SUMMER 2001 Export of Biocontrol Brisbane! ^ Australian 3 Biological o. Control Lab Exploration in Native Range of Weeds LOf 'ON ITunoj f • m St £ Id 'aassei^enex ai vd - TO PV aS^soj s n ,p CLLS X^IS^d Seapro 4 / c Control and Release P/U FLORIDA EXOTIC PEST PLANT COUNCIL Officers Ken Langeland -Chair Center for Aquatic & Invasive Plants 7922 NW 71st Street Gainesville, FL 32653 352/392-9614 kal@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu Tony Pemas -Immediate Past Chair Everglades National Park 40001 SR 9336 Homestead, FL 33034 305/242-7846 tony_pemas@nps.gov Dan Thayer -Treasurer SFWMD Post Office Box 24680 West Palm Beach, FL 33416-4680 561/682-6129 dthayer@sfwmd. gov Amy Ferriter -Editor SFWMD Post Office Box 24680 West Palm Beach, FL 33416-4680 561/682-6097 aferrite@sfwmd.gov Jackie Smith -Secretary DEP -Invasive Plant Management 3111-B13 Fortune Way Wellington, FL 33414 561/791-4720 smithjl@mail.state.fl.us Directors Mike Bodle SFWMD Post Office Box 24680 West Palm Beach, FL 33416-4680 561/682-6132 mbodle@sfwmd.gov Hillary Cherry Botany Dept. University of Florida 220 Bartram Hall P.O. Box 118526 Gainesville, FL 32611 352/336-2623 hcherry@ufl.edu Francois Laroche SFWMD Post Office Box 24680 West Palm Beach, FL 33416-4680 561/682-6193 flaroche@sfwmd. gov Brian Nelson SWFWMD 2379 Broad Street Brooksville, FL 34609-6899 352/796.7211 biian.nelson@swfwmd.state.fl.us Alison Fox UF -Agronomy Department Post Office Box 110500 Gainesville, FL 32611-0500 352/392-1811 ext.207 amfox@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu Dennis Giardina USFWS 377019th Avenue SW Naples, FL 34117 941/657-7637 dennis_giardina@fws.gov Christine Sutter SRWMD 9225 CR 49 Live Oak, FL 32060 904/362-1001 sutter_c@srwmd.state.fl.us Phil Waller BASF Corporation 6651 Englelake Drive Lakeland, FL 33813 863/619-6255 wallerp@basf.com Committee Chairs By-Laws Dennis Giardina CAST Representative Ken Langeland Editorial Amy Ferriter Education Hillary Cherry FNGAJFLEPPC Liaison Doria Gordon P.O. Box 118526 Department of Botany University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611 352/392-5949 dgordon@botany.ufl.edu Legislative Phil Waller Membership Andrea Van Loan Division of Forestry 1911 SW 34 Street Gainesville, FL 32608 352/372-3505x429 vanloaa@doacs.state.fl.us Merchendise vacant Nominations Tony Pemas Program Kathy Burks FDEP 3915 Commonwealth Blvd ms710 Tallahassee, FL 32399 850/487-2600 kathy.burks@dep.state.fl.us Plant List Dan Austin/Kathy Burks Florida Atlantic University Dept, of Biological Sciences Boca Raton, FL 33431 561/297-3327 daustin@fau.edu Publications Dan Clark 7922 NW 71st Street Gainesville, FL 32653 352/392-6894 danclark@ufl.edu Research John Volin Florida Atlantic University 2912 College Ave. Davie, FL 33314 954/236-1115 jvolin@fau.edu Ad Hoc Standard Operating Procedures Bob Doren National Park Service Florida International University SERC-OE148 University Park Miami, FL33199 305/348-6721 dorenr@fiu.edu Local Arrangements JB Miller Florida Park Service 1000 Faver Dykes Rd. St. Augustine, FL 32086 904/794-5959 millerjb@aug.com Training Jim Duquesnel P.O. Box 487 Key Largo, FL 33037 305/451-1226 jpcrsp@reefnet.com Vendors Phil Waller Task Forces Australian Pines Robert Egan Habitat Restoration Resources 224 NE 47 Street Pompano Beach, FL 33064 954/788-8018 gardengateway@yahoo.com Brazilian Pepper Dean Barber 5882 South Semeron Blvd. Orlando, FL 32822 407/275-4004 barberl@mail.state.fl.us Carrotwood Chris Lockhart Habitat Specialists, Inc. P.O. Box 3116 Boynton Beach, FL 33424-3116 561/738-1179 chris .lockhart@ habitatspecialists.com Dioscorea Mike Bodle Grasses Gerald "Stinger" Guala, Fairchild Tropical Garden 11935 Old Cutler Rd. Miami, FL 33156 stinger@fiu.edu Lygodium Amy Ferriter/Tom Fucigna Skunkvine Brian Nelson Chinese Tallow Greg Jubinsky / Cheryl McCormick 3915 Commonwealth Blvd. MS710 Tallahassee, FL 32399 850/487-2600 greg_jubinsky@dep.state.fl.us Melaleuca Francois Laroche The Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council has not tested any of the products advertised or referred to in this publication, nor has it verified any of the statements made in any of the advertisements or articles. The Council does not warrant, expressly or implied, the fitness of any product, advertised or the suitability of any advice or statements contained herein. Wildland Weeds SUMMER 2001, Volume 4. Number 3 Table of Contents 5 Controlling Tall Fescue, Common Bermuda, and Bahia Grass by Thomas G. Barnes and Brian Washburn 9 What's Up in the Literature? by Karen Brown, Allison Fox, Jamey Carter-King and Mary Langeland 16 SE-EPPC News 17 Biocontrol Down Under by John A. Goolsby, Matthew F. Purcell and Tony Wright 21 Internodes 22 Mark Your Calendar Visit these websites: Florida EPPC's: www.fleppc.org Southeast EPPC's: www.se-eppc.org California EPPC's: www.caleppc.org Wildland Weeds (ISSN 1524-9786) is a quarterly publication of the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council (EPPC) Wildland Weeds is published to provide a focus for the issues and concerns regarding exotic pest plant biology, distribution and control. To become a member of the Florida EPPC and receive the Council newsletter and Wildland Weeds Magazine, contact the Treasurer. For advertising information contact: Outdoor Tech, Inc., 6791 Proctor Rd. Tallahassee, FL 32308, Phone 850 668-2353, Fax 850 668-2664 Debra Tarver Charter Advertisers: SePRO, Griffin, Dow Agrosciences, Riverdale, Invasive Plant Control, Brewer International, Timberland Enterprises, Inc., American Cyanamid, Helena Direct editorial inquiries to Amy Ferriter, Editor Wildland Weeds Magazine: 3301 Gun Club Rd. West Palm Beach, FL 33406 aferrite@sfwmd. gov Editorial Board Mike Bodle Jim Cuda Roger Hammer Ken Langeland Steve Manning Dan Thayer Cover The staff of the Australian Biological Control Laboratory are actively searching natural areas of Australia and Southeast Asia for insects and other organisms which feed on plant species that are invasive in Florida. Cover created by John Goolsby. WILDLAND WEEDS 3 SePRO full page 4/c Prescription P/U from Spring Aquatics Thomas G. Barnes Associate Extension Professor, Department of Forestry, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40546-0073 Brian Washburn Post-doctoral scholar, Department of Wildlife & Fisheries, Columbia, MO Collectively, tall fescue (Festuca arun- dinacea ), common Bermuda (Cynodon dactylon) and Bahiagrass (Pasyalum notatum ) have been seeded on more than 50 million acres throughout the southeast and midwestern United States. These exotic grasses have been seeded for hay, pasture, turfgrass, surface mine reclamation, conservation and roadside plantings, and for erosion control. As with many exotic organ¬ isms, these species are very aggressive and can quickly invade natural areas causing plant community degrada¬ tion. Furthermore, these grasses do not provide quality wildlife habitat for grassland birds like the Northern Bobwhite quail or mammals such as the Eastern cottontail rabbit (Barnes et al 1995, Randall 1996) . We (my graduate students and I) embarked upon an interesting journey eight years ago when we began our experiments with eradicating tall fescue using a variety of management techniques including fire, tillage, and herbicides (Madison et al. 2001). The results of our first studies indicated that a spring controlled burn followed by a single application of glyphosate at the maxi¬ mum label rate was the most effective method of killing tall fescue at that time. We monitored those initial plots for two years and by the end of study, tall fescue had reinvaded much of the herbicide treated plots. Because we were interested in developing wildlife habitat, we concluded that some other grass species should be seeded to keep the tall fescue from re-invading the plots. We determined that native warm f A % :r. ; /> pfT o ir\ raw season grasses were the best option for providing quality wildlife habitat. Our initial studies in killing fescue with glyphosate and establishing the Photo 1 Typical no-till seeding of native warm season grasses six weeks after seeding. We used 12 oz imazapic + 1 qt surfactant + 1 qt 28-0-0 liquid fertilizer per acre four weeks prior to seeding. Note that the fescue has been completely eradicated and the native warm season grasses are flourishing. Photo 2 This treatment of 1 quart imazapyr + 2 quarts glyphosate + 12 oz imazapic one month later was the most effective treatment for killing common Bermuda grass. However, neither the seeded native warm season grasses or anything else grew in these plots. Photo 3 A spring burn followed by an application of 2 quarts glyphosate per acre + 12 oz imazapic per acre was the best treatment for reducing common Bermuda grass and establishing native warm season grasses. Notice the excellent stand of native warm season grasses in areas where the Bermuda grass was killed. In the upper right hand corner, notice the line of Bermuda grass. This is an area between spray units that did not receive a herbicide