The DOI matches its Crossref record; 21 of the 21 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Biological Control in Theory and Practice
Abstract
The conventional wisdom of biological control of insect pests, and its related ecological theory, is that successful natural enemies in long-lived ecosystems (1) impose a low, stable pest equilibrium, and (2) share the following properties: (a) host-specific; (b) synchronous with the pest; (c) can increase in density rapidly when the pest does; (d) need only one pest individual to complete their life cycle; (e) have a high search rate for the pest; (f) aggregate at areas of high pest density, which is thought to stabilize the interaction. These features are more characteristic of parasitoids than predators. We suggest that a stable pest equilibrium is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for control. We show that satisfactory control in model systems is compatible with both local extinction of the pest and polyphagy in the natural enemy. Only one of nine real examples of successful control is convincingly a stable interaction; the remainder show either strong evidence for instability and local extinction of the pest or are consistent with this interpretation. Successful natural enemies have collectively violated all of features 1 and 2 above, and violations of features 1 and 2a, 2b, and 2d appear to have been central to success in several situations. Two strategies by which a natural enemy may control a pest in a nonequilibrium state, termed here "lying-in-wait" and "search-and-destroy," are distinguished.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Balance of Animal Populations.—Part I.
Nicholson, A. J., & Bailey, V. A. (1935) · Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London · doi:10.1111/j.1096-3642.1935.tb01680.x · Cited by 1,626
The Dynamics of Arthropod Predator-Prey Systems
Kuris, A. M., & Hassell, M. P. (1979) · The Journal of Parasitology · doi:10.2307/3280305 · Cited by 1,581
Stability in Insect Host-Parasite Models
Hassell, M. P., & May, R. M. (1973) · The Journal of Animal Ecology · doi:10.2307/3133 · Cited by 885
Predator-Mediated Coexistence: A Nonequilibrium Model
Caswell, H. (1978) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/283257 · Cited by 526
Host-Parasitoid Systems in Patchy Environments: A Phenomenological Model
May, R. M. (1978) · The Journal of Animal Ecology · doi:10.2307/3674 · Cited by 467
Competition and Regional Coexistence
Slatkin, M. (1974) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/1934625 · Cited by 354
Krumholz, L. A. (1948) · Ecological Monographs · doi:10.2307/1948627 · Cited by 315
Sousa, W. P. (1980) · Oecologia · doi:10.1007/bf00346709 · Cited by 236
Predator-Prey Theory and Variability
Chesson, P. (1978) · Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.es.09.110178.001543 · Cited by 213
Self-citationSpatial heterogeneity and the stability of predator-prey systems
Hastings, A. (1977) · Theoretical Population Biology · doi:10.1016/0040-5809(77)90034-x · Cited by 208
Cited by
THE INFLUENCE OF INTRAGUILD PREDATION ON PREY SUPPRESSION AND PREY RELEASE: A META-ANALYSIS
Vance-Chalcraft, H. D., Rosenheim, J. A., Vonesh, J. R., Osenberg, C. W., & Sih, A. (2007) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/06-1869.1 · Cited by 247
Interactions Between Mosquito Larvae and Species that Share the Same Trophic Level
Blaustein, L., & Chase, J. M. (2007) · Annual Review of Entomology · doi:10.1146/annurev.ento.52.110405.091431 · Cited by 145
Metadata
- Authors
- Murdoch, W. W., Chesson, J., & Chesson, P. L.
- Venue
- The American Naturalist
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 1985-03
- Volume
- 125
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 344-366
- ISSN
- 0003-0147 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5323
- OpenAlex
- W1994977775
- Cited by
- 608
- References
- 21
- FWCI
- 23.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Biological Control in Theory and Practice. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/284347
- The paper
- Murdoch, W. W., Chesson, J., & Chesson, P. L. (1985). Biological Control in Theory and Practice. The American Naturalist. https://doi.org/10.1086/284347
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.