Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T03:49:53.925Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

NEW ASSOCIATIONS IN BIOLOGICAL CONTROL: THEORY AND PRACTICE

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Heikki M.T. Hokkanen  and
David Pimentel
Heikki M.T. Hokkanen
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Centre, Institute of Plant Protection, SF-31600 Jokioinen, Finland
David Pimentel
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA14853
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The new association approach for selecting biological control agents has been reanalyzed in the light of recent data. The results support the conclusion that the new association approach is ecologically and statistically sound. One of the major advantages of this approach is its capacity to control native pests, which make up 60–80% of all pests. The specificity of biocontrol agents newly associated with the target hosts is similar to other biocontrol agents. In addition, the new association approach is as safe as the old association approach in terms of environmental risks. Recent trials in the use of new associations have been most encouraging, and suggest that this approach should contribute to the future success of biological pest control worldwide.

Résumé

La méthode qui consiste à rechercher une association nouvelle pour la sélection d’agents de lutte biologique a été réanalysée à la lumière de données récentes. Les résultats appuyent la conclusion que la méthode de l’association nouvelle est écologiquement et statistiquement fondée. L’un des principaux avantages de cette méthode est la possibilité de réprimer des ravageurs indigènes, lesquels constituent de 60–80% de tous les ravageurs. La spécificité des agents nouvellement associés avec des hôtes ciblés est semblable aux autres agents. De plus, la méthode de l’assocation nouvelle est aussi sécuritaire que celle de l’association préalable en termes de risques environnementaux. Des essais récents d’utilisation d’associations nouvelles se sont avérés très encourageants et indiquent que cette méthode devrait contribuer significativement au succès futur de la lutte biologique dans le monde.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 121 , Issue 10 , October 1989 , pp. 829 - 840
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1989

Access options

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

References

Alam, M.M., Bennett, F.D., and Carl, K.P.. 1971. Biological control of Diatraea saccharalis (F.) in Barbados by Apanteles flavipes Cam. and Lixophaga diatraeae T.T. Entomophaga 16: 151–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrows, E.M., and Hooker, M.E.. 1981. Parasitization of the Mexican bean beetle by Pediobius foveolatus in urban vegetable gardens. Environ. Ent. 10: 782–786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennett, F.D., and Hughes, W.I.. 1959. Biological control of insects in Bermuda. Bull. ent. Res. 50: 423–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briggs, J.D. 1986. Microbial control of arthropods. pp. 155–165 in Franz, J.M. (Ed.), Biological Plant and Health Protection. Progress in Zoology, Vol. 32. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart – New York. 341 pp.Google Scholar
Calkins, C.O. 1983. Research on exotic insects. pp. 321–359in Wilson, C.L., and Graham, C.L. (Eds.), Exotic Plant Pests and North American Agriculture. Academic Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clausen, C.P. (Ed.). 1978. Introduced parasites and predators of arthropod pests and weeds: a world review. U.S.D.A. Handb. 480. Washington, D.C. 545 pp.Google Scholar
Cock, M.J.W. 1986. Requirements for biological control: an ecological prespective. Biocontrol News Inf. 7: 7–16.Google Scholar
Cock, M.J.W., and Perera, P.A.C.R.. 1987. Biological control of Opisina arenosella Walker (Lepidoptera, Oecophoridae). Biocontrol News Inf. 8: 283–310.Google Scholar
Crane, E. 1968. Mites infecting honeybees in Asia. Bee World 49: 113–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culliney, T.W. 1983. Origin and evolutionary history of the honeybees Apis. Bee World 64: 29–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, E.W. 1976. Pathogenesis of bacterial diseases of vectors. pp. 19–29 in Briggs, T. (Ed.), Biological Regulation of Vectors. A Conference Report. U.S. DHEW Publication No. (NIH) 77–1180. 174 pp.Google Scholar
DeBach, P. 1979. Aphytis riyadhi n. sp. (Hym.: Aphelinidae), a parasite of Aonidiella spp. (Hom.: Diaspididae). Entomophaga 24: 131–138.Google Scholar
DeBach, P., Rosen, D., and Kennett, C.E.. 1971. Biological control of coccids by introduced natural enemies. pp. 165–194 in Huffaker, C.B. (Ed.), Biological Control. Plenum Press, New York – London. 511 pp.Google Scholar
Dennill, G.B., and Moran, V.C.. 1989. On insect–plant associations in agriculture and the selection of agents for weed biocontrol. Ann. appl. Biol. 114: 157–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dogiel, V.A. 1964. General Parasitology. Oliver & Boyd, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Drooz, A.T., Bustillo, A.E., Fedde, F.G., and Fedde, V.H.. 1977. North American egg parasite successfully controls a different host genus in South America. Science 197: 390–391.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ehler, L.E. 1987. Ecology of Rhopalomyia californica Felt at Jasper Ridge (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae). Pan-Pacific Ent. 63: 237–241.Google Scholar
Elton, C.S. 1958. The Ecology of Invasions by Animals and Plants. Methuen, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fenner, F. 1983. Biological control, as exemplified by smallpox eradication and myxomatosis. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 218: 259–285.Google ScholarPubMed
Fenner, F., and Marshall, I.D.. 1957. A comparison of the virulence for European rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) of strains of myxoma virus recovered in the field in Australia, Europe and America. J. Hyg. 55: 149–191.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fenner, F., and Myers, K.. 1978. Myxoma virus and myxomatosis in retrospect: the first quarter century of a new disease. pp. 539–570in Kurstak, E., and Maramorosch, K. (Eds.), Viruses and Environment. Third Int. Conf. on Comparative Virology, Mont Gabriel, Québec.Google Scholar
Freeland, W.J. 1983. Parasites and the coexistence of animal host species. Am. Nat. 121: 223–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goeden, R.D., and Kok, L.T.. 1986. Comments on a proposed “new” approach for selecting agents for the biological control of weeds. Can. Ent. 118: 51–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greathead, D.J. 1973. Progress in the biological control of Lantana camara in East Africa and discussion of problems raised by the unexpected reaction of some of the more promising insects to Sesamum indicum. pp. 89–92 in Dunn, P.H. (Ed.), Proc. 2nd Int. Symp. Biol. Control Weeds. Commonw. Inst. Biol. Control Misc. Publ. 6. 225 pp.Google Scholar
Harris, P. 1986. Biological control of weeds. pp. 123–138 in Franz, J.M. (Ed.), Biological Plant and Health Protection. Progress in Zoology, Vol. 32. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart – New York. 341 pp.Google Scholar
Herting, B. 1971–1982. A Catalogue of Parasites and Predators of Terrestrial Arthropods. Various volumes. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Slough, U.K.Google Scholar
Hokkanen, H.M.T. 1983. Interspecific homeostasis, pest problems, and the prinicples of biological pest control. Ph.D. thesis, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York. 157 pp.Google Scholar
Hokkanen, H.M.T. 1985 a. Exploiter–victim relationships of major plant diseases: implications for biological weed control. Agric. Ecosystems Environ. 14: 63–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hokkanen, H.M.T. 1985 b. Success in classical biological control. CRC Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 3: 35–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hokkanen, H.M.T. 1986. Polymorphism, parasites, and the native area of Nezara viridula (Hemiptera, Pentatomidae). Ann. Ent. Fenn. 52: 28–31.Google Scholar
Hokkanen, H.M.T., and Pimentel, D.. 1984. New approach for selecting biological control agents. Can. Ent. 116: 1109–1121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hudon, M., and LeRoux, E.J.. 1986. Biology and population dynamics of the European corn borer (Ostrinia nubilalis) with special reference to sweet corn in Quebec. I. Systematics, morphology, geographical distribution, host range, economic importance. Phytoprotection 67: 39–54.Google Scholar
Huffaker, C.B., Kennett, C.E., and Tassan, R.L.. 1986. Comparisons of parasitism and densities of Parlatoria oleae (1952–1982) in relation to ecological theory. Am. Nat. 128: 379–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, W.A. 1988. World review of the parasitoids of the southern green stink bug, Nezara viridula (L.) (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae). Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 81: 262–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kareiva, P. 1987. The ecology of invasions: theory or anecdotes? Ecology 68: 1556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krieg, A. 1973. Arthropodenviren. Georg Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart. 328 pp.Google Scholar
Krieg, A., Huger, A.M., Langenbruch, G.A., and Schnetter, W.. 1983. Bacillus thuringiensis var. tenebrionis: ein neuer, gegenuber Larven von Coleopteren wirksamer Pathotyp. Z. ang. Ent. 96: 500–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krieg, A., Huger, A.M., and Schnetter, W.. 1987. “Bacillus thuringiensis var. san diego” Stamm M-7 ist identisch mit dem zuvor in Deutschland isolierten käferwirksamen B. thuringiensis subsp. tenebrionis Stamm BI 256-82. J. appl. Ent. 104: 417–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laing, J.E., and Hamai, J.. 1976. Biological control of insect pests and weeds by imported parasites, predators, and pathogens. pp. 685–743 in Huffaker, C.B., and Messenger, P.S. (Eds.), Theory and Practice of Biological Control. Academic Press, New York. 788 pp.Google Scholar
Langenbruch, G.A., Krieg, A., Huger, A.M., and Schnetter, W.. 1985. Erste Feldversuche zur Bekämpfung der Larven des Kartoffelkäfers (Leptinotarsa decemlineata) mit Bacillus thuringiensis var. tenebrionis. Med. Fac. Landbouww. Rijksuniv. Gent 50/2a: 441–449.Google Scholar
Lawton, J.H. 1988. Biological control of bracken in Britain: constraints and opportunities. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 318: 335–354.Google Scholar
Legner, E.F. 1986. Importation of exotic natural enemies. pp. 19–30 in Franz, J.M. (Ed.), Biological Plant and Health Protection. Progress in Zoology, Vol. 32. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart – New York. 341 pp.Google Scholar
Levin, B.R., Allison, A.C., Bremermann, H.J., Cavalli-Sforza, L.L., Clarke, B.C., Frentzel-Beyme, R., Hamilton, W.D., Levin, S.A., May, R.M., and Thieme, H.R.. 1982. Evolution of parasites and hosts, group report. pp. 213–243 in Anderson, R.M., and May, R.M. (Eds.), Poulation Biology of Infectious Diseases. Dahlem Konferenzen 1982. Srpinger-Verlag, Berlin – Heidelberg – New York.Google Scholar
Levin, S., and Pimentel, D.. 1981. Selection of intermediate rates of increase in parasite–host systems. Am. Nat. 117: 308–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipa, J.J. 1985. Progress in biological control of the Colorado beetle (Leptinotarsa decemlineata) in Eastern Europe. EPPO Bull. 15: 207–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Magnoler, A. 1970. Susceptibility of gypsy moth larvae to Lymantria spp. nuclear and cytoplasmic polyhedrosis viruses. Entomophaga 15: 407–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martignoni, M.E., and Schmid, P.. 1961. Studies on the resistance to virus infections in natural populations of Lepidoptera. J. Insect Pathol. 3: 62–74.Google Scholar
May, R.M., and Anderson, R.M.. 1979. Population biology of infectious diseases. Part II. Nature 280: 455–461.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
May, R.M., and Anderson, R.M.. 1983 a. Epidemiology and genetics in the coevolution of parasites and hosts. Proc. R. Soc. B 219: 281–313.Google ScholarPubMed
May, R.M., and Anderson, R.M.. 1983 b. Parasite–host coevolution. pp. 186–206in Futuyma, D.J., and Slatkin, M. (Eds.), Coevolution. Sinauer, Sunderland, MA.Google ScholarPubMed
McFadyen, P.J. 1985. Introduction of the gall fly Rhopalomyia californica from the U.S.A. into Australia for the control of the weed Baccharis halimifolia. pp. 779–787in Delfosse, E.S. (Ed.), Proc. VI Int. Symp. Biol. Control Weeds, 19–25 August 1984. Vancouver, Canada. Agric. Can.Google Scholar
Miller, M.C., Moser, J.C., McGregor, M., Gregoire, J.-C., Baisier, M., Dahlsten, D.L., and Werner, R.A.. 1987. Potential for biological control of native North American Dendroctonus beetles (Coleoptera: Scolytidae). Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 80: 417–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moser, J.C. 1975. Mite predators of the southern pine beetle. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 68: 1113–1116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moser, J.C. 1976. Surveying mites (Acarina) phoretic on the southern pine beetle (Coleoptera: Scolytidae) with sticky traps. Can. Ent. 108: 809–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moser, J.C., and Branham, S.J.. 1988. Bugs that eat bugs. Forest Farmer 47(3): 17–20.Google Scholar
Moser, J.C., and Roton, L.M.. 1971. Mites associated with southern pine beetles in Allen Parish, Louisiana. Can. Ent. 103: 1775–1798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myers, J.H., Risley, C., and Eng, R.. 1988. The ability of plants to compensate for insect attack: why biological control of weeds with insects is so difficult. Paper presented at the VII International Symposium on the Biological Control of Weeds, 6–11 March 1988. Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
Ossowski, L.L.J. 1960. Variation in virulence of a wattle bagworm virus. J. Insect Pathol. 2: 35–43.Google Scholar
Owen, D.F. 1986. Do native plants support a richer Lepidopteran fauna than alien plants? Environ. Conserv. 13: 359–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patalappa, N., and ChannaBasawanna, G.P.. 1979. Seasonal incidence and life history of Pediobius foveolatus (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae), a parasite of Henosepilachna vigintioctopunctata (Fabricius) (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). Mysore J. Agric. Sci. 13: 191–196.Google Scholar
Pimentel, D. 1961. Animal population regulation by the genetic feedback mechanism. Am. Nat. 95: 65–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pimentel, D. 1963. Introducing parasites and predators to control native pests. Can. Ent. 95: 785–792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pimentel, D. 1986. Population dynamics and the importance of evolution in successful biological control. pp. 3–18 in Franz, J.M. (Ed.), Biological Plant and Health Protection. Progress in Zoology, Vol. 32. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart – New York. 341 pp.Google Scholar
Pimentel, D. 1988. Herbivore population feeding pressure on plant hosts: feedback evolution and host conservation. Oikos 53: 289–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pimentel, D., Glenister, C., Fast, S., and Gallahan, D.. 1982. Environmental risks associated with the use of biological and cultural pest controls. Final Report. NSF Grant PRA 80-00803. National Technical Information Service #PB-83-168-716. Springfield, VA.Google Scholar
Pimentel, D., and Hokkanen, H.M.T.. 1989. Alternatives for successful biological control: in theory and practice. In Miller, M.C. (Ed.), Potential for Biological Control of Dendroctonus and Ips Bark Beetles. In press.Google Scholar
Ratcliffe, F.N., Myers, K., Fennessy, B.V., and Calaby, J.H.. 1952. Myxomatosis in Australia. A step towards the biological control of the rabbit. Nature 170: 7–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reeves, E.L. 1970. Pathogens of mosquitoes. pp. 20–22in Proc. 38th Conf. Calif. Mosq. Cont. Assoc., Jan. 26–29, 1970.Google ScholarPubMed
Service, M.W. 1981. Ecological considerations in biological control strategies against mosquitoes. pp. 173–195in Laird, M. (Ed.), Biocontrol of Medical and Veterinary Pests. Praeger, New York.Google Scholar
Southwood, T.R.E. 1973. The insect/plant relationship – an evolutionary perspective. pp. 3–30 in van Emden, H.F. (Ed.), Insect/Plant Relationships. R. Ent. Soc. London, Symposium 6. 213 pp.Google Scholar
Staris, G.R. 1964. Infection of Malacosoma disstria Hubner with nuclear polyhedrosis viruses from other species of Malacosoma (Lepidoptera, Lasiocampidae). J. Insect. Pathol. 6: 164–169.Google Scholar
Thompson, W.R. 1943–1947. A Catalogue of the Parasites and Predators of Insect Pests. Various volumes. Imperial Agricultural Bureaux, Institute of Entomology, Parasite Service, Belleville, Ontario, Canada.Google Scholar
Pimentel, D. 1954. Biological control work on cedar scale in Bermuda. pp. 89–93in 6th Commonwealth Ent. Conf. Rep. London.Google Scholar
Turnock, W.J., Taylor, K.L., Schroeder, D., and Dahlsten, D.L.. 1976. Biological control of pests of coniferous forests. pp. 289–311in Huffaker, C.B., and Messenger, P.S. (Eds.), Theory and Practice of Biological Control. Academic Press, New York – San Francisco – London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waage, J.K. 1988. Biological control: art or science? Revisited. Paper presented at the XVIII International Congress of Entomology, Vancouver, B.C., Canada, Session XS1: Critical Issues in Biological Control.Google Scholar
Waage, J.K., and Greathead, D.J.. 1988. Biological control: challenges and opportunities. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 318: 111–126.Google Scholar
Yukawa, J., and Kiritani, K.. 1965. Polymorphism in the southern green stink bug. Pacific Insects 7: 639–642.Google Scholar
Zwölfer, H. 1973. Competition and coexistence in phytophagous insects attacking the heads of Carduus nutans L. pp. 74–80in Proc. II Int. Symp. Biol. Contr. Weeds, 1971.Google Scholar