TY - JOUR
T1 - Does plant diversity benefit agroecosystems? A synthetic review
AU - Letourneau, Deborah K.
AU - Armbrecht, Inge
AU - Rivera, Beatriz Salguero
AU - Lerma, James
AU - Carmona, Elizabeth Jiménez
AU - Daza, Martha Constanza
AU - Escobar, Selene
AU - Galindo, Víctor
AU - GutiéRrez, Catalina
AU - LóPez, Sebastián Duque
AU - Mejía, Jessica López
AU - Rangel, Aleyda Maritza Acosta
AU - Rangel, Janine Herrera
AU - Rivera, Leonardo
AU - Saavedra, Carlos Arturo
AU - Torres, Alba Marina
AU - Trujillo, Aldemar Reyes
PY - 2011/1
Y1 - 2011/1
N2 - Predictive theory on how plant diversity promotes herbivore suppression through movement patterns, host associations, and predataion promises a potential alternative to pesticide-intensive monoculture crop production. We used meta-analysis on 552 experiments in 45 articles published over the last 10 years to test if plant diversification schemes reduce herbivores and/or increase the natural enemies of herbivores as predicted by associational resistance hypotheses, the enemies hypothesis, and attraction and repellency model applications in Agricaulture. We found extensive support for these models with intercropping schemes, inclusion of flowering plants, and use of plants that repel herbivores or attract them away from the crop. Overall, herbivore suppression, enemy enhancement, and crop damage suppression effects were significantly stronger on diversified crops than on crops with none or fewer associated plant species. However, a relatively small, but significantly negative, mean effect size for crop yield indicated that pest-suppressive diversification schemes interfered with production, in part because of reducing densities of the main crop by replacing it with intercrops or non-crop plants. This first use of meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of diversification schemes, a potentially more powerful tool than tallies of significant positive and negative outcomes (vote-counting), revealed stronger overall effects on all parameters measured compared to previous reviews. Our analysis of the same articles used in a recent review facilitates comparisons of vote-counting and meta-analysis, and shows that pronounced results of the meta-analysis are not well explained by a reduction in articles that met its stRicater criteria. Rather, compared to outcome counts, effect sizes were rarely neutral (equal to zero), and a mean effect size value for mixed outcomes could be calculated. Problematic statistical properties of vote-counting were avoided with meta-analysis, thus providing a more precise test of the hypotheses. The unambiguous and encouraging results from this meta-analysis of previous research should motivate ecologists to conduct more mechanistic experiments to improve the odds of designing effective crop diversification schemes for improved pest regulation and enhanced crop yield.
AB - Predictive theory on how plant diversity promotes herbivore suppression through movement patterns, host associations, and predataion promises a potential alternative to pesticide-intensive monoculture crop production. We used meta-analysis on 552 experiments in 45 articles published over the last 10 years to test if plant diversification schemes reduce herbivores and/or increase the natural enemies of herbivores as predicted by associational resistance hypotheses, the enemies hypothesis, and attraction and repellency model applications in Agricaulture. We found extensive support for these models with intercropping schemes, inclusion of flowering plants, and use of plants that repel herbivores or attract them away from the crop. Overall, herbivore suppression, enemy enhancement, and crop damage suppression effects were significantly stronger on diversified crops than on crops with none or fewer associated plant species. However, a relatively small, but significantly negative, mean effect size for crop yield indicated that pest-suppressive diversification schemes interfered with production, in part because of reducing densities of the main crop by replacing it with intercrops or non-crop plants. This first use of meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of diversification schemes, a potentially more powerful tool than tallies of significant positive and negative outcomes (vote-counting), revealed stronger overall effects on all parameters measured compared to previous reviews. Our analysis of the same articles used in a recent review facilitates comparisons of vote-counting and meta-analysis, and shows that pronounced results of the meta-analysis are not well explained by a reduction in articles that met its stRicater criteria. Rather, compared to outcome counts, effect sizes were rarely neutral (equal to zero), and a mean effect size value for mixed outcomes could be calculated. Problematic statistical properties of vote-counting were avoided with meta-analysis, thus providing a more precise test of the hypotheses. The unambiguous and encouraging results from this meta-analysis of previous research should motivate ecologists to conduct more mechanistic experiments to improve the odds of designing effective crop diversification schemes for improved pest regulation and enhanced crop yield.
KW - Agroecosystems
KW - Crop damage
KW - Diversification
KW - Effect sizes
KW - Herbivores
KW - Intercropping
KW - Metaanalysis
KW - Natural enemies
KW - Pest regulation
KW - Statistical outcome vote-counting
KW - Yield
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79955544447&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1890/09-2026.1
DO - 10.1890/09-2026.1
M3 - Artículo de revisión
C2 - 21516884
AN - SCOPUS:79955544447
SN - 1051-0761
VL - 21
SP - 9
EP - 21
JO - Ecological Applications
JF - Ecological Applications
IS - 1
ER -