Aproceros leucopoda, the zig-zag sawfly, an invasive pest of elms (Ulmus spp.), was found in two separate areas of Germany through July 2014, i.e., a northern area including the states of Berlin, Brandenburg, Mecklenburg-West Pomerania, Saxony and Saxony-Anhalt, and a southern area in Bavaria. A speed of self-dispersal of 45–90 km/yr has been calculated from earlier and present records. Observations of A. leucopoda in Belgium and the Netherlands during 2013, which are 360–610 km distant from records in Germany of that year, are interpreted as resulting from human-mediated jump dispersal. Larvae, feeding traces and cocoons were frequently found on the native elm species U. minor and U. glabra, whereas none could be detected on U. laevis. Other occurrences were often on Resista® elms, causing severe defoliation in a recent planting. New host plant records for A. leucopoda are: U. minor ‘Webbiana’, U. minor var. suberosa, and the Resista® cultivars U. ‘New Horizon’, U. ‘Regal’ and U. ‘Rebona’. The future dispersal of A. leucopoda throughout most of Germany is expected, because at least U. glabra and U. minor are widespread in this country.

Argidae , Aproceros leucopoda , zig-zag sawfly, invasive species, pest species, Ulmus laevis , Ulmus Resista® hybrids, distribution in Germany, self-dispersal, human-mediated jump dispersal

The invasive zig-zag sawfly Aproceros leucopoda Takeuchi, 1939, is of East Asian origin and was first found in Europe in 2003 (Blank et al. 2010). Its larvae feed on elms (Ulmus spp.) and sometimes severely defoliate their hosts. By 2009, the known European distribution of A. leucopoda extended from eastern Ukraine to Austria and from Poland to Romania. Since then, it has also been found in northern Italy (Zandigiacomo et al. 2011), Slovenia (de Groot et al. 2012), Croatia (Matošević 2012), Moldova (Timuş et al. 2008, misidentified as Arge sp.) and widely in European Russia from Rostov-on-Don to Moscow (Artokhin et al. 2012, Anonymous 2013). In Germany, it had been recorded only from the extreme southeast of Bavaria (Kraus et al. 2012) but not from the eastern states close to the Polish border, although the records of A. leucopoda from Poland made in 2003 are amongst the first from Europe. In 2013, A. leucopoda was observed near northwestern Germany in Belgium (Boevé 2014) and in the Netherlands (Mol and Vonk 2013).

Aproceros leucopoda is classified in the Argidae, which comprise roughly 70 species in Europe and about 900 worldwide (Taeger et al. 2006, 2010). In Europe, a few species of Arge have been reported to occur as pests of ornamental plants and forest trees (e.g., Pschorn-Walcher 1982, Taeger et al. 1998). Outbreaks of Arge pullata (Zaddach, 1859) may occur on birch trees. When the trees grow in pastures, farm livestock can be poisoned after ingestion of larvae (Brummerstedt et al. 1987, Thamsborg et al. 1987, Kannan et al. 1988, Hara and Shinohara 2008). Similar to Aproceros leucopoda in its association with elms as the larval hosts, is Arge captiva (F. Smith, 1874) (Shinohara et al. 2009). It became an invasive pest after its accidental introduction to Kazakhstan, where the larvae have severely damaged Dwarf Elm trees (U. pumila) planted in the new capital Astana (Blank et al. 2011).

To effect an early warning, in 2011 A. leucopoda was placed on the EPPO Alert List, which displays information on pest organisms that possibly represent a risk to the European and Mediterranean EPPO member countries (EPPO 2014). The Federal Research Centre for Cultivated Plants of Germany assessed the phytosanitary risk attached to this invasive species as high (Schrader and Schröder 2013). As a result of the monitoring of A. leucopoda in Germany, we report here on the recent range extension into large areas of Germany, map the current distribution in this country and provide new information on host plant choice. The current distribution pattern is discussed and the speed of the range extension is estimated.

Since 2009, A.D. Liston [ADL] and S.M. Blank [SMB] have paid special attention to elms in eastern Brandenburg, in the expectation that Aproceros leucopoda would become established in this region. Searches were made for feeding traces, larvae, cocoons and imagines (Figs 1–2). These were described and illustrated in detail by Blank et al. (2010). Following the first observations in eastern Brandenburg in May 2013, the frequency of searches was increased and the area in Germany that was searched was extended, covering initially Br [Berlin and Brandenburg], Ni [Lower Saxony, Niedersachsen], Sn [Saxony], St [Saxony-Anhalt] (abbreviations of the German states as used in the checklist of the sawflies of Germany, Blank et al. 2001). In early October 2013, SMB checked the western distribution of A. leucopoda while on a round-trip through By [Bavaria], BW [Baden-Wurttemberg], He [Hesse], Ni, NW [North Rhine-Westphalia] and SH [Schleswig-Holstein]. Observations of E. Jansen [EJ] during 2012–2013 primarily covered BW, Sn and St. T. Köhler [TK] contributed observations from Br and MV [Mecklenburg-West Pomerania] in 2013–2014, T. Pfannenstill [TP] and B. Zimmer [BZ] from southern Br in 2013–2014, and A. Taeger [AT] from St in 2014. Usually, presence and absence of A. leucopoda on a study site was noted by ADL, EJ, SMB, TK, but only presence was recorded by AT, BZ and TP. To determine presence or absence, elms on randomly chosen sites were screened for feeding traces, larvae, cocoons or imagines from late May to early October. The time spent searching for A. leucopoda depended on patch size of an individual elm stand, usually varying from 2–5 minutes for small bushes to 5–10 minutes for large trees. Usually, the number of signs of A. leucopoda was noted for a patch, but sometimes the search was stopped as soon as a single sign was detected. ADL, BZ, SMB and TK also determined the elm species or cultivar on the study site. The nomenclature of Ulmus taxa follows Mackenthun (2010). Unless attributed to other recorders, the observations were made by the authors. Voucher specimens of larvae and imagines from some localities as well as extensive photographic documentation of occurrences are held at the Senckenberg Deutsches Entomologisches Institut. Statistical analysis of the observation data follows Zöfel (1988).

Figure 1. 

Feeding traces, with young larvae of Aproceros leucopoda, on leaf of Ulmus minor, Forstbotanischer Garten in Eberswalde (Brandenburg). Photo: SDEI/Liston.

Figure 2. 

Feeding damage caused by Aproceros leucopoda on planted Ulmus ‘Resista’ during an outbreak between Schlieben and Kolochau (Brandenburg). Photo: LELF/Pfannenstill.

As a contribution towards encouragement of ‘citizen science’, an attempt was made to mobilize additional potential observers by placing an illustrated description of A. leucopoda and its distinctive feeding traces in the German popular press, with an appeal that observations be reported to the Senckenberg Deutsches Entomologisches Institut in Müncheberg (Bartel 2013). Records sent by citizen scientists as photos or herbarium vouchers were collected and re-identified by ADL and SMB.

For the outbreak area in Schlieben, Brandenburg, N. Neuenfeldt and TP assessed the density of specimens hibernating in cocoons in the ground. Samples of soil and leaf litter were taken from below three elm trees in December 2013. Each sample was from a 5–10 cm deep plot of ca 0.40 m² area. Cocoons of A. leucopoda were extracted from a mixed sample of ca 1.8 kg soil and litter and stored outdoors in a tent until imagines emerged.

The distribution map was prepared from a draft map produced by Carto Fauna-Flora 1.2 (Barbier and Rasmont 1996), and subsequently enhanced with Adobe Photoshop® and Corel Draw®. Countries outside Germany with records of A. leucopoda are labelled with the international vehicle registration codes. German states are labelled with the acronyms explained above. Distribution data for Ulmus glabra and U. minor were obtained from FLORKART (BfN and NetPhyD 2013). Free use of these data for the purpose of scientific analyses is licensed under the provisions of Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 3.0 DE. Only data sets with unambiguous identifications and observation dates later than 1979 were used to display the contemporary distribution of these elms, which have disappeared in some regions of Germany since 1980.

To estimate the speed of annual range extension it seems prudent to compare a number of estimates based on different hypothetical dispersal scenarios. Based on the known records, we measured the distance, A, between the earliest records from Hungary and Poland (Blank et al. 2010) and the most distant observation sites in Germany; B, between the closest neighbouring sites, where A. leucopoda was recorded within the period of a few years; C, the minimum and maximum distances between the records in Belgium (Boevé 2014) and the Netherlands (Mol and Vonk 2013) and the closest observation sites in Germany known in 2013. The annual dispersal speed was calculated from these distances and the related years of observation.

Among the native elm species of Germany, Aproceros leucopoda clearly prefers Ulmus glabra and U. minor as larval hosts (Table 1), since no feeding has been observed on U. laevis. On a mixed stand of all three elm species in Lower Austria (Traismauer), U. laevis showed a very low infestation even during an outbreak of A. leucopoda (E. Altenhofer, personal observation). A number of additional elm species and cultivars must now be considered to be larval hosts. These were introduced to Germany as ornamental trees in horticulture, for afforestation, or planted in botanical gardens for scientific purposes. Feeding could not so far be observed on seven of the taxa listed in Table 1. However, in these cases, it would be premature to conclude that they are not potential hosts, because each of these species and cultivars was studied at only a single site.

Some of the Resista® hybrid elms now prove to be suitable hosts. These cultivars, of complex hybrid parentage, were created to meet the demand for elms which are resistant to the fungal diseases commonly referred to collectively as “Dutch elm disease”. Ulmus ‘New Horizon’ and U. ‘Regal’ are at present respectively the most often and the second most often planted elms of this sort in Germany (Mackenthun 2010). They are usually planted in settings where they are highly visible to the public, such as along roads and in city parks. Aside from possible effects on the health of the affected trees, defoliation by A. leucopoda will impair their aesthetic value. That ‘New Horizon’ and ‘Regal’ are acceptable hosts to A. leucopoda is not surprising, because U. pumila and U. japonica figure prominently in the parentage of both (Mackenthun 2010). Ulmus pumila is known to be highly susceptible to attack by A. leucopoda (e.g., Wu 2006, Blank et al. 2010, Cao et al. 2011), whilst U. japonica is a known host in Japan (Blank et al. 2010) and recorded here for the first time as a host in Europe.

The range of A. leucopoda in Germany currently comprises two separate areas (Fig. 3). The northern one extends from southern Mecklenburg-West Pomerania in the north to central Saxony in the south and from central Saxony-Anhalt in the west to the Polish border in the east. The second, southern area covers part of southeast Bavaria. These two large areas of occurrence do not at present appear to be confluent. The distribution of U. glabra, one of the two preferred native elm species, covers the low mountain ranges of central Germany (BfN and NetPhyD 2013). Although autochthonous U. glabra and U. minor have disappeared in several regions (BfN and NetPhyD 2013), their combined, largely continuous distribution throughout Germany (Fig. 3) provides the opportunity for A. leucopoda to spread further into more westerly parts of the country.

The northern distribution area of A. leucopoda in Germany is mostly within the North German Plain, which in the south is delimited by the low mountain ranges of central Germany. Judging from available distribution data (Blank et al. 2010, Mol and Vonk 2013, Boevé 2014, Sobczyk and Nuss 2014, Juraskova et al. 2014, present data), A. leucopoda has been recorded only rarely above 400 m altitude in central Europe. From Austria into Bavaria, A. leucopoda has spread along the valley of the river Danube, where A. leucopoda was found at a maximum altitude of 580 m near Zwettel, Lower Austria (E. Altenhofer, personal communication). The Alps to the south and the Bohemian Massif to the north of the valley possibly work as barriers. Future observations may reveal whether the low mountain ranges of central Germany will slow down or restrict the dispersal of A. leucopoda, despite the general presence there of at least U. glabra.

Apart from range expansion through self-dispersal of imagines, it seems likely that individuals can sometimes be accidentally transported by human agency over much greater distances with road, rail, air and canal traffic (Blank et al. 2010). Trade by nurseries of infested plants throughout a wide geographic area might also have a significant impact, but we could not observe such an event involving A. leucopoda. The occurrences in Belgium (Boevé 2014) and in the Netherlands (Mol and Vonk 2013) seem likely to belong in the category of human-mediated jump dispersal (Suarez et al. 2001), because the gap of 360–610 km between these western records and the records in eastern Germany was unsuccessfully searched by us for signs of A. leucopoda in 2012 and 2013 (Fig. 3). Contrarily, the two observed distribution areas in Bavaria and in the northeastern German states should be explained by self-dispersal of A. leucopoda originating from the neighbouring countries Austria, Poland and possibly the Czech Republic, although human-mediated jump dispersal cannot be ruled out as a component within self-dispersal. Records made during consecutive years in Austria indicate a stepwise spread in a westerly direction (Fig. 3). Although comparable data from western Poland are missing, we suppose that self-dispersal also took place here, because the speeds of annual dispersal calculated from the distance between the Polish and the eastern German records (65–90 km/yr) are similar to speeds calculated from Austrian, Hungarian and Bavarian records (45–85 km/yr). The common distribution area of the preferred native larval hosts, U. glabra and U. minor, is more or less continuous from Germany to Hungary and to Poland (Meusel et al. 1965, BfN and NetPhyD 2013), which has facilitated the self-dispersal of A. leucopoda in a westerly direction.

The 2013 observations from southeastern Bavaria indicate an apparently limited speed of range extension (45 km/yr) in that area since A. leucopoda was first recorded near Passau in 2011 (Kraus et al. 2012), although the total of study sites in Bavaria is comparatively low. Contrastingly, range expansion into northeastern Germany seems to have been both more rapid and extensive. At the majority of German localities, a low number of feeding traces made by young larvae were often the only signs that the species was present, perhaps indicating that colonisation had recently taken place. The inconspicuous damage may also have been a reason for the low number of replies by citizen scientists in response to our press release in 2013 (Bartel 2013). If the spread of A. leucopoda into eastern Germany is nevertheless assumed to have depended purely on natural dispersal of imagines, the distance (ca 220 km) between the most westerly recorded locality (Westeregeln) and the Polish border (Podelzig) indicates that the first female may already have arrived in northeastern Germany two to five years before 2013.

Very little is known about the dispersal ability of sawflies and horntails (Hymenoptera ‘Symphyta’) in general, or the time scales and distances associated with the spread of individual species undergoing range expansion. The speed of annual range expansion resulting from self-dispersal of 45–90 km/yr estimated here for A. leucopoda lies within the range known for a few sawflies and for other insects. Nematus oligospilus Förster, 1854 (Tenthredinidae), a sawfly species invasive to New Zealand with larvae feeding on willow, extended its range through the North Island at 300 km/yr (Charles and Allan 2000; ca 165 km/yr measured as a straight line). In South America Ovruski and Fidalgo (1991) observed a range expansion of 300 km/yr also for N. desantisi D.R. Smith, 1983, which might be conspecific with N. oligospilus from New Zealand (Koch and Smith 2000). Ovruski and Fidalgo (1991) supposed passive transport to be a possible component of the dispersal. Gilpinia hercyniae (Hartig, 1837) (Diprionidae) is invasive to the Nearctic, where its larvae damage spruce trees (Picea spp.). The speed of range expansion in Canada is given as 50 km/yr (CABI 2014). The average speed for Sirex noctilio Fabricius, 1793 (Siricidae), a woodwasp invasive in South America, has been estimated as 30–50 km/yr (Yemshanov et al. 2009). Smith (1996) summarized distribution data for the invasive Asian woodwasp Eriotremex formosanus (Matsumura, 1912), which in the United States was first observed in southern Georgia and in northern Florida in 1974. E. formosana was found 15 years later in southeastern Virginia, about 740 km distant from these earliest sites (ca 50 km/yr) and 16 years later in eastern Texas, 990 km distant (ca 60 km/yr). However, S. noctilio and E. formosanus differ greatly from the Aproceros, Gilpinia and Nematus species in several ways, e.g., in the large body and the larval feeding habit inside solid wood. Sirex noctilio reproduces sexually and usually produces at most one generation per year (Eichhorn 1982), whereas E. formosanus is apparently parthenogenetic in the US and supposedly has two generations per year, based on phenological data (Smith 1996). Compared to the range expansion of 30–60 km/yr resulting from self-dispersal of these woodwasps, not even the highest estimated speed of 90 km/yr for A. leucopoda seems excessive, because several life traits of A. leucopoda promote rapid dispersal: it reproduces parthenogenetically, has up to four generations per year, and the larvae are external feeders on leaves (Blank et al. 2010), which appear more nutritious than wood infested by fungi. Among insects other than Hymenoptera, Brown et al. (2008) calculated an invasion speed of 58–145 km/yr for Harmonia axyridis (Pallas, 1771) (Coleoptera, Coccinellidae) in Europe. The considerably higher speed of 500 km/yr estimated for this species in South Africa (Stals 2010) probably includes jump-dispersal events. The speed of range expansion in Cameraria ohridella Deschka & Dimić, 1986 (Lepidoptera, Gracilariidae) in central and western Europe was estimated to be 60–70 km/yr based on the dates of first observations in European countries (Šerfová and Laštůvka 2001), although these authors also cite much lower speeds for other moths. For C. ohridella both active dispersal and passive transport by wind and man were considered to play a role.

The rapid range expansion of A. leucopoda throughout Europe predicted by Blank et al. (2010) is evidently taking place, and likely to progress. Although occurrences in Germany have so far seldom resulted in severe defoliation, this may only be because population levels still have not peaked. The considerable differences in climate between the European territories which it has already colonised, together with the altitudinal range inhabited by the species, suggest that it should easily be able to spread through most of Europe where elms grow (Meusel et al. 1965). Whether it is possible in the long-term to exclude it from territories such as the British Isles or Scandinavia, which may be adequately protected by the sea from self-dispersal events, remains to be seen.

For the communication of additional observations we are grateful to Ewald Altenhofer (Etzen), Antje Frers (Ellerhoop), and Katrin Langner (Ludwigsfelde). Marko Prous (Müncheberg) assisted ADL and SMB with fieldwork. David R. Smith (Washington) quickly supplied the missing copy of Ovruski and Fidalgo (1991). Gordon Mackenthun (Leipzig) kindly helped with the identification of some elm specimens. The volunteers contributing to the Flora of Germany as well as the Bundesamt für Naturschutz and the Netzwerk Phytodiversitaet Deutschland are acknowledged for freely providing distribution data of the elms in Germany. Thomas Schmitt (Müncheberg), Marko Prous, David R. Smith, and an anonymous referee checked earlier versions of the manuscript and helped to improve it.