Skip to main content

The Frequency and Strength of Nontarget Effects of Invertebrate Biological Control Agents of Plant Pests and Weeds

  • Chapter
Nontarget Effects of Biological Control

Abstract

In 1989, the cactus moth, Cactoblastis cactorum, which had been taken from South America and released around the world to control pestiferous Opuntia cacti on which it feeds, appeared in the Florida Keys. How it got there is uncertain. The moth was introduced into the Caribbean island of Nevis in 1957 and then moved by local authorities to other islands (Tuduri et al. 1971). It then either island hopped, as it had in Hawaii (Tuduri et al. 1971), and jumped from Cuba to the Florida Keys, or was carried inadvertently on ornamental cacti imported into Miami, Florida from pads collected in Hispaniola (Pemberton 1995). However, the moth was not noticed in Miami before it was found in the lower Keys so we tend to favor the natural dispersion explanation. The results of this invasion/introduction were rapid and serious. The moth dispersed 320 miles northward through Florida from 1989 to 1991 to reach Brevard County (Johnson and Stiling 1998). On average, from six sites throughout Florida, over 90% of Opuntia stricta plants with more than 10 pads exhibited feeding damage. In 1997 Cactoblastis was found in the Jacksonville area (Stiling, personal observation). If the moth can survive in Jacksonville, it could move across the Gulf Coast states into Texas and beyond. This prompts concern not only for native Florida cacti but also for cacti native to the rest of the North American continent (especially the Opuntia-rich desert southwest). Rare cacti may be particularly at risk. Opuntia spinosissima, whose entire U.S. population consists of 12 plants in the Florida Keys, is a preferred host of Cactoblastis larvae (Johnson and Stiling 1996). Individuals now exist inside cages designed to protect them from Cactoblastis.

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

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Askew, R. R. 1986. Parasitoid communities: their size, structure, and development. In J. Waage and D. Greathead (eds.), Insect parasitoids. Academic Press, London, UK. p. 225–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Askew, R. R. 1994. Parasitoids of leaf-mining Lepidoptera: what determines their host ranges? In B.A. Hawkins and W. Sheehan (eds), Parasitoid community ecology. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, UK. p. 177–202

    Google Scholar 

  • Askew, R. R. 1980. The diversity of insect communities in leaf-mines and plant galls. J. Anim. Ecol. 49: 817–829.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barratt, B. I. P., A. A. Evans, C. M. Ferguson, G. M. Barker, M. R. McNeill, and C.B. Phillips. 1997. Laboratory nontarget host range of the introduced parasitoids Microctonus aethiopoides and M. hyperodae (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) compared with field parasitism in N.Z. Environ. Entomol. 26: 694–702.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boldt, P. E. 1998. Letter. Science. In press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boldt, P. E. 1997. Response of a Rhinocyllus researcher. Biol. Control News Info. 18(4): 100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carruthers, R. I., and J. A. Onsager. 1993. Perspective on the use of exotic natural enemies for biological control of pest grasshoppers (Orthoptera: Acrididae). Environ. Entomol. 22: 885–903.

    Google Scholar 

  • Center, T. D. 1995. Review of selection criteria and ecological consequences of importing natural enemies. Edited by W. C. Kauffman and J. R. Nechols. Biodiversity and Conservation 4: 524–526.

