Microbial control of arthropod pests of tropical tree fruits

A multitude of insects and mites attack fruit crops throughout the tropics. The traditional method for controlling most of these pests is the application of chemical pesticides. Growing concern on the negative environmental effects has encouraged the development of alternatives. Inundatively and inoculatively applied microbial control agents (virus, bacteria, fungi, and entomopathogenic nematodes) have been developed as alternative control methods of a wide variety of arthropods including tropical fruit pests. The majority of the research and applications in tropical fruit agroecosystems has been conducted in citrus, banana, coconut, and mango. Successful microbial control initiatives of citrus pests and mites have been reported. Microbial control of arthropod pests of banana includes banana weevil, Cosmopolites sordidus Germar (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) (with EPNs and fungi) among others Oryctes rhinoceros (L.) is one of the most important pests of coconut and one of the most successful uses of non-occluded virus for classical biological control. Key pests of mango that have been controlled with microbial control agents include fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) (with EPNs and fungi), and other pests. Also successful is the microbial control of arthropod pests of guava, papaya and pineapple. The challenge towards a broader application of entomopathogens is the development of successful combinations of entomopathogens, predators, and parasitoids along with other interventions to produce effective and sustainable pest management.     

History and Future of Introduction of Exotic Arthropod Biological Control Agents in Spain: A Dilemma?

The first documented introduction of an exotic invertebrate biological control agent (IBCA) in Spain occurred in 1908. Sixty-four additional species have been introduced since then. Information, both previously recorded and original data, on the species introduced for pest control is summarized. Most of the introduced IBCAs focused on citrus pests and homopterans clearly predominate among target phytophagous species. Success has been more frequent for IBCAs used in seasonal inoculative strategies (50.0% of cases) than in classical biological control programs (17.1% of cases). Concerns about potential non-target effects of such species are increasing, but post-release evaluation has often been insufficient to draw any conclusions about them. Most of the beneficial species introduced in Spain were parasitoids (n = 53), and the remaining species were predators (n = 12). Only four parasitoids are considered specialized monophagous natural enemies. The mean number of host species parasitized by parasitoids is 15.2, whereas the mean number of prey species attacked by predators is 21.2. Therefore, polyphagy appears to be quite common among the IBCAs that have been introduced in Spain. The rationale guiding many of these introductions in the past would not be acceptable nowadays. Since classical biological control is such a valuable strategy for pest control, straightforward protocols to evaluate exotic candidate species are urgently needed.     

Biocontrol of Pests of Apples and Pears in Northern and Central Europe - 3. Predators

Predators of apple and pear pests in northern and central Europe and their use as biological control agents are reviewed. Many natural enemy species are specialized feeders and are able to respond to the population dynamics of particular pest species. The most oustandingly successful example of this is the use of phytoseiid mites, particularly Typhlodromus pyri , against phytophagous pest mites in apple. This mite management strategy is now widespread throughout European apple growing regions. Another example is the use of Anthocoris nemoralis against pear psyllids, Cacopsylla pyricola and C. pyri . Several groups of naturally occurring polyphagous predators, such as chrysopids, coccinellids, syrphids and spiders, also prey on a number of pest species in orchards, contributing generally to the reduction in pest populations. However, they are unlikely alone to prevent pest damage fully and reliably. In seeking biological control opportunities for a particular pest, these polyphagous natural enemies are unlikely to be a high priority. An exception, due to its abundance in orchards, is the common earwig, Forficula auricularia , although this predator may also cause some fruit injury. Another option to consider when reviewing possibilities for biological control in orchards is the introduction of biological control agents. The success rate of this approach, using arthropod predators to control pests of field crops, has been generally poor. Furthermore, mass production methods for predators are likely to be difficult and very costly. The biological supplies industry is constantly seeking culture techniques, largely for arthropod biological control agents of pests of protected crops. It is possible that some future advance may be relevant to orchards, though currently available predators do not appear promising. A careful economic appraisal of the feasibility of use of any potential biological control agent would be prudent before embarking on research.     

