Analysis of phytosanitary status of Kherson region by distribution of quarantine weeds
Abstract
The purpose of the research was to analyze the phytosanitary status of the Kherson region for the distribution of quarantine weeds included in the «List of regulated pests» (A-2), to determine trends of changes in weedy areas by individual species. Methods. The analysis was performed from 01.01.2016 to 01.01.2021 on the basis of data of the State Service of Ukraine on Food Safety and Consumer Protection for the following species of limited spread quarantine weeds: Russian knapweed Acroptilon repens L., common ragweed Ambrosia artemisiifolia L., long-spine sandbur Cеnchrus longispinus Fernald, field dodder Cuscuta campestris Junk., and Buffalobur Solanum rostratum Dunal. During the research, the general scientific methods and the variation method of mathematical statistics were used. Results. As of January 1, 2016–2021, the area weeded with common ragweed decreased from 277011.3 to 275350.6 ha. The area infested with Russian knapweed reduced from 203162.4 to 199808.6 ha and remained stable for the last three years. As of 01.01.2016, longspine sandbur was registered on the area of 21606.5 ha, since 01.01.2017 the area of its distribution decreased to 20052.2 ha and was unchanged for the last five years. The area of the field dodder reduced during the study period from 6052.7 to 5242.0 ha. Buffalobur in the country was found only in the Kherson region on the area of 134.0 ha. Analysis of the structure of areas infested with limited spread species of weeds testifies that most of them in the Kherson region are registered in the agricultural enterprises and farms of all forms of ownership. Buffalobur was detected only in the households. Findings. In the Kherson region, from 01.01.2016 to 01.01.2021 there was a tendency to reduce the areas weeded with Russian knapweed Acroptilon repens L., common ragweed Ambrosia artemisiifolia L., long-spine sandbur Cеnchrus longispinus Fernald, and field dodder Cuscuta campestris Junk. The degree of variation of the distribution areas of these weed species over the years was insignificant, which is confirmed by the results of statistical analysis. In the Kherson region, the area of Buffalobur (Solanum rostratum Dunal.) remained unchanged.
References
2. Bhowmik P. C. Invasive weeds and climate change: past, present and future. Journal of Crop and Weed. 2014. 10 (2). Р. 345–349.
3. Bartz R., Kowarik I. Assessing the environmental impacts of invasive alien plants: a review of assessment approaches. NeoBiota. 2019. Vol.43. Р. 69–99.
4. Invasive weed species’ threats to global biodiversity: future scenarios of changes in the number of invasive species in a changing climate / Shabani F. et al. Ecological Indicators. 2020. Vol. 116, article 106436. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106436.
5. Jones B. A. Tree shade, temperature, and human health: evidence from invasive species-induced deforestation. Ecological Economics. 2019. Vol. 156. P. 12–23.
6. Rai P. K., Singh J. S. Invasive alien plant species: their impact on environment, ecosystem services and human health. Ecological Indicators. 2020. Vol.111, article 106020. P. 1–20. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.106020.
7. Bellard C., Cassey P., Blackburn T. M. Alien species as a driver of recent extinctions. Biology Letters. 2016. No12, article 20150623. P. 1–5. DOI: 10.1098/rsbl.2015.0623.
8. Future distribution of invasive weed species across the major road network in the state of Montana, USA / Adhikari A., Rew L. J., Mainali K. P., Adhikari S., Maxwell B. D. Regional Environmental Change. 2020. No20 (60). P. 1–14.
9. The invasion paradox: reconciling pattern and process in species invasions / Fridley J. D. et al. Ecology. 2007. Vol.88. P. 3–17. DOI: 10.1890/0012-9658(2007)88.
10. The Anthropocene biosphere / Williams M., Zalasiewicz J., Haff P. C., Barnosky A. D., Ellis E. C. The Anthropocene Review. 2015. No2. P. 196–219. DOI: 10.1177/2053019615591020.
11. Bradley B. A., Oppenheimer M., Wilcove P. S. Climate change increases risk of plant invasion in the Eastern United States. Biological Invasions. 2010. No12. P. 1855–1872.
12. Summary for policymakers of the global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services / Diaz S. et al. Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Bonn, Germany: IPBES secretariat, 2019.
13. Seebens H. Global rise in emerging alien species results from increased accessibility of new source pools. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA. 2018. Vol.115 (10). P. 2264–2273.
14. Something in the way you move: dispersal pathways affect invasion success / Wilson J. R. U., Dormontt E. E., Prentis P. J., Lowe A. J., Richardson D. M. Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 2009. Vol.24. P. 136–144. DOI: 10.1016/j. tree.2008.10.007.
15. Кирилов Ю. Є. Розвиток аграрного сектору економіки в умовах глобалізації. Економіка АПК. 2016. № 5. С. 23–29.
16. Clements D. R., Jones V. L. Rapid evolution of invasive weeds under climate change: present evidence and future research needs. Frontiers in Agronomy. 2021. P. 1–16. DOI: 10.3389/fagro.2021.664034.
17. Skurski T. C., Rew L. J., Maxwell B. D. Mechanisms underlying non-indigenous plant impacts: a review of recent experimental research. Invasive Plant Science and Management. 2014. No7. P. 432–444. DOI: 10.1614/IPSM-D-13-00099.1.
18. Van Kleunen M. et al. Global exchange and accumulation of non-native plants. Nature. 2015. Vol. 525. P. 100–103. DOI: 10.1038/nature14910.
19. Огляд поширення карантинних організмів в Україні. Державна служба України з питань безпечності харчових продуктів та захисту споживачів. URL: https://afly.co/3np6 (дата звернення: 27.06.2021).
20. Перелік регульованих шкідливих організмів / Міністерство аграрної політики та продовольства України. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/ z0879-19#Text (дата звернення: 19.06.2021).
21. Єщенко В. О., Копитко П. Г., Костогриз П. В., Опришко В. П. Основи наукових досліджень в агрономії. Вінниця: Едельвейс і К., 2014. С. 257–312.
22. Ушкаренко В. О., Нікішенко В. Л., Голобородько С. П., Коковіхін С. В. Дисперсійний і кореляційний аналіз результатів польових дослідів: навчальний посібник. Херсон : Айлант, 2009. 372 с.