    Google Scholar 

  • Civeyrel, L., and D. Simberloff. 1996. A tale of two snails: is the cure worse than the disease? Biodiversity and Conservation 5: 1231–1252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clausen, C. P. (ed). 1978. Introduced parasites and predators of arthropod pests and weeds: a world view. U.S. Dept. Agric., Agric. Handbk. 480.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, J. M. 1996. A-bombs against amphibians. Nature 383: 386–387.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Duan, J. J., and R. H. Messing. 1996. Response of two opiine fruit fly parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) to the lantana gall fly (Diptera: Tephritidae). Environ. Entomol. 25: 1428–1437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duan, J. J., and R. H. Messing. 1998. Effect of Tetrastichus giffardianus (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) an nontarget flowerhead-feeding tephritids (Diptera: Tephritidae). Environ. Entomol. 27: 1022–1028.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehler, L. 1991. Planned introductions in biological control. In L. Ginzburg (ed.), assessing ecological risks of biotechnology. Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston. p. 1–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elliott, N., R. Kieckhefer, and W. Kauffman. 1996. Effects of an invading coccinellid on native coccinellids in an agricultural landscape. Oecologia 105: 537–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Follett, P. A., M. T. Johnson, and V. P. Jones. 1999. Parasitoid drift in Hawaiian pentatomoids. In P. A. Follett and J. J. Duan, (eds.), Nontarget effects of biological control. Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank, J. H. 1998. How risky is biological control? Comment. Ecology. 79: 1829–1834.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank, J. H., and E. D. McCoy. 1993. The introduction of insects into Florida. Florida Entomologist 76: 1–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Funasaki, G. Y., P.-Y. Lai, L. M. Nakahara, J. W. Beardsley, and A. K. Ota. 1988. A review of biological control introductions in Hawaii: 1890 to 1985. Proc. Hawaiian Entomol. Soc. 28: 105–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez, D., and F. E. Gilstrap. 1992. Foreign exploration: assessing and prioritizing natural enemies and consequences of preintroduction studies. In W. C. Kauffman and J. E. Nechols (eds), Selection criteria and ecological consequences of imporing natural enemies. Entomol. Soc. Am., Lanham, Maryland. p. 51–70

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, B. 1993. Research community swats grasshopper control trial. Science 260: 887.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gould, F., G. Kennedy, and R. Kopanic. 1996. Environmental issues associated with enhancing the impact of biological control agents: a student debate. Am. Entomol. 42: 160–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hajek, A. E., L. Butter, S. R. A. Walsh, J. C. Silver, F. P. Hain, F. L. Hastings, T. M. Odell, and R. D. R. Smitley. 1995. Host range of the gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) pathogen Entomophaga maimaiga (Zygomycletes: Entomophthorales) in the field versus laboratory. Environ. Entomol. 25: 709–721.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, R. W., and L. E. Ehler. 1979. Rate of establishment of natural enemies in classical biological control. Bull. Entomol. Soc. Am. 25: 280–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, R. W., L. E. Ehler., and B. Bisabri-Ershadi. 1980. Rate of success in classical biological control of arthropods. Bull. Entomol. Soc. Am. 26: 111–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, B. A. 1994. Pattern and process in host-parasitoid interactions. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, B. A., and P. C. Marino. 1997. The colonization of native phytophagous insects in North America by exotic parasitoids. Oecologia 112: 566–571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, W. K., D. M. Hayes, D. Brouhard, B. Goodge, and R. L. Carter. 1995. Population status and conservation of the endangered San Salvador rock iguana, Cyclura r. rileyi. J. Intl. Iguana Soc. 4:21–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jervis, M. A. 1998. Reply from M. A. Jervis. Trends Ecol. Evolution 13:110.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. M., and P. D. Stiling. 1996. Host specificity of Cactoblastis cactorum Berg, an exotic Opuntia-feeding moth, in Florida. Environ. Entomol. 25: 743–748.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. M., and P. D. Stiling. 1998. Distribution and dispersal of Cactoblastis cactorum (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae), an exotic Opuntia-fceding moth, in Florida. Florida Entomologist 81: 12–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Julien, M. H., J. D. Kerr, and R. R. Chan. 1984. Biological control of weeds: an evaluation. Protection Ecol. 7: 3–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Louda, S. M., D. Kendall, J. Connor, and D. Simberloff. 1997. Ecological effects of an insect introduced for the biological control of weeds. Science 277: 1088–1090.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Louda, S. M., D. Simberloff, J. Connor, G. Boettner, D. Kendall, and A. Arnett. 1998. Insights from data on the nontarget effects of the flowerhead weevil. Biol. Control News Info. 19: 70–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luck, R. F. 1981. Parasitic insects introduced as biological control agents. In D. Pimentel (ed), CRC Handbook of pest management in agriculture, vol. 2. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida. p. 125–284

