Abstract
Man’s activities on this planet have given rise to a variety of problems— not the least of which stem from his intentional or accidental spread of plants which subsequently become “weeds.” In the United States the losses caused by alien and native weeds are believed to equal the combined losses from insects and diseases and to rank second only to those caused by soil erosion (Saunders et al., in King, 1966). For the decade ending in 1960, this meant an annual loss of $5.1 billion (U.S. Dept. of Agr., 1965). Cultural and chemical control practices currently are the main approaches to weed control. Both methods are aimed at removing unwanted plants and reducing real and suspected damage as quickly as possible, a short term approach requiring considerable annual expenditures of resources and energies, yet affording only temporary relief, not lasting weed control. The ever-increasing recognition given to weeds as pests and the concomittant increases in expenditures for their control, have focused attention on the need for effective, low-cost, and long-lasting alternative control methods. Biological control provides one such alternative. Although the natural mortality factors in the environment of a weed have long been considered of prime importance in limiting such a plant’s distribution and abundance, their practical use has not been exploited. Many of our introduced weeds are probably as abundant as they are primarily because the natural enemies that attack them in their native lands are not found in their new home areas. Thus, these natural control factors can be augmented through the classic biological control method of importing the enemies of such weeds. This approach has received little serious consideration by those currently charged with developing and instituting weed control programs.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Literature Cited
Andres, L. A., and G. W. Angalet. 1963. Notes on the ecology and host specificity of Microlarinus lareynii, and M. lypriformis (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) and the biological control of puncturevine, Tribulus terrestris. J. Econ. Entomol. 56: 333–340.
Anonymous. 1968. Weed Control. Principles of Plant and Animal Pest Control. Vol. 2. Publ. 1597, Nat. Acad. Sci., Wash., D. C. 471 pp.
Bess, H. A., and F. H. Haramoto. 1958. Biological control of pamakani Eupatorium adenophorum, in Hawaii by a tephritid gall fly, Procecidochares utilis. 1. The life history of the fly and its effectiveness in the control of the weed. Proc. X Intern. Congr. Entomol., Montreal (1956) 4: 543–548.
Cameron, E. 1935. A study of the natural control of ragwort (Senecio jacobaea L.). J. Ecol. 23: 265–322.
Davis, C. J. 1966. Progress report: Biological control status of noxious weed pests in Hawaii-1965-66. Hawaiian Dept. of Agr. 4 pp. (processed).
Davis, C. J., and N. L. H. Krauss. 1966. Recent introductions for biological control. Proc. Hawaiian Entomol. Soc. (1965) 19: 201–207.
Dodd, A. P. 1959. The biological control of prickly pear in Australia. Pp. 565–577. In Biogeography and Ecology in Australia (Monogr. Biol., Vol. VIII). Dr. W. Junk, Publ., The Hague, Netherlands.
Frick, K. E. 1969. Attempt to establish the ragwort seed fly in the United States. J. Econ. Entomol. 62: 1135–1138.
Frick, K. E. 1970. Ragwort flea beetle established for biological control of tansy ragwort in northern California. Calif. Agr. 24(4): 12–13.
Frick, K. E., and J. K. Holloway, 1964. Establishment of the cinnabar moth, Tyria jacobaeae, on tansy ragwort in the western United States. J. Econ. Entomol. 61: 499–501.
Fullaway, D. T. 1959. Biological control of lantana in Hawaii. Pp. 70–75. In Rept. Bd. Agr. and Forest., Hawaii, Bien. ending June 30, 1958.
Goeden, R. D., C. A. Fleschner, and D. W. Ricker. 1967. Biological control of prickly pear cacti on Santa Cruz Island, California. Hilgardia 38: 579–606.
Goeden, R. D., and D. W. Ricker. 1967. Geocoris pallens found to be predaceous on Microlarinus spp. introduced to California for the biological control of puncturevine, Tribulus terrestris. J. Econ. Entomol. 60: 726–729.
Greathead, D. J. 1967. A list of the more important weeds of East Africa. Unpublished mimeo. 7 pp.
Harley, K. L. S. 1969. The suitability of Octotoma scabripennis Guer. and Uroplata girardi Pic. (Col.: Chrysomelidae) for the control of Lantana (Verbenaceae) in Australia. Bull. Entomol. Res. 58: 835–843.
Harley, K. L. S., and R. K. Kunimoto. 1969. Assessment of the suitability of Plagiohammus spinipennis (Thorns.) (Col.: Cerambycidae) as an agent for control of weeds of the genus Lantana (Verbenaceae). I. Life history and capacity to damage L. camara in Hawaii. Bull. Entomol. Res. 58: 567–574.
Harris, P., and H. Zwolfer. 1968. Screening of phytophagous insects for biological control of weeds. Can. Entomol. 100: 295–303.
Hawaii Dept. of Agr. 1962. Noxious weeds of Hawaii. 89 pp. (processed).
Hawaii Dept. of Agr. 1963. Ann. Rept. 1962-63, Div. Plant Indust. Pp. 49–69.
Hawaii Dept. of Agr. 1965. Ann. Rept. 1964-65, Div. Plant Indust. Pp. 10–12, App. V: 39-52.
Hawaii Dept. of Agr. and Conservation. 1960. Ann. Rept. 1960, Div. Entomol. and Market. S-45.
Hawkes, R. B. 1968. The cinnabar moth, Tyria jacobaeae, for control of tansy ragwort. J. Econ. Entomol. 61: 499–501.
Hawkes, R. B., L. A. Andres, and W. H. Anderson. 1967. Release and progress of an introduced flea beetle, Agasicles n. sp. to control alligatorweed. J. Econ. Entomol. 60: 1476–1477.
Hickling, C. F. 1965. Biological control of aquatic vegetation. Pest Articles and News Summaries (C). 11: 237–244.
Holloway, J. K. 1964. Projects in biological control of weeds. Pp. 650–670. In Biological Control of Insect Pests and Weeds, P. DeBach (ed.). Reinhold Publ. Co., N. Y. 844 pp.
Holloway, J. K., and C.B. Huffaker. 1952. Insects to control a weed. Pp. 135–140. In Insects-The Yearbook of Agriculture, 1952. U.S. Govt. Printing Office.
Holm, L. G., L. W. Weldon, and R. D. Blackburn. 1969. Aquatic weeds. Science 166(3906): 699–709.
Huffaker, C. B. 1967. A comparison of the status of biological control of St. Johnswort in California and Australia. Mushi 39 (Suppl.): 51–73.
Huffaker, C. B., D. W. Ricker, and C. E. Kennett. 1961. Biological control of puncturevine with imported weevils. Calif. Agr. 15: 11–12.
Huffaker, C. B., and C. E. Kennett. 1959. A ten-year study of vegetational changes associated with biological control of Klamath weed. J. Range Management 12: 69–82.
Imms, A. D. 1931. Biological control. II. Noxious weeds. Trop. Agr. (Trinidad) 8: 124–127.
Ivannikov, A. I. 1969. A nematode controlling Acroptilon picris. Zashita Rasteniya, January. Pp. 54–55. (Trans. by C. C. Nikiforoff, U.S. Dept. Agr., Agr. Res. Ser.)
Johnson, E. 1932. The puncturevine in California. Calif. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 528: 1–42.
King, L. J. 1966. Weeds of the World, Biology and Control. Intersci. Publ. Inc., N. Y. 526 pp.
Krauss, N. L. H. 1962. Biological control investigations on lantana. Proc. Hawaiian Entomol. Soc. 18: 134–136.
May, Judson, and J. N. Roney. 1969. Arizona Cooperative Insect Survey. Rept. No. 33, Aug. 1969.
Mayton, E. L., E. V. Smith, and D. King. 1945. Nutgrass eradication studies. IV. Use of chickens and geese in the control of nutgrass, C. rotundus L. J. Amer. Soc. Agron. 37: 785–791.
Miller, D. 1940. Biological control of noxious weeds of New Zealand. Herb. Publ. Ser. Bull. 27: 153–157.
Oosthuizen, M. J. 1963. The biological control of Lantana camara L. in Natal. J. Entomol. Soc. South Africa 27: 3–16.
Perkins, R. C. L. 1903. Enemies of lantana. Hawaii Livestock Breeder’s Assoc, First Ann. Mtg. Proa, Nov. 17-18, 1902: 28–35.
Perkins, R. C. L. 1904. Later notes on lantana insects. Hawaii Livestock Breeder’s Assoc, Second Ann. Mtg. Proa, 1903: 58–61.
Perkins, R. C. L., and O. H. Swezey. 1924. The introduction into Hawaii of insects that attack Lantana. Hawaiian Sugar Planters’ Assoc, Entomol. Ser. Bull. 16: 1–53.
Seaman, D. E., and W. A. Porterfield. 1964. Control of aquatic weeds by the snail Marisa comuarietis. Weeds 12: 87–92.
Simmonds, F. J. 1967. The economics of biological control. J. Roy. Soc. Arts London 115(5135): 880–898.
Squires, V. R. 1969. Distribution and polymorphism of Tribulus terrestris sens. lat. in Australia. Victorian Naturalist: 86: 328–334.
U. S. Army. 1965. Expanded project for aquatic plant control. 89th Congress, 1st Sess., House Document No. 251. 145 pp.
U. S. Department of Agriculture. 1965. A survey of extent and cost of weed control and specific weed problems. Agr. Res. Serv., ARS 34-23-1, August. 78 pp.
Vogt, G. B. 1960. Exploration for natural enemies of alligatorweed and related plants in South America. Special Report PI-4. U.S. Dept. Agr., Agr. Res. Ser., Ent. Res. Div. Mimeo. 58 pp.
Vogt, G. B. 1961. Exploration for natural enemies of alligatorweed and related plants in South America. Special Report PI-5. U.S. Dept. Agr., Agr. Res. Ser., Ent. Res. Div. Mimeo. 50 pp.
Warren, R., and V. Freed. 1958. Tansy ragwort-a poisonous weed. Oregon State Coll. Ext. Bull. 717: 3–5.
Waterhouse, D. F. 1966. The entomological control of weeds in Australia. Mushi 39 (Suppl.): 109–118.
Weber, P. W. 1956. Recent introductions for biological control in Hawaii. Proc. Hawaiian Entomol. Soc. 16: 162–164.
Weldon, L. W. 1960. A summary review of investigations on alligatorweed and its control. U.S. Dept. Agr., Agr. Res. Ser. CR-33-60. 41 pp.
Wilson, L. W. 1969. Use of plant pathogens in weed control. Ann. Rev. Phytopathol. 7: 411–434.
Zeiger, C. F. 1967. Biological control of alligatorweed with Agasicles n. sp. in Florida. Hyacinth Control Jour. 6: 31–34.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1971 Plenum Press, New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Andres, L.A., Goeden, R.D. (1971). The Biological Control of Weeds by Introduced Natural Enemies. In: Huffaker, C.B. (eds) Biological Control. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-6531-4_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-6531-4_6
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4615-6533-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-6531-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive