HERITAGE The Legacy of Charles Marlatt and Efforts to Limit Plant Pest Invasions ANDREW M. LIEBHOLD AND ROBERT L. GRIFFIN he problem of invasions by non-na- ago continue to profoundly affect dam- upon by the addition of more species. This tive plant pests has come to dom- age currently caused by non-native plant movement became popular throughout the Tinate the field of applied entomol- pests (Epanchin-Niell and Liebhold 2015). world and the American Acclimatization ogy. Most of the damaging insect pests Society was founded in New York City in of agriculture and forestry are non-na- Early History 1871, dedicated to introducing European tive (Sailer 1978, Aukema et al. 2010) and Prior to ca. 1870, there was virtually no flora and fauna into North America for this is a problem being faced around the public or scientific recognition that inter- both economic and aesthetic purposes world. This problem did not arise over- national movement of species could lead (Todd 2002). Much of the effort made by night; instead, there has been a steady to problems. This naivety is captured by the society focused on birds, and in the accumulation of non-native insect species the popularity of acclimatization societies late 1870’s, New York pharmacist Eugene in nearly every region of the world over in the mid 1800s, the first of which was Schieffelin led the society in a program to the last two centuries. Yamanaka et al. La Societé Zoologique d’Acclimatation, introduce every bird species mentioned in (2015) reported that there are presently founded in Paris in 1854 by Isidore Geoffroy the works of Shakespeare; this included more than 3,000 non-native insect spe- Saint-Hilaire, son of the well-known French releases of European robins, tits, and star- cies established in North America, and zoologist Étienne Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire lings, the latter of which ultimately became most are plant-feeding species. (Osborne 1992). The work of La Societé ecologically damaging and a substantial Given the enormity of the problem, and was based upon the concept that native nuisance (Linz et al. 2007). the fact that there has been a stream of fauna and flora were inherently deficient Introduction and naturalization of exot- these species establishing in the U.S. for and that nature could be greatly improved ic plants was a primary activity within the well more than a century, it is useful to acclimatization movement. Many private closely examine the history of how ento- individuals and horticultural societies, mologists came to identify the problem intrigued by the world’s vast flora, set forth of plant pest invasions and took action to on searches for unusual plant species that stem the flow of species. Here, we exam- might be imported, noting that many of ine the history of importation to the U.S. these species thrived when planted in of live plants, which is well known as an exotic habitat (Pauly 2007). A major a common pathway by which invading player in the endeavor to search for and plant pests are inadvertently transported import non-native plants was the U.S. to non-native habitats worldwide (Kiri- Dept. of Agriculture (USDA). During much tani and Yamamura 2003, Roques 2009, of the late 1800’s, the USDA engaged in Liebhold et al. 2012). We focus on the a diversity of efforts, combing the world history of plant imports, how this prac- searching for plant species of potential tice was eventually recognized as a risky use in agriculture, test-planting them in practice, and attempts made to stem the the U.S., and distributing seeds to farmers flow of invading species via its regula- (Griesbach 2013). This effort culminated tion. Because long time lags often exist in 1897 with the formation of the Office between when invading species estab- lish and when their damage occurs, the Fig. 1. David Fairchild, 1869-1954 (photo: Fair- regulatory actions from even a century child Tropical Botanic Garden). 218 American Entomologist • Winter 2016 Fig. 2. Charles L. Marlatt, 1863-1954 (photo: plants. In the late 1800s, the USDA Chief Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Entomologist was L.O. Howard (1897) Division). and the Superintendent of the Vegetable of Seed and Plant Introduction within the Pathology and Physiology Division was Division of Plant Industries. Organizing plant pathologist Beverley T. Galloway; this effort was USDA Secretary Edward both recognized the problem and began Wilson, who strongly believed in the need to speak out. In 1889, Howard stated that for diversifying economic plants current- 23 of the worst scale insects in the U.S. ly cultivated in the U.S. and to do so via were of foreign origin and that such pests global exploration for new species with were hurting American farmers (Wiser potential domestic use. 1974). In 1892, U.S. House of Represen- Wilson’s choice for the director of the tatives delegate Anthony Caminetti from new office was David Fairchild (Fig. 1), California introduced a