Successes We May Not Have Had: A Retrospective Analysis of Selected Weed Biological Control Agents in the United States

被引:71
作者
Hinz, Hariet L. [1 ]
Schwarzlaender, Mark [2 ]
Gassmann, Andre [1 ]
Bourchier, Robert S. [3 ]
机构
[1] CABI Switzerland, CH-2800 Delemont, Switzerland
[2] Univ Idaho, Dept Plant Soil & Entomol Sci, Moscow, ID 83844 USA
[3] Agr & Agri Food Canada, Lethbridge, AB, Canada
关键词
Biological control of weeds; host range; non-target attack; risk assessment; introduction policy; TROPICAL SODA APPLE; FIELD HOST-SPECIFICITY; GRATIANA-BOLIVIANA COLEOPTERA; GALERUCELLA-CALMARIENSIS L; LYTHRUM-SALICARIA L; SOLANUM-VIARUM; BIOCONTROL AGENT; DALMATIAN TOADFLAX; PURPLE-LOOSESTRIFE; MECINUS-JANTHINUS;
D O I
10.1614/IPSM-D-13-00095.1
中图分类号
Q94 [植物学];
学科分类号
071001 ;
摘要
In this paper, we describe five successful classical biological weed control agents released in the United States. For each of the five arthropod species, we compared data from prerelease studies that experimentally predicted the agent's host range with data collected postrelease. In general, experimental host range data accurately predicted or overestimated risks to nontarget plants. We compare the five cases with insects recently denied for introduction in the United States and conclude that none of the discussed agents would likely be approved if they were petitioned today. Three agents would be rejected because they potentially could attack economic plants, and two because of potential attack on threatened or endangered plants. All five biocontrol agents have contributed significantly to the successful management of major weeds with no or minimal environmental risk. We believe that the United States may miss opportunities for sustainable and environmentally benign management of weeds using biological control if the regulatory framework only considers the risks of agents as potential plant pests and treats any host-range data regarding economic or threatened and endangered species as a binary decision (i.e., mandates rejection if there is any chance of feeding or development). As a way forward we propose the following: (1) the addition of risk and benefit analyses at the habitat level with a clear ranking of decision-making criteria as part of the U.S. Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Technical Advisory Group's evaluation process of biocontrol agents; (2) recognition of the primacy of realized host range data for potential agents that considers the insect's host selection behavior instead of emphasizing fundamental host range data during release evaluations, and (3) development of formalized postrelease monitoring of target and nontarget species as part of the release permit. These recommendations may initially be advanced through reassessment of current policies but may in the longer term require the implementation of dedicated biocontrol legislation.
引用
收藏
页码:565 / 579
页数:15
相关论文
共 99 条
[1]   Piecing together the "new" Plantaginaceae [J].
Albach, DC ;
Meudt, HM ;
Oxelman, B .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BOTANY, 2005, 92 (02) :297-315
[2]  
Andres L. A., 1985, Proceedings of the VI International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds., P235
[3]  
[Anonymous], BIOL CONTROL INVASIV, DOI DOI 10.2985/015.082.0303
[4]  
[Anonymous], 1958, P 10 INT C ENT
[5]  
[Anonymous], 1991, BIOL CONTROL NATURAL
[6]  
Baker J. L., 2004, Proceedings of the XI International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds, Canberra, Australia, 27 April - 2 May, 2003, P247
[7]   Environmental safety of biological control: Policy and practice in New Zealand [J].
Barratt, BIP ;
Moeed, A .
BIOLOGICAL CONTROL, 2005, 35 (03) :247-252
[8]  
Blossey B, 2001, NAT AREA J, V21, P368
[9]   HOST-SPECIFICITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL-IMPACT OF 2 LEAF-BEETLES (GALERUCELLA-CALMARIENSIS AND G-PUSILLA) FOR BIOLOGICAL-CONTROL OF PURPLE-LOOSESTRIFE (LYTHRUM-SALICARIA) [J].
BLOSSEY, B ;
SCHROEDER, D ;
HIGHT, SD ;
MALECKI, RA .
WEED SCIENCE, 1994, 42 (01) :134-140
[10]   Distribution of field bindweed and hedge bindweed in the USA [J].
Boldt, PE ;
Rosenthal, SS ;
Srinivasan, R .
JOURNAL OF PRODUCTION AGRICULTURE, 1998, 11 (03) :377-381