|
Purple Loosestrife
B. Blossey - Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University, Ithaca,
New York.
|
 |
In: Van Driesche, R., et al., 2002, Biological Control of Invasive Plants
in the Eastern United States, USDA Forest Service Publication FHTET-2002-04, 413
p.
|
Pest Status of Weed
Purple loosestrife, Lythrum salicaria L., (Fig. 1) is a weed of natural
areas and its spread across North America has degraded many prime wetlands
resulting in large, monotypic stands that lack native plant species (Thompson
et al., 1987; Malecki et al., 1993). Established L. salicaria
populations persist for decades, are difficult to control using conventional
techniques (chemical, physical, and mechanical), and continue to spread into
adjacent areas (Thompson et al., 1987). Purple loosestrife has been
declared a noxious weed in at least 19 states.
Nature of Damage
Economic damage. With the exception of reduced palatability of hay
containing purple loosestrife and reduction of water flow in irrigation systems
in the West, purple loosestrife does not cause direct economic losses. Indirect
losses accrue due to reductions in waterfowl viewing and hunting opportunities.
Ecological damage. The invasion of L. salicaria alters
biogeochemical and hydrological processes in wetlands. Areas dominated by purple
loosestrife (Fig. 2) show significantly lower porewater pools of phosphate in
the summer compared to areas dominated by Typha latifolia L. (Templer
et al., 1998). Purple loosestrife leaves decompose
|
Figure 1. Purple loosestrife
stand. (Photo by B. Blossey.)
Figure 2. Wetland dominated by purple
loosestrife. (Photo by B. Blossey.)
|
quickly in the fall resulting in a nutrient flush, whereas leaves of native
species decompose in the spring (Barlocher and Biddiscombe, 1996; Emery and
Perry, 1996; Grout et al., 1997). This change in timing of nutrient
release at a time of little primary production results in significant
alterations of wetland function and could jeopardize detritivore consumer
communities adapted to decomposition of plant tissues in spring (Grout et al.,
1997).
Specialized marsh birds such as the Virginia rail (Rallus limicola
Vieillot), sora (Porzana carolina L.), least bittern (Ixobrychus
exilis Gmelin), and American bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus Rackett),
many of which are declining in the northeastern United States (Schneider and
Pence, 1992), avoid nesting and foraging in purple loosestrife (Blossey et al.,
2001a). Black terns (Clidonias niger L.), once a common breeding species
at the Montezuma National Wildlife Refuge in upstate New York, declined and
became locally extinct by 1987. The local extinction coincided with a population
explosion of purple loosestrife from few individuals in 1956 to a coverage of
more than 19% of the total area (600 ha), representing 40% of the emergent marsh
habitat in 1983 (T. Gingrich, pers. comm.). Another wetland specialist, the
marsh wren (Cistothorus palustris Wilson), was conspicuously absent in
purple loosestrife-dominated wetlands but used adjacent cattail marshes
(Rawinski and Malecki, 1984; Whitt et al., 1999). The federally
endangered bog turtle (Clemmys muhlenbergi Schoepff) loses basking and
breeding sites to encroachment of purple loosestrife (Malecki et al.,
1993).
Purple loosestrife is competitively superior over native wetland plant species
(Gaudet and Keddy, 1988; Weiher et al., 1996; Mal et al., 1997).
The species is dominating seedbanks, particularly in areas with established
purple loosestrife populations (Welling and Becker, 1990; 1993).The fact that
expanding purple loosestrife populations cause local reductions in native plant
species richness has been demonstrated by the temporary return of native species
following the suppression of L. salicaria through use of herbicide (Gabor
et al., 1996). However, without the continued use of herbicides, purple
loosestrife re-invades and re-establishes dominance within a few years (Gabor
et al., 1996). In areas where the distributions of L. salicaria and
of the native winged loosestrife, Lythrum alatum Pursh., overlap, the
taller, more conspicuous purple loosestrife reduces pollinator visitation to
L. alatum resulting in significantly reduced seed set of L. alatum.
(Brown, 1999).
Extent of losses. Direct losses are difficult to quantify due to
lack of long-term monitoring programs and data.
Geographical Distribution
Lythrum salicaria now occurs in all states of the United States, except
Florida, Alaska, and Hawaii, and in nine Canadian provinces. The abundance of
L. salicaria varies throughout this range with populations in all but the
eastern United States (the oldest infested area) still expanding, In the
Northeast and Midwest, a significant portion of the potentially available
habitat has been invaded.
