A comparison of candidate banker plants for management of pests in lettuce.

Agricultural systems are often lacking in resources for natural enemies. Providing alternative prey can help natural enemies persist through periods of low pest abundance, although this approach has been rarely commercially implemented in open field crops. In this study, we tested the potential of eight plant species to provide alternative prey to natural enemies in lettuce fields over a 2-yr period. Results showed that the tested plants would not act as sources of the lettuce aphid Nasonovia ribisnigri Mosley (Hemiptera: Aphididae), the primary lettuce pest. Of the banker plants tested, barley contained high numbers of non-lettuce aphids and appeared to provide reliable habitat for hoverfly larvae. However, lettuce aphids were present on lettuce early in the season, and may have dwarfed any effects of nonlettuce aphids on natural enemy populations. Numbers of hoverfly larvae were also high in lettuce, but did not appear to track numbers of non-lettuce aphids on banker plants. In contrast, numbers of lacewing larvae were highest on plants containing high numbers of non-lettuce aphids, and predatory hemipterans appeared to be associated with numbers of thrips on banker plants. Although barley showed promise as a source of alternative aphids, it did not appear to improve pest control in the adjacent crop.

Foraging Distance of the Argentine Ant in California Vineyards.

Argentine ants, Linepithema humile (Mayr) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), form mutualisms with hemipteran pests in crop systems. In vineyards, they feed on honeydew produced by mealybugs and soft scales, which they tend and protect from natural enemies. Few options for controlling Argentine ants are available; one of the more effective approaches is to use liquid baits containing a low dose of an insecticide. Knowledge of ant foraging patterns is required to estimate how many bait stations to deploy per unit area. To measure how far ants move liquid bait in vineyards, we placed bait stations containing sugar water and a protein marker in plots for 6 d, and then collected ants along transects extending away from bait stations. The ants moved an average of 16.08 m and 12.21 m from bait stations in the first and second years of the study, respectively. Marked ants were found up to 63 m from bait stations; however, proportions of marked ants decreased exponentially as distance from the bait station increased. Results indicate that Argentine ants generally forage at distances <36 m in California vineyards, thus suggesting that insecticide bait stations must be deployed at intervals of 36 m or less to control ants. We found no effect of insecticide on distances that ants moved the liquid bait, but this may have been because bait station densities were too low to affect the high numbers of Argentine ants that were present at the study sites.

Testing baits to control Argentine ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in vineyards.

Liquid baits were evaluated for control of the Argentine ant, Linepithema humile (Mayr) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), and associated mealybug and soft scale pests in California vineyards. In 2003, liquid baits with small doses ofimidacloprid, boric acid, or thiamethoxam dissolved in 25% sucrose water resulted in lower ant and mealybug densities and fruit damage, compared with an untreated control. Similar treatments in a soft scale-infested vineyard showed only a reduction of ant density and fruit infestation in only the boric acid and thiamethoxam treatments. In 2004, commercial and noncommercial formulations of liquid baits reduced ant densities in three separate trials, but they had inconsistent effects on mealybug densities and fruit infestation; granular protein bait had no effect. Using large plots and commercial application methodologies, liquid bait deployed in June resulted in lower ant density and fruit infestation, but it had no effect on mealybug density. Across all trials, liquid bait treatments resulted in lower ant density (12 of 14 trials) and fruit damage (11 of 14 sites), presenting the first report of liquid baits applied using commercial methodologies that resulted in a reduction of ants and their associated hemipteran crop damage. For commercialization of liquid baits, we showed that any of the tested insecticides can suppress Argentine ants when properly delivered in the crop system. For imidacloprid, bait dispensers must be protected from sunlight to reduce photodegradation. Results suggest that incomplete ant suppression can suppress mealybug densities. However, after ant populations are suppressed, there may be a longer period before hemipteran populations are effectively suppressed. Therefore, liquid baits should be considered part of a multiseason program rather than a direct, in-season control of hemipteran pest populations.

Improving liquid bait programs for Argentine ant control: bait station density.

Argentine ants, Linepithema humile (Mayr), have a positive effect on populations of mealybugs (Pseudococcus spp.) in California vineyards. Previous studies have shown reductions in both ant activity and mealybug numbers after liquid ant baits were deployed in vineyards at densities of 85-620 bait stations/ha. However, bait station densities may need to be <85 bait stations/ha before bait-based strategies for ant control are economically comparable to spray-based insecticide treatments-a condition that, if met, will encourage the commercial adoption of liquid baits for ant control. This research assessed the effectiveness of baits deployed at lower densities. Two field experiments were conducted in commercial vineyards. In experiment 1, baits were deployed at 54-225 bait stations/ha in 2005 and 2006. In experiment 2, baits were deployed at 34-205 bait stations/ha in 2006 only. In both experiments, ant activity and the density of mealybugs in grape fruit clusters at harvest time declined with increasing bait station density. In 2005 only, European fruit lecanium scale [Parthenolecanium corni (Bouché)] were also present in fruit clusters, and scale densities were negatively related to bait station density. The results indicate that the amount of ant and mealybug control achieved by an incremental increase in the number of bait stations per hectare is constant across a broad range of bait station densities. The results are discussed in the context of commercializing liquid ant baits to provide a more sustainable Argentine ant control strategy.

Predator avoidance behavior in the pea aphid: costs, frequency, and population consequences.

Induced prey defenses can be costly. These costs have the potential to reduce prey survival or reproduction and, therefore, prey population growth. I estimated the potential for predators to suppress populations of pea aphids (Acyrthosiphon pisum) in alfalfa fields through the induction of pea aphid predator avoidance behavior. I quantified (1) the period of non-feeding activity that follows a disturbance event, (2) the effect of frequent disturbance on aphid reproduction, and (3) the frequency at which aphids are disturbed by predators. In combination, these three values predict that the disturbances induced by predators can substantially reduce aphid population growth. This result stems from the high frequency of predator-induced disturbance, and the observation that even brief disturbances reduce aphid reproduction. The potential for predators to suppress prey populations through induction of prey defenses may be strongest in systems where (1) predators frequently induce prey defensive responses, and (2) prey defenses incur acute survival or reproductive costs.

Herbivore population suppression by an intermediate predator, Phytoseiulus macropilis, is insensitive to the presence of an intraguild predator: an advantage of small body size?

Recent work in terrestrial communities has highlighted a new question: what makes a predator act as a consumer of herbivores versus acting as a consumer of other predators? Here we test three predictions from a model (Rosenheim and Corbett in Ecology 84:2538-2548) that links predator foraging behavior with predator ecology: (1) widely foraging predators have the potential to suppress populations of sedentary herbivores; (2) sit and wait predators are unlikely to suppress populations of sedentary herbivores; and (3) sit and wait predators may act as top predators, suppressing populations of widely foraging intermediate predators and thereby releasing sedentary herbivore populations from control. Manipulative field experiments conducted with the arthropod community found on papaya, Carica papaya, provided support for the first two predictions: (1) the widely foraging predatory mite Phytoseiulus macropilis strongly suppressed populations of a sedentary herbivore, the spider mite Tetranychus cinnabarinus, whereas (2) the tangle-web spider Nesticodes rufipes, a classic sit and wait predator, failed to suppress Tetranychus population growth rates. However, our experiments provided no support for the third hypothesis; the sit and wait predator Nesticodes did not disrupt the suppression of Tetranychus populations by Phytoseiulus. This contrasts with an earlier study that demonstrated that Nesticodes can disrupt control of Tetranychus generated by another widely foraging predator, Stethorus siphonulus. Behavioral observations suggested a simple explanation for the differing sensitivity of Phytoseiulus and Stethorus to Nesticodes predation. Phytoseiulus is a much smaller predator than Stethorus, has a lower rate of prey consumption, and thus has a much smaller requirement to forage across the leaf surface for prey, thereby reducing its probability of encountering Nesticodes webs. Small body size may be a general means by which widely foraging intermediate predators can ameliorate their risk of predation by sit and wait top predators. This effect may partially or fully offset the general expectation from size-structured trophic interactions that smaller predators are subject to more intense intraguild predation.