Cited by 335Insect-Plant Interactions and ControlPlant and animal studiesLand Use and Ecosystem Services

Natural enemy interactions constrain pest control in complex agricultural landscapes

Open access
Martin, Emily A., Reineking, Björn, Seo, Bumsuk, Steffan-Dewenter, Ingolf·2013·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Biological control of pests by natural enemies is a major ecosystem service delivered to agriculture worldwide. Quantifying and predicting its effectiveness at large spatial scales is critical for increased sustainability of agricultural production. Landscape complexity is known to benefit natural enemies, but its effects on interactions between natural enemies and the consequences for crop damage and yield are unclear. Here, we show that pest control at the landscape scale is driven by differences in natural enemy interactions across landscapes, rather than by the effectiveness of individual natural enemy guilds. In a field exclusion experiment, pest control by flying insect enemies increased with landscape complexity. However, so did antagonistic interactions between flying insects and birds, which were neutral in simple landscapes and increasingly negative in complex landscapes. Negative natural enemy interactions thus constrained pest control in complex landscapes. These results show that, by altering natural enemy interactions, landscape complexity can provide ecosystem services as well as disservices. Careful handling of the tradeoffs among multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity, and societal concerns is thus crucial and depends on our ability to predict the functional consequences of landscape-scale changes in trophic interactions.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.1215725110

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Martin, E. A., Reineking, B., Seo, B., & Steffan-Dewenter, I.
Affiliations
  • University of Würzburg (DE)
  • University of Bayreuth (DE)
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2013-03-19
Volume
110
Issue
14
Pages
5534-5539
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W1991199013
Cited by
334
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 32 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 7
FWCI
31.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Insect Science › Insect-Plant Interactions and Control
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Plant and animal studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Land Use and Ecosystem Services
Keywords
biological control, landscape complexity, pest control, birds, trophic interactions, ecosystem services, ecosystem disservices, agricultural landscapes, crop damage
MeSH terms
Agriculture, Animals, Birds, Insecta, Pest Control, Biological, Population Dynamics, Predatory Behavior, Linear Models, Ecosystem, Republic of Korea, Herbivory

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review