Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A comparison of methods for selecting non-target species for risk assessment of the biological control agent Cotesia urabae

  • Published:
BioControl Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A computer-based tool called PRONTI (priority ranking of non-target invertebrates) has been developed to aid the selection of non-target species (NTS) for pre-release testing with entomophagous biological control agents. To test whether PRONTI can improve NTS selection, we used it to produce a prioritised list of NTS for the agent Cotesia urabae Austin & Allen (Hymenoptera: Braconidae), and compared it with the original list that was produced before this species was released in New Zealand in 2011. While the two lists were similar, with five NTS occurring in the top nine of both lists, the remaining four NTS in the top nine of each list were different, primarily because the selection criteria used by the two methods were weighted differently (e.g., PRONTI put more weight on the likelihood of a NTS being exposed to the agent). Post-release testing has demonstrated that C. urabae is able to oviposit in two NTS that were ranked highly on both lists, suggesting both methods are useful for species selection. The main advantages of PRONTI were considered to be its ability to rank hundreds of NTS simultaneously, and to provide a body of information that can be used to both understand each NTS’ ranking and to justify more objectively the selection of NTS for pre-release testing.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allen GR (1990) Influence of host behavior and host size on the success of oviposition of Cotesia urabae and Dolichogenidea eucalypti (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). J Insect Behav 3:733–749

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anon (1996) Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996. New Zealand Government, Wellington

  • Austin AD, Allen GR (1989) Parasitoids of Uraba lugens Walker (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in South Australia, with description of two new species of Braconidae. Trans Royal Soc S Aust 113:169–184

    Google Scholar 

  • Avila GA, Berndt LA, Holwell GI (2013) First releases and monitoring of the biological control agent Cotesia urabae Austin and Allen (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). NZ Entomol 36:65–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Avila GA, Withers TM, Holwell GI (2014) Host testing of the parasitoid Cotesia urabae (Austin & Allen, 1989) (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) to assess the risk posed to the New Zealand nolid moth Celama parvitis (Howes, 1917) (Lepidoptera: Nolidae): do host deprivation and experience influence acceptance of non-target hosts? Austral Entomol 54:270–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Avila GA, Withers TM, Holwell GI (2016a) Laboratory odour-specificity testing of Cotesia urabae to assess potential risks to non-target species. BioControl 61:365–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Avila GA, Withers TM, Holwell GI (2016b) Olfactory cues used in host-habitat location and host location by the parasitoid Cotesia urabae. Entomol Exp Appl 158:202–209

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Avila GA, Withers TM, Holwell GI (2016c) Retrospective risk assessment reveals likelihood of potential non-target attack and parasitism by Cotesia urabae (Hymenoptera: Braconidae): a comparison between laboratory and field-cage testing results. Biol Control 103:108–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barratt BIP (2004) Microctonus parasitoids and New Zealand weevils: comparing laboratory estimates of host ranges to realized host ranges. In: van Driesche RG, Reardon R (eds) Assessing host ranges for parasitoids and predators used for classical biological control: A guide to best practice. USDA Forest Service, Morgantown, pp 103–120

    Google Scholar 

  • Barratt BIP, Moeed A (2005) Environmental safety of biological control: Policy and practice in New Zealand. Biol Control 35:247–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barratt BIP, Ferguson CM, McNeill MR, Goldson SL (1999) Parasitoid host specificity testing to predict host range. In: Withers TM, Barton Browne L, Stanley JN (eds) Host specificity testing in Australasia: towards improved assays for biological control. CRC for Tropical Pest Management, Brisbane, pp 70–83

    Google Scholar 

  • Barratt BIP, Ferguson CM, Bixley AS, Crook KE, Barton DM, Johnstone PD (2007) Field parasitism of nontarget weevil species (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) by the introduced biological control agent Microctonus aethiopoides Loan (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) over an altitude gradient. Environ Entomol 36:826–839

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Barratt BIP, Todd JH, Ferguson CM, Crook K, Burgess EPJ, Barraclough EI, Malone LA (2013) Biosafety testing of genetically modified ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) plants using a model for the optimum selection of test invertebrates. Environ Entomol 42:820–830

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Barratt BIP, Todd JH, Malone LA (2016) Selecting non-target species for arthropod biological control agent host range testing: evaluation of a novel method. Biol Control 93:84–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berndt LA (2010) Will competition from Meteorus pulchricornis (Wesmael) (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) limit the success of the potential biocontrol agent Cotesia urabae Austin & Allen (Hymenoptera: Braconidae)? Aust J Entomol 49:369–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berndt LA (2011) Wasp released to control gum leaf skeletoniser. Biosecurity Magazine 102:14–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Berndt LA, Berry JA, Brockerhoff EG (2006) Parasitoids and predators of the endemic defoliator Pseudocoremia suavis (Butler) (Lepidoptera: Geometridae: Ennominae). N Z Entomol 29:89–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berndt LA, Mansfield S, Withers TM (2007) A method for host range testing of a biological control agent for Uraba lugens. N Z Plant Prot 60:286–290

    Google Scholar 

  • Berndt LA, Withers TM, Mansfield S, Hoare RJB (2009) Non-target species selection for host range testing of Cotesia urabae. N Z Plant Prot 62:168–173

    Google Scholar 

  • Berndt LA, Sharpe A, Withers TM, Kimberley M, Gresham B (2010) Evaluation and review report for the release of Cotesia urabae for the biological control of gum leaf skeletoniser. Application ER-AF-NOR-1-2 09/05. Appendix 2: risks to non-target species from potential biological control agent Cotesia urabae against Uraba lugens in New Zealand. http://www.epa.govt.nz/search-databases/HSNO%20Application%20Register%20Documents/Application%20Appendix%202.pdf. Accessed 2 March 2016

  • Bourchier RS (2003) Receptor characterization of nontarget butterflies for risk assessment of biological control with the egg parasitoid Trichogramma minutum (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae). Can Entomol 135:449–466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charles JG, Dugdale JS (2011) Non-target species selection for host-range testing of Mastrus ridens. N Z Entomol 34:45–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crowe A (2002) Which New Zealand Insect? Penguin Books (NZ) Ltd, Auckland

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs GW (1962) The New Zealand genus Metacrias Meyrick (Lepidoptera: Arctiidae) systematics and distribution. Trans Royal Soc NZ, Zool 2:153–167

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon DP (2010) New Zealand inventory of biodiversity. In: Kingdom animalia—chaetognatha, ecdysozoa, ichnofossils, Vol 2. Canterbury University Press, Christchurch

  • Kriticos DJ, Potter KJB, Alexander NS, Gibb AR, Suckling DM (2007) Using a pheromone lure survey to establish the native and potential distribution of an invasive Lepidopteran, Uraba lugens. J Appl Ecol 44:853–863

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhlmann U, Schaffner U, Mason PG (2006) Selection of non-target species for host specificity testing. In: Bigler F, Babendreier D, Kuhlmann U (eds) Environmental impact of invertebrates for biological control of arthropods: methods and risk assessment. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, pp 15–37

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lafontaine JD, Fibiger M (2006) Revised higher classification of the Noctuoidea (Lepidoptera). Can Entomol 138:610–635

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malone LA, Todd JH, Burgess EPJ, Walter C, Wagner A, Barratt BIP (2010) Developing risk hypotheses and selecting species for assessing non-target impacts of GM trees with novel traits: the case of altered-lignin pine trees. Environ Biosafety Res 9:181–198

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell A, Mitter C, Regier JC (2005) Systematics and evolution of the cutworm moths (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae): evidence from two protein-coding nuclear genes. Syst Entomol 31:21–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramsay GW (1963) Predaceus shield-bugs (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae) in New Zealand. NZ Entomol 3:3–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spiller DM, Wise KAJ (1982) A catalogue (1860–1960) of New Zealand insects and their host plants. DSIR Science Information Division, Wellington

    Google Scholar 

  • Stufkens MW, Farrell JA, Goldson SL (1987) Establishment of Microctonus aethiopoides, a parasitoid of the sitona weevil in New Zealand. In: Proceedings 40th New Zealand Weed & Pest control conference 40:31–32

  • Todd JH, Ramankutty P, Barraclough EI, Malone LA (2008) A screening model for optimising the selection of non-target species for testing the biosafety of transgenic crops. Environ Biosaf Res 7:35–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Todd JH, Barratt BIP, Tooman L, Beggs JR, Malone LA (2015) Selecting non-target species for risk assessment of entomophagous biological control agents: evaluation of the PRONTI decision-support tool. Biol Control 80:77–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Driesche RG, Hoddle M (1997) Should arthropod parasitoids and predators be subject to host range testing when used as biological control agents? Agric Hum Values 14:211–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Driesche RG, Reardon R (2004) Assessing host ranges for parasitoids and predators used for classical biological control: A guide to best practice. USDA Forest Serv, Morgantown

    Google Scholar 

  • van Lenteren JC, Babendreier D, Bigler F, Burgio G, Hokkanen HMT, Kuske S, Loomans AJM, Menzler-Hokkanen I, van Rijn PCJ, Thomas MB, Tommasini MG, Zeng QQ (2003) Environmental risk assessment of exotic natural enemies used in inundative biological control. BioControl 48:3–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was partly funded by Plant & Food Research, AgResearch and Scion as part of the Better Border Biosecurity (B3) (http://www.b3nz.org/home) research collaboration. We would like to thank Libby Burgess, Natalie Page-Weir and the anonymous reviewers for their comments and improvements to the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The New Zealand Institute for Plant & Food Research Limited, Private Bag 92169, Auckland, 1142, New Zealand

    Jacqui H. Todd & Louise A. Malone

  2. AgResearch, Invermay Agricultural Centre, Private Bag 50034, Mosgiel, 9053, New Zealand

    Barbara I. P. Barratt

  3. Scion (New Zealand Forest Research Institute), Private Bag 3020, Rotorua, 3046, New Zealand

    Toni M. Withers, Lisa A. Berndt & Belinda Gresham

  4. School of Biological Sciences, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, 1142, New Zealand

    Gonzalo A. Avila

  5. Better Border Biosecurity, Lincoln, New Zealand

    Jacqui H. Todd, Barbara I. P. Barratt, Toni M. Withers, Belinda Gresham & Gonzalo A. Avila

Authors
  1. Jacqui H. Todd
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Barbara I. P. Barratt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Toni M. Withers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lisa A. Berndt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Belinda Gresham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Gonzalo A. Avila
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Louise A. Malone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jacqui H. Todd.

Additional information

Handling Editor: Dirk Babendreier

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Todd, J.H., Barratt, B.I.P., Withers, T.M. et al. A comparison of methods for selecting non-target species for risk assessment of the biological control agent Cotesia urabae . BioControl 62, 39–52 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10526-016-9770-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10526-016-9770-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation