Suppr超能文献

传粉者和天敌的比较:景观和局部因素对作物丰度和丰富度影响的荟萃分析。

Comparison of pollinators and natural enemies: a meta-analysis of landscape and local effects on abundance and richness in crops.

机构信息

Faculty of Biological Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, U.K.

出版信息

Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2013 Nov;88(4):1002-21. doi: 10.1111/brv.12040. Epub 2013 Apr 12.

Abstract

To manage agroecosystems for multiple ecosystem services, we need to know whether the management of one service has positive, negative, or no effects on other services. We do not yet have data on the interactions between pollination and pest-control services. However, we do have data on the distributions of pollinators and natural enemies in agroecosystems. Therefore, we compared these two groups of ecosystem service providers, to see if the management of farms and agricultural landscapes might have similar effects on the abundance and richness of both. In a meta-analysis, we compared 46 studies that sampled bees, predatory beetles, parasitic wasps, and spiders in fields, orchards, or vineyards of food crops. These studies used the proximity or proportion of non-crop or natural habitats in the landscapes surrounding these crops (a measure of landscape complexity), or the proximity or diversity of non-crop plants in the margins of these crops (a measure of local complexity), to explain the abundance or richness of these beneficial arthropods. Compositional complexity at both landscape and local scales had positive effects on both pollinators and natural enemies, but different effects on different taxa. Effects on bees and spiders were significantly positive, but effects on parasitoids and predatory beetles (mostly Carabidae and Staphylinidae) were inconclusive. Landscape complexity had significantly stronger effects on bees than it did on predatory beetles and significantly stronger effects in non-woody rather than in woody crops. Effects on richness were significantly stronger than effects on abundance, but possibly only for spiders. This abundance-richness difference might be caused by differences between generalists and specialists, or between arthropods that depend on non-crop habitats (ecotone species and dispersers) and those that do not (cultural species). We call this the 'specialist-generalist' or 'cultural difference' mechanism. If complexity has stronger effects on richness than abundance, it might have stronger effects on the stability than the magnitude of these arthropod-mediated ecosystem services. We conclude that some pollinators and natural enemies seem to have compatible responses to complexity, and it might be possible to manage agroecosystems for the benefit of both. However, too few studies have compared the two, and so we cannot yet conclude that there are no negative interactions between pollinators and natural enemies, and no trade-offs between pollination and pest-control services. Therefore, we suggest a framework for future research to bridge these gaps in our knowledge.

摘要

为了实现多种生态系统服务的农业生态系统管理,我们需要了解管理一种服务对其他服务是否具有积极、消极或无影响。我们目前还没有授粉服务和病虫害防治服务之间相互作用的数据。然而,我们确实有授粉者和自然天敌在农业生态系统中的分布数据。因此,我们将这两组生态系统服务提供者进行了比较,以观察农场和农业景观的管理是否可能对两者的丰度和丰富度产生类似的影响。在一项荟萃分析中,我们比较了 46 项研究,这些研究在粮食作物的田间、果园或葡萄园里采样了蜜蜂、捕食性甲虫、寄生蜂和蜘蛛。这些研究使用了非作物或自然栖息地在这些作物周围景观中的接近度或比例(景观复杂性的一种度量),或非作物植物在这些作物边缘的接近度或多样性(局部复杂性的一种度量),来解释这些有益节肢动物的丰度或丰富度。在景观和局部尺度上的组成复杂性对传粉者和自然天敌都有积极影响,但对不同的分类群有不同的影响。对蜜蜂和蜘蛛的影响是显著正向的,但对寄生蜂和捕食性甲虫(主要是 Carabidae 和 Staphylinidae)的影响尚无定论。与捕食性甲虫相比,景观复杂性对蜜蜂的影响更为显著,对非木本作物的影响也比木本作物更为显著。对丰富度的影响明显强于对丰度的影响,但对蜘蛛来说可能只是。这种丰度丰富度的差异可能是由广食性和特化种之间的差异,或者依赖非作物生境的节肢动物(生态交错物种和扩散者)和不依赖非作物生境的节肢动物(文化物种)之间的差异造成的。我们称之为“特化种-广食性种”或“文化差异”机制。如果复杂性对丰富度的影响强于对丰度的影响,那么它对这些节肢动物介导的生态系统服务的稳定性的影响可能强于对其规模的影响。我们的结论是,一些传粉者和自然天敌对复杂性的反应似乎是相容的,因此有可能对农业生态系统进行管理,以造福两者。然而,比较这两者的研究太少,因此我们还不能得出授粉者和自然天敌之间没有负相互作用,以及授粉和病虫害防治服务之间没有权衡的结论。因此,我们建议建立一个未来研究的框架,以弥合我们知识中的这些差距。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验