1. No category

International Journal of Agricultural Policy and Research Vol.3 (4), pp. 198-212, April 2015
Available online at http://www.journalissues.org/IJAPR/
http://dx.doi.org/10.15739/IJAPR.041i
Copyright © 2015 Author(s) retain the copyright of this article
ISSN 2350-1561
Review
Biocontrol plants and functional diversity in biological
control of the red spider mite Tetranychus urticae : A
review
Accepted 20 March, 2015
Pia Parolin*,
Cécile Bresch
and
Christine Poncet
INRA Sophia Antipolis –
Department of Theoretical and
Applied Ecology in Protected
Environments and Agrosystems
(TEAPEA); France.
*Corresponding Author
E-mail: [email protected]
Tel: +33 4 92 38 65 96
Fax: +33 4 92 38 66 77
This review aims at better understanding the employment of biocontrol
plants in order to enhance the stability of populations of predatory mites in
crop systems, with the ultimate goal to reduce pesticide use and to control
pest mites on roses. We analyzed if plant species used in a banker plant
system influenced the success in terms of quality of the harvested plant and
of pest/predator numbers under greenhouse conditions, aiming at using
conditions which correspond to the practice of the local producers in
Southern France. The main hypothesis was that the presence of different
species of biocontrol plants causes the presence of different numbers of
predators and pests with a consequent different impact on crop health in a
crop-pest-predator system, depending on the plants’ functional attributes.
Mainly plants with domatia were efficient. They increased the number of
predators, stabilized their presence throughout the weeks of experiments,
and reduced numbers of spider mites. The function of domatia was analysed
through additional experiments which lead to the conclusion that plants
with domatia can significantly enhance biological control of the red spider
mite, and that especially Viburnum tinus is suited to be employed under the
climatic conditions of the Mediterranean area.
Key words: biological pest control, biocontrol plants, banker plants, integrated
pest management (IPM), domatia, Neoseiulus californicus, Phytoseiulus persimilis,
Tetranychus urticae, Viburnum tinus.
INTRODUCTION
Biological pest management, employed as alternative to
chemical control, can rely on the use of beneficial
organisms for pest control (Casey et al., 2007, Poncet et al.,
2012). Different methods are used to favour the
establishment of beneficial organisms such as natural
enemies or predators in integrated pest management (IPM)
crop systems, depending on the species and their
requirements (Bottrell et al., 1998). The employment of
biocontrol plants (Parolin et al., 2014a) or secondary plants
(Parolin et al., 2012 a, b) raised with the primary crop may
enhance pest management purposes under certain
circumstances (Warfe and Barmuta, 2004). An increase in
species diversity and more importantly in functional
diversity and structural complexity of plants is known to
grant a larger range of microhabitat niches, and to enable
the persistence of higher species diversity of beneficial
organisms (Tylianakis and Romo, 2010).
The following review focuses on the biological control of
the red spider mite Tetranychus urticae (Acari:
Tetranychidae), one hundred years after a scientific review
on its biology and pest characteristics was published by
Ewing (1914). We analyse the role of biocontrol plants
(sensu Parolin et al. 2014a) to enhance the stability of the
population of different species of predatory mites and
protect rose as ornamental crops. Biocontrol plants are
plants which are intentionally added to a crop system
aiming at the enhancing of crop productivity by pest
attraction and/or pest regulation and thus contribute to
Int. J. Agric. Pol. Res.
199
Figure 1: Scheme indicating possible interactions between the trophic levels in a system with a crop plant,
pest and predatory mites, and a biocontrol plant, in this case a banker plant. The processes of multitrophic
interactions are non-exclusive. Solid black lines indicate direct interactions, and white arrows indicate
indirect interactions (mediated by another component of the system). Lines with arrows indicate a positive
effect in the direction of the arrows, and lines with circles indicate negative effects in the direction of the
circles (Original scheme see Parolin et al. 2012b, 2014a).
increasing biocontrol services, which ultimately can lead to
increased sustainability of the cropping systems (Parolin et
al. 2014a).
A special type of biocontrol plants are banker plants
(Frank 2010, Huang et al. 2011) which may provide
alternative food and shelter for the predatory mites (Pratt
& Croft 2000, Skirvin & Fenlon 2001). Banker plants may
sustain a reproducing population of predators and provide
long-term pest suppression (Frank 2010, Huang et al. 2011).
In a series of experiments with rose crops in greenhouses in
Southern France, the efficient installation of the predatory
mites Neoseiulus (Amblyseius) californicus (McGregor)
(Arachnidae, Acari, Phytoseiidae) and Phytoseiulus
persimilis Athias-Henriot (Phytoseiidae) was tested to
control T. urticae. Different interactions are hypothesized
between the trophic levels (Figure 1).
Due to the scarcity of clear definitions and
categorizations of the effects of plants added to crop
systems with the aim to increase predator installation, the
knowledge on what was then named “secondary plants”
was summarized and the most commonly used terms were
given a clear and distinct definition, and their most
important functional characteristics for increased pest
management were highlighted (Table 1 and 2, Parolin et al.,
2012a, b).
These and other secondary plants may act as efficient
biocontrol tools. Therefore the new term “biocontrol
plants” was introduced to deal with such secondary plants
which are specifically suited to enhance biological control
in integrated pest management (IPM) and which
encompasses the aforementioned types of secondary plants.
We defined “biocontrol plants” as “plants which are
intentionally added to a crop system with the intent to
enhance crop productivity by mutual benefit, pest
attraction and/or pest regulation and thus contribute to an
increase of the efficiency of biological control systems,
which finally leads to increased crop productivity”.
Main questions and hypotheses
The intention was to find local plant species to be used as
biocontrol plants to enhance the reproduction and
continuous release of mite predators in greenhouses and to
understand the mechanisms of their efficiency.
Experimental evidence for the efficiency of banker plants is
rare, especially with respect to plant morphology as key
function. We analyzed if plant species used in a banker
plant system influenced the success in terms of quality of
the harvested plant, pest/predator numbers and quality of
the banker plants of biological control under greenhouse
conditions. This should correspond to the practice of local
producers in Southern France.
The main hypothesis was that different species of BP
originate different numbers of predators and pests with a
Parolin et al.
200
Table 1. Commonly used terms for secondary plant types and their direct and/or indirect effects on crop plants and pest regulating functions
(main function black, secondary functions grey) (Original table see Parolin et al. 2012a).
Effect on:
Trophic level:
Secondary
type:
Companion
Plant
1st
Enhancing
Repelling
plant
nutrition
/chemical defense
Pests/pathogens
2nd
Inter-cepting
Early
detection
Attracting
pests away
from the crop
Natural enemies
3rd
Attracting
Feeding
Maintaining
(the adults)
population
Repellent
Barrier
Indicator
Trap
Insectary
Banker
Table 2. Definition and main characteristics of different types of secondary plants (Original table see Parolin et al. 2012b).
Type of secondary plant
Definition
Banker plant
A banker plant is the plant
component of the banker plant
system, which, together with
alternative food and beneficial
organisms, is “a rearing and
release system purposefully added
to or established in a crop for
control of pests in greenhouses or
open field” (Huang et al. 2011).
Aims
Increase the probability of
establishment
of
beneficial
organisms.
Sustain
a
reproducing
population
of
beneficial organisms, within a
cropping system, that will
provide
long-term
pest
suppression.
Barrier plant
Plants are “used within or
bordering a primary crop for the
purpose of disease suppression"
(Deol and Rataul 1978).
Disease suppression and/or
interception of pests and/or
pathogens. Reduce spread of
diseases or pests.
Companion plant
A companion plant is an intercrop
that influences the first trophic
level by enhancing nutrition
and/or chemical defence of the
crop plants. In addition, it might
have repelling and/or intercepting
effects on pests and pathogens and
attract natural enemies, or provide
food for natural enemies (Parolin
et al. 2012 a).
Indicator plant
Species or variety which makes
early detection of pests and
pathogens easier, and thus is more
cost-effective in detecting pest and
disease symptoms on a crop
(Parolin et al. 2012 a).
Characteristics and functions
Biological control agents are released onto the
banker plants and as they reproduce and
increase in numbers, they spread out into the
rest of the crops, representing a mini-rearing
system for the beneficial organisms. An
advantage of banker plant systems over
augmentative biological control is preventive
control without repeated, expensive releases of
beneficial organisms (Frank 2010).
They are used within or bordering a primary
crop. High, tall plants may act as mechanical
barriers that reduce the total number of aphids
landing on the protected crop (Fereres 2000). A
non-susceptible crop can be mixed with the
crop to be protected, so that the intercrop
provides camouflage, decreases the movement
and spread, and possibly also acts as a source of
beneficial organisms (Thresh 1982).
Enhance the growing conditions Plants are grown close to a crop plant in
for the crop plants.
horticulture and agriculture, they directly
influence the first trophic level (Kuepper and
Dodson 2001; Finch et al. 2003) by (i)
enhancing flavour: some plants alter the flavour
of other plants, (ii) fixing nitrogen: legumes are
able to fix atmospheric nitrogen with Rhizobium
bacteria; this is for their own use but also
benefits neighbouring plants, (iii) shelter and
protection: tall plants may protect other species
through shading or by providing a windbreak,
(iv) biochemical pest suppression: some plants
produce chemicals that suppress or repel pests
and protect neighbouring plants (Ode 2006).
Species or varieties that are
more prone to an insect or
disease than the desired crop.
May intercept pests.
The plant provides characteristics which enable
a pest to establish earlier than on the crops,
thus providing enough time for IPM to be
installed on the crops.
Int. J. Agric. Pol. Res.
201
Table 2. Cont.
