Differential host-finding abilities by a weed biocontrol insect create within-patch spatial refuges for nontarget plants

Differentiating spillover: an examination of cross-habitat movement in ecology spillover in ecology

Organisms that immigrate into a recipient habitat generate a movement pattern that affects local population dynamics and the environment. Spillover is the pattern of unidirectional movement from a donor habitat to a different, adjacent recipient habitat. However, ecological definitions are often generalized to include any cross-habitat movement, which limits within- and cross-discipline collaboration. To assess spillover nomenclature, we reviewed 337 studies within the agriculture, disease, fisheries and habitat fragmentation disciplines. Each study's definition of spillover and the methods used were analysed. We identified four descriptors (movement, habitat type and arrangement, and effect) used that differentiate spillover from other cross-habitat movement patterns (dispersal, foray loops and edge movement). Studies often define spillover as movement (45%) but rarely measure it as such (4%), particularly in disease and habitat fragmentation disciplines. Consequently, 98% of studies could not distinguish linear from returning movement out of a donor habitat, which can overestimate movement distance. Overall, few studies (12%) included methods that matched their own definition, revealing a distinct mismatch. Because theory shows that long-term impacts of the different movement patterns can vary, differentiating spillover from other movement patterns is necessary for effective long-term and inter-disciplinary management of organisms that use heterogeneous landscapes.

Host Range and Impact of Dichrorampha aeratana, the First Potential Biological Control Agent for Leucanthemum vulgare in North America and Australia

Simple Summary

Oxeye daisy, a Eurasian member of the daisy family, has become invasive in several parts of the world, including North America and Australia. We investigated whether a root-feeding moth found closely associated with oxeye daisy in Europe could be used as a biological control agent for the plant when weedy. We found that the moth could develop on 11 out of 74 plant species that we tested in laboratory conditions when it was given no choice of plants. When the moths were given a choice of food plants outdoors, we found its larvae only on the ornamentals Shasta daisy and creeping daisy. Larval feeding had no impact on the weight and number of flowers of Shasta daisy, but larval feeding and plant competition reduced both measurements for oxeye daisy. We conclude that it is safe to release the moth species because it will not affect the ornamental value of Shasta daisy or creeping daisy and because it is unlikely to harm any other economically important or native species. Based on the moth’s preference for oxeye daisy, and that we expect it to contribute to the suppression of the weed, we propose its field release in North America and Australia.

Abstract

We evaluated the potential of the European root-feeding moth Dichrorampha aeratana as a biological control agent for the invasive weed Leucanthemum vulgare (oxeye daisy) in North America and Australia. The taxonomic proximity of the ornamental Shasta daisy (Leucanthemum × superbum) to L. vulgare and its popularity in North America made finding sufficiently host-specific biological control agents a challenge. No-choice tests conducted with 74 non-target species revealed partial or complete larval development on 11 species. In multiple-choice oviposition and larval development tests that were conducted in field cages, larvae were found on five of these, however in multiple-choice tests conducted under open-field conditions, larvae were only found on the ornamentals Shasta daisy and creeping daisy (Mauranthemum paludosum). Larval feeding by D. aeratana had no measurable impact on Shasta daisy, but larval feeding and plant competition reduced the biomass and number of flower heads of L. vulgare. We conclude that D. aeratana is a suitable biological control agent because it will not affect the ornamental value of Shasta or creeping daisies and because it is unlikely to feed on any other economically important or native species. We also expect D. aeratana to contribute to the suppression of L. vulgare populations.

Nontarget herbivory by a weed biocontrol insect is limited to spillover, reducing the chance of population-level impacts

Insects approved for classical biocontrol of weeds are often capable of using close relatives of their target weed for feeding, oviposition, or larval development, with reduced preference and performance. When nontarget herbivory occurs and is suspected to reduce survival, growth, or fecundity of individual plants, and insects are capable of reproducing on their nontarget host, characterization of spatial and temporal patterns of the occurrence and intensity of herbivory is valuable for predicting potential population-level effects. Here, we perform a novel post-release manipulative field experiment with a root-feeding biocontrol weevil, Mogulones crucifer, released in Canada to control the rangeland weed Cynoglossum officinale, to test for its ability to establish on the nontarget plant Hackelia micrantha. After Cynoglossum, M. crucifer exhibits its highest preference for and performance on Hackelia spp. We released M. crucifer on Canadian rangeland sites with naturally occurring populations of H. micrantha growing interspersed with the target weed or in the near absence of the target weed. Adult weevil feeding on surrounding plants was monitored for three summers after release (years 0, 1, and 2), and, subsequently, subsets of plants were destructively sampled to determine M. crucifer oviposition levels. Additional oviposition and larval development data were obtained from seven non-experimental sites where weevils were released zero, three, or four years earlier. M. crucifer was not detected on experimental sites without C. officinale after two years, and nontarget herbivory was restricted to rare, low-level spillover. Visible evidence of adult herbivory (i.e., scars on shoots) was associated with oviposition in 90% of targets but only 30% of nontarget plants. We infer, through ecological refuge theory, that nontarget population-level impacts from M. crucifer spillover are unlikely because of temporal, spatial, and probabilistic refuges from herbivory, and make recommendations for monitoring and management of biocontrol systems with similar attributes, such as removing target plants around nontarget populations of interest. Because M. crucifer is among the least host-specific of the modern weed biocontrol agents, and H. micrantha is likely one of its most highly preferred nontargets, these conclusions are, arguably, generally applicable to other nontarget plants and biocontrol systems.