Should We Care About Purple Loosestrife? the History of an Invasive Plant in North America
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Biol Invasions (2010) 12:1967–1999 DOI 10.1007/s10530-009-9600-7 ORIGINAL PAPER Should we care about purple loosestrife? The history of an invasive plant in North America Claude Lavoie Received: 7 November 2008 / Accepted: 2 October 2009 / Published online: 20 October 2009 © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009 Abstract Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria L., Introduction Lythraceae) is considered one of the worst invasive plant species in the world. In this paper, I reconstruct With the globalization of trade and the improvement how purple loosestrife quickly became, after a long in modes of transportation, biological invaders are (150 years) period of indifference, the persona non expected to become increasingly numerous and grata of North American wetlands. I then compare harmful to the ecosystems and the economies of a the portrayal of the species in newspapers (907 large number of countries (Perrings et al. 2005; articles) to that supported by the scientific literature McCullough et al. 2006; Westphal et al. 2008). It is (38 peer-review papers). The depiction of purple therefore crucial to conduct studies on invasive loosestrife in scientific studies (lacking definition) is plants and animals to rapidly identify the species far removed from that in newspapers (alarming). with the greatest impact, as the first step toward the Some native species likely suffer from an invasion, development of appropriate control measures. but stating that this plant has large negative impacts Nearly 900 invasive species were studied by ecol on wetlands is probably exaggerated. If purple ogists between 1980 and 2006; plants and insects loosestrife is not a primary cause of extinction or a accounted for two-thirds of the taxa studied. How major contributor to the decline of other species, but ever, some species have been studied far more than is instead an indicator of anthropogenic disturbances, others, such as the zebra mussel (Dreissena poly the resources and efforts devoted to removing this morpha (Pallas), Dreissenidae) or the Argentine ant species might be better focused on more effective (Linepithema humile (Mayr), Formicidae). Purple means to protect wetlands against disturbances. loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria L., Lythraceae) is one of the five most intensively studied invasive species Keywords Biological control . (Pysˇek et al. 2008). This species is reputed to Invasive plant species . Lythrum salicaria . outcompete native plants, form monocultures in Media . Purple loosestrife . Wetland wetlands and degrade habitats for wildlife, espe cially amphibians and birds (Blossey et al. 2001; Brown et al. 2006). Purple loosestrife is considered one of the 100 worst invasive alien species in the C. Lavoie (&) world by the International Union for the Conserva ´ Ecole supe´rieure d’ame´nagement du territoire et de tion of Nature (Invasive Species Specialist Group de´veloppement re´gional, Universite´ Laval, Quebec City, QC G1V 0A6, Canada 2008); it ranks second on the Prioritized List of e-mail: [email protected] Invasive Alien Plants in Natural Habitats in 123 1968 C. Lavoie Canada, which measures species with the most Purple loosestrife: from indifference to celebrity serious impact (Catling and Mitrow 2007). South of the Canadian border, purple loosestrife has been Purple loosestrife was probably introduced in North declared a noxious weed in 32 states (United States America both inadvertently and for horticulture. Department of Agriculture 2008). Purple loosestrife seeds were sold in American and Intriguingly, purple loosestrife was long ignored Canadian nurseries as early as 1829 (Mack 1991; prior to its rapid ascension to its current status. Purple Delisle et al. 2003), but the species was also likely loosestrife is not a newcomer to North America. introduced by ships dumping ballast (sand) contain Introduced at the beginning of the nineteenth century, ing seeds, or by raw wool or sheep imported from it was already invading hundreds of hectares of Europe and contaminated with seeds (Thompson wetlands in the 1930s. However, it was not until the et al. 1987). The oldest herbarium specimens of end of the 1980s that this plant attracted the attention purple loosestrife were collected in Massachusetts of ecologists and environmental managers. In the (1831), Pennsylvania (1852), British Columbia 1990s, purple loosestrife rapidly became the ‘‘icon of (1857), New York (1864) and Quebec (1865). The invasive exotics’’ (Washington Post, 16 Apr. 2005), species rapidly spread to reach most other states and not only for invasion ecologists, but also in the provinces between 1940 and 1985 (Stuckey 1980). popular press. Nationwide education campaigns were Abundant populations were reported in the Boston undertaken in the United States and Canada to area in 1921 (Knowlton and Deane 1921), in New prevent the sale of the species for horticulture, and York state south of the Adirondacks in 1924 (House millions of European beetles were released in nature 1924), and along the Hudson River valley in 1929 as a result of a major biological control program. (Torrey 1929). By the end of the 1990s and the beginning of the In Quebec, purple loosestrife spread along the St. 2000s, a debate began about whether purple loose- Lawrence River valley from 1923 to 1946 (Delisle strife had really had an impact on wildlife and the et al. 2003); massive infestations of marshes in the ecological functions of wetlands (Anderson 1995; 1930s and the 1940s were reported by Fernald (1938) Hager and McCoy 1998; Blossey 1999; Blossey et al. and Louis-Marie (1944). The Commune de la Baie du 2001). However, relatively few data existed at that Febvre, a floodplain near Lake St. Pierre (a widening time to support the assertions of either party (for or of the St. Lawrence River) used as pasture since the against a major impact). Since then, numerous studies beginning of the eighteenth century, was probably the attempting to detect the consequences of a purple largest and the most severely infested wetland in loosestrife invasion on wetland ecosystems have been Quebec during this period. The purple loosestrife published, shedding new light on the topic. This invasion was impressive (1,375 ha; Fig. 1), but even unique extensive research effort may answer ques there, at least 39 other vascular plant species tions on biological invasions that would likely be coexisted with the invader (Doyon 1953). Louis- unobtainable with other, less studied species. A Marie (1944) attempted to eradicate the plant, but review of these studies is therefore important to most trials (crushing, hand-pulling, harrowing, mow anyone concerned with invasive plants. In this paper, ing, fire) were unsuccessful. The spraying of herbi I reconstruct how purple loosestrife quickly became, cides (2.4-D) associated with the seeding of reed after a long (150 years) period of indifference, the canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea L., Poaceae) was persona non grata of North American wetlands. I the only effective eradication method. This method then compare the portrayal of the species in news was used on 24 ha in 1951, but there is no indication papers to that supported by the scientific literature. In that it was repeated in subsequent years (Doyon particular, I examine whether the press accurately 1953). reported ecologists’ findings on the impact of this After the work of Louis-Marie (1944) and Doyon species on wetlands. I conclude with an analysis of (1953), the species was almost completely forgotten the consequences of focusing particular attention on by ecologists until the publication of a historical this invasive plant, and on the relevance of the reconstruction of the spread of the plant in North intensive efforts to control purple loosestrife in America by Stuckey (1980). This remarkable work Canada and the United States. presents an exhaustive survey of the historical 123 Should we care about purple loosestrife? 1969 North America. Lee (2002) documented the Canadian consequences of the publication of this report. The Canadian Wildlife Service initiated (1990–1991) an informal survey across the country to verify whether purple loosestrife was causing problems. Since most wetland managers suspected major impacts on wild life, a campaign was undertaken in collaboration with Ducks Unlimited Canada to alert the public to the perils this plant presented to natural habitats. The task was to ‘‘convince the public that behind the beauty was a beast’’ (Lee 2002, p. 255). In 1991, a brochure entitled Beautiful Killer was published and distrib uted coast-to-coast. In 1992, a new brochure was distributed, and a national workshop on the manage Fig. 1 A large purple loosestrife population at the Commune ment of the species took place. In 1993, a biological de la Baie du Febvre, a floodplain of the St. Lawrence River (Quebec), in 1951, just before the spraying of herbicides (from control program was initiated, and 1 year later, two Doyon 1953) television networks presented documentaries on pur ple loosestrife. According to Lee (2002), this cam paign against purple loosestrife was a real success: literature and herbarium specimens of purple loose- ‘‘The newspaper-style headlines dramatizing the strife collected throughout the United States and impact of this plant on wetlands left many uneasy Canada. It nevertheless contains a sentence that is and uncomfortable. But with the wisdom of hindsight, symptomatic of many later scientific reports on it is now possible to say ‘it worked!’ Phones began to purple loosestrife: ‘‘As the history of its spread in ring, interviews were sought and given, school and North America reveals, L. salicaria has the ability to community projects started’’ (p. 254). (…) eliminate other species in both natural and Indeed, purple loosestrife rapidly attracted the artificial wetland habitats’’ (p. 15). Unfortunately, attention of the popular press. According to the herbarium specimens—the main data source of this Factiva electronic database (Dow Jones & Company study—cannot provide the type of information nec 2008), at least 907 articles published in American and essary to support this assertion.