Life cycle and host range of Phycitasp. rejected for biological control of prickly acacia in Australia

Prickly acacia (Vachellia nilotica subsp. indica), a native of the Indian subcontinent, is a serious weed of the grazing areas of northern Australia and is a target for classical biological control. Native range surveys in India identified a leaf webber, Phycita sp. (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) as a prospective biological control agent for prickly acacia. In this study, we report the life cycle and host-specificity test results Phycita sp. and highlight the contradictory results between the no-choice tests in India and Australia and the field host range in India. In no-choice tests in India and Australia, Phycita sp. completed development on two of 11 and 16 of 27 non-target test plant species, respectively. Although Phycita sp. fed and completed development on two non-target test plant species (Vachellia planifrons and V. leucophloea) in no-choice tests in India, there was no evidence of the insect on the two non-target test plant species in the field. Our contention is that oviposition behaviour could be the key mechanism in host selection of Phycita sp., resulting in its incidence only on prickly acacia in India. This is supported by paired oviposition choice tests involving three test plant species (Acacia baileyana, A. mearnsii and A. deanei) in quarantine in Australia, where eggs were laid only on prickly acacia. However, in paired oviposition choice trials, only few eggs were laid, making the results unreliable. Although oviposition choice tests suggest that prickly acacia is the most preferred and natural host, difficulties in conducting choice oviposition tests with fully grown trees under quarantine conditions in Australia and the logistic difficulties of conducting open-field tests with fully grown native Australian plants in India have led to rejection of Phycita sp. as a potential biological control agent for prickly acacia in Australia.

Boosting the productivity and profitability of northern Australian beef enterprises: Exploring innovation options using simulation modelling and systems analysis

The financial health of beef cattle enterprises in northern Australia has declined markedly over the last decade due to an escalation in production and marketing costs and a real decline in beef prices. Historically, gains in animal productivity have offset the effect of declining terms of trade on farm incomes. This raises the question of whether future productivity improvements can remain a key path for lifting enterprise profitability sufficient to ensure that the industry remains economically viable over the longer term. The key objective of this study was to assess the production and financial implications for north Australian beef enterprises of a range of technology interventions (development scenarios), including genetic gain in cattle, nutrient supplementation, and alteration of the feed base through introduced pastures and forage crops, across a variety of natural environments. To achieve this objective a beef systems model was developed that is capable of simulating livestock production at the enterprise level, including reproduction, growth and mortality, based on energy and protein supply from natural C4 pastures that are subject to high inter-annual climate variability. Comparisons between simulation outputs and enterprise performance data in three case study regions suggested that the simulation model (the Northern Australia Beef Systems Analyser) can adequately represent the performance beef cattle enterprises in northern Australia. Testing of a range of development scenarios suggested that the application of individual technologies can substantially lift productivity and profitability, especially where the entire feedbase was altered through legume augmentation. The simultaneous implementation of multiple technologies that provide benefits to different aspects of animal productivity resulted in the greatest increases in cattle productivity and enterprise profitability, with projected weaning rates increasing by 25%, liveweight gain by 40% and net profit by 150% above current baseline levels, although gains of this magnitude might not necessarily be realised in practice. While there were slight increases in total methane output from these development scenarios, the methane emissions per kg of beef produced were reduced by 20% in scenarios with higher productivity gain. Combinations of technologies or innovative practices applied in a systematic and integrated fashion thus offer scope for providing the productivity and profitability gains necessary to maintain viable beef enterprises in northern Australia into the future.