Effectiveness of operational control of invasive conifers: Mortality, residual populations, and reinvasion

Invasive conifers are widespread and impactful weeds, resulting in significant ecological change and management costs. Treatments to control invasive species are expensive and require long-term commitment, yet their effectiveness under operational conditions is rarely quantified. The effectiveness of two operational control approaches – aerial application of foliar herbicides and ground-based manual methods – applied to manage invasive pines in New Zealand (NZ) in typically high-density and low-density infestations, respectively, was assessed. The objective was to quantify the effectiveness of each method in reducing Pinus contorta populations and to characterize the post-treatment population structure over time to assess reinvasion risk. Pine mortality and regeneration were surveyed in operationally treated infestations 1–4 years after control across a range of invaded environments in NZ. Mortality following aerial boom spray exceeded 90% on average across all height classes 3 years after treatment. Ground-based methods achieved high mortality among larger individuals but were significantly less effective for pines shorter than 60 cm. Both operational approaches allowed populations to persist via surviving individuals in the initial years post-treatment; however, the resulting population structures differed between treatments. Reinvasion risk also differed between treatments. Following aerial boom spray, reinvasion was driven primarily by surviving larger trees, whereas following ground-based control, it was driven by missed seedlings that persisted after treatment. Despite high mortality, aerial boom spray left an estimated 1,094 surviving pines ha -1 4 years after treatment, approximately half of which exceeded 2 m in height. In contrast, the large number of seedlings missed by ground treatments could lead to rapid invasion recovery. Follow-up treatment within 2–4 years is likely to be necessary for both control methods, although management should target contrasting residual population structures and reinvasion pathways.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
NeoBiota
Published
2026-09-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3897/neobiota.109.194587
Primary Topic
Forest Insect Ecology and Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Effectiveness of operational control of invasive conifers: Mortality, residual populations, and reinvasion

Rebecca M. Turner, Matthew B. Scott, Carol A. Rolando, Thomas F. Carlin et al.
NeoBiota
Forest Insect Ecology and Management
article

Effectiveness of operational control of invasive conifers: Mortality, residual populations, and reinvasion

Rebecca M. Turner, Matthew B. Scott, Carol A. Rolando, Thomas F. Carlin, Thomas SH. Paul, Brian Richardson
article en

Abstract

Invasive conifers are widespread and impactful weeds, resulting in significant ecological change and management costs. Treatments to control invasive species are expensive and require long-term commitment, yet their effectiveness under operational conditions is rarely quantified. The effectiveness of two operational control approaches – aerial application of foliar herbicides and ground-based manual methods – applied to manage invasive pines in New Zealand (NZ) in typically high-density and low-density infestations, respectively, was assessed. The objective was to quantify the effectiveness of each method in reducing Pinus contorta populations and to characterize the post-treatment population structure over time to assess reinvasion risk. Pine mortality and regeneration were surveyed in operationally treated infestations 1–4 years after control across a range of invaded environments in NZ. Mortality following aerial boom spray exceeded 90% on average across all height classes 3 years after treatment. Ground-based methods achieved high mortality among larger individuals but were significantly less effective for pines shorter than 60 cm. Both operational approaches allowed populations to persist via surviving individuals in the initial years post-treatment; however, the resulting population structures differed between treatments. Reinvasion risk also differed between treatments. Following aerial boom spray, reinvasion was driven primarily by surviving larger trees, whereas following ground-based control, it was driven by missed seedlings that persisted after treatment. Despite high mortality, aerial boom spray left an estimated 1,094 surviving pines ha -1 4 years after treatment, approximately half of which exceeded 2 m in height. In contrast, the large number of seedlings missed by ground treatments could lead to rapid invasion recovery. Follow-up treatment within 2–4 years is likely to be necessary for both control methods, although management should target contrasting residual population structures and reinvasion pathways.

NeoBiotaVol. 109
Lincoln University (NZ), Rotorua Hospital (NZ)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Forest Insect Ecology and Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.