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McLeod, J. H. 1962. A Review of the biological control attempts against insects and weeds in Canada. Technical Communication of the Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control 2, Farnham Royal, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nafus, D. M. 1993. Movement of introduced biological control agents onto nontarget butterflies, Hypolimnas sp. (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae). Environ. Entomol. 22: 265–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nafus, D. M., and I. H. Schreiner. 1989. Biological control activities in the Mariana Islands from 1911 to 1988. Micronesica 22: 65–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Obrycki, J. J., A. M. Ormond, and K. L. Giles. 1998. Interactions between an introduced and indigenous coccinellid species at different prey densities. Oecologia (in press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, D. E., K. S. McKelvey, and L. F. Ruggiero. 1999. Indirect effects of biological control agents released to control spotted knapweed. Ecology (in press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Pemberton, R. W. 1995. Cactoblastis cactorum in the United States: an immigrant biological control agent or an introduction of the nursery industry. Am. Entomologist 41: 230–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaffner, J. V., Jr., and C.C. Griswold. 1934. Macrolepideptera and their parasites reared from field collections in the northeastern part of the United States. U.S. Dept. Agric., Misc. Pub. 188, Washington D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Secord, D., and P. Karieva. 1996. Perils and pitfalls in the host specificity paradigm. Bioscience 46: 448–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheehan, W. 1991. Host range patterns of hymenopteran parasitoids of exophytic lepidopteran folivores. In E.A. Bernays (ed.), Insect-plant interactions, vol. 3. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida. p. 209–248

    Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff, D., and P. Stiling. 1996a. How risky is biological control. Ecology 77: 1965–1974.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff, D., and P. Stiling. 1996b. Risks of species introduced for biological control. Biol. Conserv. 78: 185–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff, D., and P. Stiling. 1998. How risky is biological control: response to J. H. Frank. Ecology 79: 1834–1836.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stamp, N. E. and M. D. Bowers. 1990. Parasitism of New England buckmoth caterpillars (Hemileuca lucina: Saturnidae) by tachinid flies. J. Lepidopterists Soc. 44: 199–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiling, P. 1990. Calculating establishment rates of parasites in classical biological control. Am. Entomologist 36: 225–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiling, P. 1993. Why do natural enemies fail in biological control campaigns? Am. Entomologist 39: 31–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, M. B., and A. J. Willis. 1998. Biological control—risky but necessary? Trends Ecol. Evolution 13: 325–329.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tuduri, J. C. G., L. F. Martorell, and S. M. Gaud. 1971. Geographical distribution and host plants of the cactus moth, Cactoblastis cactorum (Berg), in Puerto Rico and the United States Virgin Islands. J. Agric. Univ. Puerto Rico 58: 130–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, C. E. 1985. Conflicting interests and biological control of weeds. In E. S. Delfosse (ed.), Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds; Aug 19–25 1984, Vancouver, Canada. Agriculture Canada, Ottowa, Canada. p. 203–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Bosch, R. 1971. Biological control of insects. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 2: 45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler, A. G., and E. R. Hoebeke. 1995. Coccinella novemnotata in Northeastern North America: historical occurrence and current status (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Washington 97: 701–716.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, M., and A. Fitter. 1996. The varying success of invaders. Ecology 77: 1661–1670.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2000 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Stiling, P., Simberloff, D. (2000). The Frequency and Strength of Nontarget Effects of Invertebrate Biological Control Agents of Plant Pests and Weeds. In: Follett, P.A., Duan, J.J. (eds) Nontarget Effects of Biological Control. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-4577-4_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-4577-4_3

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-7067-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-4577-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics