DOCSLIB.ORG

Biological Control of Invasive Non-Native Weeds: an Oppor- Tunity Not to Be Ignored

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Biological Control of Invasive Non-Native Weeds: an Oppor- Tunity Not to Be Ignored 144 entomologische berichten 73 (4) 2013 Biological control of invasive non-native weeds: An oppor- tunity not to be ignored Corin F. Pratt Richard H. Shaw Robert A. Tanner Djamila H. Djeddour Janny G.M. Vos KEY WORDS Biocontrol, Europe, Himalayan balsam, insects, Japanese knotweed Entomologische Berichten 73 (4): 144-154 The ecological and economic impacts of invasive species are significant and diverse in nature. Globalisation has led to increased introduction and establishment rates of invasive species in Europe, a trend which is likely to continue. The management of invasive weeds in Europe currently relies on chemical and manual methods which can be costly and environmentally damaging. Classical biological control (biocontrol) is proposed as a safe, cost effective, long term alternative/complementary method. The advantages of weed biocontrol have been documented across the world. This paper provides case studies of invasive weed biocontrol with examples including rubbervine, water hyacinth and leafy spurge. The paper demonstrates that Europe is lagging behind other regions in terms of biocontrol with only one example of a classical biocontrol release against an invasive weed. In 2010, following a thorough research programme, the first classical biocontrol release against a weed in Europe was conducted to manage the invasive, non-native Japanese knotweed in the United Kingdom. Further research is ongoing towards biocontrol of Himalayan balsam and floating pennywort, amongst others. An EU programme is underway to raise awareness of invasive species and assess management techniques, and includes trials to demonstrate the biocontrol of water fern at various locations including sites in The Netherlands. More European countries have started to show interest in this non-commercial control method and are advised to invest in existing weed biocontrol development and utilisation opportunities. Introduction (Williams et al. 2010) and €1.3-2.2 billion for The Netherlands (Van der Weijden et al. 2005). Pimentel (2002) estimates the total Impact of invasive non-native weeds loss to the world economy as a result of invasive non-native McNeely et al. (2001) define an invasive non-native as ‘an alien species to be 5% of annual production. With ecological effects species whose establishment and spread threaten ecosystems, additional to these financial costs, it is clear that the impacts of habitats or species with economic or environmental harm’. invasive species are of great significance. The ecological and economic impacts of invasive non-native weeds worldwide are significant and diverse in nature. Invasive Options for management of invasive weeds non-native plants can impact upon biodiversity, infrastructure, ecosystem functioning, agriculture, leisure and human health Management is often essential to lessen the impact of invasive (McFadyen 1995, Manchester & Bullock 2000, Charles & Dukes species. Various tools are available to control invasive weeds, 2007). Although it can be challenging to effectively quantify the however chemical herbicide use is becoming less acceptable ecological impacts of invasive non-natives, various studies have worldwide and manual control methods are often impractical focused on calculating the economic impacts of these species. and expensive. In the EU in particular, restrictions on herbicide For example, Pimentel et al. (2001), estimate that invasive spe- use in or around water bodies and a current lack of alterna- cies cost the United States US$ 134 billion per year (= € 104 tive options mean that manual control methods tend to be billion). The cost of invasives to Europe as a whole has been employed against riparian and water weeds, often at great estimated to be € 20 billion per year (Kettunen et al. 2008) and expense. For example, the mechanized and manual removal at a country level £ 1.7 billion (= € 2 billion) annually for the UK of water hyacinth (Eichornia crassipes) from Spain’s Guardiana entomologische berichten 145 73 (4) 2013 1. Rubber vine, Cryptostegia grandiflora, smothering native palm. Photo: Harry Evans 2. Maravalia cryptostegiae urediniospores. 