Hort. Sci. (Prague), 2012, 39(2):89-96 | DOI: 10.17221/26/2011-HORTSCI

Attractiveness of flowering plants for natural enemies

T. Kopta1, R. Pokluda1, V. Psota2
1 Department of Vegetable Science and Floriculture, Faculty of Horticulture, Mendel University in Brno, Lednice, Czech Republic
2 Department of Zoology, Fisheries, Hydrobiology and Apiculture, Faculty of Agriculture, Mendel University in Brno, Brno, Czech Republic

The set of 7 flowering plant species (Anethum graveolens, Calendula officinalis, Centaurea cyanus, Fagopyrum esculentum, Foeniculum vulgare, Tagetes patula and Vicia faba) was compared for their attractiveness to natural enemies such as ladybeetles (Coccinellidae), hoverflies (Syrphidae), ichneumon wasps (Ichneumonidae) and predatory bugs (Orius spp.) during the years 2008-2010. The trial was held in an organic open field located at the Faculty of Horticulture of Mendel University in Brno, Lednice, Czech Republic. The software Canoco (RDA analysis) was used in order to see the relations between plant and insect communities. Flowering plants A. graveolens, C. cyanus, C. officinalis, F. vulgare and F. esculentum were found to be the most attractive for the evaluated beneficial insects. The most abundant beneficial insects were hoverflies (562008, 1542009, 13242010) and ladybeetles (652008, 1162009, 5112010) followed by predatory bugs (142008, 472009, 1382010) and ichneumon wasps (202008, 142009, 822010).

Keywords: flowers; beneficial insects; visiting; biodiversity

Published: June 30, 2012  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Kopta T, Pokluda R, Psota V. Attractiveness of flowering plants for natural enemies. Hort. Sci. (Prague). 2012;39(2):89-96. doi: 10.17221/26/2011-HORTSCI.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Alomar O., Gabarra R., González O., Arnó J., 2006. Selection of insectary plants for ecological infrastructure in Mediterranean vegetable crops. In: Landscape Management for Functional Biodiversity. IOBC/WPRS Bulletin, 29: 5-8.
    2. Altieri M.A., Nicholls C.I., 2004. Biodiversity and Pest Management in Agroecosystems. 2nd Ed. NY, Food product press: 236.
    3. Ambrosino M.D., Luna J.M., Jepson P.C., Wratten S.D., 2006. Relative frequencies of visits to selected insectary plants by predatory hoverflies (Diptera: Hoverflies), other beneficial insects and herbivores. Environmental Entomology, 35: 394-400. Go to original source...
    4. Bianchi F.J.J.A., Booij C.J.H., Tscharntke T., 2006. Sustainable pest regulation in agricultural landscapes: a review on landscape composition, biodiversity and natural pest control. Proceedings of the Royal Society B., 273: 1715-1727. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    5. Boller E.F., Häni F., Poehling H.M., 2004. Ecological Infrastructures: Ideabook on Functional Biodiversity at the Farm Level. 1st Ed. Switzerland, Agridea: 212.
    6. Branquart E., Hemptinne J.L., 2000. Selectivity in the exploitation of foral resources by hoverfies (Diptera: Syrphinae). Ecography, 23: 732-742. Go to original source...
    7. Carreck N.L., Williams I.H., 2002. Food for insect pollinators on farmland: insect visits to flowers of annual seed mixtures. Journal of Insect Conservation, 6: 13-23. Go to original source...
    8. Fitzgerald J.D., Solomon M.G., 2004. Can flowering plants enhance numbers of beneficial arthropods in UK apple and pear orchards? Biocontrol Science and Technology, 14: 291-300. Go to original source...
    9. Fiedler A.K., Landis D.A., 2007. Attractiveness of Michigan native plants to arthropod natural enemies and herbivores. Environmental Entomology, 36: 751-765. Go to original source...
    10. Heil M, Koch T., Hilpert A., Fiala B., Boland W., Linsenmair K.E., 2001. Extrafloral nectar production of the ant-associated plant, Macaranga tanarius, is an induced, indirect, defensive response elicited by jasmonic acid. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 98: 1083-1088. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    11. Heimpel G.E., Jerwis M.A., 2005. Does nectar improve biocontrol by parasitoids? In: Wackers F., van Rijn P.C., Bruin J. (eds), Plant Provided Food for Carnivorous Insects: a Protective Mutalism and its Applications. London, Chapman & Hall: 267-304. Go to original source...
    12. Miles P.W., Aspinall D., Rosenberg L., 1982. Performance of the cabbage aphid, Brevicoryne brassicae (L.), on waterstressed rape plants, in relation to changes in their chemical composition. Australian Journal of Zoology, 30: 337-346. Go to original source...
    13. Pfiffner L., Luka H., Schlatter M., Lichtenhahn M., 2006. Wildflower strips to reduce lepidopteran pests in cabbage crops. In: Landscape Management for Functional Biodiversity. IOBC/WPRS Bulletin, 29: 97-99.
    14. Rod J., Hluchý M., Zavadil K., Prášil J., Somssich I., Zacharda M., 2005. Obrazový atlas chorob a škůdců zeleniny středení Evropy (A Picture Guide to Diseases and Pests of Vegetables of Central Europe). Brno, Biocont laboratory s.r.o.: 392.
    15. McVean R.I.K., Dixon A.F.G., 2001. The effect of plant drought-stress on populations of the pea aphid Acyrthosiphon pisum. Ecological Entomology, 26: 440-443. Go to original source...
    16. Roy G., Wateau K., Legrand M., Oste S., 2008. Refuges, flower strips, biodiversity and agronomic interest. Communications in agricultural and applied biological sciences, 73: 351-359.
    17. Studer R.M., 1994. Interaction between green apple aphids (Aphis pomi De Geer) and apple plants (Malus domestica Borkh.) subjected to water stress. [Ph.D. Thesis.] Available at http://e-collection.library.ethz.ch/eserv/eth:39497/eth39497-01.pdf (accessed July 5, 2011).
    18. Ter Braak C.J.F., Šmilauer P., 1998. CANOCO Reference Manual and Userʼs Guide to Canoco for Windows: Software for Canonical Community Ordination (version 4). Ithaca, Microcomputer Power: 352.
    19. Thomson J.D., 1981. Spatial and temporal components of resource assessment by fower-feeding insects. Journal of Animal Ecology, 50: 49-59. Go to original source...
    20. Tolasz R., Míková T., Valeriánová A, Voženílek V., 2007. Altas podnebí Česka (Climate Atlas of Czechia). Praha, Olomouc, Český hydrometeorologický ústav, Universita Palackého: 256.
    21. van Rijn P.C.J., Kooijman J., Wäckers F.L., 2006. The impact of floral resources on hoverflies performance and cabbage aphid biological control In: Landscape Management for Functional Biodiversity. IOBC/WPRS Bulletin, 29: 149-152.
    22. Waser N.M., Chittka L., Price M.V., Williams N.M., Ollerton J., 1996. Generalization in pollination systems, and why it matters. Ecology, 77: 1043-1060. Go to original source...
    23. Winkler K., 2005. Assessing the risk and benefits of flowering field edges. Strategic use of nectar sources to boost biological control. [Ph.D. Thesis.] Wageningen, Wageningen University: 118.
    24. Winkler K., Wäckers F., Lenteren J. van., 2006. Strategic use of nectar sources to boost biological control. In: Landscape Management for Functional Biodiversity. IOBC/ WPRS Bulletin, 29: 165-168.

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content