Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T12:26:19.750Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Integrated Leafy Spurge (Euphorbia esula) Control Using Imazapic, Aphthona spp. Biological Control Agents, and Seeded Native Grasses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Laurie A. Richardson ,
Chelsea J. Juricek ,
Rodney G. Lym ,
Donald R. Kirby  and
Dwight A. Tober
Laurie A. Richardson
Affiliation:
National Park Service, Theodore Roosevelt National Park, P.O. Box 7, Medora, ND 58645
Chelsea J. Juricek
Affiliation:
Kansas Department of Agriculture–Water Resources Division, Garden City, KS 67846
Rodney G. Lym*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Sciences, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND 58105
Donald R. Kirby
Affiliation:
Department of Animal and Range Sciences, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND 58105
Dwight A. Tober
Affiliation:
U.S. Department of Agriculture National Resource Conservation Service, P.O. Box 1458, Bismarck, ND 58504
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Chemical, cultural, and biological methods have been developed to control leafy spurge in a variety of environments. Aphthona spp. biological control agents have established throughout the northern Great Plains and Rocky Mountain region and successfully controlled leafy spurge in many areas, but notable exceptions include areas with sandy soils. Leafy spurge control can be improved by combining methods such as chemical, biological, or cultural treatments, compared to a single method used alone. The effects of Aphthona spp., imazapic herbicide, and interseeded native grass species alone or in combination for leafy spurge control were evaluated at two locations in southeastern North Dakota for 5 yr. Both the Sheyenne National Grassland (SNG) and Walcott, ND, study locations had greater than 80% sand soil. Leafy spurge stem density, canopy cover, and yield were reduced for 1 to 2 yr in all treatments that included imazapic, with no difference in control between single and combination treatments. Aphthona spp. and interseeded native grasses alone or combined did not reduce leafy spurge density or cover. Aphthona spp. population remained low throughout the study at both locations. Forb yield increased during the study at the SNG but not the Walcott location. Conversely, warm-season grass yield increased at Walcott but not at the SNG. Leafy spurge stem density declined from 92 to 50 stems/m2 in 5 yr at the SNG site. The decline could not be attributed to specific treatments applied in this study and may be due to self-limitation or soil pathogens.

Keywords

Imazapicleafy spurge, Euphorbia esula L. EPHESBiological weed controlintegrated pest managementinvasive weedinterseedingflea beetle
Type
Research Articles
Information
Invasive Plant Science and Management , Volume 1 , Issue 3 , July 2008 , pp. 255 - 264
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

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

References

Literature Cited

Bangsund, D. A., Leistritz, F. L., and Leitch, J. A. 1999. Assessing economic impacts of biological control of weeds: the case of leafy spurge in the northern Great Plains of the United States. J. Environ. Manag 56:35–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bangsund, D. A., Leitch, J. A., and Leistritz, F. L. 1996. Economics of herbicide control of leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula L.). J. Agr. Res. Econ 21:381–395.Google Scholar
Butler, J. L., Parker, M. S., and Murphy, J. T. 2006. Efficacy of flea beetle control of leafy spurge in Montana and South Dakota. Rangeland Ecol. Manag 59:452–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caesar, A. J. 1996. Identity, pathogenicity, and comparative virulence of Fusarium spp. related to stand declines of leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) in the Northern Plains. Plant Dis 80:1395–1398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caesar, A. J. 2003. Synergistic interaction of soilborne plant pathogens and root-attacking insects in classical biological control of an exotic rangeland weed. Biol. Control 28:144–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caesar, A. J., Campobasso, G., and Terraglitti, G. 1998. Identification, pathogenicity and comparative virulence of Fusarium spp. associated with diseased Euphorbia spp. in Europe. Biocontrol Sci. Technol 8:313–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daubenmire, R. 1959. A canopy-coverage method of vegetational analysis. Northwest Sci 33:43–64.Google Scholar
Dunn, P. H. 1979. The distribution of leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula L.) and other weedy Euphorbia spp. in the United States. Weed Sci 27:509–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferrell, M. A., Whitson, T. D., Koch, D. W., and Gade, A. E. 1998. Leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) control with several grass species. Weed Technol 12:374–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gassmann, A., Schroeder, D., Maw, E., and Sommer, G. 1996. Biology, ecology, and host specificity of European Aphthona spp. (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) used as biocontrol agents for leafy spurge, </emph>Euphorbia esula</emph> (Euphorbiaceae), in North America. Biol. Control 6:105–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanson, H. C. and Rudd, V. E. 1933. Leafy spurge life history and habits. N. D. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 266. 24.Google Scholar
Hodur, N. M., Leistritz, F. L., and Bangsund, D. A. 2006a. Biological control of leafy spurge: utilization and implementation. Rangeland Ecol. Manag 59:445–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodur, N. M., Leistritz, F. L., and Bangsund, D. A. 2006b. Evaluation of TEAM leafy spurge project. Rangeland Ecol. Manag 59:483–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, D. R., Carlson, R. B., Krabbenhoft, K. D., Mundal, D., and Kirby, M. M. 2000. Biological control of leafy spurge with introduced flea beetles (Aphthona spp.). J. Range Manag 53:305–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landgraf, B. K., Fay, P. K., and Havstad, K. M. 1984. Utilization of leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) by sheep. Weed Sci 32:348–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larson, D. L. and Grace, J. B. 2004. Temporal dynamics of leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) and two species of flea beetles (Aphthona spp.) used as biological control agents. Biol. Control 29:207–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lym, R. G. 1998. The biology and integrated management of leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) on North Dakota rangeland. Weed Technol 12:367–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lym, R. G. 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, R. G. and Nelson, J. A. 2000. Biological control of leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) with Aphthona spp. along railroad right-of-ways. Weed Technol 14:642–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lym, R. G. and Nelson, J. A. 2002. Integration of Aphthona spp. flea beetles and herbicides for leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) control. Weed Sci 50:812–819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lym, R. G. and Tober, D. A. 1997. Competitive grasses for leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) reduction. Weed Technol 11:787–792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markle, D. M. and Lym, R. G. 2001. Leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) control and herbage production with imazapic. Weed Technol 15:474–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masters, R. A., Beran, D. B., and Gaussoin, R. E. 2001. Restoring tallgrass prairie species mixtures on leafy spurge–infested rangeland. J. Range Manag 54:362–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masters, R. A. and Nissen, S. J. 1998. Revegetating leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula)–infested rangeland with native tallgrasses. Weed Technol 12:381–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masters, R. A., Nissen, S. J., and Caesar, A. 1992. Exploration in Europe, Ukraine, and Russia for leafy spurge associated pathogens. Pages 2-45–2-51. Proceedings of the Great Plains Agricultural Council, Leafy Spurge Task Force Symposium. Pub. 144.Google Scholar
Messersmith, C. G. and Lym, R. G. 1983. Distribution and economic impacts of leafy spurge in North Dakota. N. D. Farm Res 40/5:8–13.Google Scholar
Mundal, D. A. and Carlson, R. B. 1999. Aphthona flea beetle establishment determined by soil composition and root growth pattern. Proceedings of the Leafy Spurge Symposium. Fargo, ND North Dakota State University. 9.Google Scholar
Nelson, J. A. and Lym, R. G. 2003. Interactive effects of Aphthona nigriscutis and picloram plus 2,4-D in leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula). Weed Sci 51:118–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sedivec, K. K., Tober, D. A., and Berdahl, J. 2001. Grass varieties for North Dakota. Fargo, ND North Dakota State University Extension Service Circular R-794. 19.Google Scholar
Seiler, G. 1973. Flora of southeastern North Dakota. M. S. thesis. Fargo, ND North Dakota State University. 192.Google Scholar
Selleck, G. W., Coupland, R. T., and Frankton, C. 1962. Leafy spurge in Saskatchewan. Ecol. Monog 32:1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stohlgren, T. J., Bull, K. A., and Otsuki, Y. 1998. Comparison of rangeland vegetation sampling techniques in the Central Grasslands. J. Range Manag 51:164–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar