@article{BoetzlRiesSchneideretal.2018,
  author    = {Boetzl, Fabian A. and Ries, Elena and Schneider, Gudrun and Krauss, Jochen},
  title     = {It's a matter of design - how pitfall trap design affects trap samples and possible predictions},
  series = {PeerJ},
  volume    = {6},
  journal   = {PeerJ},
  number    = {e5078},
  doi       = {10.7717/peerj.5078},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-176870},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {Background: Pitfall traps are commonly used to assess ground dwelling arthropod communities. The effects of different pitfall trap designs on the trapping outcome are poorly investigated however they might affect conclusions drawn from pitfall trap data greatly. Methods: We tested four pitfall trap types which have been used in previous studies for their effectiveness: a simple type, a faster exchangeable type with an extended plastic rim plate and two types with guidance barriers (V- and X-shaped). About 20 traps were active for 10 weeks and emptied biweekly resulting in 100 trap samples. Results: Pitfall traps with guidance barriers were up to five times more effective than simple pitfall traps and trap samples resulted in more similar assemblage approximations. Pitfall traps with extended plastic rim plates did not only perform poorly but also resulted in distinct carabid assemblages with less individuals of small species and a larger variation. Discussion: Due to the obvious trait filtering and resulting altered assemblages, we suggest not to use pitfall traps with extended plastic rim plates. In comprehensive biodiversity inventories, a smaller number of pitfall traps with guidance barriers and a larger number of spatial replicates is of advantage, while due to comparability reasons, the use of simple pitfall traps will be recommended in most other cases.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{DaineseSchneiderKraussetal.2017,
  author    = {Dainese, Matteo and Schneider, Gudrun and Krauss, Jochen and Steffan-Dewenter, Ingolf},
  title     = {Complementarity among natural enemies enhances pest suppression},
  series = {Scientific Reports},
  volume    = {7},
  journal   = {Scientific Reports},
  doi       = {10.1038/s41598-017-08316-z},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-158621},
  pages     = {8172},
  year      = {2017},
  abstract  = {Natural enemies have been shown to be effective agents for controlling insect pests in crops. However, it remains unclear how different natural enemy guilds contribute to the regulation of pests and how this might be modulated by landscape context. In a field exclusion experiment in oilseed rape (OSR), we found that parasitoids and ground-dwelling predators acted in a complementary way to suppress pollen beetles, suggesting that pest control by multiple enemies attacking a pest during different periods of its occurrence in the field improves biological control efficacy. The density of pollen beetle significantly decreased with an increased proportion of non-crop habitats in the landscape. Parasitism had a strong effect on pollen beetle numbers in landscapes with a low or intermediate proportion of non-crop habitats, but not in complex landscapes. Our results underline the importance of different natural enemy guilds to pest regulation in crops, and demonstrate how biological control can be strengthened by complementarity among natural enemies. The optimization of natural pest control by adoption of specific management practices at local and landscape scales, such as establishing non-crop areas, low-impact tillage, and temporal crop rotation, could significantly reduce dependence on pesticides and foster yield stability through ecological intensification in agriculture.},
  language  = {en}
}