OATAO - Open Archive Toulouse Archive Ouverte Open Access Week

Agroecosystem management and biotic interactions: a review

Médiène, Safia and Valantin-Morison, Muriel and Sarthou, Jean-Pierre and de Tourdonnet, Stéphane and Gosme, Marie and Bertrand, Michel and Roger-Estrade, Jean and Aubertot, Jean-Noël and Rusch, Adrien and Motisi, Natacha and Pelosi, Céline and Doré, Thierry Agroecosystem management and biotic interactions: a review. (2011) Agronomy for Sustainable Development, vol. 31 (n° 3). pp. 491-514. ISSN 1774-0746

[img]
Preview
(Document in English)

PDF (Author's version) - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
759kB

Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13593-011-0009-1

Abstract

Increasing the use of synthetic fertilisers and pesticides in agroecosystems has led to higher crop yields, accompanied by a decline in biodiversity at the levels of field, cropping system and farm. Biodiversity decline has been favoured by changes at landscape level such as regional farm specialisation, increases in field size, and the removal of hedgerows and woodlots. The loss of biodiversity in agroecosystems has increased the need for external inputs because beneficial functions are no longer provided by beneficial species as natural enemies of crop pests and ecosystem engineers. This trend has led to a strong reliance on petrochemicals in agroecosystems. However, many scientists have been arguing for more than two decades that this reliance on petrochemicals could be considerably reduced by a better use of biotic interactions. This article reviewsoptions to increase beneficial biotic interactions in agroecosystems and to improve pest management and crop nutrition whilst decreasing petrochemical use. Four agronomic options are presented. First, it has been shown that the choice of cultivar, the sowing date and nitrogen fertilisation practices can be manipulated to prevent interactions between pests and crop, in either time or space. Nevertheless, the efficacy of these manipulations may be limited by pest adaptation. Second, beneficial biotic interactions may result from appropriate changes to the habitats of natural enemies and ecosystem engineers, mediated by soil and weed management. Here, knowledge is scarce, and indirect and complex effects are poorly understood. Third, changes achieved by crop diversification and, fourth, by landscape adaptation are promising. However, these practices also present drawbacks that may not necessarily be outweighed by beneficial effects. Overall, these four management approaches provide a powerful framework to develop sustainable agronomic practices.

Item Type:Article
Additional Information:Thanks to Springer Verlag editor. The definitive version is available at http://link.springer.com/ The original PDF of the article can be found at Agronomy for Sustainable Development website : http://link.springer.com/journal/13593
ProdINRA Id:168425
Audience (journal):International peer-reviewed journal
Uncontrolled Keywords:
Institution:Other partners > AgroParisTech (FRANCE)
Université de Toulouse > Institut National Polytechnique de Toulouse - INPT (FRANCE)
French research institutions > Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique - INRA (FRANCE)
French research institutions > Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale - INSERM (FRANCE)
Other partners > Université d'Evry - Val-d'Essonne (FRANCE)
Other partners > Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes - EPHE (FRANCE)
Other partners > Université de Rennes 1 (FRANCE)
Laboratory name:
Statistics:download
Deposited By: INRA INRA
Deposited On:24 Oct 2016 12:30

Repository Staff Only: item control page