This document provides an introduction to the concepts of bioeradication and biocontrols. It discusses using native organisms to drive non-native invasive species extinct from an ecosystem, aiming to restore balance, as an alternative to introducing additional non-native biocontrols. The document uses Ailanthus altissima as a case study, outlining the native moth, mite, fungi and deer that form a bioeradication system currently eradicating the tree locally. It advocates increasing native plant nectar sources to support the bioeradicant moth populations. Finally, it briefly summarizes weaknesses and potential bioeradicants for other invasive plants like multiflora rose.
This document discusses invasive plant species and theories of biocontrol. It begins by listing common invasive plants like Oriental bittersweet and purple loosestrife. It then discusses the concept of "backyard ecology" where important research can be done locally with minimal equipment. The document proposes alternatives to classical biocontrol using non-native species, such as bioeradication which aims to eliminate invasives using native species. Several case studies are presented, including the bioeradication of Ailanthus altissima (tree of heaven) through a combination of native moth, mite, fungal and deer controls.
Biocontrol and Bioeradication PPT given Nov. 21, 2013Richard Gardner
Biocontrol and Bioeradication research presented to the Muhlenberg Botany Society on Nov. 21, 2013 focusing on using native organisms to eradicate non-native invasive plants. This presentation describes my latest research on a variety of plants such as Ailanthus altissima, Rosa multiflora, ,
Bioeradication versus Biocontrol, definitions, theory and practice. This is a preliminary theoretical discussion of the use of native organisms to eradicate non-native invasive organisms from ecosystems as opposed to using non-natives to attempt control of other non-natives.
Thoughts on Ailanthus altissima: biological and chemical eradication methodshacuthbert
This presentation will show that Ailanthus altissima is easy to kill by a volunteer safe chemical method. At the same time a naturally occurring bioeradication system has been observed that is effectively killing Ailanthus altissima. This serves as a model for finding bioeradication systems for other invasive non-native organisms and ending the scientifically unsound practice of introducing more non-native organisms to control current problems only to become problems themselves.
This document summarizes different types of biotic interactions in an ecosystem:
Mutualism includes relationships like mycorrhizal fungi and plant roots, nitrogen-fixing bacteria and legumes, and lichens. Commensalism includes epiphytic plants, lianas that climb trees, and epizoic algae on animal fur. Negative interactions include exploitation like parasites on plants and animals and carnivorous plants. Antibiosis refers to inhibition or death of one organism by another through metabolic toxins. Competition occurs when organisms seek inadequate resources and can be intraspecific between members of a species or interspecific between different species.
The Xerces Society works to protect wildlife through invertebrate conservation and habitat protection. They promote conservation biological control, which uses habitat management to encourage beneficial insects and natural pest control. Providing diverse habitat with nectar and shelter supports a variety of beneficial insect predators and parasitoids that control pests and save US crops an estimated $4.5-12 billion annually in pest control services. The key is providing at least 20% of farm area as diverse non-crop habitat, such as hedgerows, field borders, cover crops, and permanent ground covers.
This document discusses invasive plant species and theories of biocontrol. It begins by listing common invasive plants like Oriental bittersweet and purple loosestrife. It then discusses the concept of "backyard ecology" where important research can be done locally with minimal equipment. The document proposes alternatives to classical biocontrol using non-native species, such as bioeradication which aims to eliminate invasives using native species. Several case studies are presented, including the bioeradication of Ailanthus altissima (tree of heaven) through a combination of native moth, mite, fungal and deer controls.
Biocontrol and Bioeradication PPT given Nov. 21, 2013Richard Gardner
Biocontrol and Bioeradication research presented to the Muhlenberg Botany Society on Nov. 21, 2013 focusing on using native organisms to eradicate non-native invasive plants. This presentation describes my latest research on a variety of plants such as Ailanthus altissima, Rosa multiflora, ,
Bioeradication versus Biocontrol, definitions, theory and practice. This is a preliminary theoretical discussion of the use of native organisms to eradicate non-native invasive organisms from ecosystems as opposed to using non-natives to attempt control of other non-natives.
Thoughts on Ailanthus altissima: biological and chemical eradication methodshacuthbert
This presentation will show that Ailanthus altissima is easy to kill by a volunteer safe chemical method. At the same time a naturally occurring bioeradication system has been observed that is effectively killing Ailanthus altissima. This serves as a model for finding bioeradication systems for other invasive non-native organisms and ending the scientifically unsound practice of introducing more non-native organisms to control current problems only to become problems themselves.
This document summarizes different types of biotic interactions in an ecosystem:
Mutualism includes relationships like mycorrhizal fungi and plant roots, nitrogen-fixing bacteria and legumes, and lichens. Commensalism includes epiphytic plants, lianas that climb trees, and epizoic algae on animal fur. Negative interactions include exploitation like parasites on plants and animals and carnivorous plants. Antibiosis refers to inhibition or death of one organism by another through metabolic toxins. Competition occurs when organisms seek inadequate resources and can be intraspecific between members of a species or interspecific between different species.
The Xerces Society works to protect wildlife through invertebrate conservation and habitat protection. They promote conservation biological control, which uses habitat management to encourage beneficial insects and natural pest control. Providing diverse habitat with nectar and shelter supports a variety of beneficial insect predators and parasitoids that control pests and save US crops an estimated $4.5-12 billion annually in pest control services. The key is providing at least 20% of farm area as diverse non-crop habitat, such as hedgerows, field borders, cover crops, and permanent ground covers.
This document provides an overview of integrated pest management (IPM). It discusses key principles of IPM, including using multiple pest control strategies, determining acceptable pest injury levels, and focusing on prevention over cure. Specific strategies covered include cultural, biological, host plant resistance, and chemical controls. Monitoring, identification, decision making, and record keeping are presented as important steps in any IPM program. The document emphasizes that IPM is a decision-making process that considers all options to manage pests below an economic threshold while minimizing risks.
Methods for Attracting and Preserving Beneficial InsectsFaiga64c
This document discusses methods for attracting and preserving beneficial insects. It outlines the concepts of biological control, including classical and applied biological control. It recommends selecting insecticides that are selective rather than broad-spectrum to avoid harming beneficial insects. The document discusses plants that attract beneficial insects by providing food and shelter. These include members of the carrot, sunflower, and mustard families. It also provides information on identifying common beneficial insect species and the pests they prey on.
This study investigated the antifeedant activity of Gomphrena serrata extracts on sitophilus oryzae (rice weevil). The extracts were obtained from the plant using cold maceration. Dilution methods were used to test different concentrations of the extract and standard on rice weevils. The 1:5 concentration of the G. serrata extract showed the highest antifeedant activity after 6 hours, equal to the standard. This simple, cost-effective extraction and testing method demonstrates the antifeedant potential of G. serrata extracts as a natural pesticide alternative.
Conservation and Augmentation of Biological Control Agent Karl Obispo
This document discusses different methods of biological control including conservation, augmentation, and classical biological control. Conservation involves improving habitats and reducing pesticide use to encourage natural enemy populations. Augmentation involves purchasing and releasing natural enemies when populations are not adequate. Classical biological control imports and establishes natural enemies of invasive pests. The document provides examples of each approach and emphasizes selecting insecticides and managing habitats that protect natural enemies.
This document provides an overview of integrated pest management (IPM) strategies for organic farming systems. It discusses preventative cultural practices as the foundation of organic pest management, including farm site selection, crop isolation/rotation, woody borders, and soil quality management. It also covers habitat enhancement strategies like intercropping, trap cropping, and conservation strips. The use of host plant resistance, biological control agents, and organic insecticides are also summarized. The document emphasizes that full integration of multiple complementary strategies is key to organic pest management.
3. Biological control of weeds A Lecture By Allah Dad Khan Mr.Allah Dad Khan
Australia was struggling with widespread infestation of prickly pear cactus in 1925. A small moth from Argentina was introduced that helped decimate the prickly pear population within 10 years, reducing the affected area to just 1% of what it was originally. Biological weed control uses living organisms like insects, fungi and bacteria to reduce weed populations by disrupting their ability to capture sunlight, take up water and nutrients, and reproduce. It is a natural method of control that can help restore ecological balance, but usually needs to be integrated with other control methods and requires long-term monitoring to evaluate effectiveness.
The document discusses plant health care (PHC) and integrated pest management (IPM). It covers appropriate response processes, plant resource allocation, and various pest control and treatment options including cultural, chemical, and biological controls. Treatment options range from resistant varieties and sanitation to insecticides, fungicides, oils, soaps, and beneficial insects. The goal is to promote plant vitality and vigor through proactive monitoring and selecting early intervention strategies.
Trichoderma is a fungus used for microbial control of plant pathogens. It can control pathogens through several mechanisms including mycoparasitism, antibiotic production, competition for space and nutrients in the rhizosphere, and induction of resistance in plants. The exact mechanisms involved are complex and can vary depending on the microbial control agent, pathogen, plant, and environmental conditions. Microbial control likely results from multiple mechanisms acting together synergistically.
The document discusses the costs, benefits, and consequences of interactions between species and with the environment. It explains that most symbiotic relationships exist in a stable balance, but that this balance can be impacted by the health of the host organism or environmental conditions. It provides examples of how factors like overcrowding or humidity can negatively impact hosts like seedlings or raspberries. The document also discusses how humans manage these relationships through improving environments, using drugs, pesticides, and herbicides.
1) The document discusses using biological agents like insects, mites, fungi, and plants to control various weed species.
2) It provides examples of biological agents being tested on different weeds, and criteria for selecting effective bioagents like host specificity, hardiness, feeding habits, and reproduction rate.
3) Common bioagents used include insects for lantana camara and prickly pear, carp fish and snails for aquatic weeds, mites for cactus, and fungi or competitive plants for other species.
This document discusses Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategies for vegetable gardens. IPM is a decision-making process that uses monitoring to determine when pest control is needed and employs cultural, physical, biological, and chemical tactics to keep pest populations low. The document outlines IPM principles including prevention, monitoring, identification, injury thresholds, and evaluation. It provides examples of cultural controls like companion planting and physical controls like handpicking pests. Biological controls discussed include Bacillus thuringiensis and beneficial insects. Chemical options include botanical and synthetic insecticides used as a last resort. Case studies on aphids and flea beetles demonstrate applying the IPM process.
Integrated Pest Management (IPM) utilizes various pest control tactics together in a harmonious way to achieve long-term pest control. The key components of IPM include gathering initial information, correctly identifying pests, monitoring pest populations, establishing economic injury levels, record keeping, selecting least-toxic treatment strategies, and evaluating treatments. Cultural, mechanical, biological, and chemical practices are among the pest management tactics used in IPM. The logic and necessity of IPM includes potential economic benefits from reduced pesticide use, environmental benefits from decreased contamination, and knowledge benefits from a better understanding of pests and their management.
Host plant resistance refers to the inherent ability of a plant to resist insect damage. There are three main types of resistance: antixenosis, antibiosis, and tolerance. Antixenosis makes the plant an unattractive host for feeding or oviposition. Antibiosis causes adverse effects on the insect such as reduced growth or increased mortality. Tolerance allows the plant to withstand or recover from insect damage through mechanisms like increased tillering. Resistance can be controlled by single genes or polygenes and can be specific to certain insect biotypes or provide more durable, general resistance.
Biological Control of Weeds in European Crops
`
For more information, Please see websites below:
`
Organic Edible Schoolyards & Gardening with Children
http://scribd.com/doc/239851214
`
Double Food Production from your School Garden with Organic Tech
http://scribd.com/doc/239851079
`
Free School Gardening Art Posters
http://scribd.com/doc/239851159`
`
Companion Planting Increases Food Production from School Gardens
http://scribd.com/doc/239851159
`
Healthy Foods Dramatically Improves Student Academic Success
http://scribd.com/doc/239851348
`
City Chickens for your Organic School Garden
http://scribd.com/doc/239850440
`
Simple Square Foot Gardening for Schools - Teacher Guide
http://scribd.com/doc/239851110
Biological and Cultural Control of Weeds and NematodesKarl Obispo
The document discusses various biological and mechanical methods for controlling weeds and nematodes. It describes how the head smut fungus Sporisorium ophiuri provides biological control of Rottboellia cochinchinensis by infecting seedlings. Mechanical control of R. cochinchinensis involves burning, tilling, and leaving fields fallow. Several Aphtona flea beetle species provide biological control of leafy spurge by feeding on roots and foliage. Tagetes erecta releases chemicals from its roots that are toxic to root-knot nematodes in the genus Meloidogyne. Higher organic matter and good soil care can also help minimize nematode damage.
Plants have two main types of defenses - constitutive and inducible. Constitutive defenses like cell walls, waxy cuticles, and bark are always present, while inducible defenses like toxic chemicals and enzymes are produced when the plant detects a pathogen. Examples of inducible defenses include toxic chemicals that kill pathogens, pathogen-degrading enzymes, and programmed cell death. Secondary compounds produced after attack by herbivores or pathogens are also toxic to invaders. Some examples of medically useful secondary compounds found in plants are menthol, linalool, carotene, atropine, scopolamine, sennoside. Herbivores have evolved adaptations like special enzymes and feeding behaviors to overcome plant defenses.
The document discusses various methods of pest management, including natural, synthetic, and integrated pest management approaches. It covers the advantages and disadvantages of chemical pesticides, how they work, and regulations around their use. Potential health and environmental impacts of pesticide use are also examined.
This document discusses methods for managing invasive plant species in sensitive ecologies. It identifies different types of plants - annuals, biennials, herbaceous perennials, and woody plants - and describes manual, mechanical, biological, and chemical management methods. The document focuses on specific invasive plant species, including mile-a-minute vine, multiflora rose, and autumn olive, providing details on their origins, characteristics, and potential bio-controls. Additional resources for identification and management of invasive species are listed.
This document discusses invasive species and provides criteria for identifying invasive plants. It notes that while not all non-native plants are invasive, invasive species are defined as those that colonize natural habitats, have negative impacts on ecosystems and the environment, and continue to increase their population and distribution. Examples are given of specific invasive plant species like Clidemia hirta, Piper aduncum, and Mimosa pigra that were intentionally or accidentally introduced from other regions and threaten native species through competition for resources and alteration of habitats. Physical and chemical control methods are mentioned for dealing with invasive plants.
This document provides an overview of integrated pest management (IPM). It discusses key principles of IPM, including using multiple pest control strategies, determining acceptable pest injury levels, and focusing on prevention over cure. Specific strategies covered include cultural, biological, host plant resistance, and chemical controls. Monitoring, identification, decision making, and record keeping are presented as important steps in any IPM program. The document emphasizes that IPM is a decision-making process that considers all options to manage pests below an economic threshold while minimizing risks.
Methods for Attracting and Preserving Beneficial InsectsFaiga64c
This document discusses methods for attracting and preserving beneficial insects. It outlines the concepts of biological control, including classical and applied biological control. It recommends selecting insecticides that are selective rather than broad-spectrum to avoid harming beneficial insects. The document discusses plants that attract beneficial insects by providing food and shelter. These include members of the carrot, sunflower, and mustard families. It also provides information on identifying common beneficial insect species and the pests they prey on.
This study investigated the antifeedant activity of Gomphrena serrata extracts on sitophilus oryzae (rice weevil). The extracts were obtained from the plant using cold maceration. Dilution methods were used to test different concentrations of the extract and standard on rice weevils. The 1:5 concentration of the G. serrata extract showed the highest antifeedant activity after 6 hours, equal to the standard. This simple, cost-effective extraction and testing method demonstrates the antifeedant potential of G. serrata extracts as a natural pesticide alternative.
Conservation and Augmentation of Biological Control Agent Karl Obispo
This document discusses different methods of biological control including conservation, augmentation, and classical biological control. Conservation involves improving habitats and reducing pesticide use to encourage natural enemy populations. Augmentation involves purchasing and releasing natural enemies when populations are not adequate. Classical biological control imports and establishes natural enemies of invasive pests. The document provides examples of each approach and emphasizes selecting insecticides and managing habitats that protect natural enemies.
This document provides an overview of integrated pest management (IPM) strategies for organic farming systems. It discusses preventative cultural practices as the foundation of organic pest management, including farm site selection, crop isolation/rotation, woody borders, and soil quality management. It also covers habitat enhancement strategies like intercropping, trap cropping, and conservation strips. The use of host plant resistance, biological control agents, and organic insecticides are also summarized. The document emphasizes that full integration of multiple complementary strategies is key to organic pest management.
3. Biological control of weeds A Lecture By Allah Dad Khan Mr.Allah Dad Khan
Australia was struggling with widespread infestation of prickly pear cactus in 1925. A small moth from Argentina was introduced that helped decimate the prickly pear population within 10 years, reducing the affected area to just 1% of what it was originally. Biological weed control uses living organisms like insects, fungi and bacteria to reduce weed populations by disrupting their ability to capture sunlight, take up water and nutrients, and reproduce. It is a natural method of control that can help restore ecological balance, but usually needs to be integrated with other control methods and requires long-term monitoring to evaluate effectiveness.
The document discusses plant health care (PHC) and integrated pest management (IPM). It covers appropriate response processes, plant resource allocation, and various pest control and treatment options including cultural, chemical, and biological controls. Treatment options range from resistant varieties and sanitation to insecticides, fungicides, oils, soaps, and beneficial insects. The goal is to promote plant vitality and vigor through proactive monitoring and selecting early intervention strategies.
Trichoderma is a fungus used for microbial control of plant pathogens. It can control pathogens through several mechanisms including mycoparasitism, antibiotic production, competition for space and nutrients in the rhizosphere, and induction of resistance in plants. The exact mechanisms involved are complex and can vary depending on the microbial control agent, pathogen, plant, and environmental conditions. Microbial control likely results from multiple mechanisms acting together synergistically.
The document discusses the costs, benefits, and consequences of interactions between species and with the environment. It explains that most symbiotic relationships exist in a stable balance, but that this balance can be impacted by the health of the host organism or environmental conditions. It provides examples of how factors like overcrowding or humidity can negatively impact hosts like seedlings or raspberries. The document also discusses how humans manage these relationships through improving environments, using drugs, pesticides, and herbicides.
1) The document discusses using biological agents like insects, mites, fungi, and plants to control various weed species.
2) It provides examples of biological agents being tested on different weeds, and criteria for selecting effective bioagents like host specificity, hardiness, feeding habits, and reproduction rate.
3) Common bioagents used include insects for lantana camara and prickly pear, carp fish and snails for aquatic weeds, mites for cactus, and fungi or competitive plants for other species.
This document discusses Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategies for vegetable gardens. IPM is a decision-making process that uses monitoring to determine when pest control is needed and employs cultural, physical, biological, and chemical tactics to keep pest populations low. The document outlines IPM principles including prevention, monitoring, identification, injury thresholds, and evaluation. It provides examples of cultural controls like companion planting and physical controls like handpicking pests. Biological controls discussed include Bacillus thuringiensis and beneficial insects. Chemical options include botanical and synthetic insecticides used as a last resort. Case studies on aphids and flea beetles demonstrate applying the IPM process.
Integrated Pest Management (IPM) utilizes various pest control tactics together in a harmonious way to achieve long-term pest control. The key components of IPM include gathering initial information, correctly identifying pests, monitoring pest populations, establishing economic injury levels, record keeping, selecting least-toxic treatment strategies, and evaluating treatments. Cultural, mechanical, biological, and chemical practices are among the pest management tactics used in IPM. The logic and necessity of IPM includes potential economic benefits from reduced pesticide use, environmental benefits from decreased contamination, and knowledge benefits from a better understanding of pests and their management.
Host plant resistance refers to the inherent ability of a plant to resist insect damage. There are three main types of resistance: antixenosis, antibiosis, and tolerance. Antixenosis makes the plant an unattractive host for feeding or oviposition. Antibiosis causes adverse effects on the insect such as reduced growth or increased mortality. Tolerance allows the plant to withstand or recover from insect damage through mechanisms like increased tillering. Resistance can be controlled by single genes or polygenes and can be specific to certain insect biotypes or provide more durable, general resistance.
Biological Control of Weeds in European Crops
`
For more information, Please see websites below:
`
Organic Edible Schoolyards & Gardening with Children
http://scribd.com/doc/239851214
`
Double Food Production from your School Garden with Organic Tech
http://scribd.com/doc/239851079
`
Free School Gardening Art Posters
http://scribd.com/doc/239851159`
`
Companion Planting Increases Food Production from School Gardens
http://scribd.com/doc/239851159
`
Healthy Foods Dramatically Improves Student Academic Success
http://scribd.com/doc/239851348
`
City Chickens for your Organic School Garden
http://scribd.com/doc/239850440
`
Simple Square Foot Gardening for Schools - Teacher Guide
http://scribd.com/doc/239851110
Biological and Cultural Control of Weeds and NematodesKarl Obispo
The document discusses various biological and mechanical methods for controlling weeds and nematodes. It describes how the head smut fungus Sporisorium ophiuri provides biological control of Rottboellia cochinchinensis by infecting seedlings. Mechanical control of R. cochinchinensis involves burning, tilling, and leaving fields fallow. Several Aphtona flea beetle species provide biological control of leafy spurge by feeding on roots and foliage. Tagetes erecta releases chemicals from its roots that are toxic to root-knot nematodes in the genus Meloidogyne. Higher organic matter and good soil care can also help minimize nematode damage.
Plants have two main types of defenses - constitutive and inducible. Constitutive defenses like cell walls, waxy cuticles, and bark are always present, while inducible defenses like toxic chemicals and enzymes are produced when the plant detects a pathogen. Examples of inducible defenses include toxic chemicals that kill pathogens, pathogen-degrading enzymes, and programmed cell death. Secondary compounds produced after attack by herbivores or pathogens are also toxic to invaders. Some examples of medically useful secondary compounds found in plants are menthol, linalool, carotene, atropine, scopolamine, sennoside. Herbivores have evolved adaptations like special enzymes and feeding behaviors to overcome plant defenses.
The document discusses various methods of pest management, including natural, synthetic, and integrated pest management approaches. It covers the advantages and disadvantages of chemical pesticides, how they work, and regulations around their use. Potential health and environmental impacts of pesticide use are also examined.
This document discusses methods for managing invasive plant species in sensitive ecologies. It identifies different types of plants - annuals, biennials, herbaceous perennials, and woody plants - and describes manual, mechanical, biological, and chemical management methods. The document focuses on specific invasive plant species, including mile-a-minute vine, multiflora rose, and autumn olive, providing details on their origins, characteristics, and potential bio-controls. Additional resources for identification and management of invasive species are listed.
This document discusses invasive species and provides criteria for identifying invasive plants. It notes that while not all non-native plants are invasive, invasive species are defined as those that colonize natural habitats, have negative impacts on ecosystems and the environment, and continue to increase their population and distribution. Examples are given of specific invasive plant species like Clidemia hirta, Piper aduncum, and Mimosa pigra that were intentionally or accidentally introduced from other regions and threaten native species through competition for resources and alteration of habitats. Physical and chemical control methods are mentioned for dealing with invasive plants.
This document summarizes research on alien plant invasions in Southern Africa and Robben Island. It finds that while native and non-native species differ in functional traits, invasive and non-invasive non-native species do not. These differences support Darwin's Naturalization Hypothesis. The study also finds that climate change could impact the geographic ranges of plants in the region by altering habitats. It is based on over 6 years of data collection and lab work analyzing the DNA of over 1,400 plant taxa across Southern Africa.
This document provides guidance on developing a management plan for invasive plants. It emphasizes understanding the biology and lifecycle of the target species, prioritizing areas based on goals, and using integrated control methods that are species-specific. Examples are given for developing multi-year plans to eradicate small garlic mustard patches and reduce the spread of larger infestations, as well as to prioritize and treat isolated buckthorn plants before denser areas. The key is developing a customized plan that considers objectives, species traits, and available resources.
The rangelands of Ethiopia make up about 50-70% of the country's land area and support around 9.8 million people and the majority of Ethiopia's livestock. The rangelands are located around the periphery of Ethiopia below 1,500 meters in elevation. They face increasing threats from soil erosion, degradation, and the encroachment of invasive species which have shrunk available grazing land and weakened traditional management systems. However, Ethiopia's rangelands remain resilient and continue to support many livelihoods while maintaining biodiversity and carbon sinks, but confronting climate change and growing pressures will require revitalizing indigenous management practices.
There are several ways to help endangered species, including protecting wildlife habitat from threats like deforestation, farming, and development; joining a conservation organization focused on protecting specific species or lands; and reducing the spread of invasive species that compete with native populations for resources and habitat. Additionally, getting involved locally by voicing concerns to governments and minimizing pesticide and herbicide use, as well as reducing energy and goods consumption, can help endangered species.
Building Resilience: Holistic Planning, Land Management and Grass-Fed Product...SWGLA
This document summarizes the holistic land management practices on the JX Ranch in New Mexico, which has improved the ranch's resilience. It discusses how the ranch added infrastructure like fences and water lines to better manage its 6,800 acres across 28 pastures. It restored grasslands by removing invasive mesquite and cedar trees. The ranch uses historic cattle breeds in one herd grazing rotation to improve soil and grasslands. It sells grass-fed beef directly to customers and offers ranch tours. The ranch has received several awards for its range management.
Demand for grass-fed beef has increased by 25–30% every year over the last decade. Now, more than ever, it is critical for producers to get their message out to the world. Andrew Gunther from A Greener World presents to SWGLA members on the topic at the 2016 Southwest Grass-Fed Conference.
The document discusses invasive alien species (IAS) as a threat to biodiversity and the environment. It describes how some species have traits like rapid growth and reproduction that allow them to outcompete native species. IAS are often introduced through human activities like importing plants, releasing ballast water from ships, or the pet trade. They can negatively impact ecosystems, economies, agriculture, and human health. Effective control requires integrated approaches like mechanical removal, chemicals, biological controls, and habitat management. The conclusion states that IAS are a major threat globally and that their impacts must be managed.
General Principles of Seed Production TechnologyRoshan Parihar
This document discusses principles of seed production, including genetic and agronomic principles.
Genetically, seed purity can deteriorate due to factors like natural crossing, genetic drift, mutations and mechanical mixtures. Methods to prevent deterioration include maintaining isolation distances, roguing fields to remove off-type plants, and growing seed crops only in adapted areas. Seed certification verifies genetic purity and quality.
Agronomically, seed production requires selecting suitable climates and soil conditions for the crop. Isolation of seed plots, selection of high-quality seed sources and varieties, and following best practices for seed treatment, sowing method and timing are important to maximize yield and seed quality.
Seeds contain a baby plant that can grow into a new plant. There are many different kinds of seeds that vary in shape, color, and texture, such as rice, beans, cumin, coriander, and black pepper. Seeds contain a plant embryo that needs water and air to grow into a full sized plant.
Seeds are the most important means of plant reproduction and have many uses for humans. Seed technology is the study of seed production, handling, and storage in order to ensure high quality seeds for successful crop production. It is important for maintaining genetic resources and allowing study of plant processes. Seeds are a major source of food, feed, fibers, oils and other products worldwide.
Seed quality is determined by physical, physiological, genetic, and storability attributes. Physiological attributes include germination percentage and vigor. Genetic attributes ensure the seed is the correct variety and adapted to local conditions. Seed can be classified as breeder's, pre-basic, basic, or certified based on generation and quality controls. Germination occurs through epigeal or hypogeal modes and requires water, air, temperature, and sometimes light.
A seed is a small embryonic plant enclosed in a protective seed coat that contains stored food. Seeds allow plants to maintain dormancy until conditions are suitable, protect the vulnerable young plant, provide food until photosynthesis is possible, and aid in plant dispersal. The main structures of a seed include the seed coat, hilum, embryo containing cotyledon, epicotyl/hypocotyl, plumule, and radicle. The seed coat protects the embryo while the cotyledon stores food and the epicotyl/hypocotyl and radicle form the basis of the stem and root.
This is a short paper on Bioeradication containing definitions and theory. It is a work in progress which is being further developed throughout the field season of 2015 and ... .
Thoughts on Ailanthus altissima: biological and chemical eradication methodsRichard Gardner
This document discusses how Western science has been hindered by its Roman/Christian heritage, which has encouraged an engineering approach rather than observation-based understanding. This heritage views the world as inherently flawed and in need of human improvement or control. As a result, science focuses on developing solutions to perceived problems rather than patient observation. Reductionism oversimplifies complex systems, and fields like medicine, ecology and food science aim to alter nature rather than understand it. The author argues for a return to classical observational science.
Locating and using native biocontrols for invasive non-native plants: a new paradigm as presented 14 April 2013 at the Northeast Natural History Conference.
1. The document discusses plant health care (PHC) and how it differs from integrated pest management (IPM), focusing on the appropriate response process (ARP) and how plants allocate resources.
2. It provides an overview of multiple pest control options and treatments, including advantages and limitations of alternatives like botanicals, horticultural oils, and microbial extracts.
3. The document reviews concepts like PHC vs. IPM, ARP, and resource allocation, and how stresses like pests, pathogens, abiotic disorders, and mortality spirals affect plant health.
Environmental health is the branch of public health concerned with all aspects of the natural and built environment affecting human health. In order to effectively control factors that may affect health, the requirements that must be met in order to create a healthy environment must be determined.[1] The major sub-disciplines of environmental health are environmental science, toxicology, environmental epidemiology, and environmental and occupational medicine.[2]
Definitions
WHO definitions
Environmental health was defined in a 1989 document by the World Health Organization (WHO) as: Those aspects of human health and disease that are determined by factors in the environment.[citation needed] It is also referred to as the theory and practice of accessing and controlling factors in the environment that can potentially affect health.[citation needed]
A 1990 WHO document states that environmental health, as used by the WHO Regional Office for Europe, "includes both the direct pathological effects of chemicals, radiation and some biological agents, and the effects (often indirect) on health and well being of the broad physical, psychological, social and cultural environment, which includes housing, urban development, land use and transport."[3]
As of 2016, the WHO website on environmental health states that "Environmental health addresses all the physical, chemical, and biological factors external to a person, and all the related factors impacting behaviours. It encompasses the assessment and control of those environmental factors that can potentially affect health. It is targeted towards preventing disease and creating health-supportive environments. This definition excludes behaviour not related to environment, as well as behaviour related to the social and cultural environment, as well as genetics."[4]
The WHO has also defined environmental health services as "those services which implement environmental health policies through monitoring and control activities. They also carry out that role by promoting the improvement of environmental parameters and by encouraging the use of environmentally friendly and healthy technologies and behaviors. They also have a leading role in developing and suggesting new policy areas."[5][6]
Other considerations
The term environmental medicine may be seen as a medical specialty, or branch of the broader field of environmental health.[7][8] Terminology is not fully established, and in many European countries they are used interchangeably.[9]
Children's environmental health is the academic discipline that studies how environmental exposures in early life—chemical, nutritional, and social—influence health and development in childhood and across the entire human life span.[10]
Other terms referring to or concerning environmental health include environmental public health and health protection.
Disciplines
Five basic disciplines generally contribute to the field of environmental health: environmental epidemiology,
This gardening project deals with plant diseases and control measures. It discusses 4 main topics: 1) control of plant diseases through quarantine, cultural, plant resistance, chemical, biological and integrated methods, 2) biological control through importation, augmentation and conservation, 3) common pesticides and insecticides like organochlorides and organophosphates, and 4) common agricultural equipment. The document provides details on types of control measures for plant diseases and explains biological control methods in more depth.
Biological control uses natural enemies like predators, parasites, and pathogens to control pest populations. There are three main types: conservation of existing natural enemies, classical biological control which introduces new natural enemies, and augmentation which supplements existing natural enemies. Biological control provides a progressive alternative to chemicals and can provide permanent control with low costs. However, some introductions have harmed non-target species. Biopesticides include microbial, plant-incorporated, and biochemical pesticides derived from natural materials and tend to pose less risk than conventional pesticides while effectively controlling pests when used as part of integrated pest management.
This essay compares and contrasts the organelles found in plant and animal cells. It describes the key organelles common to both cell types, such as the cell membrane, cytoplasm, nucleus, mitochondria and vacuoles. It then highlights some of the unique organelles found in plant cells, including the cell wall, chloroplasts and central vacuole. The functions of these organelles are also outlined.
1. Vegetative reproduction and apomixis are forms of asexual reproduction in plants where offspring are genetically identical to the parent.
2. Artificial vegetative reproduction in plants involves techniques like cutting, layering, grafting, suckering, and tissue culture which don't require sex.
3. Some advantages of asexual reproduction include rapid population growth without needing to find mates or move long distances, while disadvantages include lack of genetic diversity, inheritance of mutations, vulnerability to extinction, and inability to adapt to environmental changes.
Biological control of insects pest with reference to predatores and parasitoi...ankit sharda personal
Biological control uses natural predators and parasitoids to control insect pests. It has several advantages including being highly economical, selective with no side effects, and causing no harm to humans, livestock or other organisms. There are three main approaches: conservation of natural enemies, classical biological control which introduces natural enemies from the pest's native range, and augmentation which mass produces and releases natural enemies. Predators directly consume prey while parasitoids lay eggs on or in the body of the host insect, which is ultimately killed. Common biological control agents include ladybugs, dragonflies, wasps and flies.
This document discusses biocontrol agents used for biological pest control. It defines biocontrol as using living organisms to control pests like insects, mites, weeds, and plant diseases. The document outlines the history of biocontrol and describes common types of biocontrol agents like parasitoids, predators, and entomopathogens such as bacteria, viruses, fungi and nematodes. It discusses strategies for biocontrol and provides advantages like being environmentally friendly and reducing chemical pesticide use, as well as disadvantages like pathogens developing resistance.
This lesson deals with Species that Thrive on EarthRandyBaquiran1
This document discusses species and different species concepts. It defines a species as a group of organisms that can interbreed and produce fertile offspring. It describes several species concepts including the morphological, phenetic, biological, and ecological concepts. It also discusses different types of species such as endangered, dominant, rare, exotic, and type species. The document emphasizes that understanding species is important for appreciating biodiversity and ecosystem functioning.
Biodiversity refers to the variety of life on Earth, including genetic diversity within species, between species, and among ecosystems. It is commonly measured through counts of species richness in a given area. High biodiversity, which depends on both richness and evenness of species populations, creates more stable ecosystems. The document then discusses factors like adaptation and ecosystem dynamics that impact biodiversity.
The document outlines several key concepts in ecology and conservation including:
1. Factors that affect the distribution of plant and animal species such as temperature, water, light, soil pH, breeding sites, and food supply.
2. Methods for measuring ecological concepts like biomass, primary production, trophic levels, and ecological succession.
3. The major biomes of the world and how abiotic factors like temperature and rainfall affect their distribution.
4. Reasons for biodiversity conservation using rainforests as an example, including ethical, ecological, economic, and aesthetic arguments. Accelerating extinction rates are threatening many species.
The Phytobiomes Initiative proposes a systems-level approach to studying the entire microbial community associated with plants, including bacteria, viruses, and eukaryotes in the rhizosphere, phyllosphere, and within plants. Recent advances in metagenomic technologies now allow comprehensive analysis of both culturable and non-culturable microbes. Two recent studies using these methods revealed that root microbial communities are non-random and depend on host genotype and environment. The initiative aims to establish a foundation for understanding how phytobiomes influence plant health and productivity, with the goal of developing strategies to improve crop yields, reduce disease and environmental impacts, and enhance food safety and security.
Biodiversity contributes to human well-being by providing raw materials and health benefits. However, human actions often lead to irreversible losses of biodiversity at a rapidly increasing rate over the past 50 years. The main factors responsible are habitat destruction, invasive species, pollution, climate change, and overconsumption. Conserving biodiversity through measures like protecting endangered species and biodiversity hotspots is important because ecosystems provide essential services like water purification, crop pollination, and potential future medicines.
biological weed control ,what is bio-control of weed ,how biological control of weed works ,advantage of biological weed control ,methods and agents of biological weed control
This document discusses conservation biology and the importance of plants. It begins by explaining that biology is concerned with all life and how everything is connected through energy transfer. It then focuses on plants as the primary producers that all life relies on. Conservation biology is defined as figuring out relationships between living things and preserving life, especially endangered species, for future generations through habitat preservation and preventing human intervention. Several examples of species facing extinction due to beliefs in their medicinal properties are provided. The importance of plants for medicine both now and potentially in the future is discussed. Several cases of plants being overharvested are examined. Reasons for lack of conservation efforts and careers in conservation biology, especially with federal and state agencies, are outlined. Salaries for
Similar to Invasive plants:identities, issues and theory NENHC 2014 (20)
My mother's family at war within itself allegory using trees as symbols of th...Richard Gardner
Three versions of an allegory using trees from a forest to demonstrate that different people in family have different gifts all of which are essential for the family to function.
1) The document describes the author's mother and father who were married for over 65 years. It discusses his mother's ancestry dating back to the 1600s in England and her descendants who fought in the American Revolution and War of 1812.
2) It tells stories about his mother's ancestors including Lieutenant William Barton and Margaret Henderson who married after two weeks. His mother's family also owned slaves while others fought against slavery in the Civil War.
3) The author discusses his mother being the only one in her family to attend college and her skills as an artisan, noting the talents were passed down. She instigated the move from New Jersey to remove herself and the author's father from family disputes.
In Memoriam for Audrey Mary Smith (Gardner).pptxRichard Gardner
Audrey Mary Smith Gardner passed away on January 4, 2023 at the age of 87. She was remembered as an artisan, mother, grandmother, and wife. Her son, Richard Thomas Gardner III, published this memorial notice on what would have been her 88th birthday on March 17, 2023 to honor her memory.
Hiking safely over 60 years old requires planning and preparation given increased health risks. The author discusses strategies he uses such as carrying emergency communication devices like SPOT, ensuring others know his plans and routes, and hiking with a first aid kit. He also considers group dynamics if injury occurs and ensures maps are available without cell service. The author's preparations allow him to continue hiking while managing his health risks.
BCTV May 2021 talking points for an interview on Emergency PreparednessRichard Gardner
These are talking points I prepared for an interview done on BCTV by Terrisa Faulkner of Abilities in Motion (https://www.abilitiesinmotion.org/) about Emergency Preparedness
This document discusses the author's observations about type 2 diabetes based on their family history and experience managing the condition. The author notes that type 2 diabetes is caused by insulin resistance and is part of metabolic syndrome, which includes high blood sugar, blood pressure, and cholesterol. The author describes lifestyle changes they have made to control their blood sugar levels through diet, exercise and medication. They warn about the dangers of uncontrolled diabetes and share stories of complications they have witnessed in others.
This document provides instructions for making a face mask from a 27-inch bandana to use while hiking on trails where maintaining social distance is difficult. It describes folding the bandana diagonally from opposite corners to create 4 layers of protection. The mask can be easily stored in a day pack or car and put on within seconds when needed, such as when passing other hikers on narrow trails. It is cheap, easy to wash, and provides a simple solution for hikers to help protect themselves and others during the pandemic when more effective masks are not required or practical for short-term outdoor use.
Summation of 2019 research on Lycorma delicatula, the Spotted Lanternfly in Berks County, PA from egg hatching in the spring to egg laying in the fall.
1. There is an overwhelming hatred of spotted lanternflies (SLF) in Berks County fueled by Penn State, but attempts to kill every insect and remove every egg mass are impossible due to the huge numbers of SLF and host trees in the area.
2. SLF are good hitchhikers and will spread across the landscape quickly using the major transportation arteries around Berks County.
3. The few SLF seen in forests along trails were likely transported by hikers, hunters, or vehicles opening forest roads, as SLF are not strong flyers able to navigate forests on their own.
Spotted Lanternfly and Gypsy Moth, Spring 2019Richard Gardner
This is a series of slides showing the Spotted Lanternfly from egg mass through the second instar and the gypsy moth emerging from 2 egg masses in northern Berks County, PA and very southern Schuylkill County, PA.
Esa and nenhc 2019 ppt on the Spotted LanternflyRichard Gardner
This document summarizes observations from research on the Spotted Lanternfly in Berks County, Pennsylvania. It discusses the lanternfly's coevolution with humans and preference for human-modified habitats. Key points include that quarantines are ineffective against spread, the insect's lifecycle is tied to its primary host the Ailanthus tree, and egg masses are usually within 20 feet of open areas used as travel corridors. Removal of the tree is an impractical control strategy. More observation of the lanternfly's natural history is needed before rushing to solutions.
The document summarizes the author's four years of research studying American chestnut trees in Pennsylvania. Over this period, the author documented over 10,000 chestnut stems, including nearly 100 fertile trees. Some of the key lessons learned include that chestnut blight is not threatening the extinction of chestnuts, chestnuts can still reproduce even with blight, and trails and clearings provide refuge for chestnuts. The author's remaining goals are to grow chestnut trees from seedlings in their yard through two generations.
PPT of talk delivered on the Spotted Lanternfly, Jan. 25, 2019. This talks about the natural history of the Spotted Lanternfly, Lycorma delicatula , and it relationship to the people in Berks County, PA by an ecologist who studied Ailanthus altissima for his MS thesis.
Thoughts on 2018 research on the spotted lanternfly,rev. dec. 31, 2018bRichard Gardner
1) The author observed a strong correlation between wild grape vines and Spotted Lanternfly egg masses on nearby trees, suggesting wild grape may be an important habitat and food source.
2) The author hypothesizes that Spotted Lanternfly egg-laying strategies may have evolved in response to different predation pressures between its native Asia habitat and its invaded Pennsylvania habitat. Scattered egg-laying across various surfaces may help the insects spread more efficiently in Pennsylvania.
3) The author notes that Spotted Lanternfly egg masses appear camouflaged on tree bark through color, cracks and coatings, which may be an adaptation to avoid egg predation the insects faced in Asia.
Improving the viability of probiotics by encapsulation methods for developmen...Open Access Research Paper
The popularity of functional foods among scientists and common people has been increasing day by day. Awareness and modernization make the consumer think better regarding food and nutrition. Now a day’s individual knows very well about the relation between food consumption and disease prevalence. Humans have a diversity of microbes in the gut that together form the gut microflora. Probiotics are the health-promoting live microbial cells improve host health through gut and brain connection and fighting against harmful bacteria. Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus are the two bacterial genera which are considered to be probiotic. These good bacteria are facing challenges of viability. There are so many factors such as sensitivity to heat, pH, acidity, osmotic effect, mechanical shear, chemical components, freezing and storage time as well which affects the viability of probiotics in the dairy food matrix as well as in the gut. Multiple efforts have been done in the past and ongoing in present for these beneficial microbial population stability until their destination in the gut. One of a useful technique known as microencapsulation makes the probiotic effective in the diversified conditions and maintain these microbe’s community to the optimum level for achieving targeted benefits. Dairy products are found to be an ideal vehicle for probiotic incorporation. It has been seen that the encapsulated microbial cells show higher viability than the free cells in different processing and storage conditions as well as against bile salts in the gut. They make the food functional when incorporated, without affecting the product sensory characteristics.
RoHS stands for Restriction of Hazardous Substances, which is also known as t...vijaykumar292010
RoHS stands for Restriction of Hazardous Substances, which is also known as the Directive 2002/95/EC. It includes the restrictions for the use of certain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment. RoHS is a WEEE (Waste of Electrical and Electronic Equipment).
Optimizing Post Remediation Groundwater Performance with Enhanced Microbiolog...Joshua Orris
Results of geophysics and pneumatic injection pilot tests during 2003 – 2007 yielded significant positive results for injection delivery design and contaminant mass treatment, resulting in permanent shut-down of an existing groundwater Pump & Treat system.
Accessible source areas were subsequently removed (2011) by soil excavation and treated with the placement of Emulsified Vegetable Oil EVO and zero-valent iron ZVI to accelerate treatment of impacted groundwater in overburden and weathered fractured bedrock. Post pilot test and post remediation groundwater monitoring has included analyses of CVOCs, organic fatty acids, dissolved gases and QuantArray® -Chlor to quantify key microorganisms (e.g., Dehalococcoides, Dehalobacter, etc.) and functional genes (e.g., vinyl chloride reductase, methane monooxygenase, etc.) to assess potential for reductive dechlorination and aerobic cometabolism of CVOCs.
In 2022, the first commercial application of MetaArray™ was performed at the site. MetaArray™ utilizes statistical analysis, such as principal component analysis and multivariate analysis to provide evidence that reductive dechlorination is active or even that it is slowing. This creates actionable data allowing users to save money by making important site management decisions earlier.
The results of the MetaArray™ analysis’ support vector machine (SVM) identified groundwater monitoring wells with a 80% confidence that were characterized as either Limited for Reductive Decholorination or had a High Reductive Reduction Dechlorination potential. The results of MetaArray™ will be used to further optimize the site’s post remediation monitoring program for monitored natural attenuation.
Kinetic studies on malachite green dye adsorption from aqueous solutions by A...Open Access Research Paper
Water polluted by dyestuffs compounds is a global threat to health and the environment; accordingly, we prepared a green novel sorbent chemical and Physical system from an algae, chitosan and chitosan nanoparticle and impregnated with algae with chitosan nanocomposite for the sorption of Malachite green dye from water. The algae with chitosan nanocomposite by a simple method and used as a recyclable and effective adsorbent for the removal of malachite green dye from aqueous solutions. Algae, chitosan, chitosan nanoparticle and algae with chitosan nanocomposite were characterized using different physicochemical methods. The functional groups and chemical compounds found in algae, chitosan, chitosan algae, chitosan nanoparticle, and chitosan nanoparticle with algae were identified using FTIR, SEM, and TGADTA/DTG techniques. The optimal adsorption conditions, different dosages, pH and Temperature the amount of algae with chitosan nanocomposite were determined. At optimized conditions and the batch equilibrium studies more than 99% of the dye was removed. The adsorption process data matched well kinetics showed that the reaction order for dye varied with pseudo-first order and pseudo-second order. Furthermore, the maximum adsorption capacity of the algae with chitosan nanocomposite toward malachite green dye reached as high as 15.5mg/g, respectively. Finally, multiple times reusing of algae with chitosan nanocomposite and removing dye from a real wastewater has made it a promising and attractive option for further practical applications.
Evolving Lifecycles with High Resolution Site Characterization (HRSC) and 3-D...Joshua Orris
The incorporation of a 3DCSM and completion of HRSC provided a tool for enhanced, data-driven, decisions to support a change in remediation closure strategies. Currently, an approved pilot study has been obtained to shut-down the remediation systems (ISCO, P&T) and conduct a hydraulic study under non-pumping conditions. A separate micro-biological bench scale treatability study was competed that yielded positive results for an emerging innovative technology. As a result, a field pilot study has commenced with results expected in nine-twelve months. With the results of the hydraulic study, field pilot studies and an updated risk assessment leading site monitoring optimization cost lifecycle savings upwards of $15MM towards an alternatively evolved best available technology remediation closure strategy.
16. Backyard ecology/backyard research – most of
the important research in ecology can literally
be done in our back yards. All the relationships
and answers to the big questions are there for
us to find. Exotic locations and expensive
equipment may only confirm what we already
observed and synthesized.
17. Every slide in this presentation was taken within 50
miles of home. Most were taken within 10 miles
with some in our backyard. All the basic concepts
were developed while walking near home. Total
expenses to do this and related research is less than
$3000 over 4 years, including consumables and
equipment. The most expensive pieces of
equipment are the computer and the camera.
18. Medicating the ecology (gerbil science) - My first
fear with biocontrols is that we select target
organisms the way we select any other problem
that appears to need solving. We look only at the
crisis. Then we charge in solving an apparent
problem mechanistically without looking in depth
to understand the crisis or look for creative less
dangerous and minimally disruptive alternatives.
19. Classical biocontrol – the introduction of non-
native organisms in the attempt to reduce the
effects of other introduced non-native organisms
on ecosystems.
There are unforeseen negative effects from the
biocontrols which cannot be predicted in the
local and extra-local ecosystems in which they
are introduced through genetic and/or
behavioral changes in the non-native biocontrol
and native organisms.
20. In other words it is a mechanistic attempt to
use non-native organisms to control already
present non-native organisms.
It does not attempt to bring an ecosystem back
into balance. Instead it causes a new system
and (im)balance to develop that is alien.
21. Specialists – a specialist in ecology is an organism
that is limited to one organism as an energy source
(or any other limiting condition such as type of
nesting habitat or roosting location) which makes it a
specialist to that condition in a specific time and
place. It is usually derived/descended from a
generalist which has moved into a “niche” due to
varying factors such as competition, environmental
change, mate selection or lack of other available food
sources.
22. When the specific limiting factor is removed
from a specialist, it will often expand beyond the
boundaries to which it is confined.
23. Specialist biocontrol – a mythological organism
which with enough time will begin to exploit
other energy sources and environmental
resources in the ecosystem into which it was
introduced. In other words, an introduced
“specialist biocontrol” will expand in an
ecosystem beyond the expected limited
boundaries in an ecosystem to have “unexpected”
and negative effects on an ecosystem.
24. Unexpected effects of a specialist biocontrol – Some of
the nearly infinite effects an introduced biocontrol may
have upon an ecosystem after introduction:
1. begin to eat native relatives of the non-native plant it was
introduced to control.
2. act as a food supplement for other native
organisms, causing their population to explode with unforeseen
consequences. (Ex. – brown marmorated stink bugs and song
birds, emerald ash borers and woodpeckers.)
3. act as a primary food source for native predators causing a
population explosion of the original native primary food source.
4. compete with and outcompete native organisms for
resources such as egg laying sites, hibernation sites, supplemental
food sources, … .
5. carry diseases and/or parasites which may infect and
otherwise affect native organisms.
25. It is important to remember that non-native
biocontrols have high rates of failure and low rates
of success.
There is an average of 2.44 introduced
organisms for every species on which control is
being attempted. I think this number is
underestimated and that the real number is at least
5 introduced organisms for every biocontrol
target, probably higher.
26. Bioeradication – The extinction of a non-native
(invasive) species from an ecosystem using
native organisms. The goal is the regeneration
of the ecosystem by eliminating the non-native
problem from the ecosystem using native
organisms which minimize the potential
problems associated with the addition of non-
native organisms as potential controls.
27. Bioeradicant – Any native organism in any time
frame from seconds to centuries that partially or
fully inhibits a non-native organism and helps to
drive it to extinction.
28. Bioeradication system – A group of native
organisms which through any biological
relationship and time frame partially or fully
inhibits a non-native organism to the point it is
driven to extinction.
29. Bioeradication systems are what I am observing
when I walk. There may be individual organisms
doing the same, but I have not seen them.
30. Hybrid bioeradication system – A group of
native and indigenous non-native organisms
which through any biological relationship and
time frame partially or fully inhibits a non-native
organism to the point it is driven to extinction.
31. Direct bioeradication – The use of a native
organism or native organism system as a
bioeradicant for a specific organism by
increasing its population through introduction of
more of the bioeradicant.
32. Indirect bioeradication – Providing the native
natural resources such as food sources, breeding
sites or shelter needed for a bioeradicant or
bioeradicant system to develop at a specific
location for a specific organism. This may be
nectar sources, sheltering plants, mutualistic
fungi, water source or … for any life stage.
33. The difference between bioeradication and
biocontrol is that bioeradication assumes it is
possible to exterminate a non-native species
from an ecosystem using native species. While
biocontrol is trying to change, modify or
minimize the effects of one non-native organism
by using another non-native organism.
34. Bioremediation – the use of native organisms to
displace and eradicate non-native organisms while
replacing them as they are eliminated from an
ecosystem.
This is an expansion of the traditional definition of
bioremediation; the use of microorganisms or
plants to mitigate chemical or organic pollution.
This expands the term to mean use of native
organisms to restore an ecosystem during the
process of and after the removal of a non-native
organism or non-native organism system.
35. The question most frequently asked with
Bioeradication is why has no one noticed it
before?
The answer is threefold:
1.) no one thought to look
2.) many of the non-natives were
eradicated before anyone even noticed
they were an issue
3.) systems are much harder to identify,
observe and understand than individual
organisms.
36. Population
Non-native biocontrol
Non-native invasive
Native congeners
and conspecifics of
non-native invasive
time
Simplified expected curves for what happens when a non-native biocontrol is
introduced after the establishment of a non-native invasive due to the
biocontrol adapting to new food sources without defenses to that
biocontrol.
37. Population
Native bioeradicant
Non-native invasive
Native congeners of
non-native invader
time
The expected population curves for native bioeradicant use. The baseline populations for
native organisms change as the native bioeradicants adapt to the non-native invasive and eat a
few more of the native while the system comes back into balance as the non-native is
destroyed. There is some recoverable risk to the native ecosystem, but not the unrecoverable
risk of introducing non-native biocontrols.
38. One of the weaknesses we exploit in
bioeradication is that the imported non-
natives are of limited genetic variability due
to the few members of the species and
limited number of cultivars imported.
39. Modern horticultural practices further limit
the amount of genetic heterogeneity by
using primarily clones and seeds of plants
controlled for certain “desirable” traits.
40. Therefore, they have fewer genetic tools
with which to resist native herbivores and
diseases.
41. Which means that a bioeradication system
will often be devastating.
42. To further this argument, the first plant I
investigated, Ailanthus altissima, had a
complete bioeradication system in place.
43. If my first target proved that bioeradication is
happening, imagine how many other invasives
are undergoing the same!
44. Common name: Tree-of-heaven
Scientific name: Ailanthus altissima
Origin: China
Local habitat: It prefers the edge of wooded areas and open fields. However, it will grow in
wooded areas where light reaches the forest floor.
Reproduction: This tree is dioecious with separate male and female trees. A mature female
may produce over 350,000 seeds/year. Germination rate may run as high as 90%
under controlled conditions. When mechanically (physically) injured, this tree will
produce many clones from its roots up to 30 yards away. Seed bank is one year
except under controlled conditions.
Identifying features: It has odd pinnate compound leaves with opposite blade-like leaflets.
Leaflets have one pair to several pairs of notches along the edge of the proximal
end. Each notch has a gland on the distal end of the point. The odor is
unmistakable at certain times when downwind.
Weaknesses: It tends to form monoclonal stands when physically injured and may
interconnect roots between individuals in a stand. This means that herbivores and
disease have fewer genotypes to deal with and disease can move through root
grafts within the stand. It is dioecious with possible sterilization of female trees.
Local Controls: A combination of the native moth Atteva aurea, the eriophyoid mite Aculops
ailanthii, various as of yet unidentified herbivorous insects and several pathogenic
Fusarium and Verticillium fungi. Whitetailed deer browse leaves.
Outlook: Excellent. It is apparently slowly going extinct locally and probably throughout its
eastern North American range from naturally occurring processes..
45. Common name: Tree-of-heaven
Scientific name: Ailanthus altissima
Origin: China
Local habitat: It prefers the edge of wooded areas and open fields. However, it will
grow in wooded areas where light reaches the forest floor.
Reproduction: This tree is dioecious with separate male and female trees. A
mature female may produce over 350,000 seeds/year. Germination rate may run
as high as 90% under controlled conditions. When mechanically (physically)
injured, this tree will produce many clones up to 30 yards away.
Identifying features: It has odd pinnate compound leaves with blade-like leaflets
which are opposite. Leaflets have one pair to several pairs of notches
along the edge of the proximal end. Each notch has a gland on the distal
end of the point. The odor is unmistakable at certain times when downwind.
Weaknesses: tends to form monoclonal stands when physically injured and may
interconnect roots between individuals in a stand. This means that herbivores and
disease have fewer genotypes to deal with and disease can move
through root grafts when spreading through a stand.
Local Controls: A combination of the native moth Atteva aurea, Aculops ailanthii, various as
of yet unidentified herbivorous insects and several pathogenic Fusarium
and Verticillium fungi. Whitetailed deer browse leaves.
Outlook: Apparently slowly going extinct locally and probably throughout its eastern North
American range from naturally occurring processes.
46.
47.
48. Very early in the life of
Ailanthus the main root
makes a right angle turn
that is parallel with the
ground while often putting
down a tap root as seen in
this photo and the
following.
93. Birds – best for long
distances between
landscapes*
Moths – best
for medium
and short
distances
within a
landscape**
Wind – best
within
landscapes
for short
distances
with high
mite and tree
densities
Transport of Aculops ailanthii and disease across
landscapes
Deer – short and medium distances
within a landscape as they browse
on Ailanthus leaves
*I have yet to see a bird’s nest or birds consistently roost on Ailanthus
**A. aurea may be the primary transporter of A. ailanthii in all distances
94. From recent walking it appears that
there is a correlation between the
density and nearness of the nectar
sources adult Atteva aurea feed on
and the amount of disease in a stand
of Ailanthus.
95. Which means that the key to Ailanthus
control is to plant native flowers
nearby with compact inflorescences
that bloom in succession from late
spring to hard freeze as nectar sources
for adult Atteva aurea.
106. Common name: Multiflora rose
Scientific name: Rosa multiflora
Origin: Asia
Local habitat: fields and wooded areas
Reproduction: seeds and stem clones
Identifying features: The only local rose I know of where the thorns curve towards the
center of plant
Weaknesses: Many native and non-native relatives from which disease and herbivores can
evolve to become bioeradicants. Dense stands facilitate the spread of herbivores
and disease. Birds eat the abundant fruit, potentially spreading disease and
herbivores between plants locally and across landscapes. Clonal growth limits
genetic heterogeneity and facilitates the movement of disease through a stand.
Local Controls: Rose rosette disease, an Emaravirus spread by the eriophyoid mite
Phyllocoptes fructiphilus is in a bioeradication system with birds. It probably
developed on a native rose in California or another Pacific Coast state.
Outlook: Excellent. It is severely affected by rose rosette disease and possibly another
disease which yellows the leaves.
107.
108.
109.
110.
111.
112.
113.
114. Probable scenario for the spread of rose rosette
disease across the ecosystems
Birds – carrying mites long
distances, between landscapes
and within landscapes while
feeding and nesting
Pollinators – carrying mites
medium distances, within
landscapes
Wind – carrying mites
short distances, within
stands
115. Common name: Japanese honeysuckle
Scientific name: Lonicera japonica
Origin: Asia
Local habitat: It prefers the edge of wooded areas and open woodlands.
Reproduction: Cloning and bird distributed seeds.
Identifying features: Elliptic shaped leaves opposite on climbing vines. Distinct
flowers with a sweet odor when in bloom. Prefers shaded edges with a
substrate of brush and small trees to climb on.
Weaknesses: Many native and non-native relatives from which disease and herbivores can
evolve from to become bioeradicants. Clonal spread limits genetic heterogeneity
and is a pathway for disease to move through a stand. Birds eat the abundant
fruit, potentially spreading disease and herbivores between plants locally and
across landscapes.
Local Controls: There appears to be beetle herbivory and several diseases which it
shares with the non-native bush honeysuckles.
Outlook: Good. This plant is on the decline from my observations due to disease and
insect herbivory. It should be an easy research target for bioeradication.
116.
117.
118.
119.
120.
121. Common name: Morrows honeysuckle
Scientific name: Lonicera morrowii
Origin: Asia
Local habitat: wooded areas
Reproduction: seeds spread by birds
Identifying features: Bushy shrub with elliptic shaped leaves similar to Japanese
honeysuckle.
Weaknesses: Many native and non-native relatives from which disease and herbivores can
evolve to become bioeradicants. Dense stands facilitate the spread of herbivores
and disease. Birds eat the abundant fruit, potentially spreading disease and
herbivores between plants locally and across landscapes.
Local Controls: Herbivorous insects with mites and disease working together. I am seeing
possibly three separate diseases as I walk.
Outlook: Excellent. It is going extinct throughout its eastern North American range due to
disease and herbivory.
133. Probable scenario for the movement of
pathogens and insect herbivores between
Lonicera morrowii plants.
Wind – short distances
within landscapes Deer – short and medium
distances between thickets
within a landscape
Birds – long distances between
landscapes
Insect pollinators and herbivores –
short and medium distances within
landscapes
134. Common name: Amur honeysuckle
Scientific name: Lonicera maackii
Origin: Asia
Local habitat: wooded areas
Reproduction: seeds spread by birds
Identifying features: Elliptic shaped leaves with a curved narrowing point
Weaknesses: Many native and non-native relatives from which disease and herbivores can
evolve to become bioeradicants. Dense stands facilitate the spread of herbivores
and disease. Birds eat the abundant fruit, potentially spreading disease and
herbivores between plants locally and across landscapes.
Local Controls: Herbivorous insects with mites and disease working together. I am seeing a
variety of separate diseases as I walk.
Outlook: Good. It appears to be going extinct throughout its eastern North American range
due to disease and herbivory.
135.
136.
137.
138. Common name: Oriental bittersweet
Scientific name: Celastrus orbiculatus
Origin: Asia
Local habitat: forests and fields
Reproduction: seeds
Identifying features: Acuminate shaped leaves with serrulate margins towards and on the
ends of new growth becoming orbicular mature leaves with serrated margin,
bright yellow/orange seeds in the fall. Vine is not hairy as is poison ivy or shaggy
like native grape.
Weaknesses: A close native relative from which disease and herbivores can evolve to
become bioeradicants. Dense stands facilitate the spread of herbivores and
disease. Birds eat the abundant fruit, potentially spreading disease and
herbivores between plants locally and across landscapes.
Local Controls: None now. However, a disease was apparently forming at home on the
leaves of several plants.
Outlook: Good. In time since it has a close native relative, I expect a native organism or
more probably organism system to begin to eradicate it. In our backyard, there
appears to be a necrotic disease developing on the leaves.
139.
140.
141.
142.
143.
144.
145.
146.
147. Common name: Wineberry
Scientific name: Rubus phoenicolasius
Origin: Asia
Local habitat: woodlands, along the edges of road roads and trails
Reproduction: seeds and clones from stems
Identifying features: Hairy red or green stems with a combination of soft fuzzy prickles and
hard thorns. Stems turn red in the fall. Fruit forms in pods which break open
about a week before ripening to clusters of bright red drupelets.
Weaknesses: Many native and possibly non-native relatives from which disease and
herbivores can evolve to become bioeradicants. Clonal stands facilitate the spread
of herbivores and disease. Birds eat the abundant fruit, potentially spreading
disease and herbivores between plants locally and across landscapes.
Local Controls: When I walk there appears to be disease and herbivory similar to native
blackberries and the native raspberries for which it was brought in to
hybridize with.
Outlook: Good. I see chlorosis (disease) and other issues which appear to have moved from
closely related native raspberries.
148.
149.
150.
151.
152.
153. Native raspberry showing disease which may
be in the process of being passed to non-native
wineberry.
154. Common name: Garlic mustard
Scientific name: Alliaria petiolata
Origin: Eurasia
Local habitat: the understory along trails and roads
Reproduction: seeds
Identifying features: It is one of the earliest forbs to bloom which has white flowers on
multiple stems up to mid-thigh high. According to Bernd Blossey of Ithaca College,
it needs earthworms to flourish so it will usually not be found where earthworms
have not been introduced.
Weaknesses: A member of a large family of native and non-native plants from which
diseases and herbivores can evolve to become bioeradicants.
Local Controls: Since it is in the mustard family, there are potential native bioeradicants
developing. Humans can help by picking it for flavoring hopelessly boring
English/German style cooking and as a nutrition source.
Outlook: Good. There is an apparent bioeradicant already beginning to make an impact
and many native plants within the family from which bioeradicants can develop.
155.
156.
157.
158.
159. Common name: Japanese stiltgrass
Scientific name: Microstegium vimineum
Origin: Asia
Local habitat: wooded areas with partial sun. It usually starts along the edge of trails
and roads where people accidently carry the hitchhiking seeds and spreads from
there. Intermittent/seasonal streams are often a preferred growing location and a
corridor by which it spreads into the forest.
Reproduction: seeds
Identifying features: Silver vein down middle of leaf, large dense stands which become
noticeable in late summer
Weaknesses: Many native and non-native relatives from which disease can evolve into a
bioeradicant. Tends to grow in well-traveled areas which facilitates the spread of
disease.
Local Controls: Members of the Bipolaris fungi family that may have evolved from native
pathogenic fungi of Zea mays.
Outlook: Good. In the Midwest, it is being eradicated by Bipolaris fungi and other
organisms. (Our gerbils do not like it as food. So, it will probably not be usable as
a harvestable pet food for rabbits, hamsters, gerbils, mice, guinea pigs or rats.)
160.
161.
162.
163.
164.
165.
166. Part 3: The concepts, terminology,
theoretical framework and
application of bioeradication
169. Common name: Mile-a-minute
Scientific name: Polygonum perfoliatum
Origin: Asia
Local habitat: edges of woods and open areas within woods
Reproduction: seed
Identifying features: Blue green deltoid (triangular) leaves, thin fuchsia/green prickly stems,
shallow roots, clusters of green, purple and blue berries, blankets an area fast.
Weaknesses: Many native relatives from which disease and herbivores can evolve to
become bioeradicants. Self pollinating. Dense stands facilitate the spread of
herbivores and disease. Birds eat the abundant fruit, potentially spreading
disease and herbivores between plants locally and across landscapes. Not
tolerant to cold/frost so dies if there is a late spring frost or an early fall frost.
Limited growing season in cooler areas, reducing size of plants and seed
production.
Local Controls: None, the non-native biocontrol appears to be minimally successful. There
is the possibility that a disease is beginning to infect this plant.
Outlook: This plant is in a large family of related plants. Therefore, I expect it to go
extinct when native organisms catch up with it. I found it infesting a woodland
near the University of Delaware, the place where non-native biocontrols are being
studied and released in attempts to control it. This suggests that the non-native
biocontrol is not as successful as expected.
170.
171.
172.
173.
174.
175.
176. Example of plants with similar physiology in close
proximity to P. perfoliatum.
177. My first concern with this plant is that its propagule
(seed) spread is an important and uncontainable
component of how it moves across the landscape.
Look at where a new patch appears and you will
find that a bird roosted or perched in a nearby tree
after eating the berries someplace else.
Since this plant is in berry from mid-summer
through the fall migration, seed spread can be
hundreds of miles in one or two years.
179. It is obvious that migrating birds are spreading
the seeds along species specific eastern United
States migration corridors.
180. This makes the plant a bad target for biocontrol
as it is impossible to control as the plant spreads
too rapidly and too far to be contained by the
release of “specialist” herbivorous insects at
specific locations without doing a range wide
release at which time there is a strong possibility
that it will be more detrimental to the local
ecologies than the plant itself is.
181. Therefore, unless a bioeradicant system
develops and naturally spreads, this plant will
continue to spread without any hope of
containing or eradicating it.
182. My second concern is it appears that the native
congeners were not checked thoroughly for
potential controls. There are possibly hundreds
of confamiliars and congeners in the plant’s
present and potential range.
183. My third concern is that testing of biocontrols is
necessarily limited to try to control the number of
variables, reduce time to release and reduce costs.
This unfortunately increases the probability that
the biocontrol will attack native plants and/or
otherwise disrupt the ecosystem.
184. This makes for a very high likelihood that the
introduced non-native biocontrol will begin
feeding on native plant relatives given enough
generations to adapt to the local ecologies.
185. My fourth concern is the large number of other
plants in close proximity with similar physical
traits. It is not always only the chemicals in the
food that matter, but the physical attributes
such as leaf shape, vine shape, nutritional
value/density, plant density, leaf area, toughness
of stems, leaves, roots, … that affect whether a
plant is used as food.
186. My concern here is that this biocontrol may
jump from the target to a native with similar
physical properties.
187. Which leads me to fear that due to the
limited understanding of the long term
ecological relationships and the narrow numbers
of organisms tested with the short time frame of
testing, biocontrols will jump from their targeted
plant to others, especially natives related by
genes, physical attributes and proximity.
188. With the huge number of potential native
insects, diseases and systems in contact with
Mile-a-minute and it congeners/confamiliars a
native bioeradicant system will develop and may
already have developed.
189. If we are willing to look for native organisms and
organism systems in this plant’s present range of
spread, there is a high probability of finding a
safe native answer for this plant.
190. Common name: Tree-of-heaven
Scientific name: Ailanthus altissima
Origin: China
Local habitat: It prefers the edge of wooded areas and open fields. However, it will grow in
wooded areas where light reaches the forest floor.
Reproduction: This tree is dioecious with separate male and female trees. A mature female
may produce over 350,000 seeds/year. Germination rate may run as high as 90%
under controlled conditions. When mechanically (physically) injured, this tree will
produce many clones from its roots up to 30 yards away. Seed bank is one year
except under controlled conditions.
Identifying features: It has odd pinnate compound leaves with opposite blade-like leaflets.
Leaflets have one pair to several pairs of notches along the edge of the proximal
end. Each notch has a gland on the distal end of the point. The odor is
unmistakable at certain times when downwind.
Weaknesses: tends to form monoclonal stands when physically injured and may
interconnect roots between individuals in a stand. This means that herbivores and
disease have fewer genotypes to deal with and disease can move through root
grafts within the stand. It is dioecious with possible sterilization of female trees.
Local Controls: A combination of the native moth Atteva aurea, the eriophyoid mite Aculops
ailanthii, various as of yet unidentified herbivorous insects and several pathogenic
Fusarium and Verticillium fungi. Whitetailed deer browse leaves.
Outlook: Excellent. Apparently slowly going extinct locally and probably throughout its
eastern North American range from naturally occurring processes..
224. This planter of seedlings at home 2 summers ago had A. aurea and A.
ailanthii on it. I was setting up an experiment at home a few weeks
ago. I had to quit due to the heavy level of A. ailanthii destroying the
seedlings almost as fast as they sprouted.
241. Atteva aurea moved north and throughout the range of Ailanthus altissima
from native Simaroubaceae as Ailanthus altissima moved south and
throughout the country.
Atteva aurea
Ailanthus altissima
native Simaroubaceae
confamiliars
242. From recent walking it appears that
there is a correlation between the
density and nearness of the nectar
sources adult Atteva aurea feed on
and the amount of disease in a stand
of Ailanthus.
243. The key to finding a native biocontrol
insect (system) for a plant is to find an
organism which is a generalist
herbivore for a family or genus of
plants and a specialist to that family or
genus.
244. This means that the bioeradicant has
the genetic ability to switch from one
plant to another and yet will not cause
the extinction of coevolved food
sources.
245. A. aurea larvae eat other
Simaroubaceae family members, but
only eats members of this family.
246. A. aurea larvae will preferentially eat
the non-coevolved food source
because this food source does not
have the defenses to A. aurea that a
coevolved native Simaroubaceae food
source has.
247. Hence, an easy meal that is a higher
quality food source (higher energy
return for energy expended) than a
native coevolved one since it spends
less energy dealing with chemical and
physical defenses.
248. At the same time it is embedded in a
system of a mite (A. ailanthii) and
several diseases.
250. Unique features of this system:
1. A. altissima is the only food for A. aurea larvae in most of the A.
altissima range
2. A. aurea adults are broadly generalist nectar feeders
3. A. ailanthii is an apparent specialist to A. altissima
4. A. aurea larvae have no other local food sources because the adults
have spread themselves beyond their normal range by following nectar
sources and A. altissima
5. A. aurea and A. ailanthii are the apparent vectors for several A.
altissima diseases
6. A. ailanthii apparently hitchhikes between A. altissima trees on birds
and A. aurea and is spread by wind.
7. A. ailanthii appears to have environmental persistence and cold
tolerance, staying persistently in stands of A. ailanthus if observations at
home are an indicator.
8. A. aurea appears to evolving to colder temperatures as witnessed by
their presence feeding on goldenrod in central Pennsylvania in mid-
November 2012 after frost and freeze.
252. 1. Do not apply pesticides to the
surrounding area –
herbicides, insecticides, fungicides, … .
253. 2. Plant a wide variety of native high
nectar flowers, such as Asteraceae
family members, nearby so there are
high quality food sources from mid-
spring to the first hard freeze for the
adults to feed on.
254. 3. Get out the camera and microscope
to enjoy the beauty of A. aurea and A.
ailanthii.
255. So far I have found adult Atteva aurea
on daisy-like flowers and at least 2
species of goldenrod from August to
mid-November. I am still not sure
what they feed on from early spring
when the Ailanthus leaves are just
beginning to bloom to mid-August but
expect it to be other flowers with
compact inflorescences.
256.
257.
258. There are several obvious differences between
Ailanthus altissima and Polygonum perfoliatum
which changes the number of bioeradicants
available and the timing of the system
developing.
259. 1. The first and most obvious is the spread of
propagules – samaras which stay in a local area
vs. seeds in berries which are transported across
the landscape.
260. 2. A. altissima is resident all year giving ample
time for natives to use it for shelter and adapt to
the plant as a food source vs. P. perfoliatum
which as a tender annual offers a shorter time
for natives to adapt.
261. 3. The number of native confamiliars and
congeners for A. altissima is very small. P.
perfoliatum has a large number of relatives near
it such as Polygonum pensylvanicum
(Pennsylvania smartweed).
262. 4. A. altissima has several native confamiliars in
the Simaroubaceae family which serve as a
reservoir of native bioeradicants. P. perfoliatum
has many native confamiliars such as Polygonum
pensylvanicum, which is found abundantly
locally and may serve as reservoirs for
bioeradicants once a system develops.
263. 5. The native confamiliars of A. altissima are
Neotropical which means that throughout most
its range there are few reservoirs for
bioeradicants. However, the primary
bioeradicant, A. aurea apparently has
wanderlust. It may migrate seasonally hundreds
of miles a year. It is multivoltine with no
apparent diapause from first appearance to
killer freeze.
In contrast, P. perfoliatum has many local
congeners and confamiliars which are possible
local bioeradicant reservoirs.
265. Attempting rodent and insect control in our
garden and yard using native birds and bats -
21 song bird houses,
10 bat houses,
6 song bird nesting platforms,
4 kestrel houses,
2 barn owl houses
1 hawk nesting platform
(and counting).
270. As an ecologist, I regularly work with an almost
infinite set of variables. To even attempt to
reduce this huge set of variables into a few
easily measured and understood is
insanity, while being morally and ethically wrong
because it is not an accurate portrayal of reality
and can lead to disastrous consequences.
272. Propagule spread is an important
component of how problems develop. With
Mile-a-minute, it is obvious that migrating birds
spread the seeds first locally then along the
species specific migration corridors. As more
species develop a taste for the berries, they will
too spread the seeds along their migration
corridors, … .
273. In a similar way, the seeds of the various
honeysuckles and Multiflora rose are spread
primarily by birds, such as mocking birds in the
case of multifora rose. In both of these
examples native or native/non-native hybrid
systems are forming to eradicate the non-native
invasive plants. This is the only way possible to
eradicate these plants.
274. In contrast, the seeds of the various
species of grape hyacinth, (Muscari sp.) and
periwinkle (Vinca sp.) spread through a slow and
localized process which deposits most of the
seeds within a short distance of the parent or
clone sequentially from a parent plant . If a
migratory bird or mammal develops a taste for
the seeds or vegetatively reproductive parts, this
will become a major problem the same as with
the aforementioned species. However, with
infestations such as these, minimal intervention
will be successful.
275. In between these examples are plants such as
Japanese stilt grass and garlic mustard which depend on
animals, including humans, to spread their hitchhiking
seeds.
Unfortunately, humans are very efficient at
spreading hitchhiking seeds long distances.
Therefore, only a native bioeradicant system will be
successful. For both Japanese stilt grass and garlic
mustard systems are apparently developing. Most
probably the systems will be spread the same way as the
plants – inadvertently by humans.
276. Population
Non-native biocontrol
Non-native invasive
Native congeners
and conspecifics of
non-native invasive
time
Simplified expected curves for what happens when a non-native biocontrol is
introduced after the establishment of a non-native invasive due to the
biocontrol adapting to new food sources without defenses to that
biocontrol.
277. Population
Native bioeradicant
Non-native invasive
Native congeners of
non-native invader
time
The expected population curves for native bioeradicant use. The baseline populations for
native organisms change as the native bioeradicants adapt to the non-native invasive and eat a
few more of the native while the system comes back into balance as the non-native is
destroyed. There is some recoverable risk to the native ecosystem, but not the unrecoverable
risk of introducing non-native biocontrols.
278. Population
Non-native
biocontrols
Pioneer non-native invasive
Native congeners of
non-native invasive
time
Secondary non-native invasives
A more complex version of what is expected when a (pioneer) non-native plant is introduced
followed by its non-native biocontrol. The native system collapses allowing secondary non-
natives to enter.
Native organisms
279. Populationor
concentration
Non-native
specialist biocontrol
Non-native invasive
Chemical defenses of
non-native invasive
population
time
This diagram demonstrates what is expected when a non-native specialist biocontrol is
reintroduced to its non-native host as happened in North America with Pastinaca
sativa, the European parsnip, when its European control, Depressaria pastinacella, was
accidently reintroduced. (Zangerl, et al, 2005)
280. Medicating the ecology (gerbil science) - My first
fear with biocontrols is that we select target
organisms the way we select any other problem
that appears to need solving. We look only at the
crisis. Then we charge in solving an apparent
problem mechanistically without looking in depth
to understand the crisis or look for creative
minimally disruptive or less dangerous
alternatives.
281. The same misguided attitudes which we
experience in medicine we experience in
ecology, everything needs fixing immediately.
In other words, we are constantly try to fix
everything without first understanding what we
are trying to fix.
282. Classical biocontrol – the introduction of non-
native organisms in the attempt to reduce the
effects of other introduced non-native organisms
on ecosystems.
There are unforeseen negative effects from the
biocontrols which cannot be predicted in the
local and extra-local ecosystems in which they
are introduced through genetic and/or
behavioral changes in the non-native biocontrol
and native organisms.
283. In other words it is a mechanistic attempt to use
non-native organisms to control already present
non-native organisms. It does not attempt to
bring an ecosystem back into balance. Instead it
causes a new system and (im)balance to develop
that is inherently alien.
286. 1.) A specialist only exists in a limited time and
place. A specialist in one location with a limiting
resource such as food may be a generalist in
another location when that limiting resource is
commonly available.
287. 2.) Specialists should go extinct when the target
organism goes extinct in a specific location.
If they are persisting after the target is
destroyed, they are not specialists.
288. 3.) Specialists are recruited by looking primarily at
the effects on the target, not all the potential
collateral effects they may have on the rest of the
ecology such as becoming a food supplement for a
native organism or competing for breeding
resources, causing a predator to use them as a
primary prey, … . The result is an unbalanced
ecosystem with unforeseen ecological
effects, including the extinction of native
organisms.
289. 4.) Specialists derive from generalists.
Therefore, they contain the genes and (relict)
behavioral patterns which may cause them to
revert back to generalists when the situation at
that time and place change such as the addition of
another resource or the target plant becomes
scarce/extinct.
290. Non-native biocontrol has high rates of failure
and low rates of success, an average of 2.44
introduced organisms for every species on which
control is being attempted. I think this number
is underestimated and that the real number is at
least 5 introduced organisms for every
biocontrol target.
291. Bioeradication – The extinction of a non-native
(invasive) species from an ecosystem using
native organisms. The goal is the regeneration
of the ecosystem by eliminating the non-native
problem from the ecosystem using native
organisms which minimize the potential
problems associated with the addition of non-
native organisms as potential controls.
292. Bioeradication uses a variety of native organisms
working together to eradicate a non-native
organism from the ecosystem and restore it to
its original state.
293. If the target reappears after local extinction, the
bioeradication system naturally reasserts itself if
all the resources for it are still present. In other
words, the system has reverted to its original
resource use state, but has the ability to reassert
itself if the non-native invasive reappears.
294. The difference between bioeradication and
biocontrol is that bioeradication assumes it is
possible to eradicate a non-native species from
an ecosystem using native species. While
biocontrol is trying to change, modify or
minimize the effects of one non-native organism
by using another non-native organism.
295. Bioeradicant – Any native organism in any time
frame from seconds to centuries that partially or
fully inhibits a non-native organism and helps to
drive it to extinction.
296. Bioeradication system – A group of native
organisms which through any biological
relationship and time frame partially or fully
inhibits a non-native organism to the point it is
driven to extinction.
297. Hybrid bioeradication system – A group of
native and indigenous non-native organisms
which through any biological relationship and
time frame partially or fully inhibits a non-native
organism to the point it is driven to extinction.
298. Direct bioeradication – This is the (re)introduction
and use of a native organism or native organism
system as a bioeradicant for a specific organism by
increasing its population at a given location.
299. Indirect bioeradication – Providing the native
resources such as food, breeding sites or shelter
needed for a native bioeradicant or bioeradicant
system to develop at a specific location for a
specific organism. This may be nectar sources,
sheltering plants, mutualistic fungi, water source
or … .
300. Bioeradication garden – A form of Indirect
Bioeradication which is a garden of local native
plants that provide a resource for any life stage
that a native bioeradicant needs to be effective as
a bioeradicant such as food, egg laying
sites, overwintering sites, protection from
predators, …, .
Presently we have an experimental bioeradication
garden in our yard to determine nectar sources
used by Atteva aurea.
301. Bioeradication resource – Any naturally occurring
or native environmental resource a native
bioeradicant needs to be effective as a bioeradicant
in that ecosystem.
302. Resource use – This is the use by a native
bioeradicant of a native or non-native resource.
In the case of a non-native resource it takes time
to adapt to using it through either learning to
use it (behavioral changes) or genetic
changes, often both.
303. Resource familiarity – This is the amount of use
of a resource by a native bioeradicant. In the
case of non-native (invasive) resources time is
required for a native bioeradicant to adapt to a
non-native through either behavioral or genetic
changes and begin driving the non-native to
extinction.
304. Resource heritage – This is the passing on of a
behavioral and/or genetic adaptation to a
resource by a native bioeradicant. This can be
through learning, by genetic change or more
probably a combination of both. It can spread
through a species horizontally as one organism
learns from another or vertically as it is passed
on to/through offspring through learning or
genes.
305. Herbivory, predation and parasitism –
Relationships in which one organism or groups
of organisms benefit by using other organisms
as an energy source. This does not imply that all
the benefit accrues to the herbivore, predator or
parasite as there are often unseen benefits to
both groups of organisms.
306. Direct competition – When an organism competes
directly with another organism for a resource.
Examples are two species of bees competing for a
nectar source, a gold finch and a junco competing
at our thistle feeder or a mourning dove and a rock
dove (pigeon) competing for grain in a field. This is
good if a native bioeradicant is successfully
outcompeting a non-native organism, driving it to
extinction. It is bad when a non-native is driving a
native to extinction.
307. Positive indirect competition – Positive when an
organism provides a resource needed for a
native organism to compete with a non-native
organism.
Knowing how to manipulate this is better
than introducing a non-native organism into an
ecosystem to control another non-native
organism. An example is providing plants as egg
laying sites for a native butterfly that competes
for nectar with a non-native species such as the
cabbage butterfly.
Indirect Bioeradication can be a result of
this.
308. Negative indirect competition - Using a native
organism to destroy a biological resource that a
non-native organism needs which is in
competition with that or another native
organism. This may be planting tall native
wildflowers in a meadow to destroy a grass
needed by a non-native moth for food, egg
laying sites or shelter.
309. Resource enhancement/depletion – This is
enhancing a resource needed by a native
bioeradicant or depleting a resource needed by a
non-native to help eradicate a non-native
species.
This may be as simple as removing a dam to
allow fish to migrate along a river corridor and
eat larvae of a non-native, adding sand banks in
a creek to facilitate drinking by native birds or
changing a dry meadow back to a flooded
meadow to remove burrow sites for a non-native
bee or mammal.
310. Bioremediation – the use of native organisms to
displace and eradicate non-native organisms or
to replace non-native organisms as they are
eliminated from an ecosystem. This is an
expansion of the traditional definition of
bioremediation.
311. Traditional bioremediation is the use of
microorganisms or plants to mitigate chemical
or organic pollution. This is the use of the term
to mean use of native organisms to restore an
ecosystem during the process of and after the
removal of a non-native organism or non-native
organism system.
312. Mutualism – Two or more organisms which
cooperate to the benefit of each other.
Bioeradicant systems reflect this at different levels
of relationship by eliminating a non-native from the
ecosystem through (unintended) cooperation, such
as phoretic transport of smaller organisms on larger
ones, different feeding strategies which enhance
the success of both species while eradicating a non-
native such as the leaf eating larvae of a native
moth which carry a disease that weakens a non-
native which makes it into a food source for a
second organism to further destruction of the non-
native*, behavioral adaptations which help
partition a resource and other strategies.
313. * This is apparently happening to Ailanthus
altissima. Atteva aurea is carrying a fusarium
and/or verticillium disease which weakens A.
altissima. At that point the ambrosia beetle
Euwallacea validus burrows into the weakened
tree, possibly carrying another canker/necrotic
lesion causing fusarium disease with it. I have
seen this happen even with Drill and Fill. Once
the tree is weakened, E. validus burrows appear.
314. Competition – Relationships where certain
organisms benefit through a variety of
mechanisms to the detriment of others without
necessarily using them as an energy source.
This is an essential element in bioeradication.
315. Enemy Release Hypothesis (ERH) - It is the
disease/pest/competitor version of the Founder
Effect but exchanges genes for the biological
controls. This frees the plant to focus on growth
and reproduction. In essence it is a bottleneck
which reduces the biological checks a non-native
has in its native ecosystem when it moves to a
new ecosystem.
The final effect is the elimination of many of the
restraints which prevented the non-native
organism from taking over its home ecosystem.
316. Evolution of Increased Competitive Ability (EICA)
– the evolution of a non-native organism to a new
ecosystem by ridding itself of genes, genotypes
and behaviors which are unsuitable in the
introduced ecosystem and developing new
genes, genetic synergies and/or behaviors that
increase its ability to adapt and survive. It is
mostly seen on the front end of the sigmoidal
curve of adaption, exponential population growth
and plateauing that is found during the
introduction of most invasive non-native
organisms into a new ecosystem.