Biocontrol-Based Integrated Management of Oilseed Rape Pests

Transcription

1

2 Biocontrol-Based Integrated Management of Oilseed Rape Pests

3 Ingrid H. Williams Editor Biocontrol-Based Integrated Management of Oilseed Rape Pests 123

4 Editor Ingrid H. Williams Institute of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences Estonian University of Life Sciences Tartu Estonia ISBN e-isbn DOI / Springer Dordrecht Heidelberg London New York Library of Congress Control Number: Springer Science+Business Media B.V No part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher, with the exception of any material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work. Cover design: estudio Calamar S.L. Printed on acid-free paper Springer is part of Springer Science+Business Media (

5 Preface Oilseed rape is a major arable crop in both Europe and North America. It is particularly suited to the cooler climates of central and northern Europe, to the western provinces of Canada, and to the state of North Dakota in the USA. The area sown to oilseed rape exceeds 5 million hectares in the EU and 6 million hectares in Canada. Most of the European crop is autumn sown whereas most of the North American crop is spring sown. Forecasts predict a continuing increased demand for oilseed production worldwide. In both Europe (Chapters 1 and 5) and North America (Chapter 6), growers must protect their oilseed rape crops from insect pests. The pest complex varies considerably on the two continents. Coleopterous pests predominate in both; a weevil species introduced from Europe has now become a serious pest in North America. Substantial yield losses can also occur through infestation by Diptera and also, in North America, by species of Hemiptera and Lepidoptera. Further, in Europe, the relative importance of various pests differs between spring (Chapter 5) and winter rape. Crop protection against insect pests is still largely through the application of chemical insecticides. These continue to provide reliable and cost-effective control but cause concern because they can harm non-target organisms, such as parasitoids (Chapter 13) and bees (Chapter 14). More efficient targeting of insecticides in time and space can be achieved using economic thresholds, crop monitoring and computer-based decision support systems (Chapter 15). Crop management systems for the future, however, must combine sustainability with environmental acceptability to satisfy both social and economic demands; they should be high-yielding yet energy efficient, providing a good economic net return (Chapters 16 and 17). Consequently, there is now considerable emphasis on minimizing pesticide applications within integrated pest management systems and enhancing the use of natural biocontrol agents. This approach has received further impetus in Europe but the development of widespread resistance in the pollen beetle to pyrethroids, the main group of insecticides now used on the crop (Chapter 12). The past decade has seen considerable progress in our knowledge of the natural enemies that contribute to biocontrol, particularly the parasitoids (Chapters 2 and 3), the ground beetles (Chapter 4) and the spiders (Chapter 10) and of how their distribution patterns, both within (Chapter 8) and without the crop (Chapter 9), and their v

6 vi Preface behavioural ecology affects their ability to locate the crop (Chapter 7). Push-pull strategies are being developed that use host plant preferences and behavioural responses to semiochemicals to influence pest and natural enemy distributions on the crop. There is also potential for natural enemy conservation through modification of within-field crop husbandry practices, such as soil tillage (Chapter 11) as well as, on the landscape scale, through habitat and environmental manipulation to encourage vegetational diversity of the agroecosystem incorporating hedgerows, cover crops, flowering conservation headlands and field margins to provide refuge, food, overwintering sites and alternative prey or hosts for natural enemies (Chapters 9, 10, and 17). I thank the authors of the various chapters of this book for their expertise in collating the state-of-the-art knowledge that they have presented in their reviews. The book is intended to serve as a text for researchers, university teachers, graduate scientists, extension workers and growers involved in pest management. I hope it will play its part in furthering the development of integrated pest management systems that aim to incorporate biocontrol. I also thank the Estonian University of Life Sciences for financially supporting my contribution to the book, and Professor Anne Luik for her encouragement throughout. Tartu, Estonia July 2009 Ingrid H. Williams

7 Contents 1 The Major Insect Pests of Oilseed Rape in Europe and Their Management: An Overview... 1 Ingrid H. Williams 2 Parasitoids of Oilseed Rape Pests in Europe: Key Species for Conservation Biocontrol Bernd Ulber, Ingrid H. Williams, Zdzislaw Klukowski, Anne Luik, and Christer Nilsson 3 Key Parasitoids of the Pests of Oilseed Rape in Europe: A Guide to Their Identification Andrew W. Ferguson, Ingrid H. Williams, Lynda M. Castle, and Matthew Skellern 4 Ground Beetles as Predators of Oilseed Rape Pests: Incidence, Spatio-Temporal Distributions and Feeding Ingrid H. Williams, Andrew W. Ferguson, Märt Kruus, Eve Veromann, and Douglas J. Warner 5 Pests and Their Enemies in Spring Oilseed Rape in Europe and Challenges to Integrated Pest Management Barbara Ekbom 6 Key Pests and Parasitoids of Oilseed Rape or Canola in North America and the Importance of Parasitoids in Integrated Management Lloyd M. Dosdall and Peter G. Mason 7 Crop Location by Oilseed Rape Pests and Host Location by Their Parasitoids Ingrid H. Williams and Samantha M. Cook 8 Spatio-Temporal Distributions of Pests and Their Parasitoids on the Oilseed Rape Crop Ingrid H. Williams and Andrew W. Ferguson vii

8 viii Contents 9 Biological Rape Pest Control in Spatio-Temporally Changing Landscapes Carsten Thies and Teja Tscharntke 10 Insect Pests and Spiders in Oilseed Rape and Their Response to Site and Landscape Factors Thomas Frank, Thomas Drapela, Dietmar Moser, and Johann G. Zaller 11 Impact of Soil Tillage on Parasitoids of Oilseed Rape Pests Christer Nilsson 12 Chemical Control of Insect Pests and Insecticide Resistance in Oilseed Rape Thomas Thieme, Udo Heimbach, and Andreas Müller 13 Impact of Insecticides on Parasitoids of Oilseed Rape Pests Bernd Ulber, Zdzisław Klukowski, and Ingrid H. Williams 14 Oilseed Rape, Bees and Integrated Pest Management Marika Mänd, Ingrid H. Williams, Eneli Viik, and Reet Karise 15 The proplant Decision Support System: Phenological Models for the Major Pests of Oilseed Rape and Their Key Parasitoids in Europe Andreas Johnen, Ingrid H. Williams, Christer Nilsson, Zdzisław Klukowski, Anne Luik, and Bernd Ulber 16 Farming Systems, Integrated Crop Management and Winter Oilseed Rape Production Christer Nilsson 17 Integrating Crop and Landscape Management into New Crop Protection Strategies to Enhance Biological Control of Oilseed Rape Insect Pests Adrien Rusch, Muriel Valantin-Morison, Jean Pierre Sarthou, and Jean Roger-Estrade Species Index Subject Index

9 Contributors Lynda M. Castle Visual Communications Unit, Rothamsted Research, Harpenden, Hertfordshire AL5 2JQ, UK, Samantha M. Cook Plant and Invertebrate Ecology Department, Rothamsted Research, Harpenden, Hertfordshire AL5 2JQ, UK, Lloyd M. Dosdall Department of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, 4-10 Agriculture-Forestry Centre, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada T6G 2P5, Thomas Drapela Department of Integrative Biology and Biodiversity Research, Institute of Zoology, University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences Vienna, Vienna A-1180, Austria, Barbara Ekbom Department of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden, Thomas Frank Department of Integrative Biology and Biodiversity Research, Institute of Zoology, University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences, Vienna A-1180, Austria, Andrew W. Ferguson Plant and Invertebrate Ecology Department, Rothamsted Research, Harpenden, Hertfordshire AL5 2JQ, UK, Udo Heimbach Institute for Plant Protection in Field Crops and Grassland, Julius Kühn-Institute (JKI) Federal Research Centre for Cultivated Plants, Braunschweig 38104, Germany, Andreas Johnen proplant GmbH, Münster 48147, Germany, Zdzisław Klukowski Department of Crop Protection, Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences, Wroclaw, Poland, Reet Karise Institute of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Tartu 51014, Estonia, ix

10 x Contributors Märt Kruus Institute of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Tartu 51014, Estonia, Anne Luik Institute of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Tartu 51014, Estonia, Marika Mänd Institute of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Tartu 51014, Estonia, Peter G. Mason Research Centre, 960 Carling Avenue, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Ottawa, ON, K1A 0C6, Canada, Dietmar Moser Department of Integrative Biology and Biodiversity Research, Institute of Zoology, University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences Vienna, Vienna A-1180, Austria, Andreas Müller Institute for Plant Protection in Field Crops and Grassland, Julius Kühn-Institute (JKI) Federal Research Centre for Cultivated Plants, Braunschweig 38104, Germany, Christer Nilsson Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Alnarp SE , Sweden, Jean Roger-Estrade INRA-AgroParisTech, UMR211 Agronomie, Thiverval-Grignon, France, Adrien Rusch INRA-AgroParisTech, UMR211 Agronomie, Thiverval-Grignon, France, Jean Pierre Sarthou INRA, INPT-ENSAT, UMR1201 Dynamiques Forestières dans l Espace Rural, Castanet-Tolosan F-31326, France, sarthou@ensat.fr Matthew Skellern Plant and Invertebrate Ecology Department, Rothamsted Research, Harpenden, Hertfordshire AL5 2JQ, UK, matthew.skellern@bbsrc.ac.uk Thomas Thieme BTL Biotest-Labor GmbH Sagerheide, Sagerheide 18184, Germany, tt@biotestlab.de Carsten Thies Department of Crop Science, Agroecology Georg-August-University, Göttingen 37073, Germany, carsten.thies@agr.uni-goettingen.de Teja Tscharntke Department of Crop Science, Agroecology Georg-August-University, Göttingen 37073, Germany, ttschar@gwdg.de Bernd Ulber Department of Crop Sciences, Plant Pathology and Crop Protection Division, Georg-August University Göttingen, Göttingen D-37077, Germany, bulber@gwdg.de Muriel Valantin-Morison INRA-AgroParisTech, UMR211 Agronomie, Thiverval-Grignon, France, morison@grignon.inra.fr

11 Contributors xi Eve Veromann Institute of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Tartu 51014, Estonia, Eneli Viik Institute of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Tartu 51014, Estonia, Douglas J. Warner Faculty of Engineering and Information Sciences, Agriculture and Environment Research Unit, Science and Technology Research Institute, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield AL10 9AB, UK, Ingrid H. Williams Institute of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Tartu 51014, Estonia, Johann G. Zaller Department of Integrative Biology and Biodiversity Research, Institute of Zoology, University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences Vienna, Vienna A-1180, Austria,

12 Chapter 1 The Major Insect Pests of Oilseed Rape in Europe and Their Management: An Overview Ingrid H. Williams Abstract The oilseed rape crop in Europe is attacked by six major pests that often require control by growers to protect seed yield: the cabbage stem flea beetle, pollen beetle, cabbage seed weevil, cabbage stem weevil, rape stem weevil and brassica pod midge. These attack the crop successively at various growth stages and damage different parts of the plant. They are all widespread but their relative importance varies with country and year. Their control is still mainly through the application of chemical insecticides, often applied prophylactically. The pollen beetle has developed widespread resistance to pyrethroids, the main group of insecticides now used, increasing the urgency for alternative control strategies. The past decade has seen considerable progress in our knowledge of the parasitoids, predators and pathogens that contribute to biocontrol of the pests and of how to incorporate biocontrol into integrated pest management systems. More efficient targeting of insecticides in time and space can be achieved using economic thresholds, crop monitoring and computer-based decision support systems. Push-pull strategies are being developed that use host plant preferences and behavioural responses to semiochemicals to influence pest and natural enemy distributions on the crop. There is also potential for natural enemy conservation through modification of within-field crop husbandry practices as well as, on the landscape scale, through habitat and environmental manipulation to encourage vegetational diversity of the agroecosystem incorporating hedgerows, cover crops, flowering conservation headlands and field margins to provide refuge, food, overwintering sites and alternative prey or hosts for natural enemies. 1.1 Introduction Oilseed rape is the major oilseed crop grown in northern and central Europe. In 2006, over 5.3 million ha were grown with a production of 15.5 million tonnes I.H. Williams (B) Institute of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Tartu 51014, Estonia ingrid.williams@bbsrc.ac.uk I.H. Williams (ed.), Biocontrol-Based Integrated Management of Oilseed Rape Pests, DOI / _1, C Springer Science+Business Media B.V

13 2 I.H. Williams (Eurostat 2009). Major producers were Germany, France, Poland and the UK accounting for 74% of this area and 80% of production. Provisional statistics for 2007 indicate a 22% increase in area and a 15% increase in production over Forecasts predict a continuing increased demand for oilseed rape production in Europe. The crop has a high yield potential under efficient agronomic cultivation and is an important break crop in cereal rotations. It is valued both for human nutrition for its high-quality lipid acid composition and as a component of animal feeds. There is also strong incentive to increase production from the non-food sector, since the EU support for production for biodiesel. The oilseed rape crop in Europe is dominated by Brassica napus spp. oleifera, with some Brassica campestris (turnip rape) grown in Scandinavia and the Baltic States. Most of the crop is winter sown; the proportion of spring sown rape increases in northern climates. The crop is mostly grown for its seed, which is crushed to extract the oil. The oil is used for cooking, as a biofuel and as a lubricant, as well as in the production of paints, soaps and plastics. Rape meal is used in animal feeds. Its agronomy and husbandry is outlined by Alford (2003a). Integrated pest management (IPM) has the potential to improve the efficiency, profitability and environmental acceptability of crop production and, thereby, to contribute towards its sustainable production. Naturally-occurring agents of biological control, i.e., the parasitoids, predators and pathogens that attack the pests of oilseed rape, can provide economically viable control of some pests and reduce the need for insecticides. The last decade has seen considerable advances in our knowledge of naturallyoccurring biocontrol agents and how to incorporate them into IPM strategies. This knowledge base has been substantially added to by two EU programmes. The first (acronym: BORIS) was a 3-year Framework 4 Concerted Action ( ) (CT Minimizing pesticide use and environmental impact by the development and promotion of bio-control strategies for oilseed rape pests) conducted under the FAIR programme. A consortium of participants from various European countries reviewed the natural enemies of oilseed rape insect pests; the outputs from this project were published as a monograph (Alford 2003b). The second project (acronym: MASTER) was a 4-year research project ( ) (QLK5-CT Integrated Pest Management Strategies incorporating biocontrol for European oilseed rape pests) co-funded by the EU Framework 5 Quality of Life and Management of Living Resources programme. This project had the following five objectives: 1. To determine the identity, status and potential of biocontrol agents for oilseed rape pests. 2. To develop economically-viable and environmentally-acceptable IPM Strategies for the crop. 3. To determine the socioeconomic feasibility, importance and economic efficiency of the IPM strategies and constraints to their adoption. 4. To construct phenological models for major pests and their key biocontrol agents for integration into decision support systems. 5. To produce Technical Guidelines for farmers, advisors and policy makers on the IPM strategies.