Insectary plant
An insectary plant is a flowering
plant which attracts and possibly
maintains, with its nectar and
pollen resources, a population of
natural enemies which contribute
to biological pest management on
crops (Parolin et al. 2012 a).
Provide extended season of
floral resources for insects
(Fiedler et al. 2007). Attract
beneficial organisms such as
parasitic wasps and hoverflies
(Heimpel and Jervis 2005).
Repellent plant
Intercropping culture which repels Used to keep pest organisms
pests and/or pathogens thanks to away from the main culture.
the aversion caused by natural
chemical substances emitted by
these plants (Parolin et al. 2012 a).
Trap plant
Plants grown in “plant stands that
are, per se or via manipulation,
deployed to attract, divert,
intercept, and/or retain targeted
insects or the pathogens they
vector in order to reduce damage
to the main crop” (Shelton and
Badenes-Perez 2006).
Allow early detection and
monitoring of pests and diseases.
Also used as a component of pest
suppression strategies (Shelton
and
Badenes-Perez
2006)
because trap plants can be
sprayed with pesticides when
pests reach high densities on
these plants (thus acting as a
dead end for pest populations).
consequent different impact on crop health in a crop-pestpredator system, depending on their functional attributes.
The identification of these attributes was a major goal.
What makes a secondary plant an efficient biocontrol plant,
and how can biological pest control be increased without
major costs for local producers?
METHODS
Choice of plants
The tested crop plants were the ornamental rose (Rosa
sonia Meilland var. ‘Sweet Promise’, Rosaceae). Potential
species of biocontrol plants were chosen basing on their
local origin or their traditional employment as crop plants
in the Mediterranean area. We screened the available floras
and literature and selected eight plant species (Table 3). We
chose species with different physiognomic and
morphological characteristics, some with hairy leaves and
stems, others with waxy surfaces, and others with domatia.
Growth forms ranged from herbs (Eleusine, Lycopersicon)
over little structured physiognomy with few free standing
leaves (e.g. Capsicum, Sonchus) to very dense canopies with
many leaves and many stem bifurcations (e.g. Viburnum).
Selecting plants which flower from early to late
in the season, and/or have specific floral
structures, beneficial organisms are attracted
by plants with extrafloral nectaries or by
flowers with readily accessible pollen and
nectaries (Colley and Luna 2000; Ambrosino et
al. 2006). Beneficial organisms produced on
insectary plants may disperse into the crops
and thus protect them from pests (Quarles and
Grossman 2002; Heimpel and Jervis 2005;
Pontin et al. 2006).
These plants are part of an intercropping
culture which repels pests and/or pathogens
(Ibrahim et al. 2001) thanks to the aversion
caused by natural chemical substances emitted
by these plants (Hay 1986; Pfister and Hay
1988; Parolin et al. 2012 a).
Trap plants are more attractive to a particular
pest species than the main crop (Murphy 2004;
Jindal et al. 2012), i.e., the pest is concentrated
on the trap plants (Lamb 2006). Some types of
trap plants can only support low levels of pest
survival, thereby giving a similar effect as
spraying with insecticides (Khan et al. 2007).
Two champions
Viburnum tinus and Vitis riparia.
Viburnum tinus is a native plant in Southern Europe, with
Mediterranean climate, and Vitis riparia is a commonly
raised crop in these regions (Figure 2). These two plant
species are well adapted to the local climate, and can easily
be grown in open fields and greenhouses in the region,
where they can be applied as banker plants for the
mentioned species of predatory mites. The disadvantage of
Vitis riparia is that it forms long winding plants which grow
very big and form strong grips on crop plants and
infrastructure. They must be cut and controlled in their
growth which is intensive work. It may however be useful
for the connectivity of the plants which is essential for the
movement of predatory mites in the greenhouse (Casey et
al., 2007).
After a first series of experiments, we focused more on
Viburnum tinus and its characteristics. A literature review
which brings all available knowledge about the biology and
its applications together is in preparation.
Pest mite
Two-spotted red spider mites, T. urticae, were reared on
rose and bean plants in the laboratory before the
Parolin et al.
202
Table 3. Plants employed in the experiments to serve as banker plants for Neoseiulus californicus (Original table see Parolin et al. 2012c, 2013a).
Species
Capsicum annuum
L.
Lycopersicon
lycopersicum Kar.
var. saint pierre
Crepis
nicaeensis
Balb
Sonchus oleraceus L.
Common name
Family
woody /
weedy
annual /
perennial
growth
habit
wax
surface
glandular
trichomes
nonglandular
trichomes
domatia
Sweet Pepper
Solanaceae
weedy
A/P
++
-
-
-
Tomato
Solanaceae
weedy
A/P
subshrub
forb/herb
forb/herb
+
+
+
-
Asteraceae
weedy
A
forb/herb
+
-
+
-
Moderate
Asteraceae
weedy
A
forb/herb
+
-
-
-
Low
Avoids
Poaceae
weedy
A
graminoid
-
-
+
-
Low
Very low
Rosaceae
woody
P
subshrub
+
-
-
-
Caprifoliaceae
Vitaceae
woody
woody
P
P
shrub
vine
+++
++
+
-
+
+
+
+
High, proliferates well
(Morandi et al., 2000;
Sabelis, 1990)
Avoids
Low
French Hawk'sbeard
Common
sowthistle
Eleusine coracana Finger millet
(L.) Gaertn.
