Publication Type

Journal Article

Journal Name

Biological Control

Name of Author

Kris A.G. Wyckhuys, Chrysalis Consulting
Komivi S. Akutse, International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology Nairobi
Divina M. Amalin, De La Salle University
Salah Eddin Araj, The University of Jordan
Gloria Barrera, Corporación Colombiana de Investigación Agropecuaria, AGROSAVIA
Marie Joy B. Beltran, University of the Philippines Los Banos
Ibtissem Ben Fekih, Université de Liège
Paul André Calatayud, International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology Nairobi
Lizette Cicero, Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agricolas y Pecuarias
Marcellin C. Cokola, Université de Liège
Yelitza C. Colmenarez, Universidade Estadual Paulista "Júlio de Mesquita Filho"
Kenza Dessauvages, Université de Liège
Thomas Dubois, International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology Nairobi
Léna Durocher-Granger, CAB International
Carlos Espinel, Corporación Colombiana de Investigación Agropecuaria, AGROSAVIA
Patrick Fallet, Université de Neuchâtel
José L. Fernández-Triana, Canadian National Collection of Insects, Arachnids and Nematodes
Frederic Francis, Université de Liège
Juliana Gómez, Corporación Colombiana de Investigación Agropecuaria, AGROSAVIA
Khalid Haddi, Universidade Federal de Lavras
Rhett D. Harrison, CIFOR-ICRAF
Muhammad Haseeb, Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University
Natasha S.A. Iwanicki, Universidade de São Paulo
Lara R. Jaber, The University of Jordan
Fathiya M. Khamis, International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology Nairobi
Jesusa C. Legaspi, United States Department of Agriculture
Refugio J. Lomeli-Flores, Posgrado en Fitosanidad
Rogerio B. Lopes, Embrapa Recursos Geneticos e Biotecnologia

Publication Date

4-1-2024

Abstract

Since 2016, the fall armyworm (FAW) Spodoptera frugiperda has spread over extensive areas of the tropics and subtropics, imperiling food security, economic progress and the livelihoods of millions of cereal farmers. Although FAW has received long-standing scientific attention in its home range in the Americas, chemical inputs feature prominently in its mitigation and biological control uptake is globally lagging. Here, building upon a quantitative review of the global literature, we methodically dissect FAW biological control science. Of the known entomopathogens (46), parasitoids (304) and predators (215) of FAW, approx. 40% have been subject to laboratory- or field-level scrutiny. Laboratory-level performance has partially been assessed for 14–18% of the above invertebrate taxa. Yet, organismal, geographic, methodological and thematic biases hamper efforts to relate in-field biodiversity to actual ecosystem service delivery. Often, single-guild ‘snapshot’ surveys are preferred over comprehensive bio-inventories or population dynamics appraisals, trophic interactions are wrongly inferred from co-occurrence, standard pest infestation metrics are lacking and natural enemy censuses are performed arbitrarily. Diurnal biota receive inordinate attention, while egg and pupal predation - the main biotic sources of mortality - are routinely overlooked. Multiple microbial and invertebrate biota are investigated with a view towards mass-rearing and augmentative release, but the basis for agent selection is often unclear. Lastly, conservation biological control receives marginal attention and cross-disciplinary engagement with the agroecology domain is lagging. We lay out several steps, including standardized methodologies, smart use of biodemographic toolkits, networked field trials and a fortification of its ecological underpinnings, to sharpen the science of (FAW) biological control and urge further momentum in its global implementation.

Keywords

Agrochemical pollution, Agroecology, Biological control, Ecological intensification, Ecosystem services, Global change, Interdisciplinary science, Invasive species management, Systems thinking

Share

COinS