Background Information On The Pest Plant
Taxonomy
Purple loosestrife is a member of the Lythraceae (the Loosestrife family), with
highly variable growth form and morphology. Main leaves are 3 to 10 cm long and
can be arranged opposite or alternate along the squared stem and are either
glabrous or pubescent. The inflorescence is a spike of clusters of
reddish-purple petals (10 to 15 mm in length). Flowers are tri-morphic with
short, medium, and long petals and stamens. Many ornamental varieties have been
developed, some through introgression with the native L. alatum
(Ottenbreit and Staniforth, 1994). Until recently, Lythrum virgatum L.
was treated as a separate species also introduced from Europe but the species is
now considered a synonym of L. salicaria (Ottenbreit and Staniforth,
1994). Further details can be found in Mal et al., (1992).
Biology
Purple loosestrife needs temperatures above 20°C and moist open soils for
successful germination. Seedlings grow rapidly (>1 cm/day) and plants can flower
in their first growing season. Established plants can tolerate very different
growing conditions, including permanent flooding, low water and nutrient levels,
and low pH. Plants can grow in rock crevasses, on gravel, sand, clay and organic
soils. Plants develop a large, laterally branching rootstock with starch as the
main form of nutrient storage (Stamm-Katovitch et al., 1998). Mature
plants can develop rootstocks of heavier than 1 kg and can produce more than 30
annual shoots reaching a maximum height of more than 2 m. Plants are long lived
and mature plants may produce more than 2.5 million seeds annually, which remain
viable for many years. Spread to new areas occurs exclusively by seed, which is
transported mainly by water but also adheres to boots, waterfowl and other
wetland fauna.
Analysis of Related Native Plants in the Eastern United States
The Lythracea belong to the order Myrtales of which four families (Lythraceae,
Thymelaceae, Onagraceae, and Melastomataceae) are native to much of North
America. Within the Lythraceae, 12 species (excluding L. salicaria)
belonging to the genera Ammannia, Cuphea, Decodon, Lagerstroemia, Lythrum,
Rotala, and Didiplis (Peplis) occur in the northeastern Unites
States (Gleason and Cronquist, 1991). With the exception of Didiplis diandra
(Nutt.), water purslane, all species of the Lythraceae covered by Gleason and
Cronquist (1991) were used in the host specificity testing (Blossey et al.,
1994a, b; Blossey and Schroeder, 1995).
History of Biological Control Efforts in the Eastern United States
Area of Origin of Weed
Lythrum salicaria has distribution centers in Europe and Asia. The
European distribution extends from Great Britain across western Europe into
central Russia with the 65th parallel as the northern distribution limit (Tutin
et al., 1968). Purple loosestrife is common throughout central and
southern Europe and along the coastal fringe of the Mediterranean basin. In
Asia, the main islands of Japan are the core of the species native range, with
outlying populations extending from the Amur River south across the lowlands of
Manchuria and other parts of China to Southeast Asia and India (Hultén and
Fries, 1986). Lythrum salicaria was introduced to North America in the
early 1800s in ship ballast, wool, and most likely also as an ornamental or
medicinal herb (Thompson et al., 1987).
Areas Surveyed for Natural Enemies
Research in Europe began in 1986 with field surveys for potential control
agents. By 1992, field surveys for natural enemies were conducted in Finland,
Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Germany, Switzerland, Austria, and France, extending
earlier observations (Batra et al., 1986). These surveys covered 140
different sites and an area from the northernmost distribution in central
Finland to the Mediterranean basin (Blossey, 1995b). Additional surveys were
conducted in North America from Maryland to Nebraska (Hight, 1990).
Natural Enemies Found
No native or accidentally introduced herbivores with the potential for control
of L. salicaria were found in North America (Hight, 1990). More recently,
several native pathogens have been evaluated for their potential as biological
control agents (Nyvall, 1995; Nyvall and Hu, 1997). Surveys in Europe identified
more than 100 different insect species most commonly associated with purple
loosestrife (Batra et al., 1986), but only nine species were evaluated in
more detail (Blossey, 1995b).
Host Range Tests and Results
Of the nine potential control agents identified in Europe, six species were
tested for their host specificity, against 48 test plant species in 32 genera
(for a complete list of test plants taxonomically associated, associated wetland
plants, and important agricultural plants see Blossey et al., 1994b).
