File: <bc-45.htm>                                                                                                                         Pooled References                                GENERAL
INDEX 
                                   [Navigate
to   MAIN MENU ]
 
 
           BIOLOGICAL
CONTROL Of & By VERTEBRATES
                                             (Contacts)
 
 
----CLICK on desired underlined
categories [to search for Subject Matter,
depress Ctrl/F]:
 
Biological Control By Vertebrates
Biological Control of Vertebrates
References [Please refer also to Related Research #1, #2, #3 ]
 
| Biological Control by Vertebrates (Mammals, Birds & Fish). Van Driesche
  & Bellows (1996) noted that birds
  and predacious small mammals for many years were believed by some to
  be important forces suppressing populations of pests insects, especially in
  forests (Burns1960). However, there are few experimental demonstrations of
  the effectiveness of terrestrial vertebrate predators for the control of
  specific pests (Bellows et al. 1982a; Campbell and Torgersen 1983; Torgersen
  et al. 1984; Atlegrim 1989). Terrestrial predators of importance have
  included a wide variety of insectivorous birds and small mammals such as mice
  and shrews. The wide dietary range of such vertebrates and the flexibility of
  their food-collecting behaviors make the introduction of vertebrate predators
  to new regions potentially more dangerous than the introduction of other taxa
  of biological control agents (Legner 1986; Harris 1990).
  The principal method in which birds and mammals are used in biological
  control is then the conservation and enhancement of existing native species,
  rather than the introduction of new species. Zhi-Qiang Zhang (1992)
  summarized the literature on birds as pest control agents in China.  Of course there is the classical examples
  of introducing wolves into United States wildlife areas to control epizootic
  deer populations, which have been successful in every case. Several
  species of fish have been used to control insects that breed in water, such
  as mosquitoes and chironomids. The species most widely used for control of
  mosquitoes have been two species of top-feeding minnows in the family
  Poecilidae, the mosquito fish (Gambusia affinis Baird and Girard) and
  the common guppy (Poecilia reticulata Peters) (Bay et al. 1976). Use of these
  species has been successful in many cases (Legner et al. 1974,
  2000 ; Bay et al. 1976) but ineffective in others (see Blaustein
  1992).  Some species of cichlid fish  (Tilapia,
  Oreochromis, etc.) have also been
  used to suppress mosquitoes by reducing proctive plant biomass, thus
  rendering the habitat less favorable (Legner 1986). Introductions
  of poecilids and other fish species may affect native fish through
  competition or hybridization and this possibility should be carefully
  considered before releasing an adventive fish into a new area (Arthington and
  Lloyd 1989; Courtenay and Meffe 1989). Use of native fish should be
  considered as an alternative to such introductions. A rating system
  describing species characteristics that influence the potential of fish as
  mosquito and weed control agents exists that can guide the selection of
  species (Ahmed et al. 1988). Native status should be assessed for regions,
  not countries, because moving fish between distinct zones within a country
  may have effects similar to those from introducing species from other
  countries (Van Driesche & Bellows 1996). Biological Control of Vertebrates. Van Driesche & Bellows (1996) reported that vertebrates
  have been the targets of biological control efforts in relatively few cases.
  In those efforts that have been made, pathogens have frequently been chosen.
  Compared with other taxa, relatively few cases of biological control of
  vertebrates have been attempted. Several important projects involved viruses.
  The European rabbit, Oryctolagus cuniculus (L.), was controlled in
  Australia through the introduction of a myxoma virus from Sylvilagus rabbit
  species from South America (Fenner & Marshall 1957, Ross & Tittensor
  1986). Populations of domestic cats, Felis cattus L., preying on
  seabird colonies on oceanic islands have been reduced through the
  introduction of feline panleucopaenia virus (van Rensburg et al. 1987). A
  liver nematode, Capillaria hepatica (Bancroft) is currently being
  considered as a means to counter house mice (Mus domesticus L.) in
  Australia (Singleton and Redhead 1990). A venereal disease of feral domestic
  goats (Capra bercus Linnaeus), caused by the protozoan Tticbomonas
  foetus Donné, may offer a tlielns to alleviate the destruction of native
  vegetation of uninhabited oceanic islands caused by by introduced goats
  (Dobson 1988). Non-native
  vertebrates, including feral populations of domestic animals, have caused
  signifiant damage to indigenous species (especially plants and ground nesting
  birds) in many locations, and their suppression on many oceanic islands is an
  environmental priority (Chapuis et al. 1994). Vertebratess that prey on other
  vertebrates generally are inappropriate for introduction outside of their
  historical range as the specificity of this class of agents is usually not
  sufficient to limit their effects to the target pest, and such agents may
  pose dangers to other indigenous vertebrate species. Habitat modification
  that favors the action of native vertebrate predators, nevertheless, may be
  effective in some instances and prove safe to native species. The abundances
  of predatory birds such as owls and hawks and mammalian species such as foxes
  (Pseudalopex spp.) may be enhanced, for example, though provision of
  nesting structures (for birds) and vegetation modification to increase
  predation rates (by clearing strips to increase prey visibility) on prey such
  as rabbits and rodents (Muñoz and Murça 1990). Pathogens
  have in a few cases been used successfully in the biological control of
  vertebrates. A well-known example is the introduction of the myxoma virus of
  rabbits to Australia and, later, to Europe for control of the European
  rabbit, Oryctolagus cuniculus, with dramatic results
  (Ross
  & Tittensor 1986). Rabbit haemorrhagic disease. Another rabbit athogen,
  was introduced to Macquaries Island between Tasmania and Antarctica (van
  Driesche & Bellows 1996). Another
  example of successful use of biological control against a pest vertebrate is
  the introduction of the feline panleucopaenia virus of domestic cats
  (Felis cattus) into a population of feral cats on Marion Island in South
  Africa. This was done to reduce the killing by cats of up to 450,000 seabirds
  per year in a nesting colony on the island (van Rensburg et al 1987). Initial
  results were successful, with a reduction from an estimated 3409 cats to 615
  in the first five years. Clearing oceanic
  islands of introduced herbivorous mammals such as goats is criticall for the
  regeneration of indigenous plant communities (North et al. 1994). Dobson
  (1988) suggested that opportunities may exist to use pathogens against such
  pest vertebrates on oceanic islands where the vertebrates are particularly
  destructive to native ecosystems and rare species. Dobson noted that island
  populations of many feral mammals have fewer species of parasites and
  pathogens attacking them than mainland populations. Some of these, such as
  the sexually transmitted protozoan Trichomonas foetusr that affects
  goats, may be sufficiently specific that they could safely be used to reduce
  reproduction or survival rates rates. This avenue would be especially
  valuable because attempts to eradicate such pests through hunting have been
  often unsuccessful due to the near impossibility of finding ancl killing the
  last 1-2% of the population, especially in rugged terrain.   REFERENCES:
  (also see vandries.ref.htm> [Additional references may be found at: 
  MELVYL Library]     1976  Bay, E. C., C. O.
  Berg, H. C. Chapman & E. F. Legner. 
  1976.   Biological control of
  medical and veterinary pests.  In: "Theory and Practice of
  Biological Control," p. 457-79. 
  C. B. Huffaker (ed.). Academic Press, Inc., New York, London.  788 pp.   Bellows, T. S., Jr. & T. W. Fisher, (eds) 1999. Handbook
  of Biological Control: Principles and Applications. Academic Press, San
  Diego, CA.  1046 p.   Hoddle, M. S. 
  1999.  Biological control of
  vertebrate pests.  P. 955-974.  In: 
  Bellows, T. S., Jr. & T. W. Fisher, (eds) 1999. Handbook of
  Biological Control: Principles and Applications. Academic Press, San
  Diego, CA.  1046 p.   1986 
  Legner, E. F.  1986.  Importation of
  exotic natural enemies.  In: 
  pp. 19-30, "Biological Control of Plant Pests and of Vectors of
  Human  and Animal  Diseases."  Fortschritte
  der Zool. Bd. 32:  341 pp.   2000   Legner, E. F.  2000.  Biological
  control of aquatic Diptera.  p.
  847-870.  Contributions to a Manual of
  Palaearctic Diptera, Vol. 1, Science Herald, Budapest.  978 p.   1974 
  Legner, E. F., R. D. Sjogren & I. M. Hall.  1974.  The biological control of medically
  important arthropods.  Critical
  Reviews in  Environmental Control
  4(1):  85-113.   Pimentel, D. 1955b. Biology of the Indian mongoose in Puerto Rico. J. Mammal. 36: 62-8.   Pimentel, D. 1955c. The control of the mongoose in Puerto Rico. Amer. J. Trop.
  Med. Hyg. 4: 147-51.   Van Driesche, R. G. & T. S. Bellows, Jr. 1996. Biological
  Control.. Chapman & Hall, NY. 539 p.   |