Classical weed biocontrol: a lost case

or the only way forward?

Hariet L. Hinz, CABI Switzerland

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Classical biological control of exotic
invasive weeds

….is the deliberate release of specialist natural

enemies (insects, mites, fungal pathogens) from
the weed’s native range to reduce its
abundance and/or spread in its introduced
range below an ecological or economic
threshold.

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Not to be confused with….
Cane toads in Australia
Grass carp in North America

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Based on 5th edition of
Julien’s Catalog’

Deliberate releases through 2012

• 1,555 intentional releases
• 468 biological control agents
• for 175 target weeds
• in 48 plant families
• in 90 countries
https://www.ibiocontrol.org/catalog

Winston et al. (2014) Biological control of weeds: a world catalogue of agents and their target weeds. USDA Forest
Service, Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team, Morgantown, WV, USA
Schwarzländer et al. (2018) Biological control of weeds: an analysis of introductions, rates of establishment and
estimates of success, worldwide. BioControl 63: 319-331
Hinz et al. (2019) How safe is weed biological control? A global review of direct non-target attack. The Quarterly
Review of Biology (in press)

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Number of new weed biological control agent
species released per decade

Papers on non-target
150 attack by Rhinocyllus
Australia conicus on native thistles

120 North America

South Africa Lawsuits filed against
90 Hawaii USDA-APHIS
(Diorhabda on
New Zealand
St. John’s wort saltcedar)
60

Lantana Opuntia
30

Only 2010-12
0
-1900 1900s 1910s 1920s 1930s 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Non-target
attack

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Three ‘eras’ of weed biocontrol

Until 1960: mostly starvation tests on important crop species

1961-90: increase in testing plants closely related to the

target weed to determine the acutal host range of the agent

1991-2008: increasing inclusion of species native to the

introduced range due to changing socio-economic values

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 25

Non-target attack of agent

% of agent species
20 14 / 77

species released over time 28 / 198

with NTA
15
18 / 182
10
Of 457 agent species intentionally
released until 2008, 60 (13.1%) 5

attacked non-target species in the 0

field
25
Non-target attack decreased from

% of releases with NTA

20
18.2% in early releases to 9.9%
35 / 237
despite an increase in the number of 15

agents released 10 59 / 749

28 / 531
5
 Safety testing improved
0
and/or stricter regulations

8
60

00
-9
19

61

-2
til

91
19
un

19
KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE
Different categories of non-target attack (NTA)

Collateral NTA: after mass

outbreaks on plants unrelated to the
target; transient and localized
Roses Galerucella spp.

Mogulones crucifer
Spillover NTA: on plants closely
related to the target weed, on
which the biocontrol agent can
develop to a certain extent;
depends on presence of target Hackelia
weed micrantha

Cirsium Rhinocyllus
Sustained NTA: non-target plant pitcheri conicus
can act as an alternative host for
the agent
 severe effects possible

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Three cases of negative population level effects recorded
worldwide (0.7% of intentionally released agents)
Rhinocyllus
conicus

1. Cirsium
pitcheri

1960s Cirsium canescens

2.
Larinus carlinae

1950s

3. Opuntia spinosissima

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

Cactoblastis cactorum
 Impact on
target weed

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

Establishment rates
● Of all releases made through 2012, 63.2% led to establishment
● Of the 468 biocontrol agent species introduced, 70.9% established in
at least one instance

100 80

Percent releases established

Percent releases established

80
60
60
40
40
20
20

0 0
0 s s s s s s s s s s s
90 990 910 920 930 940 950 960 970 980 990 000

n
h ca

ut rib ca
ia
d
al a

a
ew e ii

Eu ica
H ica
So Am lia

N Oc wa

Am a
Ze ani
an

si
As
a
1

So Ca Afri
ut eri

h be

ra
er
r
- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 th tr

Af
a
or Aus
N

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

Impact of biological control releases by region
● Half of established releases (54%) and agent species released (55%)
caused medium, variable or heavy impact
● About ¼ of releases (24%) and agents (27%) caused heavy impact
• Across countries/regions, 66% of weeds targeted experienced some
level of control

p a c t
6 0

A fr ic a

im
5 0

h e a v y
O c e a n ia
w it h 4 0 N o r th A m e r ic a

3 0 S . A fr ic a

A s ia
N o . r e le a s e s

A u s tr a lia
2 0
C a r ib b e a n

1 0 H a w a ii

N e w Z e a la n d
0

0 5 0 1 0 0 1 5 0 2 0 0 2 5 0

N o . r e le a s e s e s ta b lis h e d

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE
 Predictability

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Plant traits & biocontrol impact
Major weed in Reproduction Ecosystem Proportion reduction
native range in weed density
No Asexual Aquatic/wetland 0.93
No Sexual Aquatic/wetland 0.77
No Asexual Terrestrial 0.80
No Sexual Terrestrial 0.50
Yes Asexual Aquatic/wetland 0.69
Yes Sexual Aquatic/wetland 0.36
Yes Asexual Terrestrial 0.41
Yes Sexual Terrestrial 0.15

Paynter et al. (2012) J. Appl. Ecol., 49, 1140-1148

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Plant traits & biocontrol impact
Major weed in Reproduction Ecosystem Proportion reduction
native range in weed density
No Asexual Aquatic/wetland 0.93
No Sexual Aquatic/wetland 0.77
No Asexual Terrestrial 0.80
No Sexual Terrestrial 0.50
Yes Asexual Aquatic/wetland 0.69
Yes Sexual Aquatic/wetland 0.36
Yes Asexual Terrestrial 0.41
Yes Sexual Terrestrial 0.15

Paynter et al. (2012) J. Appl. Ecol., 49, 1140-1148

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Plant traits & biocontrol impact
Major weed in Reproduction Ecosystem Proportion reduction
native range in weed density
No Asexual Aquatic/wetland 0.93
No Sexual Aquatic/wetland 0.77
No Asexual Terrestrial 0.80
No Sexual Terrestrial 0.50
Yes Asexual Aquatic/wetland 0.69
Yes Sexual Aquatic/wetland 0.36
Yes Asexual Terrestrial 0.41
Yes Sexual Terrestrial 0.15

Paynter et al. (2012) J. Appl. Ecol., 49, 1140-1148

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Example: no major weed in native range,
asexual/sexual, aquatic
Red water fern
(Azolla filiculoides)

Ficksberg, South Africa, upper

farm dam prior to biocontrol;
January 1996

Catfish have broken through the

mat to get air and could not get
back

Courtesy of Martin Hill, Rhodes University, South Africa

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Stenopelmus rufinasus

Courtesy of Martin Hill, Rhodes University, South Africa

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE
 Example: no major weed in native range,
asexual/sexual, aquatic
Red water fern
(Azolla filiculoides)

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

Successful biocontrol of water fern Salvinia molesta in
Asia

Before

Cyrtobagous salviniae

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE After

 Example: weed in native range, sexual, terrestrial
Common ragwort (Jacobaea vulgaris)

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Example: weed in native range, sexual, terrestrial
Common ragwort (Jacobaea vulgaris)

Longitarsus jacobaeae

McEvoy and Coombs

(1999)

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE
 Plant traits & biocontrol impact
Major weed in Reproduction Ecosystem Proportion reduction
native range in weed density
No Asexual Aquatic/wetland 0.93
No Sexual Aquatic/wetland 0.77
No Asexual Terrestrial 0.80
No Sexual Terrestrial 0.50
Yes Asexual Aquatic/wetland 0.69
Yes Sexual Aquatic/wetland 0.36
Yes Asexual Terrestrial 0.41
Yes Sexual Terrestrial 0.15

 System good at identifying easiest & hardest targets

 But: there is always the exception to the rule!
Paynter et al. (2012) J. Appl. Ecol., 49, 1140-1148

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Plant traits & biocontrol impact summary

Weed Importance
High Low
Predicted biocontrol
Best targets Intermediate target

High
impact

Intermediate Worst targets

Low

target

Biocontrol can succeed against weeds with worst combination of traits

Target prioritisation should vary according to predicted impact & weed
importance (to offset greater risk of failure by greater benefits of
success)
Paynter et al. (2012) J. Appl. Ecol., 49, 1140-1148

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Cost : Benefit

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Cost: Benefit ratios
• Costs for pre-release studies: approximately $ 1-2 Mio.

• Examples from North America:

• Knapweeds: 1 : 8 (USA), 1 : 140 (CAN)
• Leafy spurge: 1 : 9-56
• Tansy ragwort: 1 : 13
• Purple loosetrife: 1 : 27
• Puncturevine: 1 : 54
• St. John’s wort: 1: 4000

Culliney (2005) Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences, 24:131–150

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Number of new weed biological control agent
species released per decade

150
Australia
120 North America
South Africa
90 Hawaii
New Zealand
60

30

Only 2010-12
0
-1900 1900s 1910s 1920s 1930s 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Perception

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Classical biological control of
invasive weeds

???

Fighting fire with fire

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Perception of weed biocontrol safety
● Increases with knowledge about weed biocontrol
● Independent of education level or gender (not shown)
● No differences between researchers, practitioners, policy makers

Level of expertise on weed biocontrol Courtesy of Dick

Shaw (CABI UK)

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Perception of weed biocontrol safety
• Knowledge of biocontrol success examples improves perception of
biocontrol safety , regardless of knowledge of failures

Courtesy of Dick
Level of knowledge of weed biocontrol examples Shaw (CABI UK)

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 The appreciation and acceptance of
weed biocontrol increases with

• level of knowledge on weed biocontrol

• knowledge of successful examples

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Summary

• Weed biological control has become safer over time

• Two thirds of invasive weeds targeted for biocontrol
experience some level of control
• Success becomes more predictable
• When it works, weed biological control can deliver
spectacular returns on investment
• Weed biological control has no negative impact on
animal or human health

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Classical weed biocontrol:
a lost case or
the only way forward?

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Cases where weed biocontrol is
likely the only way forward
Where invasive weeds are:
• Already very widespread
• Resistant to most commonly used herbicides
• Occur in natural areas (especially along or in
waterbodies)
• Occur in remote, difficult to access areas
• Occur on extensively managed land

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 «No other form of weed management
offers such lasting control, with so little
deleterious environmental impact, at so
little cost.»

Crawley (1989)

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Challenges
• Regulations
• Funding
• Misconceptions
• Conflicts of interest
• Receiving the publicity it deserves

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Take home messages

• Consider the facts

• Help to collect more data
• Work together

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Working together
behavioural ecologists
chemical ecologists
• Host-specificity testing:
molecular biologists

landmanagers
• Post-release monitoring: conservation biologists

landmanagers
• Integrating biocontrol: restoration biologists

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE
 ‫شكرا جزيال‬merci शुक्रिया zikomo
xie-xie obrigado
efharistó
ありがとう
thank
kiitos
urakoze
you
ke itumetse tak
gracias zikomo

dhanyawaad
asante
danke terima kasih

CABI is an international intergovernmental organisation, and we gratefully acknowledge

the core financial support from our member countries (and lead agencies) including:

Ministry of Agriculture and

Rural Affairs,
People’s Republic of China

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE