Evaluation of Ustilago sporoboli- indici as a classical biological control agent for invasive Sporobolus grasses in Australia

• Published in: Biological control 2009-07, Vol.50 (1), p.7-12
• Main Authors: Yobo, K.S., Laing, M.D., Palmer, W.A., Shivas, R.G.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Biological control; biological control agents; grass weeds; host range; host specificity; indigenous species; native grasses; nontarget organisms; pathogenicity; plant damage; plant pathogenic fungi; Smut; smut diseases; Sporobolus; Ustilago; Ustilagosporoboli- indici; weed control
• ISSN: 1049-9644; 1090-2112
• DOI: 10.1016/j.biocontrol.2009.01.006

Sporobolus pyramidalis, S. africanus, S. natalensis, S. fertilis and S. jacquemontii, known collectively as the weedy Sporobolus grasses, are exotic weeds causing serious economic losses in grazing areas along Australia’s entire eastern coast. In one of the first attempts to provide biological control for a grass, the potential of a smut, Ustilago sporoboli- indici, as a biological control agent for all five weedy Sporobolus spp. found in Australia was evaluated in glasshouse studies. Application of basidiospores to 21-day-old Sporobolus seedlings and subsequent incubation in a moist chamber (26 °C, 90% RH, 48 h) resulted in infection of S. pyramidalis, S. africanus, S. natalensis and S. fertilis but not S. jacquemontii. Host-range trials with 13 native Australian Sporobolus spp. resulted in infection of four native species. Evaluation of damage caused by the smut on two Australian native and two weedy Sporobolus spp. showed that the total numbers of flowers infected for the four grasses were in the following order: S. creber > S. fertilis > S. elongatus > S. natalensis with percentage flower infections of 21%, 14%, 12% and 3%, respectively. Significant differences ( P = 0.001) were found when the numbers of infected flowers caused by each treatment were compared. The infection of the four native Sporobolus spp. by the smut indicated that it was not sufficiently host specific for release in Australia and the organism was rejected as a potential biological control agent. The implications of these results are discussed.