Agricultural practices for food safety threaten pest control services for fresh produce

Flowering Coriander (Coriandrum sativum) Strips Do Not Enhance Ecosystem Services in Azorean Orchards

The effect of flower strips on ecosystem services (ESs) and disservices (EDs) is routinely assessed following changes in service provider densities without measuring the associated levels of ES/EDs. By using the sentinel approach (i.e., exposing a plant, seeds, and prey models in a standardized way), we tested how coriander (Coriandrum sativum) strips planted in mixed orchards on Terceira Island (Azores, Portugal) affected herbivory on lettuce plants, seed predation on wheat and weed seeds, and predation on artificial caterpillars. Vertebrates had more influence than invertebrates on ESs/EDs. Herbivory (ED) after 2 weeks was similar in the coriander and the control plots (mean ± SD; 2.3% ± 3.3% vs. 2.2% ± 2.9%, n = 32 for both). Seed predation was higher in the control than in the coriander plots for both grain (ED; 30.8% ± 38.9% vs. 15.3% ± 10.8%, n = 18 for both) and weed seeds (ES; 2.5% ± 4.1% vs. 0.4% ± 0.5%, n = 18 for both). Vertebrate predation (ES) rates after 48 h were significantly higher in the control (estimate 9%, 95% CI: 4-20%) than in the coriander plots (3%, 1-8%), while no difference was observed for invertebrate predation. Coriander strips did not support increased ES/reduced ED levels in this setting. The tools used can be effective to quantitatively compare multiple ESs/EDs under different farming management strategies.

Structural Equation Models Suggest That On-Farm Noncrop Vegetation Removal Is Not Associated with Improved Food Safety Outcomes but Is Linked to Impaired Water Quality

While growers have reported pressures to minimize wildlife intrusion into produce fields through noncrop vegetation (NCV) removal, NCV provides key ecosystem services. To model food safety and environmental tradeoffs associated with NCV removal, published and publicly available food safety and water quality data from the Northeastern United States were obtained. Because data on NCV removal are not widely available, forest-wetland cover was used as a proxy, consistent with previous studies. Structural equation models (SEMs) were used to quantify the effect of forest-wetland cover on (i) food safety outcomes (e.g., detecting pathogens in soil) and (ii) water quality (e.g., nutrient levels). Based on the SEMs, NCV was not associated with or had a protective effect on food safety outcomes (more NCV was associated with a reduced likelihood of pathogen detection). The probabilities of detecting Listeria spp. in soil (effect estimate [EE] = -0.17; P = 0.005) and enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli in stream samples (EE = -0.27; P < 0.001) were negatively associated with the amount of NCV surrounding the sampling site. Larger amounts of NCV were also associated with lower nutrient, salinity, and sediment levels, and higher dissolved oxygen levels. Total phosphorous levels were negatively associated with the amount of NCV in the upstream watershed (EE = -0.27; P < 0.001). Similar negative associations (P < 0.05) were observed for other physicochemical parameters, such as nitrate (EE = -0.38). Our findings suggest that NCV should not be considered an inherent produce safety risk or result in farm audit demerits. This study also provides a framework for evaluating environmental tradeoffs associated with using specific preharvest food safety strategies. IMPORTANCE Currently, on-farm food safety decisions are typically made independently of conservation considerations, often with detrimental impacts on agroecosystems. Comanaging agricultural environments to simultaneously meet conservation and food safety aims is complicated because farms are closely linked to surrounding environments, and management decisions can have unexpected environmental, economic, and food safety consequences. Thus, there is a need for research on the conservation and food safety tradeoffs associated with implementing specific preharvest food safety practices. Understanding these tradeoffs is critical for developing adaptive comanagement strategies and ensuring the short- and long-term safety, sustainability, and profitability of agricultural systems. This study quantifies tradeoffs and synergies between food safety and environmental aims, and outlines a framework for modeling tradeoffs and synergies between management aims that can be used to support future comanagement research.

Local diversification enhances pollinator visitation to strawberry and may improve pollination and marketability

Numerous studies show that semi-natural habitats within agricultural landscapes benefit native pollinating insects and increase resultant crop pollination services. More recently, evidence is emerging that agricultural diversification techniques on farms, as well as increased compositional and configurational heterogeneity within the cropped portion of landscapes, enhance pollinator communities. However, to date, only a few studies have investigated how diversifying the crops within the farm field itself (i.e., polyculture) influences wild pollinator communities and crop pollination services. In the Central Coast of California, we investigate how local crop diversification within fields, crossed with the proportion of natural habitat in the surrounding landscape, jointly affect pollinator communities and services to strawberry. On 16 organic farms varying in farm type (monoculture vs. polyculture) and proportion of natural land cover, we find that both factors enhance pollinator abundance and richness, although neither affect honey bee abundance. Further, natural cover has a stronger effect on pollinator richness on monoculture (vs. polyculture) farms. Although strawberry can self-pollinate, we document experimentally that pollinator exclusion doubles the probability of berry malformation, while excluding both pollinators and wind triples malformation, with corresponding effects on berry marketability. Finally, in post-hoc tests, we find that berry malformation is significantly higher with greater visitation by honey bees, and observed a trend that this reduction was mitigated by increased native bee richness. These results suggest that both polyculture and semi-natural habitat cover support more abundant and diverse pollinator communities, and that ambient levels of pollinator visitation to strawberry provide an important crop pollination service by improving berry marketability (i.e., by reducing berry malformation). Although further confirmation would be needed, our work suggests that honey bees alone do not provide sufficient pollination services. Prior work has shown that honey bees tend to visit only the top of the strawberry flower receptacle, while other native bees often crawl around the flower base, leading to more complete pollination of the achenes and, consequently, better formed berries. If honey bee visits reduced native bee visitation in our system, this could explain the unexpected correlation between increased honey bee visits and malformation.

Prairie Strips and Lower Land Use Intensity Increase Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services

Agricultural landscapes can be managed to protect biodiversity and maintain ecosystem services. One approach to achieve this is to restore native perennial vegetation within croplands. Where rowcrops have displaced prairie, as in the US Midwest, restoration of native perennial vegetation can align with crops in so called “prairie strips.” We tested the effect of prairie strips in addition to other management practices on a variety of taxa and on a suite of ecosystem services. To do so, we worked within a 33-year-old experiment that included treatments that varied methods of agricultural management across a gradient of land use intensity. In the two lowest intensity crop management treatments, we introduced prairie strips that occupied 5% of crop area. We addressed three questions: (1) What are the effects of newly established prairie strips on the spillover of biodiversity and ecosystem services into cropland? (2) How does time since prairie strip establishment affect biodiversity and ecosystem services? (3) What are the tradeoffs and synergies among biodiversity conservation, non-provisioning ecosystem services, and provisioning ecosystem services (crop yield) across a land use intensity gradient (which includes prairie strips)? Within prairie strip treatments, where sampling effort occurred within and at increasing distance from strips, dung beetle abundance, spider abundance and richness, active carbon, decomposition, and pollination decreased with distance from prairie strips, and this effect increased between the first and second year. Across the entire land use intensity gradient, treatments with prairie strips and reduced chemical inputs had higher butterfly abundance, spider abundance, and pollination services. In addition, soil organic carbon, butterfly richness, and spider richness increased with a decrease in land use intensity. Crop yield in one treatment with prairie strips was equal to that of the highest intensity management, even while including the area taken out of production. We found no effects of strips on ant biodiversity and greenhouse gas emissions (N2O and CH4). Our results show that, even in early establishment, prairie strips and lower land use intensity can contribute to the conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services without a disproportionate loss of crop yield.

Bottom-Up Forces in Agroecosystems and Their Potential Impact on Arthropod Pest Management

Bottom-up effects are major ecological forces in crop-arthropod pest-natural enemy multitrophic interactions. Over the past two decades, bottom-up effects have been considered key levers for optimizing integrated pest management (IPM). Irrigation, fertilization, crop resistance, habitat manipulation, organic management practices, and landscape characteristics have all been shown to trigger marked bottom-up effects and thus impact pest management. In this review, we summarize current knowledge on the role of bottom-up effects in pest management and the associated mechanisms, and discuss several key study cases showing how bottom-up effects practically promote natural pest control. Bottom-up effects on IPM also contribute to sustainable intensification of agriculture in the context of agricultural transition and climate change. Finally, we highlight new research priorities in this important area. Together with top-down forces (biological control), future advances in understanding ecological mechanisms underlying key bottom-up forces could pave the way for developing novel pest management strategies and new optimized IPM programs.

Survival and Persistence of Foodborne Pathogens in Manure-Amended Soils and Prevalence on Fresh Produce in Certified Organic Farms: A Multi-Regional Baseline Analysis

Biological soil amendments of animal origin (BSAAOs), including untreated (e.g., raw or aged manure, or incompletely composted manure) and treated animal products (e.g., compost), are used for crop production and as part of soil health management. Application of BSAAO's must be done cautiously, as raw manure commonly contains enteric foodborne pathogens that can potentially contaminate edible produce that may be consumed without cooking. USDA National Organic Program (NOP) certified production systems follow the 90-or 120-day interval standards between applications of untreated BSAAOs and crop harvest, depending on whether the edible portions of the crops are in indirect or direct contact with the soil, respectively. This study was conducted to evaluate the survival of four foodborne pathogens in soils amended with BSAAOs and to examine the potential for bacterial transfer to fresh produce harvested from USDA NOP certified organic farms (19) from four states. Only 0.4% (2/527) of produce samples were positive for L. monocytogenes. Among the untreated manure and compost samples, 18.0% (42/233) were positive for at least one of the tested and culturable bacterial foodborne pathogens. The prevalence of non-O157 STEC and Salmonella in untreated manure was substantially &gt; that of E. coli O157:H7 and L. monocytogenes. Of the 2,461 soil samples analyzed in this study, 12.9% (318) were positive for at least one pathogen. In soil amended with untreated manure, the prevalence of non-O157 STEC [7.7% (190) and L. monocytogenes (5.0% (122), was &gt; that of Salmonella (1.1% (26)] or E. coli O157 [0.04% (1)]. Foodborne pathogen prevalence in the soil peaked after manure application and decreased significantly 30 days post-application (dpa). However, non-O157 STEC and L. monocytogenes were recovered from soil samples after 90 and 120 dpa. Results indicate that produce contamination by tested foodborne pathogens was infrequent, but these data should not be generalized outside of the specific wait-time regulations for organic crop production and the farms studied. Moreover, other sources of contamination, e.g., irrigation, wildlife, environmental conditions, cropping and management practices, should be considered. This study also provides multi-regional baseline data relating to current NOP application intervals and development of potential risk mitigation strategies to reduce pathogen persistence in soils amended with BSAAOs. These findings contribute to filling critical data gaps concerning occurrence of fecal pathogens in NOP-certified farming systems used for production of fresh produce in different US regions.

Narrow and Brittle or Broad and Nimble? Comparing Adaptive Capacity in Simplifying and Diversifying Farming Systems