application. Photo 4 The best treatment for killing bahiagrass and establishing native warm season grasses was to conduct a spring burn followed by an 8 oz application of clethodim followed by an 8 oz imazapic application at seeding. Note there is little bahiagrass in the plot and the strong establishment of Indiangrass at the end of the first growing season. WILDLAND WEEDS 5 native grasses were met with disaster. As expected, severe weed competition from crabgrass ( Digitaria spp.), johnson- grass, ( Sorghum halepense), foxtail grasses ( Setaria spp.), and ragweed (Ambrosia spp.) prevented the natives from becoming established and flour¬ ishing. A chance meeting with scientists from American Cyanamid at a wildlife conference altered our research pro¬ gram forever. Drs. Joe and Jennifer Vollmer informed me that a new her¬ bicide that contained the imazapic molecule would kill tall fescue and provide residual weed control for 45 to 60 days post-treatment. Like most scientists, I was skeptical of corporate marketing efforts, but I did agree that I would like to try some of their product for an upcoming research project. That first project consisted of two experi¬ ments: comparing the efficacy of ima¬ zapic to glyphosate for controlling tall fescue either singly or in combination. Because of limited space, readers are referred to our paper in Weed Technol- ogy, (Washburn and Barnes 2000) for specific information on methods and a complete discussion of the results. In the first study we compared a single application during the spring and fall of glyphosate at label rates. Average pre-treatment tall fescue cover on the sites was 93%. Overall, tall fescue cover was reduced to less than 12% on average by a single postemergence spring or fall application. Tall fescue cover in the spring treatments aver¬ aged 1.3% remaining compared to 6% remaining in the fall treatments. These differences were not statistically different. In the second study, we compared a single spring treatment using imazapic at maximum label rate (12 oz per acre) to a mixture of imazapic at label rate with either 1 quart or 2 quarts glyphosate per acre. We compared the efficacy of the treatments during the tall fescue spring vegetative growth stage, boot stage, summer dormancy stage, or fall vegetative stage. Average pre-treatment tall fescue cover was 91%. Imazapic alone and in combina¬ tion with glyphosate reduced tall fescue cover to less than 3% regardless of application timing. The results of these two studies concluded that either glyphosate or imazapic kill tall fescue. The herbicides can be used alone or in combination and by using both herbicides, imazapic tolerant species would also be eliminated from the plant community. Remember at the beginning of the article I mentioned the initial native warm season grass plantings were thought to be failures. Well, it turns out they were not. Even though we could not quantify their presence in the plots, the seedlings were being obstructed by the invasion of tall fescue and john- songrass. At the beginning of the third growing season we applied the maxi¬ mum label rate of imazapic without any fertilizer or surfactant in late April to the plots considered to be failures. In 7 of our 9 treatments, the imazapic reduced or eliminated the tall fescue and other exotic weeds including john- songrass. Prior to applying the herbi¬ cide, native warm season grass cover ranged from 14 to 47%. That fall, native warm season grass covered had increased from 81 to 122% (Washburn et al 1999). With this information in hand, we designed an experiment to determine the efficacy of prescribed burning, post¬ emergence imazapic applications, and combinations of prescribed burning and imazapic applications for eradicating tall fescue and increasing native warm season grasses in native prairie barrens. We implemented 16 different treatments that included different rates of imazapic with and without a non-ionic surfactant. The treatments also included burned and unburned plots. We observed that all 12 herbicide treatments had less tall fescue cover compared to the controls over a two year period. The best treat¬ ment for reducing tall fescue cover was spring burning followed by applying 8 and 10 oz of imazapic with a non-ionic surfactant. Prescribed burning alone did not decrease tall fescue cover. This has been documented in several other studies (Madison et al. 2001, Washburn et al. 1999). While we successfully reduced tall fescue cover in most treat¬ ment plots, another exotic cool-season grass, Kentucky bluegrass, that is toler¬ ant to imazapic, became dominant in some plots. Our final fescue eradication experi¬ ment was implemented last spring. The goal of this project was to compare the efficacy of several herbicides including glyphosate, imazapic, clethodim, and sethoxydim for killing tall fescue. Our reasoning behind implementing this study was to determine if a grass- specific herbicide like clethodim or sethoxydim could be used to kill fescue and remove it from native grasslands. From our previous work we knew that both imazapic and glyphosate effectively kill tall fescue but both of these herbicides will kill many forbs. This study was conducted at three locations throughout Central Kentucky in the outer bluegrass physiographic province. Specific treatments included maximum label rates of glyphosate and imazapic, 8 or 10 oz per acre clethodim, and 1 quart sethoxydim per acre. We also added 1 quart surfactant and 2.5 lbs Ammonium sulfate per acre in each herbicide tank mixture. The results of this experiment showed, to no ones surprise, that the glyphosate and imazapic effectively removed the tall fescue. Average tall fescue cover post-treatment for the glyphosate and imazapic treatments were less than 2% remaining and less than 5% remaining, respectively. Clethodim was also effec¬ tive and at two locations reduced tall fescue cover to less than 20% fescue remaining. The sethoxydim treatments were largely unsuccessful and they left an average of 73% and 46% tall fescue at two sites and 6% at the third location. In summary, we feel very comfort¬ able that either a single spring applica¬ tion of glyphosate or imazapic at maximum label rates can effectively kill tall fescue. We know that you get better results if you burn the fescue field prior to herbicide application. We also know that you get better control if you add a surfactant and small amount of nitrogen fertilizer to the tank mixture. If you are trying to remove tall fescue from a native prairie or oldfield dominated by broomsedge bluestem ( Andropogon virginicus), you can use 10 or 12 oz of imazapic per acre and it will do the job. However, if you have a diverse field with forbs, the jury is still out on the most effective treatment. Our information suggests that clethodim may be an appropriate herbicide but 6 SUMMER 2001 the others have not yet been tested for use in this situation. For example, if you apply glyphosate or imazapic in March prior to the warm season spe¬ cies breaking dormancy, more forb spe- cies may be toler- ant to this treat- 80 ment That is the 70 subject for our 60 next set of exper- 60 iments that will 40 begin this spring. 30 While most of 20 our research has 10 focused on tall 0 fescue, we are now looking at control- ling other exotic grasses and con- verting them to Common Bermuda grass has proven to be a more difficult species to elimi¬ nate. The pre-treatment and control plots had an average of 80% Bermuda grass cover. All treatment plots in this study were burned in March and herbicides were applied the Bermuda Grass □ glyphosate ■ glyphosate + 4 oz im □ glyphosate +12 oz Imazapic ■ glyphosate ♦ Im azap □ glyphosate + imazapyr + IS oz imazapic ■ select + 4 oz imazapi ■ selct* 12 oz mazaple native warm season grasses. The first two exotic grasses we have worked on include common Bermuda and bahia. Our work on common Bermuda has been done in Alabama at Wheeler National Wildlife Refuge. The bahia work has been done along the South Carolina coastal plain. first week of April. We did find a treatment that did eliminate the Bermuda grass (1 quart imazapyr + 2 quarts glypho¬ sate followed by 12 oz imazapic one month later) but there were few plants. of any species including the native warm season grasses, that survived the herbicide treatment. Total vegeta¬ tive cover in these plots was less than 1% (see photo). Two treatments that showed tremendous promise were those treated with 2 quarts glyphosate per acre. These data are somewhat skewed because our spray unit did not overlap and in the small space between herbicide treatments the Bermuda grass escaped into the plots (see photo). Thus, where the herbicides reached the grass, we got almost complete control by burning and applying the maximum label rate of glyphosate per acre. When we added either 4 or 12 oz imazapic per acre Bahiagrass □ fftptoMM +4 For More Information on How to Solve Sahara J i I Your Vegetation Problems Call Phil Waller Pendulum \ (863) 619-6255 8 SUMMER 2001 WhaJ’s Up n the