DOCSLIB.ORG

Nontarget Feeding of Leaf-Beetles Introduced to Control Purple

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Nontarget Feeding of Leaf-Beetles Introduced to Control Purple C O N S E R V A T I O N I S S U E S ABSTRACT: Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria L.) is an invasive nonindigenous plant that negative- ly affects North American wetlands. In 1992, four host-specific insect herbivores were introduced from • the plant’s native range as biological control agents and are now established in over 30 states and 10 Canadian provinces. Severe defoliation of purple loosestrife by Galerucella calmariensis L. and G. pusilla Duft. (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) selectively reduced purple loosestrife biomass by as much Nontarget Feeding as 95% at many early release sites. At three sites, mass emergence of new generation Galerucella adults resulted in localized, short-term attack on Rosa multiflora Thunb., Potentilla anserina L., and Decodon verticillatus (L.) Elliott. Individuals of the same plant species away from the immediate emergence of Leaf-Beetles areas and at other release sites remained undamaged, and we observed neither feeding nor oviposition on the same plants by overwintered adults. Attack did not persist into the next growing season, and nontarget plants grew and appeared vigorous the following year, while purple loosestrife remained Introduced suppressed. Such “spillover” does not constitute a host shift; beetles are unable to complete develop- ment on these nontarget plants. Spillover effects have been observed in other biocontrol programs and to Control Purple do not affect distribution or abundance of nontarget species. We anticipate that occasional spillover with transient attack on nontarget species may occur at other release sites with high population densities of Loosestrife (Lythrum the Galerucella species. Careful monitoring is the best means to determine long-term impact. Alimentación no Preferencial de Escarabajos Defoliadores Introducidos para salicaria L.) Controlar la Loosestrife Púrpura (Lythrum salicaria L.) RESUMEN: Lythrum salicaria L. Es una planta invasora alóctona que afecta negativamente los humedales de norte América. En 1992, se introdujeron cuatro insectos herbívoros huéspedes del rango 1 Bernd Blossey nativo de L. salicaria, que ahora están establecidos en 30 estados y diez provincias canadienses. Department of Natural Resources Galerucella calmariensis L. y G. pusilla Duft (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) causaron una severa Fernow Hall defoliación de L. salicaria reduciendo su biomasa en casi el 95% en muchos de los lugares de liberación iniciales. En tres sitios, las nuevas generaciones de Galerucella adultos atacaron localmente a Rosa Cornell University multiflora Thunb., Potentilla anserina L., y Decodon verticillatus (L.) Elliott. Individuos de la misma Ithaca, NY 14853 USA especie de planta, lejos de las áreas inmediatas de emergencia y en otros lugares de liberación permanecen sin ser dañados y no hemos observado alimentación ni oviposición en las mismas plantas Richard Casagrande por los adultos que pasaron el invierno. Los ataques no se mantuvieron en la siguiente estación, y las Lisa Tewksbury plantas que no fueron blanco de los ataques crecieron y parecían vigorosas al año siguiente, mientras que L. salicaria se mantuvo disminuida. Tal cambio momentáneo no constituye un cambio de huésped, Department of Plant Sciences los escarabajos no son capaces de completar su desarrollo fuera de sus plantas huéspedes. Efectos de University of Rhode Island cambios temporales han sido observados en otros programas de biocontrol y no afectan la distribución Kingston, RI 02881 USA o abundancia de las plantas que no sean los blancos. Anticipamos que un cambio ocasional con ataques transitorios a las plantas que no eran los objetivos podía ocurrir en otros sitios de liberación con altas Douglas A. Landis densidades de población de las especies de Galerucella. Un monitoreo cuidadoso es la mejor forma de determinar el impacto a largo término. Department of Entomology & Center for Integrated Plant Systems Index terms: biological control, Decodon verticillatus, nonindigenous invasive species, nontarget Michigan State University feeding, wetlands East Lansing, MI 48824-1311 USA Robert N. Wiedenmann Center for Economic Entomology Illinois Natural History Survey INTRODUCTION cies (Blossey 1999, Brown 1999, Blossey Champaign, IL 61820 USA et al. 2001). Established