ReviewBiology2026
Beyond Beneficial Margins: Four Mechanisms Linking Border Vegetation to Pest Dynamics.
Review in Biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Vegetated field borders are widely promoted as tools to enhance biodiversity and strengthen biological control in agroecosystems. However, their role in pest dynamics remains conceptually fragmented and empirically inconsistent. Here, we develop a unified framework explaining how crop border vegetation influences pest populations through four interlinked ecological mechanisms. First, borders act as host reservoirs and selective filters, providing alternative hosts and overwintering habitat that enhance pest persistence across crop cycles. Second, borders modify pest colonization dynamics by shaping movement, aggregation, and host-location behavior at crop edges. Third, borders restructure multitrophic networks, simultaneously supporting natural enemies, alternative prey, vectors, and pathogens, generating nonlinear effects on pest suppression. Fourth, repeated disturbance and management function as selective filters, determining which plant functional groups dominate borders and, consequently, which pest and natural enemy communities are maintained. To ground this framework, we conduct a structured synthesis of published empirical and conceptual studies on crop-border vegetation, including weed and arthropod surveys, and classify them according to the proposed mechanisms. Our synthesis reveals a strong emphasis on multitrophic effects, whereas colonization processes and disturbance filtering are comparatively underexplored. Across mechanisms, plant identity and dominance structure consistently emerge as stronger predictors of pest outcomes than species richness alone. We argue that borders are not inherently beneficial or harmful but function as selectively structured ecological interfaces shaped by management history and species composition. By integrating temporal persistence, spatial behavior, network interactions, and anthropogenic filtering, our framework provides a predictive basis for IPM-oriented design of field borders, enabling management strategies that reduce pest carryover, disrupt colonization pathways, and enhance biological control while maintaining ecosystem services. This article is part of the theme issue "
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.