iterature? Karen Brown, Alison Fox, Jamey Carter-King and Mary Langeland University of Florida, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS), Gainesville, Florida Karen Brown (kpb@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu) and Mary Langeland work at the UF Center for Aquatic and Invasive Plants. Alison Fox (amfox@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu) and Jamey Carter-King work at the UF Department of Agronomy (1997), NISC Biblioline (1971), Web of If one were to do a literature search on invasive plant species using most of the better commercial science data¬ bases, the number of citations found would be considerable. Why is it, then, that when one tries to find relevant references on the invasiveness of these species, one often comes up empty- handed? What follows is a description of the process that the authors, in a coopera¬ tive effort, have gone through in order to begin the comprehensive collection of relevant literature on the FLEPPC Category I list of invasive, non-native species for inclusion in the Aquatic Plant Information Retrieval System (APIRS) database (see Box 1). This collection will include the retrospective (or historical) literature, as well as newly published material. However, for the purposes of this article, we will focus on the literature published prior to December 2000. As staff members of the University of Florida, we have access to the vast resources of the university's library holdings. These holdings include elec¬ tronic databases and indexes to the literature. The science databases that we have searched (with the date of earliest records in parentheses) include Biological Abstracts (1980), Cambridge Scientific Abstracts - Plant Science (1994 - includes URLs), CAB (Commonwealth Agricultural Bureau -1972), FirstSearch (specifically the Agricola database - 1970), ISI's Current Contents (preceding 24 months), Everglades Digital Network Science (1945), and Zoological Abstracts (1978). Each of these databases was searched using the genus and species name of the plant (as listed in Table 1). In this compilation, synonyms were not used except for Pueraria mon- tana and P. lobata. Initially, Jamey Carter- King compiled aggregate lists of citations by searching the above-named databases, downloading the citations into "Librar¬ ies" using the EndNote cita¬ tion-manage¬ ment software (Niles Software Inc.), and reject¬ ing duplicate and incom¬ plete citations. In addition to the paper's title and source, the EndNote Libraries included abstracts for about 80% of citations. The total number of citations per species (Table 1) varied from 0 for Jasminum fluminense (although this species was featured in the Winter 2000 issue of Wildland Weeds ) to 833 for Casuarina equisetifolia. Nine species had no more than 10 citations and the average number of citations was 162 per species. The numbers of citations found in the APIRS database for aquatic species have been included to complete the table for FL EPPC Category I (3 rd column in Table 1.) Of the seven wetland or upland species for which the APIRS col¬ lection has been ongoing, only for Casu¬ arina equisetifolia and Sapium sebiferum were there more citations in the com¬ mercial databases. In both of these cases, many papers would not be relevant to APIRS because they focus on phyto¬ chemistry, biochemistry, or forestry utilization. For the other five species for which APIRS has more citations, such as Melaleuca quinquenervia and Mimosa pigra, the extensive APIRS database includes articles from agency reports and conference proceedings (commonly referred to as "gray literature"), jour¬ nals not covered by commercial databases (espe- cially foreign language ones), and articles published prior to the earliest records of most commercial electronic data¬ bases. To confirm the validity of the extracted citations, Jamey searched the Endnote Librar¬ ies by genus and species (4 th column in Table 1.) For at least two thirds of the species stud¬ ied, the species name occurred in the title and/or abstract for at least 75% of articles. Of the remaining 18 species, half of them had the genus in at least 75% of titles and/or abstracts. That What APIRS does For twenty years, the staff at APIRS has collected, cataloged, stored hard copies, and created a searchable com¬ puterized database of the literature on aquatic and wetland plants around the world. More recently, we have begun the collection of literature on upland invasive species in Florida under a grant from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Invasive Plant Management. Our pri¬ mary focus in this realm is the FLEPPC Category I and Category II species. The APIRS database now contains over 53,000 citations. Approximately 2,200 of these citations are related to 44 upland invasive plant species listed on the Category I list. To search the database, go to http://plants.ifas.ufl.edu and click on APIRS Database Online, or contact Karen Brown at kpb@gnv. ifas.ufl.edu to have a search performed for you. WILDLAND WEEDS 9 leaves 9 species (indicated by * in Table 1) such as Neyraudia reynaudiana, Senna pendula , Solanum torvum, and Syzygium cumini for which the reliability of the extracted citations is somewhat suspi¬ cious. Commercial databases may include citations that do not include the species name in the title or abstract because some data¬ bases: automatically search for synonyms; search whole papers and not just titles and abstracts; or include citations cataloged by scientific name, even if only the common name was used in the article. For a preliminary screening of citations, Jamey used the titles and abstracts to assign relevant category des¬ ignations from the fol¬ lowing list (terms in bold used as abbrevia¬ tions in Table 1): tax¬ onomy, morphology, and identification; life- history; abiotic ecol¬ ogy; biotic ecology; eco¬ nomic impacts; ecologi¬ cal impacts; chemical control; biological con¬ trol; mechanical control; cultural control; uses; physiology and biochem¬ istry; and genetics. Several categories may be assigned to each citation and they were interpreted very broadly (e.g., a paper with information about the toxicity of a plant to birds would be included under "physi¬ ology and biochemis¬ try" and "ecological impacts" because of likely impacts on wild¬ life). Most of these cat¬ egories are similar to the major categories used by APIRS (see Box 2) but the full list of categories and keywords used for cataloging citations in APIRS is much more detailed and is applied to the entire paper, as opposed to just the title and abstract, by APIRS science reader/cataloger, Mary Langeland. The most commonly allocated of Jamey's categories was physiology and biochemistry, being assigned to an average of 68% of citations. In fact, a third of all species had at least 90% of their citations assigned to this category (5 th column in Table 1.) For species such as Sapium sebiferum this emphasis could be explained by a char¬ acteristic of the species, such as potential toxicity, that is important to humans. At the other extreme, the categories of economic impacts and control methods were assigned to an average of less than 5% of citations. By including more of the gray literature, the control categories are likely to be better represented in APIRS than in the commercial databases. When adding a new species to the APIRS database list for collec¬ tion, Mary Langeland further culls Jamey's aggregate list of cita¬ tions for relevant ref¬ erences. Why is this necessary? The articles selected for inclusion in the APIRS database address not only the invasiveness of the plant, but other basic research on physiology, ecology, morphology, reproduc¬ tion, etc. Although re¬ searchers and admin¬ istrators alike want "everything there is" on a weedy species, the fact is that much, and in some cases, most of the literature has little to do with a plant's weediness or basic biology. We are proceeding through the FLEPPC Category I list alphabeti¬ cally. For the purposes of providing examples for this article, we review some of the genera starting with 'A'. These examples demonstrate the rather small percent¬ age of articles found to be relevant for our pur¬ poses, and why they are, or are not, relevant. Abrus precatorius Searching on Abrus precatorius in the com¬ mercial databases pro¬ duced a list of nearly 300 citations. However, approximately 245 of them specifically studied phytochemistry/biochemistry, especially toxicity to animals and phar¬ macology. For example. Activity of Abrus precatorius L. extracts against APIRS Subject Categories The APIRS list of major categories is quite long. The categories are further subdivided into sub-categories. Some of them, such as lakes and eutrophication, are mostly specific to aquatic species, since our roots are in the water. The categories that we most often use for upland invasive species are as follows: ♦ Control (biological (including insects, pathogens, etc.); chemical; cultural (including hand-removal, cutting, etc); mechanical; integrated (combinations of strategies); government (legislation, regulation, permitting, agency reports, etc.)) ♦ Ecology (ecosystem; host plants; nutrient cycling; phenology (life history, senescence, fruiting, dormancy); plant succession; primary production; productivity;) ♦ Economics (economic impacts of invasives; costs of management; values of areas or preservation) ♦ Morphology (cytology; histology) ♦ Physiology (photosynthesis; transpiration; respiration) ♦ Remote Sensing (GPS; GIS; aerial surveys) ♦ Reproduction (flowering; germination) ♦ Review (does not contain original research) ♦ Survey ♦ Taxonomy ♦ Toxic Plants (lethal; irritant; allelopathic) ♦ Utilization Plant names mentioned in the text are always part of the cataloged record. If there are more than 40, we list a representative selection and use the keyword phrase ‘over 40 species’. Any significant word from the text can be used as a keyword when cataloging citations in the APIRS database. Examples include illustrations (used when a reference contains good plant drawings or photographs); chemical control methodologies (such as basal bark method or cut stump method); habitat (used when plant habitat is described, or when the plant species provides habitat for other species); community response (for example, the ecological response of a plant community to the removal of an exotic species); competition; flooding or disturbance or drought (the effects of); restoration; natural areas management; seed dispersal; range; naturalized species; endangered species; biomass; herbivory; prescribed burns; population studies; seedling establishment; genetics; and many, many more. More detailed explanations of our subject categories and keyword combinations can be found within the database section of our website: http://plants.ifas.ufl.edu/categor.html 10 SUMMER 2001 Table 1. Data related to citations found in commercial electronic databases and the APIRS database for FL EPPC category I species. (Aquatic species were not searched in the commercial databases because APIRS has covered them for many years.) Commercial databases APIRS database 1 % naming species 2 Most cited category 3 (%) 2 nd most cited category 3 (%) Abrus precatorius 294 90 Phys 99 Ecol imp 52 Acacia auriculiformis 718 79 Uses 53 Phys 32 Albizia julibrissin 154 86 Phys 97 Ecol imp 29 Albizia lebbeck 414 81 Phys 99 Abiotic 44 Ardisia crenata 33 76 Phys 91 Ecol imp 48 Ardisia elliptica 4 75 Abiotic 75 Ecol imp 50 Asparagus densiflorus 78 44 Phys 90 Abiotic 38 Bauhinia variegata 189 77 Phys 98 Uses 46 Bischofia javanica 85 94 Phys 85 Uses 47 Calophyllum antillanum 5 80 Taxon 80 (Several) 20 Casuarina equisetifolia 833 100 94 Phys 94 Abiotic 54 Casuarina glauca 216 63 Phys 98 Uses 72 Cestrum diurnum 43 88 Phys 100 Ecol imp 60 Cinnamomum camphora 212 91 Phys 93 Ecol imp 41 Colocasia esculenta not inch 301 Colubrina asiatica 13 16 85 Abiotic 54 Phys 54 Cupaniopsis anacardioides 13 40 69 Phys 85 Abiotic 62 Dioscorea alata 440 75 Uses 46 Life 45 Dioscorea bulbifera 122 81 Phys 53 Taxon 49 Eichhornia crassipes not incl. 4,064 Eugenia uniflora 103 84 Uses 44 Ecol imp 34 Ficus microcarpa 86 92 Taxon 40 Biotic 30 Hydrilla verticillata not incl. 3,022 Hygrophila polysperma not incl. 134 Hymenachne amplexicaulis not incl. 37 Imperata cylindrica 467 97 Phys 88 Ecol imp 80 Ipomoea aquatica not incl. 241 Jasminum dichotomum 3 33* Taxon 67 (Several) 33 jasminum fluminense 0 Lantana camara 25 76 Ecol imp 68 Phys 40 Ligustrum sinense 49 69 Taxon 45 Ecol imp 40 Lonicera japonica 244 77 Phys 55 Ecol imp 42 Eygodium japonicum 90 73 Life 74 Phys 69 Lygodium microphyllum 17 65* Taxon 47 Ecol imp 47 Macfadyena unguis-cati 9 78 Phys 50 Taxon 40 Melaleuca quinquenervia 155 384 79 Ecol imp 60 Taxon 59 Melia azedarach 697 86 Phys 90 Uses 66 Mimosa pigra 191 323 88 Ecol imp 94 Taxon 55 Nandina domestica 85 93 Phys 79 Uses 55 Nephrolepis cordifolia 38 71 Taxon 78 Abiotic 78 Nephrolepis multiflora 7 43* Abiotic 100 Taxon 86 Neyraudia reynaudiana 13 8* Ecol imp 79 Abiotic 64 Paederia cruddasiana 10 30* Ecol imp 100 Taxon 60 Paederiafoetida 40 62 Ecol imp 87 Phys 74 Panicum repens not incl. 355 Pennisetum purpureum 676 92 Phys 95 Uses 83 Pistia stratiotes not incl. 1,049 Psidium cattleianum 51 92 Phys 77 Ecol imp 50 Psidium guajava 829 91 Phys 98 Uses 72 Pueraria montana 312 86 Phys 94 Ecol imp 59 Rhodomyrtus tomentosa 13 100 Phys 77 Abiotic 69 Rhoeo spathacea 57 91 Phys 86 Life 70 Sapium sebiferum 139 84 96 Phys 95 Ecol imp 50 Scaevola sericea 24 83 Phys 83 Abiotic 75 Schefflera actinophylla 66 59 Phys 92 Abiotic 71 Schinus terebinthifolius 125 285 85 Phys 92 Ecol imp 64 Senna pendula 18 28* Abiotic 100 Ecol imp 78 Solanum tampicense 6 67 Ecol imp 100 Taxon 60 Solanum torvum 239 44* Phys 79 Life 39 Solanum viarum 93 98 Phys 82 Ecol imp 45 Syzygium cumini 20 10* Phys 90 Life 75 Tectaria incisa 5 40* Taxon 100 Abiotic 100 Thespesia populnea 100 91 Phys 94 Ecol imp 34 Tradescantia fluminensis 82 87 Phys 98 Taxon 45 Urochloa mutica not incl. 90 1 Data included only for species for which APIRS has been collecting for several years. APIRS collections are in progress for all FL EPPC Category I species but partial data are inconclusive and quickly out-dated. 2 Percentage of articles for which the species name is found in the title and/or abstract when searched using EndNote software. * indicates that less than 75% of citations included the genus in the title and/or abstract. 3 Full names of Jamey's categories are listed in the text. WILDLAND WEEDS 11 the two-spotted spider mite Tetranychus urticae Koch (Acari: Tetranychidae) by S. A.A. Amer, et al in Acarologia (1989) 30(3):209-216 would not be considered relevant and would not be collected. There were no references specifically on the invasiveness of Abrus precatorius. There were 55 references that Mary deemed relevant and they fell into the following subject categories: physi¬ ology, utilization (human medical needs), reproduction (seed germina¬ tion), morphology, taxonomy, ecology, and weed control (in citriculture). Acacia auriculiformis Searching Acacia auriculiformis in the commercial databases produced a list of 718 total citations. Of these, 491 focused on phytochemistry and forestry/reforestation in other coun¬ tries (mostly propagation for forestry; nitrogen-fixation; wood characteristics; utilization for erosion control for disturbed, saline or mined areas). For example. Comparison of volume production, basic density and stem quality between Acacia mangium and Acacia auriculiformis grown in Zanzibar by M.S. Ali, et al in journal of Tropical Forest Science (1997) 10:10-17 would not be acquired, nor would Growth of three multipurpose tree species on tin tailings in Malaysia by K. Awang in journal of Tropical Forest Science (1994) 7:106-112. An example of a phytochemistry article that would not be collected is Enhance¬ ment of membrane damage by saponins isolated from Acacia auriculiformis by S. Babu Santi Prasad in the lapanese journal of Pharmacology (1997) 75(4):451-454. There were 234 relevant citations in the following areas: physi¬ ology (transpiration, photosynthesis), ecology (primary production, phenol¬ ogy, host plants, nutrient cycling, plant succession), invasiveness (2), reproduction (germination, flower¬ ing, ontogeny, micropropagation), morphology (genetics, identification, root nodes), taxonomy, toxic plants (nematicide), and fire. An example of a relevant article on the invasiveness of Acacia is The earleaf acacia, a fast growing, brittle exotic "weed" tree in Florida by J.F. Morton in the Proceed¬ ings of the Florida State Horticultural Society (1985) 98:309-314. Albizia lebbeck Albizia lebbeck had a total of 414 citations in the commercial databases, primarily on forestry/ reforestation, use as forage/fodder, and phytochemistry. There were 108 relevant citations on physiology, ecology, invasiveness, allelopathy, reproduction, morphology and taxonomy. Research which focuses on insects or pathogens of the plant is usually selected for inclusion. Such articles offer studies onherbivory, larval damage to the plant, disease symptoms, etc. which could lay the groundwork for biological control research. A good example is Losses in Albizia lebbek due to leaf spot and pod diseases caused by Colletotrichum dematium and their control by T. Mohd, et al (1996) in Impact of Diseases and Insect Pests in Tropical Forests: the IUFRO Symposium, Peechi, India, pp. 81-84. Another relevant article would be Julia Morton's Woman's tongue, or cha-cha (Albizia lebbeck Benth.), a fast-growing weed tree in Florida, is prized for timber, fuel, and forage elsewhere in the Proceedings of the Florida State Horticultural Society (1983) 96:173-178. This article describes the natural range imberland LLC Complete line of Vegetation Management Herbicides anc| Adjuvants for Aquatics, Invasives, Forestry, anc| Roadway/Otility Rights of Way SOLUTIONS - SERVICE - SATISFACTION FLORIDA OFFICE 3707-3 5W42 n4 Avenue Gainesville, FL 32608 C352) 375-2601 Office C352) 375-3123 Fax VEGETATION MANAGEMENT SPECIALISTS Pat Green (813) 230-3340 Paul Mason (407) 718-9154 12 SUMMER 2001 Dow Agroscience Ad B/Wp/u WILDLAND WEEDS 13 for Albizia lebbeck, the history of its introduction into Florida, its distribu¬ tion around the world, its utilization in the Old World, and its growth habits in south Florida as of 1983. The article also provides information on the climatic and soil requirements of the plant, nitrogen fixation, propagation, growth rate, economic uses and a valuable list of 76 references in the literature cited. As an interesting aside, Ms. Morton sug¬ gested that the common name of 'cha- cha' be adopted as "brief, pronounce¬ able in any language, pleasantly expres¬ sive, and inoffensive to females." [The authors support this adoption.] She claimed that the various common names have been inspired by the "clat¬ ter of the persistent dry pods." Ardisia crenata Ardisia crenata had a total of only 33 citations in the commercial databases, most of which were about phytochem¬ istry and utilization as an ornamental plant. While phytochemistry is consid¬ ered physiology research, these refer¬ ences often comprise the bulk of the total literature available on a species. They are easily found in specific jour¬ nals (for example. Phytochemistry) and are well indexed in electronic databases for those interested in this research. Also, there usually is a general lack of applicability to research con¬ ducted for control or management of invasive species. Some examples of such physiology/phytochemistry articles are New bergenin derivatives from Ardisia crenata by Z. Jia, et al. Natural Medicines (1995) 49(2): 187, or Minor triterpenoid saponinsfrom Ardisia crenata by K. Koike, Chemical and Pharmaceu¬ tical Bulletin (1999) 47(3):434-435. Much of this research is geared toward find¬ ing new products such as medicines, or antifeedants in stored crops. If the research appears to be about the allelo- pathic effects of an invasive species on other plant species, which would potentially be an invasive trait, it is of course deemed relevant. This type of research could be used to support the designation of a species as invasive. Articles that deal with the horticul¬ tural propagation of Ardisia crenata are selected because they usually contain research on basic physiology of the plant. For example. The study of photo¬ synthetic C02 exchange as a measure of the growth and yield of agricultural , ornamental , and horticultural plants by R. Ceulemans and I. Impens, Revue de 1'Agriculture (1982) 12(4):l-3 might be acquired if available. Articles are not selected if they deal with methodology and are directed toward the ornamental plant industry, for example. Production and use of Ardisia crenata as a potted foliage plant by C.A. Conover, et al. Foliage Digest (1989) 12(4):l-3. Seemingly vague articles such as Short comments on Ardisia (Myrsinaceae) of eastern Asia by Y.P. Yang, Botanical Bulletin of Academia Sinica (Taipei) (1989) 30(4):297-298 are acquired because they offer valuable information about the plant in its native habitat or range. Another good example of a relevant plant pathogen article would be Foot rot of Ardisia crenata caused by Fusarium solani by C. Fu, Taiwan Journal of Forest Science (1999) 14(2):223-227. The process of obtaining full copies of articles for cataloging and entry into the APIRS database is another undertaking altogether. Only a small part of the retrospective literature has actually been collected, cataloged and added to the APIRS database. For the New Name! Growing Cnmmitrmntl ProSource One formerly Terra Professional Products has a new name with a growing commitment to our customers. ProSource One is the exclusive source for all of your aquatic vegetation management needs. We offer the right products, reliable advice and dependable services to help make your aquatic program successful. Talk to your ProSource One aquatics vegetation management specialist. Aquatic Specialists Office Stephanie Linton 1-407-886-4744, Fax 1-407-884-0111 South Florida Area Jorge Menocal Pager 1-888-622-1629 Office 1-305-279-6901; Mobile 1-305-797-6308 14 SUMMER 2001 rest, newer articles may be available online or in current printed journals carried by the university library Older items may be found in older printed journals in the library stacks. Where author addresses are available and current, articles can be requested in writing. But in some cases such as very old articles or those in obscure journals, articles simply may not be available. Articles that seem strongly relevant but can not be obtained may be cited in the database as 'citation only', and hopefully may be found in someone's collection at a later date. Because the truth is, bibliographies and indexes, even when cataloged, annotated or with abstracts, are not always useful to researchers unless the text of the document is available. What we ultimately hope to create is a comprehensive collection of relevant references on Florida's invasive, non¬ native plant species, cataloged and computerized for easy searching of the literature, with hard copies available for research purposes. APIRS has done this for aquatics. Now we've taken on the task of upland invasives. It's a big job but, together, we're working on it! Wil/Hanrl T ▼ IIUUIIIU Charier Advertisers SePRQ Griffin Domflgrosciences Riverdole Invasive Plan! Control Bremer Infernafione Timberland Enterprises. Inc. American Cyanamid Helena A Note on "Growth Inhibition by Schinus terebinthifolius" Karen Brown Over the years here at APIRS, we have had numerous requests for the above titled paper by G.J. Gogue, C.J. Hurst and L. Bancroft. It is one of the very few publications on the allelopathic effects of Schinus terebinthifolius. The paper is cited in a few publications: one by Julia F. Morton in 1978 (.Brazilian Pepper - Its Impact on People, Animals and the Environment - Economic Botany 32(4):353-359), and one by John J. Ewel, D.S. Ojima, D.A. Karl and W.F. DeBusk in 1982 ( Schinus in Successional Ecosystems of Everglades National Park, Rept. T-676). Ms. Morton cites it as “Paper presented at annual meeting of American Society for Horticultural Science, Guelph, Ontario, Canada. Aug. 14, 1974,” and Ewel cites it as Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 9:45. (1974). I could not find a copy of this paper. After numerous attempts, I finally checked with the American Society for Horticultural Science (ASHS) some time ago and their editor at the time could find no record of it. I determined that it was probably never published, but merely presented at one of the ASHS annual meetings as cited by Ms. Morton. But people kept asking me for it, and they kept asking Ken Langeland for it (who, in turn, asks me for it), so I decided to give it one more shot before writing a note for Wildland Weeds stating that the paper in question unequivocally does not exist. There is a Journal of the ASHS, but it was not there. There is a Proceedings of the ASHS, but it was not there. There is a Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the ASHS, but these were all from the 1920‘s, and it was not there. Finally, during a chance conversation with a researcher in horticultural science, it was pointed out that one of the official journals for the ASHS is HortScience. I decided to give it a try and thumbed through the 1974 issues of HortScience at the University of Florida’s Marston Science Library. I found that Volume 9, Number 3 had two sections published, the second of which was the Program and Abstracts of the 71st Annual Meeting in Canada. On page 45 of the program, which is also page 301 of the journal, I found the coveted abstract by Dr. Gogue. It may be somewhat of an anticlimax, but the abstract is reprinted here with permission from the American Society for Horticultural Science. Growth inhibition by Schinus terebinthifolius, by G.J. Gogue, C.J. Hurst and L. Bancroft. HortScience Vol. 9(3) Section 2:301. 1974. Brazilian pepper tree ( Schinus terebinthifolius), a woody ornamental, has demonstrated seasonal allelopathic effects in Everglades National Park. Water leachates from various Schinus parts, i.e. fruit, fresh leaves, litter, stems, etc. reduced germination of Bromus rigidus when the leachate supplied the moisture in germination studies. Radical elongation was also suppressed by the leachate. The greatest inhibition in both germination percent and radical elongation occurred from the fruit leachate. With thin layer chromatography, the fruit leachate was separated into nine components. The spots were removed and used in a bioassay with B. rigidus as a test plant. The results indicated that three spots contained allelopathic materials. Identification of these spots with a mass spectrometer showed galic and ferulic acid derivitives to be present. WILDLAND WEEDS 15 SE-EPPG NEWS The Third Annual Southeast Exotic Pest Plant Council Symposium was held March 21-23 at the Georgia Center for Continuing Education on the campus of The University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia. The 135 attendants represented a number of state and regional EPPCs, including Southeast, Mid-Atlantic, Tennessee, North Carolina, Kentucky, Missis¬ sippi, Georgia, and Florida. Other attendants represented government agencies, academia, private industry, and non-government organizations. Lori Williams, Executive Director of the National Invasive Species Council and keynote speaker, opened the Policy and Regional Action Plans session with an update of the Council's activities since Clinton's Executive Order on Invasive Species was passed. Lori further stated that she was confident that invasive species would remain an important issue during the Bush Administration, and that no federal programs were anticipated to be cut in the foreseeable future as a consequence of the change in administration. The Policy session addressed many concerns, such as inter-agency dialog and cooperation and the perceived rift between research and policy. The Ecological Research and Monitoring session featured plenary speaker Dr. C. Ronald Carroll, Director of the Institute of Ecology, UGA, who gave an overview of classic competition models and how can be they be integrated into invasive species research. Presentations featured a diverse range of interests, from natural history studies of Ardisia crenata to encouraging community participation in native species restoration efforts. Todd Neel, Exotic Plant Management Specialist with Carlsbad National Park explained the role of Exotic Plant Management Teams (EPMT) and their use of integrated control techniques on NPS lands, during his plenary address in the Herbicide Technology and 1PM Session. The session concluded with an informative discussion panel entitled Successful Invasive Weed Management Partnerships: Experience from Manufacturers, Contracts, and Resource Managers, led by Bill Kline. The Screening and Risk Management session was highlighted by Alison Fox's update on assessment strategies for evaluating invasive plant species in Florida. The Outreach and Public Awareness session contained outstanding presentations, from using the popular media as a vehicle to capture the public imagination and interest in invasive species issues to encouraging community participation in landscaping and restoration efforts. The Social Event was a lot of fun - we enjoyed excellent food and Americana tunes played by Athens based String Theory. The original venue was slated for the Institute of Ecology Courtyard, but some of our tender-footed Florida friends were already "freezing" in the mid-60 degree weather, so we moved the party inside - it was still a blast! (Incidentally, many of our Florida colleagues were so desperate that they were "forced" to purchase UGA Bulldog sweatshirts to keep warm - these were likely discarded at the Florida-Georgia state lines and airport bins all over Florida.) It was great to socialize, exchange ideas and resources, and "hit the town" with friends old and new. A good time has had by all. We would like to extend a sincere thanks to all those who attended and presented their work at the annual symposium. Of course, this event could not be possible without the generous assistance of our sponsors, including: Aquascape Aquatic Vegetation Control, Inc. BASF Corporation Brewer International Dow AgroSciences DuPont Vegetation Management Helena Chemical Institute of Ecology, UGA Invasive Plant Control, Inc. L-64, Inc. Monsanto National Park Service N o vartis/Syngenta U.S. Forest Service. Next year's symposium will be held in Nashville, Tennes¬ see. Be sure to visit the SE-EPPC Web site (http: / / www.se- eppc.org) for developments. Hope to see you there! -Cheryl McCormick, 2001 Conference Chair (Editor's note: Cheryl did an unbelievable job in pulling this conference together, and has just been named President of Georgia EPPC. Great, job Cheryl!) Will the real John Randall please stand up? CalEPPC’s John Randall (left) and NC-EPPC’s Johnny Randall finally met face to face at the SE-EPPC conference, quashing rumors that they are actually the same person. Conference organizer, Cheryl McCormick (left) and SE-EPPC Coordinator, Brian Bowen enjoy a much-deserved break. 16 SUMMER 2001 Biocontrol w ° Down Under John A. Goolsby 1 , Matthew F. Purcell 2 , & Tony Wright 2 1 USDA-ARS, Australian Biological Control Laboratory, CSIRO Long Pocket Laboratories, 120 Meiers Rd., Indooroopilly, QLD Australia 4068, email: john.goolsby@brs.ento.csiro.au 2 CSIRO Entomology, Long Pocket Laboratories, 120 Meiers Rd., Indooroopilly, QLD Australia 4068 V' BRISBANE Fig 1. Region that ABCL explores for biological control agents. 'Down Under', the staff of the Aus¬ tralian Biological Control Laboratory (ABCL) are actively searching natural areas of Australia and Southeast Asia for insects and other organisms which feed on plant species that are invasive in Florida. Based in Brisbane, 14,000 miles away from the Southeastern USA, the ABCL is operated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service (USDA-ARS), hosted by the Commonwealth Industrial and Science Research Organisation (CSIRO Australia), and collaborating closely with USDA-ARS researchers at the Invasive Plant Research Laboratory in Ft. Lauderdale and Gainesville, Florida. Many familiar Florida weeds such as the paperbark tree ( Melaleuca quin- quenervia), Old World climbing fern (Lygodium microphyllum), carrotwood, (Cupaniopsis anacardioides ) and Austra¬ lian pine ( Casuarina spp.) are native to this area of Australia. However, the native distribution of many of weed species in this region continues northward from Australia into tropical and subtropical Southeast Asia, includ¬ ing Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam, Papua New Guinea, New Caledonia, and southern China. ABCL scientists explore this entire region to find the most promising biological control agents (Fig. 1). Research conducted at ABCL fol¬ lows a sequence of events involving Fig 2abcd. The ABCL has excellent research facilities including field plots, greenhouses, biocontrol quarantine, and specialized laboratories for entomology and plant pathology. WILDLAND WEEDS 17 Fig 3. Pictured here is Alex Racelis (ARS-Ft. Lauderdale) collecting seed rain samples from a native stand of Melaleuca quinquenervia in Queensland for comparative ecological studies. determination of the native distribu¬ tion of a weedy plant species, explora¬ tion for natural enemies, DNA finger¬ printing of newly discovered species, ecology of the agents and their weed hosts, field host-range surveys, and ultimately preliminary host-range screening of candidate agents. Our research determines what regulates the plant in its native environment, which brings to light the full array of potential biological control agents. Organisms with a narrow host range and good regulatory potential are intensively investigated further. The data we gather on potential agents is combined with information about the ecology of the weed where it is invasive. Our stateside USDA-ARS col¬ laborators use a science-based process to make the final decision on which organisms are best suited to be biologi¬ cal control agents. This dual-continent approach ensures the most successful outcome. Currently, we are conducting research on Melaleuca quinquenervia and Lygodium microphyllum. The biological control program for M. quinquenervia was initiated in 1985, and one insect. the melaleuca weevil, Oxyops vitiosa was released in 1997 and several addi¬ tional agents have been exported to Florida and are in various stages of final quarantine screening. The bio¬ control program for L. microphyllum was started in 1998. One agent, the leaf- defoliating moth Catac- lysta camptozonale, was shipped to Florida in 1999 for quarantine screening. Several poten¬ tial agents from Australia and Southeast Asia are currently being evalu¬ ated. (Fig. 2abcd) (Fig 3) Melaleuca quinquenervia, the broadleaf paperbark tree Since the early 1900s, melaleuca has invaded over half a mi lli on acres in southern Florida. Because melaleuca is native to Australia, sci¬ entists at the ABCL have been searching since the mid-1980s for insects in this country to topple melaleuca. One of the insects dis¬ covered, the melaleuca snout beetle, Oxyops vitiosa, was released at many sites in Florida in 1997. Massive numbers of these weevils have been recovered from sev¬ eral sites (Center et al. Ask the Readers A note from Dr. Ted Center Biological control projects against invasive weeds require a long-term commitment of resources. These resources, though, are generally limited so only a few projects can be undertaken at any one time. As a result, target selection must be prioritized so that funding, facilities, and personnel are allocated to address the most critical needs. The target chosen, though, isn’t always the worst weed, because priorities sometimes conflict. The selection process often balances the need for control against the potential for success. As a result, a biological control approach might be more appropriate against a weed of lesser importance than a more severe one, simply because the likelihood of success is greater. In such cases, target¬ ing the lesser problem becomes a more judicious use of resources. Downy rose myrtle is a case in point. Tony Wright, of the USDA-ARS Australian Biological Control Laboratory, investigates natural enemies of various invasive plants that originated in Southeast Asia, including downy rose myrtle. He and his collaborators from Thailand have observed severely damaged downy rose myrtle plants and have found a number of potential biological control agents. This has led them to believe that the potential for successfully controlling downy rose myrtle is quite high. However, we know very little about this plant, particularly with regard to the damage that it causes or the extent of the problem. We are therefore seeking advice and guidance from resource managers. Is downy rose myrtle enough of a problem to warrant a full-scale biological control project? Is there sufficient interest on the part of land and resource managers for such a project? Would there be opposition to a project? Conflicts of interest must be considered. Downy rose myrtle fruits purportedly provide a source of jelly and jam and it is purportedly grown for that purpose in some areas. It also might still be a valued landscape ornamental. We therefore need more information on potential conflicts of interest that might arise should we begin a project. Any information that you can provide would be appreciated. It can be sent me at the following: Ted D. Center, Research Leader Invasive Plant Research Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service United States Department of Agriculture 3205 College Ave., Fort Lauderdale, FL 33314 TCenter@eemail.com • Voice 954-475-0541 ext. 103 • Fax (509) 352-6022 18 SUMMER 2001 2000) and many have been released elsewhere. In their wake they have left behind hundreds of thousands of heavily damaged melaleuca saplings. The melaleuca psyllid, Boreio- glycaspis melaleucae, is a sap-sucking insect that has the potential to kill sap¬ lings. Both the adults and the nymphs feed on melaleuca, injecting toxic saliva before sucking the predigested sap. The juveniles form shelters beneath white flocculant threads excreted by these nymphs. Heavily infested trees take on the appearance of being smoth¬ ered in snow. Eventually trees begin to wither under the onslaught of the psyllid, and many fail to recover. This insect has completed testing in quarantine and release in Florida is expected in the near future. Quarantine host testing has also been completed on the defoliating sawfly, Lophyrotoma zonalis. Hundreds of thousands of larvae of L. zonalis infest trees in parts of northern Aus¬ tralia, stripping every leaf from the besieged trees. The vigor and flowering of the affected trees are significantly reduced. This sawfly completes its development on the tree and emerging adults are very mobile. This should enable this promising agent to colonize melaleuca in even the most remote wetland areas of Florida. Recently, concerns have been raised over the potential of this insect to poison ani¬ mals that eat them, as the larvae carry toxins that are unique to several sawfly species related to L. zonalis. Further trials have been requested, and to that end over thirty thousand sawfly larvae have been specially hand picked from trees in far north Queensland, Australia (Fig. 4) to be used in toxicol¬ ogy studies of livestock. One of the most promising new Fig 4. Matthew Purcell collecting Lophyrotoma zonalis sawfly larvae from a melaleuca tree in north Queensland. agents is the gall-mak¬ ing fly, Fer- gusonina sp. This fly and its symbi¬ otic nema¬ tode attack melaleuca by galling leaf and flower buds that could limit branch growth and seed pro- d u c t i o n (Goolsby et al. 2000). Through a concerted effort in the later half of Fig 5. Melaleuca flower bud which was has been consumed by the larvae of the tip-feeding moth, Holocola sp. 2000, 7000 galls were collected in Australia for shipment to the Gainesville quaran¬ tine where emerging flies were used in screening tests. So far the insects appear to be sufficiently host specific to allow release, though testing is incomplete. Research efforts are now being driven toward developing agents that could diminish the vast reproductive potential of melaleuca. Research con¬ ducted in collaboration with ABCL staff by Van, Rayachattery and Center (ARS-Ft. Lauderdale) compared repro¬ ductive potential of melaleuca trees in Florida and Australia. This work demonstrated that abortion of flower buds was a significant factor in reduc¬ ing the regenerative potential of M. quinquenervia in its native habitat. Much of the flower abortion appears to be caused by small moth larvae that bore through buds and immature inflorescences which terminates flower formation and ultimately curtails seed development. At least one species, Holocola sp. (Fig. 5) attacks both leaves and flowers, allowing it to persist year round without dying out following the flowering season, an important factor if it is be released as and agent in Florida. Attempts will be made colonize and evaluate these moths over the next year. Lygodium microphyllum, Old World climbing fern The native distribution of L. micro- phyllum extends from Australia north¬ ward through the tropics and subtrop¬ ics of Southeast Asia. Other species of Lygodium are present too including L. japonicum, L. flexuosum, and L. reticula- tum. The diversity of species in the genus Lygodium and the abundance of suitable habitat make this area ideal to explore for biological control agents. Tony Wright (CSIRO/ABCL) leads the exploration in Southeast Asia and John Goolsby (ABCL) covers Austra¬ lia. Intensive fieldwork has already revealed more than 20 species of insects and mites feeding on the fern. How¬ ever, many parts of Australia and Southeast Asia are still unexplored so the potential for more agents from this region is high. Foreign exploration for L. micro- phyllum agents is carried out year round. Seasonal variation effects the abundance of insect species, so it is important to visit sites regularly in order to collect the maximize diversity of herbivores, especially in the tropics. The wet season, December through February makes it very difficult to get to many field sites. During 'the wet', rivers rise, billabongs fill with water and estuarine crocodiles swim upstream in search of food and nesting WILDLAND WEEDS 19 sites. You don't step out into the bush of Australia without some advanced planning and good advice from the locals. The fern grows luxuriantly during the wet, which coincides with a peak in insect activity. During this year's wet season we will be collecting in the monsoon rainforests in the Ord River area of Western Australia, and the lowland jungle habitat of Bukit Timah in Singapore. Back in Brisbane, candidate agents are reared and tested for their ability to feed and reproduce on selected test plant species. Dr. Bob Pemberton (ARS-Ft. Lauderdale) developed a pre¬ liminary host test list, which includes most of the Florida fern species that are closely related to Lygodium or impor¬ tant commercially in the horticultural trade. Agents that show high speci¬ ficity in these tests are exported to Dr. Gary Buckingham (ARS) at the Florida Biological Control Laboratory in Gainesville for final quarantine screening. The leaf defoliating pyralid moth, Cataclysta camptozonale is cur¬ rently under study in the Gainesville quarantine. (Fig 6) One of the agents that shows excel¬ lent promise is an eriophyid mite, Floracarus sp. The mite feeds on the young growth, inducing the forma¬ tion of fleshy tissue, which causes the pinnae (leaves) to curl. The mites live inside the curled leaf feeding on the fleshy gall-like tissue. Eggs are laid inside the curl, with the entire lifecycle taking 12 days at 27 degrees C. Floraca¬ rus sp. feeding appears to be associated with leaf necrosis and debilitation of the plant (Fig 7ab). We have noticed that after bush fires, L. microphyllum regrows vigorously and Floracarus sp. exists below detection levels. In time mites recolonize the Lygodium patches and the symptoms of plant disease and decline begin to reappear. We are conducting field chemical exclu¬ sion tests to investigate the relation¬ ship between Floracarus sp. and plant health. Replicated field tests will mea¬ sure biomass production with and without the mite. The goal of the field research is to determine the effect Flo¬ racarus sp. might have on L. microphyl¬ lum if it was released in Florida. Potential Weed Targets Several other weeds important to Florida and the Southeastern U.S. are native to Australia and / or Southeast Asia including: Japanese climbing fern (Lygodium japonicum ), Chinese tallow (Triadica sebifera (= Sapium sebiferum )), carrotwood ( Cupaniopsis anacardioi- des), Australian pine ( Casuarina spp.), skunkvine (Paederia foetida), downy rose myrtle ( Rhodomyrtus tomentosa), hydrilla ( Hydrilla verticillata), schefflera (Schefflera actinophylla) and Chinese privet ( Ligustrum spp.). Biological control programs could be developed for these species. Some species such as carrotwood and schefflera are valuable ornamentals. Biological control agents which target plant reproduction only may be best suited to limiting their invasive characteristics, while still preserving their use in ornamental horticulture. Environmentally adapted plant flora coupled with globalization of trade and travel between Australasia and the Southeastern U.S. is now and will continue to be the cause of many serious weed invasions. The Australian Biological Control Laboratory is com¬ mitted to research and development of biological control solutions for U.S. weeds of Australian and Southeast Fig 6. The pyralid moth, Cataclysta camptozonale ms collected from in southeast Queensland and is being evaluated as potential biological control agent of Lygodium microphyllum. Fig 7a. The characteristic leaf-curling of Lygodium microphyllum that is caused by the eriophyid mite, Floracarus sp. Fig 7b. Leaf necrosis and debilitation of Lygodium microphyllum associated with infestations of the mite Floracarus sp. 20 SUMMER 2001 Asian origin. Our research is critical because not only does biological con¬ trol offer the safest and most cost-effec¬ tive approach to long-term manage¬ ment of widespread, invasive weeds, but in some instances it is the only viable control option. References Center, T. D., T. K. Van, M. Rayachhetry, G. R. Buckingham, F. A. Dray, S. A. Winer iter, M. F. Purcell, and P. D. Pratt. 2000 Field colonization of the melaleuca snout beetle (Oxyops vitiosa) in south Florida. BIOLOGI¬ CAL CONTROL 19:112-123. Goolsby, J. A., J.R. Makinson, and M.F. Purcell. 2000. Seasonal phenology of the gall-making fly Fergusonina sp (Diptera : Fergusoninidae) and its implications for biological control of Melaleuca quinquenervia. AUS¬ TRALIAN JOURNAL OF ENTO¬ MOLOGY 39, 336-343. Internodes XenoNET New Book on Australian Plants Visit the Weed Information website at www.weedinfo.com.au for the low- down on Australia's flora. The site lists a new book: Plants of Importance to Australia - a Checklist Complied by R.C.H. Shepherd, R.G. Richardson and F.J. Richardson It promises to provide an accurate botanical name, authority, family and a preferred common name for each plant that is or may be of importance to Australia. The species chosen include both weeds of agricul¬ ture, and the environment; crop species of all sorts and ornamental species that have, or may, become environmental weeds. This reference book will also help remove confusion that occurs where different plants have the same common name. You'll also find the Plant Protection Quarterly here. PPQ is an Australian journal that publishes original papers on all aspects of plant protection. Topics represented cover all aspects of the protection of economic plants from weeds, pests and diseases and include the protection and ecology of vegetation on public land such as roadsides, railways. National Parks, gardens and reserves. Interested in Conducting Research in a U.S. National Park? The U.S. National Park Service (NPS) has created an Internet-based site for its Research and Collecting Permits. The site, http:/ /science, nature, nps.gov/ servlet / Prmt_ publn- dex, covers all National Park Units in the United States. The site has been designed to be a comprehensive location for researchers to have the opportunity to review procedures, previous research efforts, policies and conditional requirements before submitting a new proposal; to search NPS-identified research preferences; to complete and submit an applica¬ tion for a permit; and to file required Investigator's Annual Reports via the Internet. The NPS encourages scientists, agencies, non-profits and all research¬ ers and research institutions to con¬ sider the National Parks as a good place for science that provides public benefits for all citizens. For additional information, contact Dr. John Dennis, Biologist, National Park Service, 1849 C Street NW, Washington, D.C. 20240; phone (202) 208-5193; john_dennis @nps.gov Product Information at your Fingertips Looking for an up-to-date copy of a herbicide label? Need quick informa¬ tion on an adjuvant? Chemical and Pharmaceutical Press, Inc. compiles pesticide product information pro¬ vided directly by the companies in an unbiased presentation. The Green- book portion of the web site contains full text product labels, supplemental labels, and MSDSs for roughly 1500 products from over 40 companies. The site also includes some 4400 labeled tank mixes for these products. These documents are available free, and can be located by brand and company name, http: / / www.greenbook.net From the E-MailBox: "Cultivated Plants of Flor¬ ida," by D. Burch, D.B. Ward, and D.W. Hall was published in January 1988 as SP-33 by IFAS Florida Cooperative Extension Service. IFAS Publications still has over a thousand of these paperback books for sale for only $5.00. I thought it might be of interest to readers of Wildland- Weeds because every woody plant on the FLEPPC Category 1 list is listed as a cultivated plant in this book. It could serve as an historical account of culti¬ vated plants at some point in time. The authors state, "By the industrious efforts of plant enthusiasts and importers, and the appropriate niches awaiting suitably selected species, the abundance of the world's flora is well sampled in Florida." (Remember, this is in 1988!) At any rate, the contact info for IFAS Pubs, is 1-800-226-1764. - Karen Brown kpb@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu WILDLAND WEEDS 21 NOTES FROM THE MARK YOUR CALENDAR DISTURBED EDGE 41 st Annual Meeting of the Aquatic Plant Management Society, July 15-18, 2001, Minneapolis, MN. Contact: David Tarver, davidptarver @worldnet. att.net. American Society of Botany, Botany 2001 "Plants and People," August 12-16, 2001. Albuquerque Convention Center, Albuquerque, NM. Contact: www.botany.org. 16th Annual Symposium, Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council, Septem¬ ber 12-14, 2001, St. Augustine, FL. Contact: Kathy Burks, kathy.burks @dep. state, fl. us 11 th International Conference on Aquatic Invasive Species, October 1-4, 2001. Hilton Alexandria Mark Center, Alexandria, VA. Contact: Contact: Elizabeth Muckle-Jeffs, profedge@renc.igs.net, www.aquatic-invasive-spe- cies-conference.org. 28 th Annual Natural Areas Confer¬ ence, 2001: A Spatial Odyssey, Octo¬ ber 3-6, 2001. Radisson's "Resort at the Port," Cape Canaveral, FL. Con¬ tact vickie.larson-l@ksc.nasa.gov, www.natareas.org. SER 2001: Restoration Across Borders, October 4-6, 2001. Sher¬ aton Fallsview Hotel, Niagara Falls Ontario, Canada. Contact: www.ser.org. The Wildland-Urban Interface: Sustaining Forests in a Changing Landscape, November 5-8,2001 Uni¬ versity of Florida Hotel and Confer¬ ence Center, Gainesville, FL. Contact Mary L. Duryea (mlduryea@ufl.edu) or Susan W. Vince (svince@ufl.edu), conference, ifas.ufl.edu/ urban / Weed Science Society of America Annual Meeting, February 10-13, 2002. Reno Hilton, Reno, NV. Con- Chapter 1 They dressed in individual elegance, as if fashion, social norms, the superficial concerns of the outer world, were of no consequence. They were one with their surroundings. He was a thing of beauty as he strode encum¬ bered, and she bore her ever-lightening burden as if it were a graceful extension of her own sturdy frame. He swept through the grove, a maniacal ballerina samurai, swinging and cleaving a swath of progress and destruction, and she followed in his wake like a visiting angel from outer space, dispensing the potion in measured doses, moving from just-cut stump to stump. Drink deeply my pretties... The bodies stacked up, green leaves wilting in the mid-day heat, mirages forming and slipping away in the ever-widening corridors that they created. His boots, beloved boots, left shallow prints, and hers traced his steps, a waltz of blade and poison, a symphony of action, portending restoration as the sun swung it's arc. And then, as silently as they had arrived, they departed, retiring to renew their vigor, prepared to dance again on holy ground, it's solemn nature invaded by the uninvited. For their foes today the party was over, but the battle had just begun... -J.A. An excerpt from "The Adventures of Hack Garlon and his buxom sidekick Squirt." Join the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council! Annual Membership Dues Include: Quarterly magazine, Wildland Weeds • Quarterly newsletter Legislative updates regarding exotic plant control issues. Membership: INDIVIDUAL INSTITUTIONAL Student - $10 • General - $20 General - $100 • Contributing - $500 Contributing - $50 • Donor - $51-500 Donor - $501 -$ 10,000 • Patron - $10,000 or Wildland Weeds subscription - $15/year ( does not indude other membership benefits) Name: _ Address:_ Telephone:_e-mail:_ Membership type:_ Mail to: Dan Thayer, 3301 Gun Club Rd., West Palm Bch., FL 33406 22 SUMMER 2001 Griffin 4 / C Avast P/U WILDLAND WEEDS 23 Syngenta Full page 4/C p/u 24 SUMMER 2001