Abstract
AbstractWhole ecosystem-based approaches are becoming increasingly common in pest management within agricultural systems. These strategies consider all trophic levels and abiotic processes within an ecosystem, including interactions between different factors. This review outlines a whole ecosystem approach to the integrated pest management of pear psyllid (Cacopsylla pyri Linnaeus) within pear (Pyrus communis L.) orchards, focusing on potential disruptions as a result of climate change. Pear psyllid is estimated to cost the UK pear industry £5 million per annum and has a significant economic impact on pear production globally. Pesticide resistance is well documented in psyllids, leading to many growers to rely on biological control using natural enemies during the summer months. In addition, multiple insecticides commonly used in pear psyllid control have been withdrawn from the UK and Europe, emphasising the need for alternative control methods. There is growing concern that climate change could alter trophic interactions and phenological events within agroecosystems. For example, warmer temperatures could lead to earlier pear flowering and pest emergence, as well as faster insect development rates and altered activity levels. If climate change impacts pear psyllid differently to natural enemies, then trophic mismatches could occur, impacting pest populations. This review aims to evaluate current strategies used in C. pyri management, discuss trophic interactions within this agroecosystem and highlight potential changes in the top-down and bottom-up control of C. pyri as a result of climate change. This review provides a recommended approach to pear psyllid management, identifies evidence gaps and outlines areas of future research.
Funder
Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference269 articles.
1. Abbas F, O’Neill Rothenberg D, Zhou Y, Ke Y, Wang HC (2022) Volatile organic compounds as mediators of plant communication and adaptation to climate change. Physiol Plant 174(6):13840. https://doi.org/10.1111/ppl.13840
2. Adams R, Domeisen C, Ford L (1983) Visual trap for monitoring pear psylla (Homoptera: Psyllidae) adults on pears. Environ Entomol 12(5):1327–1331. https://doi.org/10.1093/ee/12.5.1327
3. Agathokleous E, Feng Z, Oksanen E, Sicard P, Wang Q, Saitanis CJ, Araminiene V, Blande JD, Hayes F, Calatayud V (2020) Ozone affects plant, insect, and soil microbial communities: a threat to terrestrial ecosystems and biodiversity. Sci Adv 6(33):1176. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abc1176
4. AHDB (2012) Final Report-Exploiting semiochemicals, conservation biocontrol and selective physical controls in integrated management of pear sucker. https://projectbluearchive.blob.core.windows.net/media/Default/Research%20Papers/Horticulture/TF%20181%20final%202012%20psg.pdf. Accessed 1 December 2023
5. Allison JD, Daniel Hare J (2009) Learned and naive natural enemy responses and the interpretation of volatile organic compounds as cues or signals. New Phytol 184(4):768–782. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2009.03046.x