Abstract

Agroecosystem plant diversification can enhance pest biological regulation and is a promising alternative to pesticide application. However, the costs of competition for resources between plants may exceed the benefits gained by pest regulation. To disentangle the interactions between pest regulation and competition, we developed a generic process‐based approach that accounts for the effects of an associated plant and leaf and root pests on biomass production. We considered three crop–plant associations that differ in competition profiles, and we simulated biomass production under wide ranges of both pest regulation rates and resources’ availability. We analyzed outputs to quantify the pest regulation service level that would be required to attain monoculture yield and other production goals. Results showed that pest regulation requirements were highly dependent on the profile of resource interception of the associated plant and on resources’ availability. Pest regulation and the magnitude of competition between plants interacted in determining the balance between nitrogen and radiation uptake by the crop. Our findings suggest that productivity of diversified agroecosystems relative to monoculture should be optimized by assembling plants whose characteristics balance crops’ resource acquisition. The theoretical insights from our study draw generic rules for vegetation assemblage to optimize trade‐offs between pest regulation and production. Our findings and approach may have implications in understanding, theorizing and implementing agroecosystem diversification. By its generic and adaptable structure, our approach should be useful for studying the effects of diversification in many agroecosystems.

Highlights

  • According to the resource concentration hypothesis (Root, 1973), intensive cropping systems, in which crops are cultivated at high densities in large fields, are prone to pest infestation

  • | 8608 but still efficient in limiting yield losses, pest management should be based on a systemic approach that accounts for multiple pests and that combines biopesticides, biological control agents, pheromones, ecological engineering of plant biodiversity, and cultural practices (Birch, Begg, & Squire, 2011; Lewis, Van Lenteren, Phatak, & Tumlinson Iii, 1997)

  • We considered the minimal D value, Dmin, to be the minimal pest regulation effort (MPRE) required to compensate for yield losses due to competition (Fig. 2B)

Read more

Summary

| INTRODUCTION

According to the resource concentration hypothesis (Root, 1973), intensive cropping systems, in which crops are cultivated at high densities in large fields, are prone to pest infestation. | 8608 but still efficient in limiting yield losses, pest management should be based on a systemic approach that accounts for multiple pests and that combines biopesticides, biological control agents, pheromones, ecological engineering of plant biodiversity, and cultural practices (Birch, Begg, & Squire, 2011; Lewis, Van Lenteren, Phatak, & Tumlinson Iii, 1997) In this sense, agroecosystem plant diversification is increasingly considered a promising way to restore ecosystem functions, including ecological pest regulation (Altieri, 1999; Gurr, Wratten, & Luna, 2003; Leakey, 2014; Malézieux et al, 2009; Tscharntke et al, 2012). We analyzed model outputs to gain theoretical and generic knowledge about crop–plant–pest interactions in diversified agroecosystems

| METHODS
References for calibration
| DISCUSSION

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.