Reading assignments: biological control

1
Reading assignments biological control

• van Klinken, R. and Raghu, S. 2006. A scientific
  approach to agent selection. Australian Journal
  of Entomology 45 253-258.
• Denslow, J., and DAntonio, C. 2005. After
  bio-control assessing indirect effects of insect
  releases. Biological Control 35307-318.
• Kirby et al. 2000. Biological control of leafy
  spurge with introduced flea beetles (Apthona
  spp.). Journal of Range Management 53(3) 305-308.

2

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods
• Least public opposition
• Number of success stories
• Difficulty locating enemy
• Non-target effects
• Most likely a problem when the invasive species
  has closely related plants in the invaded area
• Monitor non-targets

3

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds

4

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• Agricultural impact
• Impact to natural areas
• Toxicity
• Beneficial characteristics
• Relatedness to native species
• Origin
• Extent of invasion

5

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• Agricultural impact
• Impact to natural areas
• Toxicity
• Beneficial characteristics
• Relatedness to native species
• Origin
• Extent of invasion
• McClay, A. S. 1989. Selection of suitable target
  weeds for classical biological control in
  Alberta.  AECV89-RI. Alberta Environmental
  Centre, Vegreville, Alberta, Canada.

6

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• Agricultural impact
• Impact to natural areas
• Toxicity
• Beneficial characteristics
• Relatedness to native species
• Origin
• Extent of invasion
• McClay, A. S. 1989. Selection of suitable target
  weeds for classical biological control in
  Alberta.  AECV89-RI. Alberta Environmental
  Centre, Vegreville, Alberta, Canada.
• Peschken, D. P and A. S. McClay. 1995. Picking
  the target a revision of McClays scoring
  system to determine the suitability of a weed for
  classical biological control, pp. 137-143. In
  Delfosse E. S. and R. R. Scott (eds.).
  Proceedings of the VIIIth International Symposium
  on Biological Control of Weeds, Canterbury NZ.

7

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• McClay (1989) and Peschken McClay (1995) use a
  scoring system to rate weeds for biocontrol
  priority.
• economic losses (light to very severe) 0-30 pts
• Additional points
• Size of the infested area
• expected spread
• Toxicity
• Available means of control
• Economic justification.

8

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• McClay (1989) and Peschken McClay (1995) use a
  scoring system to rate weeds for biocontrol
  priority.
• economic losses
• Biological elements
• Geographic origin more points for non-US weeds

9

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• McClay (1989) and Peschken McClay (1995) use a
  scoring system to rate weeds for biocontrol
  priority.
• economic losses
• Biological elements
• Geographic origin more points for non-N. Am.
  weeds
• Habitat stability more points for stable
  habitats (rangelands VS croplands)

10

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• McClay (1989) and Peschken McClay (1995) use a
  scoring system to rate weeds for biocontrol
  priority.
• economic losses
• Biological elements
• Geographic origin more points for non-N. Am.
  weeds
• Habitat stability more points for stable
  habitats (rangelands VS croplands)
• Points added for absence of close native
  relatives

11

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• McClay (1989) and Peschken McClay (1995) use a
  scoring system to rate weeds for biocontrol
  priority.
• economic losses
• Biological elements
• Geographic origin more points for non-N. Am.
  weeds
• Habitat stability more points for stable
  habitats (rangelands VS croplands)
• Points added for absence of close native
  relatives

12

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• McClay (1989) and Peschken McClay (1995) use a
  scoring system to rate weeds for biocontrol
  priority.
• economic losses
• Biological elements
• Other means decision of scientists, survey of
  land managers and weed biologists, political
  pressures, perceived need, mandate in legislation

13

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• Identify possible bio-control agents

14

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• Identify possible bio-control agents
• Example USDA ARS project South American
  Biological Control Agents to Suppress Invasive
  Pests in the U.S. began Nov 8 2005. Project
  Number 0211-22000-006-00

15

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• Identify possible bio-control agents
• Example USDA ARS project South American
  Biological Control Agents to Suppress Invasive
  Pests in the U.S. began Nov 8 2005
• Targets include Tropical Soda Apple (Solanum
  viarum), Water-hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes),
  Brazilian Peppertree (Schinus terebenthifolius)

16

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• Identify possible bio-control agents
• Example USDA ARS project South American
  Biological Control Agents to Suppress Invasive
  Pests in the U.S. began Nov 8 2005
• Targets include Tropical Soda Apple (Solanum
  viarum), Water-hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes),
  Brazilian Peppertree (Schinus terebenthifolius)
• Literature review to identify promising species

17

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• Identify possible bio-control agents
• Example USDA ARS project South American
  Biological Control Agents to Suppress Invasive
  Pests in the U.S. began Nov 8 2005
• Targets include Tropical Soda Apple (Solanum
  viarum), Water-hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes),
  Brazilian Peppertree (Schinus terebenthifolius)
• Literature review to identify promising species
• Field surveys in South America

18

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• Identify possible bio-control agents
• Example USDA ARS project South American
  Biological Control Agents to Suppress Invasive
  Pests in the U.S. began Nov 8 2005
• Targets include Tropical Soda Apple (Solanum
  viarum), Water-hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes),
  Brazilian Peppertree (Schinus terebenthifolius)
• Literature review to identify promising species
• Field surveys in South America
• Safety and effectiveness of control agent.

19

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• Identify possible bio-control agents
• Example USDA ARS project South American
  Biological Control Agents to Suppress Invasive
  Pests in the U.S. began Nov 8 2005
• Targets include Tropical Soda Apple (Solanum
  viarum), Water-hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes),
  Brazilian Peppertree (Schinus terebenthifolius)
• Literature review to identify promising species
• Field surveys in South America
• Safety and effectiveness of control agent.
• presence and abundance related to climate

20

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• Identify possible bio-control agents
• Example USDA ARS project South American
  Biological Control Agents to Suppress Invasive
  Pests in the U.S. began Nov 8 2005
• Targets include Tropical Soda Apple (Solanum
  viarum), Water-hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes),
  Brazilian Peppertree (Schinus terebenthifolius)
• Literature review to identify promising species
• Field surveys in South America
• Safety and effectiveness of control agent.
• presence and abundance related to climate
• phenology of control agents and hosts

21

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• Identify possible bio-control agents
• Example USDA ARS project South American
  Biological Control Agents to Suppress Invasive
  Pests in the U.S. began Nov 8 2005
• Targets include Tropical Soda Apple (Solanum
  viarum), Water-hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes),
  Brazilian Peppertree (Schinus terebenthifolius)
• Literature review to identify promising species
• Field surveys in South America
• Safety and effectiveness of control agent.
• presence and abundance related to climate
• phenology of control agents and hosts
• type and level of damage on targets

22

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• Identify possible bio-control agents
• Example USDA ARS project South American
  Biological Control Agents to Suppress Invasive
  Pests in the U.S. began Nov 8 2005
• Targets include Tropical Soda Apple (Solanum
  viarum), Water-hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes),
  Brazilian Peppertree (Schinus terebenthifolius)
• Literature review to identify promising species
• Field surveys in South America
• Safety and effectiveness of control agent.
• presence and abundance related to climate
• phenology of control agents and hosts
• type and level of damage on targets
• Oviposition and feeding substrates

23

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• Identify possible bio-control agents
• Example USDA ARS project South American
  Biological Control Agents to Suppress Invasive
  Pests in the U.S. began Nov 8 2005
• Targets include Tropical Soda Apple (Solanum
  viarum), Water-hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes),
  Brazilian Peppertree (Schinus terebenthifolius)
• Literature review to identify promising species
• Field surveys in South America
• Safety and effectiveness of control agent.
• presence and abundance related to climate
• phenology of control agents and hosts
• type and level of damage on targets
• Oviposition and feeding substrates
• overwintering sites

24

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• Identify possible bio-control agents
• Example USDA ARS project South American
  Biological Control Agents to Suppress Invasive
  Pests in the U.S. began Nov 8 2005
• Targets include Tropical Soda Apple (Solanum
  viarum), Water-hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes),
  Brazilian Peppertree (Schinus terebenthifolius)
• Literature review to identify promising species
• Field surveys in South America
• Safety and effectiveness of control agent.
• presence and abundance related to climate
• phenology of control agents and hosts
• type and level of damage on targets
• Oviposition and feeding substrates
• overwintering sites
• Host range tests primary and closely related
  hosts, critical hosts

25

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• Identify possible bio-control agents
• Example USDA ARS project South American
  Biological Control Agents to Suppress Invasive
  Pests in the U.S. began Nov 8 2005
• Targets include Tropical Soda Apple (Solanum
  viarum), Water-hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes),
  Brazilian Peppertree (Schinus terebenthifolius)
• Literature review to identify promising species
• Field surveys in South America
• Safety and effectiveness of control agent
• Climate modeling to match sources to target
  populations

26

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• Identify possible bio-control agents
• Example USDA ARS project South American
  Biological Control Agents to Suppress Invasive
  Pests in the U.S. began Nov 8 2005
• Targets include Tropical Soda Apple (Solanum
  viarum), Water-hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes),
  Brazilian Peppertree (Schinus terebenthifolius)
• Literature review to identify promising species
• Field surveys in South America
• Safety and effectiveness of control agent
• Climate modeling to match sources to target
  populations
• Introduction of bio-control agents to quarantine
  sites in US for further testing

27

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• Identify possible bio-control agents
• Example USDA ARS project South American
  Biological Control Agents to Suppress Invasive
  Pests in the U.S. began Nov 8 2005
• Targets include Tropical Soda Apple (Solanum
  viarum), Water-hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes),
  Brazilian Peppertree (Schinus terebenthifolius)
• Literature review to identify promising species
• Field surveys in South America
• Safety and effectiveness of control agent
• Climate modeling to match sources to target
  populations
• Introduction of bio-control agents to quarantine
  sites in US for further testing
• Progress have IDd several agents and host
  species lists for each invasive plant.
  Prioritization of agents next priority. Import
  and testing in US projected for 2007-2008.

28

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• Identify possible bio-control agents
• Rear the bio-control agent
• Laboratory rearing
• Easier, more cost effective, less mortality, more
  insects?
• Not hardened to environmental conditions, lower
  success in releases

29

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• Identify possible bio-control agents
• Rear the bio-control agent
• Laboratory rearing
• Easier, more cost effective, less mortality, more
  insects?
• Not hardened to environmental conditions, lower
  success in releases
• Field rearing
• More difficult, more expensive, fewer insects
• Site selection is important (high quality stand
  of target plant)

30

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• Identify possible bio-control agents
• Rear the bio-control agent
• Laboratory rearing
• Easier, more cost effective, less mortality, more
  insects?
• Not hardened to environmental conditions, lower
  success in releases
• Field rearing
• More difficult, more expensive, fewer insects
• Site selection is important (high quality stand
  of target plant)
• quality probably outweighs quantity in
  bio-control releases

31

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• Identify possible bio-control agents
• Rear the bio-control agent
• Release the biocontrol agent

32

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• Identify possible bio-control agents
• Rear the bio-control agent
• Release the biocontrol agent
• Only about 60 of released agents become
  established (Crawley 1989).

33

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• Identify possible bio-control agents
• Rear the bio-control agent
• Release the biocontrol agent
• Only about 60 of released agents become
  established (Crawley 1989)
• Success affected by climate, size of release,
  number and timing of releases, predators, weather
  conditions
• Improve success by releasing field-reared agents,
  matching climate, selecting release site
  carefully (high density of target plants, few
  predators)

34

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• Identify possible bio-control agents
• Rear the bio-control agent
• Release the biocontrol agent
• Only about 60 of released agents become
  established (Crawley 1989)
• Success affected by climate, size of release,
  number and timing of releases, predators, weather
  conditions
• Improve success by releasing field-reared agents,
  matching climate, selecting release site
  carefully (high density of target plants, few
  predators)
• Caged releases VS open field releases

35

• Management
• Control

• Biological methods How to implement?
• Identify appropriate target weeds
• Identify possible bio-control agents
• Rear the bio-control agent
• Release the biocontrol agent
• Only about 60 of released agents become
  established (Crawley 1989)
• Success affected by climate, size of release,
  number and timing of releases, predators, weather
  conditions
• Improve success by releasing field-reared agents,
  matching climate, selecting release site
  carefully (high density of target plants, few
  predators)
• Caged releases VS open field releases
• e.g. Kirby et al 2000 released 80 beetles in
  1989, 1000 beetles in 1990. Open release,
  colonization was successful.

36
Biological control in CA success rates and
references
37
Biological control in CA contd
38

• Management
• Control

• Underlying socioeconomic issues
• Introductions
• Many (most) NIS introduced intentionally

39

• Management
• Control

• Underlying socioeconomic issues
• Introductions
• Many (most) NIS introduced intentionally
• Concern about control (esp biological control)
• Other economic benefits of invasives e.g.
  Purple Loosestrife makes good honey!

40

• Management
• Control

• Underlying socioeconomic issues
• Introductions
• Public sentiment

Southwest Willow flycatcher Endangered species
Nests in Tamarisk (nest success lower in
Tamarisk Than in native vegetation but Still a
concern)
41

• Management
• Control

• Underlying socioeconomic issues
• Introductions
• Public sentiment
• Fear of non-native species
• IUCN prohibits release of NIS (non-indigenous
  species) in natural areas this would mean no
  biological control
• Concern about non-target effects

42

• Management
• Control

• Underlying socioeconomic issues
• Introductions
• Public sentiment
• Fear of non-native species
• IUCN prohibits release of NIS (non-indigenous
  species) in natural areas this would mean no
  biological control
• Concern about non-target effects

43

• Management
• Eradication

Feasibility
44

• Management
• Eradication

• Feasibility
• Biological characteristics habitat specific
  poor dispersal

45

• Management
• Eradication

• Feasibility
• Biological characteristics habitat specific
  poor dispersal
• Sufficient resources allocated Eradicate AND
  restore

46

• Management
• Eradication

• Feasibility
• Biological characteristics habitat specific
  poor dispersal
• Sufficient resources allocated Eradicate AND
  restore
• Widespread support

47

• Management
• Eradication

• Feasibility
• Biological characteristics habitat specific
  poor dispersal
• Sufficient resources allocated Eradicate AND
  restore
• Widespread support
• Prevent re-invasion

48

• Management
• Eradication

• Feasibility
• Biological characteristics habitat specific
  poor dispersal
• Sufficient resources allocated Eradicate AND
  restore
• Widespread support
• Prevent re-invasion
• Low populations

49

• Management
• Eradication

• Feasibility
• Biological characteristics habitat specific
  poor dispersal
• Sufficient resources allocated Eradicate AND
  restore
• Widespread support
• Prevent re-invasion
• Low populations