1. Cryptostegia grandiflora overgroeit inheemse palmbomen. Photo: Harry Evans 2. Ongeslachtelijke urediniosporen van de schimmel Maravalia cryptostegiae. basin between 2006 and 2012 cost € 21.7 million and now re- aims of biocontrol are universal, aiming to find a specific and quires ongoing vigilance to deal with outbreaks emerging from effective BCA to manage a particular target pest. missed plants, fragments and seeds (Cifuentes y de la Cerra 2012). The requirement for repeat treatment and monitoring of Application of classical biological control manually cleared sites is apparent for many aquatic invasives, with many exhibiting clonal growth and multiplication as well If a weed is exotic and has a wide range, the introduction of a as sexual propagules (Santamaría 2002). These traits enable natural enemy from its native range for permanent suppression plants or seeds missed by manual treatments to recolonise is preferable and is the premise of ‘classical biological control’ quickly and can assist with dispersal (Santamaría 2002). (CBC). This approach has several advantages: An alternative, effective, self-sustaining, environmentally • Sustainable – once established the control should be benign and economically acceptable approach for the control self-perpetuating. of invasive weeds is, therefore, desirable. Biological control • Economical – compared to traditional chemical and manual (biocontrol) aims to meet these criteria and has a good track methods. record of doing so (Cruttwell MacFadyen 1998), particularly in • Environmentally-friendly – chemical use is reduced, native countries that show a strong commitment to biocontrol re- species are allowed to recolonise slowly, non-target species search (Culliney 2005). are unaffected. • Safe – there is no user exposure to chemicals that might enter the environment. It only impacts the target weed. Biological control of invasive non-native weeds • Large scale – the agent should find the weed within its own Biological control has been defined as ‘the actions of parasites, eco-climatic range. predators, and pathogens in maintaining another organism’s Classical biological control has been practiced worldwide for density at a lower average than would occur in their absence’ over 100 years with approximately 7,000 introductions (includ- (De Bach 1964). The natural enemies of the target pest are ing repeat introductions into a single country) of almost 2,700 known as ‘biological control agents’ (BCAs). Biological weed species of classical BCA (Cock et al. 2010). For weeds, there have control has a simple premise; that the addition of phytophago- been over 1,300 releases of more than 400 agents against 150 us natural enemies into a system impacted by a weed will sup- target weeds worldwide (Julien & Griffiths 1998, updated to press the target plant below a desired threshold, be it ecological 2010). However, despite European countries being the source of or economic. The level of suppression required and the type around 425 of these releases, there has been only one officially of BCA are dependent on the system. A temporary elevation of sanctioned release of a non-native BCA against a weed in the a naturally occurring insect or pathogen is more suited to the European Union, which was the psyllid Aphalara itadori (Shinji) agricultural/glasshouse environment where the crop to be pro- against Japanese knotweed (Fallopia japonica) in the UK in 2010 tected is, by definition, temporary, and permanent agent estab- (Djeddour & Shaw 2010, Shaw et al. 2011). Although the applica- lishment is neither necessary nor desired. This type of control is tion of classical weed biocontrol is in its infancy in Europe com- known as inundative or augmentative biocontrol. pared with other regions such as South Africa, Australia, New Biocontrol is practiced against a range of pest species, par- Zealand and North America (Cock et al. 2010), the interest in the ticularly invertebrates and plants. This paper will focus on the region has increased significantly in the last decade (Shaw 2003, biocontrol of weeds, although the majority of the principles and Sheppard et al. 2006, Cock & Seier 2007, Cortat et al. 2010). At a 146 entomologische berichten 73 (4) 2013 3. Water hyacinth Eichhornia crassipes flower. Photo: 4. Manual removal of water hyacinth in Benin. Photo: Rob Reeder Rob Reeder 4. Handmatige verwijdering van waterhyacint in Benin. 3. Bloemen van de water hyacint Eichhornia crassipes. time of globalisation with movement of materials around the Foreign exploration Establish dialogue with organisation/ planet both extensive and increasing, the introduction and government(s) in the native range of the target weed; gain per- establishment of ecologically and economically injurious non- mission for survey and export of live native organisms with spe- native species to new regions is increasingly frequent (Hulme cial reference to the Convention on Biological Diversity; carry 2009, Hulme et al. 2009). Indeed, Europe has seen its highest rate out surveys for potential agents across seasons and geographi- of introductions in the last 25 years (Hulme 2009). It is perhaps cal range including collections from closely-related plants; understandable, therefore, that the demand for long term, af- collect and identify natural enemies using appropriate special- fordable and environmentally benign invasive weed control ists as necessary;
Load more

Recommended publications
  • NSW Weeds Conference Program
    16th NSW Weeds Conference Proceedings 18th - 21st of July, 2011 Pacific Bay Conference Centre, Coffs Harbour Proudly hosted by Thank you to our Gold Sponsors Silver Sponsor Bronze Sponsors Introduction: The NSW Weeds Conference held in Coffs harbour 18-22 June 2011, is the 16th in a series organised by NSW Department of Primary Industries in partnership with various other organisations. The 2011 Conference was organised in partnership with Coffs Harbour City Council, NSW North Coast Weeds Advisory Committee, The Weed Society of NSW Inc. and NSW Weed Officers Association. Organising Committee: Rod Ensbey, NSW Department of Primary Industries Birgitte Verbeek, NSW Department of Primary Industries Tony Cook, NSW Department of Primary Industries Warwick Felton, Weeds Society of New South Wales Inc. Tim Scanlon, National Parks & Wildlife Service Reece Luxton, Clarence Valley Council David Merrikin, Northern Rivers Catchment Management Authority Ian Turnbull, Bellingen Shire Council Barry Powells, Coffs Harbour City Council Conference organiser: Michelle Aubert, Coffs Harbour City Council Citation: Proceedings of 16th NSW Weeds Conference, Coffs Harbour, July 2011 Disclaimer: The contents of these proceedings have undergone limited editorial or peer review. Papers have been critiqued (reviewers) for incorrect information, excessively controversial content and politically sensitive or libellous information prior to their publication. Paper Reviewers: Rod Ensbey Birgitte Verbeek Elissa van Oosterhout Phillip Blackmore Alan Maguire Peter Gray Tony Cook ISBN 978 1 74256 211 7 Monday 18th of July Registration from 4.30pm – Foyer Pacific Bay Conference Centre. Welcome Reception 5.30pm – 7.00pm Amongst the trade display, Pacific Bay Conference Centre. Day 1 – Tuesday 19th of July Opening Session - Auditorium Chair Bruce Christie, Principal Director Biosecurity NSW DPI 8.30 Welcome to Country 8.35 Conference Welcome – Mayor Keith Rhoades, Coffs Harbour City Council, President of the Local Government Association 8.45 Conference Opening - Minister for Primary Industries, Hon.
    [Show full text]
  • Download This Article in PDF Format
    Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst. 2018, 419, 42 Knowledge & © K. Pabis, Published by EDP Sciences 2018 Management of Aquatic https://doi.org/10.1051/kmae/2018030 Ecosystems www.kmae-journal.org Journal fully supported by Onema REVIEW PAPER What is a moth doing under water? Ecology of aquatic and semi-aquatic Lepidoptera Krzysztof Pabis* Department of Invertebrate Zoology and Hydrobiology, University of Lodz, Banacha 12/16, 90-237 Lodz, Poland Abstract – This paper reviews the current knowledge on the ecology of aquatic and semi-aquatic moths, and discusses possible pre-adaptations of the moths to the aquatic environment. It also highlights major gaps in our understanding of this group of aquatic insects. Aquatic and semi-aquatic moths represent only a tiny fraction of the total lepidopteran diversity. Only about 0.5% of 165,000 known lepidopterans are aquatic; mostly in the preimaginal stages. Truly aquatic species can be found only among the Crambidae, Cosmopterigidae and Erebidae, while semi-aquatic forms associated with amphibious or marsh plants are known in thirteen other families. These lepidopterans have developed various strategies and adaptations that have allowed them to stay under water or in close proximity to water. Problems of respiratory adaptations, locomotor abilities, influence of predators and parasitoids, as well as feeding preferences are discussed. Nevertheless, the poor knowledge on their biology, life cycles, genomics and phylogenetic relationships preclude the generation of fully comprehensive evolutionary scenarios. Keywords: Lepidoptera / Acentropinae / caterpillars / freshwater / herbivory Résumé – Que fait une mite sous l'eau? Écologie des lépidoptères aquatiques et semi-aquatiques. Cet article passe en revue les connaissances actuelles sur l'écologie des mites aquatiques et semi-aquatiques, et discute des pré-adaptations possibles des mites au milieu aquatique.
    [Show full text]
  • 2 Floating Fern (Salvinia)
    2 FLOATING FERN (SALVINIA) M. H. Julien,1 T. D. Center,2 and P. W. Tipping2 1 CSIRO Entomology, Indooroopilly, Australia 2 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Research Service, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, USA PEST STATUS OF WEED tats for vectors of human disease with serious socio- economic impacts. Salvinia molesta D. S. Mitchell is a floating fern na- In developing countries, the impact of salvinia tive to South America that in the last half of the twen- can be devastating because weed mats block the use tieth century spread widely throughout the tropics of waterways for transportation, cutting off access and subtropics, moved in part by the trade in orna- to important services, farm lands, and hunting mental plants for fish tanks and ponds. It forms dense grounds. The harm from salvinia mats to fisheries also mats over lakes and slow moving rivers and causes can be very significant to communities dependent on large economic losses and a wide range of ecological fish for local consumption (sometimes as the main problems to native species and communities. It is of source of protein) or in areas where fish sales are the interest in the United States because of its recent es- main source of cash income (Bennett, 1966; Thomas tablishment in east Texas. and Room, 1986). Salvinia also is a weed of paddy Nature of Damage rice that reduces production by competing for wa- ter, nutrients and space (Anon., 1987). Economic damage. Mats of S. molesta (referred to Ecological damage. The ability to grow very hereafter as salvinia) impede access to and use of wa- quickly (Cary and Weerts, 1983; Mitchell and Tur, terways for commercial and recreational purposes 1975; Mitchell, 1978/9; Room, 1986) and blanket wa- and degrade waterside aesthetics (Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Control of Water Hyacinth with Arthropods: a Review to 2000
    Biological Control of Water Hyacinth with Arthropods: a Review to 2000 M.H. Julien* Abstract Water hyacinth, native to the Amazon River, invaded the tropical world over the last century and has become an extremely serious weed. The search for biological control agents began in the early 1960s and continues today. Six arthropod species have been released around the world. They are: two weevils, Neochetina bruchi and N. eichhorniae; two moths, Niphograpta albiguttalis and Xubida infusellus; a mite Orthogalumna terebrantis; and a bug Eccritotarsus catarinensis. The mite and X. infusellus have not contributed to control and the bug is under evaluation following recent releases in Africa. The two weevils and the moth N. albiguttalis have been released in numerous infestations since the 1970s and have contributed to successful control of the weed in many locations. It is timely to assess their impact on water hyacinth and, to help in planning future strategies, to identify the factors that contribute to or mitigate against successful biological control. Although the search for new agents continues, and as a result biological control will likely be improved, this technique alone is unlikely to be successful in all of the weed’s habitats. It is important that whole-of-catchment management strategies be developed that integrate biological control with other control techniques. The aims of such strategies should be to achieve the best possible control using methods that are affordable and sustainable; hence the need to develop strategies using biological control as the base component. WATER hyacinth apparently became a problem in the sation of the weed for commercial and subsistence USA following its distribution to participants in the purposes has also been widely considered.
    [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]
  • Water Hyacinth: Can Its Aggressive Invasion Be Controlled?
    Home Subscribe Archive Contact April 2013 Thematic focus: Ecosystem Management Water hyacinth: Can its aggressive invasion be controlled? The spread of invasive alien species is neither easy to manage nor easy to reverse, threatening not only biodiversity but also economic development and human wellbeing (UNEP, 2012). Native to the Amazon Basin in South America water hyacinth has emerged as a major weed in more than 50 countries in the tropical and subtropical regions of the world with profuse and permanent impacts (Patel, NC 2.0 NC 2012; Téllez et al., 2008; Shanab et al., 2010; Villamagna and - CCBY Murphy, 2010). Worryingly, climate change may allow the spread of / water hyacinth to higher latitudes (Patel, 2012). Intensified Flickr monitoring, mitigation and management measures are needed to obinZ / / obinZ keep water hyacinth at unproblematic levels. R Why is this issue important? The beautiful, large purple and violet flowers of the South American water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) make it a very popular ornamental plant for ponds. However water hyacinth has also been labelled as the world’s worst water weed and has garnered increasing international attention as an invasive species (Zhang et al., 2010). Efficient in utilizing aquatic nutrients and solar energy for profuse biomass production, water hyacinth can cause extensive ND 2.0 ND environmental, social and economic problems. It is found in lakes, - NC estuaries, wetlands, marshes, ponds, dambos, slow flowing rivers, - CCBY streams, and waterways in the lower latitudes where growth is / stimulated by the inflow of nutrient rich water from urban and Flickr / agricultural runoff, deforestation, products of industrial waste and insufficient wastewater treatment (Villamagna and Murphy, 2010; Ndimele et al., 2011).
    [Show full text]
  • ELEMENT STEWARDSHIP ABSTRACT for Eichhornia Crassipes
    ELEMENT STEWARDSHIP ABSTRACT for Eichhornia crassipes (Martius) Solms water hyacinth To the User: Element Stewardship Abstracts (ESAs) are prepared to provide The Nature Conservancy’s staff and other land managers with current management-related information on species and communities that are most important to protect, or most important to control. The Abstracts organize and summarize data from many sources including literature, researchers and managers actively working with the species or community. We hope, by providing this abstract free of charge, to encourage users to contribute their information to the abstract. This sharing of information will benefit all land managers by ensuring the availability of an abstract that contains up-to-date information on management techniques and knowledgeable contracts. Contributors of information will be acknowledged within the abstract. The Nature Conservancy’s Wildland Invasive Species Program is responsible for updating and maintaining this ESA. Anyone with comments or information on current or past monitoring, research, or management programs for the species or community described in an abstract is encouraged to contact TNC’s Wildland Invasive Species program at 124 Robbins Hall, University of California, Davis, CA 95616. This abstract is a compilation of available information and is not an endorsement of any particular practices or products. Please do not remove this cover statement from the attached abstract. Author of this Abstract: Michael S. Batcher, M.S., A.I.C.P.; Consulting Ecologist and Environmental Planner; 1907 Buskirk-West Hoosick Rd., Buskirk, NY 12028, phone: (518) 686- 5868, email: [email protected] THE NATURE CONSERVANCY 4245 North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, Virginia 22203 (703) 841-5300 SCIENTIFIC NAME Eichhornia crassipes (Martius) Solms Synonym Piaropus crassipes (Martius) Britton COMMON NAME water hyacinth DESCRIPTION AND DIAGNOSTIC CHARACTERISTICS E.
    [Show full text]
  • Lepidoptera: Pyraloidea: Crambidae) Inferred from DNA and Morphology 141-204 77 (1): 141 – 204 2019
    ZOBODAT - www.zobodat.at Zoologisch-Botanische Datenbank/Zoological-Botanical Database Digitale Literatur/Digital Literature Zeitschrift/Journal: Arthropod Systematics and Phylogeny Jahr/Year: 2019 Band/Volume: 77 Autor(en)/Author(s): Mally Richard, Hayden James E., Neinhuis Christoph, Jordal Bjarte H., Nuss Matthias Artikel/Article: The phylogenetic systematics of Spilomelinae and Pyraustinae (Lepidoptera: Pyraloidea: Crambidae) inferred from DNA and morphology 141-204 77 (1): 141 – 204 2019 © Senckenberg Gesellschaft für Naturforschung, 2019. The phylogenetic systematics of Spilomelinae and Pyraustinae (Lepidoptera: Pyraloidea: Crambidae) inferred from DNA and morphology Richard Mally *, 1, James E. Hayden 2, Christoph Neinhuis 3, Bjarte H. Jordal 1 & Matthias Nuss 4 1 University Museum of Bergen, Natural History Collections, Realfagbygget, Allégaten 41, 5007 Bergen, Norway; Richard Mally [richard. [email protected], [email protected]], Bjarte H. Jordal [[email protected]] — 2 Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Ser- vices, Division of Plant Industry, 1911 SW 34th Street, Gainesville, FL 32608 USA; James E. Hayden [[email protected]] — 3 Technische Universität Dresden, Institut für Botanik, 01062 Dresden, Germany; Christoph Neinhuis [[email protected]] — 4 Senckenberg Naturhistorische Sammlungen Dresden, Museum für Tierkunde, Königsbrücker Landstraße 159, 01109 Dresden, Germany; Matthias Nuss [[email protected]] — * Corresponding author Accepted on March 14, 2019. Published online at www.senckenberg.de/arthropod-systematics on May 17, 2019. Published in print on June 03, 2019. Editors in charge: Brian Wiegmann & Klaus-Dieter Klass. Abstract. Spilomelinae and Pyraustinae form a species-rich monophylum of Crambidae (snout moths). Morphological distinction of the two groups has been diffcult in the past, and the morphologically heterogenous Spilomelinae has not been broadly accepted as a natural group due to the lack of convincing apomorphies.
    [Show full text]
  • The Stained-Glass Moth, Samea Ecclesialis Guenée (Lepidoptera: Crambidae)1 James E
    Entomology Circular No. 431 Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services September 2014 Division of Plant Industry FDACS-P-02015 The Stained-glass Moth, Samea ecclesialis Guenée 1 (Lepidoptera: Crambidae) James E. Hayden2 INTRODUCTION: Samea ecclesialis Guenée (Lepidoptera: Crambidae: Spilomelinae) is a common moth that is widely distributed in Florida, the southern United States, and the New World tropics. It is often seen flying on lawns and weedy areas, and it is one of the most frequently attracted moths to Multi-Lure® (McPhail-type) traps deployed in Florida for tephritid fruit fly detection (Fig. 1). Despite the moth's abundance, it has no reported economic importance. However, it is related to Samea multiplicalis (Guenée) and Niphograpta albiguttalis (Warren), well- studied herbivores of aquatic weeds (Center et al. 1982; Knopf and Habeck 1976), and to Nomophila Hübner, the celery webworms, which are pests of herbaceous plants and young vegetables (Flint 1922). Figure 1: Samea ecclesialis male in Multi-Lure trap sample. Photography credit: James Hayden IDENTIFICATION: Adult: The forewing length is 8.5–11mm, males having slightly more pointed forewings (Fig. 2A). The wing pattern is a complex array of opaque brown and nearly translucent windows (Fig. 2A–C). Guenée's description (1854) compares the pattern to stained glass (vitraux), hence the species name in reference to churches. Males are easily distinguished from all similar species in North America by the presence of nearly black scale tufts on the sides of the fifth abdominal segment (Fig. 4). The windows of the forewing are roughly arrayed in three bands. In the medial band, the window nearer the anterior margin of the wing is roughly square (Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological and Integrated Control of Water Hyacinth, Eichhornia Crassipes
    Biological and Integrated Control of Water Hyacinth, Eichhornia crassipes Proceedings of the Second Meeting of the Global Working Group for the Biological and Integrated Control of Water Hyacinth, Beijing, China, 9–12 October 2000 Editors: M.H. Julien, M.P. Hill, T.D. Center and Ding Jianqing Sponsored by: International Organization for Biological Control Organised by: Institute of Biological Control, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences Supported by: National Natural Scientific Foundation of China Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research Canberra 2001 The Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR) was estab- lished in June 1982 by an Act of the Australian Parliament. Its primary mandate is to help identify agricultural problems in developing countries and to commission collaborative research between Australian and developing country researchers in fields where Australia has a special research competence. Where trade names are used this constitutes neither endorsement of nor discrim- ination against any product by the Centre. ACIAR PROCEEDINGS This series of publications includes the full proceedings of research workshops or symposia organised or supported by ACIAR. Numbers in this series are distributed internationally to selected individuals and scientific institutions. © Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research, GPO Box 1571, Canberra ACT 2601. Julien, M.H., Hill, M.P., Center, T.D. and Ding Jianqing, ed. 2001. Biological and Integrated Control of Water Hyacinth, Eichhornia crassipes. Proceedings of the Second Meeting of the Global Working Group for the Biological and Integrated Control of Water Hyacinth, Beijing, China, 9–12 October 2000. ACIAR Proceedings No. 102, 152p ISBN 1 86320 319 2 (print) 1 86320 320 6 (electronic) Contents Address of Welcome 5 Editorial 6 Biological Control of Water Hyacinth with Arthropods: a Review to 2000 8 M.H.
