biodiversity conservation in agroecosystems-practice ...

Annual report

BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION CONSERVATION IN IN BIODIVERSITY AGROECOSYSTEMS-PRACTICE AGROECOSYSTEMS-PRACTICE AND AND EXECUTION EXECUTION

MINOR RESEARCH PROJECT (2337-MRP/15-16/KLKE020/UGC-SWRO)

Submitted to

THE UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION Submitted to

THE UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION

PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Dr. JASIN RAHMAN V.K ASSISTANT PROFESSOR

DEPARTMENT OF ZOOLOGY TKM COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCE KOLLAM-691005, KERALA May 2017

BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION IN AGROECOSYSTEMS-PRACTICE AND EXECUTION ANNUAL REPORT OF THE

MINOR RESEARCH PROJECT (2337-MRP/15-16/KLKE020/UGC-SWRO)

Submitted to

THE UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION

PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Dr. JASIN RAHMAN V.K ASSISTANT PROFESSOR

DEPARTMENT OF ZOOLOGY TKM COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCE KOLLAM-691005, KERALA MAY 2017

Biodiversity conservation in Agroecosystems-Practice and Execution

INDEX CHAPTERS INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………….

PAGE No. 1

OBJECTIVES………………………………………………………….

5

REVIEW OF LITERATURE…………………………………………

6

STUDY AREAS..……………………………………………………...

8

MATERIALS AND METHODS…………………………………….

13

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION……………………………………...

14

CONCLUSION….……………………………………………………

21

SUMMARY….………………………………………………………..

22

REFERENCES………………………………………………………...

23

Sl. No.

PLATES

PAGE No.

1

Map of Kerala showing the study areas

8

2

Well-maintained and organized field with trap-crops

11

3

Poorly maintained (PM) and unorganized (UO) field with a variety of crops and weeds

11

4

PM and UO fields with weeds largely harbour pests and eventually end up with yield reduction

12

5

Food web existing among prominent members in each trophic level in the agroecosystem

18

Sl. No. 1

TABLE Tri-trophic interactions identified in the study areas

Annual report of the Minor Research Project

PAGE No. 14

0


INTRODUCTION In India agriculture is the backbone of the livelihood security system for 700 million men, women and children. Although agriculture contributes only 17% to GDP, but accounts for 57% workforce employment, about 600 million people directly or indirectly depend on agriculture for their livelihoods. Further, out of the net cultivated area of about 141 million ha, about 85 million ha (60%) fall under dryland/rainfed zone (Kumar et al. 2015). Many people in rural areas involve in various sorts of amateur agricultural practice too without proper guidance and organization to meet the daily need of agricultural produce. Even though people are aware about the health hazards of chemical strategies in agriculture, many are forced to go for the same to protect the crop from pest and disease attacks and produce high yield. Since chemical strategies cause large requirement of water for spraying, development of pesticide resistance in pests, deposition of pesticide residues in crops, change of soil chemistry and destruction of natural enemies in agroecosystems, an environmentally safe and economically viable alternative strategy is needed in agricultural sector. An Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategy by maintaining biological control agents, using selected biopesticides, and practicing mixed cropping, trap crops etc. can bring about healthy agricultural production without harmful pesticide residues and thereby protect the soil and natural enemies. Conservation of biodiversity in agroecosystems has not yet been focused much as on natural ecosystems, despite the fact that the agroecosystems make up large areas in our country and contribute to considerable variety of natural habitats for diverse kinds of organisms. Large percentage of areas is used for various kinds of agriculture, nurseries and gardens in India. In India, after the second global plan of action for plant genetic

resources (PGRs) for food and agriculture and CBD

decisions III/11, IV/6, V/5, VI/5, VII/3, VIII/23, IX/1, X/44 and XI/30 necessary policies and measures came in force to promote conservation and sustainable use of country’s agrobiodiversity (Nayar et al. 2009). Even if the primary habitat of many organisms is in natural areas, most species interact with these agricultural systems in Annual report of the Minor Research Project

1


one or other ways such as for habitats or for foraging and breeding. So managing these areas will dramatically benefit overall levels of the biodiversity in those areas and contribute to the survival of many species to successfully assume their ecological niche. So managing the environment has to be done only with nominal impact on nature. The destruction of primary ecosystems, intensive farming, urbanization, and also infrastructure development cause depletion and weakening of the stability of ecosystems. Agroecosystems are the most at risk of losing biological diversity. During the last decades, worldwide losses of biodiversity have occurred at an unprecedented scale and agricultural intensification has been a major driver of this global change (Matson et al. 1997). Extensive usage of synthetic pesticides and fertilizers, and soil disturbance in agriculture greatly affect the biodiversity. Conventional agricultural practices result in habitat fragmentation, killing of nontarget organisms, pollution and health hazards also. The indiscriminate use of synthetic fertilizers can have significant effects on the highly diverse community of soil microorganisms and invertebrates that regulate nutrient cycling in ecosystems (Matson et al. 1997). Through drift and runoff, the impact of agrochemicals such as pesticides and fertilizers can extend far beyond the farm, affecting biological communities in distant freshwater and marine ecosystems. Being genetically uniform and thereby more susceptible to pests and diseases monocultures require higher inputs of pesticides. Monocultural, high-yield production systems require high rates of chemical fertilizers also. Improper management of land in agriculture and resulting mosaics of managed and unmanaged ecosystems have caused habitat loss and fragmentation for many species of flora and fauna. The loss of biodiversity has got a wide range of negative ecological and social consequences. One of the proposed solutions for combining productive and environmental functions of agriculture and to ward off the negative consequences of agriculture is an approach called ‘ecological intensification’ which entails the environmentally friendly replacement of anthropogenic inputs and/or enhancement of crop productivity, by including regulating and supporting ecosystem services Annual report of the Minor Research Project

2


management in agricultural practices (Bommarco et al, 2013). Conservation of biodiversity provides a number of benefits to agriculture. Adjacent to agricultural systems there should be provisioning of natural areas which can provide habitat for pollinators and natural enemies of pests. Within the agroecosystem itself, increasing crop diversity through the use of polycultures can augment the resources available to pollinators and natural enemies resulting in higher populations of these beneficial organisms. Minimizing the use of agrochemicals can also result in the conservation of beneficial organisms and the conservation of functional processes such as decomposition and nutrient cycling. Thus, the conservation of biodiversity within the agroecosystem affects plant and soil processes that can, in turn, benefit crop productivity. Being more genetically diverse and more pest and disease resistant than conventional, commercial cropping systems, traditional agricultural systems including mixed cropping can harbour more biodiversity because it can provide habitats for a variety of species and it needs lesser inputs of synthetic agrochemicals. They seldom approach the diversity of surrounding natural systems either. Home garden systems should also be managed so that higher level of biodiversity could be conserved. Since the average land holdings is less than one hectare in the study areas many turn reluctant to agriculture and seek other resorts for livelihood. An increased biodiversity at a given trophic level positively affects the productivity of this trophic level (Balvanera et al, 2006). Maintaining high biodiversity in agroecosystems makes agricultural production more sustainable and economically viable. Agricultural biodiversity ensures, for example, pollination of crops, biological crop protection, maintenance of proper structure and fertility of soils, protection of soils against erosion, nutrient cycling, and control of water flow and distribution. In this context promoting agricultural practices with promising strategies for economical and sustainable agriculture becomes necessary. Since there is a scare among people over unhealthy foodstuffs produced through unbridled farming practices using chemical fertilizers and pesticides, the farmers have to be trained for healthy agricultural practices as well. The demonstration and implementation of various strategies and their proper execution are needed for promoting sustainable and healthy agricultural practices Annual report of the Minor Research Project

3


and thereby conservation of biodiversity in agroecosystems. In order to execute strategies for conservation of biodiversity, it is essential that all species which are highly associated with the agroecosystem are properly understood and identified scientifically. Long term sustainable conservative measures may have to take into account the type of balance that exists within a community. This can only be assessed by the proper identification of the various tri-trophic interactions, i.e., species inhabiting the area comprising the food stuff/crop plants, the primary consumers and their natural enemies. Every species differs from its related species in food preference, breeding season, tolerance to various environmental factors, resistance to predators, pathogens, etc. Such information is required for effectively implementing a pest management programme without destroying the diversity and richness of beneficial and neutral fauna in an agroecosystem. So attempts were made to identify and document various tri-trophic interactions existing in the agroecosystems in the study areas. Relative abundance of various fauna in the agroecosystems was also noted. Demonstration and awareness programmes on the conservation of biodiversity which may urge public to go for a sustainable agricultural practice were planned to be conducted as part of the objectives for the second year of this project.


4


OBJECTIVES  Survey of biodiversity in local agroecosystems and documentation of prevailing fauna  Evaluation of the impact of monoculture practices, clonal varieties and agricultural inputs on biodiversity  Experiment

on

possible

ways

for

augmenting

beneficial

fauna

in

agroecosystems  Demonstration of mixed cropping, integrated pest management strategies, organic farming, bio fencing and planting of supporting vegetation for natural enemies  Creation of landscape matrix for inter-patch migration and survival of fauna during post-harvest and breeding season  Awareness camps and classes on conservation strategies and the impact of various agricultural practices on biodiversity

ACTIVITIES PROPOSED IN THE FIRST YEAR OF THE PROJECT  Literature survey  Selection of study areas  Survey of biodiversity in important local agroecosystems and documentation of prevailing fauna  Study of the relative abundance and importance of various fauna in the agroecosystem  Compilation of the data and planning of demonstration and awareness programmes to be conducted


5


REVIEW OF LITERATURE Conservation of biodiversity relies on understanding and identifying all species which are highly associated with the agroecosystems properly. This can only be made possible by the proper identification of the various tri-trophic interactions, i.e., species inhabiting the area comprising the food stuff/crop plants, the primary consumers and their natural enemies. Interactions occur between plant and herbivore and herbivore and its predator. These interactions are dependent on various factors such as plant quality, type of habitat, intra and interspecific competition etc. Mooney et al (2012) proposed Tri-trophic Interaction (TTI) hypothesis which predicts the superior performance of specialist herbivores, i.e., a herbivore feeding specifically on a host plant. For more than half a century, Many studies by evolutionary ecologists like Dethier (1954), Fraenkel (1959), Ehrlich and Raven (1964), Feeny (1976), Rhoades and Cates (1976), Brues (1924), Jaenike (1990), Wyatt (1965) emphasised plant-herbivore interactions for understanding plant defence and dietary specialization by insect herbivores. While most research before 1980 viewed plant-herbivore interactions from a bi-trophic perspective – considering plant defence and herbivore offense alone – the role of predators and parasitoids

(natural

enemies)

has

increasingly

been

recognized

as

important (Lawton and McNeill, 1979; Singer and Stireman, 2005; Price et al., 1980; Bernays, 1998; Schmitz, 2008). For plants, natural enemies can serve as indirect plant defences and can mediate the efficacy of direct defences (Price et al., 1980; Gassmann and Hare, 2005; Dicke, 2000). Exploitation of tri-trophic interactions has the capacity to directly benefit agricultural systems. Significant biocontrol of crop pests can be exerted by the third trophic level, given an adequate population of natural enemies (Cortesero et al., 1999). The widespread use of pesticides or Bt crops can undermine natural enemies’ success (Obrycki, 2001; Groot, 2002; Poppy et al., 2004). In some cases entire populations of predators and parasitoids are decimated, necessitating even greater use of insecticide because the ecological service they provided in controlling herbivores has been lost. Annual report of the Minor Research Project

6


Even when pesticides are not widely used, monocultures cannot support natural enemies in great enough numbers for them to have any impact on pest populations. A lack of diversity in the first trophic level is usually linked to low abundance in the third because alternative resources are missing from the system that are necessary for stable, large natural enemy populations. Natural enemy population thrives by increasing landscape diversity through companion planting, border crops, cover crops, intercropping, or allowing some weed growth for providing nectar or other sugar-rich resources (Wäckers, 2005). Even though many studies like above pin points the need and strategies for conserving biodiversity in agricultural ecosystems across the globe, a feasibility study with demonstration to reach out farmers and successfully implement in Indian agroecosystems has not yet been reported.


7


STUDY AREAS Study areas (Plate 1) were selected in different regions with varying agricultural practices. Some rural areas in Kollam and Kozhikode districts of Kerala were chosen to execute the project. The study areas consisted of well-maintained agricultural fields as well as unorganized fields (Plates 2 to 4). People in various sectors are engaged in horticulture for domestic purpose in the current scenario of unhealthy vegetable crops with huge load of pesticides.

Study areas

Plate 1. Map of Kerala showing the study areas Annual report of the Minor Research Project

8


The climate of Kollam is essentially tropical. It is characterized by hot and humid summers and plenty of seasonal rainfall. The Arabian Sea, located to the west of Kollam influences the weather of Kollam. It moderates the disparities between the extreme summer and winter temperatures. The maximum summer temperature in Kollam is around 34°C and the minimum temperature recorded during the winters is 21°C. The disparity between the summer and winter temperatures are moderated because of the close proximity to the Arabian Sea. Summer months in Kollam last from March to May. The cool sea breeze from the Arabian Sea has casts a soothing effect over Kollam. The average rainfall in Kollam city varies between 1100 mm to 1500 mm per annum. The humidity in Kollam city is approximately 90% during the rainy months. Kollam experiences rainfall during the months of October and November from the north east monsoons. It gradually fades away by the end of November. South west monsoons descend over Kollam in the month of June and drags till September. Winter rains are common phenomena in Kollam climate. It receives a considerable amount of rainfall from the retreating monsoons. The city is one of the 'wet spots' of Kerala. The dry weather in Kollam sets in at the beginning of December and lasts till the month of February. December, January and February are the winter months, whereas March, April and May are hot and humid. Kozhikode (Calicut) has a tropical monsoon climate with short dry season. The area within 25 miles of this station is covered by croplands (60%), oceans and seas (28%), forests (8%),

and grasslands (3%).

The warm

season lasts

from

February to May. Summers are hot and humid with the maximum temperature of 34°C and minimum temperature of 23°C. The cold season lasts from July to August. The most important rainy season is during the South West Monsoon which sets in the first week of June and extends up to September. The North-East Monsoon extends form the second half of October through November. The average annual rainfall in 3266 m. Winter is mild and lasts from about mid-October to early February. Heavy rains occur from the last week of September until early November, due to the retreat of the South-East monsoon. The relative humidity typically ranges from 40% (comfortable) to 94% (very humid).


9


Agriculture is the main occupation of the people in these areas. More than half of the income of these rural areas is from agriculture and allied sectors. Heterogeneity in cultivation practices and diversity of cropping patterns are the important features of agriculture in the district. Over 90% of the land holdings are less than one hectare. The normal sowing season of first paddy crop is April-May. Coconut occupies maximum area under crops. Rubber, one of the most important plantation crops of the Kozhikode district, is grown in midland and highland regions where the soil and climate conditions are favourable. Pepper is the most important spices crop cultivated in both study areas. Besides the farmers who take agriculture as a profession, a majority of housekeeping women as well as people in various occupations involve in horticulture during Rabi season in these areas.


10


Plate 2: Well-maintained and organized field with trap-crops

Plate 3: Poorly maintained (PM) and unorganized (UO) field with a variety of crops and weeds Annual report of the Minor Research Project

11


Plate 4: PM and UO fields with weeds largely harbour pests and eventually end up with yield reduction Annual report of the Minor Research Project

12


MATERIALS AND METHODS Survey

and identification

of

biodiversity

in local agroecosystems and

documentation of prevailing fauna The horticultural ecosystems in the study areas were regularly visited and the fauna associated with the major crops were either noted or collected in specimen bottles filled with formaldehyde. In order to identify the tri-trophic interactions existing in the agroecosystems, the specimens were first sorted under a trinocular stereo microscope and then got identified. Identification was made easy and accurate with Digital Image Capture which is different from older analogue photosystems. Digital camera was mounted on a trinocular Stereo Zoom Microscope using camera adapter. This system provided clear morphological details of the organisms under observation and helped to select better images with the help of previews with magnifying function. Since the images obtained can be stored in SD card of camera and then copied to external hard disk later, the use of costly CCD camera tethered to a computer with the aid of software, could be avoided. Moreover taxonomic identification was made easy with the help of high resolution images (well resolved micrographs) provided by the camera. Large numbers of high resolution images thus obtained were kept in an external hard disc for future reference while forming tri-trophic matrix for sowing/planting compatible crops that better facilitate the survival of beneficial fauna. Relative abundance and importance of various fauna in the agroecosystem were noted in the field. Observations were tabulated.


13


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Various organisms and their associated crop plants and natural enemies were identified. The tri-trophic interactions identified to exist in the agroecosystems in the study areas are given in the following tables. Table 1. Tri-trophic interactions identified in the study areas HOST PLANT: BRINJAL (Solanum melongena L.) Common name of pest Scientific name Henosepilachna Hadda beetle vigintioctopuntata

Natural enemies Parasitoid wasps

Shoot and fruit borer

Leucinodes orbonalis (Pyraustidae: Lepidoptera)

Parasitoid wasps-Trathala flavo-orbitalis, Bracon spp., Goryphus nursei, Trichograma chilonis

Jassids

Empoasca devastans

Spiders, Green lacewings

Red spider mite

Tetranychus urticae

Predatory mite-Amblyseius tetranychivorus, Predatory thrips

Aphid

Myzus persicae

Red ant, Robber fly, Lacewing, Ladybird beetle, Spider, Praying mantis, Reduvid bug, Dragonfly, Hoverfly

Serpentine leaf miner

Liriomyza trifolii

Parasitoid waspsBroconids, Eulophids

HOST PLANT: BITTERGOURD (Momordica charantia) Common name of pest Scientific name Aulacophora foveicollis, Red Pumpkin Beetle A. cincta, A. intermedia Aphids

A. malvae, Aphis gossypi

Fruit Fly

Dacus cucurbitae, D. dorsalis, Bactocera cucurbitae

Epilachna beetle

Epilachna spp


Natural enemies


Parasitoid wasps-Pediobius foveolatus,

14


HOST PLANT: CAULIFLOWER (Brassica oleracea L. var. botrytis) Common name of pest Scientific name Natural enemies Plutella xylostella Diamond Back Moth Braconid parasitoid waspCotesia plutellae Leaf webber

Crocidolomia binotalis

Stem borer

Hellula undalis

Tobacco caterpillar

Spodoptera litura

Aphids

Brevicornea brassicae, Lipaphis erisimi

Cabbage butterfly

Pieris brasicae


HOST PLANT: SNAKEGOURD (Trichosanthes cucumerina) Common name of pest Scientific name Natural enemies Bactocera cucurbitae Fruit Fly Parasitoid wasps Snake gourd semilooper

Anadevidia peponis

Epilachna beetle

Epilachna spp.

Red Pumpkin Beetle

Aulacophora foveicollis, A. cincta, A. intermedia

Stem gall fly

Neolasioptera falcate

Aphids

Aphis sp.

HOST PLANT: TOMATO (Solanum lycopersicum) Common name of pest Scientific name Whitefly Bemisia sp. Stem borer

Hellula undalis

Fruit borer

Helicoverpa armigera


Liriomyza trifolii


Parasitoid wasp-Pediobius foveolatus


Natural enemies Ladybugs, Lacewing larvae Parasitoid waspsCampoletis sp., Trichograma spp.

15


HOST PLANT: SPINACH (Spinacia oleracea L.) Common name of pest Scientific name Aphid Aphis sp.

Natural enemies Red ant, Robber fly, Lacewing, Ladybird beetle, Spider, Praying mantis, Reduvid bug, Dragonfly, Hoverfly

Leaf eating caterpillar

Parasitoid waspsTrichogramma chilonis, Braconid wasp, Ichneumon spp.,

Leaf miner

Parasitoid wasps, Robber fly, spider, red ants

HOST PLANT: CUCUMBER FAMILY-PUMPKIN (Cucurbita pepo L.), CUCUMBER (Cucumis sativus) Common name of pest Scientific name Natural enemies Bactocera cucurbitae Fruit fly Parasitoid wasps Aphids

Aphis sp.

Grass hopper Whitefly

Wasps, shrews, moles, toads, birds, snakes, lizards, Bemisia sp.

Eriophid mites Epilachna beetle


Ladybugs, Lacewing larvae Predatory mites

Epilachna spp.

HOST PLANT: LADIES FINGER (Abelmoschus esculentus) Common name of pest Scientific name Amrasca biguttula biguttula Okra Jassid/Leaf hopper

Parasitoid wasp- Pediobius foveolatus

Natural enemies Spiders, Green lacewings

Whitefly

Bemisia tabaci

Ladybugs, Lacewing

Fruit borer

Helicoverpa armigera

Parasitoid waspCampoletis sp., Trichograma spp.

Red spider mite

Tetranychus urticae

Ladybird beetles, reduvid bugs, lacewings, predatory mites, predatory thrips

Shoot and fruit borer

Earias vitella

Parasitoid waspTrathala flavo-orbitalis, Bracon spp., Goryphus nursei, Trichograma spp.


16


HOST PLANT: PEA Common name of pest Aphids

Scientific name Aphis sp.

Jassids/Leaf hopper

Natural enemies Red ant, Robber fly, Lacewing, Ladybird beetle, Spider, Praying mantis, Reduvid bug, Dragonfly, Hoverfly Spiders, Green lacewings

Whitefly

Bemisia sp.

Fruit borer

Earias vittella


Liriomyza trifolii

HOST PLANT: CHILLY Common name of pest Yellow mite

Scientific name

Natural enemies Predatory mites, Predatory thrips

Thrips

Scirtothrips dorsalis

Predatory mites, Predatory thrips

Mites

Polyphagotarsonemus latus

Predatory mites, Predatory thrips

Aphids

Ladybugs, Lacewing larvae


It was found that many species of pests are generalist herbivores and many natural enemies are generalist predators. The observation of Mooney et al (2012) explained Tri-trophic Interaction (TTI) hypothesis which predicts that the specialist herbivores have superior performance. When these specialist herbivores flourish on a plant, specialist predators or parasitoids will become necessary to devour the population of pests. Since many of the pests found in the study areas are generalist herbivores they can probably be controlled by generalist natural enemies. A food web was constructed using the prominent members in each trophic level (Plate 5). It shows the complexity of food chains existing among many members in the agroecosystem. The food web constructed helps to understand at a glance (i) the crops which are highly susceptible for pest infestation, (ii) the pests Annual report of the Minor Research Project

17


which are preferred by more natural enemies and (iii) the natural enemies which prefer different types of prey.

Plate 5: Food web existing among prominent members in each trophic level in the agroecosystem The pest profile and probable incidence and succession of pests and predators in each crop in different seasons (e.g., Kumar et al. 2017) has to be understood to set a healthy agroecosystems. This will help farmers to take wise decision in selecting different crops for different seasons and compatible crops for mixed and inter


18


cropping. Natural enemies, parasitoids and predators are the main sources of reduction in the populations of noxious insect pests (Pfadt, 1980). But since the synthetic pesticides are harmful to natural enemies, farmers have to use botanicals and natural enemies in the field to control the pests. Temperature, relative humidity and rainfall have effect on the incidence of the pests and survival of natural enemies in agroecosystems. Singh et al. (2013) reported that whitefly and leafhopper population showed negative correlation with maximum, minimum and mean temperature and maximum and minimum relative humidity whereas positive correlation with rainfall. Meena et al. (2010) reported that Weather parameters (minimum temperature and relative humidity) showed significant negative correlation with coccinellid predators, whereas, maximum temperature had non-significant positive and rainfall had nonsignificant negative correlation with coccinellid population. So Constructing glass/net houses may have effect on the biodiversity in agricultural field. The biodiversity in agroecosystem is also prone to the heavy metal and pesticide pollution in the soil. Das et al. (2000) has reported the serious deterioration of the ecosystem of the Kuttanad, the rice bowl of Kerala as there were high concentrations of heavy metals and organochlorine pesticide residues in water and sediment. This may badly affect the healthy tri-trophic interactions in the agroecosystems and thereby natural control of pests, biogeochemical cycles, rejuvenation of soil etc. Other beneficial or neutral fauna associated with agroecosystems Various species of Frogs, Earthworms, Butterflies, Honeybees, Wasps, Ground beetles, Dung beetles etc. constituted other beneficial/neutral fauna in agroecosystems. The general natural enemies observed consisted of larval and adult ladybird beetles (Coleoptera, Coccinellidae), parasitic wasps (Hymenoptera, Braconidae), syrphid larvae (Diptera, Syrphidae), predatory bugs (Hemiptera, Miridae) and many species of ants.


19


Relative abundance Relative abundance of various organisms was not quantitatively estimated since it was beyond the scope of the current objectives. It was found by general observation that Shoot and Fruit borer, Jassids, Red spider mite, Aphids, Epilachna beetle and Fruit borer were abundant among the pest population. Butterflies, Honeybees and Beetles of various species constituted the majority of pollinators but many species of wasps and moths visited different crops. Several moths were pests to one or many plants. But many species of Beetles and Wasps were both pollinators and natural enemies. Soil harboured many species of Earthworms, Ground beetles and Dung beetles but only in a few areas of some agroecosystems. The earthworms seem to be rare in many areas because of the manipulation of agroecosystems without proper water channel to allow the percolation of water to deep soil and keep the moisture rather than giving sprinklers and drip irrigation. Planning of demonstration and awareness programmes to be conducted Demonstration and awareness programmes on the conservation of biodiversity are essential in order to reach out the public and urge them to go for a sustainable agricultural practice. These programmes are part of the objectives of the second year of this project. The impact of monoculture practices, clonal varieties and agricultural inputs on biodiversity will be evaluated and mixed cropping, integrated pest management strategies, organic farming, bio fencing and planting of supporting vegetation for natural enemies will be demonstrated. The importance of creating landscape matrix for inter patch migration and survival of beneficial fauna during post-harvest and breeding season will be emphasised in farmers’ meet. The pictures of various fauna and data on the mapping of areas and landscape matrix will be stored in external memory for future reference and implementation of the project at large scale.


20


CONCLUSION This study identified prevailing tri-trophic interactions in the agroecosystems of the study areas. Understanding of the existing tri-trophic interactions in the agroecosystems will be helpful to plan the selection of compatible crops to be sown/planted adjacently, the spacing and timing of planting different crops, the selection of compatible crops for mixed cropping and trap crops and provisioning of natural areas adjacent to agricultural systems for providing habitat for pollinators and natural enemies. The study will also help to plan and execute suitable pest control practices like cultural control and biocontrol. Thus by determining herbivore and predator performance and abundance, the planning of different crops to be grown together and integration of different agricultural practices can be proposed. Competitive interactions and coexistence among herbivores and natural enemies are the components of relative abundance of various species which bring about the balance in agro ecosystems. It is suggested that high and low-quality host plants may have effects on the potentially different roles played by predators and parasitoids, hence future studies should consider the same. It is planned to conduct demonstration and awareness programmes on the conservation of biodiversity as part of the objectives of the second year of this project to urge the public to go for a sustainable

agricultural

practice

without

destroying

agroecosystems and thereby maintain the ecological balance.


the

biodiversity

in

21


SUMMARY Surveys on the biodiversity were conducted in the agroecosystems in selected study areas. Horticulture was the prevalent agricultural practice during the study period. Various vegetable crops were grown either separately or with other annual or biennial crops. Since chemical strategies cause large requirement of water for spraying, development of pesticide resistance in pests, deposition of pesticide residues in crops, change of soil chemistry and destruction of natural enemies in agroecosystems, an environmentally safe and economically viable alternative strategy is needed in agricultural sector. An Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategy by maintaining biological control agents, using selected biopesticides, and practicing mixed cropping, trap crops etc. can bring about healthy agricultural production without harmful pesticide residues and thereby protect the soil and natural enemies. The surveys aimed understanding of the tri-trophic interactions (interaction between plant, herbivore and natural enemies) existing in the agroecosystems which will help selection, spacing and timing of planting different crops of compatible crops to be sown/planted adjacently, identification of suitable combination of crops for mixed cropping and intercropping, selection of suitable trap crops to attract pest population and destroy without allowing to infest main crops and provisioning of natural areas adjacent to agricultural systems for providing habitat for pollinators and natural enemies. The study will also help to plan and execute suitable pest control practices like cultural control and biocontrol. Thus by determining herbivore and predator performance and abundance, the planning of different crops to be grown together and integration of different agricultural practices can be proposed. Many literatures on the above aspects were surveyed. Since there exists a lacuna of executing above mentioned tactics in the agroecosystems in unorganized sector in Indian villages, demonstration and awareness programmes on the same are planned to conduct as part of the objectives of the second year of this project to aware the farmers to go for environment friendly agricultural practices for conserving the biodiversity in agroecosystems and thereby protecting the ecological balance and safety of agricultural produce.


22


REFERENCES

Balvanera P, Pfisterer AB, Buchmann N, He Hing-Shen, Nakashizuka T, Raffaelli D, Schmid B (2006) Quantifying the evidence for biodiversity effects on ecosystem functioning and services. Ecology Letters 9: 1146-1156. Bernays EA (1998) Evolution of feeding behavior in insect herbivores: Success seen as different ways to eat without being eaten. Bioscience 48: 35–44. Bommarco R, Kleijin D, Potts SG (2013) Ecological intensification: Harnessing ecosystem services or food security. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 28: 230238 Brues CT (1924) The specificity of food-plants in the evolution of phytophagous insects. American Naturalist 58: 127–144. Cortesero AM, Stapel JO, Lewis WJ (1999) Understanding and Manipulating Plant Attributes to Enhance Biological Control". Biological Control. 17 (1): 35–49. Das MR (2000) Biotechnology to aid environmental monitoring. Press report, The Hindu, March 30, 2000 Dethier VG (1954) Evolution of feeding preference in phytophagous insects. Evolution 8: 33–54. Dicke M (2000) Chemical ecology of host-plant selection by herbivorous arthropods: A multitrophic perspective. Biochemical Systematics and Ecology 28: 601–617. Ehrlich PR, Raven PH (1964) Butterflies and plants: A study in coevolution. Evolution 18: 586–608. Feeny PP (1976) Plant apparency and chemical defense. Recent Advances in Phytochemistry 10: 1–40.


23


Fraenkel GS (1959) Raison d'etre of seconary plant substances. Science 129: 1466– 1470. Gassmann AJ, Hare JD (2005) Indirect cost of a defensive trait: Variation in trichome type affects the natural enemies of herbivorous insects on Datura wrightii. Oecologia 144: 62–71. Groot AT, Dicke M (2002) Insect-resistant transgenic plants in a multi-trophic context". The Plant Journal. 31 (4): 387–406. Jaenike J (1990) Host specialization in phytophagous insects. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 21: 243–273. Kumar NA, Nambi VA, Rani MG, King EDIO, Chaudhury SS, Mishra S (2015) Community agro biodiversity conservation continuum: an integrated approach to achieve food and nutrition security. Current Science 109 (3): 474-487. Kumar P, Singh DV, Sachan SK (2017) Succession of Importance Insect Pests of Okra (Abulmoschus esculantous) under Western Uttar Pradesh Climate Conditions. International Journal of Engineering and Management Sciences 8(1): 72-74 Lawton JH, McNeill S (1979) Between the devil and the deep blue sea: On the problems of being an herbivore. In: Anderson RM, Turner BD, Taylor LR, editors. Population dynamics Symposium of the British Ecological Society. Oxford: Blackwell. pp. 223–244. Matson PA, Parton WJ, Power AG, Swift MJ (1997) Agricultural intensification and ecosystem properties. Science 277: 504-509. Meena NK, Kanwat PM (2010) Studies on seasonal incidence and relative safety of pesticides against coccinellid beetles in okra ecosystem. Journal of Biological Control 24 (2):116-122.


24


Mooney KA, Pratt RT, Singer MS (2012) The Tri-Trophic Interactions Hypothesis: Interactive Effects of Host Plant Quality, Diet Breadth and Natural Enemies on

Herbivores.

PLoS

ONE

7(4):

e34403.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0034403 Nayar MP, Singh AK, Nair KN (2009) Agrobiodiversity hotspots in India – Conservation and Benefit Sharing, Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Authority, New Delhi, vol. 1, pp. 2–3. Obrycki JJ (2001) Transgenic Insecticidal Corn: Beyond Insecticidal Toxicity to Ecological Complexity Analysis of transgenic insecticidal corn developed for lepidopteran pests reveals that the potential benefits of crop genetic engineering for insect pest management may not outweigh the potential ecological and economic risks". Oxford Journals. 51 (5): 353–361. Pfadt RE (1980) Fundamentals of applied entomology. Macmillan Company, New York, pp. 99(104): 24-126. Poppy GM, Sutherland JP (2004) Can biological control benefit from geneticallymodified crops? Tritrophic interactions on insect-resistant transgenic plants". Physiological Entomology. 29 (3): 257–268. Price PW, Bouton CE, Gross P, McPheron BA, Thompson JN, et al. (1980) Interactions among three trophic levels: Influence of plants on interactions between insect herbivores and natural enemies. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 11: 41–65. Rhoades DF, Cates RG (1976) Toward a general theory of plant antiherbivore chemistry. Recent Advances in Phytochemistry 10: 168–213. Schmitz OJ (2008) Herbivory from individuals to ecosystems. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics 39: 133–152. Singer MS, Stireman JO (2005) The tri-trophic niche concept and adaptive radiation of phytophagous insects. Ecology Letters 8: 1247–1255. Annual report of the Minor Research Project

25


Singh Y, Jha A, Verma S, Mishra VK, Singh SS (2013) Population dynamics of sucking insect pests and its natural enemies on okra agroecosystem in Chitrakoot region . African Journal of Agricultural Research 8(28): 3814-3819. Wäckers (2005) In: FL, Rijn PCJ van, Bruin J Eds. Plant-provided food for carnivorous insects : protective mutualism and its applications (1. paperback ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521819415. Wyatt

IJ

(1965)

Distribution

of

Myzus

Persicae

(Sulz)

on

Year-Round

Chrysanthemums .I. Summer Season. Annals of Applied Biology 56: 439–459.


26