Talk:Salvinia

Further "economic impact" in the state of Queensland, Australia

Salvinia is classified as a category 3 pest plant under Queensland's Biosecurity Act 2014, and it has a Weeds of National Significance status. This means landholders, including the City of Gold Coast, must take steps to keep their land and water free of this plant. There is a fine for non-compliance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:E422:3C01:3190:D092:A40C:65BE (talk) 06:55, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Biological control of Salvinia in Australia

The salvinia weevil (Cyrtobagous salviniae) was discovered by the CSIRO in 1979. It originates from the same native range in Brazil as salvinia. The adult weevils feed on the salvinia plant, but most damage is done by the larvae, which tunnels into the plant's stem (rhizome). This causes the plant to turn brown, lose buoyancy and sink.

Weevils can control mats of salvinia within a month, but the plant's regrowth can continue for up to 3 years. Weevils need time to increase their population to a size where they are eating the salvinia quicker than it can grow. As the plant is eaten, their numbers decrease allowing salvinia to regrow. This is then followed by an increase in the weevil numbers. This cycle continues until the salvinia and weevils reach an equilibrium.

Extensive testing was completed to ensure the weevil was not going to affect other species before being released. As part of our integrated approach, weevil infestation levels are monitored and we mechanically remove salvinia if it is growing too fast. Removing damaged salvinia is done before it decomposes and has a negative impact on water quality.

Reference: — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:E422:3C01:3190:D092:A40C:65BE (talk) 06:56, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Removal

Hello @Wizardman: What copyvio and what banned user? rm copyvio from banned userSpecial:Diff/1143892792 I have checked the obvious source and that is not it. Invasive Spices (talk) 15:55, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The diff in question is [1]. Given how far reaching the user's copyvio was and their use of offline sources more often then not I have to assume everything they did that I can't verify was a copyvio (a very long and slow process sadly). Wizardman 16:12, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have verified no copyvio that I can find. (Ironically a journal article has copyviod this article https://www.irjet.net/archives/V4/i3/IRJET-V4I3144.pdf .) Will you object if I restore it? Invasive Spices (talk) 20:08, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]