Skip to main content
Log in

Assessing the biosecurity risk from pathogens and herbivores to indigenous plants: lessons from weed biological control

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Biological Invasions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Some potentially invasive herbivores/pathogens in their home range may attack plants originating from another geographic area. Methods are required to assess the risk these herbivores/pathogens pose to these plants in their indigenous ecosystems. The processes and criteria used by weed biological control researchers to assess the impact of potential biological control agents on a plant species in its non-native range provide a possible framework for assessing risks to indigenous plants. While there are similarities between these criteria such as the need for clear objectives, studies in the native range of the herbivore/pathogen, good knowledge of the ecology of the target plant and taxonomy of the plant and herbivore/pathogen, and modelling of the interaction between the two organisms, there are some important differences in approach. These include the need to consider the threat classification of the plant, the likely greater risk from polyphagous herbivores/pathogens than oligophagous or monophagous species, and the need to consider the impact of an additional natural enemy in conjunction with a suite of existing natural enemies. The costs of conducting a risk assessment of a herbivore/pathogen in another country that damages plants indigenous to another geographic area means that criteria will be needed for deciding which foreign herbivore/pathogen species should be assessed. These criteria could include the threat classification of the plant, the amount of damage to the particular plant organs affected, and the importance in key ecosystems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anonymous (2006) Biosecurity New Zealand risk analysis procedures, version 1. Ministry of Forestry and Agriculture Biosecurity New Zealand, Wellington, 103 p

  • Brasier CM (1996) New horizons in Dutch elm disease control. Report on Forest Research, 1996. Forestry Commission, HMSO, London, pp 20–28

  • Briese DT (2006) Can an a priori strategy be developed for biological control? The case of Onopordum spp. Thistles in Australia. Aust J Entom 45:317–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brockerhoff EG, Bain J, Kimberley M, Knízek M (2006) Interception frequency of exotic bark and ambrosia beetles (Coleoptera: Scolytinae) and relationship with establishment in New Zealand and worldwide. Can J For Res 36(2):289–298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crop Protection Compendium (2004) CD ROM edition. CAB International, Wallingford

    Google Scholar 

  • Dugdale JS (1988) Lepidoptera—annotated catalogue, and keys to family-group taxa. Fauna NZ 14:1–282

    Google Scholar 

  • Froud KJ, Charles JG, Allan DJ (1998) Tree pests: some recent arrivals in New Zealand. (poster abstract). In: Proceedings of New Zealand Plant Protection Conference vol 51, p 267

  • Germplasm Resources Information Network - (GRIN) [Online Database] (2007) USDA, ARS, National Genetic Resources Program. National Germplasm Resources Laboratory, Beltsville, Maryland.URL: www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/taxon.pl?14441 (24 October 2007)

  • Goeden RD, Fleschner CA, Ricker DW (1967) Biological control of prickly pear cacti on Santa Cruz Island, California. Hilgardia 38:579–606

    Google Scholar 

  • Goolsby JA, van Klinken RD, Palmer WA (2006) Maximising the contribution of native-range studies towards the identification and prioritisation of weed biocontrol agents. Aust J Entomol 45:276–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grevstad FS (1999) Experimental invasions using biological control introductions: the influence of release size on the chance of population establishment. Biol Invasions 1(4):313–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hitchmough R, Bull L, Cromarty P (comps) (2007) New Zealand threat classification system lists—2005. Department of Conservation, Wellington, 194 p

  • Holt RD (1977) Predation, apparent competition and the structure of prey communities. Theor Popul Biol 12:197–229

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hoy JM (1961) Eriococcus orariensis Hoy and other Coccoidea (Homoptera) associated with Leptospermum Forst. Species in New Zealand. Department of Scientific and Industrial Research (DSIR) Bulletin 141

  • IPPC (2005) Identification of risks and management of invasive alien species using the IPPC framework. In: Proceedings of workshop in Braunschweig, Germany 22–26 September 2003. International Plant Protection Convention Secretariat, FAO, Rome, Italy

  • Johnson DM, Stiling PD (1998) Distribution and dispersal of Cactoblastis cactorum (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae), an exotic Opuntia-feeding moth, in Florida. Florida Entomol 81:12–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Julien MH (1992) Biological control of weeds: a world catalogue of agents and their target weeds, 3rd edn. CAB International, Wallingford, p 186

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolesik P (1995) Asphondylia dodonaeae, a new species of Cecidomyiidae (Diptera) damaging leaves and branches of hop-bush, Dodonaea viscosa (Sapindaceae) in Australia. Trans Royal Soc South Aust 119(4):171–176

    Google Scholar 

  • Louda SM, Pemberton RW, Johnson MT, Follett PA (2003) Non-target effects: the Achilles heel of biological control? Retrospective analyses to reduce risk associated with biocontrol introductions. Ann Rev Entomol 48:365–396

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Louda SM, Rand TA, Arnett AE, McClay A, Shea K, McEachern AK (2005) Evaluation of ecological risk to populations of a threatened plant from an invasive biocontrol insect. Ecol Appl 15:234–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin NA (2008) Host plants of the potato/tomato psyllid: a cautionary tale. Weta 35:12–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Memmott J, Craze PG, Harmman HM, Syrett P (2005) The effect of propagule size on the invasion of an alien insect. J Animal Ecol 74:50–62

    Google Scholar 

  • Molloy J, Bell B, Clout M, de Lange P, Gibbs G, Given D, Norton D, Smith N, Stephens T (2002) Classifying species according to threat of extinction. A system for New Zealand. Threatened species occasional publication 22. 26 p

  • Morin L, Evans KJ, Sheppard AW (2006) Selection of pathogen agents in weed biological control: critical issues and peculiarities in relation to arthropod agents. Aust J Entomol 45:349–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris RJ, Lewis OT, Godfray HCJ (2004) Experimental evidence for apparent competition in a tropical forest food web. Nature (London) 428:310–313

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer WA, Pullen KR (1995) The phytophagous arthropods associated with Lantana camara, L. hirsuta, L. urticifolia and L. urticoides (Verbenaceae) in North America. Biol Control 5:54–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paynter Q, Martin N, Berry J, Hona S, Peterson P, Gourlay AH, Wilson-Davey J, Smith L, Winks C, Fowler SV (2008) Non-target impacts of Phytomyza vitalbae a biological control agent of the European weed Clematis vitalba in New Zealand. Biol Control 44:248–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peacock L, Worner SP (2008) Biological and ecological traits that assist establishment of alien invasive insects. NZ Plant Prot 61:1–7

    Google Scholar 

  • Pemberton RW (1985) Native weeds as candidates for biological control research. In: Delfosse ES (ed) Proceedings of the VI international symposium on biological control of weeds. Ottawa, Canada, Agriculture Canada, pp 869–877

  • Pemberton RW (2002) Selection of appropriate future target weeds for biological control In: Van Driesche R et al (eds) Biological control of invasive plants in the eastern United States. Morgantown WV, USDA Forest Service Publication FHTET-2002-04, pp 375–386

  • Plant-SyNZ database (2009) www.crop.cri.nz/home/plant-synz/index.php (Accessed February 2009)

  • Raghu S, van Klinken RD (2006) Refining the ecological basis for agent selection in weed biological control. Aust J Entomol 45:251–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raghu S, Wilson JR, Dhileepan K (2006) Refining the process of agent selection through understanding plant demography and plant response to herbivory. Aust J Entomol 45:308–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simmonds FJ, Bennett FD (1966) Biological control of Opuntia spp. by Cactoblastis cactorum in the Leeward Islands (West Indies). Entomophaga 11:183–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sumner DA (ed) (2003) Exotic pests and diseases: biology and economics for biosecurity. Iowa State Press, Ames. 265 pp

  • Sutherst RW (2003) Prediction of species geographical ranges. A critical comment on M.J. Samways, R. Osburn, H. Hastings and V. Hattingh (1999) Global climate change and accuracy of predictions of species geographical ranges: establishment of introduced ladybirds (Coccinellidae, Chilocorus spp.) worldwide. J Biogeography 26, 795–812. J Biogeography 30: 805–816

  • Syrett P (2001) Biological control of weeds on conservation land: priorities for the Department of Conservation. Landcare research contract report: LC0102/038. 29 p

  • Syrett P, Smith LA, Bourner TC, Fowler SV, Wilcox A (2000) A European pest to control a New Zealand weed: investigating the safety of heather beetle, Lochmaea suturalis (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) for biological control of heather, Calluna vulgaris. Bull Entomol R 90:169–178

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Valentine EW (1970) A list of the phytophagous hymenoptera in New Zealand. NZ Entomol 4(4):52–62

    Google Scholar 

  • van Epenhuijsen CW, Henderson RC, Carpenter A, Burge GK (2000) The rise and fall of manuka blight scale: a review of the distribution of Eriococcus orariensis (Hemiptera: Eriococcidae) in New Zealand. NZ J Entomol 233:67–70

    Google Scholar 

  • van Klinken RD, Raghu S (2006) A scientific approach to agent selection. Aust J Entomol 45:253–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waage JK, Mumford JD (2008) Agricultural biosecurity. Phil Trans R Soc B 363:863–876

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wallis RL (1955) Ecological studies on the potato psyllid as a pest of potatoes. Tech Bull US Dep Agric 1107:1–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Waloff N, Richards OW (1977) The effect of insect fauna on growth, mortality and natality of broom, Sarothamnus scoparius. J Appl Ecol 14:787–798

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wikipedia (2007) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chestnut_blight (20 November 2007)

  • Zalucki MP, van Klinken RD (2006) Predicting population dynamics of weed biological control agents: science or crystal balls? Aust J Entomol 45:331–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Rosa Henderson for information on manuka blight scale. Dr Shiroma Sathypala for information on the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries Biosecurity New Zealand risk assessment procedures. Barbara Barratt, John Kean, Bruce Chapman and two anonymous referees for helpful comments. This paper was part funded by the Foundation for Research, Science and Technology contract CO2X0501, Better Border Biosecurity.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicholas Martin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Martin, N., Paynter, Q. Assessing the biosecurity risk from pathogens and herbivores to indigenous plants: lessons from weed biological control. Biol Invasions 12, 3237–3248 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-010-9718-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-010-9718-7

Keywords

Navigation