Biological control of cat's claw creeper | Primary industries & fisheries | Queensland Government

Biological control of cat's claw creeper

Tools

Accessibility

Skip to:


Primary navigation



Navigation path


Biological control of cat's claw creeper

Summary

Biological control of cat's claw creeper
Official release of the leaf-tying moth in a cat's claw creeper infested area

The invasive liana cat's claw creeper is a serious environmental weed in coastal Queensland and New South Wales. Biological control is considered the most suitable option for managing this weed. In this project, we have host-tested and released two insects, a leaf-sucking tingid and a leaf-tying moth, throughout Queensland and northern New South Wales, but monitoring is ongoing. Training local Landcare and community groups in agent rearing, release and monitoring methods is an important component of the project. A third insect, the leaf-mining buprestid beetle, has been sucessfully host-tested and we are currently awaiting approval to release this biocontrol agent.

Details

Dates

Start date: September 2002
End date: June 2014

Project leader

Dr K Dhileepan, Ecosciences Precinct
k.dhileepan@deedi.qld.gov.au

Aim Achieve biological control of cat's claw creeper using introduced insect species.
Benefits

Cat's claw creeper, an invasive liana native to Central and South America, is a major weed in coastal Queensland and New South Wales, where it poses a significant threat to biodiversity in riparian and rainforest communities. Cat's claw creeper is a structural parasite and produces stolons and subterranean root tubers. Biological control appears the most suitable management option for this weed. Management objectives focus on reducing the rate of shoot growth to limit the weed's ability to climb and smother native vegetation, as well as reducing tuber biomass to minimise the tuber bank.

Achievements
  • A map on the distribution of cat's claw creeper in South East Queensland and northern New South Wales was produced.
  • Based on genetic studies, Paraguay was identified as the source country for the invasive cat's claw creeper populations in Australia and many other countries.
  • A climate matching model (CLIMEX) identified areas in northern Argentina, southern Brazil, Uruguay and Paraguay as climatically suitable native range areas for biological control agent explorations.
  • Simulated herbivory studies suggested that specialist herbivores in the leaf-feeding guild may be desirable in the biological control of cat's claw creeper. For the biological control agent to be effective, multiple consecutive defoliation events would be required.
  • Following extensive host-specificity testing, two biological control agents, a leaf-sucking tingid (Carvalhotingis visenda) and a leaf-tying moth (Hypocosmia pyrochroma) were released across Queensland and northern New South Wales in partnership with community groups. Field releases have now concluded and both agents appear to have established successfully at numerous sites, but monitoring is ongoing.
  • Also, we have completed host-specificity testing on a further agent, the leaf-mining buprestid beetle (Hylaeogena jureceki). Results indicate that this beetle is highly target-specific and can severely damage cat's claw creeper. We have submitted an application to Australian regulatory authorities to release this agent.
  • Research into the characteristics of underground tuber banks in cat's claw creeper infestations revealed that tubers were abundant in terms of density, yet small in size and with few connections between them. This work suggests that new recruitment is primarily from seeds, not from vegetative propagation as previously thought. Future biological control efforts need to focus on introducing seed and pod-feeding insects to reduce seed output.
  • Results from field studies on the growth of two cat's claw creeper varieties (long-pod and short-pod) at four field sites in south-eastern Queensland suggest that long-pod plants are more vigorous than short-pod plants, producing 40% more leaves. Above-ground biomass and total biomass were significantly greater for long-pod plants than short-pod plants at all sites. Biomass allocation also differed significantly; leaf mass ratio and stem mass ratio were higher and root mass ratio lower for long-pod plants than short-pod plants.
Key publications
Funding
  • Land Protection Fund
  • Queensland Government (Blueprint for the Bush)
Collaborators

Further information

Rate this page

How useful is the information on this page?

(1=not at all, 5=extremely useful)
Please rate this page (1= not at all, 5= extremely useful)
1
2
3
4
5


(for questions - please use our enquiries form.)

Page maintained by Jens Froese
Last updated 07 February 2012



Footer

© The State of Queensland, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation 1995-2012.
Copyright protects this material. Except as permitted by the Copyright Act, reproduction by any means (photocopying, electronic, mechanical, recording or otherwise), making available online, electronic transmission or other publication of this material is prohibited without the prior written permission of The Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation, Queensland. Enquiries should be addressed to SAFTRSCopyright@deedi.qld.gov.au (Queensland residents phone 13 25 23; non-Queensland residents phone 61 7 3404 6999).