PM 9/31 (1) <i>Ambrosia trifida</i>

EPPO BulletinVolume 51, Issue 3 p. 616-621 STANDARD - NATIONAL REGULATORY CONTROL SYSTEMSFree Access PM 9/31 (1) Ambrosia trifida First published: 25 November 2021 https://doi.org/10.1111/epp.12783AboutSectionsPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use check box below share version article.I have read accept the Wiley Online Library UseShareable LinkUse link a this article with your friends colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Abstract Specific scope This Standard describes control procedures aiming monitor, contain eradicate trifida. approval amendment approved in 2021–09. Authors contributors are given Acknowledgements section. 1 INTRODUCTION Further information on biology, distribution economic importance can be found (2019, 2021). L. (Asteraceae) is summer annual plant native North America (Bassett & Crompton, 1982). The species was introduced into many countries region at end 19th century (Follak et al., 2013; Chauvel 2015, Many occurrences A. considered casual populations 2013). However, there well-established south-west France (Chauvel 2015). also established parts Italy (Acta Plantarum, 2020) while further local Serbia, Russia Bulgaria Stoyanov 2014; EPPO, 2019, 21). Occurrences known from Asia including Japan, South Korea China (EPPO, In its range, has historically been recorded naturally disturbed habitats (e.g. along banks water courses) Today, it regarded as major weed agricultural systems become (Regnier 2016). region, occurs crop fields, ruderal habitats, railway tracks, such riparian Globally, numerous interceptions contaminant seed for planting or grain human animal consumption 2019). Europe imports agri-food industry seeds (Verloove, 2006; There documented cases introduction via imported includes contaminated soybean 2015), maize (Stoyanov 2015) other spring crops (sunflower, sorghum) (G. Fried, pers. comm., America, consequences associated presence major. plants’ temporal emergence pattern, rapid aggressive growth, herbicide resistance contribute success fields (Harrison 2001; Regnier Yield reductions 13–50%, more, observed, losses being greatest when grow simultaneously Barnett Steckel, currently only locally areas France, however, farmers report additional costs hand weeding, even destruction plots before harvesting due very high densities trifida, meaning total loss Moreover, health problem produces large amount highly allergenic pollen (Oh, 2018). Thus, likely seasonal allergic rhinitis caused by potential impacts biodiversity within competitive form monospecific stands meso-hygroscopic environments (river banks, wet grasslands, gravel pits ditches) member risk advised prepare monitoring activities contingency plan eradication containment pest. presents basis national regulatory system monitoring, describes: elements programme that should conducted detect new infestation delimit an infested area; measures recently detected (including incursion); prevent spread country neighbouring where pest present no longer feasible. Regional cooperation important, recommended communicate their neighbours exchange views best implement achieve regional goal preventing For efficient implementation level, between relevant public bodies NPPOs, ministries environment, charge transport, management, etc.), well interested (associations) established. 2 MONITORING OF TRIFIDA Staff organizations trained recognize all stages lifecycle, small populations. may include staff nature conservation managers botanists, agronomists, farmers, forest etc. As range citizen science projects implemented encourage landholders citizens sightings morphological characteristics (size seedling, shape leaves) allow identification development. Regular surveys (see ISPM 6: Surveillance; FAO, 2018) necessary determine geographical prevalence. Monitoring concentrate climatically suitable most vulnerable colonization (arable land, like roadsides transport corridors; see (2019) more comprehensive list habitats). ERADICATION Any case incursion) based delimitation area application both feasibility depends size designation area, density population accumulated bank, accessibility site. Eradication feasible initial infestation. Measures described Appendix 1. 4 CONTAINMENT countries. 2. 5 COMMUNICATION AND COLLABORATION essential promote phytosanitary management methods. NPPOs provide land stakeholders guides facilitate cooperation, site-specific studies plant, techniques management. Professionals administration, foresters) informed about threat natural managed preventive measures. Integrated involving different sorts various measures, will effective efficient. International Ragweed Society (http://internationalragweedsociety.org/) association promotes exchanges international scientific community. already some initiatives French Walloon ragweed observatories (French Ministry Solidarity Health, 2021), which monitor strategies ensure authorities concerned. Citizen A project (“A la recherche de l'Ambroisie trifide”) launched (https://www.tela-botanica.org/mission/ambrosiatrifida/). ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS prepared Mr S Follak (AT) work Expert Working Group (EWG) 2019 analysis EWG included following participants: D Chapman (GB), (AT), B (FR), G Fried Ms Y. Kulakova (RU), D. Marisavljevic (RS), E (US), U Starfinger (DE), J Van Valkenburg (NL) M Chouibani (MA). Panel Invasive Alien Plants reviewed Standard. APPENDIX PROGRAMME involves four main activities: surveillance fully investigate treatment and/or verification eradication. progress. must verified establish if attempts successful. plants warned risks avoid touching bare skin. Surveillance survey extent carried out places habitat complexes, arable watercourses streams canals. High-risk harbour cargo yards (places loading). Particular attention adjacent sites might receive human-assisted environments, e.g. transportation networks fields. mostly related disturbance. increased invasion Containment Unintentional through transfer soil material vehicles machinery avoided. Movement prohibited. Equipment cleaned remove moving uninfested 41: movement used vehicles, equipment; 2017). managers, techniques. See example “Ambrosia habitus, leaves, seeds” (Karrer 2016) “Biology Management Giant Ragweed” (Johnson 2007). 3. Treatment It technically possible combination chemical mechanical means, but applicable infestations outbreaks. Hand weeding (uprooting) applied (crop watercourses). pulled flowering ensuring complete removal root system. Herbicides individual patches (spot treatment) 2). 4. Verification continuous treated important re-establishment. Mechanical until found. believed remain viable >4 years (up 20 depending burial depth; 2019) thus forms long-term persistent seedbank. Repeated visits therefore made least more. areas, difficult achieve. diverse action, rotation tillage practices help reduce size. 1). regarding prevention soil, machinery, livestock any commodity Chemical highlighted availability products containing active substances vary nationally available effective. Indications uses each substance incomplete. Products instructions label line protection product regulations. consistently single applications pre-emergence (PRE) post-emergence (POST) herbicides late resistance. programs combine PRE POST treatments, two modes action American evaluated combinations crops, soybean, cotton maize. Multiple groups trifida: glyphosate, acetolactate synthase (ALS) inhibitors imazamox, cloransulam-methyl, sulfentrazone), photosystem II (atrazine), protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO) (saflufenacil) auxin-type (dicamba, 2,4-D) Johnson 2007; Soltani 2011; Wuerffel 2015; Knezevic references listed Table example, al. showed mode actions provided greater than 90% (glyphosate-resistant) (Nebraska/USA). general, (<15 cm tall). minimizes early-season interference existing plants. glyphosate 2,4-D 10- 25-cm 26- 46-cm tall Glyphosate Indiana, USA, controlled 94–100% killed (at 840 1120 g/ha), whereas 99–100% 280–1120 g/ha) (Robinson 2012). experience France. Based use ALS imazamox tribenuron-methyl sunflower (both tolerant varieties). maize, dicot weeds (B. Chauvel, 2020; particular after escapes emerging Here, applicable. TABLE Selection crops. Effectiveness depend scale, site herbicide-resistant biotypes. Sequential (PRE POST) mixtures recommended. details Crop Herbicide Period Reference Maize MesotrioneDicambaIsoxaflutole PRE/POSTPOSTPRE/POST Wichert (1999)Johnson (2007)Knezevic Soybean Imazamox B. comm. (2020) Sunflower ImazamoxTribenuron-methyl POSTPOST Cereals FluroxypyrClopyralid2,4-D POSTPOSTPOST (2007), Robinson (2012) Field (post-harvest), non-crop Tillage problematic commonly (Barnes 2004; observed frequently mulch-tilled (49%) compared no-till (37%) conventional-till (32%) Utilization conventional (ploughing) reduced incidence 10–15%. No-till leaves surface they prone predation insects organisms 2003). Using plough buries deep enough spring. result intermediate level disturbance place optimum depths survival Ganie (2016, 2017) detailed preplant (tandem disc) complements soybean. Cultivation