Life histories and host specificities of theEchium flea beetlesLongitarsus echii andL. Aeneus [Col. Chrysomelidae]
Two halticine flea beetles,Longitarsus echiiKoch andLongitarsus aeneusKutsch, occurring on the boraginaceous plantEchium plantagineum L. in the western Mediterranean region are potential biological control agents in Australia where the plant has become a weed (Paterson's curse). The adults of both species feed by making “shot holes” in the leaves. The larvae of both species attack the roots ofEchium, those ofL. echii feeding more centrally in the root than those ofL. aeneus which attack the outer cortex and rootlets. Both species are univoltine. The host restrictions of both flea beetles as adults and as larvae were tested using the criteria already established for theEchium leaf minerDialectica scalariellaZeller (Wapshere & Kirk, 1977). This testing established that it would be safe to introduce the 2 insects into Australia for the biological control ofE. plantagineum and they are now under quarantine.RésuméDeux altises,Longitarsus echiiKoch etLongitarsus aeneusKutsch, vivant surEchium plantagineum L. dans l'ouest de la région méditerranéenne, sont des agents de contrôles biologiques potentiels de cette adventice en Australie. Les adultes des 2 espèces creusent des trous dans les feuilles et leurs larves attaquent les racines de la plante. Les larves deL. echii se nourrissent plus de la partie centrale de la racine, alors que celles deL. aeneus préfèrent le cortex extérieur et les radicelles. Les 2 espèces ont une génération par an. La spécificité d'hôte des 2 espèces, tant adultes que larves, a été étudiée selon les critères déjà établis pourDialectica scalariellaZeller (Wapshere & Kirk, 1977). Ces essais ont confirmé que l'introduction des 2 insectes en Australie pour la lutte biologique contreEchium plantagineum serait sans danger, et cette introduction a eu lieu récemment.
The population and impact of Longitarsus echii Koch (Coleoptera: Chrysmelidae), a root-feeding beetle on Echium plantagineum L. under field grazing conditions.
Longitarsus echii was fi rst released in Australia in 1996 as a biological control agent for Echium plantagineum L. The impact of this insect on E. plantagineum has been studied at two sites for two years (2002–2003) in the Riverina district of NSW. At both sites the population of L. echii has been maintained or increased during a period of extended drought across eastern Australia. At site 1, a replicated grazing trial, the intensity of sheep grazing had no impact on the L. echii population while insect numbers were maintained between years. In comparison, Mogulones larvatus (another biocontrol insect for E. plantagineum) was limited by grazing and the population could not be sampled post-drought. At the second site, a fi ne wool and cattle producer, the population of L. echii has reached a size where 100% of E. plantagineum sampled were attacked and 43% of plants died before fl owering, and seeding was reduced by greater than 80% in the fi rst year. The long-term prospects of L. echii as a biological control agent for E. plantagineum are discussed in relation to grazing and drought conditions.
HABITAT, THE TEMPLET FOR ECOLOGICAL STRATEGIES?
The very etymology of Ecology, from the greek 'Qikos', 'the household', implies that ecologists should devote some attention to the 'house' or habitat of the population or community they are studying. However, as Charles Elton (1966) has so forcibly pointed out, 'definition of habitats, or rather lack of it, is one of the chief blind spots in Zoology'. Elton himself has provided us with a qualitative classification of habitats, while another past President, Alex Watt (1947) highlighted the dynamic nature of habitats by his phrase, 'pattern and process'. Elton referred to the need to quantify habitat characteristics. In this Address I will attempt some quantification;however, you will all be aware that in doing this I will not be able to emulate those former Presidents who have been able to provide a definitative synthesis of a field or of their own studies, my offering can be but a small beginning, an indication of the type of characteristics we should quantify. In considering ecosystem patterns and environment R. M. May (1974) writes 'it is to be emphasized that although patterns may underlie the rich and varied tapestry of the natural world, there is no single simple pattern. Theories must be pluralistic'. Indeed, the complexity of the subject is daunting and in any attempt to formulate some type of general framework, one is continually beset with exceptions. In stressing the need for a framework I am echoing a plea of my predecessor Amyan Macfadyen (1975) who cited K. E. F. Watt's (1971) vivid image 'if we do not develop a strong theoretical core that will bring all parts of ecology back together we shall all be washed out to sea in an immense tide of unrelated information'. In some ways I think we may see ourselves at a similar point to the inorganic chemist before the development of the periodic table; then he could not predict, for example, how soluble a particular sulphate would be, or what was the likelihood of a particular reaction occurring. Each fact had to be discovered for itself and each must be remembered in isolation. It is noteworthy that from Dobereiner's early efforts in 1816 it took more than fifty years before Mendeleeff ormulated his Periodic Law (1869) and even after this there were various attempts at rearrangement. Another parallel may be drawn with astronomy before the development of the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram that relates the evolution and the properties of stars. Again in our own subject biology, the situation is somewhat analagous to that before the formulation of the Linnean system of classification; but now from this system of classification, we are able to organize our knowledge of, for example, the functional morphology of organisms and we can even make assumptions, with a high probability