This selection was based on literature reports of their specificity, their
distribution and availability in the field, and initial observations of their
impact on purple loosestrife performance. The selected species were the
root-mining weevil, Hylobius transversovittatus Goeze; two leaf beetles,
Galerucella calmariensis L. and Galerucella pusilla Duftschmidt; a
flower-feeding weevil, Nanophyes marmoratus Goeze; a seed-feeding weevil,
Nanophyes brevis Boheman; and a gall midge, Bayeriola salicariae
Gagné.
Host specificity tests identified two native North American plant species,
Decodon verticillatus (L.) Ell. (swamp loosestrife) and L. alatum as
potential hosts for the Galerucella leaf beetles (Blossey et al.,
1994b) and with less probability for H. transversovittatus. (Blossey
et al., 1994a). Both plant species are members of the family Lythraceae and
therefore closely related to L. salicaria. The flower and seed feeding
weevils N. marmoratus and N. brevis were entirely restricted to
L. salicaria (Blossey and Schroeder, 1995). The gall midge B. salicariae
attacked and successfully completed larval development on L. alatum, Lythrum
californicum Torr. and Gray and Lythrum hyssopifolia L. although
attack rates were much lower than on L. salicaria (Blossey and Schroeder,
1995).
Releases Made
Based on results indicating a potential wider host range, the gall midge B.
salicariae was not proposed for introduction (Blossey and Schroeder, 1995).
After review by the Technical Advisory Group, it was determined that further
invasion by L. salicaria is considered a greater threat to the native
L. alatum and D. verticillatus than potential attack by the leaf
beetles or the root feeder, and releases were approved. Initial introductions in
eastern North America occurred in Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, New York,
Minnesota, and southern Ontario in August, 1992 (Hight et al., 1995).
Predictions that at high population densities beetles might nibble at other
species (Blossey et al., 1994a, b; Blossey and Schroeder, 1995) were
confirmed (Corrigan, 1998; Blossey et al., 2001b), but attack was
transient and restricted to newly emerging beetles.
Approval to introduce the flower-feeding weevil N. marmoratus was granted
followed by introductions in New York and Minnesota in 1994. Additional releases
occurred in New Jersey in 1996. The seed-feeding weevil N. brevis, while
approved for introduction, was not released into North America, due to the
presence of a nematode infection. This infection appeared benign for N.
brevis, however, due to the potential for non-target effects of the nematode
after introduction into North America, only disease free specimens should be
introduced, which, at present, effectively precludes the introduction of N.
brevis.
|
Biology and Ecology of Key Natural Enemies
Galerucella calmariensis and G. pusilla (Coleoptera:
Chrysomelidae)
Galerucella calmariensis (Fig. 3) and G. pusilla are two sympatric
species that occur throughout the European range of purple loosestrife (Palmén,
1945; Silfverberg, 1974) and share the same niche on their host plant (Blossey,
1995a). With some experience adults can be identified to species; however, eggs
and larvae are indistinguishable. The two introduced species easily can be
confused with other North American Galerucella species (see Manguin et
al., 1993 for descriptions of all five species in the genus Galerucella
known from North America).
Adults overwinter in the leaf litter and emerge in early spring synchronized
with host plant phenology. Adults feed on young plant tissue causing a
characteristic “shothole” defoliation pattern. Females lay eggs in batches of
two to 10 on leaves and stems from May to July. First instar larvae feed
concealed within leaf or flower buds; later instars feed openly on all
aboveground plant parts. Larval feeding strips the photosynthetic tissue off
individual leaves creating a “window-pane” effect by leaving the upper epidermis
intact. Mature larvae pupate in the litter beneath the host plant. At high
densities (>2 to 3 larvae/cm shoot), entire purple loosestrife populations can
be defoliated (Fig.
|
Figure 3. Mating pair of Galerucella
calmariensis. (Photo by B. Blossey.)
Figure 4. Defoliated purple loosestrife
plants. (Photo by B. Blossey.)
|
4). At lower densities, plants retain leaf tissue but show reduced shoot growth,
reduced root growth, and fail to produce seeds (Blossey 1995a, b; Blossey and
Schat, 1997). Both species are usually univoltine, although a second generation
may occur in some parts of North America. Adults are mobile and possess good
host finding abilities. Peak dispersal of overwintered beetles is during the
first few weeks of spring. New generation beetles have dispersal flights shortly
after emergence and are able to locate patches of host plants as far away as 1
km (Grevstad and Herzig, 1997).
Hylobius transversovittatus (Coleoptera: Curculionidae)
In the spring, overwintered H. transversovittatus adults (Fig. 5) appear
shortly after L. salicaria shoots begin to grown. The largely nocturnal
adults (10 to 14 mm) consume foliage and stem tissue; oviposition begins
approximately two weeks after adults emerge from overwintering and lasts into
September (Blossey, 1993). Females lay white, oval-shaped eggs in plant stems or
in the soil close to the host plant. First instar larvae mine the root cortex
and older larvae subsequently enter the central part of the rootstock where they
feed for one to two years. Development time from egg to adult is dependent upon
environmental conditions (temperature, moisture) and time of oviposition
(Blossey, 1993). Pupation chambers are found in the upper part of the root and
adults emerge between June and October and can be long-lived (several years).
Figure 5. Hylobius transversovittatus
adult. (Photo by B. Blossey.)
|
|
Figure 6. Destroyed rootstock (due to
Hylobius transversovittatus larval
feeding). (Photo by B. Blossey.)
|
Adult feeding is of little consequence; however, larval feeding can be very
destructive (Fig. 6) (Nötzold et al., 1998). With increasing attack
rates, larval feeding reduces shoot growth, seed output, and shoot and root
biomass, and can ultimately result in plant mortality (Nötzold et al.,
1998). Attack rates vary widely with rootstock age and size (up to 1 larva/10 g
of fresh root weight) and up to 40 larvae have been found per rootstock
(Blossey, 1993). Large rootstocks can withstand substantial feeding pressure and
several larval generations will be necessary before significant impacts can be
expected.
In Europe, the weevil occurs in all purple loosestrife habitats, except
permanently flooded sites (Blossey, 1993), from southern Finland to the
Mediterranean and from western Europe through Asia. Experiments have shown that
adults and larvae can survive extended submergence. However, excessive flooding
prevents access to plants by adults and will eventually kill developing larvae.
Aside from this restriction, the species appears quite tolerant of a wide range
of environmental conditions. Information on movements of H.
transversovittatus is sparse because of its nocturnal nature and secretive
habits during daylight hours. The most likely time to find adults is at night
using a flashlight or on overcast days with light rain. Adults move primarily by
walking, but dispersal flights of newly emerged adults have been reported
(Palmén, 1940).
|
Nanophyes marmoratus (Coleoptera: Curculionidae)
Overwintered adults of N. marmoratus (1.4 to 2.1 mm) (Fig. 7) appear on
purple loosestrife in mid to late May in upstate New York. The beetles start
feeding on the youngest leaves. As soon as flower buds develop, beetles move to
upper parts of flower spikes where they mate and feed on receptacles and
ovaries. Oviposition starts soon thereafter and continues into August. Eggs are
laid singly into the tips of flower buds before petals are fully developed.
Larvae first consume stamens and, in most cases, petals, followed by the ovary.
Mature larvae use frass to form pupation chambers at the bottom of the bud.
Attacked buds remain closed and are later aborted. The new generation beetles
appear mainly in August and feed on the remaining green leaves of purple
loosestrife before overwintering in the leaf
|
Figure 7. Nanophyes marmoratus
adult. (Photo by B. Blossey.)
|
litter. Complete development from egg to adult takes about 1 month. There is one
generation a year. Adult and larval feeding causes flower-bud abortion, thus
reducing the seed output of L. salicaria. Attack rates can reach more
than 70%.
Evaluation of Project Outcomes
Establishment and Spread of Agents
All four introduced species have successfully established in North America. The
two Galerucella species are established in Maine, Massachusetts,
Connecticut, Rhode Island, Vermont, New Jersey, New York, New Hampshire,
Maryland, Delaware, Virginia, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana,
Tennessee, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Kansas, and Iowa. The
species have spread up to 5 km from the original release sites and G.
calmariensis appears to be more successful than G. pusilla. The
secretive nature of H. transversovittatus makes assessments of its status
difficult. Releases have occurred throughout the United States but establishment
(attacked roots) is confirmed only for Colorado, Maryland, Pennsylvania, New
York, Indiana, Minnesota, New Jersey, Michigan, and Virginia. The flower-feeding
weevil now occurs in New York, New Jersey, Colorado, and Minnesota, and
populations are expanding.
