Risks and Rewards

Assessing the Effectiveness and Safety of Classical Invasive Plant Biocontrol by Arthropods

Kayri Havens, Claudia L. Jolls, Tiffany M. Knight, Patricia L Vitt

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Abstract

The use of biocontrol agents has been promoted as a relatively safe, efficient, and environmentally friendly alternative to chemical or mechanical control of invasive plant species. However, these agents may not be effective or may have unacceptable nontarget effects on desirable plant species. Although two recent meta-analyses conclude that biocontrol of weeds is effective (Clewley et al. 2012) and that nontarget impacts are rare and minimal (Suckling and Sforza 2014), we found that these conclusions were overstated on the basis of our review of the same literature. Most studies were either data deficient or were not designed to effectively assess biocontrol agent impact on fitness components of targeted weeds and on nontargeted plant species. We call for more rigorous experimental design and monitoring for biocontrol projects in order to obtain the quantitative data needed to make informed decisions about the risks and rewards of invasive plant biocontrol.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)247-258
Number of pages12
JournalBioScience
Volume69
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2019
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Arthropods
Reward
arthropods
biological control
Safety
biological control agents
weeds
Introduced Species
suckling
Meta-Analysis
Research Design
experimental design
monitoring

Keywords

  • biocontrol efficacy
  • invasive plants
  • nontarget impacts

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)

Cite this

@article{9bf8373b7cef4cb18cbc357eaaf84b35,
title = "Risks and Rewards: Assessing the Effectiveness and Safety of Classical Invasive Plant Biocontrol by Arthropods",
abstract = "The use of biocontrol agents has been promoted as a relatively safe, efficient, and environmentally friendly alternative to chemical or mechanical control of invasive plant species. However, these agents may not be effective or may have unacceptable nontarget effects on desirable plant species. Although two recent meta-analyses conclude that biocontrol of weeds is effective (Clewley et al. 2012) and that nontarget impacts are rare and minimal (Suckling and Sforza 2014), we found that these conclusions were overstated on the basis of our review of the same literature. Most studies were either data deficient or were not designed to effectively assess biocontrol agent impact on fitness components of targeted weeds and on nontargeted plant species. We call for more rigorous experimental design and monitoring for biocontrol projects in order to obtain the quantitative data needed to make informed decisions about the risks and rewards of invasive plant biocontrol.",
keywords = "biocontrol efficacy, invasive plants, nontarget impacts",
author = "Kayri Havens and Jolls, {Claudia L.} and Knight, {Tiffany M.} and Vitt, {Patricia L}",
year = "2019",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1093/biosci/biz015",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "69",
pages = "247--258",
journal = "BioScience",
issn = "0006-3568",
publisher = "American Institute of Biological Sciences",
number = "4",

}

Risks and Rewards : Assessing the Effectiveness and Safety of Classical Invasive Plant Biocontrol by Arthropods. / Havens, Kayri; Jolls, Claudia L.; Knight, Tiffany M.; Vitt, Patricia L.

In: BioScience, Vol. 69, No. 4, 01.04.2019, p. 247-258.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - Risks and Rewards

T2 - Assessing the Effectiveness and Safety of Classical Invasive Plant Biocontrol by Arthropods

AU - Havens, Kayri

AU - Jolls, Claudia L.

AU - Knight, Tiffany M.

AU - Vitt, Patricia L

PY - 2019/4/1

Y1 - 2019/4/1

N2 - The use of biocontrol agents has been promoted as a relatively safe, efficient, and environmentally friendly alternative to chemical or mechanical control of invasive plant species. However, these agents may not be effective or may have unacceptable nontarget effects on desirable plant species. Although two recent meta-analyses conclude that biocontrol of weeds is effective (Clewley et al. 2012) and that nontarget impacts are rare and minimal (Suckling and Sforza 2014), we found that these conclusions were overstated on the basis of our review of the same literature. Most studies were either data deficient or were not designed to effectively assess biocontrol agent impact on fitness components of targeted weeds and on nontargeted plant species. We call for more rigorous experimental design and monitoring for biocontrol projects in order to obtain the quantitative data needed to make informed decisions about the risks and rewards of invasive plant biocontrol.

AB - The use of biocontrol agents has been promoted as a relatively safe, efficient, and environmentally friendly alternative to chemical or mechanical control of invasive plant species. However, these agents may not be effective or may have unacceptable nontarget effects on desirable plant species. Although two recent meta-analyses conclude that biocontrol of weeds is effective (Clewley et al. 2012) and that nontarget impacts are rare and minimal (Suckling and Sforza 2014), we found that these conclusions were overstated on the basis of our review of the same literature. Most studies were either data deficient or were not designed to effectively assess biocontrol agent impact on fitness components of targeted weeds and on nontargeted plant species. We call for more rigorous experimental design and monitoring for biocontrol projects in order to obtain the quantitative data needed to make informed decisions about the risks and rewards of invasive plant biocontrol.

KW - biocontrol efficacy

KW - invasive plants

KW - nontarget impacts

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85064108320&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85064108320&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/biosci/biz015

DO - 10.1093/biosci/biz015

M3 - Review article

VL - 69

SP - 247

EP - 258

JO - BioScience

JF - BioScience

SN - 0006-3568

IS - 4

ER -