First use of participatory Bayesian modeling to study habitat management at multiple scales for biological pest control

  • Nicolas SalliouEmail author
  • Aude Vialatte
  • Claude Monteil
  • Cécile Barnaud
Research Article
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Pest control


Habitat management is increasingly considered as a promising approach to favor the ecosystem service of biological control by enhancing natural enemies. However, habitat management, whether at local or landscape scale, remains very uncertain for farmers. Interactions between ecological processes and agricultural practices are indeed uncertain and site-specific, which makes implementation difficult. Thus, prospecting innovations based on habitat management may benefit from integrating local stakeholders and their knowledge. Our objective is to explore with both local and scientific stakeholders how they perceive agricultural practices, ecological processes, and services related to biological pest control and habitat management. We conducted a participatory Bayesian Network modeling approach with five stakeholders in Southwest France around apple orchard cultivation. We co-constructed such Bayesian Networks based on participants’ knowledge. We explored scenarios favoring natural enemies and habitat manipulation with each participant’s Bayesian Network. We compared how different stakeholders perceive the impact of each scenario on the biological control ecosystem service. Our results indicate that a landscape with a high proportion of semi-natural habitats does not translate into significant biological control for most participants even though some stakeholders perceive a significant impact on generalist predators’ activity within orchards. For these local stakeholders, habitat management at the orchard level such as inter-row vegetation seems currently more promising than at the landscape scale. Here, we show for the first time that the use of Bayesian modeling in a participatory manner can give precious insights into the most promising perspectives on habitat management at different scales. These different local perspectives suggest in particular that further dialogue between ecologists and local stakeholders should be sought about inter-row habitat management as the most promising practice to foster biological pest control and other ecosystem services.


Apple orchards Biological pest control Semi-natural habitats Participatory Bayesian network Stakeholder perspective 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Bell A, Zhang W, Nou K (2016) Pesticide use and cooperative management of natural enemy habitat in a framed field experiment. Agric Syst 143:1–13. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bianchi FA, Ives AR, Schellhorn NA (2013) Interactions between conventional and organic farming for biocontrol services across the landscape. Ecol Appl 23(7):1531–1543. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Duru M, Therond O, Martin G, Martin-Clouaire R, Magne MA, Justes E, Journet EP, Aubertot JN, Savary S, Bergez JE, Sarthou JP (2015) How to implement biodiversity-based agriculture to enhance ecosystem services: a review. Agron Sustain Dev 35(4):1259–1281. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Düspohl M, Frank S, Doell P (2012) A review of Bayesian networks as a participatory modeling approach in support of sustainable environmental management. J Sustain Dev 5(12):1–18. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Etienne M, Du Toit D, Pollard S (2011) ARDI: a co-construction method for participatory modeling in natural resources management. Ecol Soc 16.
  6. Girard N, Navarrete M (2005) Quelles synergies entre connaissances scientifiques et empiriques ? L’exemple des cultures du safran et de la truffe. Nat Sci Soc 13(1):33–44. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gontijo LM, Cockfield SD, Beers EH (2012) Natural enemies of Woolly Apple Aphid (Hemiptera: Aphididae) in Washington state. Environ Entomol 41(6):1364–1371. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Griffiths GJK, Holland JM, Bailey A, Thomas MB (2008) Efficacy and economics of shelter habitats for conservation biological control. Biol Control 45(2):200–209. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hill SB, MacRae RJ (1995) Conceptual framework for the transition from conventional to sustainable agriculture. J Sustain Agric 7(1):81–87. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Horton DR, Broers DA, Lewis RR, Granatstein D, Zack RS, Unruh TR, Moldenke AR, Brown JJ (2003) Effects of mowing frequency on densities of natural enemies in three Pacific Northwest pear orchards. Entomol Exp Appl 106(2):135–145. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lamine C (2011) Transition pathways towards a robust ecologization of agriculture and the need for system redesign. Cases from organic farming and IPM. J Rural Stud 27(2):209–219. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lefebvre M, Franck P, Toubon J-F et al (2016) The impact of landscape composition on the occurence of a canopy dwelling spider depends on orchard management. Agric Ecosyst Environ 169:33–42.
  13. Maalouly M, Franck P, Bouvier J-C, Toubon JF, Lavigne C (2013) Codling moth parasitism is affected by semi-natural habitats and agricultural practices at orchard and landscape levels. Agric Ecosyst Environ 169:33–42. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Marliac G, Simon S, Mazzia C, Penvern S, Lescourret F, Capowiez Y (2015) Increased grass cover height in the alleys of apple orchards does not promote Cydia pomonella biocontrol. BioControl 60(6):805–815. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Martínez-Harms MJ, Balvanera P (2012) Methods for mapping ecosystem service supply: a review. Int J Biodiver Sci Ecosyst Serv Manag 8(1–2):17–25. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Meynard J-M, Dedieu B, Bos AP (2012) Re-design and co-design of farming systems. An overview of methods and practices. In: Darnhofer I, Gibbon D, Dedieu B (eds) Farming systems research into the 21st century: the new dynamic. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, pp 405–429. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mols PJM (1996) Do natural enemies control woolly aphid? In: Acta Horticulturae. In: International Society for Horticultural Science (ISHS). Leuven, Belgium, pp 203–207.
  18. Ortiz-Martínez SA, Ramírez CC, Lavandero B (2013) Host acceptance behavior of the parasitoid Aphelinus mali and its aphid-host Eriosoma lanigerum on two Rosaceae plant species. J Pest Sci 86(4):659–667. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Puech C, Poggi S, Baudry J, Aviron S (2015) Do farming practices affect natural enemies at the landscape scale? Landsc Ecol 30(1):125–140. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rusch A, Chaplin-Kramer R, Gardiner MM et al (2016) Agricultural landscape simplification reduces natural pest control: a quantitative synthesis. Agric Ecosyst Environ 221:198–224.
  21. Salliou N, Barnaud C (2017) Landscape and biodiversity as new resources for agro-ecology? Insights from farmers’ perspectives. Ecol Soc 22.
  22. Salliou N, Barnaud C, Vialatte A, Monteil C (2017) A participatory Bayesian belief network approach to explore ambiguity among stakeholders about socio-ecological systems. Environ Model Softw 96:199–209. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Schellhorn NA, Gagic V, Bommarco R (2015) Time will tell: resource continuity bolsters ecosystem services. Trends Ecol Evol 30(9):524–530. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Sigwalt A, Pain G, Pancher A, Vincent A (2012) Collective innovation boosts biodiversity in French vineyards. J Sustain Agric 36(3):337–352. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Simon S, Bouvier J-C, Debras J-F, Sauphanor B (2010) Biodiversity and pest management in orchard systems. A review. Agron Sustain Dev 30(1):139–152. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Stallman HR, James HS (2015) Determinants affecting farmers’ willingness to cooperate to control pests. Ecol Econ 117:182–192.
  27. Steingröver EG, Geertsema W, van Wingerden WKRE (2010) Designing agricultural landscapes for natural pest control: a transdisciplinary approach in the Hoeksche Waard (The Netherlands). Landsc Ecol 25(6):825–838. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Symondson WOC, Sunderland KD, Greenstone MH (2002) Can generalist predators be effective biocontrol agents? Annu Rev Entomol 47(1):561–594. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. Tscharntke T, Karp DS, Chaplin-Kramer R, Batáry P, DeClerck F, Gratton C, Hunt L, Ives A, Jonsson M, Larsen A, Martin EA, Martínez-Salinas A, Meehan TD, O'Rourke M, Poveda K, Rosenheim JA, Rusch A, Schellhorn N, Wanger TC, Wratten S, Zhang W (2016) When natural habitat fails to enhance biological pest control – five hypotheses. Biol Conserv 204:449–458. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Veres A, Petit S, Conord C, Lavigne C (2013) Does landscape composition affect pest abundance and their control by natural enemies? A review. Agric Ecosyst Environ 166:110–117. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Weber DC, Brown MW (1988) Impact of Woolly Apple Aphid (Homoptera: Aphididae) on the growth of potted apple trees. J Econ Entomol 81(4):1170–1177. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© INRA and Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.UMR 1201 DynaforINRACastanet Tolosan CedexFrance
  2. 2.D-BAUG, IRL, Planning of Landscape and Urban Systems (PLUS)ETH ZürichZürichSwitzerland
  3. 3.INP-ENSATUniversity of ToulouseCastanet TolosanFrance

Personalised recommendations