The benefits and potential of pre-emptive weed biological control: Three case studies in Queensland, Australia

• Pre-emptive biological control has been used successfully for arthropod pests. • Benefits of pre-emptive biological control can be significant in terms of funds and time saved. • Chromolaena odorata in Australia is an example of a weed targeted for pre-emptive biological control. • Other priority weeds could be targeted for pre-emptive biological control, using effective agents utilized elsewhere. Invasive weed species can have significant impacts on agriculture, biodiversity and livelihoods. The cost and feasibility of managing these species using conventional means can be prohibitive depending on the size of the infestations or the habitats in which they invade. Under these conditions, biological control is seen as a viable, sustainable means to manage many weeds. However, biological control can take many years and at considerable cost to achieve the desired level of control, due to the numerous steps that are involved, including native range surveys and host-specificity testing of potential agents. Pre-emptive biological control targeting particularly high-risk species prior to their arrival in a country or emerging weeds can be cost-effective, especially if the respective biological control agents have been utilized in other countries. While pre-emptive biological control of arthropods has been investigated previously, there are few examples of pre-emptive biological control of weed species. The invasive weed species, Chromolaena odorata , Mikania micrantha and Coccinia grandis have all been or are currently targets of pre-emptive biological control in Australia. Research on the gall fly Cecidochares connexa was initiated prior to its host, C. odorata being detected in Australia. Cecidochares connexa was eventually released in Australia to control C. odorata , after initial research on the agent found it to be suitably host specific and effective against the target weed. Cecidochares connexa has also been released in numerous other countries in Africa, Asia and the Pacific, where it is providing very good control. Australia funded research on the rust Puccinia spegazzinii as part of a project involving Fiji and Papua New Guinea while the target weed, M. micrantha was a target for eradication in Queensland. The rust was later approved for release in Australia to control M. micrantha following additional host-specificity testing. However, research funded by Australia overseas suggests that the rust may not be able to suppress M. micrantha populations below current levels. Consequently, while P. spegazzinii has been released in numerous countries now, it has not yet been field released in Australia. Biological control research in Australia on C. grandis is relatively new as the weed is relatively minor and not yet declared a target for biological control. Consequently, no biological control agents have yet been released in the country. Pre-emptive biological control of C. odorata and M. micrantha has been particularly cost-effective, not just for Australia, but subsequently for numerous other countries where these weeds were well-established and problematic and the respective biological control agents were later released.