Parrot’s feather: Use of herbicides - diquat

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
    60%
  • Certainty
    40%
  • Harms
    0%

Source countries

Key messages

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

  1. A replicated, randomized, controlled, field study conducted in summer 1986 in Portugal (Moreira et al. 1999) found that the application of the herbicide diquat did not reduce the biomass of parrot’s feather Myriophyllum aquaticum. For three out of three comparisons, the fresh weight of parrot’s feather plants treated with diquat did not differ from untreated plants (15–25 vs 22–26 kg/m2). Additionally, the biomass of parrot’s feather plants treated with diquat (15–25 kg/m2) was higher than that of plants treated with 2,4-D amine (2–9 kg/m2) for three out of three comparisons, was higher than that of plants treated with gluphosinate-ammonium (9–22 kg/m2) for five out of nine comparisons, and was higher than of plants treated with glyphosate (9–14 kg/m2) for two out of three comparisons. Parrot’s feather biomass was assessed in 20 x 7 m plots and each herbicide rate was tested in four replicates. Herbicide rates were 2 kg/ha for diquat, 6.5 kg/ha for 2,4-D amine, 1–2.4 kg/ha for gluphosinate-ammonium and 3.6 kg/ha for glyphosate.

    Study and other actions tested
  2. A small, replicated, randomized, controlled, laboratory study conducted in 2006 in the USA (Wersal et al. 2010), found that the application of the herbicide diquat reduced growth of parrot’s feather Myriophyllum aquaticum. After four weeks, the dry weight of parrot’s feather plants treated with diquat was lower than untreated plants (1–3 vs 6 g/pot). Daytime and night-time application of the herbicide resulted in similar results. Parrot’s feather shoots were propagated in 3.78 l pots and placed inside 246 l containers filled with water. Each herbicide rate (0.19 and 0.37 mg/l) was applied to three plants.

    Study and other actions tested
  3. A small, replicated, controlled, laboratory study conducted between 2007 and 2008 in the USA (Wersal & Madsen 2010), found that the application of the herbicide diquat reduced growth in parrot’s feather Myriophyllum aquaticum. After six weeks, the dry weight of parrot’s feather plants treated with diquat was reduced compared to untreated plants (2–6 vs 18 g/pot). Six weeks after application, diquat had controlled parrot’s feather plants by 50–70% (visual assessment, with 0% corresponding to no control and 100% to complete control). Parrot’s feather shoots were propagated in 3.78 l pots and placed inside 246 l containers filled with water. Each herbicide rate (subsurface: 0.19 and 0.37 mg/l; foliar: 4.5 kg/ha) was applied to four 246 l containers, each holding four plants. Number of plants used as control is not presented and control in the context of the visual assessments was not clearly defined.

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Aldridge, D., Ockendon, N., Rocha, R., Smith, R.K. & Sutherland, W.J. (2019) Some aspects of control of freshwater invasive species. Pages 569-602 in: W.J. Sutherland, L.V. Dicks, N. Ockendon, S.O. Petrovan & R.K. Smith (eds) What Works in Conservation 2019. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Control of Freshwater Invasive Species

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Control of Freshwater Invasive Species
Control of Freshwater Invasive Species

Control of Freshwater Invasive Species - Published 2017

Control of Freshwater Invasive Species Synopsis

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, terrestrial mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read latest volume: Volume 17

Go to the CE Journal

Subscribe to our newsletter

Please add your details if you are interested in receiving updates from the Conservation Evidence team about new papers, synopses and opportunities.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust