Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T06:04:32.515Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Early season natural control of the brown planthopper, Nilaparvata lugens: the contribution and interaction of two spider species and a predatory bug

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 October 2007

L. Sigsgaard
L. Sigsgaard*
Affiliation:
Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Thorvaldsensvej 40, DK-1871 Frederiksberg C, Denmark
*
*Fax: +45 3528 2670 E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Nilaparvata lugens Stål, the Brown Planthopper (BPH), is a major pest in rice. The lycosid Pardosa pseudoannulata (Bösenberg & Strand) and the linyphiid Atypena formosana (Oi) are the early dominant predators in irrigated rice. Later, predatory bugs, including the mirid Cyrtorhinus lividipennis Reuter, become dominant. In unsprayed rice, BPH numbers normally remain low. While P. pseudoannulata is known to be a key natural enemy of BPH, the contribution to BPH reduction by the smaller A. formosana is less well known. Due to the size difference, A. formosana may also be an intraguild prey of P. pseudoannulata. To investigate predation on BPH by the two spider species alone, together and in combination with C. lividipennis, two cage experiments were conducted, the first with adult spiders, the second with immature/unmated spiders. In the latter, spiders were introduced with a delay to allow a better establishment of C. lividipennis. In both experiments, BPH numbers were lowest in treatments with more than one predator species present. Intermediate BPH reduction was obtained with P. pseudoannulata followed by A. formosana and C. lividipennis. While P. pseudoannulata can prey upon large nymphs and adult BPH, A. formosana favour early instar BPH, leading to a more even control across instars in treatments with both spider species. Pardosa pseudoannulata numbers increased more with A. formosana or A. formosana and C. lividipennis present. In contrast, P. pseudoannulata reduced A. formosana and C. lividipennis numbers. The presence of C. lividipennis apparently lessened intraguild predation on A. formosana and may be an intraguild prey of A. formosana. Competition for prey may have added to the antagonistic interactions found. From a biological control perspective, the presence of both spiders in early rice is an advantage for the biological control of BPH in rice. In early rice, results show that A. formosana is an important predator of BPH and, like C. lividipennis, can complement control by P. pseudoannulata and serve as intraguild prey for the latter species.

Keywords

biological controlNilaparvata lugensPardosa pseudoannulataAtypena formosanaCyrtorhinus lividipennisrice
Type
Research Article
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 97 , Issue 5 , October 2007 , pp. 533 - 544
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aquilino, K.M., Cardinale, B.J. & Ives, A.R. (2005) Reciprocal effects of host plant and natural enemy diversity on herbivore suppression: an empirical study of a model tritrophic system. Oikos 108, 275–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrion, A.T. & Litsinger, J.A. (1984) The spider fauna of Philippine rice agroecosystems. II. Wetland. Philippine Entomologist 6, 11–37.Google Scholar
Barrion, A.T., Aquino, G.B. & Heong, K.L. (1994) Community structures and population dynamics of rice arthropods in irrigated ricefields in the Philippines. Philippine Journal of Crop Science 19, 73–85.Google Scholar
Cardinale, B.J., Harvey, C.T., Gross, K. & Ives, A.R. (2003) Biodiversity and biocontrol: emergent impacts of a multi-enemy assemblage on pest suppression and crop yield in an agroecosystem. Ecology Letters 6(9), 857–865.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, M.E., Wolcott, T.G., Wolcott, D.L. & Hines, A.H. (1999) Intraspecific interference among foraging blue crabs Callinectes sapidus: interactive effects of predator density and prey patch distribution. Marine Ecology Progress Series 178, 69–78.Google Scholar
Diggle, P.J., Liang, K.Y. & Zeger, S.L. (1994) Analysis of Longitudinal Data. 253 pp. Oxford, Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Domingo, I.T. & Schoenly, K.G. (1998) An improved suction apparatus for sampling invertebrate communities in flooded rice. International Rice Research Notes 23, 38–39.Google Scholar
Finke, D.F. & Denno, R.F. (2005) Predator diversity and the functioning of ecosystems: the role of intraguild predation in dampening trophic cascades. Ecology Letters 8, 1299–1306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallagher, K.S., Kenmore, P.E. & Sogawa, K. (1994) Judicial use of insecticides deter planthopper outbreaks and extend the life of resistant varieties in southeast Asian rice. pp. 599–614in Denno, R.F. & Perfect, T.J. (Eds) Planthoppers: Their Ecology and Management. New York, Chapman & Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, J. (1999) Sampling method and time determines composition of spider collections. Journal of Arachnology 27, 176–182.Google Scholar
Greenstone, M.H. (1979) Spider feeding behaviour optimises dietary essential amino acid composition. Nature 282, 501–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffin, B.D. & Byers, J.E.E. (2006) Intraguild predation reduces redundancy of predator species in multiple predator assemblage. Journal of Animal Ecology 75, 959–966.Google Scholar
Heinrichs, E.A., Medrano, F.G. & Rapusas, H.R. (1985) Genetic Evaluation for Insect Resistance in Rice. 356 pp. Manila, Philippines, International Rice Research Institute.Google Scholar
Heong, K.L. & Rubia, E.G. (1989) Functional response of Lycosa pseudoannulata on brown planthopper (BPH) and green leafhopper (GLH). International Rice Research Notes 14, 29–30.Google Scholar
Heong, K. & Rubia, E. (1990) Mutual interference among wolf spider adult females. International Rice Research Notes 15, 30–31.Google Scholar
Heong, K.L., Bleih, S. & Rubia, E. (1989) Predation of wolf spider on mirid bug and brown planthopper (BPH). International Rice Research Newsletter 14, 33.Google Scholar
Heong, K.L., Bleih, S. & Lazaro, A. (1990) Predation of Cyrtorhinus lividipennis Reuter on eggs of the green leafhopper and brown planthopper in rice. Researches on Population Ecology 32, 255–262.Google Scholar
Heong, K.L., Aquino, G.B. & Barrion, A.T. (1991) Arthropod community structures of rice ecosystems in the Philippines. Bulletin of Entomological Research 81, 407–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heong, K.L., Aquino, G.B. & Barrion, A.T. (1992) Population dynamics of plant- and leafhoppers and their natural enemies in rice ecosystems in the Philippines. Crop Protection 11, 371–379.Google Scholar
Hinkley, A.D. (1965) Pest on rice in Fiji. Agricultural Science 1, 18–21.Google Scholar
Iida, H. (2003) Small within-clutch variance in spiderling body size as a mechanism for avoiding sibling cannibalism in the wolf spider Pardosa pseudoannulata (Araneae: Lycosidae). Population Ecology 45, 1–6.Google Scholar
International Rice Research Institute (1980) Annual report for 1979. Manila, Philippines, IRRI.Google Scholar
Inthavong, S., Inthavong, K., Sengsaulivong, V., Schiller, J.M., Rapusas, H.R., Barrion, A.T. & Heong, K.L. (1998) Arthropod biodiversity in Lao irrigated rice ecosystem. pp. 69–85 in Proceedings of the Rice Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Conference: Integrating Science and People in Rice Pest Management. 18–21 November 1996, Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, Malaysian Agricultural Research and Development Institute.Google Scholar
Kenmore, P.E., Carino, F.O., Perez, C.A., Dyck, V.A. & Gutierrez, A.P. (1984) Population regulation of the rice brown planthopper (Nilaparvata lugens Stål) within rice fields in the Philippines. Journal of Plant Protection in the Tropics 1, 19–37.Google Scholar
Kiritani, K. & Kakiya, N. (1975) An analysis of the predator-prey system in the paddy field. Researches on Population Ecology 17, 29–38.Google Scholar
Kuno, E., & Dyck, V.A. (1985) Dynamics of Philippine and Japanese populations of the brown planthopper: comparison of basic characteristics. pp. 1–9 in Proceedings, ROC-Japan seminar on the ecology and control of the brown planthopper. February 1984, Taiwan, National Science Council, ROC.Google Scholar
Manti, I. (1990) Mass rearing of a mirid predator. International Rice Research Newsletter 15, 32.Google Scholar
Marc, P. & Canard, A. (1997) Maintaining spider biodiversity in agroecosystems as a tool in pest control. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 62, 229–235.Google Scholar
Matsumura, M., Trafelet-Smith, G.M., Gratton, C., Finke, D.L., Fagan, W.F. & Denno, R.F. (2004) Does intraguild predation enhance predator performance? A stoichiometric perspective. Ecology 85, 2601–2615.Google Scholar
Matteson, P.C., Gallagher, K.S. & Kenmore, P.E. (1994) Extension of integrated pest management for planthoppers in Asian irrigated rice: empowering the user. pp. 656–685in Denno, R.F. & Perfect, T.J. (Eds) Planthoppers: Their Ecology and Management. New York, Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
Ooi, P.A.C. & Shepard, B.M. (1994) Predators and parasitoids of rice insect pests. pp. 585–612in Heinrichs, E.A. (Ed.) Biology and Management of Rice Insects. New Delhi, Wiley Eastern Limiter.Google Scholar
Polis, G.A., Myers, C.A. & Holt, R.D. (1989) The ecology and evolution of intraguild predation: potential competitors that eat each other. Annual Review of Ecological Systems 20, 297–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reddy, P. & Heong, K. (1991) Co-variation between insects in a ricefield and important spider species. International Rice Research Newsletter 16, 24.Google Scholar
Rubia, E.G., Almazan, L.P. & Heong, K.L. (1990) Predation of yellow stem borer (YSB) by wolf spider. International Rice Research Newsletter 15, 22.Google Scholar
Sahu, S., Singh, R. & Kumar, P. (1996) Host preference and feeding potential of spiders predaceous on insect pests of rice. Journal of Entomological Research 20, 145–150.Google Scholar
SAS Institute Inc. (1999) SAS/STAT User's Guide Version 8. SAS/STAT Inc., Cary, N.C., SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
Schoenly, K.G., Cohen, J.E., Heong, K.L., Arida, G.S., Barrion, A.T. & Litsinger, J.A. (1996) Quantifying the impact of insecticides on food web structure of rice-arthropod populations in a Philippine farmer's irrigated field: a case study. pp. 343–351in Polis, G. & Winemiller, K. (Eds) Food Webs: Integration of Patterns & Dynamics. New York, Chapman & Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shepard, B., Barrion, A. & Litsinger, J. (1987) Friends of the rice farmer. Helpful insects, spiders, and pathogens. 136 pp. Los Baños, Philippines, IRRI.Google Scholar
Sigsgaard, L. & Villareal, S. (1999) Predation rates of Atypena formosana on brown planthopper and green leafhopper. International Rice Research Notes 24, 18.Google Scholar
Sigsgaard, L., Villareal, S., Gapud, V. & Rajotte, E. (1999) Directional movement of predators between the irrigated rice field and its surroundings. pp. 43–47in Hong, L.W. & Sastroutomo, S.S. (Eds) Biological control in the tropics: towards efficient biodiversity and bioresource management for effective biological control. Proceedings of the Symposium on Biological Control in the Tropics. MARDI Training Centre, 18–19 March 1999, Serdang, Malaysia.Google Scholar
Sigsgaard, L., Toft, S. & Villareal, S. (2001) Diet-dependent survival, development and fecundity of the spider Atypena formosana (Oi) (Araneae: Linyphiidae) – Implications for biological control in rice. Biocontrol Science and Technology 11, 233–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snyder, W.E., Snyder, G.B., Finke, D.L. & Straub, C.S. (2006) Predator biodiversity strengthens herbivore suppression. Ecology Letters 9, 789–796.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Toft, S. & Wise, D.H. (1999) Growth, development, and survival of a generalist predator fed single and mixed species diets of different quality. Oecologia 119, 191–197.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Way, M.J. & Heong, K. (1994) The role of biodiversity in the dynamics and management of insect pests of tropical irrigated rice: A review. Bulletin of Entomological Research 84, 567–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilby, A., Villareal, S.C., Lan, L.P., Heong, K.L. & Thomas, M.B. (2005) Functional benefits of predator species diversity depend on prey identity. Ecological Entomology 30(5), 497–501.Google Scholar