Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The fixed plot survey method for determining the host range of the flowerbud-feeding weevil Dicomada rufa, a candidate for the biological control of Hakea sericea in South Africa

  • Published:
BioControl Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The hakea bud weevil, Dicomada rufa (Curculionidae), is a promising candidate for the biological control of the weed Hakea sericea (Proteaceae) in South Africa. Because D. rufa could not be successfully cultured on potted plants in quarantine, most of theconventional methods for host range determination were not suitable. A type of open-field testing method, the fixed plot survey method, was developed to show that D. rufa is host specific to H. sericea. The trial was conducted in three 1–2 ha plots at three localities in New SouthWales, Australia, involving 41 test plantspecies. This result was combined with otherconventional considerations to apply for therelease of D. rufa in South Africa. Theseincluded a multiple choice feeding trial inquarantine in South Africa, during which 10test species from seven genera of South AfricanProteaceae were not accepted for feeding. AllSouth African Proteaceae, except Brabejumstellatifolium, are phylogenetically distinctfrom H. sericea. Also, there are norecords of D. rufa interacting withcommercially important plants in Australia,including commercially cultivated South AfricanProteaceae. Dicomada rufa adult andlarval feeding destroys buds, flowers, smallfruits and succulent shoots. It is expectedthat this damage will supplement that of thetwo seed-feeding biological control agentsalready established in South Africa and furtherreduce the reproductive potential of the weed,particularly that of young plants regeneratingafter fires. Without compromising safety, thefixed plot survey method may also contribute toreducing the time and cost normally associatedwith conventional host specificity 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

  • 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 puncture vine, Tribulus terrestris. J. Ecol. Entomol. 56: 333–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balciunas, J.K., D.W. Burrows and M.F. Purcell, 1996. Comparison of the physiological and realized host-ranges of a biological control agent from Australia for the control of the aquatic weed, Hydrilla verticillata. Biol. Contr. 7: 148–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barker,W.R., 1996. Novelties and taxonomic notes relating to Hakea sect. hakea (Proteaceae), mainly of eastern Australia. J. Adelaide Bot. Gard. 17: 177–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bond, W.J., 1980. Fire and senescent fynbos in the Swartberg. Sth. Afr. For. J. 114: 68–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Briese, D.T., 1999. Open field host-specificity tests: Is ‘natural’ good enough for risk assessment? In: T.M. Withers, L. Barton Browne and J. Stanley (eds), Host Specificity Testing in Australasia: Towards Improved Assays for Biological Control. CRC for Tropical Pest Management, Brisbane, Australia. pp. 44–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Briese, D.T., A. Walker, W.J. Pettit and J.-L. Sagliocco, 2002. Host-specificity of candidate agents for the biological control of Onopordium spp. thistles in Australia: An assessment of testing procedures. Biocontrol Sci. Technol. 12: 149–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clement, S.L and M. Cristofaro, 1995. Open-field tests in host specificity determination of insects for biological control of weeds. Biocontrol Sci. Technol. 5: 395–406.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cruttwell-McFadyen, R.E., 1998. Biological control of weeds. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 43: 369– 393.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cullen, J.M., 1990. Current problems in host specificity screening. In: E.S. Delfosse (ed.), Proceedings of the VII International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds, 6–11 March, 1988, Istituto Sperimentale per la Patologia Vegetale Ministero dell'Agricoltura e delle Foreste, Rome, Italy. pp. 27–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, A.J., 1993. The impact of the hakea seed moth Carposina autologa (Carposinidae) on the canopy-stored seeds of the weed Hakea sericea. Agric., Ecosyst. Environ. 45: 105–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, A.J., 1999. A review of established and new insect agents for the biological control of Hakea sericea Schrader (Proteaceae) in South Africa. In: T. Olckers and M.P. Hill (eds), Biological Control of Weeds in South Africa (1990–1998). Afr. Ent. Mem. 1: 35–44.

  • Greathead, D.J., 1968. Biological control of Lantana camara in East Africa: A review of discussions of recent developments in East Africa. PANS 14: 167–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunn, B., 1978. Research notes on Dicomada rufa. Unpublished report of the Plant Protection Research Institute, Department of Agriculture, Stellenbosch, South Africa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, P. 1979. Cost of biological control of weeds by insects in Canada. Weed Sc. 27: 242–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, P. and H. Zwolfer, 1968. Screening of phytophagous insects for biological control of weeds. Can. Entomol. 100: 295–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heard, T.M. and R.D. van Klinken, 1998. An analysis of test designs for host range determination of insects for biological control of weeds. In: M.P. Zalucki, R.A.I. Drew and G.G.White (eds), Proceedings of the 6th Australasian Applied Entomological Research Conference, 29 September-2 October 1998, Brisbane, Australia. pp. 539–546.

  • Henderson, L., 2001. Alien Weeds and Invasive Plants. Plant Protection Research Institute Handbook No. 12: 104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, M.P. and P.E. Hulley, 1995. Biology and host range of Gratiana spadicea (Klug, 1829) (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Cassidinae), a potential biological control agent for the weed Solanum sisymbriifolium Lamarck (Solanaceae) in South Africa. Biol. Contr. 5: 345–352.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, R.L., 1998. Minimizing uncertainty - in support of no-choice tests. In: T.M. Withers, L. Barton Browne and J. Stanley (eds), Host Specificity Testing in Australasia: Towards Improved Assays for Biological Control. CRC for Tropical Pest Management, Brisbane, Australia. pp. 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, L.A.S. and B.G. Briggs, 1963. Evolution in Australian Proteaceae. Austr. J. Bot. 11: 21–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kluge, R.L., 1983. The hakea fruit weevil, Erytenna consputa Pascoe (Coleoptera: Curculionidae), and the biological control of Hakea sericea Schrader in South Africa. PhD Thesis, Rhodes University, Grahamstown (unpublished).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kluge, R.L. and S. Neser, 1991. Biological control of Hakea sericea (Proteaceae) in South Africa. Agric., Ecosyst. Environ. 37: 91–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Le Maitre, D.C., B.W. van Wilgen, R.A. Chapman and D.H. McKelly, 1995. Invasive plants and water resources in the Western Cape Province, South Africa: Modeling the consequences of lack of management. J. Appl. Ecol. 33: 161–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marohasy, J., 1998. The design and interpretation of host-specificity tests for weed biological control with particular reference to insect behaviour. Biocontrol News and Information 19: 13N–20N.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, W.C. and D.A. Ironside, 1982. Insects and other animals reported on macadamia in California. Macad. Soc. Yearbook 28: 36–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, K.M., 1964. Observations on some Australian forest insects: Insects attacking Hakea spp. in New South Wales. Linn. Soc. New South Wales 89: 295–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neser, S., 1968. Studies on some potentially useful insect enemies on needle-bushes (Hakea spp. - Proteaceae). Ph.D. thesis, Australian National University, Canberra. (unpublished). 194 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neser, S., 1978. Silky hakea - Hakea sericea Schrad. In: C.H. Stirton (ed.), Plant Invaders - Beautiful but Dangerous. The Department of Nature and Environmental Conservation of the Cape Provincial Administration, Cape Town. pp. 76–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olckers, T., 2000. Biology, host specificity and risk assessment of Gargaphia decoris, the first agent to be released in South Africa for the biological control of the invasive tree Solanum mauritianum. BioControl 45: 373–388.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olckers, T., H.G. Zimmermann and J.H. Hoffmann, 1995. Interpreting ambiguous results in biological control of weeds: Assessment of two Leptinotarsa species (Chrysomelidae) for the biological control of Solanum elaeagnifolium (Solanaceae) in South Africa. Biol. Contr. 5: 336–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, D.M., I.A.W. Macdonald and G.G. Forsyth, 1989. Reductions in plant species richness under stands of alien trees and shrubs in the fynbos biome. S. Afr. For. J. 149: 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sedgely,M., 1998. Banksia: new proteaceous cut flower crop. Horticultural Reviews 22: 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snedecor, G.W. and W.G. Cochran, 1967. Statistical Methods. The Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Klinken, R.D., 2000. Host specificity testing: why do we do it and how can we do it better? In: R. van Driesche, T. Heard, A. McClay and R. Reardon (eds), Proceedings of Session: Host specificity Testing of Exotic Arthropod Biological Control Agents - The Biological Basis for Improvement in Safety. X International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds, 4–14 July. 1999, Bozeman, Montana, U.S.A. pp. 54–68.

  • Van Wilgen, B.W., P.R. Little, R.A. Chapman, A.H.M. Gorgens, T. Willems and C. Marais, 1997. The sustainable development of water resources: History, financial costs, and benefits of alien plant control programmes. Sth. Afr. J. Sci. 93: 404–410.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wapshere, A.J., 1974. A strategy for evaluating the safety of organisms for biological control. Annals Appl. Biol. 77: 201–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, E.C., 1992. Monograph on Curculionidae of Australia. Volume VI. CSIRO Publications, Melbourne. pp. 476–477.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, E.C., 1994. Monograph on Curculionidae of Australia. Volume VII. CSIRO Publications, Melbourne. p. 664.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ARC-Plant Protection Research Institute, Private Bag X5017, Stellenbosch 7599, South Africa

    A.J. Gordon

Authors
  1. R.J. Kluge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A.J. Gordon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kluge, R., Gordon, A. The fixed plot survey method for determining the host range of the flowerbud-feeding weevil Dicomada rufa, a candidate for the biological control of Hakea sericea in South Africa. BioControl 49, 341–355 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BICO.0000025384.15189.38

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BICO.0000025384.15189.38

Search

Navigation