CSIRO Publishing Books Journals About Us Shopping Cart You are here: Journals > Animal Production Science   
Animal Production Science
  Food, Fibre and Pharmaceuticals from Animals
 
Search
 
 
  Advanced Search
   

Journal Home
About the Journal
Editorial Board
Contacts
Content
Online Early
Current Issue
Just Accepted
All Issues
Special Issues
Research Fronts
Reviews
Sample Issue
For Authors
General Information
Notes for Authors
Submit Article
Open Access
For Referees
General Information
Review Article
Annual Referee Index
For Subscribers
Subscription Prices
Customer Service
Print Publication Dates

 Early Alert
Subscribe to our Email Alert or RSS feeds for the latest journal papers.

 Connect with us
facebook   youtube

Training

Publication Workshops


 

Article << Previous     |     Next >>   Contents Vol 46(10)

Shelterbelts in agricultural landscapes suppress invertebrate pests

A. Tsitsilas B, S. Stuckey A, A. A. Hoffmann A, A. R. Weeks B, L. J. Thomson A C

A Centre for Environmental Stress and Adaptation Research, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Vic. 3086, Australia.
B Centre for Environmental Stress and Adaptation Research, Zoology Department, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Vic. 3010, Australia.
C Corresponding author. Email: lthom@unimelb.edu.au.
 
PDF (213 KB) $25
 Export Citation
 Print
  


Abstract

The homogenous nature of agricultural landscapes generally reduces biodiversity of invertebrate species, but this can be partly offset by developing refuges at field margins. In Australia, shelterbelts are widely planted to provide protection for livestock and to counter salinity problems associated with rising water tables. Shelterbelts may also play a role in acting as reservoirs for organisms that are beneficial to pastures, although this has rarely been directly evaluated. We sampled invertebrates along transects running from replicated shelterbelts into pastures, and in glasshouse trials we tested the impact of the beneficial organisms from the shelterbelts on the collected pests. Contrary to popular views, numbers of pest mites and lucerne fleas were low within shelterbelts. Moreover, numbers were typically lower adjacent to shelterbelts compared with >30 m into the pasture, an effect that was much more apparent when shelterbelts carried a groundcover of high (>30 cm) grass. Numbers of predatory mites and spiders were higher in shelterbelts and in adjacent pasture when there was taller grass and higher grass cover in the shelterbelts. Samples of potential predators collected from a shelterbelt were more effective at suppressing pest mite numbers than those collected in pasture. Shelterbelts with ground cover appear to harbour a diversity of beneficial organisms that suppress pest numbers in adjacent pastures.

Keywords: field margins, natural enemies, pasture mites, predatory mites, spiders.


   
Subscriber Login
Username:
Password:  

    


 
Top  Email this page
 
Legal & Privacy | Contact Us | Help

CSIRO

© CSIRO 1996-2012