Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Biological Control: Reducing the Impact of Invasive Weeds and Pests, or just Another Source of Alien Invaders?

  • Chapter
Biological Invasions in New Zealand

Part of the book series: Ecological Studies ((ECOLSTUD,volume 186))

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Barratt BIP, Evans AA, Ferguson CM, Barker GM, McNeill MR, Phillips CB (1997) Laboratory nontarget host range of the introduced parasitoids Microctonus aethiopoides and M. hyperodae (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) compared with field parasitism in New Zealand. Environ Entomol 26:694–702

    Google Scholar 

  • Barratt BIP, Goldson SL, Ferguson CM, Phillips CB, Hannah DJ (2000) Predicting the risk from biological control agent introductions: a New Zealand approach. In: Follett PA, Duan JJ (eds) Nontarget effects of biological control. Kluwer, Norwell, MA, pp 59–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Barron MC, Barlow ND, Wratten SD (2003) Non-target parasitism of the endemic New Zealand red admiral butterfly (Bassaris gonerilla) by the introduced biological control agent Pteromalus puparum. (Biol Control 27:329–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barton J, Webster R, Boow J, Ragiel K, Edenborough K, Whaley K (2004) Evaluating the flow-on effects of the biological control agents for mist flower (Ageratina riparia) on plant succession. In: Cullen JM (ed) Proc 11th Int Symp Biological Control of Weeds, 27 April–2 May 2003, Canberra, Australia. CSIRO Entomology, Canberra, pp 487–492

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett FD, Habeck DH (1992) Cactoblastis cactorum: a successful weed control agent in the Caribbean, now a pest in Florida? In: Delfosse ES, Scott RR (eds) Proc 8th Int Symp Biological Control of Weeds, 2–7 February 1992, Canterbury, New Zealand. DSIR/CSIRO, Melbourne, pp 21–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Berry JA (1998) The bethyline species (Hymenoptera: Bethylidae: Bethylinae) imported into New Zealand for biological control of pest leafrollers. NZ J Zool 25:329–333

    Google Scholar 

  • Berry JA (2005) Checklist of New Zealand Hymenoptera. www.landcareresearch.co.nz/research/biodiversity/invertebratesprog/hymenoptera/checklist_index.asp (March 2005)

    Google Scholar 

  • Booth RG, Cross AE, Fowler SV, Shaw RH (1995) The biology and taxonomy of Hyperaspis pantherina (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) and the classical biological control of its prey,Orthezia insignis (Homoptera: Ortheziidae). Bull Entomol Res 85:307–314

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron PJ (1989) Wiseana spp., porina (Lepidoptera: Hepialidae). In: Cameron PJ, Hill RL, Bain J, Thomas WP (eds) A review of biological control of invertebrate pests and weeds in New Zealand 1874 to 1987. CAB and DSIR, Oxon, UK, pp 39–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron PJ, Wigley PJ (1989) Costelytra zealandica (White), grass grub (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). In: Cameron PJ, Hill RL, Bain J, Thomas WP (eds) A review of biological control of invertebrate pests and weeds in New Zealand 1874 to 1987. CAB and DSIR, Oxon, UK, pp 9–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron PJ, Hill RL, Bain J, Thomas WP (1993) Analysis of importations for biological control of insect pests and weeds in New Zealand. Biocontrol Sci Technol 3:387–404

    Google Scholar 

  • Charles JG (1998) The settlement of fruit crop arthropod pests and their natural enemies in New Zealand: an historical guide to the future. Biocontrol News Info 19:47N–58N

    Google Scholar 

  • Charles JG, Allan DJ (2002) An ecological perspective to host-specificity testing of biocontrol agents. NZ Plant Protect 55:37–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Crosby TK (1989) Austrosimulium australense (Schiner), New Zealand black fly and Austrosimulium ungulatum Tonnoir, West Coast black fly (Diptera: Simuliidae). In: Cameron PJ, Hill RL, Bain J, Thomas WP (eds) A review of biological control of invertebrate pests and weeds in New Zealand 1874 to 1987. CAB and DSIR, Oxon, UK, pp 375–379

    Google Scholar 

  • DeBach P (1964) Biological control of insect pests and weeds. Chapman and Hall, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Donovan BJ, Havron A, Leathwick DM, Ishay JS (2002) Release of Sphecophaga orientalis Donovan (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae: Cryptinae) in New Zealand as a possible ‘new association’ biocontrol agent for the adventive social wasps Vespula germanica (F.) and Vespula vulgaris (L.) (Hymenoptera: Vespidae: Vespinae). NZ Entomol 25:17–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Dugdale JS (1988) Lepidoptera — annotated catalogue, and keys to family-group taxa. Fauna of New Zealand 14, DSIR, Wellington, New Zealand

    Google Scholar 

  • Emberson RM (2000) Endemic biodiversity, natural enemies, and the future of biological control. In: Spencer N, Nowierski R (eds) Proc 10th Int Symp Biological Control of Weeds, 4–14 July 1999, Montana State University, Bozeman, pp 875–880

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrell JA, Stufkens MW (1990) The impact of Aphidius rhopalosiphi (Hymenoptera: Aphidiidae) on populations of the rose grain aphid (Metopolophium dirhodum) (Hemiptera: Aphididae) on cereals in Canterbury, New Zealand. Bull Entomol Res 80:377–383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fowler SV (2000) Trivial and political reasons for the failure of classical biological control of weeds: a personal view. In: Spencer N, Nowierski R (eds) Proc 10th Int Symp Biological Control of Weeds, 4–14 July 1999, Montana State University, Bozeman, pp 169–172

    Google Scholar 

  • Fowler SV, Syrett P, Hill RL (2000) Success and safety in the biological control of environmental weeds in New Zealand. Austral Ecol 25:553–562

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fowler SV, Gourlay AH, Hill RL, Withers TM (2004) Safety in New Zealand weed biocontrol: a retrospective analysis of host specificity testing and the predictability of impacts on non-target plants. In: Cullen JM (ed) Proc 11th Int Symp Biological Control of Weeds, 27 April–2 May 2003, Canberra, Australia. CSIRO Entomology, Canberra, pp 265–270

    Google Scholar 

  • Funasaki GY, Lai P-Y, Nakahara LM, Beardsley JW, Ota AK (1998) A review of biological control introductions in Hawaii: 1890 to 1985. Proc Hawaiian Entomol Soc 28:105–160

    Google Scholar 

  • Futuyma DJ (2000) Potential evolution of host range in herbivorous insects. In:Van Driesche, RG, Heard T, McClay AS, Reardon R (eds) Host-specificity testing of exotic arthropod biological control agents: the biological basis for improvement in safety. USDA Forest Service Bull, Morgantown, West Virginia, pp 42–53

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldson SL, McNeill MR, Phillips CB, Proffitt JR (1992) Host specificity testing and suitability of the parasitoid Microctonus hyperodae (Hym.: Braconidae, Euphorinae) as a biological control agent of Listronotus bonariensis (Col.: Curculionidae) in New Zealand. Entomophaga 37:483–498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grundy TP (1989) An economic analysis of biological control of rose-grain aphid in New Zealand. Agribusiness and Economics Unit, Lincoln College, Canterbury, New Zealand

    Google Scholar 

  • Haines ML, Syrett P, Emberson RM, Withers TM, Fowler SV, Worner SP (2004) Ruling out a host range expansion as the cause of the unpredicted non-target attack of tagasaste (Chamaecytisus palmensis) by Bruchidius villosus. In: Cullen JM (ed) Proc 11th Int Symp Biological Control of Weeds, 27 April–2 May 2003, Canberra, Australia. CSIRO Entomology, Canberra, pp 271–276

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes LM (1999) A review of the biological control of weeds programme in the Canterbury Region, 1987–1999. Landcare Research Contract Rep LC9900/011, Landcare Research, Lincoln, New Zealand

    Google Scholar 

  • Henneman ML, Memmott J (2001) Infiltration of a Hawaiian community by introduced biological control agents. Science 293:1314–1316

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hill MG, Allan DJ (1989) Mythimna separata (Walker), cosmopolitan armyworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). In: Cameron PJ, Hill RL, Bain J, Thomas WP (eds) A review of biological control of invertebrate pests and weeds in New Zealand 1874 to 1987. CAB and DSIR, Oxon, UK, pp 107–109

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill RL, Wittenberg R, Gourlay AH (2001) Biology and host range of Phytomyza vitalbae and its establishment for the biological control of Clematis vitalba in New Zealand. Biocontrol Sci Technol 11:459–473

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoare RJB (2001) Adventive species of Lepidoptera recorded for the first time in New Zealand since 1988. NZ Entomol 24:23–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann JH (1995) Biological control of weeds: the way forward, a South African perspective. In: Stirton CH (ed) Weeds in a changing world. BCPC Symp Proc no 64. British Crop Protection Council, Brighton, pp 77–98

    Google Scholar 

  • Howarth FG (1983) Classical biocontrol: panacea or Pandora’s box? Proc Hawaiian Entomol Soc 24:239–244

    Google Scholar 

  • Howarth FG (1991) Environmental impacts of classical biological control. Annu Rev Entomol 36:485–509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Julien MH, Griffiths MW (comps) (1999) Biological control of weeds: a world catalogue of agents and their target weeds, 4th edn. CABI, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Keey G (2003) The changing world underfoot. Forest Bird 307:32–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuschel G (1969) The genus Catoptes Schonherr and two species oblitae of Fabricius from New Zealand. NZ J Sci 12:789–810

    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, Simberloff D, Boettner G, Connor J, Kendall D (1998) Insights from data on the nontarget effects of the flowerhead weevil. Biocontrol News Info 19:70N–72N

    Google Scholar 

  • Louda SM, Pemberton RW, Johnson MT, Follett PA (2003) Nontarget effects — the Achilles’ heel of biological control? Retrospective analyses to reduce risk associated with biocontrol introductions. Annu Rev Entomol 48:365–396

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Marohasy J (1996) Host shifts in biological weed control: real problems, semantic difficulties or poor science? Int J Pest Manage 42:71–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McGregor PG (2001) Biological control of ragwort: assessing the impact of ragwort flea beetle (Longitarsus jacobaeae (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae)). Landcare Research Contract Rep LC0102/019, Landcare Research, Lincoln, New Zealand

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller D (1925) Forest and timber insects of New Zealand. NZ State Forest Service Bull 2. Government Printer, Wellington, New Zealand

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller D (1970) Biological control of weeds in New Zealand 1927–48. New Zealand Department of Scientific and Industrial Research Info Ser 74. Government Printer, Wellington, New Zealand

    Google Scholar 

  • Munro VMW, Henderson IM (2002) Nontarget effect of entomophagous biocontrol: shared parasitism between native Lepidopteran parasitoids and the biocontrol agent Trigonospila brevifacies (Diptera: Tachinidae) in forest habitats. Environ Entomol 31:388–396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray TJ, Barratt BIP, Ferguson CM (2002) Field parasitism of Rhinocyllus conicus Froelich (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) by Microctonus aethiopoides Loan (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) in Otago and South Canterbury. NZ Plant Protect 55:263–266

    Google Scholar 

  • Paynter QE, Fowler SV, Gourlay AH, Haines ML, Harman HM, Hona SR, Peterson PG, Smith LA, Wilson-Davey JRA, Winks CJ, Withers TM (2004) Safety in New Zealand weed biocontrol: a nationwide survey for impacts on non-target plants. NZ Plant Protect 57:102–107

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sands DPA (1997) The’ safety’ of biological control agents: assessing their impact on beneficial and other non-target hosts. Mem Museum Victoria 56:611–615

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stufkens MW, Farrell JA (1989) Sitona discoideus Gyllenhal, sitona weevil (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). In: Cameron PJ, Hill RL, Bain J, Thomas WP (eds) A review of biological control of invertebrate pests and weeds in New Zealand 1874 to 1987. CAB and DSIR, Oxon, UK, pp 27–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Syrett P (1999) Broom beetle gets taste for Tagasaste. Biocontrol News Info 20:51N

    Google Scholar 

  • Syrett P, Grindell JM, Hayes LM, Winks CJ (1991) Distribution and establishment of two biological control agents for ragwort in New Zealand. In: Proc 44th New Zealand Weed and Pest Control Conf, New Zealand Plant Protection Society, 13–15 August 1991, Tauranga, New Zealand, pp 292–295

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas WP (1989) Epiphyas postvittana (Walker), lightbrown apple moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). In: Cameron PJ, Hill RL, Bain J, Thomas WP (eds) A review of biological control of invertebrate pests and weeds in New Zealand 1874–1987. CAB and DSIR, Oxon, UK, pp 187–195

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas MB, Casula P, Wilby A (2004) Biological control and indirect effects. Trends Ecol Evol 19:61

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thomson GM (1922) The naturalisation of animals and plants in New Zealand. Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Klinken RD, Edwards OR (2002) Is host-specificity of weed biological control agents likely to evolve rapidly following establishment? Ecol Lett 5:590–596

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Withers TM (2001) The colonisation of eucalypts in New Zealand by Australian insects. Austral Ecol 26:467–476

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Landcare Research, P.O. Box 69, Lincoln, 8152, New Zealand

    S. V. Fowler

  2. Forest Biosecurity and Protection, Ensis — a joint venture between SCION (the Forest Research Institue New Zealand Ltd) and CSIRO, 49 Sala Street, Private Bag 3020, Rotorua, New Zealand

    T. M. Withers

Authors
  1. S. V. Fowler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. T. M. Withers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Landcare Research, PO Box 69, Lincoln, 8152, New Zealand

    Robert B. Allen

  2. Landcare Research, Private Bag 1930, Dunedin, New Zealand

    William G. Lee

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Fowler, S.V., Withers, T.M. (2006). Biological Control: Reducing the Impact of Invasive Weeds and Pests, or just Another Source of Alien Invaders?. In: Allen, R.B., Lee, W.G. (eds) Biological Invasions in New Zealand. Ecological Studies, vol 186. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-30023-6_23

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation