An Alternative Perspective for the Theory of Biological Control
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Population Dynamics and the Paradox of Biological Control
2.1. Local versus Regional Persistence
2.2. Transient versus Equilibrium Dynamics
3. Invasion Biology and the Theory of Biological Control
3.1. Dynamics of Natural Enemy Establishment
3.2. Dynamics of Natural Enemy Impact
4. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Heimpel, G.E.; Mills, N.J. Biological Control: Ecology and Applications; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Cock, M.J.; Murphy, S.T.; Kairo, M.T.; Thompson, E.; Murphy, R.J.; Francis, A.W. Trends in the classical biological control of insect pests by insects: An update of the BIOCAT database. BioControl 2016, 61, 349–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schwarzländer, M.; Hinz, H.L.; Winston, R.L.; Day, M.D. Biological control of weeds: An analysis of introductions, rates of establishment and estimates of success, worldwide. BioControl 2018, 63, 319–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Caltagirone, L.E.; Doutt, R.L. The history of the vedalia beetle importation to California and its impact on the development of biological control. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 1989, 34, 11–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Herren, H.R.; Neuenschwander, P. Biological control of cassava pests in Africa. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 1991, 36, 2572–2583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suckling, M.D. Benefits from biological control of weeds in New Zealand range from negligible to massive: A retrospective analysis. Biol. Control 2013, 66, 27–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hawkins, B.A.; Cornell, H.V. Theoretical Approaches to Biological Control; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1999. [Google Scholar]
- Murdoch, W.W.; Briggs, C.J.; Nisbet, R.M. Consumer-Resource Dynamics; Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- McEvoy, P.B. Theoretical contributions to biological control success. BioControl 2018, 63, 87–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hassell, M.P. The Spatial and Temporal Dynamics of Host-Parasitoid Interactions; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Barlow, N.D. Models in biological control: A field guide. In Theoretical Approaches to Biological Control; Hawkins, B.A., Cornell, H.V., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1999; pp. 43–68. [Google Scholar]
- Zalucki, M.P.; Van Klinken, R.D. Predicting population dynamics of weed biological control agents: Science or gazing into crystal balls? Aust. J. Entomol. 2006, 45, 331–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buckley, Y.M. Is modelling population dynamics useful for anything other than keeping a researcher busy? In Proceedings of the XII International Symposium for Biological Control of Weeds, La Grande Motte, France, 22–27 April 2007; Julien, M.H., Sforza, R., Bon, M.C., Evans, H.C., Hatcher, P.E., Hinz, H.L., Rector, B.G., Eds.; CABI Publishing: Wallingford, UK, 2008; pp. 3–6. [Google Scholar]
- Shea, K.; Kelly, D. Estimating biological control agent impact with matrix models: Carduus nutans in New Zealand. Ecol. Appl. 1998, 8, 824–832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buckley, Y.M.; Rees, M.; Sheppard, A.W.; Smyth, M.J. Stable coexistence of an invasive plant and biocontrol agent: A parameterized coupled plant-herbivore model. J. Appl. Ecol. 2005, 42, 70–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Briggs, C.J. Host-parasitoid interactions. In The Princeton Guide to Ecology; Levin, S.A., Ed.; Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA, 2009; pp. 213–219. [Google Scholar]
- Halpern, S.L.; Underwood, N. Approaches for testing herbivore effects on plant population dynamics. J. Appl. Ecol. 2006, 43, 922–929. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Briggs, C.J.; Hoopes, M.F. Stabilizing effects in spatial parasitoid-host and predator-prey models: A review. Theor. Pop. Biol. 2004, 65, 299–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luck, R.F. Evaluation of natural enemies for biological control: A behavioral approach. Trends Ecol. Evol. 1990, 5, 196–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Getz, W.M.; Mills, N.J. Host-parasitoid coexistence and egg-limited encounter rates. Am. Nat. 1996, 148, 333–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Murdoch, W.W.; Briggs, C.J.; Swarbrick, S. Host suppression and stability in a parasitoid-host system: Experimental demonstration. Science 2005, 309, 610–613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Murdoch, W.W.; Chesson, J.; Chesson, P.L. Biological control in theory and practice. Am. Nat. 1985, 125, 344–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kean, J.M.; Barlow, N.D. Can host-parasitoid metapopulations explain successful biological control? Ecology 2000, 81, 2188–2197. [Google Scholar]
- Mills, N.J.; Heimpel, G.E. Could increased understanding of foraging behavior help to predict the success of biological control? Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 2018, 27, 26–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mills, N.J. Factors influencing top-down control of insect pest populations in biological control systems. Basic Appl. Ecol. 2001, 2, 323–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kidd, D.; Amarasekare, P. The role of transient dynamics in biological pest control: Insights from a host–parasitoid community. J. Anim. Ecol. 2012, 81, 47–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Abram, P.K.; Moffat, C.E. Rethinking biological control programs as planned invasions. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 2018, 27, 91–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Blackburn, T.M.; Pyšek, P.; Bacher, S.; Carlton, J.T.; Duncan, R.P.; Jarošík, V.; Wilson, J.R.U.; Richardson, D.M. A proposed unified framework for biological invasions. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2011, 26, 333–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Schoener, T.W. The newest synthesis: Understanding the interplay of evolutionary and ecological dynamics. Science 2011, 331, 426–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fauvergue, X.; Vercken, E.; Malausa, T.; Hufbauer, R.A. The biology of small, introduced populations, with special reference to biological control. Evol. Appl. 2012, 5, 424–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Elkinton, J.S. Population ecology. In Encyclopedia of Insects, 2nd ed.; Resh, V.H., Cardé, R.T., Eds.; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 2009; pp. 826–837. [Google Scholar]
- Estoup, A.; Ravigne, V.; Hufbauer, R.; Vitalis, R.; Gautier, M.; Facon, B. Is there a genetic paradox of biological invasion? Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2016, 47, 51–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Duncan, R.P. How propagule size and environmental suitability jointly determine establishment success: A test using dung beetle introductions. Biol. Invasions 2016, 18, 985–996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goodsman, D.W.; Lewis, M.A. The minimum founding population in dispersing organisms subject to strong Allee effects. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2016, 7, 1100–1109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Blackburn, T.M.; Lockwood, J.L.; Cassey, P. The influence of numbers on invasion success. Mol. Ecol. 2015, 24, 1942–1953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Cassey, P.; Delean, S.; Lockwood, J.L.; Sadowski, J.S.; Blackburn, T.M. Dissecting the null model for biological invasions: A meta-analysis of the propagule pressure effect. PLoS Biol. 2018, 16, e2005987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rossinelli, S.; Bacher, S. Higher establishment success in specialized parasitoids: Support for the existence of trade-offs in the evolution of specialization. Funct. Ecol. 2015, 29, 277–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Duncan, R.P.; Blackburn, T.M.; Rossinelli, S.; Bacher, S. Quantifying invasion risk: The relationship between establishment probability and founding population size. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2014, 5, 1255–1263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Memmott, J.; Craze, P.G.; Harman, H.M.; Syrett, P.; Fowler, S.V. The effect of propagule size on the invasion of an alien insect. J. Anim. Ecol. 2005, 74, 50–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cassey, P.; Prowse, T.A.; Blackburn, T.M. A population model for predicting the successful establishment of introduced bird species. Oecologia 2014, 175, 417–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Grevstad, F.S. Factors influencing the chance of population establishment: Implications for release strategies in biological control. Ecol. Appl. 1999, 9, 1439–1447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koontz, M.J.; Oldfather, M.F.; Melbourne, B.A.; Hufbauer, R.A. Parsing propagule pressure: Number, not size, of introductions drives colonization success in a novel environment. Ecol. Evol. 2018, 8, 8043–8054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Grevstad, F.S.; Coombs, E.M.; McEvoy, P.B. Revisiting release strategies in biological control of weeds: Are we using enough releases? In Proceedings of the XIII International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds, Waikoloa, HI, USA, 11–16 September 2011; pp. 368–376. [Google Scholar]
- Szucs, M.; Melbourne, B.A.; Tuff, T.; Hufbauer, R.A. The roles of demography and genetics in the early stages of colonization. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 2014, 281, 20141073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Vahsen, M.L.; Shea, K.; Hovis, C.L.; Teller, B.J.; Hufbauer, R.A. Prior adaptation, diversity, and introduction frequency mediate the positive relationship between propagule pressure and the initial success of founding populations. Biol. Invasions 2018, 20, 2451–2459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Avila, G.A.; Charles, J.G. Modelling the potential geographic distribution of Trissolcus japonicus: A biological control agent of the brown marmorated stink bug, Halyomorpha halys. BioControl 2018, 63, 505–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scott, J.K.; Yeoh, P.B.; Michael, P.J. Methods to select areas to survey for biological control agents: An example based on growth in relation to temperature and distribution of the weed Conyza bonariensis. Biol. Control 2016, 97, 21–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Myers, J.H.; Sarfraz, R.M. Impacts of insect herbivores on plant populations. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2017, 62, 207–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Tomasetto, F.; Tylianakis, J.M.; Reale, M.; Wratten, S.; Goldson, S.L. Intensified agriculture favors evolved resistance to biological control. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2017, 114, 3885–3890. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Paynter, Q.; Overton, J.M.; Hill, R.L.; Bellgard, S.E.; Dawson, M.I. Plant traits predict the success of weed biocontrol. J. Appl. Ecol. 2012, 49, 1140–1148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fagan, W.F.; Lewis, M.A.; Neubert, M.G.; van den Driessche, P. Invasion theory and biological control. Ecol. Lett. 2002, 5, 148–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Seastedt, T.R. Biological control of invasive plant species: A reassessment for the Anthropocene. New Phytol. 2015, 205, 490–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mills, N.J. Selecting effective parasitoids for biological control introductions: Codling moth as a case study. Biol. Control 2005, 34, 274–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shea, K.; Jongejans, E.; Skarpaas, O.; Kelly, D.; Sheppard, A.W. Optimal management strategies to control local population growth or population spread may not be the same. Ecol. Appl. 2010, 20, 1148–1161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Dauer, J.T.; McEvoy, P.B.; van Sickle, J. Controlling a plant invader by targeted disruption of its life cycle. J. Appl. Ecol. 2012, 49, 322–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Crone, E.E.; Menges, E.S.; Ellis, M.M.; Bell, T.; Bierzychudek, P.; Ehrlén, J.; Kaye, T.N.; Knight, T.M.; Lesica, P.; Morris, W.F.; et al. How do plant ecologists use matrix population models? Ecol. Lett. 2011, 14, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Dixon, A.F.; Dixon, A.E. Insect Predator-Prey Dynamics: Ladybird Beetles and Biological Control; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Mills, N.J. Accounting for differential success in the biological control of homopteran and lepidopteran pests. N. Z. J. Ecol. 2006, 30, 61–72. [Google Scholar]
- Russell, F.L.; Louda, S.M. Phenological synchrony affects interaction strength of an exotic weevil with Platte thistle, a native host plant. Oecologia 2004, 139, 525–534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Welch, K.D.; Harwood, J.D. Temporal dynamics of natural enemy–pest interactions in a changing environment. Biol. Control 2014, 75, 18–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miller-Rushing, A.J.; Høye, T.T.; Inouye, D.W.; Post, E. The effects of phenological mismatches on demography. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 2010, 365, 3177–3186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Kharouba, H.M.; Ehrlén, J.; Gelman, A.; Bolmgren, K.; Allen, J.M.; Travers, S.E.; Wolkovich, E.M. Global shifts in the phenological synchrony of species interactions over recent decades. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2018, 115, 5211–5216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Thackeray, S.J.; Henrys, P.A.; Hemming, D.; Bell, J.R.; Botham, M.S.; Burthe, S.; Helaouet, P.; Johns, D.G.; Jones, I.D.; Leech, D.I.; et al. Phenological sensitivity to climate across taxa and trophic levels. Nature 2016, 535, 241–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Renner, S.S.; Zohner, C.M. Climate change and phenological mismatch in trophic interactions among plants, insects, and vertebrates. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2018, 49, 165–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Asch, M.; Visser, M.E. Phenology of forest caterpillars and their host trees: The importance of synchrony. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2007, 52, 37–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jeffs, C.T.; Lewis, O.T. Effects of climate warming on host–parasitoid interactions. Ecol. Entomol. 2013, 38, 209–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Godfray, H.C.; Hassell, M.P.; Holt, R.D. The population dynamic consequences of phenological asynchrony between parasitoids and their hosts. J. Anim. Ecol. 1994, 63, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Revilla, T.A.; Encinas-Viso, F.; Loreau, M. (A bit) earlier or later is always better: Phenological shifts in consumer-resource interactions. Theor. Ecol. 2014, 7, 149–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mills, N.J. Biological control: The need for realistic models and experimental approaches to parasitoid introductions. In Parasitoid Population Biology; Hochberg, M.E., Ives, A.R., Eds.; Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA, 2000; pp. 217–234. [Google Scholar]
© 2018 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Mills, N.J. An Alternative Perspective for the Theory of Biological Control. Insects 2018, 9, 131. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects9040131
Mills NJ. An Alternative Perspective for the Theory of Biological Control. Insects. 2018; 9(4):131. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects9040131
Chicago/Turabian StyleMills, Nicholas J. 2018. "An Alternative Perspective for the Theory of Biological Control" Insects 9, no. 4: 131. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects9040131