Cultural practices, density, date, row spacing choice cultivar, affect crop's ability compete All these maximize degree occupies space early growing season, diminishing growth pressure respective crop. grown soybeans planted 19-cm rows produced less biomass 76-cm rows, affected yield similarly spacings (Hock 2006). Planting date significant influence crop-weed competition delayed could tactic minimize percentage seedlings emerge (Schutte 2008). High-density (9 plants/m2) effectively suppress little impact (Page Nurse, Summer factor strongly avoided areas. adaptation by, inclusion winter cereals combined during intercropping period empty autumn-seeded cover perennial pasture hay 2016; Goplen 2017; 2020). Results (2017) indicated inputs cropping studied (Minnesota, USA) need prevented (i.e. zero-weed threshold) seedbank 96%. Maximizing diversity advisable allows options wheat) usually harvested prior production, replenishment wheat alfalfa canopy predators seedbanks. Biological At present, biological agents region. Pathogens reported adversely Puccinia xanthii forma specialis ambrosia-trifidae species-specific rust fungus biocontrol agent (Batra, 1981). attacks reduces production. REFERENCES Acta Plantarum Flora delle Regioni italiane https://www.actaplantarum.org/flora/flora_info.php?id=628 [accessed February 2020]. Barnes J, B, Gibson K Weller (2004) late-season giant horseweed Indiana Management. https://doi.org/10.1094/CM-2004-0923-02-BR KA Steckel LE (2013) (Ambrosia trifida) cotton. Weed Science 61, 543– 548. Bassett IJ Crompton CW (1982) biology Canadian weeds. 55. Journal Plant 62, 1003– 1010. Batra SWT (1981) ambrosia-trifidae. Mycopathologia 73, 61– 64. Rodriguez A, Moreau C, Martinez Q, Bilon R (2015) Développement d’Ambrosia en France: connaissances historiques écologiques vue d’une éradication l’espèce. Botanique Société 71, 25– 38. G, S, D, Y, Le Bourgeois T, Monty Rossi JP, U, Tanner R, Tassus X, (2021) Monographs invasive N° 5: Botany Letters, https://doi.org/10.1080/23818107.2021.1879674 Global Database. https://gd.eppo.int/ Pest Paris. https://gd.eppo.int/taxon/AMBTR/documentss 12 FAO 41 equipment. Rome. (2018) 6 Surveillance. Dullinger Kleinbauer I, Moser Essl F Invasion dynamics three Asteraceae Artemisia annua, Iva xanthiifolia) central eastern Europe. Preslia 85, 41– 61. Health L’Observatoire des ambroisies. https://solidarites-sante.gouv.fr/sante-et-environnement/risques-microbiologiques-physiques-et-chimiques/especes-nuisibles-et-parasites/ambroisie-info/l-observatoire-des-ambroisies ZA, Lindquist JL, Jugulam M, Kruger GR, Marx DB Jhala AJ An integrated approach glyphosate-resistant Research 57, 112– 122. Sandell LD, Mithila (2016) resistant Technology 30, 45– 56. JJ, Sheaffer CC, Becker RL, Coulter JA, Breitenbach FR, Behnken LM, GA Gunsolus GL Seedbank depletion patterns Minnesota systems. 65, 52– 60. Harrison SK, EE Schmoll JT (2003) Postdispersal no-tillage corn. 955– 964. EE, Webb JE (2001) Competition fecundity 49, 224– 229. Hock SM, SZ, Martin AR JL (2006) time competitiveness indices. 54, 38– 46. W, Loux Nordby Sprague Nice Westhoven Stachler (2007) Biology 2007. Available: https://weedscience.missouri.edu/publications/gwc-12.pdf 14 January Karrer van Leitsch-Vitalos Kropf Citterio Europe; seeds. EU-COST-Action FA-1203 ‘Sustainable artemisiifolia Europe’, pp. http://internationalragweedsociety.org/docs/Ambroisia_Europe_GB.pdf 18 Adewale Osipitan O, Scott Nedeljkovic Alternative Nebraska. Sustainable Agriculture 8, 21– 32. Oh J-W Pollen allergy changing world: guide understanding clinical practice. Singapore, Springer. Page ER Nurse RE Cropping prevalence trifida): From 1950’s present. Crops 184, 104– 111. MM, Holloman Venkatesh Diekmann F, Taylor Ford RA, Stoltenberg DE, Hartzler RG, Davis AS, Schutte BJ, Cardina Mahoney KJ WG Certified advisors perceptions distribution, resistance, Corn Belt. 64, 361– 377. AP, Simpson DM glyphosate. 26, 657– 660. JT, Spokas Forcella (2008) Hydrothermal seedling model trifida). 56, 555– 560. N, Shropshire C Sikkema PH (2011) L.) 91, 577– 581. Vladimirov V Milanova (2014) (Asteraceae), non-native Bulgarian Flora. Comptes rendus l'Académie bulgare Sciences 67, 1653– 1656. Verloove (2006). Catalogue neophytes Belgium (1800–2005). Meise, National Botanic Garden Belgium. 89 p.; ill.; 21 cm. – (Scripta Botanica Belgica, vol. 39). Townson JK, Bartlett DW Foxon (1999) Technical mesotrione, herbicide. BCPC Conference Weeds 1, 105– 110. JR, Young JM, Matthews VM, BG Timing soil-residual 29, 771– 781. Volume51, Issue3December 2021Pages ReferencesRelatedInformation