Impacts of field margins and organic practices on arthropod natural enemy and pest diversities in paddy fields
-
摘要: 过去几十年间, 为了满足不断增加的粮食需求而发展集约化农业, 已成为导致全球生物多样性丧失的重要因素, 由此引起的害虫生物控制等重要生态系统服务的下降严重威胁到了农业可持续发展。探究更加绿色、生物多样性友好的生产管理方式已成为农业生态学研究的重要内容。本文通过调查, 分析了稻田边界植物群落结构对节肢动物群落分布的影响, 探讨了有机农业生产和农田边界带管理对农田生物多样性和害虫生物控制服务的影响, 为稻田可持续生产提供科学依据。本研究主要结果如下: 1)本研究捕获节肢动物9531头, 分属50个科。其中, 天敌类群有28个科2653头(包括蜘蛛2253头, 分属14个科41个种); 害虫类群有18个科3971头, 优势科为叶蝉科(Cicadellidae, 84.01%)。2)毗邻花带的有机稻田天敌丰富度显著高于常规稻田和有机稻田, 有机稻田天敌丰富度显著高于常规稻田, 毗邻花带的有机稻田天敌多度也显著高于常规稻田。3)毗邻花带的有机稻田中, 稻田边界田埂和与边界不同距离的稻田内部天敌多度和丰富度差异显著, 其中天敌丰富度在距离为5 m时显著高于20 m, 天敌多度在5 m时显著高于0 m。4)稻田内部及其边界田埂的天敌丰富度和多度及害虫多度均与稻田边界田埂地表植被盖度呈显著正相关。5)常规稻田中天敌/害虫多度比最高, 可能是由于广谱杀虫剂杀死了大部分害虫; 有机稻田中天敌/害虫多度比较低, 其中不毗邻花带的有机稻田中最低, 可能是由于有机稻田中害虫数量较高。研究表明, 在地块内实行有机管理措施, 同时在边界上构建野花带, 可以有效地维持稻田天敌生物多样性, 提高稻田天敌个体数量。但是, 有效控制害虫多样性、提升天敌对害虫的控制, 还需要更多植物和节肢动物相互关系的认识, 通过“正确”植物物种的选择实现害虫生物防治功能提升。Abstract: Although the expansion of agricultural land and intensive production have contributed to increased food production, the resulting high-intensity human disturbances and excessive use of agrochemicals have caused significant environmental damage. This has led to the loss of biodiversity and degradation of ecosystem services, ultimately posing threats to both sustainable food production and human health. Therefore, it is crucial to develop sustainable production management strategies. Organic production at the field scale and the establishment of flowering boundaries are considered efficient measures for biodiversity and ecosystem services. However, few studies have investigated whether organic practices and flowering boundaries can effectively increase the natural enemies of arthropods and improve the control of pests in cultivated fields, particularly in paddy planting systems. In this study, we aimed to fill this knowledge gap by investigating the distribution and diversity of natural enemies and pests of arthropods in paddy fields and their field margins, and how vegetation on the field margin affect diversities of natural enemies and pests of arthropods in paddy fields. The following three treatments were established: conventional paddy fields with traditional field margins (Con), organic paddy fields with traditional field margins (Org), and organic paddy fields with flowering boundaries (OrgF). Arthropods were sampled at the field margins and in paddy fields 5 and 20 m away from the margin using a suction sampler. Vegetation coverage and diversity in the field margins were also investigated. The results are as follows: 1) a total of 9531 arthropods belonging to 50 families were caught, with 2653 individuals identified as natural enemies from 28 families (including 2253 individual spiders belonging to 14 families and 41 species), and a total of 3971 individual pests representing 18 families (dominated by Cicadellidae, accounting for 84.01% of the total pests). 2) The richness of the natural enemies in Org was greater than that in Con. The richness of natural enemies in OrgF was higher than that in Con and Org, and the abundance of natural enemies in OrgF was higher than that in Con. 3) In OrgF, the abundance and richness of natural enemies at different distances between the boundary of the paddy field and the interior of the paddy field were significantly different, with a greater richness of natural enemies in the paddy field 5 m away from the field margin than at 20 m. Furthermore, the abundance of natural enemies was significantly lower at the field margins than in paddy fields 5 m away from the boundary. 4) The richness and abundance of natural enemies and pests in paddy fields and their boundaries were positively correlated with vegetation coverage at the paddy field boundary. 5) The ratio of enemies to pests was the highest in the conventional paddy fields (Con), as most pests might be killed by broad-spectrum insecticides, followed by Org and OrgF, which had a large number of pests with only targeted bio-pesticides being used. In conclusion, organic practices in the fields and the flowering boundaries can effectively help to maintain arthropod diversity and increase the diversity of natural enemies in paddy fields. However, to effectively control pests and improve biological control services, an in-depth understanding of the plant-arthropod relationship and careful selection of the “correct” plant diversity are required.
-
图 1 昆山市巴城悦丰岛水稻基地采样稻田分布图
Con1、Con2、Con3和Con4分别表示常规稻田的4个采样点; Org1、Org2、Org3和Org4分别表示有机稻田的4个采样点; OrgF1、OrgF2、OrgF3和OrgF4分别表示毗邻花带的有机稻田的4个采样点。Con1, Con2, Con3 and Con4 refer to the 4 sampling pionts in conventional paddy field; Org1, Org2, Org3 and Org4 refer to the 4 sampling pionts in organic paddy field; OrgF1, OrgF2, OrgF3 and OrgF4 refer to the 4 sampling pionts in organic paddy field adjacent to the flowering boundary.
Figure 1. Distribution of the sampling paddy fields in Yuefeng Island in Bacheng Town in Kunshan City
图 2 不同处理稻田中节肢动物取样样方位置示意图
Con、Org和OrgF分别表示常规稻田、有机稻田和毗邻花带的有机稻田。○示取样样方, ①、②和③表示样带编号。Con, Org and OrgF refer to conventional paddy field, organic paddy field and organic paddy field adjacent to the flowering boundary. ○ refers to sampling plot, and ①, ② and ③ refer to numbers of sampling transects.
Figure 2. Schematic diagrams of the location of sampling plots of arthropod in paddy fields of different treatments
图 3 不同稻田边界和生产管理方式下稻田节肢动物中天敌和害虫的稀释曲线 (95%置信区间)
Con、Org和OrgF分别表示常规稻田、有机稻田和毗邻花带的有机稻田。Con, Org and OrgF refer to conventional paddy field, organic paddy field and organic paddy field adjacent to the flowering boundary.
Figure 3. Rarefaction curves of the number of species and individuals for natural enemies and pests of arthropods in paddy fields with different field margins and production management types (95% confidence)
图 4 不同处理稻田节肢动物中的天敌和害虫丰富度和多度对比
Con、Org和OrgF分别表示常规稻田、有机稻田和毗邻花带的有机稻田。不同小写字母表示不同处理在P<0.05水平差异显著。Con, Org and OrgF refer to conventional paddy field, organic paddy field and organic paddy field adjacent to the flowering boundary. Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences among different treatments at P<0.05 level.
Figure 4. Comparison of richness and abundance of natural enemy and pest from arthropods in paddy fields under different treatments
图 5 基于非度量多维尺度分析(NMDS)与群落相似度分析的不同处理稻田节肢动物群落组成对比
Con、Org和OrgF分别表示常规稻田、有机稻田和毗邻花带的有机稻田。Con, Org and OrgF refer to conventional paddy field, organic paddy field and organic paddy field adjacent to the flowering boundary.
Figure 5. Comparison of community composition of arthropods in paddy fields under different treatments based on non-linear multi-dimensional scaling (NMDS) and community similarity analysis
图 6 距农田边界不同距离的不同处理稻田内部采样样方的节肢动物多样性指数
Con、Org和OrgF分别表示常规稻田、有机稻田和毗邻花带的有机稻田。“d”表示农田边界至稻田内部取样样方的距离(m)。不同小写字母表示不同处理在P<0.05水平差异显著。Con, Org and OrgF refer to conventional paddy field, organic paddy field and organic paddy field adjacent to the flowering boundary. “d” refers to the distance between sampling plots and field margin (m). Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences among different treatments at P<0.05 level.