    [Show full text]
  • Field Guide for the Biological Control of Weeds in Eastern North America
    US Department TECHNOLOGY of Agriculture TRANSFER FIELD GUIDE FOR THE BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF WEEDS IN EASTERN NORTH AMERICA Rachel L. Winston, Carol B. Randall, Bernd Blossey, Philip W. Tipping, Ellen C. Lake, and Judy Hough-Goldstein Forest Health Technology FHTET-2016-04 Enterprise Team April 2017 The Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team (FHTET) was created in 1995 by the Deputy Chief for State and Private Forestry, USDA, Forest Service, to develop and deliver technologies to protect and improve the health of American forests. This book was published by FHTET as part of the technology transfer series. http://www.fs.fed.us/foresthealth/technology/ Cover photos: Purple loosestrife (Jennifer Andreas, Washington State University Extension), Galerucella calmariensis (David Cappaert, Michigan State University, bugwood.org), tropical soda apple ((J. Jeffrey Mullahey, University of Florida, bugwood.org), Gratiana boliviana (Rodrigo Diaz, Louisiana State University), waterhyacinth (Chris Evans, University of Illinois, bugwood.org), Megamelus scutellaris (Jason D. Stanley, USDA ARS, bugwood.org), mile-a-minute weed (Leslie J. Mehrhoff, University of Connecticut, bugwood.org), Rhinoncomimus latipes (Amy Diercks, bugwood.org) How to cite this publication: Winston, R.L., C.B. Randall, B. Blossey, P.W. Tipping, E.C. Lake, and J. Hough-Goldstein. 2017. Field Guide for the Biological Control of Weeds in Eastern North America. USDA Forest Service, Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team, Morgantown, West Virginia. FHTET-2016-04. In accordance with
    [Show full text]
  • Insects and Other Arthropods That Feed on Aquatic and Wetland Plants
    Insects and Other United States Arthropods That Feed on Department of Agriculture Aquatic and Wetland Agricultural Research Plants Service Technical Bulletin 1870 October 2002 Cover: Adult salvinia weevils on Salvinia minima United States Department of Agriculture Insects and Other Agricultural Research Arthropods That Feed on Service Technical Aquatic and Wetland Bulletin 1870 Plants Ted D. Center, F. Allen Dray, Jr., Greg P. Jubinsky, and Michael J. Grodowitz Center is research entomologist and Dray is ecologist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Invasive Plant Research Laboratory, Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Jubinsky is environmental administrator, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Tallahassee. Grodowitz is research entomologist, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Abstract Center, T.D., F.A. Dray Jr., G.P. Jubinsky, and M.J. Grodowitz. 1999. Insects and Other Arthropods That Feed on Aquatic and Wetland Plants. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Technical Bulletin No. 1870. Plant-feeding insects play an often unappreciated but important role in the dynamics of aquatic and wetland ecosystems. Natural resource managers, scientists, and others working in such ecosystems need to be able to recognize these insects and the damage they cause. This manual provides photographs and descriptions of the life stages and feeding damage of about 50 of the most common native plant-feeding insects and naturalized biological control insects found in aquatic and wetland ecosystems in the United States. Keywords: Biological control, herbivory, insect-plant interaction, insects, phytophagous, weeds. While supplies last, single copies of this publication can be obtained at no cost from USDA–ARS, Invasive Plant Research Laboratory, 3205 College Ave., Fort Lauderdale, FL 33314.
    [Show full text]