Avoiding conflicts between insect and weed biological control: selection of non-target species to assess host specificity of cabbage seedpod weevil parasitoids

Abstract:  Classical biological control of insect pests and weeds may lead to potential conflicts, where insect pests are closely related to weed biological control agents. Such a conflict may occur in the classical biological control of the cabbage seedpod weevil, Ceutorhynchus obstrictus (Marsham) in North America, which belongs to the same subfamily, Ceutorhynchinae, as a number of agents introduced or proposed for introduction against non-indigenous invasive weed species. We propose a step-by-step procedure to select non-target species and thereby to develop a non-target species test list for screening candidate entomophagous biological control agents of a herbivore pest insect in a way that would simultaneously evaluate non-target potential on weed biological control agents and other non-target species. Using these recommendations, we developed a non-target test list for host specificity evaluations in the area of origin (Europe) and the area of introduction (North America) for cabbage seedpod weevil parasitoids. Scientifically based predictions on expected host–parasitoid interactions and ecological information about the ecological host range in the area of origin can help avoid conflicts, while still allowing the introduction of safe and effective agents against both insect pests and weeds.     

梨小食心虫生物防治研究进展

梨小食心虫Grapholita molesta(Busck)是世界性分布的果树主要害虫之一,可危害多种果树。多年来,过度依赖化学农药防治梨小食心虫效果并不理想,且杀伤天敌、污染环境、导致农药残留。利用自然天敌防治梨小食心虫高效、无毒、无污染,符合当前社会对环保的要求。本文结合前人工作,从病原微生物、寄生性天敌、捕食性天敌、性信息素、化学信息物质等方面,综述了梨小食心虫生物防治的研究进展,并对其应用前景进行了展望。     

Effects of Predator and Prey Dispersal on Success or Failure of Biological Control

Biological control, defined as the reduction of pest populations by natural enemies, is often a component of integrated pest management strategies. Augmentation of natural enemy numbers by planned releases is a common biological control method, the successes and failures of which have been extensively reviewed. The effectiveness of biological control is influenced by how populations of predators and prey (or hosts and parasitoids) disperse in patchy environments. Here, we address the question of whether such dispersal leads to beneficial or detrimental pest control outcomes by developing a simple predator-prey model with constant releases of natural enemies in a two-patch environment. Theoretical and numerical results for all possible cases indicate that population dispersal has significant effects on the persistence of pests. For some ranges of dispersal rates or parameter space, dispersal is beneficial for pest control measures but this is not so for other ranges when it is detrimental. Therefore, knowledge of pest and natural enemy dispersal is crucial for understanding the effectiveness of biological control in a patchy environment. Finally, the model is generalised for multi-patch systems.     

Biological control of invasive stink bugs: review of global state and future prospects

Invasive stink bugs (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) are responsible for high economic losses to agriculture on a global scale. The most important species, dating from recent to old invasions, include Bagrada hilaris (Burmeister), Halyomorpha halys (Stål), Piezodorus guildinii (Westwood), Nezara viridula (L.), and Murgantia histrionica (Hahn). Bagrada hilaris, H. halys, and N. viridula are now almost globally distributed. Biological control of these pests faces a complex set of challenges that must be addressed to maintain pest populations below the economic injury level. Several case studies of classical and conservation biological control of invasive stink bugs are reported here. The most common parasitoids in their geographical area of origin are egg parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae, Encyrtidae, and Eupelmidae). Additionally, native parasitoids of adult stink bugs (Diptera: Tachinidae) have in some cases adapted to the novel hosts in the invaded area and native predators are known to prey on the various instars. Improving the efficacy of biocontrol agents is possible through conservation biological control techniques and exploitation of their chemical ecology. Moreover, integration of biological control with other techniques, such as behavioural manipulation of adult stink bugs and plant resistance, may be a sustainable pest control method within organic farming and integrated pest management programs. However, additional field studies are needed to verify the efficacy of these novel methods and transfer them from research to application.     

Tea: Biological control of insect and mite pests in China

Tea is one of the most economically important crops in China. To secure its production and quality, biological control measures within the context of integrated pest management (IPM) has been widely popularized in China. IMP programs also provide better control of arthropod pests on tea with less chemical insecticide usage and minimal impact on the environment. More than 1100 species of natural enemies including about 80 species of viruses, 40 species of fungi, 240 species of parasitoids and 600 species of predators, as well as several species of bacteria have been recorded in tea ecosystems in China. Biological and ecological characteristics of some dominant natural enemies have been well documented. Several viral, bacterial, and fungal insecticides have been commercially utilized at large scale in China. Progress in biological control methods in conjunction with other pest control approaches for tea insect pest management is reviewed in this article. Knowledge gaps and future directions for tea pest management are also discussed.     

Adaptive defense of pests and switching predation can improve biological control by multiple natural enemies

One of the most important questions in biological control is whether multiple natural enemies can provide greater suppression of agricultural pests than a single best enemy. Intraguild predation (IGP) among natural enemies has often been invoked to explain failure of biological control by multiple enemies, and classical theoretical studies on IGP have supported this view. However, empirical studies are inconclusive and have yielded both positive and negative results. We extend classical models by considering anti-predator behavior of pests and diet switching of omnivorous natural enemies, and examine their effects on pest control. We assume that the pest can adaptively allocate effort toward the specific defense against each predator, and that the omnivorous natural enemy can consume disproportionately more of the relatively abundant prey (switching predation) by type III functional responses to prey items. The model predicts that adaptive defense augments pests but favors introduction of multiple natural enemies for controlling pests if IGP is weak. In contrast, switching predation does not make pest control by multiple natural enemies advantageous as in classical studies, in the absence of adaptive defense. However, switching predation reduces the necessity of defense by the pest against the omnivore and offsets the effect of adaptive defense. Thus, it makes the introduction of multiple natural enemies advantageous for pest control when the pest employs adaptive defense even if IGP is strong. These results suggest that types and combinations of behavior of prey and predators may greatly affect qualitative outcomes of biological control by multiple natural enemies.     

Biological control of aphids and coccids: a comparative analysis

A comparison of the biological control of aphids and coccids was carried out by analyzing success rates for the three major types of biological control, i.e., classical, augmentative, and conservational. Because of the higher intrinsic rates of increase for aphids versus coccids, the working hypothesis that biological control of aphids is less successful compared to coccids was adopted. However, this hypothesis was not supported by an analysis of classical biological control using the BIOCAT database. In this analysis, parasitoids were more successful than predators when used against either aphids or coccids, but the control of Icerya spp. with Rodolia spp. (predators) was highly successful. Some reasons for success of Rodolia spp. are adduced, but field studies on the long-term population dynamics of Icerya–Rodolia systems are needed for determining the mechanisms of regulation. Comparative analyses of augmentative and conservational biological control of aphids and coccids were inconclusive, due to lack of adequate databases; some possible factors involved in the success of these types of biological control are discussed. It is suggested that parasitoids could be better control agents than predators in augmentative biological control of aphids in production greenhouses. Conservational biological control of either aphids or coccids should be aimed at enhancing populations of indigenous natural enemies, especially mobile generalist predators that are capable of keeping pace with mobile pests.     

What makes a successful biocontrol agent? A meta-analysis of biological control agent performance

We qualitatively reviewed the biocontrol literature in two major journals, Biological Control and Environmental Entomology, over the past 10 years by scoring 878 studies into 11 biocontrol-oriented questions. Quantitative meta-analyses were then used on data from 145 studies to examine the effects of different types of biocontrol agents (parasitoids, predators, and pathogens) on several attributes of weed and pest populations. Results for our qualitative review showed that most biocontrol studies were focused on lepidopteran pests, and that parasitoids were the most common biocontrol agents used. Our quantitative review showed that, for weeds, biocontrol agents significantly reduced weed biomass (−82.0%), flower (−98.9%), and seed production (−89.4%). For pests, our quantitative review showed that biocontrol agents significantly reduced pest abundance by 130% compared to control groups, increased parasitism (+139.0%) and increased overall pest mortality (+159.0%) compared to targets not exposed to biocontrol agents. Effects on pest mortality tended to be stronger for parasitoids than predators, although reductions caused in pest abundance were much stronger when predators were used as biocontrol agents. Addition of two or more biocontrol agents increased mortality by 12.97% and decreased pest abundance by 27.17% compared to single releases. Separate sets of meta-analyses demonstrated that the negative impacts of biocontrol on non-target species were much smaller than those for target species, although adverse effects of biocontrol on non-target organisms are based on small sample sizes and should be interpreted with caution. Our results also showed that biocontrol efficacy tended to be higher when agents were generalists than when they were specialists. Large fail–safe numbers found for most of the estimated effects indicate the robustness of the results found for the efficacy of biological control programs.     

Current status and future perspectives on natural enemies for pest control in Taiwan

ABSTRACT

In Taiwan, the agricultural policy, ‘Reduce the consumption of pesticide to half in the next 10 years’, was launched in 2017. Pesticide application, which results in contamination of food by chemical residues, pest resistance, and other adverse ecological effects, is a growing public and environmental concern. Pest control by natural predators is, thus, the best alternative. Biological control methods implemented based on insights obtained from studies on pest behaviour, rearing, and various crop management modes, increase the possibility of controlling pests in modern organic agricultural systems. More than a decade has passed since the first introduction of a predatory insect in Taiwan for pest control (in the 1990s). Predatory and parasitic natural enemies, including lacewing, predatory stink bugs, Orius, and parasitic wasps, were initially used for controlling thrips, aphids, spider mites, whiteflies, and lepidopteran pests. At present, there exists a wide range of integrated pest management (IPM) methods incorporating other non-chemical, biological, and agricultural methods. However, recently, there has been an increase in research and development on the utilisation of natural enemies of insects and the associated food safety issues. Mass production and release, storage, and handling techniques of insect predators and parasitoids have been successful in recent years. The final goal of present day research is to develop natural enemy products and provide an IPM-based model to farmers for using natural enemies in agricultural production systems, thereby reducing pesticide application and ensuring food security.     

Criteria for release of genetically-improved phytoseiids: an examination of the risks associated with release of biological control agents

Biological control of agricultural pests by phytoseiid predators has been achieved through classical introductions, conservation of indigenous and established foreign species, and augmentation of both introduced and indigenous species. Laboratory selection of phytoseiids has produced several strains that have been mass reared and released for pest management programs in glasshouses and agricultural cropping systems. Concerns over risks of classical biological control have developed recently. The development of recombinant DNA (rDNA) techniques for the genetic manipulation of crops and microorganisms also has inaugurated a debate on the safety of releasing transgenic organisms into the environment. This debate will extend to the release of phytoseiids that have been manipulated with rDNA techniques. Risks associated with releasing phytoseiids for augmentation or classical biological control programs are minimal and the benefits are great. Research initiated to answer questions about the risks of releasing transgenic phytoseiids into the environment provides opportunities to expand our understanding of the ecological impact of phytoseiids in agricultural and natural environments and could lead to improved pest management tactics.     

Biological Control not on Target

Non-target effects of exotic biological control agents, parasitoids and predators, released worldwide to control insect pests, are becoming more apparent. This paper summarizes previously recorded information on the diet breadth of natural enemies released to control insect pests worldwide. It also summarizes the diet breadth of native parasitic hymenoptera in North America to determine whether the diet breadths of native and exotic parasitoids differ. Of released biocontrol agents, 48% were recorded as generalists (attacking more than one genus of host) and another 29.2% attacked more than one species in a genus. Only 22.5% were recorded as specialists on the target pests. This suggests that many natural enemies released in biocontrol programs against insect pests have broad diets and that non-target effects are likely. Data from native hymenoptera in North America also show that many species attack multiple host genera and species, with an average of 5.8 genera and 7.3 species attacked, indicating broad agreement with data from biological control releases.     

温室内大花植物对天敌丰度及其控害功能的影响

【目的】大花植物(花粉和花蜜)能否为特殊的寒地温室内各种昆虫的成虫期补充营养,提供食物来源进而影响温室内天敌的控害功能是当前保护地内防控害虫的关键的科学问题之一。【方法】本实验连续两年选择调查了哈尔滨市郊区(寒地,北纬45o)三栋大型玻璃温室的花卉作物栽培引入情况并用粘虫板连续监测了温室内各种节肢动物丰度动态,分析了温室内大花植物栽培比例对各类(种)优势害虫丰度,寄生性天敌及捕食性天敌丰度的影响,探讨了不同天敌类群丰度的关系及害虫多样性与总丰度等关系。【结果】研究表明:较高比例的大花植物栽培整体上能提高害虫的多样性指数,抑制各种害虫种群的暴发,但单一种类的大花植物也会导致较为严重的害虫发生;影响寄生性天敌类群的环境因素与影响捕食性天敌的因素相似,而捕食性天敌(体型较大)对化学农药的喷洒相对更为敏感。【结论】研究结果可为田间生物控害工程的"功能植物"筛选提供信息,为设施农业害虫生物防治提供科学依据。     

A review on biological interactions and management of the cotton bollworm,Helicoverpa armigera (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)

Helicoverpa armigera Hübner (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) is one of the most damaging insect pests globally, causing estimated global economic losses of over 3 billion US dollars annually. Crops most affected include cotton, tomato, soybean, grain crops such as corn and sorghum, chickpea and other pulses. Adults of this species possess strong migratory abilities (>2000 km), high fecundity and rapid reproductive rates; completing 4–6 generations per year in most cropping regions. Furthermore, the larvae are polyphagous, with a wide and diverse host range and possess the ability to enter diapause in order to survive adverse climatic conditions. At present, it is distributed across most of Oceania, Asia, Africa and southern Europe and has recently spread to South America. Various control measures have been trialled or proposed for the treatment of this pest, including synthetic insecticides, phytopesticides, microbial pesticides, macro-biocontrol agents (both parasitoids and predators) and the development of genetically modified crops (e.g. Bt cotton). Successful control necessitates the use of an integrated pest management (IPM) approach, wherein biological, chemical and physical control measures are combined for the greatest control efficacy.     

Production and use of biological pest control agents

Biological pest control agents are gaining prominence for the control of insect pests in agriculture and forestry. The shift from chemical control has been due to environmental concerns and recent innovations in biotechnology. Production and use of biological insect control agents is the challenge of the future for pest management.     

Insect Pathogens as Biological Control Agents: Do They Have a Future?

Naturally occurring entomopathogens are important regulatory factors in insect populations. Many species are employed as biological control agents of insect pests in row and glasshouse crops, orchards, ornamentals, range, turf and lawn, stored products, and forestry and for abatement of pest and vector insects of veterinary and medical importance. The comparison of entomopathogens with conventional chemical pesticides is usually solely from the perspective of their efficacy and cost. In addition to efficacy, the advantages of use of microbial control agents are numerous. These include safety for humans and other nontarget organisms, reduction of pesticide residues in food, preservation of other natural enemies, and increased biodiversity in managed ecosystems. As with predators and parasitoids, there are three basic approaches for use of entomopathogens as microbial control agents: classical biological control, augmentation, and conservation. The use of a virus (Oryctes nonoccluded virus), a fungus (Entomophaga maimaiga), and a nematode (Deladenus siricidicola) as innoculatively applied biological control agents for the long-term suppression of palm rhinoceros beetle (Oryctes rhinoceros), gypsy moth (Lymantria dispar), and woodwasp (Sirex noctilio), respectively, has been successful. Most examples of microbial control involve inundative application of entomopathogens. The most widely used microbial control agent is the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis. The discovery of new varieties with activity against Lepidoptera, Coleoptera, and Diptera and their genetic improvement has enhanced the utility of this species. Recent developments in its molecular biology, mode of action, and resistance management are reviewed. Examples of the use, benefits, and limitations of entomopathogenic viruses, bacteria, fungi, nematodes, and protozoa as inundatively applied microbial control agents are presented. Microbial control agents can be effective and serve as alternatives to broad-spectrum chemical insecticides. However, their increased utilization will require (1) increased pathogen virulence and speed of kill; (2) improved pathogen performance under challenging environmental conditions (cool weather, dry conditions, etc.); (3) greater efficiency in their production; (4) improvements in formulation that enable ease of application, increased environmental persistence, and longer shelf life; (5) better understanding of how they will fit into integrated systems and their interaction with the environment and other integrated pest management (IPM) components; (6) greater appreciation of their environmental advantages; and (7) acceptance by growers and the general public. We envision a broader appreciation for the attributes of entomopathogens in the near to distant future and expect to see synergistic combinations of microbial control agents with other technologies. However, if future development is only market driven, there will be considerable delays in the implementation of several microbial control agents that have excellent potential for use in IPM programs.     