14 1 The Major Insect Pests of Oilseed Rape in Europe 3 This chapter identifies the economically-important pests of oilseed rape in Europe, outlines the damage they cause and reviews the advances made towards integrating biocontrol into the management of the insect pests of oilseed rape in Europe. It relies heavily on the outputs from the two EU-projects BORIS and MASTER as well as on research conducted by other European researchers who did not participate in these projects; many of the latter have contributed other chapters to this book. 1.2 Major Insect Pests and the Damage They Cause The oilseed rape crop in Europe is attacked by a diversity of herbivores, including insects, nematodes, slugs and pigeons (Alford et al. 2003). Here we consider only the six major insect pests; these are widespread and abundant and cause sufficient economic damage in some years to require insecticide treatment by growers (Bromand 1990, Garbe et al. 2000). A recent survey of winter oilseed rape growers in Germany, Poland, Sweden and the UK and of spring/turnip rape growers in Estonia and Finland, conducted as part of the EU-project MASTER showed that they applied control measures against a total of eight pests during the growing season (Menzler-Hokkanen et al. 2006). Of these, the pollen beetle (Meligethes aeneus (Fabricius), Coleoptera: Nitidulidae) was deemed to require control by the majority of growers in each country. The cabbage stem flea beetle (Psylliodes chrysocephala (L.), Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae), cabbage seed weevil (Ceutorhynchus obstrictus (Marsham) syn. C. assimilis (Paykull), Coleoptera: Curculionidae) and the brassica pod midge (Dasineura brassicae Winnertz, Diptera: Cecidomyidae) were controlled on winter rape in Germany, Poland, Sweden and the UK (12 20% of growers). The stem weevils (the cabbage stem weevil, Ceutorhynchus pallidactylus (Marsham), syn. C. quadridens (Panzer) and, in some countries, the rape stem weevil, Ceutorhynchus napi Gyllenhal, both Coleoptera: Curculionidae), were controlled on winter rape in Germany, Poland and the UK (14 16% of growers) but not in Sweden. The cabbage stem weevil is present throughout Europe but the rape stem weevil is only present in central Europe. The cabbage root fly (Delia radicum L. Diptera: Anthomyidae) was controlled in winter rape in Germany only (12% of growers). Flea beetles (Phyllotreta spp., Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) were controlled by about a third of growers of spring rape crops in Estonia and Finland. This review focuses on the six most widespread major pests only, namely the cabbage stem flea beetle, the pollen beetle, the cabbage seed weevil, the pod midge, the cabbage stem weevil and the rape stem weevil. The less widely distributed cabbage root fly and the flea beetles, as well as other minor pests, of importance in some countries and seasons, including Ceutorhynchus picitarsis (the rape winter stem weevil), Athalia rosae (the turnip sawfly), Brevicoryne brassicae (cabbage aphid) and Myzus persicae (peach/potato aphid) are considered at greater length by Ekbom (Chapter 5, this volume).

15 4 I.H. Williams Cabbage Stem Flea Beetle Description The cabbage stem flea beetle is 4 5 mm long, usually black with a blue-green metallic sheen (Alford 1999, Kirk 1992) (Fig. 1.1); a brown variant also occurs (Bonnemaison and Jourdheuil 1954). It has large hind femurs enabling it to jump. The antennae have 10 segments. Fig. 1.1 Cabbage stem flea beetle, Psylliodes chrysocephala (Photo: Rothamsted Research) Distribution The cabbage stem flea beetle is the most widely distributed stem-mining pest of winter oilseed rape crops throughout regions of northern Europe with a maritime climate (Bromand 1990, Garbe et al. 2000); it is also recorded from the Middle East, Asia, North Africa Canada and the USA (Balachowsky 1963, Bonnemaison 1965, Cox 1998). Spring-sown crops are not infested Life Cycle The cabbage stem flea beetle is univoltine. Adults migrate to emerging winter oilseed rape crops in early autumn (late August/early September); they require temperatures above 16 C for flight (Ebbe-Nyman 1952). Once in the crop their flight muscles atrophy (Ebbe-Nyman 1952, Bonnemaison 1965). The number of adults on the crop increases during the autumn, declines during the winter and few are found after April (Williams and Carden 1961). On arrival, the adults feed on the cotyledons and young leaves of the emerging crop. The ovaries of the females are immature at this stage but mature within about 2 weeks of feeding on the crop (Bonnemaison and Jourdheuil 1954, Williams and Carden 1961). Mating occurs soon after emergence and continues throughout the winter (Bonnemaison and Jourdheuil 1954).