Agriculture Specialist and Project Intern. ATTRA Publication #IP125/71.
Lamb EM (2006). Indicator plants, Trap crops, and Banker plants: Tools for Greenhouse IPM Ornamental Crops. IPM E-Newsletter.
Morandi MAB, Sutton JC, Maffia LA (2000). Relationships of aphid and mite infestations to control of Botrytis cinerea by Clonostachys rosea in rose (Rosa hybrida) leaves.
Murphy G (2004). Trap Crops and Banker Plants - thinking outside the pest management tool box. Greenhouse Floriculture IPM Specialist/OMAFRA.
Ode PJ (2006). Plant chemistry and natural enemy fitness:
Effects on Herbivore and Natural Enemy Interactions.
Annual Rev. Entomol., 51:163-185.Crossref
Parolin P, Bresch C, Bout A, Ruiz G, Poncet C, Desneux N (2012c). Testing banker plants for predator installation.
Acta Horticulturae 927:211-217.
Parolin P, Bresch C, Brun R, Bout A, Boll R, Desneux N, Poncet C (2012a). Secondary plants used in biological control: a review. Int. J. Pest Manag. 58(2):91-100.
Crossref
Parolin P, Bresch C, Muller MM, Errard A, Poncet C (2011).
Distribution of acarodomatia and predatory mites on Viburnum tinus. J. Mediterranean Ecol. 11:41-48.
Parolin P, Bresch C, Poncet C, Desneux N (2012b).
Functional characteristics of secondary plants for increased pest management. Int. J. Pest Manag.
58(4):369-377.
Parolin P, Bresch C, Poncet C, Desneux N (2014a).
Introducing the term 'Biocontrol Plants' for Integrated Pest Management. Scientia Agricola 71(1):77-80. Crossref Parolin P, Bresch C, Ruiz G, Desneux N, Poncet C (2013a).
Testing banker plants for biological control of mites on roses. Phytoparasitica 41:249-262.Crossref
Parolin P, Bresch C, Ruiz G, Poncet C (2013b). Presence of arthropod pests on eight species of banker plants in a greenhouse. Ecologia Aplicada 12:1-8.
Parolin P, Bresch C, Ruiz G, Poncet C (2014b). Multiple choice for mites: first food, then home. Int. J. Agric. Pol.
Res. 2(2):49-54.
Pfister CA, Hay ME (1988). Associational plant refuges:
Parolin et al. 312
convergent patterns in marine and terrestrial communities result from differing mechanisms. Oecologia, 77 :118-129.Crossref
Poncet C, Mailleret L, Desneux N, Muller M, Bout A, Brun R, Pizzol J, Boll R, Bresch C, Parolin P, Fatnassi H (2012). The ecological approach of greenhouse agro-ecosystem:
practical interest for IPM. Acta Horticulturae 927:173- 185.
Pontin DR, Wade MR, Kehrli P, Wratten SD (2006).
Attractiveness of single and multiple species flower patches to beneficial insects in agroecosystems. Annals Appl. Biol. 148:39-47.Crossref
Pratt P, Croft B (2000). Banker plant: evaluation of release strategies for predatory mites. J. Environ. Hort.18:211- 217.
Quarles W, Grossman J (2002). Insectary Plants, Intercropping and Biological Control. The IPM Practitioner 24(3):1-11.
Sabelis MW (1990). How to analyse prey preference when prey density varies? A new method to discriminate between the effects of gut fullness and prey type composition. Oecologia 82:289-298. Crossref
Sarwar M, Kongming W, Xuenong X, Endong W (2011).
Evaluations of four mite predators (Acari: Phytosiidae) released for suppression of spider mite infesting protected crop of sweet pepper (Capsicum annuum L.).
Afr. J. Agric. Res 6:3509-3514.
Shelton AM, Badenes-Perez FR (2006). Concepts and applications of trap cropping in pest management. Annu Rev. Entomol. 51:285-308.Crossref
Skirvin D, Fenlon J (2001). Plant species modifies the functional response of Phytoseiulus persimilis (Acari:
Phytoseiidae) to Tetranychus urticae (Acari:
Tetranychidae): implication for biological control. Bul.
Entomol. Res. 91:61-67.
Thresh M (1982). Cropping practices and virus spread. Ann.
Rev. Phytopathol. 20:193-218.Crossref
Tylianakis JM, Romo CM (2010). Natural enemy diversity and biological control: Making sense of the context- dependency. Basic and Appl. Ecol. 11:657-668. Crossref Van Leeuwen T, Vontas J, Tsagkarakou A, Dermauw W,
Tirry L (2010). Acaricide resistance mechanisms in the two-spotted spider mite Tetranychus urticae and other important Acari: A review. Insect Biochemistry and Molecular Biol. 40:563-572.Crossref
Warfe DM, Barmuta LA (2004). Habitat structural complexity mediates the foraging success of multiple predator species. Oecologia 141:171–178.Crossref
