IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v487y2024ics030438002300296x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Less is more: Less herbicide does more when biological control is present in Pontederia crassipes

Author

Listed:
  • Xu, Linhao
  • Goode, Ashley B.C.
  • Tipping, Philip W.
  • Smith, Melissa C.
  • Gettys, Lyn A.
  • Knowles, Brittany K.
  • Pokorny, Eileen
  • Salinas, Luz
  • DeAngelis, Donald L.

Abstract

An experiment along with simulation modeling was applied to study the combinations of herbicide treatment and biological control that best limit invasive water hyacinth (Pontederia crassipes, formerly Eichhornia crassipes) in freshwater aquatic systems. The experiment consisted of 14 different treatments of P. crassipes in 1.67 m2 outdoor tank mesocosms. Seven treatments were with and seven were without insect biological control agents, Neochetina eichhorniae. In both of the sets of seven treatments, there was one no-herbicide treatment, a one-time full-strength herbicide treatment with 40 %, 80 % and 100 % coverage of the P. crassipes, and a one-time half-strength herbicide treatment with 40 %, 80 %, and 100 % surface area coverage. An overarching hypothesis was that leaving part of a tank unsprayed, providing habitat for the maintenance of biological control agents, would optimize control. Data from the experiment, measured on five days over the 167-day period, were used to calibrate a difference equation model of P. crassipes with and without the biological control agent. The model was then used to project longer term dynamics of the system. The model predicted that an initial one-time herbicide treatment, combined with application of the biocontrol agent at 80 % areal coverage, could maintain P. crassipes at levels lower than the carrying capacity of the plant's biomass over the long term, though not enough that N. eichhorniae would be considered, by itself, a highly effective control. However, the results suggest that a combination of biocontrol with 80 % spraying coverage every 600 days or so would be an effective integrated biocontrol strategy for maintaining decreased P. crassipes biomass at low levels over the long term.

Suggested Citation

  • Xu, Linhao & Goode, Ashley B.C. & Tipping, Philip W. & Smith, Melissa C. & Gettys, Lyn A. & Knowles, Brittany K. & Pokorny, Eileen & Salinas, Luz & DeAngelis, Donald L., 2024. "Less is more: Less herbicide does more when biological control is present in Pontederia crassipes," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 487(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:487:y:2024:i:c:s030438002300296x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2023.110566
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030438002300296X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2023.110566?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Muniz-Junior, Gilberto & Roque, Fábio de Oliveira & Pires, Aliny PF. & Guariento, Rafael D., 2023. "Are lower pesticide doses better? An evolutionary perspective on integrated pest management," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 482(C).
    2. Jardine, Sunny L. & Sanchirico, James N., 2018. "Estimating the cost of invasive species control," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 242-257.
    3. McCann, Michael J., 2016. "Evidence of alternative states in freshwater lakes: A spatially-explicit model of submerged and floating plants," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 337(C), pages 298-309.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Carolina Carrión-Klier & Nicolas Moity & Christian Sevilla & Danny Rueda & Heinke Jäger, 2022. "The Importance of Very-High-Resolution Imagery to Map Invasive Plant Species: Evidence from Galapagos," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-21, November.
    2. Lucas Bretschger & Karen Pittel, 2019. "Twenty Key Questions in Environmental and Resource Economics," CER-ETH Economics working paper series 19/328, CER-ETH - Center of Economic Research (CER-ETH) at ETH Zurich.
    3. Onal, Sevilay & Akhundov, Najmaddin & Büyüktahtakın, İ. Esra & Smith, Jennifer & Houseman, Gregory R., 2020. "An integrated simulation-optimization framework to optimize search and treatment path for controlling a biological invader," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    4. Haden Chomphosy, William & Manning, Dale T. & Shwiff, Stephanie & Weiler, Stephan, 2023. "Optimal R&D investment in the management of invasive species," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    5. Hidekazu Yoshioka & Yuta Yaegashi, 2020. "A growth rate control problem of harmful species population and its application to algae bloom," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 107-124, March.
    6. Jones, Benjamin A., 2023. "Can invasive species lead to sedentary behavior? The time use and obesity impacts of a forest-attacking pest," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    7. Catarino, Rui & Areal, Francisco & Park, Julian & Parisey, Nicolas, 2019. "Spatially explicit economic effects of non-susceptible pests' invasion on Bt maize," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 22-33.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:487:y:2024:i:c:s030438002300296x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.