Predictable risk to native plants in weed biological control

Abstract. Data on field host use of 112 insects, 3 fungi, 1 mite, and 1 nematode established for biological control of weeds in Hawaii, the continental United States, and the Caribbean indicate that the risk to native flora can be judged reliably before introduction. Virtually all risk is borne by native plant species that are closely related to target weeds. Fifteen species of insects introduced for biological control use 41 native plant species; 36 of which are congeneric with target weeds, while 4 others belong to two closely allied genera. Only 1 of 117 established biological organisms uses a native plant unrelated to the target weed. Thus the elements of protection for the native flora are the selection of weed targets that have few or no native congeners and the introduction of biological control organisms with suitably narrow diets.

[1]  John W. Beardsley,et al.  A Review of Biological Control Introductions in Hawaii: 1890 to 1985 , 1988 .

[2]  D. Strong,et al.  Biological Control of Invading Species--Risk and Reform , 2000, Science.

[3]  M. Julien,et al.  Biological Control of Weeds: A World Catalogue of Agents and Their Target Weeds , 1992 .

[4]  R. Pemberton,et al.  Host Utilization of Native Cirsium Thistles (Asteraceae) by the Introduced Weevil Rhinocyllus conicus (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) in California , 1987 .

[5]  T. McAvoy,et al.  DISPERSAL OF TRICHOSIROCALUS HORRIDUS (PANZER) (COLEOPTERA: CURCULIONIDAE) IN SOUTHWEST VIRGINIA , 1987 .

[6]  G. Poinar.  Observations on Nutgrass Insects in Hawaii with Notes on the Host Range of Bactra truculenta Meyrick and Athesapeuta cyperi Marshall , 1964 .

[7]  Derek M. Johnson,et al.  Host specificity of Cactoblastis cactorum (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae), an exotic Opuntia-feeding moth, in Florida , 1996 .

[8]  J. Linsley.  ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF CLASSICAL BIOLOGICAL CONTROL I , 1991 .

[9]  J. Marohasy.  Host shifts in biological weed control: Real problems, semantic difficulties or poor science? , 1996 .

[10]  N. Rees.  Impact of Rhinocyllus conicus on Thistles in Southwestern Montana , 1977 .

[11]  Elizabeth A. Kellogg,et al.  An ordinal classification for the families of flowering plants , 1998 .

[12]  D. Onstad,et al.  Risks of Host Range Expansion by Parasites of Insects Population ecology can help us estimate the risks that biological control agents pose to nontarget species , 1996 .

[13]  J. H. Frank.  HOW RISKY IS BIOLOGICAL CONTROL? COMMENT , 1998 .

[14]  Daniel Simberloff,et al.  Ecological Effects of an Insect Introduced for the Biological Control of Weeds , 1997 .

[15]  J. Diehl,et al.  Impact of the cinnabar moth (Tyria jacobaeae) on Senecio triangularis, a non-target native plant in Oregon. , 1990 .

[16]  D. Greathead,et al.  Occurrence of Teleonemia scrupulosa on Sesamum indicum Linn. in Uganda , 1967, Nature.

[17]  J. Lockwood,et al.  Environmental issues involved in biological control of rangeland grasshoppers (Orthoptera: Acrididae) with exotic agents. , 1993 .

[18]  W. Kauffman,et al.  Selection Criteria and Ecological Consequences of Importing Natural Enemies , 1992 .

[19]  R. Carruthers,et al.  Perspective on the use of exotic natural enemies for biological control of pest grasshoppers (Orthoptera: Acrididae) , 1993 .

[20]  B. A. Hawkins,et al.  The colonization of native phytophagous insects in North America by exotic parasitoids , 1997, Oecologia.

[21]  R. Pemberton.  The Potential of Biological Control for the Suppression of Invasive Weeds of Southern Environments , 1996 .

[22]  Matthew J.W. Cock,et al.  A Review of biological control of pests in the commonwealth caribbean and Bermuda up to 1982 , 1985 .

[23]  J. Lockwood,et al.  Benefits and costs of controlling rangeland grasshoppers (Orthoptera: Acrididae) with exotic organisms: search for a null hypothesis and regulatory compromise , 1993 .

[24]  D. Strong.  Fear No Weevil? , 1997, Science.

[25]  K. Harley,et al.  The phytophagous insects on lantana in brazil and their potential for biological control in Australia , 1983 .

[26]  R. Pemberton.  Cactoblastis cactorum (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) in the United States: An Immigrant Biological Control Agent or an Introduction of the Nursery Industry? , 1995 .

[27]  F. Howarth.  Environmental Impacts of Classical Biological Control , 1991 .

[28]  P. McEvoy.  Host Specificity and Biological Pest Control How well is research on host specificity addressing the potential risks of biological control , 1996 .

[29]  R. Pemberton.  Native weeds as candidates for biological control research , 1985 .

[30]  R. D. Goeden,et al.  Phytophagous Insect Faunas of the Two Most Common Native Cirsium Thistles, C. californicum and C. proteanum, in Southern California , 1986 .

[31]  R. Pemberton.  Native plant considerations in the biological control of leafy spurge , 1984 .