Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T01:55:38.088Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) Control and Soil Seedbank Composition Fifteen Years after Release of Aphthona Biological Control Agents

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 July 2017

Blake M. Thilmony  and
Rodney G. Lym
Blake M. Thilmony
Affiliation:
Former Graduate Research Assistant and Professor, Plant Sciences Department, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND 58105
Rodney G. Lym*
Affiliation:
Former Graduate Research Assistant and Professor, Plant Sciences Department, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND 58105
*
*Corresponding author’s E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Aphthona spp. flea beetles were released in two ecological sites of the Little Missouri National Grasslands in southwestern North Dakota in 1999 to control leafy spurge. The change in leafy spurge density and soil seedbank composition was monitored to evaluate the effectiveness of the biological weed control agent and the associated change in plant communities 5, 10, and 15 yr after release in loamy overflow (valleys) and loamy sites (ridges). In 2014, 15 yr after release, leafy spurge stem density had decreased 94% from 110 to 7 stems m−2 in the loamy overflow sites and 88% from 78 to 9 stems m−2 in the loamy sites. Leafy spurge represented only 2% and 6% of the loamy overflow and loamy seedbanks in 2004, respectively, compared with nearly 67% and 70%, respectively, in 1999. There was a slow shift to reintroduction of native species into the seedbank over the last 15 yr. The number of desirable species increased to 21 by 2014 (more than three times the number of species in 1999) in the loamy overflow sites, and doubled to 14 species in the loamy sites, while less desirable forb species doubled in both sites. Desirable grass species doubled in the loamy overflow sites by 2014 but remained unchanged in loamy sites. Aphthona spp. successfully controlled leafy spurge for more than 15 yr without any additional control methods or costs to land managers and resulted in the slow return of a subset of native species.

Keywords

Leafy spurgeEuphorbia esula LBiocontrolinvasive speciesnative species
Type
Research and Education
Information
Invasive Plant Science and Management , Volume 10 , Issue 2 , June 2017 , pp. 180 - 190
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2017 

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.)

Footnotes

Associate Editor for this paper: Kelly Lyons, Trinity University.

References

Literature Cited

Bazzaz, FA (1996) Plants in Changing Environments: Linking Physiological, Population, and Community Ecology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 320 pGoogle Scholar
Benson, EJ, Hartnett, DC (2006) The role of seed and vegetative reproduction in plant recruitment and demography in tallgrass prairie. Plant Ecol 187:163–177 Google Scholar
Butler, JL, Parker, MS, Murphy, JT (2006) Efficacy of flea beetle control of leafy spurge in Montana and South Dakota. Rangeland Ecol Manag 59:453–461 Google Scholar
Butler, JL, Wacker, SD (2010) Lack of native vegetation recovery following biological control of leafy spurge. Rangeland Ecol Manag 63:553–563 Google Scholar
Cavers, PB (1995) Seed banks: memory in soil. Can J Soil Sci 75:11–13 Google Scholar
Cline, D, Juricek, C, Lym, RG, Kirby, DR (2008) Leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) control with Aphthona spp. affects seedbank composition and native grass establishment. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 1:120–132 Google Scholar
Cline, DA (2002) Evaluation of Biological Agents on Leafy Spurge (Euphorbia esula L.) and the Soil Seedbank Composition in the Little Missouri National Grassland. M.S. thesis. Fargo, ND; North Dakota State University. 51 pGoogle Scholar
Coffin, DP, Lauenroth, WK (1989) Spatial and temporal variation in the seed bank of a semiarid grassland. Am J Bot 76:53–58 Google Scholar
Gauger, AW, Leonard, AC, Chandler, EF, Simpson, HE, Budge, WE (1930) Geology and natural resources of North Dakota. University of North Dakota Departmental Bulletin 14(1). 64 pGoogle Scholar
Great Plains Flora Association (1986) Flora of the Great Plains. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas Google Scholar
Hanna, AY, Harlan, PW, Lewis, DT (1982) Soil available water as influenced by landscape position and aspect. Agron J 74:999–1004 Google Scholar
Hanson, HC, Whitman, W (1938) Characteristics of major grassland types in western North Dakota. Ecol Monogr 8:57–114 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joshi, A, Olson, DL (2009) Revisiting leafy spurge biocontrol: a case study. Rangelands 31:31–35 Google Scholar
Julien, MH, Griffiths, MW, eds (1999) Biological Control of Weeds: A World Catalogue of Agents and Their Target Weeds. 4th edn. Wallingford, UK: Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research. P 63 Google Scholar
Juricek, CJ (2006) Integrated Pest Management and Vegetation Impact Using Aphthona spp. for Leafy Spurge (Euphorbia esula L.) Control. M.S. thesis. Fargo, ND: North Dakota State University. 78 pGoogle Scholar
Kirby, DR, Carlson, RB, Krabbenhoft, KD, Mundal, DA, Kirby, MM (2000) Biological control of leafy spurge with introduced flea beetles (Aphthona spp.). J Range Manage 53:305–308 Google Scholar
Larson, DL, Larson, JL (2010) Control of one invasive plant species allows exotic grasses to become dominant in northern Great Plains grasslands. Biol Conserv 143:1901–1910 Google Scholar
Lesica, P, Hanna, D (2004) Indirect effects of biological control on plant diversity vary across sites in Montana grasslands. Conserv Biol 18:444–454 Google Scholar
Lesica, P, Hanna, D (2009) Effect of biological control on leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) and diversity of associated grasslands over 14 years. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 2:151–157 Google Scholar
Lym, RG (1998) The biology and integrated pest management of leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) on North Dakota rangeland. Weed Technol 12:367–373 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lym, RG (2005) Integration of biological control agents with other weed management technologies: successes from the leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) IPM program. Biol Control 35:366–375 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lym, RG, Carlson, RB (2002) Effect of leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) genotype on feeding damage and reproduction of Aphthona spp.: implication for biological control. Biol Control 23:127–133 Google Scholar
Malo, DD, Worcester, BK (1975) Soil fertility and crop responses at selected landscape positions. Agron J 67:397–401 Google Scholar
McArthur, ED (1988) New plant development in range management. Pages 81–112 in Tueller PT, ed. Handbook of Vegetation Science: Vegetation Science Applications for Rangeland Analysis and Management. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Google Scholar
Mico, MA, Shay, JM (2002) Effect of flea beetles (Aphthona nigriscutis) on prairie invaded by leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) in Manitoba. Gt Plains Res 12:167–184 Google Scholar
Minnesota Wildflowers (2016) Draba reptans (Carolina whitlow-grass). https://www.minnesotawildflowers.info/flower/carolina-whitlow-grass. Accessed: January 22, 2016Google Scholar
Northern Great Plains Floristic Quality Assessment Panel (2001) Coefficients of Conservatism for the Vascular Flora of the Dakotas and Adjacent Grasslands. Reston, VA: U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Division, Information and Technology Report SGS/BRB/ITR-2001-0001. 32 pGoogle Scholar
Pearson, DE, Ortega, YK, Runyon, JB, Butler, JL (2016) Secondary invasion: the bane of weed management. Biol Conserv 197:8–17 Google Scholar
Perez, CJ, Waller, SS, Moser, LE, Stubbendieck, JL, Steuter, AA (1998) Seedbank characteristics of a Nebraska sandhills prairie. J Range Manage 51:55–62 Google Scholar
Sedivec, KK, Barker, WT (1998) Selected North Dakota and Minnesota Range Plants. Fargo, ND: North Dakota State University Extension Service, North Dakota State University of Agriculture and Applied Science, Publication EB-69 Google Scholar
Setter, CM, Lym, RG (2013) Change in leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) density and soil seedbank composition 10 years following release of Aphthona spp. biological control agents. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 6:147–160 Google Scholar
Stubbendieck, J, Hatch, SL, Bryan, NM (2011) North American Wildland Plants: A Field Guide. 2nd edn. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. 496 pGoogle Scholar
Swanton, CJ, Booth, BD (2004) Management of weed seedbanks in the context of populations and communities. Weed Technol 18:1496–1502 Google Scholar
Templeton, AR, Levin, DA (1979) Evolutionary consequences of seed pools. Am Nat 114:232–249 Google Scholar
Ter Heerdt, GNJ, Verweij, GL, Bekker, RM, Bakker, JP (1996) An improved method for seed-bank analysis: seedling emergence after removing the soil by sieving. Funct Ecol 10:144–151 Google Scholar
Thilmony, BM (2016) Aminocyclopyrachlor efficacy on native forbs and soil seedbank change 15 years following release of leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula L.) biological control agents. M.S. thesis. Fargo, ND: North Dakota State University. 90 pGoogle Scholar
Thompson, K, Grime, JP (1979) Seasonal variation in the seed banks of herbaceous species in ten contrasting habitats. J Ecol 67:893–921 Google Scholar
Tilman, D, Knops, J, Wedin, D, Reich, P (2001) Experimental and observational studies of diversity, productivity, and stability. Pages 42–70 in Kinzig AP, Pacala SW, Tilman D, eds. The Functional Consequences of Biodiversity: Empirical Progress and Theoretical Extensions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press Google Scholar
Tilman, D, Lehman, C (2001) Biodiversity, composition, and ecosystem processes: theory and concepts. Pages 39–41 in Kinzig AP, Pacala SW, Tilman D, eds. The Functional Consequences of Biodiversity: Empirical Progress and Theoretical Extensions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press Google Scholar
Tracy, BF, Sanderson, MA (2000) Patterns of plant species richness in pasture lands of the northeast United States. Plant Ecol 149:169–180 Google Scholar
Travnicek, AJ, Lym, RG, Prosser, C (2005) Fall-prescribed burn and spring-applied herbicide effects on Canada thistle control and soil seedbank in a northern mixed-grass prairie. Rangeland Ecol Manag 58:413–422 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[USDA-NRCS] U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (2012) Ecological Sites of North Dakota. Fargo, ND: North Dakota State University Cooperative Extension Service. https://www.ag.ndsu.edu/pubs/ansci/range/r1556.pdf. Accessed: January 25, 2016Google Scholar
[USDA-NRCS] U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (2014) Plants Database. Baton Rouge, LA: National Plant Data Center. http://plant.usda.gov/index.html. Accessed: June 25, 2014Google Scholar
Wolf, JK (1987) Influence of Landscape Position on Soil, Water, Runoff, Soil Erosion and Crop Yield. Ph.D dissertation. Fargo, ND: North Dakota State University. 107 pGoogle Scholar
Young, JA (1988) Seedbeds as selective factors in the species composition of rangeland communities. Pages 171–188 in Tueller PT, ed. Handbook of Vegetation Science: Vegetation Science Applications for Rangeland Analysis and Management. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Google Scholar