Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluating the post-release efficacy of invasive plant biocontrol by insects: a comprehensive approach

  • Forum Article
  • Published:
Arthropod-Plant Interactions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We propose a comprehensive program to evaluate the post-release phase of biocontrol programs that use insect herbivores to control invasive plant species. We argue that any release should be done in randomized release and non-release sites and should be followed up by well-replicated sampling and experimental protocols that evaluate the degree of success or failure. These follow-up studies should include landscape scale monitoring across relevant habitat gradients of (1) the abundance of the biocontrol agent, (2) the impact of the biocontrol agent on the target plant species, (3) the potential for non-target effects, and (4) the response of native species and communities to a reduction in the invasive species. We also argue that (5) experimental reductions of the biocontrol agent are required to eliminate the chance that the putative impact of the biocontrol agent is not confounded with other causes. Finally, we describe six scenarios, informed largely by a community ecology perspective, in which a biocontrol agent may decrease the abundance or vigor of the target plant species but not lead to successful control where native communities re-establish. We classify these failure scenarios as either direct or indirect effects of the invasive plant species: Native Source Limitation, Static Competitive Hierarchies, Novel Weapons, Trophic Shifts, Invasive Engineering and Associated Invasives. Overall, we argue that well replicated and landscape-scale post release monitoring programs are required not only to evaluate critically the degree of success and failure of biocontrol programs worldwide but also to provide insights into improving future biocontrol efforts.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adair RJ, Holtkamp RH (1999) Development of a pesticide exclusion technique for assessing the impact of biological control agents for Chrysanthemoides monilifera. Biocontrol Sci Technol 9:383–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Archer ME (1989) The wasps and bees (Hymenoptera: Aculeata) of Allerthorpe Common before and after coniferization. The Naturalist (Sheffield) 114:129–136

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnett AE, Louda SM (2002) Re-test of Rhinocyllus conicus host specificity, and the prediction of ecological risk in biological control. Biol Conserv 106:251–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bais HP, Vepachedu R, Gilroy S, Callaway RM, Vivanco JM (2003) Allelopathy and exotic plant invasion: from molecules and genes to species interactions. Science 301:1377–1380

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bever JD (2003) Soil community feedback and the coexistence of competitors: conceptual frameworks and empirical tests. New Phytol 157:465–473

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blossey B (1995) A comparison of various approaches for evaluating potential biological control agents using insects on Lythrum salicaria. Biol Control 5:113–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blossey B, Skinner L (2000) Design and importance of post-release monitoring. In: Spencer NR (ed) Proceedings of the X international symposium on biological control of weeds, July 4–14, 1999. Montana State University, Bozeman, Montana, pp 693–706

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown BJ, Mitchell RJ, Graham SA (2002) Competition for pollination between an invasive species (purple loosestrife) and a native congener. Ecology 83:2328–2336

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunker DE (2004) The application of competition theory to invaders and biological control: a test case with purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), broad-leaved cattail (Typha latifolia), and a leaf-feeding beetle (Galerucella calmariensis). Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Biological Sciences, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, 116 pp

  • Burnham KP, Anderson DR (1998) Model selection and inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. Springer-Verlag, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Bush GL (1969) Sympatric host race formation and speciation in frugivorous flies of genus Rhagoletis (Diptera, Tehpritidae). Evolution 23:237–251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler JL, Parker MS, Murphy JT (2006) Efficacy of flea beetle control of leafy spurge in Montana and South Dakota. Rangeland Ecol Manag 59:453–461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callaway RM, Aschehoug ET (2000) Invasive plants versus their new and old neighbors: A mechanism for exotic invasion. Science 290:521–523

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Callaway RM, Ridenour WM (2004). Novel weapons: invasive success and the evolution of increased competitive ability. Front Ecol Environ 2:436–443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callaway RM, DeLuca TH, Belliveau WM (1999) Biological-control herbivores may increase competitive ability of the noxious weed Centaurea maculosa. Ecology 80:1196–1201

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell CL, McCaffrey JP (1991) Population trends, seasonal phenology, and impact of Chrysolina quadrigemina, C. hyperici (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae), and Agrilus hyperici (Coleoptera, Buprestidae) associated with Hypericum perforatum in northern Idaho. Environ Entomol 20:303–315

    Google Scholar 

  • Carson WP, Root RB (2000) Herbivory and plant species coexistence: community regulation by an outbreaking phytophagous insect. Ecol Monogr 70:73–99

    Google Scholar 

  • Carson WP, Cronin JP, Long ZT (2004) A general rule for predicting when insects will have strong top-down effects on plant communities: on the relationships between insect outbreaks and host concentration. In: Weisser WW, Siemann E (eds) Insects and ecosystem functions. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp 193–212

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll SP, Boyd C (1992) Host race radiation in the soapberry bug—natural history with the history. Evolution 46:1052–1069

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chase JM, Leibold MA, Downing AL, Shurin JB (2000) The effects of productivity, herbivory, and plant species turnover in grassland food webs. Ecology 81:2485–2497

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen H, Chen Z, Zhou Y (2005) Rice water weevil (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) in mainland China: invasion, spread and control. Crop Prot 24:695–702

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark SE, Van Driesche RG, Sturdevant N, Kegley S (2001) Effect of root feeding insects on spotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa) stand density. Southwestern Entomol 26:129–135

    Google Scholar 

  • Corbin JD, D’Antonio CM (2004) Competition between native perennial and exotic annual grasses: implications for an historical invasion. Ecology 85:1273–1283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornett MW, Bauman PJ, Breyfogle DD (2006) Can we control leafy spurge? Adaptive management and the recovery of native vegetation. Ecol Restorat 24:145–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cory JS, Myers JH (2000) Direct and indirect ecological effects of biological control. Trends Ecol Evol 15:137–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crawley MJ (1989) Insect herbivores and plant population dynamics. Annu Rev Entomol 34:531–564

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crooks JA (2002) Characterizing ecosystem-level consequences of biological invasions: the role of ecosystem engineers. Oikos 97:153–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denslow JS, D’Antonio CM (2005) After biocontrol: assessing indirect effects of insect releases. Biol Control 35:307–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dhileepan K (2001) Effectiveness of introduced biocontrol insects on the weed Parthenium hysterophorus (Asteraceae) in Australia. Bull Entomol Res 91:167–176

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dhileepan K (2007) Biological control of Parthenium (Parthenium hysterophorus) in Australian rangeland translates to improved grass production. Weed Sci 55:497–501

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dhileepan K, Setter SD, McFadyen RE (2000) Impact of defoliation by the biocontrol agent Zygogramma bicolorata on the weed Parthenium hysterophorus in Australia. Biocontrol 45:501–512

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans JA, Landis DA (2007) Pre-release monitoring of Alliaria petiolata (garlic mustard) invasions and the impacts of extant natural enemies in southern Michigan forests. Biol Control 42:300–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fagan WF, Lewis MA, Neubert MG, van den Driessche P (2002) Invasion theory and biological control. Ecol Lett 5:148–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gelman A, Carlin JB, Stern HS, Rubin DB (2004) Bayesian data analysis, 2nd edn. Chapman and Hall

  • Ghazoul J (2002) Flowers at the front line of invasion? Ecol Entomol 27:638–640

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghazoul J (2004) Alien abduction: disruption of native plant-pollinator interactions by invasive species. Biotropica 36:156–164

    Google Scholar 

  • Goeden RD, Louda SM (1976) Biotic interference with insects imported for weed control. Annu Rev Entomol 21:325–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gould F (1979) Rapid host range evolution in a population of the phytophagous mite Tetranychus urticae Koch. Evolution 33:791–802

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grevstad FS (2006) Ten-year impacts of the biological control agents Galerucella pusilla and G. calmariensis (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) on purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) in Central New York State. Biol Control 39:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grodowitz MJ (1998) An active approach to the use of insect biological control for the management of non-native aquatic plants. J Aquat Plant Manag 36:57–61

    Google Scholar 

  • Grover JP (1994) Assembly rules for communities of nutrient-limited plants and specialist herbivores. Am Nat 143:258–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grover JP (1997) Resource competition. Chapman and Hall Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann JH, Moran VC (1998) The population dynamics of an introduced tree, Sesbania punicea, in South Africa, in response to long-term damage caused by different combinations of three species of biological control agents. Oecologia 114:343–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holt RD, Grover JP, Tilman D (1994) Simple rules for interspecific dominance in systems with exploitative and apparent competition. Am Nat 144:741–771

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt-Joshi TR, Root RB, Blossey B (2005) Disruption of weed biological control by an opportunistic mirid predator. Ecol Appl 15:861–870

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurlbert SH (1984) Pseudoreplication and the design of ecological field experiments. Ecol Monogr 54:187–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ireson JE, Davies JT, Friend DA, Holloway RJ, Chatterton WS, van Putten EI, McFadyen REC (2007) Weeds of pastures and field crops in Tasmania: economic impacts and biological control. Technical Series No.13, CRC for Australian Weed Management, Adelaide

  • Jones CG, Lawton JH, Shachak M (1994) Organisms as ecosystem engineers. Oikos 69:373–386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones CG, Lawton JH, Shachak M (1997) Ecosystem engineering by organisms: Why semantics matters. Trends Ecol Evol 12:275–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonsen ID, Bourchier RS, Roland J (2007) Influence of dispersal, stochasticity, and an Allee effect on the persistence of weed biocontrol introductions. Ecol Modell 203:521–526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Julien MH, Griffiths MW (eds) (1998) Biological control of weeds: a world catalogue of agents and their target weeds. CABI Publishing, Wallingford

    Google Scholar 

  • Klironomos JN (2002) Feedback with soil biota contributes to plant rarity and invasiveness in communities. Nature 417:67–70

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kok LT, McAvoy TJ, Mays WT (2004) Biological control of Carduus thistles in Virginia—a long-term perspective, three decades after the release of two exotic weevils. In: Cullen JM, Briese DT, Kriticos DJ, Lonsdale WM, Morin L, Scott JK (eds) Proceedings of the XI international symposium on biological control of weeds. CSIRO Entomology, Canberra, Australia, pp 554–559

    Google Scholar 

  • Kourtev PS, Ehrenfeld JG, Haggblom M (2002) Exotic plant species alter the microbial community structure and function in the soil. Ecology 83:3152–3166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landis DA, Sebolt DC, Haas MJ, Klepinger M (2003) Establishment and impact of Galerucella calmariensis L. (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) on Lythrum salicaria L. and associated plant communities in Michigan. Biol Control 28:78–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lau JA, Strauss SY (2005) Insect herbivores drive important indirect effects of exotic plants on native communities. Ecology 86:2990–2997

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lesica P, Hanna D (2004) Indirect effects of biological control on plant diversity vary across sites in Montana grasslands. Conserv Biol 18:444–454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindgren CJ (2003) Using 1-min scans and stem height data in a post-release monitoring strategy for Galerucella calmariensis (L.) (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) on purple loosestrife, Lythrum salicaria L. (Lythraceae), in Manitoba. Biol Control 27:201–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Long ZT, Mohler CL, Carson WP (2003) Extending the resource concentration hypothesis to plant communities: effects of litter and herbivores. Ecology 84:652–665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Louda SM, O’Brien CW (2002) Unexpected ecological effects of distributing the exotic weevil, Larinus planus (F.), for the biological control of Canada thistle. Conserv Biol 16:717–727

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Louda SM, Kendall D, Connor J, Simberloff D (1997) Ecological effects of an insect introduced for the biological control of weeds. Science 277:1088–1090

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Louda SM, Arnett AE, Rand TA, Russell FL (2003) Invasiveness of some biological control insects and adequacy of their ecological risk assessment and regulation. Conserv Biol 17:73–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McClay AS, Balciunas JK (2005) The role of pre-release efficacy assessment in selecting classical biological control agents for weeds—applying the Anna Karenina principle. Biol Control 35:197–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McConnachie AJ, Hill MP, Byrne MJ (2004) Field assessment of a frond-feeding weevil, a successful biological control agent of red waterfern, Azolla filiculoides, in southern Africa. Biol Control 29:326–331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McEvoy PB, Coombs EM (1999) Biological control of plant invaders: regional patterns, field experiments, and structured population models. Ecol Appl 9:387–401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McFadyen REC (1998) Biological control of weeds. Annu Rev Entomol 43:369–393

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McFadyen REC (2000) Successes in biological control of weeds. In: Spencer NR (ed) Proceedings of the X international symposium on biological control of weeds, July 4–14, 1999. Montana State University, Bozeman, Montana, pp 3–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Mico MA, Shay JM (2002) Effect of flea beetles (Aphthona nigriscutis) on prairie invaded by leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) in Manitoba. Great Plains Res 12:167–184

    Google Scholar 

  • Mummey DL, Rillig MC (2006) The invasive plant species Centaurea maculosa alters arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal communities in the field. Plant Soil 288:81–90

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Murdoch WW, Luck RF, Swarbrick SL, Walde S, Yu DS, Reeve JD (1995) Regulation of an insect population under biological control. Ecology 76:206–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker IM (2000) Invasion dynamics of Cytisus scoparius: a matrix model approach. Ecol Appl 10:726–743

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paynter Q (2005) Evaluating the impact of a biological control agent Carmenta mimosa on the woody wetland weed Mimosa pigra in Australia. J Appl Ecol 42:1054–1062

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson DE, Callaway RM (2003) Indirect effects of host-specific biological control agents. Trends Ecol Evol 18:456–461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson DE, Callaway RM (2005) Indirect nontarget effects of host-specific biological control agents: Implications for biological control. Biol Control 35:288–298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pemberton RW (2000) Predictable risk to native plants in weed biological control. Oecologia 125:489–494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pickart AJ, Miller LM, Duebendorfer TE (1998) Yellow bush lupin invasion in northern California coastal dunes I. Ecological impacts and manual restoration techniques. Restoration Ecol 6:59–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Power ME (1992) Top-down and bottom-up forces in food webs: do plants have primacy? Ecology 73:733–746

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pratt PD, Coombs EM, Croft BA (2003) Predation by phytoseiid mites on Tetranychus lintearius (Acari: Tetranychidae), an established weed biological control agent of gorse (Ulex europaeus). Biol Control 26:40–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ravit B, Ehrenfeld JG, Haggblom MM (2003) A comparison of sediment microbial communities associated with Phragmites australis and Spartina alterniflora in two brackish wetlands of New Jersey. Estuaries 26:465–474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ridenour WL, Callaway RM (2003) Root herbivores, pathogenic fungi, and competition between Centaurea maculosa and Festuca idahoensis. Plant Ecol 169:161–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts KJ, Anderson RC (2001) Effects of garlic mustard [Alliaria petiolata (Beib. Cavara and Grande)] extracts on plants and arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungi. Am Midl Nat 146:146–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roduner MA, Cuperus G, Mulder P, Stritzke J, Payton M (2003) Successful biological control of the musk thistle in Oklahoma using the musk thistle head weevil and the rosette weevil. Am Entomol 49:112–120

    Google Scholar 

  • Seabloom EW, Harpole WS, Reichman OJ, Tilman D (2003) Invasion, competitive dominance, and resource use by exotic and native California grassland species. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100:13384–13389

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Seastedt TR, Gregory N, Buckner D (2003) Effect of biocontrol insects on diffuse knapweed (Centaurea diffusa) in a Colorado grassland. Weed Sci 51:237–245

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shea K, Kelly D (1998) Estimating biocontrol agent impact with matrix models: Carduus nutans in New Zealand. Ecol Appl 8:824–832

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siemann E, Carson WP, Rogers WE, Weisser WW (2004) Reducing herbivory using insecticides. In: Weisser WW, Siemann E (eds) Insects and ecosystem functions. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp 303–327

    Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff D, Gibbons L (2004) Now you see them, now you don’t—population crashes of established introduced species. Biol Invas 6:161–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff D, Stiling P (1996) How risky is biological control? Ecology 77:1965–1974

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stinson KA, Campbell SA, Powell JR, Wolfe BE, Callaway RM, Thelen GC, Hallett SG, Prati D, Klironomos JN (2006) Invasive plant suppresses the growth of native tree seedlings by disrupting belowground mutualisms. PLoS Biol 4:727–731

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Story JM, Good WR, White LJ, Smith L (2000) Effects of the interaction of the biocontrol agent Agapeta zoegana L. (Lepidoptera: Cochylidae) and grass competition on spotted knapweed. Biol Control 17:182–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Story JM, Callan NW, Corn JG, White LJ (2006) Decline of spotted knapweed density at two sites in western Montana with large populations of the introduced root weevil, Cyphocleonus achates (Fahraeus). Biol Control 38:227–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Symstad AJ (2004) Secondary invasion following the reduction of Coronilla varia (Crownvetch) in Sand Prairie. Am Midl Nat 152:183–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Syrett P, Briese DT, Hoffmann JH (2000) Success in biological control of terrestrial weeds by arthropods. In: Gurr GM, Wratten SD (eds) Biological control: measures of success. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordecht, pp 189–230

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas MB, Willis AJ (1998) Biocontrol—Risky but necessary? Trends Ecol Evol 13:325–329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas MB, Reid AM (2007) Are exotic natural enemies an effective way of controlling invasive plants? Trends Ecol Evol 22:447–453

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tilman D (1982) Resource competition and community structure. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Heijden MGA, Klironomos JN, Ursic M, Moutoglis P, Streitwolf-Engel R Boller T, Wiemken A, Sanders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant biodiversity, ecosystem variability and productivity. Nature 396:69–72

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Putten WH, Kowalchuk GA, Brinkman EP, Doodeman GTA, Van der Kaaij RM, Kamp AFD, Menting FBJ, Veenendaal EM (2007) Soil feedback of exotic savanna grass relates to pathogen absence and mycorrhizal selectivity. Ecology 88:978–988

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vitousek PM, Walker LR, Whiteaker LD, Mueller-Dombois D, Matson PA (1987) Biological invasion by Myrica fava alters ecosystem development in Hawaii. Science 238:802–804

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler GS, Center TD (2001) Impact of the biological control agent Hydrellia pakistanae (Diptera: Ephydridae) on the submersed aquatic weed Hydrilla verticillata (Hydrocharitaceae). Biol Control 21:168–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams NM, Minckley RL, Silveira FA (2001) Variations in native bee faunas and its implications for detecting community changes. Conserv Ecol 5:7. Available at http://www.consecol.org/vol5/iss1/art7. Cited 29 Nov 2004

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Henry Stevens, Scott Stark, and two anonymous reviewers for comments and critiques of earlier drafts of this manuscript. This work was supported by the US Department of Agriculture, Weedy and Invasive Species Program and the Ecological Studies Program of the US National Science Foundation.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Daniel E. Bunker

    Present address: Department of Ecology, Evolution and Environmental Biology, Columbia University, New York, NY, 10027, USA

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biological Sciences, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, 15260, USA

    Walter P. Carson, Anthony J. Baumert, Daniel E. Bunker & Thomas H. Pendergast IV

  2. Department of Plant Biology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, 30605, USA

    Stephen M. Hovick

Authors
  1. Walter P. Carson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stephen M. Hovick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anthony J. Baumert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Daniel E. Bunker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Thomas H. Pendergast IV
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas H. Pendergast IV.

Additional information

Handling Editor: Heikki Hokkanen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Carson, W.P., Hovick, S.M., Baumert, A.J. et al. Evaluating the post-release efficacy of invasive plant biocontrol by insects: a comprehensive approach. Arthropod-Plant Interactions 2, 77–86 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11829-008-9036-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11829-008-9036-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation