Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of Contributors
- Preface
- 1 Ecology, sustainable development, and IPM: the human factor
- 2 From simple IPM to the management of agroecosystems
- 3 Populations, metapopulations: elementary units of IPM systems
- 4 Arthropod pest behavior and IPM
- 5 Using pheromones to disrupt mating of moth pests
- 6 Nutritional ecology of plant feeding arthropods and IPM
- 7 Conservation, biodiversity, and integrated pest management
- 8 Ecological risks of biological control agents: impacts on IPM
- 9 Ecology of natural enemies and genetically engineered host plants
- 10 Modeling the dynamics of tritrophic population interactions
- 11 Weed ecology, habitat management, and IPM
- 12 The ecology of vertebrate pests and integrated pest management (IPM)
- 13 Ecosystems: concepts, analyses, and practical implications in IPM
- 14 Agroecology: contributions towards a renewed ecological foundation for pest management
- 15 Applications of molecular ecology to IPM: what impact?
- 16 Ecotoxicology: The ecology of interactions between pesticides and non-target organisms
- Index
- References
3 - Populations, metapopulations: elementary units of IPM systems
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 August 2010
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of Contributors
- Preface
- 1 Ecology, sustainable development, and IPM: the human factor
- 2 From simple IPM to the management of agroecosystems
- 3 Populations, metapopulations: elementary units of IPM systems
- 4 Arthropod pest behavior and IPM
- 5 Using pheromones to disrupt mating of moth pests
- 6 Nutritional ecology of plant feeding arthropods and IPM
- 7 Conservation, biodiversity, and integrated pest management
- 8 Ecological risks of biological control agents: impacts on IPM
- 9 Ecology of natural enemies and genetically engineered host plants
- 10 Modeling the dynamics of tritrophic population interactions
- 11 Weed ecology, habitat management, and IPM
- 12 The ecology of vertebrate pests and integrated pest management (IPM)
- 13 Ecosystems: concepts, analyses, and practical implications in IPM
- 14 Agroecology: contributions towards a renewed ecological foundation for pest management
- 15 Applications of molecular ecology to IPM: what impact?
- 16 Ecotoxicology: The ecology of interactions between pesticides and non-target organisms
- Index
- References
Summary
Introduction
Integrated pest mnagement (IPM) is directly concerned with manipulating potentially damaging pest populations and exploits the synergy between control strategies. The drive towards sustainable methods of crop production has demanded that we should minimize chemical use, energy inputs, the effects on non-target organisms, and harm to the wider environment. The development of a framework to conceptualize the processes that drive pest population dynamics will be crucial to this endeavor and allow us to devise increasingly sophisticated, successful, and sustainable management strategies.
Over the last 20 to 30 years there has been a revolution in ecological thinking on how populations function, with the growing appreciation of the spatial dimension and the importance of movement in population dynamics (Woiwod et al., 2001). This revolution found its expression in the development of metapopulation theory, based on the concept of local populations linked together by movement (Hanski, 1999; Hanski and Gilpin, 1997). The metapopulation approach, and indeed the word itself, originated from models developed by Levins (Levins, 1969; Levins, 1970) but this conceptual framework only started to be applied widely in ecology from about 1990 onwards (Hanski and Simberloff, 1997).
The development of this theory has been driven largely by theoretical ecologists and its application by those working within conservation biology. This is perhaps unsurprising as early model formulations emphasized discrete subpopulations with high likelihood of turnover (i.e. extinction and re-colonization) and low levels of movement between patches, which is clearly directly applicable to many species of conservation concern.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2007
References
(2000). Coexistence of competing parasitoids on a patchily distributed host: local vs. spatial mechanisms. Ecology, 81, 1286–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1994). Metapopulation dynamics affect resistance development in the predatory mite, Metaseiulus occidentalis (Acari, Phytoseiidae). Journal of Economic Entomology, 87, 525–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (1998). Pattern formation and the spatial scale of interaction between predators and their prey. Theoretical Population Biology, 53, 108–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1958). The role of weather and entomophagous species in the natural control of insect populations. Journal of Economic Entomology, 51, 474–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , et al. (2002). A balanced view of scale in spatial statistical analysis. Ecography, 25, 626–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (1996). A model for the spatial dynamics of linyphiid spiders in farmland. Journal of Applied Ecology, 33, 471–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1991). Metapopulation dynamics: brief history and conceptual domain. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 42, 3–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1999). Metapopulation Ecology. Oxford Series in Ecology and Evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hanski, I. and Simberloff, D. (1997). The metapopulation approach, its history, conceptual domain, and application to conservation. In and (eds.), Metapopulation Biology: Ecology, Genetics and Evolution. San Diego: Academic Press. pp. 5–26.Google Scholar
and (eds.) (1997). Metapopulation Biology: Ecology, Genetics and Evolution. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
(1991). Local extinction in a metapopulation context: an empirical evaluation. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 42, 73–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, P. H., Nee, S., Mooers, A. O. and Mooers, L. P. (1992). The hierarchical views of life: phylogenies and metapopulations. In , and (eds.), Genes in Ecology. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications. pp. 123–37.Google Scholar
(1997). Spatial scales in ecological pest management (EPM): Importance of regional crop rotations. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture, 15, 163–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1997). A differential equation model of the interaction between the migration of the Senegalese grasshopper, Oedaleus senegalensis, its predators, and a seasonal habitat. Ecological Modelling, 101, 185–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2002). Landscape structure, habitat fragmentation, and the ecology of insects. Agricultural and Forest Entomology, 4, 159–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (1993). Response of a predator to variation in prey density at three hierarchical scales: lady beetles feeding on aphids. Ecology, 74, 1929–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1997). Metapopulation dynamics and pest control in agricultural systems. American Naturalist, 149, 220–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (2001). The influence of matrix habitat on Apthona flea beetle immigration to leafy spurge patches. Oecologia, 127, 287–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and (2000). Can host–parasitoid metapopulations explain successful biological control?Ecology, 81, 2188–97.Google Scholar
and (2001). A spatial model for the successful biological control of Sitona discoideus by Microctonus aethiopoides. Journal of Applied Ecology, 38, 162–9.Google Scholar
(1969). Some demographic and genetic consequences of environmental heterogeneity for biological control. Bulletin of the Entomological Society of America, 15, 237–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1996). Modelling the biological control of insect pests: a review of host–parasitoid models. Ecological Modelling, 92, 121–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1994). Population regulation in theory and practice – the Robert H. Macarthur Award Lecture presented August 1991 in San Antonio, Texas, USA. Ecology, 75, 271–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , and (1996). Refuge dynamics and metapopulation dynamics: an experimental test. American Naturalist, 147, 424–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1991). An acarine predator–prey metapopulation system inhabiting greenhouse cucumbers. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 42, 285–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2000). Effects of demographic parameters on metapopulation size and persistence: an analytical stochastic model. Oikos, 91, 51–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (1990). Host–parasitoid associations in patchy environments. Nature, 344, 150–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , et al. (2002). Illustrations and guidelines for selecting statistical methods for quantifying spatial pattern in ecological data. Ecography, 25, 578–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1988). Environmental variability, migration, and persistence in host–parasitoid systems. American Naturalist, 132, 810–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1990). Stability, variability, and persistence in host–parasitoid systems. Ecology, 71, 422–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (1991). Metapopulation persistence despite local extinction: predator–prey patch models of the Lotka-Volterra type. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 42, 267–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2000). Optimal release strategies for biological control agents: an application of stochastic dynamic programming to population management. Journal of Applied Ecology, 37, 77–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1993). A metapopulation approach to modelling the long-term impact of pesticides on invertebrates. Journal of Applied Ecology, 30, 696–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simberloff, D. (1986). Island biogeographic theory and integrated pest management. In (ed.), Ecological Theory and Integrated Pest Management Practice. New York: Wiley-Interscience. pp. 19–35.Google Scholar
, , and (2002). Modelling the effects of plant species on biocontrol effectiveness in ornamental nursery crops. Journal of Applied Ecology, 39, 469–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (1999). Hops as a metapopulation landscape for tetranychid–phytoseiid interactions: perspectives of intra- and interplant dispersal. Experimental and Applied Acarology, 23, 581–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1991). Studying metapopulation effects in predator–prey systems. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 42, 305–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (1998). Isolating the components of activity-density for the carabid beetle Pterostichus melanarius in farmland. Oecologia, 116, 103–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , and (2002). Characteristics of insect populations on habitat fragments: a mini-review. Ecological Research, 17, 229–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1994). Immigration and the dynamics of a predator–prey interaction in biological-control. Journal of Animal Ecology, 63, 337–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , and (2001). Modelling the dynamic spatio-temporal response of predators to transient prey patches in the field. Ecology Letters, 4, 568–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1997). Cyclic colonization in predictably ephemeral habitats: a template for biological control in annual crop systems. Biological Control, 10, 4–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woiwod, I. P., Reynolds, D. R. and Thomas, C. D. (2001). Introduction and overview. In , , and (eds.), Insect Movement: Mechanisms and Consequences, Wallingford, UK: CAB International. pp. 1–18.Google Scholar
- 1
- Cited by