Beneficial Insects in Agriculture: Enhancement of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services

Farm scale assessment of the impacts of biodiversity enhancement on the financial and environmental performance of mixed livestock farms in New Zealand

Systemic insecticides, such as neonicotinoids, are a major contributor towards beneficial insect declines. This has led to bans and restrictions on neonicotinoid use globally, most noticeably in the European Union, where four commonly used neonicotinoids (imidacloprid, thiamethoxam, clothianidin and thiacloprid) are banned from outside agricultural use. While this might seem like a victory for conservation, restrictions on neonicotinoid use will only benefit insect populations if newly emerging insecticides do not have similar negative impacts on beneficial insects. Flupyradifurone and sulfoxaflor are two novel insecticides that have been registered for use globally, including within the European Union. These novel insecticides differ in their chemical class, but share the same mode of action as neonicotinoids, raising the question as to whether they have similar sub-lethal impacts on beneficial insects. Here, we conducted a systematic literature search of the potential sub-lethal impacts of these novel insecticides on beneficial insects, quantifying these effects with a meta-analysis. We demonstrate that both flupyradifurone and sulfoxaflor have significant sub-lethal impacts on beneficial insects at field-realistic levels of exposure. These results confirm that bans on neonicotinoid use will only protect beneficial insects if paired with significant changes to the agrochemical regulatory process. A failure to modify the regulatory process will result in a continued decline of beneficial insects and the ecosystem services on which global food production relies.

Agroforestry is able to address two of society’s great contemporary issues, climate change mitigation and food security. Characterised by the presence of trees within croplands and farmland, agroforestry has been recognised for its ability to enhance biomass and soil carbon while sustaining agricultural production. Agroforestry’s many environmental and ecosystem services - including water quality improvement, erosion control, and biodiversity enhancement - may also help achieve a number of other United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, including renewable energy, responsible consumption and life on land. Yerba mate (YM) is a tree species that is native to South America, which has traditionally been harvested for its leaves, which are used to prepare a traditional infusion. Over the years, new YM products have emerged, including dehydrated powder for instant preparation. The cultivation of YM has evolved from traditional forest stands to large-scale monoculture plantations, but there is recent interest in sustainable agroforestry approaches. Research in Argentina's Misiones Province has demonstrated the benefits of YM being shaded by other trees in agroforestry systems, including increased yields of YM and an enhancement of preferred flavours of the leaves, as well as increased soil fertility, carbon sequestration and protection against extreme weather conditions. To continue to improve upon YM agroforestry, the I 049 Agroforestry project plans to study YM cultivation in agroforestry arrangements to better support sustainable agroforestry practices and innovative marketing strategies in Argentina.

Beneficial insects provide critical ecosystem services and in agriculture their contribution in pollination and pest control is widely evident (Losey and Vaughan, 2006; Kremen and Chaplin-Kramer, 2007). Globally, 35% of food production benefits from pollinator services (Klein et al., 2007). In many systems, pollination has been provided by the domesticated honey bee (primarily Apis mellifera), but the reliability of pollination services by wild pollinators is becoming increasingly valued (Garibaldi et al., 2013, 2014). These wild pollinators, the majority of which are bee species, persist independently in the ecosystem by relying on multiple resources to complete their lifecycles (Bohart, 1972). Similarly, natural enemies, such as insect predators and parasitoids, provide vital pest control and also persist independently in the farmscape. Although these beneficial insects are not directly managed for their ecosystem services, the farm landscape surrounding targeted crop fields can be modified to increase their abundance and diversity resulting in increased ecosystem services to support a sustainable agricultural system (Landis et al., 2000; Hannon and Sisk, 2009; Holzschuh et al., 2012). Managing farmscapes for these wild beneficial insects is especially critical as insects are threatened by human-mediated landscape disturbances (Tscharntke et al., 2005). With wild bee populations in decline (Potts et al., 2010), there is increasing interest in managing for wild bees by incorporating pollinator habitat into farmland. The concept of setting aside land specifically for wildlife within a farmscape is not new (Baudry et al., 2000), however, the addition of wildflower plantings or saving natural wildflower areas is a specific strategy that can be adopted for its multi-functionality in supporting both pollinators and natural enemies. It is especially valuable in that it can be modified and designed to fit specific cropping systems, landscapes, and support the lifecycles of a community of unmanaged beneficial insects. Here we consider how these variables have been examined in recent pollinator habitat studies, and discuss additional considerations to optimize wildflower plantings to benefit multiple ecosystem services.

The review paper delves into the various applications of beneficial insects in agriculture and their vital functions in advancing environmentally friendly agricultural methods. It has been acknowledged that beneficial insects, such as pollinators, parasitoids, and predators, contribute to agricultural yield, biodiversity preservation, and integrated pest management (ipm). The efficacy of these insects in managing pest populations and augmenting pollination services has been underscored by a review of several research and case studies. Despite known obstacles like habitat needs and species-specific conservation initiatives, beneficial insects nevertheless have a substantial potential to improve environmental health and global food security. The goal of this review is to present a thorough understanding of the functions of beneficial insects while promoting more study and application to maximize their application in sustainable agriculture.

Silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) have antimicrobial and insecticidal properties and they have been considered for their potential use as insecticides. While they do, indeed, kill some insects, two broader issues have not been considered in a critical way. First, reports of insect-lethal AgNPs are often based on simplistic methods that yield nanoparticles of nonuniform shapes and sizes, leaving questions about the precise treatments test insects experienced. Second, we do not know how AgNPs influence beneficial insects. This work addresses these issues. We assessed the influence of AgNPs on life history parameters of two agricultural pest insect species, Heliothis virescens (tobacco budworm) and Trichoplusia ni (cabbage looper) and a beneficial predatory insect species, Podisus maculiventris (spined soldier bug), all of which act in agroecosystems. Rearing the two pest species on standard media amended with AgNPs led to negligible influence on developmental times, pupal weights, and adult emergence, however, they led to retarded development, reductions in adult weight and fecundity, and increased mortality in the predator. These negative effects on the beneficial species, if also true for other beneficial insect species, would have substantial negative implications for continued development of AgNPs for insect pest management programs.

Beneficial insects provide natural ecosystem services such as biological control of pests, soil formation, nutrient cycling and pollination of plants. Beneficial insects include pollinators important in the essential pollination process of all plants, and natural enemies of pests such as parasitoids and predators which are important in the suppression of pest damage to crops. Knowledge on management techniques to attract beneficial insects in the agricultural fields is a way forward to enhance agro ecosystems for increased crop production. Therefore, proper understanding and identification of natural enemies, as well as pollinators in agricultural fields, is essential in promoting biological control and pollination activity. Natural enemies and pollinators, within legume fields, play a key role in ensuring sustainable production, especially in smallholder farms. There is a limited understanding of beneficial insects and the ecosystem services they offer to the agricultural production process in much of sub-Saharan Africa. This paper reviewed and provided existing knowledge on beneficial insects in bean fields. This will give the basis for research on beneficial insects in bean fields and practices that encourage their populations.

Ecosystem services of fast-growing tree plantations: A case study on integrating social valuations with land-use changes in Uruguay

Seagrass ecosystem services show complex spatial patterns and associations

Recent advancements in next-generation sequencing (NGS) technology and bioinformatics tools have revealed a vast array of viral diversity in insects, particularly RNA viruses. However, our current understanding of insect RNA viruses has primarily focused on hematophagous insects due to their medical importance, while research on the viromes of agriculturally relevant insects remains limited. This comprehensive review aims to address the gap by providing an overview of the diversity of RNA viruses in agricultural pests and beneficial insects within the agricultural ecosystem. Based on the NCBI Virus Database, over eight hundred RNA viruses belonging to 39 viral families have been reported in more than three hundred agricultural insect species. These viruses are predominantly found in the insect orders of Hymenoptera, Hemiptera, Thysanoptera, Lepidoptera, Diptera, Coleoptera, and Orthoptera. These findings have significantly enriched our understanding of RNA viral diversity in agricultural insects. While further virome investigations are necessary to expand our knowledge to more insect species, it is crucial to explore the biological roles of these identified RNA viruses within insects in future studies. This review also highlights the limitations and challenges for the effective virus discovery through NGS and their potential solutions, which might facilitate for the development of innovative bioinformatic tools in the future.

Cultivation and cropping are major causes of destruction and degradation of natural ecosystems throughout the world. We face the challenge of maintaining provisioning services while conserving or enhancing other ecosystem services and biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. There is a range of possibilities within two types of intervention, namely “land sharing” and “land separation”; the former advocates the enhancement of the farmed environment, but the latter a separation between land designated for farming versus conservation. Land sharing may involve biodiversity-based agricultural practices, learning from traditional farming, changing from conventional to organic agriculture and from “simple” crops and pastures to agro-forestry systems, and restoring or creating specific elements to benefit wildlife and particular services without decreasing agricultural production. Land separation in the farmland context involves restoring or creating non-farmland habitat at the expense of field-level agricultural production—for example, woodland on arable land. Restoration by land sharing has the potential to enhance agricultural production, other ecosystem services and biodiversity at both the field and landscape scale; however, restoration by land separation would provide these benefits only at the landscape scale. Although recent debate has contrasted these approaches, we suggest they should be used in combination to maximize benefits. Furthermore, we suggest “woodland islets”, an intermediate approach between land abandonment and farmland afforestation, for ecological restoration in extensive agricultural landscapes. This approach allows reconciliation of farmland production, conservation of values linked to cultural landscapes, enhancement of biodiversity, and provision of a range of ecosystem services. Beyond academic research, restoration projects within agricultural landscapes are essential if we want to halt environmental degradation and biodiversity loss.

Feeding an estimated nine billion people by the year 2050 will be challenging. Though controversy surrounds the extent to which food production needs to increase, versus a focus on distributional issues and reduced waste, there is a need to reduce the environmental impacts of current farming practices and to avoid further depletion of biodiversity. Over the last century, biodiversity loss has accompanied agricultural intensification so a business-as-usual scenario gives little cause for optimism. In the last decade, studies in many countries have demonstrated the benefits of “alternative” agricultural systems that can be as productive as conventional agriculture on a per-hectare basis, despite requiring fewer pesticides and fertilizers. These systems employ ecological intensification whereby ecosystem services such as nutrient provisioning, natural pest control, and enhanced pollination replace anthropogenic inputs. Enhancement of biodiversity in these systems is not confined to planned diversity such as multiple crops but includes many other taxa to the extent that farmlands can be important complements to nature reserves and other protected areas. Ecological engineering is one approach that can guide the diversification of farmlands to deliver multiple ecosystem services agricultural intensification based on an ecological evidence base offers significant scope for a win–win scenario whereby future food production needs are more strongly supported by ecosystem services whilst simultaneously motivating farmers to accommodate biodiversity.

The existence of tradeoffs and synergies between ecosystem services emphasize the need to understand the preferences of ecosystem service beneficiaries. In this paper, the preferences of ecosystem services provided by different types of urban forests in South Korea are analyzed to provide insights on the improved distribution and supply of ecosystem services. The Delphi technique was utilized to elicit expert opinions on the categorization of ecosystem services provided by urban forests. A choice experiment on 500 Seoul citizens was then conducted to analyze the preferences for 7 types of ecosystem services – food provision, water flow regulation, noise reduction, microclimate regulation & air quality improvement, moderation & prevention of landslides, biodiversity enhancement, recreation, and health services. An AHP analysis was carried out to investigate experts’ ranking of the relative importance of these ecosystem services. The results showed that except for microclimate regulation & air quality improvement, Seoul citizens’ preferences for different types of urban forests did not differ according to the attribute level of each ecosystem service. There were also no significant differences between the preferences for urban natural parks and urban neighborhood parks, possibly indicating that Seoul citizens perceive them to be similar. Secondly, the results indicate a higher preference for urban forests with certain features, such as a higher proportion of fruit trees and deciduous trees, higher leaf area, denser tree canopy cover, wider distances between trees, and higher levels of species richness. The enhancement of biodiversity was considered the most influential service for Seoul citizens in their choice of urban forests. Seoul citizens were willing to pay 12,176 KRW/year and 21,036 KRW/year to enhance the level of biodiversity from “poor” to “average” and from “average” to “rich,” respectively. Finally, preferences and relative importance for almost all ecosystem services were different for citizens and experts. As it is impossible to maximize the provision of all ecosystem services concurrently, policymakers and urban forest managers need to consider citizens’ preferences and opinions when designing and managing urban forests in order to increase user satisfaction and welfare.

Soil and water are the essence of life and are essential for food production, and for urban, industrial and recreational infrastructures. It is a known fact that soils are degraded and desertified by natural and anthropogenic factors, and also due to abrupt climate changes. Thus, soil must be used in such a way as to protect, enhance and restore its functions. The survival of a projected 9.5 billion people by 2050 depends on sustainable management of world soils. Sustainability implies maintenance and enhancement of soil quality through judicious land use, recommended soil management practices and conservation‐effective measures. The strategy is to enhance net primary production and agronomic yields per unit area, input and time through sustainable intensification by conservation tillage, mulch farming, complex cropping/farming systems including cover cropping and agroforestry, integrated nutrient management, disease‐suppressive soils, drip irrigation or subirrigation, condensation irrigation, precision or soil‐specific farming, delivering plant nutrients and water directly to the roots and so on. These practices enhance soil quality and its ecosystem services, whereas increase in soil and ecosystem C pools also adapts to and mitigates climate change. As a win‐win strategy, it enhances the environment, advances food security and promotes sustainable development. Key Concepts: Sustainable intensification: It implies producing more from less while reducing the environmental foot print of agro ecosystems. The aim is to minimize losses of the inputs (fertilizers, water, and energy) and enhance use efficiency. Soil quality restoration: Term ‘soil quality’ refers to the productive capacity of soil. Quality of soil under agro ecosystems is prone to degradation by land misuse and soil mismanagement. Thus, achieving sustainable management necessitate restoration of soil quality to enhance ecosystem functions. Soil organic matter management: Soil organic matter is a key determinant of soil quality. The threshold or critical level of soil organic matter in the root zone of arable lands is 1.1–1.5% on weight basis. Yet, organic matter of most soils managed by extractive farming practices is as low as 0.1%. The goal of sustainable management is to enhance soil organic matter content to above the threshold level. Soil degradation processes: Decline in quality of soils under agro ecosystems is caused by a range of degradation processes. These include physical processes (e.g. decline in aggregation, crusting, compaction, and erosion), chemical processes (e.g. acidification, salinization, nutrient depletion, and elemental imbalance) and biological processes (e.g. depletion of soil organic matter, reduction in microbial biomass, and decline in soil biodiversity). Ecosystem services of soils: The term refers to economic and ecologic goods and services provided by the soil. Important among these are production of food, fiber, fuel etc.; purification of water, enhancement of bio diversity, sequestration of carbon, and moderation of climate among others. Soil management for adaptation to climate change: Judicious management of soil to restore its quality can enhance its resilience to extreme events (e.g. drought, heat wave, and inundation) and uncertain and variable climate. Adaptation is important to minimizing the risks of changing climate. Climate‐strategic agriculture: It refers to adoption of agricultural practices, which reduce the risks and avail of any new opportunities which may emerge from change in climate. Soils and global food security: Being the most basic resource, sustainable management of soils is essential to advancing global food security. Between 2005 and 2050, food production must be doubled to meet the needs of growing population and changing dietary preferences toward animal‐based over plant‐based foods.

Agriculture, an ecosystem transformed by humans for the purpose of supplying food, fiber and biofuel, can provide people a host of benefits, or ecosystem services (ES). While markets exist for farm products, many of today’s central agro-environmental policy concerns are related to ES that lack complete markets, such as regulating ES and recreational, aesthetic and cultural ES. Valuation of non-marketed ES linked to agriculture is needed to improve their utilization and efficient provision. Some ES that facilitate agricultural production or provide natural amenities can be perceived by people through various natural resources and landscapes on farmlands and surrounding areas. One indirect way to measure the value of ES is via what people pay for the lands that provide them. In this hedonic study, the agricultural land price is used to reveal marginal values of those resources and landscapes, and to infer the degree of ES capitalization into land prices in southwestern Michigan. Results suggest that recreational and aesthetic services are largely capitalized through lakes, rivers, wetlands, woodlands and conservation lands. Some production-supporting regulating services may have also been partially capitalized. Certain ES from the land parcel and its surroundings are unlikely to be capitalized due to unawareness or little realized value (e.g., beneficial insects and soil microbial communities), as well as missing incentive for large scale public goods (e.g., carbon sequestration and biodiversity). In comparing sales prices and appraisal values, we find that sales prices reflect amenity benefits better than appraisal values, which tend to emphasize agricultural production potential and built capital values.