Biological Invasions

, Volume 14, Issue 2, pp 255–271 | Cite as

Biological control as an invasion process: disturbance and propagule pressure affect the invasion success of Lythrum salicaria biological control agents

  • Alice G. Yeates
  • Shon S. Schooler
  • Ralph J. Garono
  • Yvonne M. Buckley
Original Paper


Understanding the mechanisms behind the successful colonization and establishment of introduced species is important for both preventing the invasion of unwanted species and improving release programs for biological control agents. However, it is often not possible to determine important introduction details, such as date, number of organisms, and introduction location when examining factors affecting invasion success. Here we use biological control introduction data to assess the role of propagule pressure, disturbance, and residence time on invasion success of four herbivorous insect species introduced for the control of the invasive wetland plant, Lythrum salicaria, in the Columbia River Estuary. Two sets of field surveys determined persistence at prior release sites, colonization of new sites, and abundance within colonized sites. We quantified propagule pressure in four ways to examine the effect of different measurements. These included three measurements of introduction size (proximity to introduction site, introduction size at a local scale, and introduction size at a regional scale) and one measure of introduction number (number of introduction events in a region). Disturbance was examined along a tidal inundation gradient (distance from river mouth) and as habitat (island or mainland). Statistical models and model averaging were used to determine which factors were driving invasion success. In this study we found: (1) sparse evidence for the positive influence of propagule pressure on invasion success; (2) disturbance can negatively affect the invasion success of herbivorous insects; (3) the effects of disturbance and propagule pressure are species specific and vary among invasion stages, and (4) not all measures of propagule pressure show the same results, therefore single measures and proxies should be used cautiously.


Galerucella calmariensis G. pusilla Hylobius transversovittatus Introduced alien species Nanophyes marmoratus Purple loosestrife 



We thank J. Kooser, L. Moore, and E. Thompson for laboratory and field assistance. G. Dorsey, E. Coombs, P. McEvoy, F. Grevstad, L. Wunder, D. McLain, and M. Magruder provided valuable support and advice. Special thanks to A. Bourne, S. Burgess, and J. Dwyer for statistical advice. R. Van Klinken and three anonymous reviewers provided constructive reviews. Funding for this project was provided to S. Schooler and R. Garono by the Oregon Department of Agriculture and the Oregon State Weed Board, to A. Yeates through an Australian Postgraduate Award, and to Y. Buckley by an ARC Australian Research Fellowship (DP0771387).


  1. Albright MF, Harman WN, Fickbohm SS, Meehan H, Groff S, Austin T (2004) Recovery of native flora and behavioral responses by Galerucella spp. following biological control of purple loosestrife. Am Midl Nat 152(2):248–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beirne BP (1975) Biological control attempts by introductions against pest insects in the field in Canada. Can Entomol 107:225–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blossey B (1995) Coexistence of two leaf-beetles in the same fundamental niche, distribution, adult phenology, and oviposition. Oikos 74:225–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blossey B, Skinner LC, Taylor J (2001) Impact and management of purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) in North America. Biodivers Conserv 10:1787–1807CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Britton-Simmons KH, Abbott KC (2008) Short- and long-term effects of disturbance and propagule pressure on a biological invasion. J Ecol 96:68–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information theoretic approach, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Chawala A, Jay AD, Baptista AM, Wilkin M, Seaton C (2008) Seasonal variability and estuary-shelf interactions in circulation dynamics of a River-dominated estuary. Estuar Coasts 31:269–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chytrý M, Jarošík V, Pyšek P, Hájek O, Knollová I, Tichý L, Danihelka J (2008) Separating habitat invisibility by alien plants from the actual level of invasion. Ecology 89(6):1541–1553PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Crawley MJ (2005) Statistics: an introduction using R. Wiley, West SussexCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Crawley MJ, Kornberg H, Lawton JH, Usher MB, Southwood R, O’Connor RJ, Gibbs A (1986) The population biology of invaders (and discussion). Philos Trans R Soc Lond Ser B Biol Sci 314(1167):711–731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dawson W, Burslem DFRP, Hulme PE (2009) Factors explaining alien plant invasion success in a tropical ecosystem differ at each stage of invasion. J Ecol 97:657–665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. De Clerck-Floate R, Wikeem B (2009) Influence of release size on establishment and impact of a root weevil for the biological control of houndstongue (Cynoglossum officinale). Biol Sci Technol 19(2):169–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dehnen-Schmutz K, Touza J, Perrings C, Williams M (2007) A century of the ornamental plant trade and its impact on invasion success. Divers Distrib 13:527–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Denoth M, Myers JH (2005) Variable success of biological control of Lythrum salicaria in British Columbia. Biol Control 32:269–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Edward E, Munishi KT, Hulme PE (2009) Relative roles of disturbance and propagule pressure on the invasion of humid tropical forest by Cordia alliodora (Boraginaceae) in Tanzania. Biotropica 41(2):171–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fagan WF, Lewis MA, Neubert MG, van den Driessche P (2002) Invasion theory and biological control. Ecol Lett 5:148–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ferrarese E, Garono RJ (2010) Dispersal of Galerucella pusilla and G. calmariensis via passive water transport in the Columbia River Estuary. Biol Control 52(2):115–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gelman A, Hill J (2007) Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Grevstad FS (1999a) Experimental invasions using biological control introductions: the influence of release size on the chance of population establishment. Biol Invasions 1:313–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Grevstad FS (1999b) Factors influencing the chance of population establishment: implications for release strategies in biological control. Ecol Appl 9(4):1439–1447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Grevstad FS, Herzig AL (1997) Quantifying the effects of distance and conspecific on colonization: experiments and models using the loosestrife leaf beetle, Galerucella calmariensis. Oecologia 110:60–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Groves RH (2006) Are some weeds sleeping? Some concepts and reasons. Euphytica 148:111–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hayes KR, Barry SC (2008) Are there any consistent predictors of invasion success? Biol Invasions 10:483–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hylander K (2009) No increase in colonization rate of boreal bryophytes close to propagule sources. Ecology 90:160–169PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jeschke JM, Strayer DL (2006) Determinants of vertebrate invasion success in Europe and North America. Global Change Biol 12:1608–1619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kolar CS, Lodge DM (2001) Progress in invasion biology: predicting invaders. Trends Ecol Evol 16(4):199–204PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lande R (1993) Risks of population extinction from demographic and environmental stochasticity and random catastrophes. Am Nat 142(6):911–927CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Leung B, Drake JM, Lodge DM (2004) Predicting invasions: propagule pressure and the gravity of Alee effects. Ecology 85(6):1651–1660CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Liebhold AM, Tobin PC (2008) Population ecology of insect invasions and their management. Annu Rev Entomol 53:387–408PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lockwood JL, Cassey P, Blackburn T (2005) The role of propagule pressure in explaining species invasions. Trends Ecol Evol 20(5):223–228PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lozon JD, Maclsaac HJ (1997) Biological invasions: are they dependent on disturbance? Environ Rev 5:131–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mack RN, Simberloff D, Londsdale WM, Evans H, Clout M, Bazzaz FA (2000) Biotic invasions: causes, epidemiology, global