Contribution of weed biocontrol to

restoration efforts in natural areas

Hariet L. Hinz, CABI Switzerland
KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE
 Basis of this talk
Van Driesche, R.G., et al. (2010) Classical biological control for the
protection of natural ecosystems. Biological Control 54: S2-S33.

Van Driesche, R.G. and R. C. Reardon (2017) Supressing over-

abundant invasive plants and insects in natural areas by use of
their specialized natural enemies. FHTET-2017-02
(and references therein)

Denslow, J.S. and C.M. D‘Antonio (2005)

After biocontrol: Assessing indirect effects
of insect releases. Biological Control 35:
307-318

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 A bit of history…
1880-1975:
• most biocontrol projects targeted towards economic
species (agriculture, forestry etc.)
• But: some had spill-over benefits (e.g. native grassland
plants)

1975-present:
• gradually projects initiated which targeted ecological
species (e.g. Orthezia scale) or a combination of economic
and ecological species (e.g purple loosestrife)

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Situations where biocontrol may contribute to
invasive species control in natural areas and
thereby to restoration

• Control is necessary over large, possibly remote areas

• Other control methods are not feasible and/or must be
repeated (not economically viable)
• Other control methods are considered too hazardous (e.g.
along waterbodies)
• High densities of the invasive species are not solely driven by
anthropogenic disturbances/disruptions («driver» vs.
«passenger»)

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

Biocontrol can act in two ways, direct and indirect

BC agent +
-
TARGET - Desired
+
species
- -
+ Other +
undesirable
species - Ecosystem services
- (e.g. productivity,
livestock health,
wild-life value, water)
Direct effects
Indirect effects
From Denslow & D‘Antonio (2005)

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Two different goals

• Economic invasive species

mostly (only) requires direct effects of biocontrol on the
invasive species (e.g. reduction in density)

• Environmental/ecological invasive species

Require indirect effects to take place via e.g. reduction
of weed density

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Results from Van Driesche et al. 2010
• 70 cases of classical biological control «for the
protection of nature»
 of the 21 insect targets:
- 81% provided benefits to protection of biodiversity
- 48% protected products harvested from natural systems
- 5% preserved ecosystem services

 of the 49 weed targets:

- 98% provided benefits to protection of biodiversity
- 47% protected products from natural systems
- 25% preserved ecosystem services

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Example - saltcedar
• Saltcedar (Tamarix spp.) complex of semi-deciduous shrubs
originating from Eurasia
• Introduced to U.S. for erosion control and as shade tree
• Invasive in wetlands and riparian ecosystems of the arid
and semi-arid parts of the western U.S.
• By mid 1990s, 1 mio ha invaded

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Example - saltcedar
• Saltcedar tolerates degraded conditions and outcompetes
native riparian woodlands
• High evapotranspiration rates deplete groundwater
• Leads to soil salinization
• Increases sedimentation and erosion
• Promotes wildfires with increased burn intensity
• Offers poorer quality habitat to wildlife

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Example - saltcedar
• A defoliating leaf beetle (Diorhabda spp.) was released,
later recognized to be a complex of four different species
• Repeated defoliation led to 60% or more mortality
 > 2,500 acre-feet groundwater conserved annually
 increase in native or desired vegetation
 increase in diversity and abundance of native reptiles
and amphibians

Insert pic of
larvae

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Example - saltcedar
At sites with moderate native woody plant abundance that are
not excessively degraded, recovery may take place without
major intervention
But where this is not the case, a restoration strategy is
necessary to re-introduce native trees
At other sites, environmentally damaging processes that
facilited conversion from native woodlands to saltcedar stands
(e.g. water diversion), must be mitigated along with saltcedar
suppression for recovery to take place

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

Picture: Tom Dudley
 Example - saltcedar
• Saltcedar displaces native willows, nesting habitat of the
endangered southwestern willow flycatcher
• However, the flycatcher also started using saltcedar as a
nesting place after reduction of native willows
• Due to this conflict of interest, the biocontrol project was
stopped

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

Picture: G. Drus Empidonax traillii extimus
 Example – leafy spurge
• Leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) is a perennial herbaceous
plant of Eurasian origin
• It is toxic to cattle and wildlife, who will rarely eat it and
avoid infested pastures
• In wildland it reduces native species richness and cover
• By 1997, 2 mio ha infested across 35 states

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Example – leafy spurge
• Five flea beetle species in the genus
Aphthona were released, especially two
of which were very successful
• Reduction in stem densities of up to 90%
• Estimated to result in total annual direct
benefit (including range- and wildland)
of $US 19.1 mio.
• Cost-benefit ratio of 9-56

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Example – leafy spurge
• Biocontrol alone worked very well in 1/3 of all infested areas
• Greatest effectiveness in control was observed where
different control methods were integrated, f.ex. beetles with
herbicides or with sheep or goat grazing

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Summary

• Biological control can substantially contribute to

the restoration of native biodiversity and
ecosystem services
• Depending on site conditions it may even be the
sole method necessary
• However, usually an Integrated Ecosystem
Management approach is needed

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 Recommendations
• Biological control should be used more often in
attempts to restore invaded natural ecosystems
• Projects need to actively include conservation
biologists and landmanagers
• Goals of the project and expectations in respect to
biocontrol need to be clearly defined
• Anticipate potential conflicts of interest

KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE

 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