IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i9p1509-d1479731.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Response of Insects and Weeds within the Crop to Variation in Sowing Density of Canola

Author

Listed:
  • Lucie Vykydalová

    (Department of Plant Biology, Faculty of AgriSciences, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic)

  • Petra Martínez Barroso

    (Department of Applied and Landscape Ecology, Faculty of AgriSciences, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic)

  • Igor Děkanovský

    (University Hospital Brno, Jihlavská 20, 625 00 Brno, Czech Republic)

  • Eva Hrudová

    (Department of Crop Science, Breeding and Plant Medicine, Faculty of AgriSciences, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic)

  • Yentriani Rumeta Lumbantobing

    (Institute of Civil Engineering, Warsaw University of Life Sciences—SGGW, Nowoursynowska 159, 02 776 Warsaw, Poland)

  • Markéta Michutová

    (Department of Crop Science, Breeding and Plant Medicine, Faculty of AgriSciences, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic)

  • Jan Winkler

    (Department of Plant Biology, Faculty of AgriSciences, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic)

Abstract

The relationships between weeds and insects in canola stands with different seeding rates are not fully understood. Varying seeding rates in canola crops can create different conditions that affect both weed and insect populations and their interactions. The aim of this work was to determine the response of weeds and insects of selected taxa to different densities of canola stand densities and to clarify the interactions between weeds and insects in canola stands. The field experiment was conducted on a plot located in the cadastral area of the municipality of Pěnčín (Moravia, Czech Republic). The results show that a reduced canola sowing rate of oilseed rape leads to increased weed infestation, which is dominated by one taxon ( Papaver rhoeas L.). The increase in weed infestation of canola stands is not reflected in an increase in the diversity of captured insects. Increased canola seeding rate improves weed suppression but increases the number of canola pest insects. A higher number of plants and more canola biomass increase the food supply and, thus, make the stand more attractive to canola pests. The taxon Brassicogethes aeneus dominated the pests species spectrum. Changing the seeding rate of canola results in a response in weed and insect populations. The standard recommended seeding rate is optimal in terms of competitive suppression of weeds and the occurrence of pests and trapped insects. Increasing or decreasing the seeding rate of rapeseed does not bring any benefits in terms of pest regulation or biodiversity. However, the results obtained indicate an interesting weed–insect interaction in the conditions of canola stands.

Suggested Citation

  • Lucie Vykydalová & Petra Martínez Barroso & Igor Děkanovský & Eva Hrudová & Yentriani Rumeta Lumbantobing & Markéta Michutová & Jan Winkler, 2024. "The Response of Insects and Weeds within the Crop to Variation in Sowing Density of Canola," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-15, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:9:p:1509-:d:1479731
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/9/1509/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/9/1509/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Damien M Hicks & Pierre Ouvrard & Katherine C R Baldock & Mathilde Baude & Mark A Goddard & William E Kunin & Nadine Mitschunas & Jane Memmott & Helen Morse & Maria Nikolitsi & Lynne M Osgathorpe & Si, 2016. "Food for Pollinators: Quantifying the Nectar and Pollen Resources of Urban Flower Meadows," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-37, June.
    2. Sebastian Seibold & Martin M. Gossner & Nadja K. Simons & Nico Blüthgen & Jörg Müller & Didem Ambarlı & Christian Ammer & Jürgen Bauhus & Markus Fischer & Jan C. Habel & Karl Eduard Linsenmair & Thoma, 2019. "Arthropod decline in grasslands and forests is associated with landscape-level drivers," Nature, Nature, vol. 574(7780), pages 671-674, October.
    3. Eva Hrudová & Marek Seidenglanz & Pavel Tóth & Jana Poslušná & Pavel Kolařík & Jiří Havel, 2023. "Pollen Beetles in Oilseed Rape Fields: Spectrum and Distribution in Czech Republic during 2011–2013," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-23, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Balzan, Mario V & Caruana, Julio & Zammit, Annrica, 2018. "Assessing the capacity and flow of ecosystem services in multifunctional landscapes: Evidence of a rural-urban gradient in a Mediterranean small island state," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 711-725.
    2. Felix Neff & Fränzi Korner-Nievergelt & Emmanuel Rey & Matthias Albrecht & Kurt Bollmann & Fabian Cahenzli & Yannick Chittaro & Martin M. Gossner & Carlos Martínez-Núñez & Eliane S. Meier & Christian , 2022. "Different roles of concurring climate and regional land-use changes in past 40 years’ insect trends," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-12, December.
    3. Gackstetter, David & von Bloh, Malte & Hannus, Veronika & Meyer, Sebastian T. & Weisser, Wolfgang & Luksch, Claudia & Asseng, Senthold, 2023. "Autonomous field management – An enabler of sustainable future in agriculture," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    4. Nan-Ji Jiang & Hetan Chang & Jerrit Weißflog & Franziska Eberl & Daniel Veit & Kerstin Weniger & Bill S. Hansson & Markus Knaden, 2023. "Ozone exposure disrupts insect sexual communication," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-7, December.
    5. Arianna Latini & Ilaria Papagni & Lorenzo Gatti & Patrizia De Rossi & Alessandro Campiotti & Germina Giagnacovo & Daniele Mirabile Gattia & Susanna Mariani, 2022. "Echium vulgare and Echium plantagineum : A Comparative Study to Evaluate Their Inclusion in Mediterranean Urban Green Roofs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-19, August.
    6. Simon Hodge & Oliver Schweiger & Alexandra-Maria Klein & Simon G. Potts & Cecilia Costa & Matthias Albrecht & Joachim R. de Miranda & Marika Mand & Pilar De la Rúa & Maj Rundlöf & Eleanor Attridge & R, 2022. "Design and Planning of a Transdisciplinary Investigation into Farmland Pollinators: Rationale, Co-Design, and Lessons Learned," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-30, August.
    7. Patrick José Jeetze & Isabelle Weindl & Justin Andrew Johnson & Pasquale Borrelli & Panos Panagos & Edna J. Molina Bacca & Kristine Karstens & Florian Humpenöder & Jan Philipp Dietrich & Sara Minoli &, 2023. "Projected landscape-scale repercussions of global action for climate and biodiversity protection," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-14, December.
    8. Carturan, Bruno S. & Siewe, Nourridine & Cobbold, Christina A. & Tyson, Rebecca C., 2023. "Bumble bee pollination and the wildflower/crop trade-off: When do wildflower enhancements improve crop yield?," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 484(C).
    9. Jessika Konrad & Ralph Platen & Michael Glemnitz, 2024. "The Effects of Vegetation Structure and Timber Harvesting on Ground Beetle (Col.: Carabidae) and Arachnid Communities (Arach.: Araneae, Opiliones) in Short-Rotation Coppices," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-30, January.
    10. Gail Ann Langellotto & Andony Melathopoulos & Isabella Messer & Aaron Anderson & Nathan McClintock & Lucas Costner, 2018. "Garden Pollinators and the Potential for Ecosystem Service Flow to Urban and Peri-Urban Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-16, June.
    11. Evans, Luke C. & Sibly, Richard M. & Thorbek, Pernille & Sims, Ian & Oliver, Tom H. & Walters, Richard J., 2019. "Quantifying the effectiveness of agri-environment schemes for a grassland butterfly using individual-based models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 411(C).
    12. Michael Roswell & Jonathan Dushoff & Rachael Winfree, 2019. "Male and female bees show large differences in floral preference," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-18, April.
    13. Johannes Uhler & Sarah Redlich & Jie Zhang & Torsten Hothorn & Cynthia Tobisch & Jörg Ewald & Simon Thorn & Sebastian Seibold & Oliver Mitesser & Jérôme Morinière & Vedran Bozicevic & Caryl S. Benjami, 2021. "Relationship of insect biomass and richness with land use along a climate gradient," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-9, December.
    14. Zheng, Liang & Wang, Ying & Li, Jiangfeng, 2023. "Quantifying the spatial impact of landscape fragmentation on habitat quality: A multi-temporal dimensional comparison between the Yangtze River Economic Belt and Yellow River Basin of China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    15. Angela Turck & Wiltrud Terlau, 2023. "Hesitations and Aspirations of Farmers in Nature-Protected Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-12, February.
    16. Frances S. Sivakoff & Scott P. Prajzner & Mary M. Gardiner, 2018. "Unique Bee Communities within Vacant Lots and Urban Farms Result from Variation in Surrounding Urbanization Intensity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-17, June.
    17. Joanne Lee Picknoll & Pieter Poot & Michael Renton, 2021. "A New Approach to Inform Restoration and Management Decisions for Sustainable Apiculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-20, May.
    18. Sacher, Philipp & Meyerhoff, Jürgen & Mayer, Marius, 2022. "Evidence of the association between deadwood and forest recreational site choices," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:9:p:1509-:d:1479731. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.