Optimizing search strategies for invasive pests: Learn before you leap

Strategic searching for invasive pests presents a formidable challenge for conservation managers. Limited funding can necessitate choosing between surveying many sites cursorily, or focussing intensively on fewer sites. While existing knowledge may help to target more likely sites, e.g. with species distribution models (maps), this knowledge is not flawless and improving it also requires management investment. 2.In a rare example of trading-off action against knowledge gain, we combine search coverage and accuracy, and its future improvement, within a single optimisation framework. More specifically we examine under which circumstances managers should adopt one of two search-and-control strategies (cursory or focussed), and when they should divert funding to improving knowledge, making better predictive maps that benefit future searches. 3.We use a family of Receiver Operating Characteristic curves to reflect the quality of maps that direct search efforts. We demonstrate our framework by linking these to a logistic model of invasive spread such as that for the red imported fire ant Solenopsis invicta in south-east Queensland, Australia. 4.Cursory widespread searching is only optimal if the pest is already widespread or knowledge is poor, otherwise focussed searching exploiting the map is preferable. For longer management timeframes, eradication is more likely if funds are initially devoted to improving knowledge, even if this results in a short-term explosion of the pest population. 5.Synthesis and applications. By combining trade-offs between knowledge acquisition and utilization, managers can better focus - and justify - their spending to achieve optimal results in invasive control efforts. This framework can improve the efficiency of any ecological management that relies on predicting occurrence. © 2010 The Authors. Journal of Applied Ecology © 2010 British Ecological Society.

Field and Service Robotics: Results of the 9th International Conference

The Field and Service Robotics (FSR) conference is a single track conference with a specific focus on field and service applications of robotics technology. The goal of FSR is to report and encourage the development of field and service robotics. These are non-factory robots, typically mobile, that must operate in complex and dynamic environments. Typical field robotics applications include mining, agriculture, building and construction, forestry, cargo handling and so on. Field robots may operate on the ground (of Earth or planets), under the ground, underwater, in the air or in space. Service robots are those that work closely with humans, importantly the elderly and sick, to help them with their lives. The first FSR conference was held in Canberra, Australia, in 1997. Since then the meeting has been held every 2 years in Asia, America, Europe and Australia. It has been held in Canberra, Australia (1997), Pittsburgh, USA (1999), Helsinki, Finland (2001), Mount Fuji, Japan (2003), Port Douglas, Australia (2005), Chamonix, France (2007), Cambridge, USA (2009), Sendai, Japan (2012) and most recently in Brisbane, Australia (2013). This year we had 54 submissions of which 36 were selected for oral presentation. The organisers would like to thank the international committee for their invaluable contribution in the review process ensuring the overall quality of contributions. The organising committee would also like to thank Ben Upcroft, Felipe Gonzalez and Aaron McFadyen for helping with the organisation and proceedings. and proceedings. The conference was sponsored by the Australian Robotics and Automation Association (ARAA), CSIRO, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Defence Science and Technology Organisation Australia (DSTO) and the Rio Tinto Centre for Mine Automation, University of Sydney.

Climate-ready crops: Intellectual property, agriculture, and climate change

In The Climate Change Review, Ross Garnaut emphasised that ‘Climate change and climate change mitigation will bring about major structural change in the agriculture, forestry and other land use sectors’. He provides this overview of the effects of climate change on food demand and supply: ‘Domestic food production in many developing countries will be at immediate risk of reductions in agricultural productivity due to crop failure, livestock loss, severe weather events and new patterns of pests and diseases.’ He observes that ‘Changes to local climate and water availability will be key determinants of where agricultural production occurs and what is produced.’ Gert Würtenberger has commented that modern plant breeding is particularly concerned with addressing larger issues about nutrition, food security and climate change: ‘Modern plant breeding has an increasing importance with regard to the continuously growing demand for plants for nutritional and feeding purposes as well as with regard to renewal energy sources and the challenges caused by climate changes.’ Moreover, he notes that there is a wide array of scientific and technological means of breeding new plant varieties: ‘Apart from classical breeding, technologies have an important role in the development of plants that satisfy the various requirements that industrial and agricultural challenges expect to be fulfilled.’ He comments: ‘Plant variety rights, as well as patents which protect such results, are of increasingly high importance to the breeders and enterprises involved in plant development programmes.’ There has been larger interest in the intersections between sustainable agriculture, environmental protection and food security. The debate over agricultural intellectual property is a polarised one, particularly between plant breeders, agricultural biotechnology companies and a range of environmentalist groups. Susan Sell comments that there are complex intellectual property battles surrounding agriculture: 'Seeds are at the centre of a complex political dynamic between stakeholders. Access to seeds concerns the balance between private rights and public obligations, private ownership and the public domain, and commercial versus humanitarian objectives.' Part I of this chapter considers debates in respect of plant breeders’ rights, food security and climate change in relation to the UPOV Convention 1991. Part II explores efforts by agricultural biotechnology companies to patent climate-ready crops. Part III considers the report of the Special Rapporteur for Food, Olivier De Schutter. It looks at a variety of options to encourage access to plant varieties with climate adaptive or mitigating properties.

The doomsday vault: Seed banks, food security, and climate change

"It could easily provide the back-drop for a James Bond movie. Deep inside a mountain near the North Pole, down a fortified tunnel, and behind airlocked doors in a vault frozen to -18 degrees Celsius, scientists are squirreling away millions of seed samples. The samples constitute the very foundation of agriculture, the biological diversity needed so the world's major food crops can adapt to the next pest or disease, or to climate change. It's little wonder that the Svalbard Global Seed Vault has captured the public's imagination more than almost any agricultural topic in recent years. Popular press reports about the ‘Doomsday Vault,’ however, typically mask the complexity of the endeavor and, if anything, underestimate its practical utility." Cary Fowler This chapter considers the use of seed banks to address concerns about intellectual property, climate change and food security. It has a number of themes. First of all, it is interested in the use of ‘Big Science’ projects to address pressing global scientific concerns and Millennium Development Goals. Second, it highlights the increasing use of banks as a means of managing both property and intellectual property across a wide range of fields of agriculture and biotechnology. Third, it considers the linkage of intellectual property, access to genetic resources and benefit sharing. There are a variety of positions in this debate. Some see requirements in respect of access to genetic resources and benefit sharing as an inconvenient burden for science and commerce. Others defend access to genetic resources and benefit sharing as meaningful and productive. Those inclined to somewhat more conspiratorial views suggest that access to genetic resources and benefit sharing are a ruse to facilitate biopiracy. This chapter has a number of components. Section I focuses upon the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) network – often raised as a model for Climate Innovation Centres. Section II considers the Svalbard Global Seed Vault – the so-called Doomsday Vault. After a consideration of the World Summit on Food Security in 2009, it is concluded in this chapter that any future international agreement on climate change needs to address intellectual property, plant genetic resources and food security.

Mathematical modeling for improved greenhouse gas balances, agro-ecosystems, and policy development: Lessons from the Australian experience

If the land sector is to make significant contributions to mitigating anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in coming decades, it must do so while concurrently expanding production of food and fiber. In our view, mathematical modeling will be required to provide scientific guidance to meet this challenge. In order to be useful in GHG mitigation policy measures, models must simultaneously meet scientific, software engineering, and human capacity requirements. They can be used to understand GHG fluxes, to evaluate proposed GHG mitigation actions, and to predict and monitor the effects of specific actions; the latter applications require a change in mindset that has parallels with the shift from research modeling to decision support. We compare and contrast 6 agro-ecosystem models (FullCAM, DayCent, DNDC, APSIM, WNMM, and AgMod), chosen because they are used in Australian agriculture and forestry. Underlying structural similarities in the representations of carbon flows though plants and soils in these models are complemented by a diverse range of emphases and approaches to the subprocesses within the agro-ecosystem. None of these agro-ecosystem models handles all land sector GHG fluxes, and considerable model-based uncertainty exists for soil C fluxes and enteric methane emissions. The models also show diverse approaches to the initialisation of model simulations, software implementation, distribution, licensing, and software quality assurance; each of these will differentially affect their usefulness for policy-driven GHG mitigation prediction and monitoring. Specific requirements imposed on the use of models by Australian mitigation policy settings are discussed, and areas for further scientific development of agro-ecosystem models for use in GHG mitigation policy are proposed.

Mating compatibility between bactrocera invadens and bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae)

The invasive fruit fly, Bactrocera invadens Drew, Tsuruta & White, is a highly polyphagous fruit pest that occurs predominantly in Africa yet has its origins in the Indian subcontinent. It is extremely morphologically and genetically similar to the Oriental fruit fly, Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel); as such the specific relationship between these two species is unresolved. We assessed prezygotic compatibility between B. dorsalis and B. invadens using standardized field cage mating tests, which have proven effectiveness in tephritid cryptic species studies. These tests were followed by an assessment of postzygotic compatibility by examining egg viability, larval and pupal survival, and sex ratios of offspring produced from parental and subsequent F1 crosses to examine for hybrid breakdown as predicted under a two-species hypothesis. B. dorsalis was sourced from two countries (Pakistan and China), and each population was compared with B. invadens from its type locality of Kenya. B. invadens mated randomly with B. dorsalis from both localities, and there were generally high levels of hybrid viability and survival resulting from parental and F1 crosses. Furthermore, all but one hybrid cross resulted in equal sex ratios, with the single deviation in favor of males and contrary to expectations under Haldane's rule. These data support the hypothesis that B. dorsalis and B. invadens represent the same biological species, an outcome that poses significant implications for pest management and international trade for sub-Saharan Africa.

Exposure risk assessment and evaluation of the best management practice for controlling pesticide runoff from paddy fields. Part 2: Model simulation for the herbicide pretilachlor

BACKGROUND: Monitoring studies revealed high concentrations of pesticides in the drainage canal of paddy fields. It is important to have a way to predict these concentrations in different management scenarios as an assessment tool. A simulation model for predicting the pesticide concentration in a paddy block (PCPF-B) was evaluated and then used to assess the effect of water management practices for controlling pesticide runoff from paddy fields. RESULTS: The PCPF-B model achieved an acceptable performance. The model was applied to a constrained probabilistic approach using the Monte Carlo technique to evaluate the best management practices for reducing runoff of pretilachlor into the canal. The probabilistic model predictions using actual data of pesticide use and hydrological data in the canal showed that the water holding period (WHP) and the excess water storage depth (EWSD) effectively reduced the loss and concentration of pretilachlor from paddy fields to the drainage canal. The WHP also reduced the timespan of pesticide exposure in the drainage canal. CONCLUSIONS: It is recommended that: (1) the WHP be applied for as long as possible, but for at least 7 days, depending on the pesticide and field conditions; (2) an EWSD greater than 2 cm be maintained to store substantial rainfall in order to prevent paddy runoff, especially during the WHP.

Development of multi-rotor localised surveillance using multi-spectral sensors for plant biosecurity

This report describes a proof of concept for multi-rotor localised surveillance using a multi-spectral sensor for plant biosecurity applications. A literature review was conducted on previous applications using airborne multispectral imaging for plant biosecurity purposes. A ready built platform was purchased and modified in order to fit and provide suitable clearance for a Tetracam Mini-MCA multispectral camera. The appropriate risk management documents were developed allowing the platform and the multi-spectral camera to be tested extensively. However, due to technical difficulties with the platform the Mini- MCA was not mounted to the platform. Once a suitable platform is developed, future extensions can be conducted into the suitability of the Mini-MCA for airborne surveillance of Australian crops.

Effects of laboratory colonization on Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera, Tephritidae) mating behaviour: ‘what a difference a year makes

Laboratory-reared insects are widely known to have significantly reduced genetic diversity in comparison to wild populations; however, subtle behavioural changes between laboratory-adapted and wild or ‘wildish’ (i.e., within one or very few generations of field collected material) populations are less well understood. Quantifying alterations in behaviour, particularly sexual, in laboratory-adapted insects is important for mass-reared insects for use in pest management strategies, especially those that have a sterile insect technique component. We report subtle changes in sexual behaviour between ‘wildish’ Bactrocera dorsalis flies (F1 and F2) from central and southern Thailand and the same colonies 12 months later when at six generations from wild. Mating compatibility tests were undertaken under standardised semi-natural conditions, with number of homo/heterotypic couples and mating location in field cages analysed via compatibility indices. Central and southern populations of B. dorsalis displayed positive assortative mating in the 2010 trials but mated randomly in the 2011 trials. ‘Wildish’ southern Thailand males mated significantly earlier than central Thailand males in 2010; this difference was considerably reduced in 2011, yet homotypic couples from southern Thailand still formed significantly earlier than all other couple combinations. There was no significant difference in couple location in 2010; however, couple location significantly differed among pair types in 2011 with those involving southern Thailand females occurring significantly more often on the tree relative to those with central Thailand females. Relative participation also changed with time, with more southern Thailand females forming couples relative to central Thailand females in 2010; this difference was considerably decreased by 2011. These results reveal how subtle changes in sexual behaviour, as driven by laboratory rearing conditions, may significantly influence mating behaviour between laboratory-adapted and recently colonised tephritid fruit flies over a relatively short period of time.

Trapping to monitor tephritid movement: Results, best practice, and assessment of alternatives

Movement of tephritid flies underpins their survival, reproduction, and ability to establish in new areas and is thus of importance when designing effective management strategies. Much of the knowledge currently available on tephritid movement throughout landscapes comes from the use of direct or indirect methods that rely on the trapping of individuals. Here, we review published experimental designs and methods from mark-release-recapture (MRR) studies, as well as other methods, that have been used to estimate movement of the four major tephritid pest genera (Bactrocera, Ceratitis, Anastrepha, and Rhagoletis). In doing so, we aim to illustrate the theoretical and practical considerations needed to study tephritid movement. MRR studies make use of traps to directly estimate the distance that tephritid species can move within a generation and to evaluate the ecological and physiological factors that influence dispersal patterns. MRR studies, however, require careful planning to ensure that the results obtained are not biased by the methods employed, including marking methods, trap properties, trap spacing, and spatial extent of the trapping array. Despite these obstacles, MRR remains a powerful tool for determining tephritid movement, with data particularly required for understudied species that affect developing countries. To ensure that future MRR studies are successful, we suggest that site selection be carefully considered and sufficient resources be allocated to achieve optimal spacing and placement of traps in line with the stated aims of each study. An alternative to MRR is to make use of indirect methods for determining movement, or more correctly, gene flow, which have become widely available with the development of molecular tools. Key to these methods is the trapping and sequencing of a suitable number of individuals to represent the genetic diversity of the sampled population and investigate population structuring using nuclear genomic markers or non-recombinant mitochondrial DNA markers. Microsatellites are currently the preferred marker for detecting recent population displacement and provide genetic information that may be used in assignment tests for the direct determination of contemporary movement. Neither MRR nor molecular methods, however, are able to monitor fine-scale movements of individual flies. Recent developments in the miniaturization of electronics offer the tantalising possibility to track individual movements of insects using harmonic radar. Computer vision and radio frequency identification tags may also permit the tracking of fine-scale movements by tephritid flies by automated resampling, although these methods come with the same problems as traditional traps used in MRR studies. Although all methods described in this chapter have limitations, a better understanding of tephritid movement far outweighs the drawbacks of the individual methods because of the need for this information to manage tephritid populations.

The complexities of knowing what it is you are trapping

The effectiveness of any trapping system is highly dependent on the ability to accurately identify the specimens collected. For many fruit fly species, accurate identification (= diagnostics) using morphological or molecular techniques is relatively straightforward and poses few technical challenges. However, nearly all genera of pest tephritids also contain groups of species where single, stand-alone tools are not sufficient for accurate identification: such groups include the Bactrocera dorsalis complex, the Anastrepha fraterculus complex and the Ceratitis FAR complex. Misidentification of high-impact species from such groups can have dramatic consequences and negate the benefits of an otherwise effective trapping program. To help prevent such problems, this chapter defines what is meant by a species complex and describes in detail how the correct identification of species within a complex requires the use of an integrative taxonomic approach. Integrative taxonomy uses multiple, independent lines of evidence to delimit species boundaries, and the underpinnings of this approach from both the theoretical speciation literature and the systematics/taxonomy literature are described. The strength of the integrative approach lies in the explicit testing of hypotheses and the use of multiple, independent species delimitation tools. A case is made for a core set of species delimitation tools (pre- and post-zygotic compatibility tests, multi-locus phylogenetic analysis, chemoecological studies, and morphometric and geometric morphometric analyses) to be adopted as standards by tephritologists aiming to resolve economically important species complexes. In discussing the integrative approach, emphasis is placed on the subtle but important differences between integrative and iterative taxonomy. The chapter finishes with a case study that illustrates how iterative taxonomy applied to the B. dorsalis species complex led to incorrect taxonomic conclusions, which has had major implications for quarantine, trade, and horticultural pest management. In contrast, an integrative approach to the problem has resolved species limits in this taxonomically difficult group, meaning that robust diagnostics are now available.

Resolving cryptic species complexes of major tephritid pests

An FAO/IAEA Co-ordinated Research Project (CRP) on “Resolution of Cryptic Species Complexes of Tephritid Pests to Overcome Constraints to SIT Application and International Trade” was conducted from 2010 to 2015. As captured in the CRP title, the objective was to undertake targeted research into the systematics and diagnostics of taxonomically challenging fruit fly groups of economic importance. The scientific output was the accurate alignment of biological species with taxonomic names; which led to the applied outcome of assisting FAO and IAEA Member States in overcoming technical constraints to the application of the Sterile Insect Technique (SIT) against pest fruit flies and the facilitation of international agricultural trade. Close to 50 researchers from over 20 countries participated in the CRP, using coordinated, multidisciplinary research to address, within an integrative taxonomic framework, cryptic species complexes of major tephritid pests. The following progress was made for the four complexes selected and studied: Anastrepha fraterculus complex – Eight morphotypes and their geographic and ecological distributions in Latin America were defined. The morphotypes can be considered as distinct biological species on the basis of differences in karyotype, sexual incompatibility, post-mating isolation, cuticular hydrocarbon, pheromone, and molecular analyses. Discriminative taxonomic tools using linear and geometric morphometrics of both adult and larval morphology were developed for this complex. Bactrocera dorsalis complex – Based on genetic, cytogenetic, pheromonal, morphometric, and behavioural data, which showed no or only minor variation between the Asian/African pest fruit flies Bactrocera dorsalis, B. papayae, B. philippinensis and B. invadens, the latter three species were synonymized with B. dorsalis. Of the five target pest taxa studied, only B. dorsalis and B. carambolae remain as scientifically valid names. Molecular and pheromone markers are now available to distinguish B. dorsalis from B. carambolae. Ceratitis FAR Complex (C. fasciventris, C. anonae, C. rosa) – Morphology, morphometry, genetic, genomic, pheromone, cuticular hydrocarbon, ecology, behaviour, and developmental physiology data provide evidence for the existence of five different entities within this fruit fly complex from the African region. These are currently recognised as Ceratitis anonae, C. fasciventris (F1 and F2), C. rosa and a new species related to C. rosa (R2). The biological limits within C. fasciventris (i.e. F1 and F2) are not fully resolved. Microsatellites markers and morphological identification tools for the adult males of the five different FAR entities were developed based on male leg structures. Zeugodacus cucurbitae (formerly Bactrocera (Zeugodacus) cucurbitae) – Genetic variability was studied among melon fly populations throughout its geographic range in Africa and the Asia/Pacific region and found to be limited. Cross-mating studies indicated no incompatibility or sexual isolation. Host preference and genetic studies showed no evidence for the existence of host races. It was concluded that the melon fly does not represent a cryptic species complex, neither with regard to geographic distribution nor to host range. Nevertheless, the higher taxonomic classification under which this species had been placed, by the time the CRP was started, was found to be paraphyletic; as a result the subgenus Zeugodacus was elevated to genus level.

Resolution of Cryptic Species Complexes of Tephritid Pests to Enhance SIT Application and Facilitate International Trade

Tephritid fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) are considered by far the most important group of horticultural pests worldwide. Female fruit flies lay eggs directly into ripening fruit, where the maggots feed causing fruit loss. Each and every continent is plagued by a number of fruit fly pests, both indigenous as well as invasive ones, causing tremendous economic losses. In addition to the direct losses through damage, they can negatively impact commodity trade through restrictions to market access. The quarantine and regulatory controls put in place to manage them are expensive, while the on-farm control costs and loss of crop affect the general well-being of growers. These constraints can have huge implications on loss in revenues and limitations to developing fruit and vegetable-based agroindustries in developing, emergent and developed nations. Because fruit flies are a global problem, the study of their biology and management requires significant international attention to overcome the hurdles they pose. The Joint Food and Agriculture Organisation / International Atomic Energy Agency (FAO/IAEA) Programme on Nuclear Techniques in Food and Agriculture has been on the foreground in assisting Member States in developing and validating environment-friendly fruit fly suppression systems to support viable fresh fruit and vegetable production and export industries. Such international attention has resulted in the successful development and validation of a Sterile Insect Technique (SIT) package for the Mediterranean fruit fly. Although demands for R&D support with respect to Mediterranean fruit fly are diminishing due to successful integration of this package into sustainable control programmes against this pest in many countries, there were increasing demands from Member States in Africa, Asia and Latin America, to address other major fruit fly pests and a related, but sometimes neglected issue of tephritid species complexes of economic importance. Any research, whether it is basic or applied, requires a taxonomic framework that provides reliable and universally recognized entities and names. Among the currently recognized major fruit fly pests, there are groups of species whose morphology is very similar or identical, but biologically they are distinct species. As such, some insect populations that are grouped taxonomically within the same pest species, display different biological and genetic traits and show reproductive isolation which suggest that they are different species. On the other hand, different species may have been taxonomically described, but there may be doubt as to whether they actually represent distinct biological species or merely geographical variants of the same species. This uncertain taxonomic status has practical implications on the effective development and use of the SIT against such complexes, particularly at the time of determining which species to mass-rear, and significantly affects international movement of fruit and vegetables through the establishment of trade barriers to important agricultural commodities which are hosts to these pest tephritid species...