Oecologia

, Volume 165, Issue 3, pp 605–616 | Cite as

Early impacts of biological control on canopy cover and water use of the invasive saltcedar tree (Tamarix spp.) in western Nevada, USA

  • Robert R. Pattison
  • Carla M. D’Antonio
  • Tom L. Dudley
  • Kip K. Allander
  • Benjamin Rice
Physiological ecology - Original Paper

Abstract

The success of biological control programs is rarely assessed beyond population level impacts on the target organism. The question of whether a biological control agent can either partially or completely restore ecosystem services independent of population level control is therefore still open to discussion. Using observational and experimental approaches, we investigated the ability of the saltcedar leaf beetle [Diorhabda carinulata (Brullé) (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae)] to reduce the water use of saltcedar trees (Tamarix ramosissima Ledeb.) in two sites (Humboldt and Walker Rivers) in Nevada, USA. At these sites D. carinulata defoliated the majority of trees within 25 and 9 km, respectively, of the release location within 3 years. At the Humboldt site, D. carinulata reduced the canopy cover of trees adjacent to the release location by >90%. At a location 4 km away during the first year of defoliation, D. carinulata reduced peak (August) stem water use by 50−70% and stand transpiration (July to late September) by 75% (P = 0.052). There was, however, no reduction in stem water use and stand transpiration during the second year of defoliation due to reduced beetle abundances at that location. At the Walker site, we measured stand evapotranspiration (ET) in the center of a large saltcedar stand and found that ET was highest immediately prior to D. carinulata arrival, dropped dramatically with defoliation, and remained low through the subsequent 2 years of the study. In contrast, near the perimeter of the stand, D. carinulata did not reduce sap flow, partly because of low rates of defoliation but also because of increased water use per unit leaf area in response to defoliation. Taken together, our results provide evidence that in the early stages of population expansion D. carinulata can lead to substantial declines in saltcedar water use. The extent of these declines varies spatially and temporally and is dependent on saltcedar compensatory responses along with D. carinulata population dynamics and patterns of dispersal.

Keywords

Defoliation Evapotranspiration Herbivory Sap flow 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Access to the field sites and logistical support were generously provided by the Brinkerhoff Ranch, Silver State Hunt Club and the Walker River Paiute Tribe. We thank A. Caires, M. Kernacker and N. Louden for field assistance and the staff of the USDA/ARS Exotic and Invasive Weed Research Unit–Reno, Nevada. Helpful comments on this manuscript were provided by J. Cleverly, M. Tumbusch and an anonymous reviewer. Experiments reported in this work comply with the current laws of the United States of America.

References

  1. Allander KK, Smith JL, Johnson MJ (2009) Evapotranspiration from the lower Walker River basin, west-central Nevada, water years 2005–07. US Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2009–5079. U.S. Geological Survey. Available at: http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2009/5079/
  2. Baker JM, van Bavel CHM (1987) Measurement of mass flow of water in the stems of herbaceous plants. Plant Cell Environ 10:777–782Google Scholar
  3. Bowen IS (1926) The ratio of heat losses by conduction and by evaporation from any water surface. Phys Rev 27:779–787CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brooks M, Dudley T, Drus G, Matchett J (2008) Reducing wildfire risk by integration of prescribed burning and biocontrol of Invasive Tamarisk (Tamarix spp.): U.S. Geological Survey, El Portal. Available at: http://www.werc.usgs.gov/ProductDetails.aspx?ID=3681
  5. Carson WP, Hovick SM, Baumert AJ, Bunker DE, Pendergast TH (2008) Evaluating the post-release efficacy of invasive plant biocontrol by insects: a comprehensive approach. Arthropod-Plant Interactions 2:77–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cleverly JR, Smith SD, Sala A, Devitt DA (1997) Invasive capacity of Tamarix ramosissima in a Mojave Desert floodplain: the role of drought. Oecologia 111:12–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cleverly JR, Dahm CN, Thibault JR, Gilroy DJ, Coonrod J (2002) Seasonal estimates of actual evapo-transpiration from Tamarix ramosissima stands using three-dimensional eddy covariance. J Arid Environ 52:181–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cleverly JR, Dahm CN, Thibault JR, McDonnell DE, Allred Coonrod JE (2006) Riparian ecohydrology: regulation of water flux from the ground to the atmosphere in the Middle Rio Grande, New Mexico. Hydrol Process 20:3207–3225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cunningham SA, Pullen KR, Colloff MJ (2009) Whole-tree sap flow is substantially diminished by leaf herbivory. Oecologia 158:633–640CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Dahm C, Cleverly J, Coonrod J, Thibault J, McDonnell J, Gilroy D (2002) Evapotranspiration at the land/water interface in a semi-arid drainage basin. Freshw Biol 47:831–843CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dennison PE, Nalger PL, Hultine KR, Glenn EP, Ehleringer JR (2009) Remote monitoring of tamarisk defoliation and evapotranspiration following Salt Cedar Leaf Beetle attack. Remote Sens Environ 113:1462–1472Google Scholar
  12. Denslow JS, D’Antonio CM (2005) After biocontrol: assessing indirect effects of insect releases. Biol Cont 35:307–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Devitt DA, Sala A, Smith SD, Cleverly J, Shaulis LK, Hammett R (1998) Bowen ratio estimates of evapo-transpiration for Tamarix ramosissima stands on the Virgin River in southern Nevada. Water Resour Res 34:2407–2414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dugas WA, Mayeux HS (1991) Evaporation from rangeland with and without honey mesquite. J Range Manag 44:161–170Google Scholar
  15. Geraci CC (2006) Remote sensing assessment of widespread saltcedar (Tamarix spp.) infestation and biological control in northwest Nevada. MSc thesis. University of North Dakota, Grand ForksGoogle Scholar
  16. Glenn E, Nagler P (2005) Comparative ecophysiology of saltcedar (Tamarix ramosissima) and native trees. J Arid Environ 61:419–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Horton JL, Kolb TE, Hart SC (2001) Responses of riparian trees to interannual variation in ground water depth in a semi-arid river basin. Plant Cell Environ 24:293–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hudgeons JL, Knutson AE, Heinz KM, DeLoach CJ, Dudley TL, Pattison RR, Kiniry JR (2007) Defoliation by introduced Diorhabda carinulata leaf beetles (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) reduces carbohydrate reserves and regrowth of Tamarix (Tamaricaceae). Biol Cont 43:213–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hultine KR, Belnap J, van Riper III, Ehleringer JR, Dennison PE, Lee ME, Nagler PL, Snyder KA, Uselman SM, West JB (2010a) Tamarisk biocontrol in the western United States: ecological and societal implications. Front Ecol Environ 8:467–474Google Scholar
  20. Hultine KR, Nagler PL, Morino K, Bush SE, Burtch KG, Dennison PE, Glenn EP, Ehleringer JR (2010b) Sap flux-scale transpiration by tamarisk (Tamarix spp.) before, during and after episodic defoliation by the saltcedar leaf beetle (Diorhabda carinulata). Agr Forest Meteorol 150:1467–1475Google Scholar
  21. Jensen ME (1974) Consumptive use of water and irrigation water requirements. American Society of Civil Engineers, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. Laczniak RJ, DeMeo GA, Reiner SR, Smith JL, Nylund WE (1999) Estimates of ground-water discharge as determined from measurements of evapotranspiration, Ash Meadows Area, Nye County, Nevada. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 99-4079. Geological Survey, Las VegasGoogle Scholar
  23. Lewis PA, Deloach CJ, Knutson AE, Tracy JL, Robbins TO (2003) Biology of Diorhabda carinulata deserticola (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae), an Asian leaf beetle for biological control of saltcedars (Tamarix spp.) in the United States. Biol Cont 27:101–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Longland WS, Dudley TL (2008) Effects of a biological control agent on the use of saltcedar habitat by passerine birds. Great Basin Birds 10:21–26Google Scholar
  25. Moore GW, Cleverly JR, Owens MK (2008) Nocturnal transpiration in riparian Tamarix thickets authenticated by sap flux, eddy covariance and leaf gas exchange measurements. Tree Physiol 28:521–528PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Moran VC, Hoffmann JH, Zimmermann HG (2005) Biological control of invasive alien plants in South Africa: necessity, circumspection, and success. Front Ecol Environ 3:71–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Morin L, Reid AM, Sims-Chilton NM, Buckley YM, Dhileepan K, Hastwell GT, Nordblom TL, Raghu S (2009) Review of approaches to evaluate the effectiveness of weed biological control agents. Biol Cont 51:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nagler PL, Scott RL, Westenburg C, Cleverly JR, Glenn EP, Huete AR (2005) Evapotranspiration on western US rivers estimated using the enhanced vegetation index from MODIS and data from eddy covariance and Bowen ratio flux towers. Remote Sens Environ 97:337–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pattison RR, D’Antonio CM, Dudley TL (2010) Biological control reduces growth, and alters water relations of the saltcedar tree (Tamarix spp.) in western Nevada, USA. J Arid Environ. doi: 10.1016/j.jaridenv.2010.11.006
  30. Penman HL (1948) Natural evaporation from open water, bare soil, and grass. Proc R Soc Lond Ser A Math Phys Sci 193:120–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sala A, Smith SD, Devitt DA (1996) Water use by Tamarix ramosissima and associated phreatophytes in a Mojave Desert floodplain. Ecol Appl 6:888–898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. SAS (2002) SAS/STAT user’s guide, version 9.1. SAS Institute, CaryGoogle Scholar
  33. Schäfer KVR, Clark KL, Skowronski N, Hamerlynck EP (2010) Impact of insect defoliation on forest carbon balance as assessed with a canopy assimilation model. Glob Change Biol 16:546–560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shafroth P, Cleverly JR, Dudley TL, Taylor J, Van Riper C, Weeks E, Stuart J (2005) Control of Tamarix in the western United States: implications for water salvage, wildlife use, and riparian restoration. Environ Manag 35:231–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. SigmaPlot (2002) SigmaPlot version 8.0. SPSS, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  36. Sogge M, Sferra S, Paxton E (2008) Tamarix as habitat for birds: implications for riparian restoration in the southwestern United States. Rest Ecol 16:146–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. SPSS (2003) SPSS, 2003–2004. SPSS, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  38. Synder KA, Williams DG (2003) Defoliation alters water uptake by deep and shallow roots of Prosopis velutina (Velvet Mesquite). Funct Ecol 17:363–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Thomas MB, Reid AM (2007) Are exotic natural enemies an effective way of controlling invasive plants? Trends Ecol Evol 22:447–453CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. United States Geological Survey (2008) USGS Stream Gauge Site ID 10302002. Available at: http://waterdata.usgs.gov/. Accessed 27 Aug 2008

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag (outside the USA) 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert R. Pattison
    • 1
    • 4
  • Carla M. D’Antonio
    • 1
    • 5
  • Tom L. Dudley
    • 2
    • 6
  • Kip K. Allander
    • 3
  • Benjamin Rice
    • 1
  1. 1.Exotic and Invasive Weed Research UnitUSDA/ARSRenoUSA
  2. 2.Department of Natural Resources and Environmental SciencesUniversity of NevadaRenoUSA
  3. 3.U.S. Geological SurveyRenoUSA
  4. 4.Anchorage Forestry Sciences LaboratoryUSDA/FSAnchorageUSA
  5. 5.Ecology, Evolution & Marine BiologyUniversity of CaliforniaSanta BarbaraUSA
  6. 6.Marine Science InstituteUniversity of CaliforniaSanta BarbaraUSA

Personalised recommendations