L. salicaria pop- Invasive nonindigenous plants constitute a ulations persist for decades, are difficult to Donna R. Ellis major threat to rare and endangered spe- control using conventional techniques Department of Plant Science cies (Wilcove et al. 1998) and the manage- (chemical, physical, mechanical), and con- University of Connecticut ment of natural areas (MacDonald et al. tinue to spread into adjacent areas (Thomp- Storrs, CT 06269 USA 1989, Randall 1996). Purple loosestrife son et al. 1987). A classical biological (Lythrum salicaria L.), a Eurasian peren- weed control program was initiated in 1986 • nial herb introduced to North America in (Malecki et al. 1993), and four host-spe- the early 1800s (Thompson et al. 1987), cific insect herbivores were introduced to 1 Corresponding author e-mail: [email protected] can alter biogeochemical and hydrologi- North America (Malecki et al. 1993, Hight cal processes in wetlands (Emery and Per- et al. 1995) in 1992. The selected species Natural Areas Journal 21:368–377 ry 1996, Grout et al. 1997) and threaten were a root-mining weevil, Hylobius trans- rare and endangered plant and animal spe- versovittatus Goeze; two leaf-feeding bee- 368 Natural Areas Journal Volume 21 (4), 2001 tles, Galerucella calmariensis L. and G. by the decision to introduce biological species to increase (which should benefit pusilla Duft.; and a flower-feeding weevil, control agents for purple loosestrife (Blos- or allow recovery of native food webs). Nanophyes marmoratus Goeze. sey et al. 1994a, b; Blossey and Schroeder Long-term monitoring programs (incor- 1995). Herbicide treatments actually re- porating target pest, control agent, and Biological control, similar to chemical, sulted in a further increase of purple loose- associated plant and animal communities) mechanical, and physical control, may strife due to superior recruitment from the need to be designed to evaluate the full affect nontarget species. Benefits and risks seed bank and accelerated suppression of ecological impact (positive as well as neg- associated with biological control have native species (Skinner et al. 1994). Host- ative) of biological weed control (Blossey recently received much attention due to specificity tests identified two closely re- 1999, Blossey and Skinner 2000). Biolog- actual or suspected nontarget effects lated native North American species, De- ical control agents for purple loosestrife (Howarth 1991, Simberloff and Stiling codon verticillatus (L.) Elliott (swamp have now been released in over 30 states 1996, Louda et al. 1997, McFadyen 1998, loosestrife or waterwillow) and Lythrum and 10 provinces in the United States and Follett and Duan 2000, Pemberton 2000, alatum Pursh. (winged loosestrife), as po- Canada, and a monitoring program was Wajnberg et al. 2001). Risks to nontarget tentially vulnerable to limited attack by established (Blossey and Skinner 2000) to species need to be weighed against the newly emerged Galerucella beetles (Blos- assess changes in abundance of insects risks of allowing invasive species to re- sey et al. 1994a, b; Blossey and Schroeder and wetland plant communities. At many main unchecked. Recent reviews of non- 1995). However, the taller L. salicaria not release sites, purple loosestrife is declin- target effects in biological weed control only replaces L. alatum where ranges over- ing, but we also have recently observed (note: we did not consider the safety record lap; in areas where both species co-occur, nontarget feeding by Galerucella spp. The and regulations for insect biological con- the presence of L. salicaria reduces polli- purpose of this paper is to discuss the trol) concluded that host-specificity tests nator visitation and seed set of L. alatum implications of nontarget feeding detected are valuable and accurately predict poten- (Brown 1999). Biocontrol agents were at several field sites for the biological con- tial nontarget effects (McFadyen 1998, introduced based on risk assessments that trol program targeting purple loosestrife. Fowler et al. 2000, Pemberton 2000, Gass- concluded that benefits outweighed po- mann and Louda 2001). Nontarget im- tential risks to L. alatum and D. verticilla- Status of Galerucella calmariensis pacts of Rhinocyllus conicus Fröhlich at- tus (Blossey et al. 1994a,b; Blossey and and G. pusilla tacking native North American Cirsium Schroeder 1995). species (Louda et al. 1997), and of Cacto- Initial releases of the two leaf beetles G. blastis cactorum Berg. attacking native Successful weed biocontrol programs can calmariensis and G. pusilla occurred in Opuntia species in Florida (Simberloff and reduce biomass of target plant species to seven states and six provinces (Hight et al. Stiling 1996), are the result of poor deci- very low levels (McEvoy et al. 1991), al- 1995). Demand for these species quickly sion-making processes before 1970 that lowing other previously suppressed plant exceeded their availability and mass-rear- allowed the release of nonspecific herbi- vores (Pemberton 2000, Gassmann and Louda 2001). Contemporary regulations Table 1. Total number of release sites for biological control agents against purple loosestrife (U.S. Department of Agriculture 1999) in 11 states, sites with quantitative monitoring using a standardized
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Biology and Feeding Potential of Galerucella Placida Baly (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae), a Weed Biocontrol Agent for Polygonum Hydropiper Linn
    Journal of Biological Control, 30(1): 15-18, 2016 Research Article Biology and feeding potential of Galerucella placida Baly (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae), a weed biocontrol agent for Polygonum hydropiper Linn. D. DEY*, M. K. GUPTA and N. KARAM1 Department of Entomology, College of Agriculture, Central Agricultural University, Imphal-795004, India. 1Directorate of Research, Central Agricultural University, Imphal-795004, India. Corresponding author Email: [email protected] ABSTRACT: Galerucella placida Baly is a small leaf beetle belonging to the family Chrysomelidae. which feeds on aquatic weed Polygonum hydropiper Linn. The insect was reported from various regions of India during 1910-1936. Investigation on some biological parameters of G. placida and feeding of the P. hydropiper by G. placida was conducted in laboratory. The results indicated the fecundity of G. placida was 710-1210 eggs per female. Eggs were markedly bright yellow, pyriform basally rounded and oval at tip. It measured 0.67 mm in length and 0.46 mm in width. Average incubation period was 3.80 days. Larvae of G. placida underwent three moults. The first instar larva was yellow in colour and measured 1.26 mm in length and 0.40 mm in width. The second instar was yellowish in colour but after an hour of feeding, the colour of the grub changes to blackish brown from yellow. It measured 2.64 mm in length and 0.77 mm in width. The third instar measured 5.59 mm in length and 1.96 mm in width. The average total larval duration of G. placida was 13.30 days. The fully developed pupa looked black in colour and measured 4.58 mm in length and 2.37 mm in width.
    [Show full text]
  • St. John's-Wort
    A Guide to Weeds in British Columbia ST. JOHN’S-WORT DISTRIBUTION Hypericum perforatum L. Family: Clusiaceae (St. John’s-wort). Other Scientific Names: None. Other Common Names: Klamath weed, goatweed. Legal Status: Not categorized. Growth form: Perennial forb. Leaves: Leaves are opposite, 1–3 cm long, oval- Flower: Flowers shaped, with prominent veins and covered with are 2 cm in transparent dots. diameter, bright yellow, Stems: Mature plants are numerous in flat-topped 0.1–1.0 m high. The stems are clusters. Flowers have 5 erect, 2-sided, rust coloured, separate petals that are twice with numerous branches. as long as the sepals. Stamens Roots: Short rhizomes. are numerous and paired into Seedling: No information 3 groups. available. Seeds/Fruit: Seed pods are 6 mm long, rust-brown, with 3- Similar Species celled capsules that contain Exotics: None known. numerous seeds (Whitson et al. Natives: None known. 1996). Impacts ____________________________________________ Agricultural: St. John’s-wort invades grazed and irritation and blistering in light-coloured livestock disturbed lands. In dense stands, it displaces native when they are exposed to sunlight (Powell et al. 1994). plant species and reduces livestock and wildlife forage. Ecological: No information available. The plant also contains a toxin that causes skin Human: Commercially available as an antidepressant. Habitat and Ecology __________________________________ General requirements: In BC, St. John’s-wort grows Historical: Introduced from Eurasia. at low- to mid-elevations in coastal, grassland, and Life cycle: St. John’s-wort grows early in spring when open forested regions. It is commonly found on soil moisture is available, and flowers from June to rangeland, pasture, and meadows and along roadsides September, depending on geographic location.
    [Show full text]
  • Purple Loosestrife Lythrum Salicaria L
    Weed of the Week Purple Loosestrife Lythrum salicaria L. Native Origin: Eurasia- Great Britain, central and southern Europe, central Russia, Japan, Manchuria China, Southeast Asia, and northern India Description: Purple loosestrife is an erect perennial herb in the loosestrife family (Lythraceae), growing to a height of 3-10 feet. Mature plants can have 1 to 50 4-sided stems that are green to purple and often branching making the plant bushy and woody in appearance. Opposite or whorled leaves are lance-shaped, stalk-less, and heart-shaped or rounded at the base. Plants are usually covered by a downy pubescence. Flowers are magenta-colored with five to seven petals and bloom from June to September. Seeds are borne in capsules that burst at maturity in late July or August. Single stems can produce an estimated two to three million seeds per year from a single rootstock. The root system consists of a large, woody taproot with fibrous rhizomes. Rhizomes spread rapidly to form dense mats that aid in plant production. Habitat: Purple loosestrife is capable of invading wetlands such as freshwater wet meadows, tidal and non-tidal marshes, river and stream banks, pond edges, reservoirs, and ditches. Distribution: This species is reported from states shaded on Plants Database map. It is reported invasive in CT, DC, DE, ID, IN, KY, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, NC, NE, NH, NJ, NY, OH, OR, PA, RI, TN, UT, VA, VT, WA, and WI. Ecological Impacts: It spreads through the vast number of seeds dispersed by wind and water, and vegetatively through underground stems at a rate of about one foot per year.
    [Show full text]
  • Integrated Noxious Weed Management Plan: US Air Force Academy and Farish Recreation Area, El Paso County, CO
    Integrated Noxious Weed Management Plan US Air Force Academy and Farish Recreation Area August 2015 CNHP’s mission is to preserve the natural diversity of life by contributing the essential scientific foundation that leads to lasting conservation of Colorado's biological wealth. Colorado Natural Heritage Program Warner College of Natural Resources Colorado State University 1475 Campus Delivery Fort Collins, CO 80523 (970) 491-7331 Report Prepared for: United States Air Force Academy Department of Natural Resources Recommended Citation: Smith, P., S. S. Panjabi, and J. Handwerk. 2015. Integrated Noxious Weed Management Plan: US Air Force Academy and Farish Recreation Area, El Paso County, CO. Colorado Natural Heritage Program, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado. Front Cover: Documenting weeds at the US Air Force Academy. Photos courtesy of the Colorado Natural Heritage Program © Integrated Noxious Weed Management Plan US Air Force Academy and Farish Recreation Area El Paso County, CO Pam Smith, Susan Spackman Panjabi, and Jill Handwerk Colorado Natural Heritage Program Warner College of Natural Resources Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 August 2015 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Various federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, orders, and policies require land managers to control noxious weeds. The purpose of this plan is to provide a guide to manage, in the most efficient and effective manner, the noxious weeds on the US Air Force Academy (Academy) and Farish Recreation Area (Farish) over the next 10 years (through 2025), in accordance with their respective integrated natural resources management plans. This plan pertains to the “natural” portions of the Academy and excludes highly developed areas, such as around buildings, recreation fields, and lawns.
    [Show full text]
  • Weed Biocontrol: Extended Abstracts from the 1997 Interagency Noxious-Weed Symposium
    Weed Biocontrol: Extended Abstracts from the 1997 Interagency Noxious-Weed Symposium Dennis Isaacson Martha H. Brookes Technical Coordinators U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team Morgantown, WV and Oregon Department of Agriculture Salem, OR June 1999 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many of the tasks of organizing a symposium such as this — and there are many — are not obvious, and, if they are handled well, the effort that goes into them can easily be overlooked. Sherry Kudna of the Oregon Department of Agriculture Weed Control staff managed most of the arrangements and took care of many, many details, which helped the symposium run smoothly. We truly appreciate her many contributions. We also acknowledge the contributions of the presenters. They not only organized their own presentations and manuscripts, but also assisted with reviewing drafts of each other’s papers in the proceedings. Several of the presenters also covered their own expenses. Such dedication speaks well of their commitment to improving the practice of weed biocontrol. Both the Oregon State Office of the Bureau of Land Management and the USDA Forest Service made major contributions to supporting the symposium. Although several individuals from both organizations provided assistance, we especially note the encouragement and advice of Bob Bolton, Oregon Bureau of Land Management Weed Control Coordinator, and the willingness to help and financial support for publishing this document from Richard C. Reardon, Biocontrol/Biopesticides Program Manager, USDA Forest Service's Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team, Morgantown, WV. We thank Tinathan Coger for layout and design and Patricia Dougherty for printing advice and coordination of the manuscript We also thank Barbra Mullin, Montana State Department of Agriculture, who delivered the keynote address; Tami Lowry, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Corvallis, who helped format the document; and Eric Coombs, who provided the photographs of weeds and agents that convey the concepts of weed biocontrol.
    [Show full text]
  • Vascular Plant Species with Documented Or Recorded Occurrence in Placer County
    A PPENDIX II Vascular Plant Species with Documented or Reported Occurrence in Placer County APPENDIX II. Vascular Plant Species with Documented or Reported Occurrence in Placer County Family Scientific Name Common Name FERN AND FERN ALLIES Azollaceae Mosquito fern family Azolla filiculoides Pacific mosquito fern Dennstaedtiaceae Bracken family Pteridium aquilinum var.pubescens Bracken fern Dryopteridaceae Wood fern family Athyrium alpestre var. americanum Alpine lady fern Athyrium filix-femina var. cyclosorum Lady fern Cystopteris fragilis Fragile fern Polystichum imbricans ssp. curtum Cliff sword fern Polystichum imbricans ssp. imbricans Imbricate sword fern Polystichum kruckebergii Kruckeberg’s hollyfern Polystichum lonchitis Northern hollyfern Polystichum munitum Sword fern Equisetaceae Horsetail family Equisetum arvense Common horsetail Equisetum hyemale ssp. affine Scouring rush Equisetum laevigatum Smooth horsetail Isoetaceae Quillwort family Isoetes bolanderi Bolander’s quillwort Isoetes howellii Howell’s quillwort Isoetes orcuttii Orcutt’s quillwort Lycopodiaceae Club-moss family Lycopodiella inundata Bog club-moss Marsileaceae Marsilea family Marsilea vestita ssp. vestita Water clover Pilularia americana American pillwort Ophioglossaceae Adder’s-tongue family Botrychium multifidum Leathery grapefern Polypodiaceae Polypody family Polypodium hesperium Western polypody Pteridaceae Brake family Adiantum aleuticum Five-finger maidenhair Adiantum jordanii Common maidenhair fern Aspidotis densa Indian’s dream Cheilanthes cooperae Cooper’s
    [Show full text]
  • What Magnitude Are Observed Non-Target Impacts from Weed Biocontrol?
    What Magnitude Are Observed Non-Target Impacts from Weed Biocontrol? David Maxwell Suckling1,2*, Rene´ Franc¸ois Henri Sforza3 1 Biosecurity Group, The New Zealand Institute of Plant and Food Research Ltd, Christchurch, New Zealand, 2 Better Border Biosecurity, Christchurch, New Zealand, 3 European Biological Control Laboratory, USDA-ARS, Campus International de Baillarguet, Montferrier-sur-Lez, France Abstract A systematic review focused by plant on non-target impacts from agents deliberately introduced for the biological control of weeds found significant non-target impacts to be rare. The magnitude of direct impact of 43 biocontrol agents on 140 non-target plants was retrospectively categorized using a risk management framework for ecological impacts of invasive species (minimal, minor, moderate, major, massive). The vast majority of agents introduced for classical biological control of weeds (.99% of 512 agents released) have had no known significant adverse effects on non-target plants thus far; major effects suppressing non-target plant populations could be expected to be detectable. Most direct non-target impacts on plants (91.6%) were categorized as minimal or minor in magnitude with no known adverse long-term impact on non-target plant populations, but a few cacti and thistles are affected at moderate (n = 3), major (n = 7) to massive (n = 1) scale. The largest direct impacts are from two agents (Cactoblastis cactorum on native cacti and Rhinocyllus conicus on native thistles), but these introductions would not be permitted today as more balanced attitudes exist to plant biodiversity, driven by both society and the scientific community. Our analysis shows (as far as is known), weed biological control agents have a biosafety track record of .99% of cases avoiding significant non-target impacts on plant populations.
    [Show full text]
  • Feeding, Colonization and Impact of the Cinnabar Moth, Tyria Jacobaeae
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Jonathan W. Diehl for the degree of Master of Science in Entomology presented on May 20, 1988. Title: Feeding, Colonization and Impact of the Cinnabar Moth Tyria jacobaeae, on Senecio triangularisa Novel, Native Host Plant Abstract Redacted for privacy approved: Peter B. McEvoy I conducted field and laboratory studies to determine the impact of the cinnabar moth, Tvria jacobaeae L., on the native perennial herb, Senecio triangularis Hook. The cinnabar moth was introduced into Oregon in 1960 to control the noxious weed Senecio iacobaea L. and is now well established on both the native plant and the weed in Oregon. My objectives were to determine the suitability of S. triangularis as a diet for the cinnabar moth, to estimate the frequency with which the moths colonize the native plant in the field, and to estimate the impact of larval feeding on the plant's survivorship and reproduction. Larvae successfully completed development on S. triangularis, but development time was longer, growth was slower, and pupae were lighter compared to performance on S. iacobaea. Cinnabar moth colonization and feeding damage were concentrated at one of the four study sites observed. Cinnabar moth defoliation results in a 3.9% reduction in seed viability and is inversely related to damage to seeds by native insects. I conclude that cinnabar moths commonly discover this native plant in the field, can establish and develop on it, and cause a small reduction in plant reproductive success. Feeding, Colonization and Impact of the Cinnabar Moth, Tvria iacobaeae, on Senecio triangularis, a Novel, Native Host Plant by Jonathan W.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Control of Purple Loosestrife Lythrum Salicaria by Two Chrysomelid Beetles Galerucella Pusilla and G. Calmariensis
    An Abstract of the Thesis of Shon S. Schooler for the degree of Master of Science in Entomology presented on May 7th, 1998. Title: Biological Control of Purple Loosestrife Lythrum salicaria By Two Chrysomelid Beetles Galerucella pusilla and G. calmariensis Redacted for Privacy Abstract approved: Peter B. McEv In the first part of this study we monitored the development of biological control of purple loosestrife Lythrum salicaria over a six-year period at Morgan Lake in western Oregon. In 1992, two beetles, Galerucella pusilla and G. calmariensis (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae), were released to control the wetland weed at this test site. Our purpose was to estimate quantitative performance parameters that might be generally applied in monitoring biological weed control. Our six performance measures were: 1) biological control agent establishment, 2) the rate of increase of the agents, 3) the rate of spread of the agents, 4) the effect of the agents on individual target plants, 5) the effect of the agents on the population of the target plants, and 6) the indirect impact of the biological control agents on the local plant community. The beetles established viable populations that increased during the study with an intrinsic rate of increase (r), based on the growth rate in damage, estimated at 2.24/year. Within six years after introduction, the beetles spread to saturate the entire purple loosestrife habitat (4100 m2) around the lake. The rate of spread, estimated by calculating a diffusion coefficient (D), was 57.5 m2/year. Adult beetles made seasonal, exploratory movements up to 30 m away from the host plant stand into surrounding crop fields, which suggests a disturbance-free buffer should be established in the habitat surrounding the loosestrife stand.
    [Show full text]
  • Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team Biological Control of Invasive
    Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Biological Control Biological Control of Invasive Plants in the Eastern United States Roy Van Driesche Bernd Blossey Mark Hoddle Suzanne Lyon Richard Reardon Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team—Morgantown, West Virginia United States Forest FHTET-2002-04 Department of Service August 2002 Agriculture BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF INVASIVE PLANTS IN THE EASTERN UNITED STATES BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF INVASIVE PLANTS IN THE EASTERN UNITED STATES Technical Coordinators Roy Van Driesche and Suzanne Lyon Department of Entomology, University of Massachusets, Amherst, MA Bernd Blossey Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY Mark Hoddle Department of Entomology, University of California, Riverside, CA Richard Reardon Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team, USDA, Forest Service, Morgantown, WV USDA Forest Service Publication FHTET-2002-04 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We thank the authors of the individual chap- We would also like to thank the U.S. Depart- ters for their expertise in reviewing and summariz- ment of Agriculture–Forest Service, Forest Health ing the literature and providing current information Technology Enterprise Team, Morgantown, West on biological control of the major invasive plants in Virginia, for providing funding for the preparation the Eastern United States. and printing of this publication. G. Keith Douce, David Moorhead, and Charles Additional copies of this publication can be or- Bargeron of the Bugwood Network, University of dered from the Bulletin Distribution Center, Uni- Georgia (Tifton, Ga.), managed and digitized the pho- versity of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003, (413) tographs and illustrations used in this publication and 545-2717; or Mark Hoddle, Department of Entomol- produced the CD-ROM accompanying this book.
    [Show full text]
  • 11 Purple Loosestrife
    11 PURPLE LOOSESTRIFE B. Blossey Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York PEST STATUS OF WEED Purple loosestrife, Lythrum salicaria L., (Fig. 1) is a weed of natural areas and its spread across North America has degraded many prime wetlands result- ing in large, monotypic stands that lack native plant species (Thompson et al., 1987; Malecki et al., 1993). Established L. salicaria populations persist for de- cades, are difficult to control using conventional tech- niques (chemical, physical, and mechanical), and con- tinue to spread into adjacent areas (Thompson et al., 1987). Purple loosestrife has been declared a noxious weed in at least 19 states. Nature of Damage Economic damage. With the exception of reduced palatability of hay containing purple loosestrife and Figure 1. Purple loosestrife stand. reduction of water flow in irrigation systems in the (Photo by B. Blossey.) West, purple loosestrife does not cause direct eco- nomic losses. Indirect losses accrue due to reductions in waterfowl viewing and hunting opportunities. Ecological damage. The invasion of L. salicaria alters biogeochemical and hydrological processes in wetlands. Areas dominated by purple loosestrife (Fig. 2) show significantly lower porewater pools of phos- phate in the summer compared to areas dominated by Typha latifolia L. (Templer et al., 1998). Purple loosestrife leaves decompose quickly in the fall re- sulting in a nutrient flush, whereas leaves of native species decompose in the spring (Barlocher and Biddiscombe, 1996; Emery and
    [Show full text]
  • Literature on the Chrysomelidae from CHRYSOMELA Newsletter, Numbers 1-41 October 1979 Through April 2001 May 18, 2001 (Rev
    Literature on the Chrysomelidae From CHRYSOMELA Newsletter, numbers 1-41 October 1979 through April 2001 May 18, 2001 (rev. 1)—(2,635 citations) Terry N. Seeno, Editor The following citations appeared in the CHRYSOMELA process and rechecked for accuracy, the list undoubtedly newsletter beginning with the first issue published in 1979. contains errors. Revisions and additions are planned and will be numbered sequentially. Because the literature on leaf beetles is so expansive, these citations focus mainly on biosystematic references. They Adobe Acrobat® 4.0 was used to distill the list into a PDF were taken directly from the publication, reprint, or file, which is searchable using standard search procedures. author’s notes and not copied from other bibliographies. If you want to add to the literature in this bibliography, Even though great care was taken during the data entering please contact me. All contributors will be acknowledged. Abdullah, M. and A. Abdullah. 1968. Phyllobrotica decorata de Gratiana spadicea (Klug, 1829) (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae, DuPortei, a new sub-species of the Galerucinae (Coleoptera: Chrysomel- Cassidinae) em condições de laboratório. Rev. Bras. Entomol. idae) with a review of the species of Phyllobrotica in the Lyman 30(1):105-113, 7 figs., 2 tabs. Museum Collection. Entomol. Mon. Mag. 104(1244-1246):4-9, 32 figs. Alegre, C. and E. Petitpierre. 1982. Chromosomal findings on eight Abdullah, M. and A. Abdullah. 1969. Abnormal elytra, wings and species of European Cryptocephalus. Experientia 38:774-775, 11 figs. other structures in a female Trirhabda virgata (Chrysomelidae) with a summary of similar teratological observations in the Coleoptera.
    [Show full text]