Rosa var. Sonia
Rose
Viburnum tinus L.
Laurustinus
Vitis riparia Michx. Grapevine
var.
Gloire
de
Montpellierclone
1030
Figure 2: Viburnum tinus (left), and Vitis riparia (right) in the
greenhouse grown in 2l pots and left uncontrolled for 2 months.
Presence and
reproduction of
Tetranychus urticae
Presence and
reproduction
of Neoseiulus
californicus
Moderate / proliferates
Very low
well (Sarwar et al., 2011)
Low
to
abundant
Avoids
(Castagnoli et al., 1999)
Moderate
Low
Very high
High
Int. J. Agric. Pol. Res.
203
Figure 3: Experiment to test the efficiency of 8 plant species as banker
plants for rose crops. From Parolin et al. 2013a
Figure 4: Percentage of banker plants bearing more than 5 predators N. californicus on the entire plant in
the experiment (left) and bearing eggs of Tetranychus urticae (right) at the end of the experiment (12
weeks). Original graph see Parolin et al. 2013a
experiment started.
Predatory mites
Neoseiulus californicus is a generalist predatory mite that
feeds on various arthropods and pollen. The commercial
strain Spical® was ordered at Koppert’s. Pollen from Pinus
halepensis P. Mill. collected on trees outside the greenhouse
was added to all plants at regular intervals in order to avoid
food limitation for the predators. The amount of pollen
used was little, it was sprayed over the plants.
EXPERIMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS
Experiment 1: “Testing banker plants for biological
control of mites on roses” (Parolin et al. 2013a)
We analysed the quality of the rose crops and the responses
of the populations of predatory mites N. californicus and
pest mites T. urticae to eight species of potential BP with
different morphological structures. In a long-term
experiment in a greenhouse which lasted 12 weeks, every
banker plant was paired with a rose plant and infested with
pest and predatory mites (Figure 3). The measured
parameters were vitality and growth of the plants (both,
banker and rose crop) and numbers of predators, pests and
their eggs.
Reproduction and establishment of the pest and
predatory mites differed between plant species as well as
plant growth and vitality. The results indicated that out of 8
chosen local plant species, Viburnum tinus and Vitis riparia
were the most efficient BP in this combination of pestpredator species. Their presence resulted in best health of
the rose crops, highest number of predatory mites and
lowest numbers of pests (Figure 4, 5).
Experiment 2: “Multiple choice for mites: first food,
then home“ (Parolin et al. 2014b)
The influence of pollen and presence of domatia on the
predatory mite N. californicus
were analyzed. In
Parolin et al.
204
Figure 5: Mean number (± SD) of pest mites Tetranychus urticae (black
bars) and predatory mites N. californicus (white bars) on the selected
banker plant species after 12 weeks of experiment (mean number of mite
individuals per plant, n = 7 plants per species). Red line: threshold of pest
infestation, basing on the definition that plants are classified as infested if
more than 5 mobile mites were found on the plant (Casey et al. 2007).
Original graph see Parolin et al. 2013a.
Figure 6: Presence of the predatory mite N. californicus on detached leaves of the
8 plant species with different food options (only prey T. urticae, only pollen,
pollen + prey T. urticae put on the leaves), in percent – where 100 % means that
at least one mite individual is present on the leaves of one plant species in all
eight repetitions. Original graph see Parolin et al. 2014b.
experiments with mites, pollen is frequently added in order
to provide alternative food. In an experiment we tested the
influence of pollen on the choice of Phytoseiid mites. We
offered two food options to the predatory mite N.
californicus, employed to control T. urticae.
On detached leaves in the laboratory we compared the
presence of predatory mites on leaves with pollen and T.
urticae vs. only pollen available as food (Figure 6, 7). We
used the leaves of eight plant species which are potential
banker plants for this predatory mite species. After 24
hours we counted the mites on the leaves of the different
host plants and found huge differences between species of
Int. J. Agric. Pol. Res.
205
Figure 7: Presence of the pest mite T. urticae (adults and eggs) on detached leaves of the 8
plant species in percent – where 100 % means that at least one mite individual is present
on the leaves of one plant species in all eight repetitions. Original graph see Parolin et al.
2014b.
host plants and between food availability. We did not find
eggs of the predatory mites as the duration of the
experiment was not long enough. The results of our study
indicate that a) if available, the predatory mites prefer to be
on the plants where most T. urticae are present (roses and
sweet pepper Capsicum annuum), b) if only pollen is
available, the two plant species which bear domatia are
preferred (Vitis riparia and Viburnum tinus), and c) overall,
the predatory mites prefer certain plant species where they
can hide – mainly those which bear domatia, even if their
prey T. urticae is absent.