Biocontrol of Pests of Apples and Pears in Northern and Central Europe: 2. Parasitoids

The parasitoids of arthropod pests of apple and pear in northern and central Europe and their use as biological control agents are reviewed. The review demonstrates that apple and pear pests are host to a large and varied parasitoid fauna. All important pests are known to be host of parasitoids, but many parasitoids play only a minor part in regulating populations of their host. However, many parasitoid species are important natural enemies and some effectively regulate pest populations in unsprayed and/or commercial (insecticide sprayed) apple or pear orchards either individually or as part of parasitoid guilds. Exploitation/fostering of existing populations of parasitoids has been demonstrated to be an effective or partially effective approach for natural control of several important pest species. Important examples include natural regulation of the apple sawfly by Lathrolestes ensator and Aptesis nigrocincta, of the summer fruit tortrix moth by Colpoclypeus florus and Teleutaea striata, of leaf midges by Platygaster demades, of woolly aphid by Aphelinus mali and of leaf mining moths by guilds of parasitoid species. Introduction of parasitoids is an alternative approach to the exploitation of parasitoids already present in the orchard. This approach has been little explored and its success rate has been low, mainly confined to the control of non-indigenous pests by introducing parasitoids from their native region. Mass production methods for parasitoids are difficult and costly and are likely to be economic only where long-term populations can be established. Even where low cost mass culture techniques are developed, the degree of control may not be high enough to prevent economic pest damage as demonstrated by negative results with mass release of Trichogramma egg parasites for control of tortricids in orchards. Suitability of the orchard habitat is recognized as crucial to the success of individual parasitoids. Key requirements are adequate populations of the pest(s) and/or alternative hosts, suitable shelter, overwintering sites or food sources and avoidance of harmful effects of pesticides. Many species are highly sensitive to broad-spectrum insecticides, especially in the adult life-stage. Avoiding the harmful affects of insecticides is crucial to successful exploitation. The use of insecticides needs to be avoided, either altogether or at crucial times in the parasitoids' life cycle, or less harmful alternatives need to be used. Numerous parasitoids could potentially be exploited as biological control agents but hitherto have received little attention because little is known about them and/or because they are sensitive to broad-spectrum pesticides and are thus virtually absent from commercial orchards. The aim of future studies should be to develop effective strategies for establishing equilibria between important pests and their parasitoids, with pest damage rarely exceeding the economic threshold.     

Accounting for differential success in the biological control of homopteran and lepidopteran pests

One of the strongest patterns in the historical record of biological control is that programmes targeted against lepidopteran pests have been far less successful than those targeted against homopteran pests. Despite fueling considerable interest in the theory of host–parasitoid interactions, biological control has few unifying principles and no theoretical basis for understanding the differential pattern of success against these two pest groups. Potential explanations considered here include competitive limitation of natural enemy establishment, the influence of antagonistic parasitoid interactions, generation time ratio, and gregarious parasitoid development. An analysis of the biological control record showed that on average six natural enemies have been introduced per pest for both pest groups, providing no evidence of a differential intensity of competition. Similarly, use of a discrete time host–parasitoid model showed that antagonistic interactions that are common among parasitoids of Lepidoptera should not limit the success of biological control as such interactions can readily be counteracted by host refuge breaking. A similar model showed that a small generation time ratio (coupled with a broad window of host attack) and gregarious development can facilitate the suppression of pest abundance by parasitoids, and both were found to be positively associated with success in the biological control record. Of the four explanations considered here, generation time ratio coupled with a broad window of host attack appears to provide the best explanation for the differential pattern of success.