Abstract
Considerable investments have been made in the biological control of invasive Australian Acacia species in the Fynbos biome of South Africa. The biological control agents introduced for the most invasive Acacia species do not kill standing trees but rather reduce the reproductive output, thereby reducing the rate of spread. Here, we consider the changes in the abundance of Acacia saligna (Labill.) H. L. Wendl. and Acacia cyclops A. Cunn. ex G. Don., in the presence of biological control agents for the purpose of informing long-term decision-making on the costs of manual control. We used remote sensing of permanent monitoring plots to assess the impacts of biological control in combination with fire and firewood removal. The cover of these two species where the plots had been left to biological control, informal firewood harvesting, and fire with no other forms of prescribed control for a 20-year period was assessed. The cover decreased by up to 85%, with smaller changes over periods of less than 10 years, and no impacts over a 6-year period. Biological control resulted in a marked slowing down in the rate of increase of the Acacia spp. cover. The reduction in the rate of spread of these two highly invasive species due to biological control should reduce the cost of clearing and, therefore, the financial burden on landowners and natural resource management entities involved in Acacia spp. control.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 5
Claim · model-written summary
Cover of the two Acacia species declined by up to 85% over 20 years under biological control, firewood harvesting and fire.
AcaciaOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The cover decreased by up to 85%, with smaller changes over periods of less than 10 years, and no impacts over a 6-year period.”
e1“The cover of these two species where the plots had been left to biological control, informal firewood harvesting, and fire with no other forms of prescribed control for a 20-year period was assessed.”
t0“Acacia species”
Claim · model-written summary
Acacia cover changes were smaller over periods shorter than 10 years.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“smaller changes over periods of less than 10 years”
t0“Acacia species”
Claim · model-written summary
No cover impact was observed over six years.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“no impacts over a 6-year period”
t0“Acacia species”
Claim · model-written summary
Biological control markedly slowed the increase in Acacia cover.
- Treatment
- Biological controle0
- Outcome
- rate of increase of the Acacia spp. covere0
- Direction
- slowing downe0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Biological control resulted in a marked slowing down in the rate of increase of the Acacia spp. cover.”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors expect biological control to reduce clearing costs and financial burden.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The reduction in the rate of spread of these two highly invasive species due to biological control should reduce the cost of clearing and, therefore, the financial burden on landowners and natural resource management entities involved in Acacia spp. control.”