consequences, and control. Ecol Appl 10(3):689–710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Malecki RA, Blossey B, Hight SD, Schroeder D, Kok LT, Coulson JR (1993) Biological control of purple loosestrife. Bioscience 43:680–686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Martin TG, Wintle BA, Rhodea JR, Kuhnert PM, Field SA, Low-Choy SJ, Tyre AJ, Possingham HP (2005) Zero tolerance ecology: improving ecological inference by modeling the source of zero observations. Ecol Lett 8:1235–1246PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Melbourne BA, Cornell HV, Davies KF, Dugaw CJ, Elmendorf S, Freestone AL, Hall R, Harrison S, Hastings A, Holland M, Holyoak M, Lambrinos J, Moore K, Yokomizo H (2007) Invasion in a heterogeneous world: resistance, coexistence or hostile takeover? Ecol Lett 10(1):77–94PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Memmott J, Fowler SV, Hill RL (1998) The effect of release size on the probability of establishment of biological control agents: gorse thrips (Sericothrips staphylinus) released against gorse (Ulex europaeus) in New Zealand. Biocontrol Sci Tech 8:103–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mikheyev AS, Tchingnoumba L, Henderson A, Alonso A (2008) Effect of propagule pressure on the establishment and spread of the little fire ant Wasmannia auropunctata in a Gabonese oilfield. Divers Distrib 14:301–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Milton SJ, Wilson JRU, Richardson DM, Seymour CL, Dean WR, Iponga DM, Procheş Ş (2007) Invasive alien plants infiltrate bird-mediated shrub nucleation processes in arid savanna. J Ecol 95:648–661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Morin L, Reid AM, Sims 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 Control 51(1):1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Myburgh M, Chown SL, Daniels SR, Jansen van Vuuren B (2007) Population structure, propagule pressure, and conservation biogeography in the sub-Antarctic: lessons from indigenous and invasive springtails. Divers Distrib 13:143–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pemberton RW, Liu H (2009) Marketing time predicts naturalization of horticultural plants. Ecology 90:69–80PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Piper GL, Coombs EM, Blossey B, McEvoy PB, Schooler SS (2004) Purple loosestrife. In: Coombs EM, Clark JK, Piper GL, Cofrancesco AF (eds) Biological control of invasive plants in the United States. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, pp 281–292Google Scholar
  43. Pyšek P, Jarošík V (2005) Residence time determines the distribution of alien plants. In: Inderjit S (ed) Invasive plants: ecological and agricultural aspects. Birkhäuser Basel, Switzerland, pp 77–96Google Scholar
  44. Pyšek P, Jarošík V, Müllerová J, Pergl J, Wild J (2008) Comparing the rate of invasion by Heracleum mantegazziam at continental, regional, and local scales. Divers Distrib 14:355–363Google Scholar
  45. R Development Core Team (2008) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0,
  46. Rouget M, Richardson DM (2003) Inferring process from pattern in plant invasions: a semimechanistic model incorporating propagule pressure and environmental factors. Am Nat 162:713–724PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Ruesink JL (2005) Global analysis of factors affecting the outcome of freshwater fish introductions. Conserv Biol 19(6):1883–1893CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sax DF, Gaines SD (2008) Species invasions and extinction: the future of native biodiversity on islands. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:11490–11497PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Schooler SS, McEvoy PB, Coombs EM (2006) Negative per capita impacts of purple loosestrife and reed canary grass on plant diversity of wetland communities. Divers Distrib 12:351–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Schooler SS, McEvoy PB, Hammond P, Coombs EM (2009) Negative per capita effects of two invasive plants, Lythrum salicaria and Phalaris arundinacea, on the moth diversity of wetland communities. Bull Entomol Res 99:229–243PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Shea K, Possingham HP (2000) Optimal release strategies for biological control agents: an application of stochastic dynamic programming to population management. J Appl Ecol 37:77–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Stokes KE, Cunningham SA (2006) Predictors of recruitment for willows invading riparian environments in south-east Australia: implications for weed management. J Appl Ecol 43:909–921CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Turner MG, Gardner RH, O’Neill RV (2001) Landscape ecology in theory and practice: pattern and process. Springer-Verlag, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  54. Whittingham MJ, Swetnam RD, Wilson JD, Chamberlain DE, Freckleton RP (2005) Habitat selection by yellowhammers Emberiza citronella on lowland farmland at two spatial scales: implications for conservation management. J Appl Ecol 42(2):270–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Williamson M, Fitter A (1996) The varying success of invaders. Ecology 77(6):1661–1666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wilson JRU, Richardson DM, Rouget M, Procheş Ş, Amis MA, Henderson L, Thuiller W (2007) Residence time and potential range: crucial considerations in modelling plant invasions. Divers Distrib 13:11–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Zuur AF, Ieno EN, Walker NJ, Saveliev AA, Smith GM (2009) Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alice G. Yeates
    • 1
  • Shon S. Schooler
    • 2
  • Ralph J. Garono
    • 3
  • Yvonne M. Buckley
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Biological SciencesThe University of QueenslandSt LuciaAustralia
  2. 2.CSIRO Ecosystem Sciences, EcoSciences PrecinctBrisbaneAustralia
  3. 3.Lake Superior National Estuarine Research Reserve, University of WisconsinSuperiorUSA

Personalised recommendations