Theory and History of Weed Biological Control
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Basics on Aquatic Biological Control Aquatic Weed Control-Short Course Coral Springs, Florida, May 2-5, 2016 Rodrigo Diaz Department of Entomology, LSU AgCenter Goal: Explain how biological control works and how it has been used for aquatic weed management 1. What is biological control? 2. What steps are involved in biological control program? 3. How we select biological control agents? 4. Who regulates biological control in United States? 5. What is the history and safety of biological control? 6. Examples of aquatic weed biological control What is Biological Control? • Classical biological control-Intentional introduction of agents from the weed’s native range to reduce populations in the introduced range. Agents are released with the expectation of establishment and spread to achieve long-term control • Biological control agents are host-specific insect herbivores, mites or plant pathogens that have co- existed with their host plant (target weed) Biological control agents are monophagous Types of host specificity: • Monophagous: feeding on one plant species or one genus • Oligophagous: feeding on species in the same family • Polyphagous: feeding on species of different families Price et al. 2011 Enemy Release Hypothesis (ERH) Native range Introduced range Biological control Evolution of increase competitive ability (EICA) Native range Introduced range In the absence of natural enemies, plant reallocate resources from defense to growth and reproduction increasing its competitive ability Blossey and Notzold 1995 What is the ideal case in a biological control program? 1400 Weed 1200 Agent 1000 800 v v v 600 Abundance 400 200 Equilibrium 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 Time How we can measure the success of a biological control program? Weed biological control programs: Hoffmann’s definitions: 60% agents established 1. Complete: no other control method is required 50% resulted in some level of 2. Substantial: other methods are needed but reduced efforts control 3. Negligible: control dependent on other control measures Economic benefits: cost ratios range from 7:1 to 36:1 Different levels of success (Delfosse 2004): 1. Biological: measure of management of the target weed 2. Ecological: sustainable, low-input, and energy-conserving management 3. Economical: calculate benefit-cost ratios 4. Social: individuals across society 5. Legal: laws and regulations that facilitates biological control 6. Scientific: Knowledge gain of ecological systems under study 7. Political: long-term and increasing support for biological control 1. Theory and definitions 2. Steps in biological control of weeds Steps during a biological control of program ‘Pipeline’ 1. Select target 2. Surveys /Research 3. Quarantine 4. Field releases/ 5. Technology weed in native range (host range tests) Establishment transfer 5 to 10 years to complete 1. Select target weed • Which other methods of control are available? • Cost-benefit analysis of using biological control • Has this weed been a target for biological control elsewhere? • Are there any conflict of interests? • Species identification and area of origin of the target weed 2. Surveys and research in the native range • Foreign explorations in the weed’s native range • Surveys and collections of natural enemies • Studies on the ecology of the weed and natural enemies in the native range • Field host range of potential agents 3. Quarantine • Import insects to quarantine using appropriate permits and labels • Establish insect colonies in quarantine • Studies on biology and impact of potential agents • Conduct host range testing (specificity!) 4. Field releases and establishment • Mass rearing of biological control agents • Select field sites and method for releases • Initiate field releases, monitor establishment and spread • Evaluate impact of agents in the field: 1. Before and after 2. Exclusion using cages or insecticides 3. Long-term studies evaluating reduction of weed populations 5. Technology transfer • Tropical soda apple (Solanum viarum) weed of pastures in FL • Leaf beetle Gratiana boliviana released in 2003 Scientists Cattle ranchers Extension agents 5. Technology transfer 1. Theory and definitions 2. Steps in biological control of weeds 3. Selection of biological control agents (host specificity!) Things to consider during agent selection • Host specificity and risks to non-target species • Adaptation to plant genotypes (DNA studies) • Climate match between origin and introduced range (e.g. CLIMEX) • Impact to target weed (e.g. reduced growth and reproduction) • How many biological control agents should be released Host range testing: Centrifugal Phylogenetic Method Target weed Other species, same subgenus Test plant list: close related native Other subgenus, same genus species, economic importance, Other genus, same tribe and threatened or endangered Other tribe, same family species Plants of economic importance Host range testing – critical step 1. No-choice tests: larval development / adult oviposition YES 2. Multiple-choice tests: agent preference 3. Open field tests YES Risks to non-targets – Direct effects • Plants that are close related to the target weed have higher risks of non-target effects (similar chemistry, etc.) • Example: The weevil Rhinocyllus conicus released against exotic Carduus thistles in the US in 1969. BUT the weevil attacked native Circium thistles in 1980s • Plants from the same tribe: Cynareae • Feeding on native thistles was consistent with host specificity testing • But there was a lack of concern over non-economic native species http://www.forestryimages.org Risks to non-targets – Unintended effects • Cactoblastis cactorum was released in Caribbean (Nevis) in 1957 and was first reported in Key West, FL in 1989 Pear prickly cacti in FL http://www.floridainvasives.org/Heartland/links/CactoblastusMothHeatherJezorekUSF.pdf Risks to non-targets – Indirect effects • Leaf feeding beetle Diorhabda carinulata (= D. elongate) released in 1999 against saltcedar (tamarix spp.) in Nevada and Utah Endangered bird the southwestern willow flycatcher used saltcedar for nesting in western riparian ecosystems http://www.fws.gov/utahfieldoffice/swfl.html http://fcwp.org/BioControl/Saltcedar.html DeLoach et al. 2004, Dudley and Bean 2012 Host-plant genotypes • Brazilian peppertree Schinus terebinthifolia is an invasive species in FL. Genetic studies determined that two haplotypes (A, B) has been introduced in Florida. Introduced range: Florida Native Range: Brazil B-K Pseudophilothrips gandolfoi: poor performance on FL types M West coast (A) A L East coast (B) C-D Hybrids A, B A A Pseudophilothrips ichini: good performance on FL types Williams et al. 2005, 2007; Manrique et al. Climate match • Successful biological control of water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) in East Africa, Argentina, Australia, USA, India, Thailand (tropical or subtropical areas). • But this did not occurred in South Africa. Worst infestations found in the Highveld: high-altitude, extreme winter temperatures Water hyacinth Insect densities remained low or failed to persist in the Highveld. In addition, eutrophic waters with high Neochetina eichhorniae nutrient levels allow plants to recover http://www.bonniesplants.com/floating_plants/water_hyacinths Julien et al. 2000 Single vs. multiple biological control agents • Lottery model: multiple agents are released to increase likelihood of success • Silver bullet: a single agent capable of reducing pest populations • Cumulative stress hypothesis: multiple agents are released to exert sufficient damage to the target weed Harris 1981, Myers 1985 1. Theory and definitions 2. Steps in biological control of weeds 3. Selection of biological control agents 4. Regulations and permitting process in USA Petition for field releases Format of Petition • Target weed information • Biological control agent information • Experimental methodology and analysis • Results and discussion (host range tests) • Protocol for releasing the agent TAG Committee: Technical Advisory • Post-release monitoring Group (1987) • Benefit/Risk • Independent assessment of the safety • Potential Environmental Impacts of biological control agents. • Composed by 15 governmental • Petitioner’s Conclusion agencies from USA, Canada, and Coombs et al. 2004 Mexico. 1. Theory and definitions 2. Steps in biological control of weeds 3. Selection of biological control agents 4. Regulations and permitting process in the USA 5. History and safety of weed biological control History – Early successes First successful biological control program of weeds (Australia) Cactoblastis cactorum from Argentina was introduced against prickly pear species (Opuntia spp.) in Australia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cactoblastis_cactorum Julien and Griffiths 1998 History – Early Successes • 1930s: First successful biological control of weeds in USA • Leaf beetle Crysolina quadrigemina against St John’s wort (Hypericum perforatum) in California http://www.parfaitimage.com/Insecta/chrysolina_quadrigemina.html Julien and Griffiths 1998 History – Lessons learned during the last 100 years • Improved protocols of host range testing • Close relatives have higher risks of non-target effects • Importance of selecting effective agents • Risk-benefit-cost analysis • Long-term post-release evaluations of biocontrol programs Safety of biological control of weeds • Precautionary Principle (1992) • International code of best practices for Classical biological control of weeds (Balciunas 2000) • Independent TAG committee (1987) • Government Regulations/Permitting