Please cite this article in press as: Rusch, A., et al. Using landscape indicators to predict high pest infestations and successful natural pest control at the regional scale. Landscape Urban Plan. (2012), doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.11.021 ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model LAND-2127; No. of Pages 12 Landscape and Urban Planning xxx (2012) xxx–xxx Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Landscape and Urban Planning jou rn al h om epa ge: www.elsevier.com/locate/landurbplan Using landscape indicators to predict high pest infestations and successful natural pest control at the regional scale A. Rusch a,b,* , M. Valantin-Morison c,1 , J. Roger-Estrade c,d,2 , J.P. Sarthou e,f,3 a Department of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Box 7044, 750 07 Uppsala, Sweden b UMR INRA-ENITAB 1065 Santé et Agroecologie du Vignoble, Centre de recherches INRA de Bordeaux-Aquitaine, Institut des Science de la Vigne et du Vin, Villenave d’Ornon, France c INRA, UMR21 Agronomie, INRA/AgroParisTech, 78850 Thiverval-Grignon, France d AgroParisTech, UMR 211 Agronomie, INRA/AgroParisTech, BP 01, F-78850 Thiverval-Grignon, France e University of Toulouse, ENSAT, UMR 1248 AGIR, F-31326 Castanet-Tolosan, France f INRA, UMR1248 AGIR, F-31326 Castanet-Tolosan, France a r t i c l e i n f o Article history: Received 21 March 2011 Received in revised form 22 November 2011 Accepted 30 November 2011 Available online xxx Keywords: Landscape planning Biological pest control Ecosystem services Sensitivity Specificity ROC a b s t r a c t Designing multifunctional landscapes requires accurate indicators to assess the effect of landscape struc- ture on the provision on ecosystem services. Biological pest control relying on natural enemies is an important ecosystem service considered as a sustainable alternative to chemical control. The aim of this study was to measure and compare the accuracy of landscape indicators computed at various spatial scales to predict pollen beetle infestations and successful biological control in northwestern France. The sensitivity, specificity, and probability of correctly ranking fields were estimated for each indicator based on a survey of 42 fields using the receiver operating characteristic procedure. For pest infestation, the proportion of woodland and the proportion of semi-natural habitats were found to be informative indica- tors with good discriminatory abilities. For biological control, the proportion of woodland, the proportion of semi-natural habitats and the proportion of the previous year’s oilseed rape fields with reduced soil tillage were found to be informative indicators with good discriminatory abilities. By using indicator values and optimal thresholds we were able to compute maps of areas at risk for pest infestation and those displaying successful biological control at the regional scale. This study provides tools that could help extension services, landscape planners, and policy makers in optimizing landscape structure accord- ing to the provision of a key ecosystem service. The results of this study also provide new grounds for understanding trophic interactions at the regional scale as well as the ambivalent effect of landscape complexity on pest and natural enemy populations. © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Agricultural intensification has an adverse impact on the envi- ronment and ecosystem services at various scales (Matson, Parton, Power, & Swift, 1997; Tscharntke, Klein, Kruess, Steffan-Dewenter, & Thies, 2005). More specifically, pesticide use poses a major threat for biodiversity and human health (Geiger et al., 2010; Koutros et al., * Corresponding author at: Department of Ecology, Swedish University of Agri- cultural Sciences, Box 7044, 750 07 Uppsala, Sweden. Tel.: +46 18 67 24 34. E-mail addresses: adrien.rusch@slu.se, adrien.rusch@grignon.inra.fr (A. Rusch), muriel.morison@grignon.inra.fr (M. Valantin-Morison), estrade@grignon.inra.fr (J. Roger-Estrade), sarthou@ensat.fr (J.P. Sarthou). 1 Address: UMR Agronomie INRA/AgroParisTech, Batiment EGER, BP 01, 78850 Thiverval-Grignon, France. Tel.: +33 01 30 81 53 51; fax: +33 01 30 81 54 25. 2 Address: AgroParisTech, Département SIAFEE Bâtiment EGER, BP 01, 78850 Thiverval-Grignon, France. Tel.: +33 01 30 81 54 12; fax: +33 01 30 81 54 25. 3 Address: UMR Dynafor INRA-INP/ENSAT, AGRO Toulouse, BP 32607, F-31326 Castanet-Tolosan Cedex, France. Tel.: +33 05 34 32 39 26. 2009). Because pest management mainly relies on the intensive use of broad spectrum pesticides, there is now a need to design sustain- able pest management strategies that better integrate ecological processes (Altieri, 1999; Gurr, Wratten, & Luna, 2003). Biological pest control that relies on natural enemies such as predators or parasitoids is an important ecosystem service consid- ered as a sustainable alternative to chemical control (Gurr et al., 2003; Letourneau, Jedlicka, Bothwell, & Moreno, 2009). There are two different, complementary strategies for promoting natural pest control in agroecosystems: crop management practices at the field scale, such as increasing within-field diversity or reducing soil tillage, and landscape management measures such as optimizing the spatial configuration between crop and semi-natural habitats (Landis, Wratten, & Gurr, 2000; Rusch, Valantin-Morison, Sarthou, & Roger-Estrade, 2010). However, despite the increasing body of evidence suggesting the strong influence of landscape context on population dynamics and trophic interactions, there is a lack of practical guidelines for landscape planning to optimize ecosystem services (Rusch et al., 2010). 0169-2046/$ – see front matter © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.11.021