Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T05:42:29.095Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cover Crops and Disturbance Influence Activity-Density of Weed Seed Predators Amara aenea and Harpalus pensylvanicus (Coleoptera: Carabidae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Meredith J. Ward ,
Matthew R. Ryan ,
William S. Curran ,
Mary E. Barbercheck  and
David A. Mortensen
Meredith J. Ward
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, 116 Agriculture Sciences and Industries Building, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802
Matthew R. Ryan*
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, 116 Agriculture Sciences and Industries Building, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802
William S. Curran
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, 116 Agriculture Sciences and Industries Building, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802
Mary E. Barbercheck
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, 516 Agriculture Sciences and Industries Building, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802
David A. Mortensen
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, 116 Agriculture Sciences and Industries Building, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: matt.ryan@psu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The activity-density of Amara aenea (DeGeer) and Harpalus pensylvanicus (DeGeer) (Coleoptera: Carabidae) was monitored in an experiment that compared five management treatments representing a range of disturbance frequencies, crops, and aboveground biomass production. In 2004 and 2005, three treatments comprised of multiple summer cover crops were compared to bare fallow and soybean, the latter of which used mechanical cultivation to manage weeds. In 2005 weed seed predation was assessed from June to September in two of the treatments (bare fallow and oat–pea/rye–hairy vetch). Beetle activity-density varied with treatment, time of sampling, and year. In 2004 peak activity-density of A. aenea was highest in the mustard/buckwheat/canola, but there was no difference in H. pensylvanicus activity-density. In 2005 activity-density of H. pensylvanicus was higher in oat–pea/rye–hairy vetch than in soybean treatment. Seed predation rates were relatively consistent across treatments, averaging between 38 and 63%. In fallow and oat–pea/rye–hairy vetch, H. pensylvanicus activity-density accounted for 29 and 33% of the variation in seed predation, respectively. Our findings suggest cover crops have a positive effect on the activity-density of A. aenea and H. pensylvanicus and that disturbance negatively influences their activity-density in the absence of cover crops.

Keywords

Buckwheat, Fagopyrum esculentum Moenchcanola, Brassica napus Lfield pea, Pisum sativum Lhairy vetch, Vicia villosa Rothmustard, Sinapis alba Loat, Avena sativa Lred clover, Trifolium pretense Lrye, Secale cereale Lsoybean, Glycine max MerrAmara aenea DeGeerHarpalus pensylvanicus DeGeerSeed bankground beetlesconservation biocontrolpost-dispersal weed seed predation
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 59 , Issue 1 , March 2011 , pp. 76 - 81
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Current address: 121 Warren St, Sayre, PA 18840.

References

Literature Cited

Best, R. L. and Beegle, C. C. 1977. Food preferences of 5 species of carabids commonly found in Iowa corn-fields. Environ. Entomol. 6:9–12.Google Scholar
Cardina, J., Norquay, H. M., Stinner, B. R., and McCartney, D. A. 1996. Postdispersal predation of velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) seeds. Weed Sci. 44:534–539.Google Scholar
Carmona, D. M. and Landis, D. A. 1999. Influence of refuge habitats and cover crops on seasonal activity-density of ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) in field crops. Environ. Entomol. 28:1145–1153.Google Scholar
Carmona, D. M., Menalled, F. D., and Landis, D. A. 1999. Gryllus pennsylvanicus (Orthoptera: Gryllidae): laboratory weed seed predation and within field activity-density. J. Econ. Entomol. 92:825–829.Google Scholar
Cromar, H. E., Murphy, S. D., and Swanton, C. J. 1999. Influence of tillage and crop residue on postdispersal predation of weed seeds. Weed Sci. 47:184–194.Google Scholar
Davis, A. S., Dixon, P. M., and Liebman, M. 2003. Cropping system effects on giant foxtail (Setaria faberi) demography: II. Retrospective perturbation analysis. Weed Sci. 51:930–939.Google Scholar
Davis, A. S. and Liebman, M. 2003. Cropping system effects on giant foxtail (Setaria faberi) demography: I. Green manure and tillage timing. Weed Sci. 51:919–929.Google Scholar
Gallandt, E. R., Molloy, T., Lynch, R. P., and Drummond, F. A. 2005. Effect of cover-cropping systems on invertebrate seed predation. Weed Sci. 53:69–76.Google Scholar
Hatten, T. D., Bosque-Perez, N. A., Labonte, J. R., Guy, S. O., and Eigenbrode, S. D. 2007. Effects of tillage on the activity density and biological diversity of carabid beetles in spring and winter crops. Environ. Entomol. 36:356–368.Google Scholar
Holland, J. M. 2002. The Agroecology of Carabid Beetles. Hampshire, UK Intercept Limited. 356 p.Google Scholar
Holland, J. M., Smith, B. M., Southway, S. E., Birkett, T. C., and Aebischer, N. J. 2008. The effect of crop, cultivation and seed addition for birds on surface weed seed densities in arable crops during winter. Weed Res. 48:503–511.Google Scholar
Jordan, N., Mortensen, D. A., Prenzlow, D. M., and Cox, K. C. 1995. Simulation analysis of crop-rotation effects on weed seedbanks. Am. J. Bot. 82:390–398.Google Scholar
Kromp, B. 1999. Carabid beetles in sustainable agriculture: a review on pest control efficacy, cultivation impacts and enhancement. Agric. Ecosystems Environ. 74:187–228.Google Scholar
Landis, D. A., Wratten, S. D., and Gurr, G. M. 2000. Habitat management to conserve natural enemies of arthropod pests in agriculture. Ann. Rev. Entomol. 45:175–201.Google Scholar
Larochelle, A. and Lariviere, M-C. 2003. A Natural History of the Ground-Beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) of America North of Mexico. Moscow–Sofia Pensoft. 583 p.Google Scholar
Leslie, T. W., Biddinger, D. J., Mullin, C. A., and Fleischer, S. J. 2009. Carabidae population dynamics and temporal partitioning: response to coupled neonicotinoid-transgenic technologies in maize. Environ. Entomol. 38:935–943.Google Scholar
Melnychuk, N. A., Olfert, O., Youngs, B., and Gillott, C. 2003. Abundance and diversity of Carabidae (Coleoptera) in different farming systems. Agric. Ecosystems Environ. 95:69–72.Google Scholar
Menalled, F. D., Smith, R. G., Dauer, J. T., and Fox, T. B. 2007. Impact of agricultural management on carabid communities and weed seed predation. Agric. Ecosystems Environ. 118:49–54.Google Scholar
Mullin, C. A., Saunders, M. C., Leslie, T. W., Biddinger, D. J., and Fleischer, S. J. 2005. Toxic and behavioral effects to Carabidae of seed treatments used on Cry3Bbl- and Cry1Ab/c-protected corn. Environ. Entomol. 34:1626–1636.Google Scholar
Navntoft, S., Wratten, S. D., Kristensen, K., and Esbjerg, P. 2009. Weed seed predation in organic and conventional fields. Biol. Control. 49:11–16.Google Scholar
Nurse, R. E., Booth, B. D., and Swanton, C. J. 2003. Predispersal seed predation of Amaranthus retroflexus and Chenopodium album growing in soyabean fields. Weed Res. 43:260–268.Google Scholar
O'Rourke, M. E., Heggenstaller, A. H., Liebman, M., and Rice, M. E. 2006. Post-dispersal weed seed predation by invertebrates in conventional and low-external-input crop rotation systems. Agric. Ecosystems Environ. 116:280–288.Google Scholar
Pavuk, D. M., Purrington, F. F., Williams, C. E., and Stinner, B. R. 1997. Ground beetle (Coleoptera: Carabidae) activity density and community composition in vegetationally diverse corn agroecosystems. Am. Midland Nat. 138:14–28.Google Scholar
Saska, P., van der Werf, W., de Vries, E., and Westerman, P. R. 2008. Spatial and temporal patterns of carabid activity-density in cereals do not explain levels of predation on weed seeds. Bull. Entomol. Res. 98:169–181.Google Scholar
Saska, P., Vodde, M., Heijerman, T., Westerman, P., and van der Werf, W. 2007. The significance of a grassy field boundary for the spatial distribution of carabids within two cereal fields. Agric. Ecosystems Environ. 122:427–434.Google Scholar
Shearin, A. F., Reberg-Horton, S. C., and Gallandt, E. R. 2007. Direct effects of tillage on the activity density of ground beetle (Coleoptera: Carabidae) weed seed predators. Environ. Entomol. 36:1140–1146.Google Scholar
Shearin, A. F., Reberg-Horton, S. C., and Gallandt, E. R. 2008. Cover crop effects on the activity-density of the weed seed predator Harpalus rufipes (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Weed Sci. 56:442–450.Google Scholar
Thorbek, P. and Bilde, T. 2004. Reduced numbers of generalist arthropod predators after crop management. J. Appl. Ecol. 41:526–538.Google Scholar
Westerman, P. R., Hofman, A., Vet, L. E. M., and van der Werf, W. 2003. Relative importance of vertebrates and invertebrates in epigeaic weed seed predation in organic cereal fields. Agric. Ecosystems Environ. 95:417–425.Google Scholar
Williams, C. L., Liebman, M., Westerman, P. R., Borza, J., Sundberg, D., and Danielson, B. 2009. Over-winter predation of Abutilon theophrasti and Setaria faberi seeds in arable land. Weed Res. 49:439–447.Google Scholar