Suppression of Target Weed
At several release sites complete defoliation of large purple loosestrife stands
(many hectares) has been reported with local reductions of more than 95% of the
biomass (Fig. 8). Such outcomes are currently restricted to some of the earlier
release sites but similar observations have been made in Rhode Island,
Connecticut, New York, Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, Minnesota, and Canada.
Figure 8a. Purple loosestrife before
suppression. (Photo by B. Blossey.)
|
|
Figure 8b. Purple loosestrife after
suppression. (Photo by B. Blossey.)
|
Recovery of Native Plant Communities
A standardized long-term monitoring program has been developed to follow the
development of wetland plant populations. Presently, it is too early to assess
results, other than limited observations at the most advanced release sites. For
example, at a release site in Illinois, several native plant species were
re-discovered after suppression of purple loosestrife. Similar results and a
resurgence of cattails and other wetland plants have been observed at several
release sites in New York. Further long-term data are needed to evaluate changes
in plant communities.
Economic Benefits
The successful control and further implementation of biological control has
resulted in reductions of herbicide purchases.
Recommendations for Future Work
At present, the focus in the purple loosestrife biocontrol program is on
evaluation of releases using the standardized monitoring protocol. A second
focus is the continued mass production of beetles to make control agents
available to interested agencies or private citizens. The development of an
artificial diet for the root-feeding weevil H. transversovittatus is
anticipated to accelerate the release program and increase establishment rates.
Later plans include redistribution of the flower-feeding weevil N. marmoratus.
Ongoing research and monitoring programs are testing the assumption of
cumulative effects of herbivores. Agent combinations are anticipated to be more
destructive to plants than a single species alone (Malecki et al., 1993).
However, agent combinations also may impede some species, as even spatially
separated herbivores can compete via their common host plant (Masters et al.,
1993; Denno et al., 1995). Whether these interactions have any influence
on control of L. salicaria where both Galerucella and H.
transversovittatus were introduced requires further study.
Results from early release sites indicate that successful suppression of purple
loosestrife can be achieved. However, it is not yet clear what type of
replacement communities will develop. At many sites, a diverse wetland plant
community replaces the once monotypic stands of L. salicaria. At several
sites, other invasive species such as Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin.
ex Steudel (common reed) or Phalaris arundinacea L. (reed canary grass)
may expand as purple loosestrife is controlled – clearly not a desired result.
At yet other sites, dense purple loosestrife litter limits growth of native
species. In cooperation with land managers, we are currently investigating means
(fire, disking, flooding, mowing, etc.) to accelerate the return of native plant
communities. As part of these ongoing evaluations an assessment of the changes
in animal communities (birds, amphibians, and insects) as L. salicaria is
controlled will help evaluate whether invaded and degraded wetlands can be
successfully restored Attack of native parasitoids on H. transversovittatus
larvae in the stems and attack of a nematode on adult Galerucella remains
at 10% (B. Blossey, unpublished data); however, in some instances native
predators appear to limit leaf-beetle population growth in cages (T. Hunt,
unpublished data) or at dry sites. In Europe, specialized egg, larval and adult
parasitoids can have dramatic impacts (attack rates of up to 90%) on the leaf
beetles and flower-feeding weevils. While great care was taken to avoid the
introduction of these and other natural enemies from Europe, the impact of
native predators on the success of purple loosestrife biocontrol and the
contribution of biocontrol agents to the wetland food web dynamics needs to be
assessed.
References
Barlocher, F. and N. R. Biddiscombe. 1996. Geratology and decomposition of
Typha latifolia and
Lythrum salicaria in a freshwater marsh. Archiv fuer
Hydrobiologie 136: 309-325.
Batra, S. W. T., D. Schroeder, P. E. Boldt, and W. Mendl. 1986. Insects
associated with purple
loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) in Europe. Proceedings of the
Entomological Society of Washington
88: 748-759.
Blossey, B. 1993. Herbivory below ground and biological weed control: life
history of a root-boring weevil
on purple loosestrife. Oecologia 94: 380-387.
Blossey, B. 1995a. Coexistence of two competitors in the same fundamental niche.
Distribution, adult
phenology and oviposition. Oikos 74: 225-234.
Blossey, B. 1995b. A comparison of various approaches for evaluating potential
biological control agents
using insects on Lythrum salicaria. Biological Control 5:
113-122.
Blossey, B. and M. Schat. 1997. Performance of Galerucella calmariensis
(Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae)
on different North American populations of purple loosestrife.
Environmental Entomology 26:
439-445.
Blossey, B. and D. Schroeder. 1995. Host specificity of three potential
biological weed control agents
attacking flowers and seeds of Lythrum salicaria. Biological
Control 5: 47-53.
Blossey, B., D. Schroeder, S. D. Hight, and R. A. Malecki. 1994a. Host
specificity and environmental
impact of the weevil Hylobius transversovittatus, a biological
control agent of purple loosestrife
(Lythrum salicaria). Weed Science 42: 128-133.
Blossey, B., D. Schroeder, S. D. Hight, and R. A. Malecki. 1994b. Host
specificity and environmental
impact of two leaf beetles (Galerucella calmariensis and G.
pusilla) for the biological control of purple
loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria). Weed Science 42:134-140.
Blossey, B., L. Skinner, and J. Taylor. 2001a. Impact and Management of purple
loosestrife in North
America. Biodiversity and Conservation 10: 1787-1807.
Blossey, B., R. Casagrande, L. Tewksbury, D. A. Landis, R. Wiedenmann, and D. R.
Ellis. 2001b.
Non-target feeding of leaf-beetles introduced to control purple loosestrife
(Lythrum salicaria). Natural
Areas Journal 21: 368-377.
Brown, B. 1999. The impact of an invasive species (Lythrum salicaria) on
pollination and reproduction of
a native species (L. alatum). Ph.D. dissertation, Department of
Biological Sciences, Kent State
University, Kent, Ohio, USA.
Corrigan, J. E., D. L. MacKenzie, and L. Simser. 1998. Field observations of
non-target feeding by
Galerucella calmariensis (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae), an introduced
biological control agent of
purple loosestrife, Lythrum salicaria (Lythraceae). Proceedings
of the Entomological Society of
Ontario 129:99-106.
Denno, R. F., M. S. McClure, and J. M. Ott. 1995. Interspecific interactions in
phytophagous insects:
competition reexamined and resurrected. Annual Review of Entomology
40: 297-331.
Emery, S. L. and J. A. Perry. 1996. Decomposition rates and phosphorus
concentrations of purple
loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) and cattail (Typha spp.) in
fourteen Minnesota wetlands. Hydrobiologia
323: 129-138.
Gaudet, C. L., and P. A. Keddy. 1988. A comparative approach to predicting
competitive ability from
plant traits. Nature 334: 242-243.
Gabor, T. S., T. Haagsma, and H. R. Murkin. 1996. Wetland plant responses to
varying degrees of
purple loosestrife removal in southeastern Ontario, Canada. Wetlands
16: 95-98.
Gleason, H.A. and A. Cronquist. 1991. Manual of Vascular Plants of the
Northeastern United States
and adjacent Canada. 2nd ed. The New York Botanical Garden. Bronx, New
York.
Grevstad, F. S. and A. L. Herzig. 1997. Quantifying the effects of distance and
conspecifics on
colonization: experiments and models using the loosestrife leaf beetle,
Galerucella calmariensis.
Oecologia 110: 60-68.
Grout, J. A., C. D. Levings, and J. S. Richardson. 1997. Decomposition rates of
purple loosestrife
(Lythrum salicaria) and Lyngbyei’s sedge (Carex lyngbyei) in
the Fraser River Estuary. Estuaries 20:
96-102.
Hight, S. D. 1990. Available feeding niches in populations of Lythrum
salicaria L. (purple loosestrife) in
the northeastern United States, pp. 269-278. In E. S. Delfosse (ed.).
Proceedings of the VII
International Symposium on the Biological Control of Weeds. March 6-11,
1988, Rome, Italy. Istituto
Sperimentale de la Patologia Vegetale (MAF), Rome, Italy.
Hight, S. D., B. Blossey, J. Laing, and R. DeClerck-Floate. 1995. Establishment
of insect biological
control agents from Europe against Lythrum salicaria in North
America. Environmental Entomology
24: 967-977.
Hultén, E. and M. Fries 1986. Atlas of North European Vascular plants,
Vol. 2. Koeltz Scientific Books,
Königstein, Germany.
Mal, T.K., J. Lovett-Doust, and L. Lovett-Doust. 1997. Time-dependent
competitive displacement of
Typha angustifolia by Lythrum salicaria. Oikos 79:
26-33.
Malecki, R. A., B. Blossey, S. D. Hight, D. Schroeder, L. T. Kok, and J. R.
Coulson. 1993. Biological
control of purple loosestrife. Bioscience 43: 480-486.
Manguin, S., R. White, B. Blossey, and S. D. Hight. 1993. Genetics, taxonomy,
and ecology of certain
species of Galerucella (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Annals of the
Entomological Society of
America 86: 397-410.
Masters, G. J., V. K. Brown, and A. C. Gange. 1993. Plant mediated interactions
between above- and
belowground insect herbivores. Oikos 66: 148-151.
Nötzold, R., B. Blossey, and E. Newton. 1998. The influence of below-ground
herbivory and plant
competition on growth and biomass allocation of purple loosestrife.
Oecologia 113: 82-93.
Nyvall, R. F. 1995. Fungi associated with purple loosestrife (Lythrum
salicaria) in Minnesota. Mycologia
87: 501-506.
Nyvall, R. F. and A. Hu. 1997. Laboratory evaluation of indigenous North
American fungi for biological
control of purple loosestrife. Biological Control 8: 37-42.
Ottenbreit, K. A. and R. J. Staniforth. 1994. Crossability of naturalized and
cultivated Lythrum taxa.
Canadian Journal of Botany 72: 337-341.
Palmén, E. 1940. Zur Biologie und nordeuropäischen Verbreitung von Hylobius
transversovittatus Steph.
(Coleoptera: Curculionidae). Annales Entomologici Fennici 6:
129-140.
Palmén, E. 1945. Zur Systematik Finnischer Chrysomeliden. 1. Gattung
Galerucella Crotch. Annales
Entomologici Fennici 11:140-147.
Rawinski, T.J. and R. A. Malecki. 1984. Ecological relationships among purple
loosestrife, cattail and
wildlife at the Montezuma National Wildlife Refuge. New York Fish and
Game Journal 31: 81-87.
Schneider, K. J. and D. M. Pence. 1992. Migratory nongame birds of management
concern in the
Northeast. U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service,
Newton Corner, Massachusetts,
USA.
Silfverberg, H. 1974. The West Palaearctic species of Galerucella Crotch
and related genera
(Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae). Notulae Entomologicae 54: 1-11.
Stamm-Katovitch, E. J., R. L. Becker, C. C. Sheaffer, and J. L. Halgerson. 1998.
Seasonal fluctuations
of carbohydrate levels in roots and crowns of purple loosestrife (Lythrum
salicaria). Weed Science
46: 540-544.
Templer, P., S. Findlay, and C. Wigand. 1998. Sediment chemistry associated with
native and
non-native emergent macrophytes of a Hudson River marsh ecosystem.
Wetlands 18: 70-78.
Thompson, D. Q., R. L. Stuckey, and E. B. Thompson. 1987. Spread, impact, and
control of purple
loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) in North American wetlands. U.S.
Fish and
Wildlife Service, Fish and Wildlife Research Report No. 2. Washington D.C.
Tutin, T. G., V. H. Heywood, N. A. Burges, D. M Moore, D. H. Valentine, S. M.
Walters and
D. A. Webb (eds.). 1968. Flora Europaea, Vol. 2, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, United
Kingdom.
Weiher, E., I. C. Wisheu, P. A. Keddy, and D. R. J. Moore. 1996. Establishment,
persistence, and
management implications of experimental wetland plant communities.
Wetlands 16: 208-218.
Welling, C. H. and R. L. Becker. 1990. Seed bank dynamics of Lythrum
salicaria L.: implications for
control of this species in North America. Aquatic Botany 38:
303-309.
Welling, C. H. and R. L. Becker. 1993. Reduction of purple loosestrife
establishment in Minnesota
wetlands. Wildlife Society Bulletin 21: 56-64.
Whitt, M. B., H. H. Prince, and R. R. Cox, Jr. 1999. Avian use of purple
loosestrife dominated habitat
relative to other vegetation types in a Lake Huron wetland complex.
Wilson Bulletin 111: 105-114.
[ Contents ]
[ Previous ]
[ Next ]
|