Classical and augmentative biological control against ... - IOBC-WPRS

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Ris & Malausa General trends The temporal survey shows a quite regular increase of ClBC related publications with a mean of about 45 hits / year for the last ten years (Figure 6). Within this period, we observe a relative stability between the different combinations of pests and BCA (Figure 7). The main part of the publications (56%) of the cases deals with the biocontrol of phytophagous arthropods on which we will focus here. 42% of the papers deal with the biocontrol of weed. In this case, BCA are for 57% of the cases phytophagous insects and for 41% fungi (data not shown). More than 70 arthropod pests were listed which cover 7 orders and approximately 40 families. As shown in Figure 8, Hemiptera and Lepidoptera were the two main orders with a total of 66% of the pest species and 70% of the publications. If the citation rate / order is highly correlated with the number of pests / order, this trend hides a great variability at the infra-order level. Indeed, the citation rate highly differs with regard to the pest species with a median of 2 papers / pest species and a range from 1 to 13 citations. The 13 most cited pests are listed in Figure 9. Two main observations can be drawn from this short list. Firstly, this list is quite equally composed of either very specialist pests like Phyllocnistis citrella (on Citrus species), Mononychellus tanajoa (on cassava) or Toxoptera citricida (on Citrus species) or more generalist taxa like Homalodisca vitripennis, Lymantria dispar or Pseudococcus viburni. All of them are phytophagous pests whose damage are linked either to their herbivory, consumption of sap or virus transmission except the particular case of the fire ant Solenopsis invicta which is responsible for direct nuisance on farmers or indirect ecological modifications in the agrosystems. The second observation is that the percentage of ClBC related publications / pest is negatively correlated with the corresponding total number of references (including also studies on other pest control strategies and/or various biological topics). For instance, 22% of the 32 references focusing on H. vitripennis explicitly deal with classical biological control while this percentage falls down to only 1% to 3% for well documented species like L. dispar, S. invicta or D. virgifera virgifera. This may be explained by the fact that ClBC is mainly considered as a “pionneer” pest control strategy that are developed either soon after the emergence of a new invasive pest or on “non biological model” for which the investigations on other biological aspects are limited. [Remark: Although Classical Biological Control can be perceived as a “pioneer” pest control strategies on non “biological models”, substantial investments are required on several biological aspects (e.g. community ecology, population genetics)] Biocontrol agents used The biocontrol agents related to ClBC (hereafter ClBCA) against arthropod species were not detailed in only 12% of the papers. These are in most of the cases either prospective works (55%) such as faunistic inventories of natural enemies on “new” pests like Diabrotica virgifera virgifera or retrospective studies (35%) on advanced programmes that take into account several BCA (see Appendix 9.1). Among the documented cases, 76% of ClBC programmes were based on the use of insect parasitoids. Pathogens and nematodes on one side and predatory arthropods on the other side are equally represented with about 12% of the publications for each case. 22
Chapter 3 Pathogens and Nematodes as candidate for ClBCA The particular cases of pathogens and nematodes have been recently reviewed by Hajek and co-workers (62, 63 3 ). Our own survey indicates that half of the papers actually deal with entomopathogenic fungi. Six pest species were identified including two mites (Aceria guerreronis and Mononychellus tanajoa) and two insects (Aphis gossypii and Coptotermes formosanus). However, except for the evaluation of Neozygites species against M. tanajoa (14, 39, 42, 43), other attempts seem to be rather limited. With regard to the catalogue of Hajek et al.(62), two other cases of entomopathogen fungi were missed in our own survey. These are the introductions of Entomophaga maigmaiga and Metarhizium anisopliae, against respectively the Lymantria dispar and the Curculionidae Otiorynchus nodosus for which the sources of Hajek and coworkers were mainly personal communications. The rather limited use of entomopathogenic fungi in ClBC was also confirmed by the review of Shah and Pell(156). The use of viruses as biocontrol agent for ClBC against arthropod pests were only documented fort three cases that are the Lepidoptera species Anticarsia gemmatalis (48, 127) and Lymantria dispar (16) and the Coleoptera Oryctes rhinoceros (81). Microspodia as candidate for ClBC were reported in only two studies (25, 165). The sole case of the use of nematodes is the study of Hurley et al. (79) who studied the extension of the use of parasitic nematode Deladenus siricidicola against the woodwasp Sirex noctilio. Predatory arthropods as candidate for ClBCA The literature about predatory arthropods is dominated by four case-studies. The first one is the classical biocontrol of the cassava green mites M. tanajoa by Typhlodromalus aripo and, to a lesser extent, T. manihoti. All these studies are the extension of a very large classical biocontrol programme at a continental scale; two main issues were addressed during the recent decade that are the introduction and field evaluation of T. aripo in Mozambique and Malawi (125, 194) and the ecological interactions with other species (14, 124, 193) or plants(55). The second case-study is those of the predatory ladybird Harmonia axyridis (19, 90, 91, 137). The main concern of these publications is nevertheless not the Research and Development in ClBC but rather the risks of non-intended effects and geographic spray of this insect that is now considered as a world-wide invasive species. Another case of the use of ladybird is those of Cryptolaemus montrouzieri and Scymnus coccivora which have been successfully used to control the hibiscus mealybug Maconellicoccus hirsutus (51, 86, 103) which is the extension of a worldwide use of these species. The fourth main case-study is the classical biocontrol programme of Prostephanus truncatus, a serious pest of stored maize beetle using Teretrius (formerly Teretriosa) nigrescens (73, 169, 170). The lasts reported uses of predatory arthropods as candidate for ClBC were those of the Coleoptera Laricobius nigrinus against the adelgid Adelges tsugae (197) and the phytoseid Neoseiulus baraki against the coconut mite A. guerreronis (119). Contrary to other cases which were the continuity of older programmes, these two studies are associated with new BCA inventories undertaken during the last ten years - see respectively (196) and(99). Insect parasitoids as BCA Related journals papers and categorization of the studies In total, 125 publications were used for this analysis. Only 14% were associated to proceedings of meetings or other supports than journals. 43 different journals were identified but 50% of the publications were published only by five: Biological Control (21%), BioControl (8%), Biocontrol Science and Technology (7%), Florida Entomologist (7%) and 3 within this Chapter, numbers in parentheses refer to references listed in Appendix 9 23
Page 1 and 2: IOBC OILB WPRS SROP In te rn atio n
Page 3 and 4: Preface One of the Research Activit
Page 5 and 6: LORITO Matteo UNINA, Dip. Arboricol
Page 7 and 8: List of Tables (continued) Table 17
Page 9 and 10: Contents Chapter 1 Potential of bio
Page 11 and 12: Chapter 1 Potential of biological c
Page 13 and 14: Chapter 1 To allow for the analysis
Page 15 and 16: Chapter 1 Table 4: Microbial specie
Page 17 and 18: Chapter 1 Table 4 (continued) T. lo
Page 19 and 20: Chapter 1 Table 4 (continued) Cupri
Page 21 and 22: Chapter 1 other was aiming at ident
Page 23 and 24: Chapter 2 Table 5: References extra
Page 25 and 26: Chapter 2 Table 6: Biocontrol agent
Page 27 and 28: Table 7 (continued) Chapter 2 Hemip
Page 29 and 30: Chapter 2 Bacillus thuringiensis: 2
Page 31: Chapter 3 - financial; since the de
Page 35 and 36: Chapter 3 [Remark: Estimating the s
Page 37 and 38: Chapter 3 100% 80% 60% P = Phytopha
Page 39 and 40: Chapter 3 0,25 4 0,20 % dedicated t
Page 41 and 42: Chapter 3 Table 9: Recent introduct
Page 43 and 44: Chapter 3 Table 9: Recent introduct
Page 45 and 46: Chapter 4 The survey was limited to
Page 47 and 48: Chapter 4 Table 11 (continued) Othe
Page 49 and 50: Chapter 4 SCLPs are included in ann
Page 51 and 52: Chapter 4 laminarin is available on
Page 53 and 54: Chapter 5 (EC) No 1109/2009. Tests
Page 55 and 56: Chapter 6 Identified difficulties a
Page 57 and 58: Chapter 6 Table 12: Evidence for, a
Page 59 and 60: Table 13: Trichoderma-based prepara
Page 61 and 62: Chapter 6 Many preparations have be
Page 63 and 64: Chapter 6 Persistence, physiologica
Page 65 and 66: Chapter 6 Harman, G. E. (2006) Over
Page 67 and 68: Chapter 6 Sharon, E., Bar-Eyal, M.,
Page 69 and 70: Chapter 7 purification, formulation
Page 71 and 72: Chapter 7 Business profitability Co
Page 73 and 74: Chapter 8 A survey was carried out
Page 75 and 76: Chapter 8 80 70 60 %of supply %of a
Page 77 and 78: Chapter 8 efficacy and the price of
Page 79 and 80: Conclusions and perspectives reduct
Page 81 and 82: Appendices For Chapter 1 Appendix 1
Page 83 and 84:
Appendix 1 B O Milsana + Brevibacil
Page 85 and 86:
Appendix 1 Strawberry (target patho
Page 87 and 88:
Appendix 1 Fruits - postharvest (ap
Page 89 and 90:
Appendix 1 Legumes (Fabaceae) (targ
Page 91 and 92:
Appendix 1 Miscellaneous crops (tar
Page 93 and 94:
Appendix 1 Lecanicillium muscarium
Page 95 and 96:
Appendix 1 Bedini, S., Bagnoli, G.,
Page 97 and 98:
Appendix 1 Dik, A., and Wubben, J.