Humanity faces a triple threat of climate change, biodiversity loss, and global food insecurity. In response, increasing the general adaptive capacity of farming systems is essential. We identify two divergent strategies for building adaptive capacity.Simplifyingprocesses seek to narrowly maximize production by shifting the basis of agricultural production toward centralized control of socially and ecologically homogenized systems.Diversifyingprocesses cultivate social-ecological complexity in order to provide multiple ecosystem services, maintain management flexibility, and promote coordinated adaptation across levels. Through five primarily United States focused cases of distinct agricultural challenges—foodborne pathogens, drought, marginal lands, labor availability, and land access and tenure—we compare simplifying and diversifying responses to assess how these pathways differentially enhance or degrade the adaptive capacity of farming systems in the context of the triple threat. These cases show that diversifying processes can weave a form of broad and nimble adaptive capacity that is fundamentally distinct from the narrow and brittle adaptive capacity produced through simplification. We find that while there are structural limitations and tradeoffs to diversifying processes, adaptive capacity can be facilitated by empowering people and enhancing ecosystem functionality to proactively distribute resources and knowledge where needed and to nimbly respond to changing circumstances. Our cases suggest that, in order to garner the most adaptive benefits from diversification, farming systems should balance the pursuit of multiple goals, which in turn requires an inclusive process for active dialogue and negotiation among diverse perspectives. Instead of locking farming systems into pernicious cycles that reproduce social and ecological externalities, diversification processes can enable nimble responses to a broad spectrum of possible stressors and shocks, while also promoting social equity and ecological sustainability.

Landscape simplification increases vineyard pest outbreaks and insecticide use

Diversifying agricultural landscapes may mitigate biodiversity declines and improve pest management. Yet landscapes are rarely managed to suppress pests, in part because researchers seldom measure key variables related to pest outbreaks and insecticides that drive management decisions. We used a 13-year government database to analyse landscape effects on European grapevine moth (Lobesia botrana) outbreaks and insecticides across c. 400 Spanish vineyards. At harvest, we found pest outbreaks increased four-fold in simplified, vineyard-dominated landscapes compared to complex landscapes in which vineyards are surrounded by semi-natural habitats. Similarly, insecticide applications doubled in vineyard-dominated landscapes but declined in vineyards surrounded by shrubland. Importantly, pest population stochasticity would have masked these large effects if numbers of study sites and years were reduced to typical levels in landscape pest-control studies. Our results suggest increasing landscape complexity may mitigate pest populations and insecticide applications. Habitat conservation represents an economically and environmentally sound approach for achieving sustainable grape production.

Shifts in species interactions and farming contexts mediate net effects of birds in agroecosystems

Some birds are viewed as pests and vectors of foodborne pathogens in farmlands, yet birds also benefit growers by consuming pests. While many growers seek to prevent birds from accessing their farms, few studies have attempted to quantify the net effects of bird services and disservices, let alone how net effects shift across farm management strategies. We quantified the net effect of birds on crop production across 20 California strawberry (Fragaria × ananassa) farms that varied in local management practices and landscape context. We surveyed farms for berry damage and bird droppings (as potential sources of pathogens) and implemented a large-scale exclusion experiment to quantify the impact of birds on production. We found that birds had only a slightly negative overall impact on strawberry production, reducing economic value by 3.6%. Direct bird damage and intraguild predation contributed equally to this net effect, underscoring the importance of indirect trophic interactions that may be less apparent to growers. In simple landscapes (e.g., low proportions of surrounding seminatural habitat), birds provided pest control in the interiors of farm fields, and costs from bird damage to crops peaked at field edges. In complex landscapes (e.g., high proportions of seminatural habitat), birds were more likely to disrupt pest control by feeding as intraguild predators. Nonetheless, seminatural habitat dampened bird services and disservices, and our models predicted that removing habitat around farm fields would increase costs from bird damage to crops by up to 76%. Fecal contamination of crops was extremely rare (0.01%). However, both fecal contamination and bird damage did increase on farms with higher densities of fencing and wires, where birds often perch. Our results demonstrate that maintaining seminatural habitat around farms may enhance bird diversity and mitigate bird damage without increasing food safety risks. We also show that the net effects of birds depend on farming context and vary in complex ways in relation to locations within a farm, local farm attributes, and the surrounding landscape. This context-specific variation must be considered in order to optimize the management of wild birds in agroecosystems.

Balancing Disturbance and Conservation in Agroecosystems to Improve Biological Control

Disturbances associated with agricultural intensification reduce our ability to achieve sustainable crop production. These disturbances stem from crop-management tactics and can leave crop fields more vulnerable to insect outbreaks, in part because natural-enemy communities often tend to be more susceptible to disturbance than herbivorous pests. Recent research has explored practices that conserve natural-enemy communities and reduce pest outbreaks, revealing that different components of agroecosystems can influence natural-enemy populations. In this review, we consider a range of disturbances that influence pest control provided by natural enemies and how conservation practices can mitigate or counteract disturbance. We use four case studies to illustrate how conservation and disturbance mitigation increase the potential for biological control and provide co-benefits for the broader agroecosystem. To facilitate the adoption of conservation practices that improve top-down control across significant areas of the landscape, these practices will need to provide multifunctional benefits, but should be implemented with natural enemies explicitly in mind.

Proximity of restored hedgerows interacts with local floral diversity and species' traits to shape long-term pollinator metacommunity dynamics

Disconnected habitat fragments are poor at supporting population and community persistence; restoration ecologists, therefore, advocate for the establishment of habitat networks across landscapes. Few empirical studies, however, have considered how networks of restored habitat patches affect metacommunity dynamics. Here, using a 10-year study on restored hedgerows and unrestored field margins within an intensive agricultural landscape, we integrate occupancy modelling with network theory to examine the interaction between local and landscape characteristics, habitat selection and dispersal in shaping pollinator metacommunity dynamics. We show that surrounding hedgerows and remnant habitat patches interact with the local floral diversity, bee diet breadth and bee body size to influence site occupancy, via colonisation and persistence dynamics. Florally diverse sites and generalist, small-bodied species are most important for maintaining metacommunity connectivity. By providing the first in-depth assessment of how a network of restored habitat influences long-term population dynamics, we confirm the conservation benefit of hedgerows for pollinator populations and demonstrate the importance of restoring and maintaining habitat networks within an inhospitable matrix.

Crop pests and predators exhibit inconsistent responses to surrounding landscape composition

Decades of research have fostered the now-prevalent assumption that noncrop habitat facilitates better pest suppression by providing shelter and food resources to the predators and parasitoids of crop pests. Based on our analysis of the largest pest-control database of its kind, noncrop habitat surrounding farm fields does affect multiple dimensions of pest control, but the actual responses of pests and enemies are highly variable across geographies and cropping systems. Because noncrop habitat often does not enhance biological control, more information about local farming contexts is needed before habitat conservation can be recommended as a viable pest-suppression strategy. Consequently, when pest control does not benefit from noncrop vegetation, farms will need to be carefully comanaged for competing conservation and production objectives.

The idea that noncrop habitat enhances pest control and represents a win–win opportunity to conserve biodiversity and bolster yields has emerged as an agroecological paradigm. However, while noncrop habitat in landscapes surrounding farms sometimes benefits pest predators, natural enemy responses remain heterogeneous across studies and effects on pests are inconclusive. The observed heterogeneity in species responses to noncrop habitat may be biological in origin or could result from variation in how habitat and biocontrol are measured. Here, we use a pest-control database encompassing 132 studies and 6,759 sites worldwide to model natural enemy and pest abundances, predation rates, and crop damage as a function of landscape composition. Our results showed that although landscape composition explained significant variation within studies, pest and enemy abundances, predation rates, crop damage, and yields each exhibited different responses across studies, sometimes increasing and sometimes decreasing in landscapes with more noncrop habitat but overall showing no consistent trend. Thus, models that used landscape-composition variables to predict pest-control dynamics demonstrated little potential to explain variation across studies, though prediction did improve when comparing studies with similar crop and landscape features. Overall, our work shows that surrounding noncrop habitat does not consistently improve pest management, meaning habitat conservation may bolster production in some systems and depress yields in others. Future efforts to develop tools that inform farmers when habitat conservation truly represents a win–win would benefit from increased understanding of how landscape effects are modulated by local farm management and the biology of pests and their enemies.