Bacterial Endosymbionts Identified From Leafhopper (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae) Vectors of Phytoplasmas.

Insects often harbor bacterial endosymbionts that provide them with nutritional benefit or with protection against natural enemies, plant defenses, insecticides, and abiotic stresses. Certain endosymbionts may also alter acquisition and transmission of plant pathogens by insect vectors. We identified bacterial endosymbionts from four leafhopper vectors (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae) of 'Candidatus Phytoplasma' species by direct sequencing 16S rDNA and confirmed endosymbiont presence and identity by species-specific conventional PCR. We examined three vectors of Ca. Phytoplasma pruni, causal agent of cherry X-disease [Colladonus geminatus (Van Duzee), Colladonus montanus reductus (Van Duzee), Euscelidius variegatus (Kirschbaum)] - and a vector of Ca. Phytoplasma trifolii, the causal agent of potato purple top disease [Circulifer tenellus (Baker)]. Direct sequencing of 16S identified the two obligate endosymbionts of leafhoppers, 'Ca. Sulcia' and 'Ca. Nasuia', which are known to produce essential amino acids lacking in the leafhoppers' phloem sap diet. About 57% of C. geminatus also harbored endosymbiotic Rickettsia. We identified 'Ca. Yamatotoia cicadellidicola' in Euscelidius variegatus, providing just the second host record for this endosymbiont. Circulifer tenellus harbored the facultative endosymbiont Wolbachia, although the average infection rate was only 13% and all males were Wolbachia-uninfected. A significantly greater percentage of Wolbachia-infected Ci. tenellus adults than uninfected adults carried Ca. P. trifolii, suggesting that Wolbachia may increase this insect's ability to tolerate or acquire this pathogen. Results of our study provide a foundation for continued work on interactions between leafhoppers, bacterial endosymbionts, and phytoplasma.

Afidopyropen as a potential tool for Potato leafroll virus management in post-neonicotinoid potato production.

Potato leafroll virus (PLRV) has been well managed by neonicotinoids since their widespread adoption in the United States, becoming virtually absent from seed and production fields in the Northwest. However, with increasing interest in discontinuing neonicotinoid usage, there is concern that PLRV could enjoy a resurgence in the absence of effective alternative chemistries. We tested the effects of afidopyropen, an insecticide with novel mode of action, on PLRV transmission and the feeding/probing behavior of its primary vector, the green peach aphid (Myzus persicae [Sulzer]). Afidopyropen foliar sprays decreased PLRV transmission by individual green peach aphids relative to water controls: PLRV acquisition from treated potato plants and subsequent transmission was reduced by 89%, and PLRV inoculation by viruliferous aphids to treated potato plants was reduced by 35%. Although electropenetrograph analyses following 4-h recordings of individual aphids on potato plants showed decreases in the total and mean duration of phloem feeding (E) on plants subject to an afidopyropen treatment relative to water, these only trended toward significance. Taken together, these results suggest treatment with afidopyropen can decrease PLRV transmission in potatoes, but that significant changes in feeding/probing might not occur quickly post-exposure. Overall, while the reductions in transmission were not as dramatic as have been observed following neonicotinoid treatments, afidopyropen may be a useful alternative and should be evaluated in field experiments.

Acquisition and Transmission of 'Candidatus Liberibacter solanacearum' Differs Among Wolbachia-Infected and -Uninfected Haplotypes of Bactericera cockerelli.

'Candidatus Liberibacter solanacearum' (Lso) causes disease symptoms and economic losses in potato, tomato, and other solanaceous crops in North America. Lso is transmitted to plants by the potato psyllid, Bactericera cockerelli, which occurs as distinct haplotypes named western, central, and northwestern that differ in the presence or absence of the bacterial endosymbiont, Wolbachia. Previous work showed that all three vector haplotypes can transmit Lso, but it was not clear whether acquisition and transmission rates of Lso were equal among the haplotypes. The goal of our study was to compare Lso infection rates among psyllids of the western, central, and northwestern haplotypes. Using data collected from several years of periodic testing of Lso infection of laboratory-reared potato psyllid colonies, we showed that psyllids of the western and central haplotypes are more likely to harbor Lso than are psyllids of the northwestern haplotype. We then used greenhouse assays to demonstrate that psyllids of the northwestern haplotype are less likely to acquire and transmit Lso than those of the western haplotype. Lso infection rates corresponded with Wolbachia infection among the three psyllid haplotypes. The Wolbachia-infected central and western haplotypes were more likely to harbor and transmit Lso than the Wolbachia-free northwestern haplotype. Results demonstrate that potato psyllids of the western and central haplotypes pose a greater risk for spread of Lso in crops and suggest a pattern between infection with Lso and Wolbachia in potato psyllid.

Landscape Context Influences the Bee Conservation Value of Wildflower Plantings.

Pollination provided by bees is a critical ecosystem service for agricultural production. However, bee populations are at risk from stressors such as habitat loss, pesticides, and disease. On-farm wildflower plantings is one mitigation strategy to provide habitat and resources for bees. In many instances, government programs can subsidize the installation of these plantings for private landowners. Semi-natural habitat (SNH) in the landscape is also important for bee conservation and may alter the effectiveness of wildflower plantings. In this study, we tested the effectiveness of wildflower plantings and interactions with SNH in the landscape for promoting bee abundance and richness. Bee surveys were conducted over 2 yr at 22 sites in eastern Virginia and Maryland. Wildflower plantings, averaging 0.22 ha in size, were installed and maintained by cooperators at 10 of the sites. In total, 5,122 bees were identified from 85 species. Wildflower plantings did not alter bee communities independently, but bee abundance was greater on farms with plantings and 20-30% SNH in the landscape. Bee abundance and richness had nonlinear responses to increasing SNH in the landscape. The positive effects for richness and abundance peaked when SNH was approximately 40% of the landscape. Similar to predictions of the intermediate-landscape complexity hypothesis, increases in bee abundance at wildflower sites were only detected in simplified landscapes. Results indicate that small wildflower plantings in the Mid-Atlantic U.S. only provided conservation benefits to bee communities under specific circumstances on the scale studied, and that conserving SNH across the landscape may be a more important strategy.

Crop pests and predators exhibit inconsistent responses to surrounding landscape composition.

The idea that noncrop habitat enhances pest control and represents a win-win opportunity to conserve biodiversity and bolster yields has emerged as an agroecological paradigm. However, while noncrop habitat in landscapes surrounding farms sometimes benefits pest predators, natural enemy responses remain heterogeneous across studies and effects on pests are inconclusive. The observed heterogeneity in species responses to noncrop habitat may be biological in origin or could result from variation in how habitat and biocontrol are measured. Here, we use a pest-control database encompassing 132 studies and 6,759 sites worldwide to model natural enemy and pest abundances, predation rates, and crop damage as a function of landscape composition. Our results showed that although landscape composition explained significant variation within studies, pest and enemy abundances, predation rates, crop damage, and yields each exhibited different responses across studies, sometimes increasing and sometimes decreasing in landscapes with more noncrop habitat but overall showing no consistent trend. Thus, models that used landscape-composition variables to predict pest-control dynamics demonstrated little potential to explain variation across studies, though prediction did improve when comparing studies with similar crop and landscape features. Overall, our work shows that surrounding noncrop habitat does not consistently improve pest management, meaning habitat conservation may bolster production in some systems and depress yields in others. Future efforts to develop tools that inform farmers when habitat conservation truly represents a win-win would benefit from increased understanding of how landscape effects are modulated by local farm management and the biology of pests and their enemies.