Figure 6. Arthropod diversity indexes in sampling plots with different distances from the field margin in paddy fields under different treatments
图 7 距农田边界不同距离的不同处理稻田内部节肢动物中天敌群落的非度量多维度分析(NMDS)
Con、Org和OrgF分别表示常规稻田、有机稻田和毗邻花带的有机稻田。“d”表示农田边界至稻田内部取样样方的距离(m)。Con, Org and OrgF refer to conventional paddy field, organic paddy field and organic paddy field adjacent to the flowering boundary. “d” refers to the distance between sampling plots and the field margin (m).
Figure 7. Non-linear multi-dimensional scaling (NMDS) based on natural enemies from arthropods in sampling plots with different distances from the field margin in paddy fields under different treatments
图 8 距农田边界不同距离的不同处理稻田内部节肢动物中害虫群落的非度量多维度分析(NMDS)
Con、Org和OrgF分别表示常规稻田、有机稻田和毗邻花带的有机稻田。“d”表示农田边界至稻田内部取样样方的距离(m)。Con, Org and OrgF refer to conventional paddy field, organic paddy field and organic paddy field adjacent to the flowering boundary. “d” refers to the distance between sampling plots and the field margin (m).
Figure 8. Non-linear multi-dimensional scaling (NMDS) based on pests from arthropods in sampling plots in paddy fields with different distances from the field margin in paddy fields under different treatments
图 9 稻田边界田埂地表植被盖度与稻田内部节肢动物多样性的关系
Figure 9. Relationship between vegetation cover rate at the field margin and arthropod diversity in paddy fields
图 10 不同处理稻田(A)及与农田边界不同距离稻田内部(B)节肢动物中天敌和害虫多度比
Con、Org和OrgF分别表示常规稻田、有机稻田和毗邻花带的有机稻田。图中不同小写字母表示不同处理/距离在P<0.05水平差异显著。Con, Org and OrgF refer to conventional paddy field, organic paddy field and organic paddy field adjacent to the flowering boundary. Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences among different treatments/distances at P<0.05 level.
Figure 10. Ratio of abundance of natural enemies to pests from arthropods in paddy fields under different treatments (A) and paddy fields with different distances from field margin (B)
表 1 有机稻田和常规稻田管理信息
Table 1. Management information of organic and conventional paddy fields
投入
Input常规稻田
Conventional paddy field有机稻田
Organic paddy field毗邻花带的有机稻田
Organic paddy field adjacent to the flowering boundary水稻品种
Rice variety南粳46 Nanjing 46 绿肥
Green manure油菜和苕子 Brassica napus and Vicia dasycarpa 农药
Pesticide咪鲜胺、烯啶虫胺、茚虫威、
草甘膦异丙胺盐
Prochloraz, nitenpyram, indoxacarb and glyphosate isopropylamine salt苦参碱、蛇床子素、枯草芽孢杆菌和人工除草
Matrine, osthole, Bacillus subtilis and manual weeding除草时间
Weeding time2022年7月20日除草, 随后根据实际情况增加一次除草
Weed on 20th July in 2022, and then part of paddy field will be weeded one more time according to the actual situation2022年6月25日起, 以15 d为一个周期除草, 共4次
Weed once every 15 days from 25th June in 2022, 4 times in total边界植被
Vegetation located at the boundary田埂地表植被总盖度为16.50%, 优势物种为马唐和牛筋草, 占比分别为11.75%和24.06%
Total vegetation coverage rate of the field margin is 16.5%, and the dominant species are Digitaria sanguinalis and Eleusine indica, accounting for 11.75% and 24.06%, respectively田埂地表植被总覆盖度为66.00%, 优势物种为莲子草, 占比81.92%
Total vegetation coverage rate of the field margin is 66.00% and the dominant species is Alternanthera sessilis, accounting for 81.92%稻田边界靠近公路绿化带和野花带, 野花带以菊科混播为主。田埂地表植被总盖度为69.25%, 优势物种为莲子草, 占比68.54%
The paddy field margin is close to green belt along highway and wild flowering boundaries, and the latter one is dominated by a mixture of the Asteraceae species. Vegetation coverage rate of the field margin is 69.25%, and the dominant species is Alternanthera sessilis, accounting for 68.54%
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 不同处理稻田边界地表覆盖植被基础数据
Table 2. Basic data of the surface cover vegetation at field margin of paddy fields under different treatments
处理 Treatment 丰富度 Richness 盖度 Cover (%) 常规稻田 Conventional paddy field 6.25±1.71a 16.50±2.89b 有机稻田 Organic paddy field 8.00±1.83a 66.00±3.63a 毗邻花带的有机稻田 Organic paddy field adjacent to the flowering boundary 9.00±2.16a 69.25±1.97a 不同小写字母表示不同处理间在P<0.05 水平差异显著。Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences among different treatments at P<0.05 level.
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] MEEMKEN E M, QAIM M. Organic agriculture, food security, and the environment[J]. Annual Review of Resource Economics, 2018, 10: 39−63 doi: 10.1146/annurev-resource-100517-023252 [2] CAMPBELL J W, MILNE M, DINH B T, et al. Spider (Araneae) abundance and species richness comparison between native wildflower plantings and fallow controls in intensively managed agricultural areas[J]. Arthropod-Plant Interactions, 2020, 14(2): 263−274 doi: 10.1007/s11829-019-09725-9 [3] KLEIJN D, KOHLER F, BÁLDI A, et al. On the relationship between farmland biodiversity and land-use intensity in Europe[J]. Proceedings Biological Sciences, 2009, 276(1658): 903−909 [4] PRUDHOMME R, DE PALMA A, DUMAS P, et al. Combining mitigation strategies to increase co-benefits for biodiversity and food security[J]. Environmental Research Letters, 2020, 15(11): 114005 doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/abb10a [5] ETIENNE L, FRANCK P, LAVIGNE C, et al. Pesticide use in vineyards is affected by semi-natural habitats and organic farming share in the landscape[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2022, 333: 107967 [6] SERÉE L, ROUZES R, THIÉRY D, et al. Temporal variation of the effects of landscape composition on lacewings (Chrysopidae: Neuroptera) in vineyards[J]. Agricultural and Forest Entomology, 2020, 22(3): 274−283 doi: 10.1111/afe.12380 [7] MARINO P C, LANDIS D A. Effect of landscape structure on parasitoid diversity and parasitism in agroecosystems[J]. Ecological Applications, 1996, 6(1): 276−284 doi: 10.2307/2269571 [8] WESTPHAL C, VIDAL S, HORGAN F G, et al. Promoting multiple ecosystem services with flower strips and participatory approaches in rice production landscapes[J]. Basic and Applied Ecology, 2015, 16(8): 681−689 doi: 10.1016/j.baae.2015.10.004 [9] HAALAND C, NAISBIT R E, BERSIER L F. Sown wildflower strips for insect conservation: a review[J]. Insect Conservation and Diversity, 2011, 4(1): 60−80 doi: 10.1111/j.1752-4598.2010.00098.x [10] MIDDLETON E G, MACRAE I V, PHILIPS C R. Floral plantings in large-scale commercial agroecosystems support both pollinators and arthropod predators[J]. Insects, 2021, 12(2): 91 doi: 10.3390/insects12020091 [11] WOODCOCK B A, BULLOCK J M, MCCRACKEN M, et al. Spill-over of pest control and pollination services into arable crops[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2016, 231: 15−23 [12] 魏雪, 胡潇方, 徐志宇, 等. 欧盟的农田生物多样性保护政策及启示[J]. 中国国土资源经济, 2022, 35(12): 40−47 doi: 10.19676/j.cnki.1672-6995.000820WEI X, HU X F, XU Z Y, et al. Policies and implications of farmland biodiversity conservation in the European Union[J]. Natural Resource Economics of China, 2022, 35(12): 40−47 doi: 10.19676/j.cnki.1672-6995.000820 [13] GONG S X, ZHOU X S, ZHU X M, et al. Organic rice cultivation enhances the diversity of above-ground arthropods but not below-ground soil eukaryotes[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2023, 347: 108390 [14] 满吉勇, 袁凯, 陈宝雄, 等. 太湖流域稻田管理方式对蜘蛛群落特征的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报(中英文), 2021, 29(9): 1467−1479MAN J Y, YUAN K, CHEN B X, et al. Impact of rice field management on the spider community characteristics in Taihu Lake Basin[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2021, 29(9): 1467−1479 [15] 周子杨, 黄先才, 孟玲, 等. 有机稻田埂植物上节肢动物多样性[J]. 生态学杂志, 2011, 30(7): 1347−1353ZHOU Z Y, HUANG X C, MENG L, et al. Arthropod diversity on plants at field margins of organic farming paddy rice[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2011, 30(7): 1347−1353 [16] 袁伟, 刘洪, 张士新, 等. 长江农场有机稻田害虫与天敌群落评价[J]. 上海农业学报, 2010, 26(2): 132−136YUAN W, LIU H, ZHANG S X, et al. Evaluation of communities of insect pests and natural enemies in organic rice fields of Changjiang Farm[J]. Acta Agriculturae Shanghai, 2010, 26(2): 132−136 [17] PIMENTEL D. Environmental and economic costs of the application of pesticides primarily in the United States[J]. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 2005, 7(2): 229−252 doi: 10.1007/s10668-005-7314-2 [18] RUSCH A, VALANTIN-MORISON M, SARTHOU J P, et al. Biological control of insect pests in agroecosystems: effects of crop management, farming systems, and seminatural habitats at the landscape scale: a review[J]. Advances in Agronomy, 2010, 109: 219−259 [19] SASKA P, VODDE M, HEIJERMAN T, et al. The significance of a grassy field boundary for the spatial distribution of carabids within two cereal fields[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2007, 122(4): 427−434 [20] ARTLETT M S. Properties of sufficiency and statistical tests[M]//KOTZ S, JOHNSON N L. Breakthroughs in Statistics. New York: Springer, 1992: 113−126 [21] SPRENT P. Applied Nonparametric Statistical Methods[M]. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 1989 [22] GREGO J M. Practical data analysis for designed experiments[J]. Technometrics, 1998, 40(2): 154−155 [23] UNDERWOOD A J. Experiments in Ecology: Their Logical Design and Interpretation Using Analysis of Variance[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997 [24] HOCHBERG Y. A sharper Bonferroni procedure for multiple tests of significance[J]. Biometrika, 1988, 75(4): 800−802 doi: 10.1093/biomet/75.4.800 [25] ARGAÑARAZ C I, MARTÍNEZ PASTUR G J, RAMÍREZ M J, et al. Ground-dwelling spiders and understory vascular plants on Fuegian austral forests: Community responses to variable retention management and their association to natural ecosystems[J]. Forest Ecology and Management, 2020, 474: 118375 doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118375 [26] GINESTET C. Ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis[J]. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 2011, 174(1): 245−246 doi: 10.1111/j.1467-985X.2010.00676_9.x [27] TAKADA M B, TAKAGI S, IWABUCHI S, et al. Comparison of generalist predators in winter-flooded and conventionally managed rice paddies and identification of their limiting factors[J]. SpringerPlus, 2014, 3: 418 doi: 10.1186/2193-1801-3-418 [28] 吴大付, 吴艳兵, 任秀娟, 等. 农业集约化对生物多样性的影响[J]. 吉林农业科学, 2010, 35(2): 61−64WU D F, WU Y B, REN X J, et al. Agricultural intensification’s impaction on the biodiversity[J]. Journal of Jilin Agricultural Sciences, 2010, 35(2): 61−64 [29] RAMLYUSOF N H, YUSUP S, KUEH B W B, et al. Effectiveness of biopesticides in enhancing paddy growth for yield improvement[J]. Sustainable Chemistry & Pharmacy, 2018, 7: 1−8 [30] YUAN X, ZHOU W W, JIANG Y D, et al. Organic regime promotes evenness of natural enemies and planthopper control in paddy fields[J]. Environmental Entomology, 2019, 48(2): 318−325 doi: 10.1093/ee/nvz013 [31] TSUTSUI M H, TANAKA K, BABA Y G, et al. Spatio-temporal dynamics of generalist predators (Tetragnatha spider) in environmentally friendly paddy fields[J]. Applied Entomology and Zoology, 2016, 51(4): 631−640 doi: 10.1007/s13355-016-0440-5 [32] 刘子琪, 袁龙飞, 廖先骏, 等. 新烟碱类杀虫剂呋虫胺的研究进展[J]. 现代农药, 2021, 20(1): 7−12LIU Z Q, YUAN L F, LIAO X J, et al. Research progress of neonicotinoid insecticide dinotefuran[J]. Modern Agrochemicals, 2021, 20(1): 7−12 [33] 廖丹. 茚虫威在水稻中的残留及其光降解研究[D]. 长沙: 湖南师范大学, 2019LIAO D. Study on the residues in rice field and the photodegradation of indoxacarb[D]. Changsha: Hunan Normal University, 2019 [34] HE X Q, QIAO Y H, SIGSGAARD L, et al. The spider diversity and plant hopper control potential in the long-term organic paddy fields in sub-tropical area, China[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2020, 295: 106921 [35] 段美春, 张鑫, 李想, 等. 农田景观虫害控制植被缓冲带布局、模式和功能[J]. 中国农学通报, 2014, 30(1): 264−270DUAN M C, ZHANG X, LI X, et al. Layout, type and function of farmland vegetable buffer with insect pests control in agricultural landscape[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2014, 30(1): 264−270 [36] LOWE E B, GROVES R, GRATTON C. Impacts of field-edge flower plantings on pollinator conservation and ecosystem service delivery — A meta-analysis[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2021, 310: 107290 [37] BELL J R, WHEATER C P, CULLEN W R. The implications of grassland and heathland management for the conservation of spider communities: a review[J]. Journal of Zoology, 2001, 255(3): 377−387 doi: 10.1017/S0952836901001479 [38] SCHELLHORN N A, BIANCHI F J J A, HSU C L. Movement of entomophagous arthropods in agricultural landscapes: links to pest suppression[J]. Annual Review of Entomology, 2014, 59: 559−581 doi: 10.1146/annurev-ento-011613-161952 [39] ANJUM-ZUBAIR M, SCHMIDT-ENTLING M H, QUERNER P, et al. Influence of within-field position and adjoining habitat on carabid beetle assemblages in winter wheat[J]. Agricultural and Forest Entomology, 2010, 12(3): 301−306 [40] MANLICK P J, PAULI J N. Human disturbance increases trophic niche overlap in terrestrial carnivore communities[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2020, 117(43): 26842−26848 [41] JEANNERET P, SCHÜPBACH B, PFIFFNER L, et al. Arthropod reaction to landscape and habitat features in agricultural landscapes[J]. Landscape Ecology, 2003, 18(3): 253−263 doi: 10.1023/A:1024496712579 [42] TSCHARNTKE T, GRASS I, WANGER T C, et al. Beyond organic farming-harnessing biodiversity-friendly landscapes[J]. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 2021, 36(10): 919−930 [43] KATI V, KARAMAOUNA F, ECONOMOU L, et al. Sown wildflowers enhance habitats of pollinators and beneficial arthropods in a tomato field margin[J]. Plants, 2021, 10(5): 1003 doi: 10.3390/plants10051003 [44] 俞欢慧. 利用稻田田埂生物多样性控制水稻虫害的效应研究[D]. 海口: 海南大学, 2014YU H H. Study on the effects of controlling rice pests by using plant biodiversity of paddy ridge[D]. Haikou: Hainan University, 2014 [45] 梁中伟, 曹艳霞, 李文文, 等. 推拉系统在玉米有机种植中防治害虫效果研究−以香根草和糖蜜草组成推拉系统为例[J]. 农业科技通讯, 2013(10): 68−73LIANG Z W, CAO Y X, LI W W, et al. Study on the effect of push-pull system on pest control in organic maize planting: a case study of the push-pull system composed of Vetiveria zizanioides and Melinis minutiflora[J]. Bulletin of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2013(10): 68−73 [46] MACLEOD A, WRATTEN S D, SOTHERTON N W, et al. ‘Beetle banks’ as refuges for beneficial arthropods in farmland: long-term changes in predator communities and habitat[J]. Agricultural and Forest Entomology, 2004, 6(2): 147−154 doi: 10.1111/j.1461-9563.2004.00215.x [47] 吴学峰, 高亦珂, 谢哲城, 等. 昆虫野花带在农业景观中的应用[J]. 中国生态农业学报(中英文), 2019, 27(10): 1481−1491WU X F, GAO Y K, XIE Z C, et al. Application of wildflower strips for agricultural landscaping[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2019, 27(10): 1481−1491 [48] 庄西卿. 稻田田埂昆虫群落与田埂杂草关系的研究[J]. 生态学报, 1989, 9(1): 35−40ZHUANG X Q. Studies on the relationship between the insect community and the grasses on the rice field ridges[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 1989, 9(1): 35−40 -
点击查看大图
计量
- 文章访问数: 68
- HTML全文浏览量: 44
- PDF下载量: 12
- 被引次数: 0