Experiment 3: “Presence of arthropod pests on eight
species of banker plants in a greenhouse“ (Parolin et al.
2013b)
The installation of spontaneous arthropod species was
analysed in a greenhouse experiment with different species
of banker plants. Biocontrol plants may attract pests which
in turn attack the crop plants. Therefore, we analyzed the
presence of spontaneous arthropod species on the 8 species
of BP along the experimental period (Parolin et al. 2013b).
Despite all precautions, after 4-8 weeks there were several
undesired arthropod species, mostly well-known pests, on
the BP in the greenhouse. We documented their installation
over a time span of three months. We found 6 species of
arthropods,
whiteflies
Trialeurodes
vaporariorum
Westwood (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae), rose aphids
Rhodobium porosum L. (Hemiptera: Aphididae), gall midges
Feltiella acarisuga Vallot (Arthropoda, Insecta), western
flower thrips
Frankliniella occidentalis Pergande
(Thysanoptera: Thripidae), parasitic wasps Encarsia sp.
(Hymenoptera: Aphelinidae), and predatory mites P.
persimilis Athias-Henriot (Phytoseiidae). The different
species of plants attracted different species of arthropods,
linked to the specific chemical properties and
morphological traits such as leaf hairiness, wax surfaces, or
the presence of domatia. The pest arthropods did not
reproduce on the available plants in the experimental phase
and thus did not represent a problem for the crops. This
shows that the mere presence of arthropods in a
greenhouse must not seriously affect the crop system as
long as there is a certain diversity of plant species present.
It also shows that the 8 chosen species of BP are suitable,
under the given conditions, to enhance the crop system
without acting as involuntary multipliers for pests.
Also the roses associated to the 8 species of BP differed in
their degree of bearing spontaneous arthropod species
(Figure 8 A-F, 9 A-D). Whiteflies, gall midges and thrips
were present only on roses associated to certain species of
BP. Aphids were present on roses associated to all species
of BP. The roses associated to Vitis riparia were less
infested by other arthropods than those associated to the
other species of BP. Only aphids colonized them. This study
reveals how a diversified crop system can contribute to a
partial ecological equilibrium even in open glasshouse
conditions, and that secondary plants in general and banker
plants in particular may play an important role in this
Parolin et al.
206
Figure 8 A-F: Percentage of banker plants bearing more than 5 individuals of pest organisms not intentionally introduced
into the experiment after three months: (A) >5 individuals of whiteflies, (B) >5 individuals of aphids, (C) 1-3 individuals of
gall midges Feltiella, (D) 1-3 individuals of thrips, (E) 1-3 individuals of the parasitic wasp Encarsia sp., and (F) 1-3
individuals of the predatory mite Phytoseiulus persimilis. Original graphs see Parolin et al. 2013b.
context (Frank, 2010; Huang et al. 2011; Parolin et al.
2012c, 2013b).
Experiment 4: “Predatory mites Neoseiulus californicus
and Phytoseiulus persimilis chose plants with domatia“
(Bresch et al. in press)
We then subjected the mites to a multiple choice
experiment: if predatory and pest mites have the choice
between eight species of plants which stand close to each
other and are connected by a high number of leaves, twigs
and artificial wooden bridges, which plant do they prefer?
There was an infestation with other arthropods which we
monitored. We offered the pest and predator organisms 8
species of plants without restrictions of food (pollen
thrown in) and moving (bridges built between plants,
plants in close touch; four repetitions; Figure 10). All
present arthropods had clear preferences for some plants,
the distribution was not uniform (Figure 11).
There was a tendency towards a preference of N.
californicus and P. persimilis for three plant species out of
the 8 offered. The two predator mites were mostly installed
on Rosa, Viburnum tinus and Vitis riparia. We suppose that
the heavy infestation of the rose plants with Tetranychus
urticae was responsible for the high number of predator
mites found on the rose plants because this food supply is
highly attractive for the predators. The relatively high
number of predators of both species on Viburnum tinus and
Vitis riparia is probably related to the fact that these are the
only two species among the 8 potential banker plants which
possess domatia.
The distribution of pest organisms was not uniform
among the 8 plant species. The plants which were least
affected by pest species were Viburnum tinus and Vitis
riparia. However, with the present data we cannot state
whether there is no preference of the pests for these plant
species, or if the pests specifically avoid the relatively high
number of predator mites present on these two species.
Since all the organisms could migrate to all the plants freely
in this experiment, this may indicate that the presence of
Int. J. Agric. Pol. Res.
207
Figure 9 A-D: Percentage of roses associated to different species of
BP bearing other pest organisms not intentionally introduced into the
experiment after three months: (A) whiteflies, (B) aphids, (C) gall
midges Feltiella, (D) thrips. Original graphs see Parolin et al. 2013b.
predatory mites is not the determining factor for pest
distribution on the plants. It is probably related to the plant
characteristics. Spider mites prefer the roses among all
other plants, and so do Feltiella, Planococcus and Aphis.
Since Viburnum tinus and Vitis riparia hosted most
predators and less or no pests were present on them, out of
the chosen 8 species these two are best suited as potential
banker plants for rose crop raising. Predators were easily
found in the domatia formed by hairs near the leaf veins
where they hide and reproduce.
In a repetition of the experiment using only detached
leaves instead of whole plants in order to reduce the
number of variables and focus on the available domatia we
found similar results to those found on the whole plants,
Parolin et al.
208
Figure 10: Experimental setting with all plants placed in direct contact in a
plastic tray. From Bresch et al. in press.
Figure 11: Acarodomatia on the lower leaf side of Viburnum tinus (left) and Vitis riparia (centre).
Acarodomatium on Viburnum tinus with a predatory mite N. californicus (right). From Parolin et al. 2011.
which indicates that the leaves (and not the stems or other
parts) were mainly responsible for the presence of mites.
Experiment 5: “Distribution of acarodomatia and
predatory mites on Viburnum tinus“ (Parolin et al.
2011)
The banker plants Viburnum tinus and Vitis riparia bear
acarodomatia (Figure 11) which proved to be particularly
efficient in increasing the installation and propagation of
predatory mites and be little affected by additional pests.
Plants of Viburnum tinus were screened for presence and
distribution of domatia and predatory mites. A mean
number of 26.7 domatia per plant, with high variability
between plants, was found (Figure 12). The leaves had a
mean of 0.6 domatia per leaf.
Leaf position of domatia on the plant (Figure 13) and
exposure to sunlight (light / shade; Figure 14) were not
significantly related to the number of domatia present.
N. californicus installed themselves efficiently on V. tinus
and reduced the number of the common pest mite T. urticae.
The results indicate that there is a close positive
relationship between the distribution of domatia and the
presence of the predatory mite N. californicus on V. tinus.
Domatia were found more frequently on old and mature
leaves (Figure 15, 16, 17), which is an important factor to
take into account in the practical use of V. tinus as banker
plant, when considering cutting cycles and the frequency of
replacement of the banker plants in a greenhouse system.
DISCUSSION
Our experimental results indicate that the employment of
secondary plants added to the crop system is promising for
the control of the spider mite under the given
circumstances. However, several disadvantages became
evident:
Int. J. Agric. Pol. Res.
209
Figure 12: Number of domatia per plant on 3 plants of Viburnum tinus. Original graph see Parolin et al. 2011.
Figure 13: Number of domatia on leaves of Viburnum tinus, in relation to leaf position on the plant. Original graph see
Parolin et al. 2011.
Figure 14: Number of domatia on leaves of Viburnum tinus (A) in relation to leaf exposure to sunlight and number of predatory
mites (B) depending on the exposition to sunlight of Viburnum tinus. Original graph see Parolin et al. 2011.
Parolin et al.
Figure 15: Number of domatia on leaves of Viburnum tinus in relation leaf age. Original graph see
Parolin et al. 2011.
Figure 16: Number of predators N. californicus in leaves of
Viburnum tinus depending on leaf age. Original graph see Parolin et
al. 2011.
Figure 17: Number of predators N. californicus in leaves of Viburnum tinus
depending on leaf position. Original graph see Parolin et al. 2011.
210
Int. J. Agric. Pol. Res.
211
The overall employment of banker plants is costly
(raising and maintenance of the plants).
The distribution of predatory mites is reduced in
space due to their little size and lacking capability of
movement in the third dimension (flying). The employment
of woody bridges and a high number of banker plants in the
greenhouse could efficiently increase the control of pests
(Casey and Parrella 2005) but this is even more cost and
maintenance intensive.
The use of winding plants with domatia such as
Vitis sp. was highly efficient but causes problems as the
plants grow very big and form strong grips on crop plants
and infrastructure. They must be cut and controlled in their
growth which is intensive work.
These disadvantages bring up the question of using
alternatives to living plants in the system. If domatia are
particularly efficient in the propagation and stabilization of
populations of predatory mites, can we find alternatives to
living plants which mimick domatia and provide the needed
shelter for reproduction? A series of experiments is needed
to test this. The overall goal is to answer the question if
plants with domatia can harbor predators all year round, or
if we can find a material to replace living plants with
domatia with the aim to enhance the stability and increase
of predatory mite populations in IPM greenhouses with
crop plants infested by Tetranychus urticae. With this
knowledge, the employment of biological control to reduce
the presence of the red spider mites on roses may be
enhanced and the need for dangerous pesticides reduced,
especially given the extreme record of pesticide resistance
of T. urticae (Van Leeuwen et al. 2010, Grbic et al. 2011,
Dermauw et al. 2013).
REFERENCES
Ambrosino MD, Luna JM, Jepson PC, Wratten SD (2006).
Relative frequencies of visits to selected insectary plants
by predatory hoverflies (Diptera: Syrphidae), other
beneficial insects, and herbivores. Environmental
Entomology 35:394-400.Crossref
Bottrell DG, Barbosa P, Gould F (1998). Manipulating
natural enemies by plant variety selection and
modification: A realistic strategy? Annu Rev Entomol
43:347-367. Crossref
Bresch C, Ruiz G, Poncet C, Parolin P (under review).
Predatory mites Neoseiulus californicus and Phytoseiulus
persimilis chose plants with domatia. J. Mediterranean
Ecol.
Casey C, Newman J, Robb K, Tjosvold SA, MacDonald JD,
Parrella MP (2007). IPM program successful in California
greenhouse cut roses. California Agriculture 61:71-78.
Crossref
Casey CA, Parrella MP (2005). Evaluation of a mechanical
dispenser and interplant bridges on the dispersal and
efficacy of the predator, Phytoseiulus persimilis (Acari :
Phytoseiidae) in greenhouse cut roses. Biological Control
32, 130-136.Crossref
Castagnoli M, Liguori M, Simoni S (1999). Effect of two
different host plants on biological features of Neoseiulus
californicus (Mcgregor). Int. J.
Acarol. 25:145150.Crossref
Colley MR, Luna JM (2000). Relative attractiveness of
potential beneficial insectary plants to aphidophagous
hoverflies (Diptera: Syrphidae). Environ. Entomol.
29(5):1054-1059. Crossref
Deol GS, Rataul HS (1978). Role of various barrier crops in
reducing the incidence of cucumber mosaic virus in chilli,
Capsicum annum Linn. Indian J. Entomol, 40:261–264.
Dermauw W, Wybouw N, Rombauts S, Menten B, Vontas J,
Grbic M, Clark R.M, Feyereisen R, Van Leeuwen T (2013).
A link between host plant adaptation and pesticide
resistance in the polyphagous spider mite Tetranychus
urticae.
Ewing HE (1914). The common red spider or spider mite.
Oregon Agricultural College. Experiment Station 1883:196.
Fereres A (2000). Barrier crops as a cultural control
measure of non-persistently transmitted aphid-borne
viruses. Virus Research 71:221-231.Crossref
Fiedler A, Tuell J, Isaacs R, Landis D (2007). Attracting
Beneficial Insects with Native Flowering Plants. Michigan
State University Extension Bulletin E-2973. 6 pp.
Finch S, Billiald H, Collier RH (2003). Companion planting –
do aromatic plants disrupt host-plant finding by the
cabbage root fly and the union fly more effectively than
non-aromatic plants? Entomologia Experimentalis et
Applicata 109:183-195.Crossref
Frank SD (2010). Biological control of arthropod pests
using banker plant systems: Past progress and future
directions. Biological Control 52:8-16. Crossref
Grbić M, Van Leeuwen T, Clark RM, Rombauts S, Rouzé P,
Grbić V, et al (2011). The genome of Tetranychus urticae
reveals herbivorous pest adaptations. Nature 479:487-92.
Crossref
Hay ME (1986). Associational plant defenses and the
maintenance of species diversity: turning competitors
into accomplices. Am Natural 128:617-641.Crossref
Heimpel GE, Jervis MA (2005). Does floral nectar improve
biological control by parasitoids? In Wäckers FL, van Rijn
PCJ, Bruin J (Eds.). Plant-provided food for carnivorous
insects: A protective mutualism and its applications,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. pp. 267304.Crossref
Huang N, Enkegaard A, Osborne LS, Ramakers PMJ,
Messelink GJ, Pijnakker J, Murphy G (2011). The banker
plant method in biological control. Critical Reviews in
Plant Sci. 30:259-278.Crossref
Ibrahim MA, Kainulainen P, Aflatuni A, Tiilikkala K,
Holopainen
JK
(2001).
Insecticidal,
repellent,
antimicrobial activity and phytotoxicity of essential oils
with special reference to limonene and its suitability for
control of insect pests. Agric. Food Sci. Fin 10:243-259.
Jindal J, Hari NS, Hari JK (2012). Potential of Napier millet,
Pennisetum purpureum × P. glaucum, as a trap crop for
managing Chilo partellus populations on maize. Int.
Parolin et al.
J. Pest Manage. 58:1-7. Crossref
Khan ZR, Midega CAO, Wadhams LJ, Pickett JA, Mumuni A
(2007). Evaluation of Napier grass (Pennisetum
purpureum) varieties for use as trap plants for the
management of African stemborer (Busseola fusca) in a
push–pull strategy. Entomologia Experimentalis et
Applicata 124:201-211. Crossref
Kuepper G, Dodson M (2001). Companion Planting: Basic
Concept and Resources. NCAT Agriculture Specialist and
Project Intern. ATTRA Publication #IP125/71.
Lamb EM (2006). Indicator plants, Trap crops, and Banker
plants: Tools for Greenhouse IPM Ornamental Crops. IPM
E-Newsletter.
Morandi MAB, Sutton JC, Maffia LA (2000). Relationships of
aphid and mite infestations to control of Botrytis cinerea
by Clonostachys rosea in rose (Rosa hybrida) leaves.
Murphy G (2004). Trap Crops and Banker Plants - thinking
outside the pest management tool box. Greenhouse
Floriculture IPM Specialist/OMAFRA.
Ode PJ (2006). Plant chemistry and natural enemy fitness:
Effects on Herbivore and Natural Enemy Interactions.
Annual Rev. Entomol., 51:163-185.Crossref
Parolin P, Bresch C, Bout A, Ruiz G, Poncet C, Desneux N
(2012c). Testing banker plants for predator installation.
Acta Horticulturae 927:211-217.
Parolin P, Bresch C, Brun R, Bout A, Boll R, Desneux N,
Poncet C (2012a). Secondary plants used in biological
control: a review. Int. J. Pest Manag. 58(2):91-100.
Crossref
Parolin P, Bresch C, Muller MM, Errard A, Poncet C (2011).
Distribution of acarodomatia and predatory mites on
Viburnum tinus. J. Mediterranean Ecol. 11:41-48.
Parolin P, Bresch C, Poncet C, Desneux N (2012b).
Functional characteristics of secondary plants for
increased pest management. Int. J. Pest Manag.
58(4):369-377.
Parolin P, Bresch C, Poncet C, Desneux N (2014a).
Introducing the term 'Biocontrol Plants' for Integrated
Pest Management. Scientia Agricola 71(1):77-80. Crossref
Parolin P, Bresch C, Ruiz G, Desneux N, Poncet C (2013a).
Testing banker plants for biological control of mites on
roses. Phytoparasitica 41:249-262.Crossref
Parolin P, Bresch C, Ruiz G, Poncet C (2013b). Presence of
arthropod pests on eight species of banker plants in a
greenhouse. Ecologia Aplicada 12:1-8.
Parolin P, Bresch C, Ruiz G, Poncet C (2014b). Multiple
choice for mites: first food, then home. Int. J. Agric. Pol.
Res. 2(2):49-54.
Pfister CA, Hay ME (1988). Associational plant refuges:
212
convergent patterns in marine and terrestrial
communities result from differing mechanisms. Oecologia,
77 :118-129.Crossref
Poncet C, Mailleret L, Desneux N, Muller M, Bout A, Brun R,
Pizzol J, Boll R, Bresch C, Parolin P, Fatnassi H (2012). The
ecological approach of greenhouse agro-ecosystem:
practical interest for IPM. Acta Horticulturae 927:173185.
Pontin DR, Wade MR, Kehrli P, Wratten SD (2006).
Attractiveness of single and multiple species flower
patches to beneficial insects in agroecosystems. Annals
Appl. Biol. 148:39-47.Crossref
Pratt P, Croft B (2000). Banker plant: evaluation of release
strategies for predatory mites. J. Environ. Hort.18:211217.
Quarles W, Grossman J (2002). Insectary Plants,
Intercropping and Biological Control. The IPM
Practitioner 24(3):1-11.
Sabelis MW (1990). How to analyse prey preference when
prey density varies? A new method to discriminate
between the effects of gut fullness and prey type
composition. Oecologia 82:289-298. Crossref
Sarwar M, Kongming W, Xuenong X, Endong W (2011).
Evaluations of four mite predators (Acari: Phytosiidae)
released for suppression of spider mite infesting
protected crop of sweet pepper (Capsicum annuum L.).
Afr. J. Agric. Res 6:3509-3514.
Shelton AM, Badenes-Perez FR (2006). Concepts and
applications of trap cropping in pest management. Annu
Rev. Entomol. 51:285-308.Crossref
Skirvin D, Fenlon J (2001). Plant species modifies the
functional response of Phytoseiulus persimilis (Acari:
Phytoseiidae)
to
Tetranychus
urticae
(Acari:
Tetranychidae): implication for biological control. Bul.
Entomol. Res. 91:61-67.
Thresh M (1982). Cropping practices and virus spread. Ann.
Rev. Phytopathol. 20:193-218.Crossref
Tylianakis JM, Romo CM (2010). Natural enemy diversity
and biological control: Making sense of the contextdependency. Basic and Appl. Ecol. 11:657-668. Crossref
Van Leeuwen T, Vontas J, Tsagkarakou A, Dermauw W,
Tirry L (2010). Acaricide resistance mechanisms in the
two-spotted spider mite Tetranychus urticae and other
important Acari: A review. Insect Biochemistry and
Molecular Biol. 40:563-572.Crossref
Warfe DM, Barmuta LA (2004). Habitat structural
complexity mediates the foraging success of multiple
predator species. Oecologia 141:171–178.Crossref