Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-s6l46 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-29T16:39:08.399Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Biological Control of Parthenium (Parthenium hysterophorus) in Australian Rangeland Translates to Improved Grass Production

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

K. Dhileepan
K. Dhileepan*
Affiliation:
Tropical Weeds Research Centre, Biosecurity Queensland, Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries, Charters Towers, Queensland 4820, Australia
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: kunjithapatham.dhileepan@dpi.qld.gov.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Biological control of parthenium, a major weed in grazing areas in Australia, was initiated in the mid 1970s. Since then, nine species of insects and two rust fungi have been introduced. Evaluation using pesticide exclusion at two sites (Mt. Panorama and Plain Creek) in Queensland, Australia, revealed that classical biological control had a significant negative effect on the target weed, but the impact varied between years. In this study, I quantified the effects of biological control of parthenium on grass production. Grass production declined with the increase in parthenium biomass. Significant increase in grass production due to biological control was observed, but only in 1 of 4 yr at Mt. Panorama and 2 of 4 yr at Plain Creek. At Mt. Panorama, there was a 40% increase in grass biomass in 1997 because of defoliation by Zygogramma bicolorata and galling by Epiblema strenuana. At Plain Creek, grass biomass increased by 52% in 1998 because of E. strenuana and by 45% in 2000 because of combined effects of E. strenuana and the summer rust Puccinia melampodii. This study provides evidence on the beneficial effects of biological control of parthenium in areas under limited grazing.

Keywords

Parthenium, Parthenium hysterophorus L.Biological controlbeneficial impactgrass production

Information

Type
Weed Management
Information
Weed Science , Volume 55 , Issue 5 , October 2007 , pp. 497 - 501
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Literature Cited

Adamson, D. C. 1996. Introducing dynamic considerations when economically evaluating weeds. , University of Queensland, Brisbane. 105.Google Scholar
Adamson, D. C. and Bray, S. 1999. The Economic Benefit from Investing in Insect Biological Control of Parthenium Weed (Parthenium hysterophorus). Queensland, Australia University of Queensland. 44.Google Scholar
Barton, J., Fowler, S. F., Gianotti, A. F., Winks, C. J., de Beurs, M., Arnold, G. C., and Forrester, G. 2007. Successful biological control of mist flower (Ageratina riparia) in New Zealand: agent establishment, impact and benefits to the native flora. Biol. Control. 40:370.385.Google Scholar
Chippendale, J. F. and Panetta, F. D. 1994. The cost of parthenium weed to the Queensland cattle industry. Plant Prot. Q. 9:73–76.Google Scholar
Crawley, M. J. 1989. The success and failures of weed biocontrol using insects. Biocontrol News Inf. 10:213–223.Google Scholar
Dhileepan, K. 2003. Seasonal variation in the effectiveness of leaf-feeding beetle Zygogramma bicolorata (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) and stem-galling moth Epiblema strenuana (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) as biocontrol agents on the weed Parthenium hysterophorus (Asteraceae). Bull. Entomol. Res. 93:393–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dhileepan, K., Florentine, S. K., and Lockett, C. J. 2006. Establishment, initial impact and persistence of parthenium summer rust Puccinia melampodii in north Queensland. Pages 577–580. in Preston, C., Watts, J.H., Crossman, N.D. eds. Proceedings of the Fifteenth Australian Weeds Conference. Adelaide, Australia Weed Management Society of South Australia.Google Scholar
Dhileepan, K. and McFadyen, R. E. 1997. Biological control of parthenium in Australia—progress and prospects. Pages 40–44. in Mahadevappa, M., Patil, V.C. eds. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Parthenium Management. Dharwad, India University of Agricultural Sciences.Google Scholar
Dhileepan, K., Setter, S., and McFadyen, R. E. 2000. Impact of defoliation by the introduced biocontrol agent Zygogramma bicolorata (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) on parthenium weed in Australia. Biocontrol. 45:501–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fensham, R. J. 1999. Native grasslands of the central highlands, Queensland, Australia. Floristics, regional context and conservation. Range. J. 21:82–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fensham, R. J., Holman, J. E., and Cox, M. J. 1999. Plant species responses along a grazing disturbance gradient in Australian grassland. J. Veg. Sci. 10:77–86.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, J. H. and Moran, V. C. 1998. The population dynamics of an introduced tree, Sesbania punicea, in South Africa, in response to long-term damage caused by different combinations of three species of biological control agents. Oecologia. 114:343–348.Google Scholar
Huffaker, C. B. and Kennett, C. E. 1959. A ten-year study of vegetational changes associated with biological control of Klamath weed. J. Range Manag. 12:69–82.Google Scholar
Jayanth, K. P. and Visalakshy, P. N. G. 1996. Succession of vegetation after suppression of parthenium weed by Zygogramma bicolorata in Bangalore, India. Biol. Agric. Hortic. 12:303–309.Google Scholar
McClay, A. S. 1995. Beyond “before-and-after:” experimental design and evaluation in classical weed biocontrol. Pages 213–219. in Delfosse, E.S., Scott, R.R. eds. Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds. Canterbury, New Zealand Lincoln University.Google Scholar
McEvoy, P., Cox, C., and Coombs, E. 1991. Successful biological control of ragwort Senecio jacobaea, by the introduced insects in Oregon. Ecol. Appl. 14:430–442.Google Scholar
McFadyen, R. E. 1992. Biological control against parthenium weed in Australia. Crop Prot. 24:400–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McFadyen, R. E. and McClay, A. R. 1981. Two new insects for the biological control of parthenium weed in Queensland. Pages 145–149. in Wilson, B.J., Swarbrick, J.D. eds. Proceedings of the Sixth Australian Weeds Conference. Brisbane, Australia Weed Science Society of Queensland.Google Scholar
Moran, V. C. and Hoffmann, J. H. 1989. The effects of herbivory by a weevil species, acting alone and unrestrained by natural enemies, on growth and phenology of the weed Sesbania punicea . J. Appl. Ecol. 26:967–978.Google Scholar
Navie, S. C., McFadyen, R. E. C., Panetta, F. D., and Adkins, S. W. 1996. The biology of Australian weeds 27. Parthenium hysterophorus L. Plant Prot. Q. 11:76–88.Google Scholar
Navie, S. C., Panetta, F. D., McFadyen, R. E. C., and Adkins, S. W. 2004. Germinable soil seedbanks of central Queensland rangelands invaded by the exotic weed Parthenium hysterophorus L. Weed Biol. Manag. 4:154–167.Google Scholar
Norris, R. F. 1997. Impact of leaf mining on the growth of Portulaca oleracea (common purslane) and its competitive interaction with Beta vulgaris (sugarbeet). J. Appl. Ecol. 34:349–362.Google Scholar
Page, A. R. and Lacey, K. L. 2006. Economic impact assessment of Australian weed biological control. Adelaide, Australia CRC for Australian Weed Management Technical Series 10. 150.Google Scholar
Sridhara, S., Basavaraja, B. K., and Ganeshaiah, K. N. 2005. Temporal variation in relative dominance of Parthenium hysterophorus and its effect on native biodiversity. Pages 240–242. in Ramachandra Prasad, T.V., Nanjappa, H.V., Devendra, R., Manjunath, A., Subramanya, , Chandrashekar, S.C., Kiran Kumar, V.K., Jayaram, K.A., Prabhakara Setty, T.K. eds. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Parthenium Management. Bangalore, India University of Agricultural Sciences.Google Scholar
Story, J. M., Callan, N. W., Corn, J. G., and White, L. J. 2006. Decline of spotted knapweed density at two sites in western Montana with large populations of the introduced root weevil, Cyphocleonus achates (Fahraeus). Biol. Control. 38:227–232.Google Scholar