Conservation Evidence strives to be as useful to conservationists as possible. Please take our survey to help the team improve our resource.

Providing evidence to improve practice

Individual study: Responses of slug numbers and slug damage to crops in a silvoarable agroforestry landscape

Published source details

Griffiths J., Phillips D.S., Compton S.G., Wright C. & Incoll L.D. (1998) Responses of slug numbers and slug damage to crops in a silvoarable agroforestry landscape. Journal of Applied Ecology, 35, 252-260


This study is summarised as evidence for the intervention(s) shown on the right. The icon shows which synopsis it is relevant to.

Use alley cropping Natural Pest Control

A paired, replicated, controlled study in 1991-1994 in West Yorkshire, UK (Griffiths et al. 1998) found more slugs in alley-cropped plots (averaging 14.3-20.6 slugs/pitfall trap) than in controls without trees (0.2-10.4 slugs) in 1992-1994. More roundback slugs Arion spp. occurred in alley-cropped plots (0.2-8.3 slugs/refuge trap) than in controls (0.0-0.3 slugs) in 1994. An average of 1.7-8.8 grey field slugs Derocerus reticulatum/refuge trap occurred in alley-cropped plots compared to 2.0-4.0 in controls in 1994. Within alley cropped plots, 5-8 roundback slugs and 6-9 grey field slugs/refuge trap were found in tree rows compared with 0-3 and 2-9 in crop alleys, respectively. The proportion of plants damaged by slugs was higher, and the number of emerging pea Pisum sativum plants was lower, next to tree rows than elsewhere in crop alleys or in the controls. Four plots of alley-cropped arable crops (using a wheat Triticum aestivum-barley Hordeum vulgare-pea rotation) were compared with paired, conventionally cropped controls. Rows of trees (containing five tree species) were established in 1987 and spaced 14 m apart. In 1994, slugs were sampled using 16 refuge traps (40 x 40 cm squares of roofing felt) in two pairs of alley-cropped plots and controls.