Selecting biological control agents
Selecting effective agents
What is success in biological control?
What the HSNO Act requires
Like the Resource Management Act 1991 [http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1991/0069/latest/DLM230265.html] before it, the HSNO Act [http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1996/0030/latest/DLM381222.html] is 'effects-based', enabling legislation. It requires applicants wishing to introduce a new biological control agent to comprehensively assess the probability and magnitude of both the adverse and beneficial effects that might flow from the introduction. The Act is not concerned with changes in the population dynamics, abundance or vigour of a weed or pest resulting from control per se but how those changes affect the pest status of the target. Applicants must focus on the effects of damage to the target rather than the intensity of that damage.
Defining success
Successful control occurs when the abundance or the vigour of the damaging
stage falls below a damage threshold (Greathead and Greathead 1992). Rather than
the effects of control, percent damage or parasitism of the damaging stage has
often been used to describe the impact of biological control agents even though
these measures have little relevance to damage threshold, and can sometimes be
misleading. For example, the braconid parasitoid Apanteles ruficrus Haliday
often kills over 90% of Mythimna separata (Walker) (Noctuidae) larvae in maize
crops (Hill 1977, but this level of larval parasitism does not appear to lower
the average population level of the pest. In fact, successful control is based
more on the reduction in average food consumption as a result of heavy rates of
larval parasitism, doubling the tolerance of the plant (Hill 1988). Similarly,
very high levels of seed predation by a biological control agent may have little
effect on the density of the target weed if the target species is not
seed-limited ( Understanding what is required of biological control should be an important
starting point for planning a biological control project, but rarely is. The
potential success of a biological control project can only be judged in the
context of other management strategies for the pest ( In most cases where success thresholds for arthropod pests are identified,
the research has been retrospective. For example, Barlow and Goldson (1993)
showed that the economic threshold for damage to lucerne by the weevil reduction
in the density of Sitona discoideus Gyllenhal was 60% of the pest's natural
equilibrium population, a level easily achieved by the parasitoid Microctonus
aethiopoides Loan. Setting better goals for biological control of both weeds and
pests would assist the EPA in evaluating potential benefits.
Barlow N.D. and Goldson S.L. (1993).
A modelling analysis of the successful biological control of Sitona discoideus (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) by Microctonus aethiopoides (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) in New Zealand.
Journal of Applied Ecology 30: 165-179
Briese D.T. (2006).
Can an a priori strategy be developed for biological control? The case for Onopordum spp. thistles in Australia.
Australian Journal of Entomology 45: 317-323
Greathead D.J. and Greathead A.H. (1992).
Biological control of insect pests by insect parasitoids and predators: the BIOCAT database.
Biocontrol News and Information 13: 61N-68N
Hill M.G. (1988).
Analysis of the biological control of Mythimna separata (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) by Apanteles ruficrus (Braconidae: Hymenoptera) in New Zealand.
Journal of Applied Ecology 25: 197-208
Hill R.L. (1977).
Parasite helps control armyworm.
New Zealand Journal of Agriculture 134: 21-23
Hill R.L. (2008).
Application to release from containment a beetle, Lema obscura F. (Chrysomelidae), for the biological control of the weed tradescantia (Tradescantia fluminensis).
http://www.ermanz.govt.nz/appfiles/execsumm/pdf/NOR07001-002.pdf
Standish R.J., Robertson A.W. and Williams P.A. (2001).
The impact of an invasive weed Tradescantia fluminensis on native forest regeneration.
Journal of Applied Ecology 38: 1253-1263
Wearing C.H. (1979).
Integrated control of apple pests in New Zealand 10. Population dynamics of codling moth in Nelson.
New Zealand Journal of Zoology 6: 165-199
Wearing C.H. and Charles J.G. (1989).
Cydia pomonella (L.), codling moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae).
Pp. 161-169 In: A review of biological control of insect pests and weeds in New Zealand 1874 to 1987, P.J. Cameron, R.L. Hill, J. Bain and W.P. Thomas (Ed.) CAB International Institute of Biological Control 10, CAB International, Wallingford, UK
Planning for success
References
Previous page
Introduction
Next page
For weed biocontrol