Page 99 and 100:
Appendix 1 Gerlagh, M., Amsing, J.
Page 101 and 102:
Appendix 1 Jing, W., Tu, K., Shao,
Page 103 and 104:
Appendix 1 Li, G. Q., Huang, H. C.,
Page 105 and 106:
Appendix 1 Morandi, M. A. B., Maffi
Page 107 and 108:
Appendix 1 Rabea, E. I., Badawy, M.
Page 109 and 110:
Appendix 1 Sutton, J. C., Liu, W.,
Page 111 and 112:
Appendix 1 Zahavi, T., Cohen, L., W
Page 113 and 114:
Appendix 2 Powdery mildew on grapes
Page 115 and 116:
Appendix 2 Powdery mildew on cucurb
Page 117 and 118:
Appendix 2 Askary, H. (1998). Patho
Page 119 and 120:
Appendix 2 Malathrakis, N. E. (2002
Page 121 and 122:
Appendix 3. Inventory of biocontrol
Page 123 and 124:
Appendix 3 References on biocontrol
Page 125 and 126:
Appendix 4. Inventory of biocontrol
Page 127 and 128:
Appendix 4 Grapes (target pathogen
Page 129 and 130:
Appendix 4 References on biocontrol
Page 131 and 132:
Appendix 4 Robak, J., and Ostrowska
Page 133 and 134:
Appendix 5 Cherry (target pathogens
Page 135 and 136:
Appendix 5 Successful inhibition in
Page 137 and 138:
Appendix 5 Smilanick, J. L., Denis-
Page 139 and 140:
Appendix 6 showed protein content o
Page 141 and 142:
Appendix 6 El-Khallal, S. M. (2007)
Page 143 and 144:
Appendix 6 Liu, Q., J. C. Yu, et al
Page 145 and 146:
Appendix 6 of tomato wilt pathogen
Page 147 and 148:
Appendix 6 incognita, respectively.
Page 149 and 150:
Appendix 7. Number of references re
Page 151 and 152:
Appendix 8. Collection of data on a
Page 153 and 154:
Appendix 8 Camporese & Duso, 1996 T
Page 155 and 156:
Appendix 8 8.5 Fungi [5 species] Re
Page 157 and 158:
Appendix 8 Berner & Schnetter, 2002
Page 159 and 160:
Appendix 8 Morandi-Filho et al., 20
Page 161 and 162:
Appendix 8 Marshall D.B. & Lester P
Page 163 and 164:
Appendix 9 9.2. Details on the use
Page 165 and 166:
Appendix 9 References 1. Abd-Rabou
Page 167 and 168:
Appendix 9 50. Gariepy TD, Kuhlmann
Page 169 and 170:
Appendix 9 97. Langewald J, Neuensc
Page 171 and 172:
Appendix 9 146. Roltsch WJ, Meyerdi
Page 173 and 174:
Appendix 10. Substances included in
Page 175 and 176:
Appendix 10 Chemical Dimoxystrobin
Page 177 and 178:
Appendix 10 Chemical Prosulfocarb '
Page 179 and 180:
Appendix 10 Natural other Abamectin
Page 181 and 182:
Appendix 11. Invertebrate beneficia
Page 183 and 184:
Appendix 11 11.2. Invertebrate bioc
Page 185 and 186:
Appendix 11 Coccinella septempuncta
Page 187 and 188:
Appendix 11 Trichogramma brassicae
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Appendix 11 Diglyphus isaea Digline
show all

Classical and augmentative biological control against ... - IOBC-WPRS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?