Study

Population fluctuations of selected arthropods in alfalfa: influence of two harvesting practices

  • Published source details Summers C.G. (1976) Population fluctuations of selected arthropods in alfalfa: influence of two harvesting practices. Environmental Entomology, 5, 103-110.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Leave part of the crop or pasture unharvested or uncut

Action Link
Natural Pest Control
  1. Leave part of the crop or pasture unharvested or uncut

    A controlled study in 1972 of two 16.1 ha alfalfa Medicago sativa fields in California, USA (Summers 1976) found that predator and pest numbers were higher in the field with uncut strips than the completely cut field. There were 18,044 individual predators and 16,138 pest (lygus bugs Lygus spp. and pea aphids Acyrthosiphon pisum) individuals in the field with uncut strips and 7,131 predators and 12,557 pests in the completely cut field. Predators included spiders (Araneae), damsel bugs Nabis spp., green lacewing Chrysoperla (Chrysopa) carnea and ladybirds (Coccinellidae). Lygus bugs moved from uncut strips into cut areas, but moved back to uncut strips when cutting occurred. Predatory species showed a similar pattern. Alfalfa hay protein content was slightly higher in the field with uncut strips (18.1-20.7% protein) than the completely cut field (17.1-18.2%) but modified crude protein was slightly lower. One field had banks 1 m-wide and 0.2 m high distributed every 15-25 m. At each mowing period, banks were cut alternately (one alfalfa strip left uncut at every alternate raised strip, the next bank cut). Cuttings were distributed either side of the strip. Invertebrates were sampled on uncut and cut strips and between strips (10 samples/location) using a D-vac suction sampler. The second field was cut completely, and sampled using the same method as in the field with cut strips. Sampling took place one week after strip-cutting began (after the second cut, 7th May) and continued bimonthly until mid-September.

     

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 18

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust