Petition date: Jan. 25, 2006 Mailed on: Jan. 26, 2006 Petitioner: Lincoln Smith U. S. Department of Agriculture – Agricultural Research Service Exotic Invasive Weeds Research Unit Western Regional Research Center 800 Buchanan Street, Albany, CA 94710 tel. (510) 559-6185 fax (510) 559-5737 [email protected] Nature of Petition: Proposed Field Release of the Weevil, Ceratapion basicorne (Coleoptera: Apionidae), from Turkey for Biological Control of Yellow Starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis) in the United States. Evaluation studies were conducted at the USDA-ARS-WRRC quarantine laboratory in Albany, CA and in the field in eastern Turkey. Insects for release will be processed through the WRRC quarantine laboratory. Initial releases and monitoring will be made in California by Lincoln Smith in collaboration with California Department of Food and Agriculture scientists. 2 Table of Contents 1. Introduction: ..........................................................................................................................4 1.1 Nature of the Problem ......................................................................................................4 1.2 Proposed Action...............................................................................................................4 2. Target Weed Information .......................................................................................................5 2.1 Taxonomy........................................................................................................................5 2.1 Description.......................................................................................................................6 2.3 Distribution of Target Weed.............................................................................................6 2.4 Taxonomically Related Plants ..........................................................................................8 2.5 Distribution of Taxonomically Related Plants in North America ......................................9 2.6 Life History....................................................................................................................10 2.7 Impacts ..........................................................................................................................11 2.8 Alternative Management Options ...................................................................................14 3. Biological Control Agent Information..................................................................................18 3.1 Taxonomy......................................................................................................................18 3.2 Geographical Range .......................................................................................................19 3.3 Known Host Range (Specificity) ....................................................................................19 3.4 Life History....................................................................................................................20 3.5 Population of the Agent Studied.....................................................................................20 4. Experimental Methodology and Analysis .............................................................................20 4.1 Test Plant List ................................................................................................................20 4.2 Design of Host Specificity Experiment...........................................................................25 4.3 Positive Controls............................................................................................................27 4.4 Reason for Decisions......................................................................................................28 4.5 Design of Impact Experiment.........................................................................................28 5. Results and Discussion.........................................................................................................29 5.1 Host specificity ..............................................................................................................29 5.2 Impact on target plant.....................................................................................................31 5.3 Summary of Results .......................................................................................................32 5.4 Protocol for Releasing the Agent....................................................................................33 5.5 Post-Release Monitoring ................................................................................................34 5.6 Benefit/Risk ...................................................................................................................34 3 6. Potential Environmental Impacts..........................................................................................35 6.1 Human Impacts ..............................................................................................................35 6.2 Potential Economic Impacts ...........................................................................................35 6.3 Plant Impacts..................................................................................................................35 6.4 Nonplant Impacts ...........................................................................................................36 6.5 Proposed Methods for Mitigation ...................................................................................37 6.6 Abiotic and Edaphic Effects ...........................................................................................37 6.7 Outcome of No Action ...................................................................................................37 7. Petitioner’s Conclusion ........................................................................................................38 Acknowledgements...................................................................................................................39 Literature Cited.........................................................................................................................40 Tables .......................................................................................................................................51 Figures......................................................................................................................................63 Appendices Appendix 1. Genera and Higher Taxa in the Family Asteraceae occuring in North America.........................................................................................................................87 Appendix 2. Host Plant Test List (all in family Asteraceae)..................................................99 Appendix 3. Federally listed Threatened and Endangered species in the family Asteraceae that occur in the continental United States .................................................101 Appendix 4. Key to species of Ceratapion associated with Centaurea solstitialis and some allies (Boris Korotyaev unpubl.). .................................................................107 Appendix 5. Fecundity, development and behavior of Ceratapion basicorne (Coleoptera: Apionidae), a prospective biological control agent of yellow starthistle (Smith and Drew in press). Environmental Entomology..............................................113 Appendix 6. Assessment of risk of attack to safflower by Ceratapion basicorne (Coleoptera: Apionidae), a prospective biological control agent of Centaurea solstitialis (Asteraceae) (Smith et al. 2006). Biological Control..................................131 4 1. Introduction: 1.1 Nature of the Problem Yellow starthistle (YST), Centaurea solstitialis L., was accidentally introduced into California over 130 years ago, primarily through importation of contaminated alfalfa seed (Maddox et al. 1985). The weed infests about 8 million hectares (16-20 million acres) in the western U.S. and Canada (Duncan 2001, Pitcairn et al. in press). Infestations have been reported in 23 of the contiguous 48 states, with the heaviest infestations in the states of California, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington (Maddox, et al., 1985). It is the most common weed in California, and it is continuing to spread (Pitcairn et al. in press) and threaten states to the east. The weed is designated as noxious in 11 western states and two Canadian provinces (Skinner et al. 2000). Yellow starthistle is highly invasive in grassland habitats and displaces desirable plants in both natural and grazing areas. Its flowers have inch-long spines that deter feeding by grazing animals and lower the utility of recreational lands. Consumption of YST by horses causes a fatal syndrome known as "chewing disease" or nigropallidal encephalomalacia (Cordy 1978). Conventional control strategies have been inadequate because of the size of the infestation, economic and environmental costs of herbicides, and the relatively low monetary return from grazing and recreational land use. Yellow starthistle originates from the Mediterranean region, where it generally occurs in low densities and appears to be under natural control (Uygur et al. 2004). Research to discover, evaluate and introduce classical biological control agents began in the 1960s (Maddox 1981; Rosenthal et al. 1992; Turner et al. 1995; Sheley et al. 1999). Some biological control agents