bill that would son of an abolitionist minister who later prohibit importation or transportation became president of Kansas State Uni- of plants (Weber 1930, Wiser 1974). The versity. Fairchild had already achieved a bill was referred to the House Agriculture reputation as a leading “plant explorer,” Committee, but the Committee never took having traveled the world collecting botan- action and the bill died. In 1897, the Ohio ical specimens with financing from the State Horticultural Society drafted a bill, philanthropist Barbour Lathrop. Through endorsed by Howard and Galloway, pro- time, Fairchild’s stature within the USDA procedures for government certification viding for inspection of foreign imports increased, and he solidified his social status of phylloxera-free status of plant material and interstate movement of nursery stock. in Washington when he married Marian traded internationally and plant import This bill was introduced in Congress but Bell, daughter of Alexander Graham Bell. inspection procedures. During this era, ultimately failed. As director of the USDA Office of Seed and several European countries initiated their Meanwhile, in the mid-1890s, the rav- Plant Introduction, he was very active, and own measures to stem the flow of danger- ages to forests in New England caused by during the course of his lifetime, he intro- ous plant pests. For example, Great Brit- the newly discovered infestations of the duced some 200,000 species of plants to ain implemented the Destructive Insects gypsy moth, Lymantria dispar (L.), and North America (Pauly 2007). Among these, Act in 1877; this legislation provided for the brown-tail moth, Euproctis chrysor- Fairchild is credited with introducing hairy inspection and other measures to pre- rhoea (L.), were gaining wide attention. alfalfa from Peru, sweet peppers and seed- vent the entry of plant pests (MacLeod While the federal government refrained less grapes from Italy, Feterita sorghum et al. 2010). from funding the ongoing gypsy moth from Sudan, cotton from Egypt, and rice Meanwhile, in the U.S., there was eradication program being carried out from China (Baker et al. 1963). growing recognition of quarantine issues by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, among entomologists and plant patholo- in 1897, Congress instructed the USDA An Awakening to Danger gists. In California, the fruit industry was to investigate the situation with these Just as the acclimatization movement being adversely affected by a series of two insects and make recommendations started in Europe, so did the public real- devastating pests introduced and spread regarding new federal legislation (Wiser ization that dangers lurked in movement with nursery stock. Around 1870, the cot- 1974). Out of the 1897 USDA study, led by of plants. In Europe, increasing awareness tony cushion scale, Icerya purchasi Mas- Howard and Galloway, emerged a rec- of the problem can be traced back to the kell, was introduced from Australia, as ommendation for a federal inspection devastation caused by the grape phyl- were the red scale, Aonidiella aurantii system targeting insects and fungal pests loxera, Daktulosphaira vitifoliae (Fitch). (Maskell), and the San Jose scale, Qua- in interstate and foreign plant shipments. This pest of grapes was accidentally intro- draspidiotus perniciosus (Comstock), acci- Frustrated by Congress’s inaction on duced to Europe in 1862 on infested vines dentally introduced from China (Luck the problem, Howard (1898) pointed out imported from the U.S. to a vineyard in 2006). Alarmed by the appearances of an that most European countries had now the Rhône valley of France for the pur- increasingly large number of damaging enacted bans on imports of plants from pose of hybridization with local varieties exotic pests, orchardists and horticultur- the U.S. and stated, “Foreign nations are (Stevenson 1980, MacLeod et al. 2010). alists voiced their concerns, and in 1881, just beginning to do what we ourselves In reaction to the massive damage this the California Legislature passed the “Act might long ago have done with advan- pest caused to the viticulture industry to Promote and Protect the Horticultur- tage.” The Bureau of Entomology also in Europe, representatives from seven al Interests of the State.” This legislation published a list of insect species poten- European countries met in Berne, Swit- established a statewide system for inspec- tially harmful to U.S. agriculture that were zerland, in 1878, to develop what is con- tion of imported plants as well as erad- at risk of importation from Europe and sidered the first international phytosani- ication of new infestations (Wiser 1974). Asia (USDA 1896). tary agreement. This took the form of the As these events unfolded, there was In 1905, Congress finally passed legis- “International Convention on Measures to growing recognition among certain per- lation targeting injurious insects in the be taken against Phylloxera vastatrix” (P.