Next Article in Journal
A Liberal Undergraduate Education for Engineers
Previous Article in Journal
Challenges of the Sharing Economy for SMEs: A Literature Review
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 12
Issue 16
10.3390/su12166505
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Harnessing Opportunities Provided by the Invasive Chromolaena odorata to Keep It under Control

by
Lutendo Mugwedi
Department of Ecology and Resource Management, School of Environmental Sciences, University of Venda, Thohoyandou 0950, South Africa
Sustainability 2020, 12(16), 6505; https://doi.org/10.3390/su12166505
Submission received: 11 March 2020 / Revised: 5 April 2020 / Accepted: 16 April 2020 / Published: 12 August 2020
(This article belongs to the Section Environmental Sustainability and Applications)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Invasive alien plants (IAPs) have been well-documented as socio-ecological change drivers in most countries globally. Billions of dollars have been spent worldwide on IAP management projects with varying degrees of success. Understanding the contribution of IAPs to human well-being and livelihoods could provide insights into potential sustainable incentives that could be used to achieve effective IAP management. A review was conducted to assess the benefits of the invasive Chromolaena odorata on human well-being and livelihoods. Literature was gathered using keyword searches in electronic databases. The findings from this review showed that C. odorata is utilised in bioenergy production, crop production and protection, ethnopharmacology, human nutrition, and livestock production. However, most of these benefits were reported on the Asian/West African biotype. There was only one ethnopharmacological benefit record on the southern African biotype. This shows that, although C. odorata has significant negative impacts on the environment and livelihoods, its benefits have been integrated into human well-being and livelihoods. Therefore, C. odorata utilisation in bioenergy production, crop and livestock production, crop protection, and ethnopharmacology could create an economic incentive for species control in invaded sites. However, for utilisation to be effective, it should be used as a complementary control strategy.

1. Introduction

Invasive alien plants (IAPs) are now well recognised as one of the key drivers of global socio-ecological change. This is because they affect biodiversity and ecosystem services [1,2], thus in turn affecting human well-being and livelihoods. The IAPs invade both human-modified and natural ecosystems [3], thus reducing their biodiversity and ability to deliver ecosystem services needed to maintain and enhance human well-being and livelihoods [4]. To counteract biodiversity and ecosystem services loss, millions of dollars are spent around the globe annually to manage IAPs [5]. For example, South Africa is currently spending more than US$101 million per year in the management of IAPs [6].
IAPs can have both negative and positive impacts on human well-being and livelihoods [4]. Human well-being is comprised of security, access to basic material to sustain good life, health, personal freedom, and good social relations [7]. Livelihood includes capabilities, assets, and activities needed to earn a living [8]. IAPs’ negative impacts pose significant threats to human well-being and livelihoods in many parts of the world, but the impacts are severe in developing countries where most people (especially in rural areas) are more dependent on ecosystem services [9,10,11]. Most research has been focused on IAPs’ ecological impacts [9,10,12], but currently the focus is also shifting towards IAPs’ impacts on human well-being and livelihoods [4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13].
Environmental managers are often faced with a challenge of limited resources to manage IAPs, thus necessitating the need for alternative economic incentives that could be used to augment IAP management [14]. For example, a South African government agency, the Working for Water programme, is faced with a serious challenge to advocate for more IAP management budget allocation because several socio-economic initiatives are competing for the same pool of funds [15]. A few IAPs have both benefits and disbenefits [12,16,17], which are influenced by multiple socio-ecological factors that are context-specific [9,10,18]. Therefore, research on the role of IAPs in human well-being and livelihoods is crucial to identify benefits that could be used as incentives to promote sustainable IAP management while reducing a burden on limited funding pools. However, the research should also consider IAPs’ benefits and disbenefits trade-offs to avoid creating a conflict of interest between different stakeholders [4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19].
Chromolaena odorata (L.) R.M. King & H. Rob. (Asteracea), synonym: Eupatorium odoratum (L.) King & H. (Eupatoriae), is a perennial, deciduous, and multi-stemmed shrub native to South and Central America, but which now has invaded various ecosystems such as grasslands, savannas, and tropical rainforests [20,21,22]. Chromolaena odorata can grow up to 2 m as a freestanding shrub. However, it can reach a height of 10 m as a climber on other plants [17]. Chromolaena odorata can create dense monospecific stands, thus outgrowing most native vegetation, and restricting human and animal access to invaded areas [23,24].
Chromolaena odorata was unintentionally introduced in Southeast Asia, Africa, and Oceania [25]. There are two biotypes in the introduced countries; i.e., the Asian/West African biotype and the southern African biotype [26,27]. Chromolaena odorata is among the worst 100 invasive alien species worldwide [28]. Both C. odorata biotypes cause significant threats to biodiversity, human well-being, and livelihoods by displacing native plants through shading, increasing fire intensity and frequency, and altering soil properties [13,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31]. Livelihoods are largely threatened through reduced grazing capacity and impacts on agricultural land, crop yield, livestock, medicinal plants, eco-tourism, and trophy-hunting potential [13,32,33,34].
Chromolaena odorata is difficult to control due to rapid attainment of reproductive maturity and large production of seeds, short-term persistent seed banks [35], and production of multiple stems (resprouts) from basal stems following severe disturbances like fire and cutting [24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36]. A 10-year old shrub can produce more than 860,000 seeds of which 48% is germinable [35]. Between 1995 and 2008, South Africa spent 171.8 million rand in controlling C. odorata, but the extent of invasion has increased despite the control efforts [37]. Furthermore, biological control of C. odorata has also been less successful in South Africa, despite the release of multiple biological control agents [38]. Consequently, as the extent of invasion increases, the vulnerability of the rural poor, whose well-being and livelihoods are heavily dependent on ecosystem services, also increases due to lack of capital and/or techniques to control C. odorata [9]. However, utilisation of IAPs can contribute to their ultimate control and should form part of their management strategy [39]. To the best of my knowledge, no attempt has been made to synthesise C. odorata’s benefits on human well-being and livelihoods. The published studies have either focussed on C. odorata’s benefits in animal and crop production, and ethnopharmacology [40,41,42]. Therefore, this review aimed to assess the potential benefits of C. odorata on human well-being and livelihoods and show how these benefits can be used as incentives geared towards its sustainable management. Furthermore, knowledge gaps for future research were identified.

2. Materials and Methods

Electronic databases, i.e., Google Scholar, Science Direct, Scopus, Springer, and Web of Science, were used to source published literature on C. odorata or E. odoratum. All the above-mentioned databases were used to increase the chances of acquiring all the relevant literature. The following keywords were used to search relevant literature: “Chromolaena odorata”, “Eupatorium odoratum”, and “siam weed” in combination with “animal production”, “benefits”, “bioenergy”, “biogas”, “control methods”, “crop production”, “disbenefits”, “disservices”, “ecosystem services”, “ethnopharmacological use”, “human well-being”, “livelihood impacts”, “impacts”, “medicinal use”, and “socio-economic benefits”. A literature search was conducted between August 2019 and February 2020, and only literature published in the English language was considered. Books, proceedings papers, reports, research papers, review papers, and theses (referred to as papers in this review) that mentioned C. odorata, E. odoratum, or siam weed invasion status, distribution, human well-being, and livelihood benefits (e.g., crop and livestock production, and insecticidal or medicinal potential), negative and positive impacts on society and the environment, and species management strategies, were selected. The search yielded more than 1000 articles that were screened to identify relevant papers. After screening, 728 papers were found relevant. All 728 papers were read in detail to identify papers that investigated the potential benefits of C. odorata on human well-being and livelihoods. Furthermore, papers on C. odorata’s negative impacts and control methods were also considered to inform an effective utilisation strategy that will help keep the species under control. Based on the review of papers that investigated C. odorata’s potential benefits, six categories were developed; namely, (1) animal production, (2) bioenergy, (3) crop production, (4) crop protection, (5) ethnopharmacology, and (6) food source.

3. Results and Discussion

Out of 728 papers, 54 papers investigated the potential benefits of C. odorata on human well-being and livelihoods. Out of 54 papers, 17 papers investigated ethnopharmacological benefits, followed by crop production, animal production, crop protection, bioenergy, and then food source (Figure 1). Fifty-three out of 54 studies were from the countries where the Asian/West African biotype is invasive, and one study was from the countries where the southern African biotype is invasive.

3.1. Ethnopharmacological Uses

Despite C. odorata’s invasive status in Asia and West Africa, it has been integrated into traditional medicine. Chromolaena odorata aqueous extract and decoction from the leaves are widely used to treat wounds, burns, and diseases such as diabetes and eye problems, in countries such as Vietnam, Malaysia, Thailand, Nigeria, and Ivory Coast [43,44,45,46]. A considerable number of scientific studies have confirmed the pharmacological efficacies of C. odorata. Chromolaena odorata contains anticancer, antidiabetic, antifungal, anti-hepatotoxic, anti-inflammatory, antimalarial, antimicrobial, and antioxidant properties [43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55]. In Vietnam, formulations prepared from leaf aqueous extracts and decoctions are licensed for clinical use [56]. Ethnopharmacological uses of C. odorata in humans from different countries are reported in Table 1. Given C. odorata’s traditional utilisation in Asia and West Africa, information on C. odorata utilisation in traditional medicine is very limited in eastern and southern Africa [41], except one record from Shackleton et al. [13]. According to Omokhua et al. [41], the non-utilisation of C. odorata in eastern and southern Africa can be partly explained by four hypotheses. Firstly, the locals might be still trying to fully comprehend C. odorata’s benefits as the species’ introduction is recent. Although one can argue that the species was introduced more than seven decades ago in South Africa [38], its spread and a substantial increase in density occurred between the 1950s and 1980s [33]. Secondly, traditional medicine practitioners may be lacking ethnopharmacological knowledge of the plant because it is only found in the eastern parts of the country. Thirdly, studies on traditional usage of the plant are still lacking. Lastly, the southern African biotype might be lacking medicinal properties that are contained in the Asian/West African biotype [41]. However, Naidoo et al. [57] showed that the southern African biotype has potential use in traditional medicine. Their findings showed that leaf methanol extract inhibited Bacillus cereus, Bacillus subtilis, Staphylococcus aereus, and Staphylococcus epidermidis (Gram-positive bacteria), and Escherichia coli (Gram-negative bacterium).
Apart from ethnopharmacological uses, in India, C. odorata leaves are used to treat wounds in livestock [58].

3.2. Crop Production

The application of organic mulching is effective in soil physicochemical properties enhancement, weed growth control, soil temperature reduction, soil moisture conservation, and soil erosion reduction, thus increasing crop yield and quality [69,70,71,72]. Chromolaena odorata fallow crops and mulch increase soil macro-invertebrates (e.g., earthworms) and nutrients (e.g., nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, magnesium, and calcium) [73,74,75,76,77,78]. As a result, C. odorata is widely used as a fallow crop and mulch for soil fertility and crop yield improvement in countries where it is invasive (Table 2). For example, in Nigeria, Agbede et al. [78] found that C. odorata mulch (5 t ha−1) produced an average of 35.4 t ha−1 of Dioscorea rotundata Poir. over two seasons compared to control (23.2 t ha−1). In Ghana, Fening et al. [79] reported higher Zea mays L. yield under C. odorata mulch (3 t ha−1) compared with control (2.23 t ha−1). These findings show that C. odorata can be used as an alternative source of fertilizer by impoverished farmers who cannot afford inorganic fertilizer.

3.3. Animal Production

Livestock such as goats and cattle avoid foraging on C. odorata in its natural state (i.e., fresh leaves) [40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,90,91], and this is attributed to the strong odour of essential oils in the leaves [40]. Furthermore, there have been reports of cattle that died after consuming C. odorata fresh leaves [4,40]. The strong odour is greatly reduced when the leaves are sun-dried [92]. As a result, C. odorata leaf meal is used as a feed additive. This is because C. odorata is rich in crude protein, amino acids (e.g., arginine, histidine, leucine, lysine, and methionine) [92,93,94], and minerals such calcium, phosphorus, magnesium, potassium, zinc, and iron [95].
A considerable number of studies have reported on C. odorata utilisation as a feed additive in livestock diets, while some studies showed that C. odorata leaf meal has the potential to be used as a feed additive (Table 3). In Nigeria, Fasuyi et al. [96] assessed the effect of C. odorata leaf meal-based diets (0, 2.5, 5, and 7.5%) on layer chickens’ feed intake, body weight, and total egg production, weight, and yolk colour over eight weeks. The highest feed intake, body weight, and total egg production were achieved under the 5% of C. odorata leaf meal inclusion, while the highest egg weight and yolk colour were achieved under 5% and 7.5%, respectively [96]. Furthermore, in Nigeria, Aro et al. [40] also recorded the highest total egg production under the 5% C. odorata leaf meal inclusion over eight weeks.
In Nigeria, Jiwuba et al. [97] assessed the effect of C. odorata leaf meal-based diets (0, 4, 8, and 12%) on broiler chickens’ carcass weight over 49 days. The highest weight (2952 g) was achieved by broilers that were fed a 4% C. odorata leaf meal-based diet, followed by broilers (2771 g) that were not fed a C. odorata leaf meal-based diet [97]. Contrary to Jiwuba et al. [97]’s findings, Donkoh et al. [98] in Ghana, Enkenyem et al. [99] in Nigeria, and Bonsu et al. [100] in Ghana found that broilers that were fed a 0% C. odorata leaf meal-based diet gained more weight than broilers fed with (1% to 7.5%) C. odorata leaf meal-based diets, although there were no significant differences. Nevertheless, Donkoh et al. [98] concluded that the weight of C. odorata leaf meal-fed broilers might be increased if tannins in C. odorata leaves could be eliminated or neutralised. Enkenyem et al. [99] recommended that C. odorata leaf meal (5%) could be used as a cheaper ingredient in broiler diets, while Bonsu et al. [100] recommended that only 3% should be included in broiler finisher diets.
In Tanzania, Shao [101] assessed the effect of C. odorata leaf meal-based diets (0, 5, 10, and 15%) in Small East African goats’ performance (weight gain) over a three-month period. Goats that were fed a 5% C. odorata leaf meal-based diet had the highest weight (4.88 kg), which was significantly greater than those fed 0% (3.18 kg), 10% (2.5 kg), and 15% (2.25 kg) diets [101]. In Nigeria, Ogadu [102] also assessed the effect of C. odorata leaf meal-based diets (0, 2, 4, and 6%) in West African dwarf goats’ performance (weight gain) over three months. Goats that were fed a 4% C. odorata leaf meal-based diet had the highest weight (6.20 kg), which was significantly greater than those on 0% (4.8 kg), 6% (4.5 kg), and 2% (5.00 kg) diets [102].
The overall findings suggest that to achieve the highest egg and meat production, the optimal level of C. odorata leaf meal inclusion in chicken (broilers and layers) and goat diets should be between 4% and 5%. However, C. odorata leaf meal should be prepared before plant maturity (i.e., seed set) to obtain higher nutritive value and to avoid the dispersal of the weed to uninvaded areas [101,103].

3.4. Crop Protection

Due to negative environmental impacts associated with synthetic insecticides, botanical insecticides are regarded as the best alternatives owing to their environmental-friendly pest management [105]. However, impoverished small-holder farmers cannot afford commercially available botanical insecticides such as Pyrethrum and azadirachtin [103]. Chromolaena odorata is regarded as a cheaper and effective botanical insecticide against pests of various crops. This is because it is readily available and doesn’t require organic solvents, and complex apparatus to extract the insecticide [79,103]. In countries where C. odorata is invasive, impoverished small-holder farmers are using C. odorata leaves and leaf extract to control pests in the field and during harvest storage (Table 4).
In a field trial in Ghana, Ezena [106] assessed the insecticidal potential of C. odorata against cabbage (Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.) pests over two seasons. The treatments consisted of three doses of C. odorata (10, 20, and 30g/L of water) and a synthetic insecticide, Sunhalothrin® (active ingredient: Lambda-cyhalothrin, EC), produced by Wynca Sunshine Products, Sikasso, Mali. All C. odorata dosages had the highest marketable cabbage yield, 20 g/L (8.18 t/ha−1), 10 g/L (6.53 t/ha−1), and 10 g/L (6.19 t/ha−1) compared to Sunhalothrin® (5.85 t/ha−1). The highest cost-benefit ratios were obtained from C. odorata leaf extracts (20 g/L (1:34.2), 10 g/L (1:26.9), and 30 g/L (1:26.2)) rather than Sunhalothrin® (1:19.3). Furthermore, crops treated with 20 g/L of C. odorata had significantly higher populations of natural enemies, such as spiders, ladybird beetles, earwigs, red ants, and mason wasps, than those treated with Sunhalothrin® [106]. Amoabeng et al. [103] also conducted a field trial in Ghana to assess the insecticidal potential of C. odorata leaf extract against cabbage pests Brevicoryne brassicae (L.) (Hemiptera: Aphididae) and Plutella xylostella (L.) (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae). The treatments consisted of C. odorata leaf extract (30 g/L) and synthetic insecticide Attack® (active ingredient: emamectin benzoate), produced by PGG Wrightson, Wellington, New Zealnd. Chromolaena odorata suppressed P. xylostella significantly better than the synthetic insecticide Attack®, while B. brassicae suppression was comparable. Furthermore, C. odorata was less toxic to natural enemies such as ladybirds, hoverflies, and spiders than Attack® [103]. As a result, C. odorata had a higher cost-benefit ratio (1:29) than Attack® (1:25) [107]. These findings show that C. odorata leaves and leaf extract provide effective and economically feasible alternative pest control biopesticides.

3.5. Bioenergy

With the ever-increasing demand for energy coupled with the emission of greenhouse gases and the declining supply of fossil fuels, alternative renewable energy sources are becoming more imperative [113,114]. Although IAPs present more disservices than services, research is evolving on the bioenergy potential of IAPs that are already present in the environment [115,116,117,118,119,120]. In Nigeria, Dahunsi et al. [121] found that C. odorata has the potential to be used for biogas production, because they obtained a gas yield of more than 49.2%. In South Africa, Melane [120] found that C. odorata is the best species to be utilised as feedstock for combustion in low-technology reactors to produce heat and electricity via steam turbines owing to its physical, chemical, and economic viability.

3.6. Food Source

Some IAPs are utilised as traditional leafy vegetables owing to their nutritional value, thus making a significant contribution to human well-being [122,123,124]. In southern parts of Nigeria, C. odorata leaves are consumed as a vegetable, and this is largely attributed to high nutritional content in the leaves [41].

3.7. Chromolaena Odorata Management

Although C. odorata contributes to human well-being and livelihoods, it is regarded as a destructive species. This is because it was found to have high negative impacts on society and the environment, and low benefits [19]. This is supported by Shackleton et al. [13], who found that in northern-central Tanzania, most research respondents reported significant negative impacts (e.g., loss of grazing land) associated with C. odorata, while a few respondents reported its benefits (e.g., medicinal use). The control or eradication (where possible) of destructive species causes little conflict between people who benefit from the species utilisation and those who are responsible for species control (e.g., environmental managers) [19]. All the benefits presented in this review are obtained through the harvest of the species’ biomass (leaves and stems). Therefore, C. odorata utilisation can provide a win-win solution. However, it should be noted that utilisation alone cannot be effective; therefore, it should be used as a complementary control strategy.
Utilisation should entail repeated cutting of stems at 3 cm above ground at least four times per year, to exhaust plant reserves in the rootstock [125]. This method is effective in reducing the number of resprouts, which cause dense infestations, and also result in plant mortality, usually after the third cutting [125]. This harvesting strategy should also be adopted by people who only derive benefits from C. odorata leaves. Chromolaena odorata seeds are wind-dispersed, but not greater than 80 m from the source [35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,100,101,102,103,104,105,106,107,108,109,110,111,112,113,114,115,116,117,118,119,120,121,122,123,124,125,126]. Vehicles are largely responsible for long-distance dispersal [126]. Therefore, biomass harvesting should be done before flowering to combat species introduction into new areas as a result of seed dispersal. Vigilant monitoring should also be carried out in areas adjacent to the infested sites and on roadsides, to eradicate any seedlings present through uprooting. Development of C. odorata awareness programmes could also help improve the species’ monitoring and control efforts in new areas when detected.
In areas where there is no utilisation, C. odorata clearing should be integrated with chemical control (e.g., fluroxypyr and triclopyr/picloram herbicides), followed by biomass burning to reduce species densities [20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36]. However, in habitats where there are indigenous tree species (e.g., woodlands, riparian zones, and forests), controlled burning is recommended as C. odorata biomass can create high and intense flames that can end up killing trees [36]. Biomass burning is also effective in reducing reinvasion, because it kills C. odorata rootstock and the soil seed bank [23,35,36]. Furthermore, the use of biological control agents can be effective in reducing C. odorata spread and densification. For example, biological control agents such as Cecidochares connexa (Macquart) (Tephritidae), Pareuchaetes insulata (Walker) (Erebidae), and Pareuchaetes pseudoinsulata Rego Barros (Erebidae) have been reported to be effective in reducing C. odorata infestation densities in some parts of the Pacific, southern and western Africa, and South-East Asia [17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,100,101,102,103,104,105,106,107,108,109,110,111,112,113,114,115,116,117,118,119,120,121,122,123,124,125,126,127,128,129]. If C. odorata utilisation can be integrated with the other effective control methods, there will be a reduction in costs associated with mechanical and chemical control methods, and less burden on people responsible for IAP management.

4. Conclusions

Synthesising information on the contribution of IAPs to human well-being and livelihoods is a vital step in the planning of an effective IAP management plan that incorporates benefits associated with the species. This review showed that C. odorata provides benefits that enhance human well-being and livelihoods in countries where it is invasive, as a bioenergy crop, feed additive (leaf meal) in livestock production, organic fertilizer, and biopesticide in crop production and protection, and food (leafy vegetables). Therefore, C. odorata utilisation should be integrated with other control methods to achieve sustainable management of the species. Furthermore, people who are benefitting from species utilisation, and environmental managers responsible for species control, should co-develop the species management plan. This is because when all the stakeholders are involved in the co-development of the species management plan, the co-developed control strategies are equitable and non-controversial [19]. However, C. odorata utilisation is still limited to Asia and West Africa where the Asian/West Africa biotype is invasive. Therefore, there is a need for studies on the potential benefits of the southern African biotype on human well-being and livelihoods. Given the current rise in renewable energy research, more studies are needed to explore technologies that can optimise biogas extraction in C. odorata. Furthermore, there is also a need for studies on the cost-benefit analyses of different C. odorata utilisation categories (e.g., crop protection). This will help to identify a utilisation category that offers maximum return on investment.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Garland More who kindly reviewed the manuscript draft and three anonymous reviewers for their useful and positive comments that greatly improved the manuscript. I would also like to thank the Dean of the School of Environmental Sciences, Professor John Odiyo, for funding the paper writing workshop and colleagues for creating an environment conducive to paper writing.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Pejchar, L.; Mooney, H.A. Invasive species, ecosystem services and human wellbeing. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2009, 24, 497–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Kannan, R.; Shackleton, C.M.; Shaanker, R.U. Invasive alien species as drivers in socio-ecological systems: Local adaptations towards use of Lantana in Southern India. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2014, 16, 649–669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Vilà, M.; Ibàñez, I. Plant invasions in the landscape. Landsc. Ecol. 2011, 26, 461–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Shackleton, R.T.; Shackleton, C.M.; Kull, C.A. The role of invasive alien species in shaping local livelihoods and human well-being: A review. J. Environ. Manag. 2019, 229, 145–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Hoffmann, B.D.; Broadhurst, L.M. The economic cost of managing invasive species in Australia. NeoBiota 2016, 31, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Van Wilgen, B.W.; Wilson, J.R.U. The Status of Biological Invasions and Their Management in South Africa in 2017; South African National Biodiversity Institute: Pretoria, South Africa, 2018; Available online: https://www.sanbi.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/National-Status-Report-web-6MB.pdf (accessed on 11 February 2020).
  7. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA). Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  8. Scoones, I. Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: A Framework for Analysis; Institute of Development Studies: Brighton, UK, 1998. [Google Scholar]
  9. Shackleton, C.M.; McGarry, D.; Fourie, S.; Gambiza, J.; Shackleton, S.E.; Fabricius, C. Assessing the effects of invasive alien species on rural livelihoods: Case examples and a framework from South Africa. Hum. Ecol. 2007, 35, 113–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Kull, C.A.; Shackleton, C.M.; Cunningham, P.J.; Ducatillon, C.; Dufour-Dror, J.M.; Esler, K.J.; Friday, J.B.; Gouveia, A.C.; Griffin, A.R.; Marchante, E.; et al. Adoption, use and perception of Australian acacias around the world. Divers. Distrib. 2011, 175, 822–836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Simberloff, D.; Martin, J.-L.; Genovesi, P.; Maris, V.; Wardle, D.A.; Aronson, J.; Courchamp, F.; Galil, B.; A-Berthou, E.G.; Pascal, M.; et al. Impacts of biological invasions: What’s what and the way forward. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2013, 28, 58–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Shackleton, R.T.; Le Maitre, D.C.; van Wilgen, B.W.; Richardson, D.M. Use of non-timber forest products from invasive alien Prosopis species (mesquite) and native trees in South Africa: Implications for management. For. Ecosyst. 2015, 2, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Shackleton, R.T.; Witt, A.B.R.; Aool, W.; Pratt, C.F. Distribution of the invasive alien weed, Lantana camara, and its ecological and livelihood impacts in eastern Africa. Afr. J. Range Forage Sci. 2017, 34, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. McGeoch, M.A.; Genovesi, P.; Bellingham, P.J.; Costello, M.J.; McGrannachan, C.; Sheppard, A. Prioritizing species, pathways, and sites to achieve conservation targets for biological invasion. Biol. Invasions 2016, 18, 299–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Turpie, J.; Marais, C.; Blignaut, J.N. The working for water programme: Evolution of a payments for ecosystem services mechanism that addresses both poverty and ecosystem service delivery in South Africa. Ecol. Econ. 2008, 65, 788–798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Van Wilgen, B.W.; Richardson, D.M. Challenges and trade-offs in the management of invasive alien trees. Biol. Invasions 2014, 16, 721–734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Novoa, A.; Kaplan, H.; Wilson, J.R.U.; Richardson, D.M. Resolving a prickly situation: Involving stakeholders in invasive cactus management in South Africa. Environ. Manag. 2016, 57, 998–1008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Potgieter, L.J.; Gaertnera, M.; O’Farrell, P.J.; Richardson, D.M. Perceptions of impact: Invasive alien plants in the urban environment. J. Environ. Manag. 2019, 229, 76–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Zengeya, T.; Ivey, P.; Woordford, D.J.; Weyl, O.; Novoa, A.; Shackleton, R.; Richardson, D.; van Wilgen, B. Managing conflict-generating invasive species in South Africa: Challenges and trade-offs. Bothalia 2017, 47, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Goodall, J.M.; Zacharias, P.J.K. Managing Chromolaena odorata in subtropical grasslands in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on Biological Control and Management of Chromolaena odorata, Durban, South Africa, 23–25 October 2000. [Google Scholar]
  21. Kriticos, D.C.; Yonow, T.; McFadyen, R.E. The potential distribution of Chromolaena odorata (Siam weed) in relation to climate. Weed Res. 2005, 45, 246–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Raimundo, R.L.G.; Fonseca, R.L.; Schachetti-Pereira, R.; Peterson, A.T.; Lewinsohn, T.M. Native and exotic distributions of siamweed (Chromolaena odorata) modeled using the genetic algorithm for rule-set production. Weed. Sci. 2007, 55, 41–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Goodall, J.M.; Erasmus, D.J. Review of the status and integrated control of the invasive alien weed, Chromolaena odorata, in South Africa. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 1996, 56, 151–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Mugwedi, L.F.; Rouget, M.; Egoh, B.; Sershen; Ramdhani, S.; Slotow, R.; Rentería, J.L. An assessment of a community-based, forest restoration programme in Durban (eThekwini), South Africa. Forests 2017, 8, 255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. McFadyen, R.E.C. Chromolaena in Asia and the Pacific: Spread continues but control prospects improve. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on Biological Control and Management of Chromolaena odorata, Durban, South Africa, 23–25 October 2000. [Google Scholar]
  26. Zachariades, C. Biotype matching of Chromolaena for more successful biological control. Proc. S. Afr. Sugarcane Technol. Assoc. 2003, 7, 216–219. [Google Scholar]
  27. Codilla, L.T.; Metillo, E.B. Biotype of the invasive plant species Chromolaena odorata (Asteraceae: Eupatoriae) in the Zamboanga Peninsula, the Philippines. Philipp. J. Syst. Biol. 2012, 5, 28–42. [Google Scholar]
  28. Lowe, S.; Browne, M.; Boudjelas, S.; De Poorter, M. 100 of the World’s Worst Invasive Alien Species: A Selection from the Global Invasive Species Database; Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG): Auckland, New Zealand, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  29. Mangla, S.; Callaway, I.M.; Callaway, R.M. Exotic invasive plant accumulates native soil pathogens which inhibit native plants. J. Ecol. 2008, 96, 58–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Zachariades, C.; Day, M.; Muniappan, R.; Reddy, G.V.P. Chromolaena odorata (L.) King and Robinson (Asteraceae). In Biological Control of Tropical Weeds Using Arthropods; Muniappan, R., Reddy, G.V.P., Raman, A., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  31. Te Beest, M.; Mpandza, N.J.; Olff, H. Fire and simulated herbivory have antagonistic effects on resistance of savanna grasslands to alien shrub invasion. J. Veg. Sci. 2015, 26, 114–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. MacWilliam, A. A Plague on your house? Some impacts of Chromolaena odorata on Timorese livelihoods. Hum. Ecol. 2000, 28, 451–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Zachariades, C.; Goodall, J.M. Distribution, impact and management of Chromolaena odorata in southern Africa. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on Biological Control and Management of Chromolaena odorata, Durban, South Africa, 23–25 October 2000. [Google Scholar]
  34. Sakuntaladewi, N.; Sumarhani; Suharti, S.; Widiarti, A.; Heriyanto, N.M.; Djaenudin, D. Socio-Economic Impacts of Chromolaena odorata on Communities around Merapi Mountain National Park, Indonesia; UNEP/GEF Project Fund No. 0515; United Nations Environment: Nairobi, Kenya, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  35. Witkowski, E.T.F.; Wilson, M. Changes in density, biomass, seed production and soil seedbanks of the non-native invasive plant, Chromolaena odorata, along a 15-year chronosequence. Plant Ecol. 2001, 152, 13–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Te Beest, M.; Cromsigt, J.P.G.M.; Ngobese, J.; Olff, H. Managing invasions at the cost of native habitat? An experimental test of the impact of fire on the invasion of Chromolaena odorata in a South African savanna. Biol. Invasions 2012, 14, 607–618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Van Wilgen, B.W.; Forsyth, G.G.; Le Maitre, D.C.; Wannenburgh, A.; Kotzé, J.D.F.; van den Berg, E.; Henderson, L. An assessment of the effectiveness of a large, national-scale invasive alien plant control strategy in South Africa. Biol. Conserv. 2012, 148, 28–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Zachariades, C.; Strathie, L.W.; Retief, E.; Dube, N. Progress towards the biological control of Chromolaena odorata (L.) R.M. King & H. Rob. (Asteraceae) in South Africa. Afr. Entomol. 2011, 19, 282–302. [Google Scholar]
  39. Semenya, S.S.; Tshisikhawe, M.P.; Potgieter, M.T. Invasive alien plant species: A case study of their use in the Thulamela Local Municipality, Limpopo Province, South Africa. Sci. Res. Essays 2012, 2363–2369. [Google Scholar]
  40. Aro, S.O.; Osho, I.B.; Aletor, V.A.; Tewe, O.O. Chromolaena odorata in livestock nutrition. J. Med. Plants Res. 2009, 3, 1253–1257. [Google Scholar]
  41. Omokhua, A.G.; McGaw, L.J.; Finnie, J.F.; van Stadden, J. Chromolaena odorata (L.) R.M. King & H. Rob. (Asteraceae) in sub-Saharan Africa: A synthesis and review of its medicinal potential. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2016, 183, 112–122. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  42. Koutika, L.S.; Rainey, H.J. Chromolaena odorata in different ecosystems: Weed or fallow plant? Appl. Ecol. Environ. Res. 2010, 8, 131–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Akah, P.A. Mechanism of hemostatic activity of Eupatorium odoratum. Int. J. Crude Drug Res. 1990, 28, 253–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Phan, T.T.; Hughes, M.A.; Cherry, G.W.; Le, T.T.; Pham, H.M. An aqueous extract of the leaves of Chromolaena odorata (formerly Eupatorium odoratum) (Eupolin) inhibits hydrated collagen lattice contraction by normal human dermal fibroblasts. J. Altern. Complement. Med. 1996, 2, 335–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Pandith, H.; Thongpraditchote, S.; Wongkrajang, Y.; Gritsanapan, W. In vivo and in vitro hemostatic activity of Chromolaena odorata leaf extract. Pharm. Biol. 2012, 50, 1073–1077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Onkaramurthy, M.; Veerapur, V.P.; Thippeswamy, B.S.; Madhusudana Reddy, T.N.; Rayappa, H.; Badami, S. Anti-diabetic and anti-cataract effects of Chromolaena odorata Linn., in streptozotocin-induced diabetic rats. J. Ethnopharm. 2013, 145, 363–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Triratana, T.; Suwannuraks, R.; Naengchomnong, W. Effect of Eupatorium odoratum on blood coagulation. J. Med. Assoc. Thail. 1991, 74, 283–286. [Google Scholar]
  48. Irobi, O.N. Activities of Chromolaena odorata (Compositae) leaf extract against Pseudomonas aeroginosa and Streptococcus faecalis. J. Ethnopharmacol. 1992, 37, 81–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Bamba, D.; Bessiere, J.M.; Marion, C.; Pelissier, Y.; Fouraste, I. Essential oil of Eupatorium odoratum. Planta Medica 1993, 59, 184–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Phan, T.T.; Hughes, M.A.; Cherry, G.W. Effect of an aqueous extract from the leaves of Chromolaena odorata (Eupolin) on the proliferation of human keratinocytes and on the migration in an in vitro model of reepithelialization. Wound Repair Regen. 2001, 9, 301–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Phan, T.T.; See, P.; Lee, S.T.; Chan, S.Y. Anti-oxidant effects of the extracts from the leaves of Chromolaena odorata on human dermal fibroblasts and epidermal keratinocytes against hydrogen peroxide and hypoxanthine–xanthine oxidase induced damage. Burns 2001, 27, 319–327. [Google Scholar]
  52. Suksamrarn, A.; Chotipong, A.; Suavansri, T.; Boongird, S.; Tirnsuksai, P.; Vimuttipong, S.; Chuaynugul, A. Antimycobacterial activity and cytotoxicity of flavonoids from the flowers of Chromolaena odorata. Arch. Pharm. Res. 2004, 27, 507–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Ngono, N.A.; Ebelle Etame, R.; Ndifor, F.; Biyiti, L.; Amvam, Z.P.H.; Bouchet, P. Antifungal activity of Chromolaena odorata (L.) King & Robinson (Asteraceae) of Cameroon. Chemotherapy 2006, 52, 103–106. [Google Scholar]
  54. Kouamé, P.B.-K.; Jacques, C.; Bedi, G.; Silvestre, V.; Loquet, D.; Barillé-Nion, S.; Robins, R.J.; Tea, I. Phytochemicals isolated from leaves of Chromolaena odorata: Impact on viability and clonogenicity of cancer cell lines. Phytother. Res. 2013, 27, 835–840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Ezenyi, I.C.; Salawu, O.A.; Kulkarni, R.; Emeje, M. Antiplasmodial activity-aided isolation and identification of quercetin-4’-methyl ether in Chromolaena odorata leaf fraction with high activity against chloroquine-resistant Plasmodium falciparum. Parasitol. Res. 2014, 113, 4415–4422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Maver, T.; Maver, U.; Kleinschek, K.S.; Smrke, D.M.; Kreft, S. A review of herbal medicines in wound healing. Int. J. Dermatol. 2015, 54, 740–751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Naidoo, K.K.; Coopoosamy, R.M.; Naidoo, G. Screening of Chromolaeana odorata (L.) King and Robinson for antibacterial and antifungal properties. J. Med. Plants Res. 2011, 5, 4859–4862. [Google Scholar]
  58. Reang, I.; Goswami, S.; Pala, N.A.; Kumar, M.; Bussmann, R.W. Ethnoveterinary applications of medicinal plants by traditional herbal healers in Reang Tribeo south District Tripura, India. Med. Aromat. Plants 2016, 5, 100023. [Google Scholar]
  59. Zahara, M. Description of Chromolaena odorata L. R.M King and H. Robinson as medicinal plant: A Review. In Proceedings of the IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, Politeknik Aceh Selatan Campus, Kabupaten Aceh Selatan, Indonesia, 8–9 December 2018. [Google Scholar]
  60. Aba, P.E.; Joshua, P.E.; Ezeonugu, F.C.; Ezeja, M.I.; Omoja, V.U.; Umeakuana, P.U. Possible anti-diarrhoeal potential of ethanol leaf extract of Chromolaena odorata in castor oil-induced rats. J. Complement. Integr. Med. 2015, 12, 301–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Cácares, A.; Menéndez, H.; Méndez, E.; Cohobón, E.; Samayoa, B.E.; Jauregui, E.; Peralta, E.; Carrillo, G. Antigonorrhoeal activity of plants used in Guatemala for the treatment of sexually transmitted diseases. J. Ethnopharmacol. 1995, 48, 85–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Dangol, D.R. Traditional uses of plants of common land habitats in western Chitwan, Nepal. J. Inst. Agric. Anim. Sci. 2008, 29, 71–78. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  63. Ayensu, E.S. Medicinal Plants of West Africa; Reference Publication Inc.: Algonac, MI, USA, 1978. [Google Scholar]
  64. Prusti, A.B. Ethnobotanical exploration of Malkangiri Ditrict of Orissa, India. Ethnobot. Leafl. 2007, 11, 122–140. [Google Scholar]
  65. Agyare, C.; Asase, A.; Lechtenberg, M.; Niehues, M.; Deters, A.; Hensel, A. An ethnopharmacological survey and in vitro confirmation of ethnopharmacological use of medicinal plants used for wound healing in Bosomtwi-Atwima-Kwanwoma area, Ghana. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2009, 125, 393–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Erhenhi, A.H.; Obadoni, B.O. Known medicinal and aphrodisiac plants of Urhonigbe forest reserve, Edo State, Nigeria. J. Med. Plants Stud. 2015, 3, 101–106. [Google Scholar]
  67. Phan, T.T.; Hughes, M.A.; Cherry, G.W. Enhanced proliferation of fibroblast and endothelial cells treated with an extract of leaves of Chromolaena odorata (Eupolin) an herbal remedy for treating wounds. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 1998, 101, 65–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Owoyele, V.B.; Adediji, J.O.; Soladoye, A.O. Anti-inflammatory activity of aqueous leaf extract of Chromolaena odorata. Inflammopharmacology 2005, 13, 479–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Sinkevičienė, A.; Jodaugienė, D.; Pupalienė, R.; Urbonienė, M. The influence of organic mulches on soil properties and crop yield. Agron. Res. 2009, 7, 485–491. [Google Scholar]
  70. Kumar, P.; Pant, M.; Negi, G.S.C. Lantana mulching for soil fertility improvement, soil and water conservation and crop yield enhancement in rainfed rice in the Kumaun Hills. In Invasive Plants: An Ecological Appraisal for the Indian Subcontinent; Bhatt, J.R., Singh, J.S., Singh, S.P., Tripathi, R.S., Kohli, R.K., Eds.; CABI: Wallingford, UK, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  71. Tondoh, J.E.; Koné, A.W.; N’Dri, J.K.; Tamene, L.; Brunet, D. Changes in soil quality after subsequent establishment of Chromolaena odorata fallows in humid savannahs, Ivory Coast. Catena 2013, 101, 99–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Teame, G.; Tsegay, A.; Abrha, B. Effect of organic mulching on soil moisture, yield, and yield contributing components of sesame (Sesamum indicum l.). Int. J. Agron 2017, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  73. Kanmegne, J.; Duguma, B.; Henrot, J.; Isirimah, N.O. Soil fertility enhancement by planted tree-fallow species in the humid lowlands of Cameroon. Agrofor. Syst. 1999, 46, 239–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Koutika, L.S.; Ndango, R.; Hauser, S. Nutrient concentrations and NH4-N mineralization under different soil and fallow types in southern Cameroon. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 2004, 167, 591–595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Tian, G.; Kang, B.T.; Kolawole, G.O.; Idinoba, P.; Salako, F.K. Long-term effects of fallow systems and lengths on crop production and soil fertility maintenance in West Africa. Nutri. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 2005, 71, 139–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Mboukou-Kimbatsa, I.; Bernhard-Reversat, F.; Loumeto, J.-J.I.; Ngao, J.; Lavelle, P. Understory vegetation, soil structure and soil invertebrates in Congolese eucalypt plantations, with special reference to the invasive plant Chromolaena odorata and earthworm populations. Eur. J. Soil Biol. 2007, 43, 48–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Koné, A.W.; Edoukou, E.F.; Gonnety, J.T.; N’Dri, A.N.A.; Assémien, L.F.E.; Angui, P.K.T.; Tondoh, J.E. Can the shrub Chromolaena odorata (Asteraceae) be considered as improving soil biology and plant nutrient availability? Agroforest. Syst. 2012, 85, 233–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Agbede, T.M.; Adekiya, A.O.; Ogeh, J.S. Response of soil properties and yam yield to Chromolaena odorata (Asteraceae) and Tithonia diversifolia (Asteraceae) mulches. Arch. Agron. Soil Sci. 2014, 60, 209–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Fening, J.O.; Yeboah, E.; Adjei-Gyapong, T.; Gaizie, E. On farm evaluation of the contribution of three green manures to maize yield in the semi-deciduous forest zone of Ghana. Afr. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2009, 3, 234–238. [Google Scholar]
  80. Ngobo, M.P.; Weise, S.F.; Mcdonald, M.A. Revisiting the performance of natural fallows in Central Africa. Scand. For. Res. 2004, 19, 14–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Slaats, J.J.P.; Janssen, B.H.; Wessel, M. Crop production in relation to cultural practices in the Chromolaena odorata fallow system in South-West Côte d’Ivoire. Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 1998, 46, 305–317. [Google Scholar]
  82. Adjei-Nsiah, S.; Leeuwis, C.; Giller, K.E.; Sakyi-Dawson, O.; Cobbina, J.; Kuyper, T.W.; Abekoe, M.; Van Der Werf, W. Land tenure and differential soil fertility management practices among native and migrant farmers in Wenchi, Ghana: Implications for interdisciplinary action research. Wagening. J. Life Sci. 2004, 52, 331–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  83. Roder, W.; Phengchanh, S.; Keoboualapha, B.; Maniphone, S. Chromolaena odorata in slash-and-burn rice systems of Northern Laos. Agroforest. Syst. 1995, 31, 79–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Ikuenobe, C.E.; Anoliefo, G.O. Influence of Chromolaena odorata and Mucuna pruriens fallow duration on weed infestation. Weed Res. 2003, 43, 199–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Yonghachea, P.F. Farmer’s Perceptions of Imperata cylindrica and Chromolaena odorata Fallows on the North West, South West and Littoral Provinces of Cameroon. Master’s Thesis, University of Hohenhein, Stuttgart, Germany, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  86. Jamilal; Mulyani, S.; Juniarti. The application of liquid organic fertilizer of Chromolaena odorata on ratooned rice plants cultivation. Asian J. Appl. Res. Community Dev. Empower. 2017, 1, 9–15. [Google Scholar]
  87. Nawaz, M.; Sansamma, G. Eupatorium [Chromolaena odorata (L.) King and Robinson] biomass as a source of organic manure in okra cultivation. J. Trop. Agric. 2004, 42, 33–34. [Google Scholar]
  88. Munda, G.C.; Islam, M.; Panda, B.B.; Patel, D.P. Performance of rice (Oryza sativa L.)-rapeseed (Brassica campestris L.) cropping sequence under system based nutrient management. Crop Prod. 2008, 45, 36–39. [Google Scholar]
  89. Awopegba, M.; Awodun, M.; Oladele, S. Maize (Zea mays) biomass and yield as influenced by leguminous and non-leguminous mulch types in southeastern Nigeria. Bulg. J. Soil Sci. 2016, 1, 154–169. [Google Scholar]
  90. Kumar, A.; Mohanty, A.K.; Borah, T.R.; Singh, A.K. Evaluation of indigenous forest plant leaves for bio-mulching in organic ginger production and income generation under rain-fed conditions of NEH region. Indian J. Trad. Knowl. 2012, 11, 487–492. [Google Scholar]
  91. Hai, P.V.; Everts, H.; Tien, D.V.; Schonewille, J.T.; Hendriks, W.H. Feeding Chromolaena odorata during pregnancy to goat dams affects acceptance of this feedstuff by their offspring. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2012, 137, 30–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Aro, S.O. The Effects of Siam Weed Leaf Meal (Chromolaena odorata) on the Performance, Egg Quality Characteristics, Nutrient Utilization, Haematological and Biochemical Indices of Layers. Master’s Thesis, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria, 1990. [Google Scholar]
  93. Apori, S.O.; Long, R.J.; Castro, F.B.; Ørskov, E.R. Chemical composition and nutritive value of leaves and stems of tropical weed Chromolaena odorata. Grass Forage Sci. 2000, 55, 77–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Ngozi, I.M.; Jude, I.C.; Catherine, I.C. Chemical Profile of Chromolaena odorata L. (King and Robinson) Leaves. Pak. J. Nutr. 2009, 8, 521–524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  95. Nwinuka, N.; Nwiloh, B.; Eresama, J. Nutritional and potential medicinal value of Chromolaena odorata leaves. Int. J. Trop. Agric. Food Syst. 2009, 3, 122–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Fasuyi, S.O.; Fajemilehin, S.O.K.; Omojola, A.B. The egg quality characteristics of layers fed varying dietary inclusions of siam weed (Chromolaena odorata) leaf meal (SWLM). Int. J. Poult. Sci. 2004, 4, 752–757. [Google Scholar]
  97. Jiwuba, P.C.; Ogbuewu, I.P.; Nwachukwuguru, K. Performance and economy of production of broilers fed Siam weed (Chromolaena odorata) leaf meal (SWLM). Trop. Anim. Health Prod. 2018, 50, 1305–1311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  98. Donkoh, A.; Atuahene, C.C.; Anang, D.M.; Badu-Botah, E.K.; Boakye, K.T. Response of broiler chickens to the dietary inclusion of Chromolaena odorata leaf meal. J. Anim. Feed Sci. 2002, 11, 309–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Ekenyem, B.U.; Obih, T.K.O.; Odo, B.I.; Mba, F.I.A. Performance of finisher broiler chicks fed varying replacement of Chromolaena odorata leaf meal for soyabean meal. Pak. J. Nutr. 2010, 558–561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Bonsu, F.R.K.; Kagya-Agyemang, J.K.; Kwenin, W.K.J.; Hope, K.N.; Sekyere, F.O. Growth performance, haematological indices and carcass characteristics of broilers fed diet containing different levels of Chromolaena odorata leaf meal. Egerton J. Sci. Technol. 2013, 13, 115–125. [Google Scholar]
  101. Shao, J.K. Effect of Chromolaena odorata Leaf Meal on the Performance of Small East African Goats. Master’s Thesis, Sokoine University of Agriculture, Morogoro, Tanzania, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  102. Ogadu, C.B.-J. In vitro and in vivo Evaluation of Siam Weed (Chromolaena odorata) Leaf Meal as Additive in the Diet of West African Dwarf Bucks. Master’s Thesis, Federal University of Agriculture, Makurdi, Nigeria, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  103. Amoabeng, B.W.; Gurr, G.M.; Gitau, C.W.; Nicol, H.I.; Munyakazi, L.; Stevenson, P.C. Tri-trophic insecticidal effects of African plants against cabbage pests. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e78651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Bamikole, M.A.; Ikhatua, U.J.; Osemwenkhae, A.E. Converting bush to meat: A case of Chromolaena odorata feeding to rabbits. Pak. J. Nutr. 2004, 3, 258–261. [Google Scholar]
  105. Isman, M.B. Botanical insecticides, deterrents, and repellents in modern agriculture and an increasingly regulated world. Ann. Rev. Entomol. 2006, 51, 45–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  106. Ezena, G.N. Exploiting the Insecticidal Potential of the Invasive Siam Weed, Chromolaena odorata L. (Asteraceae) in the Management of major pests of Cabbage, Brassica oleracea var capitata and Their Natural Enemies for Enhanced Yield in the Moist Semi-Deciduous Agro-Ecological Zone of Ghana. Master’s Thesis, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  107. Amoabeng, B.W.; Gurr, G.M.; Gitau, C.W.; Stevenson, P.C. Cost: Benefit analysis of botanical insecticide use in cabbage: Implications for smallholder farmers in developing countries. Crop Prot. 2014, 57, 71–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Degri, M.M.; Mailafiya, D.M.; Wabekwa, J.W. Efficacy of aqueous leaf extracts and synthetic insecticide on pod-sucking bugs infestation of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp) in the Guinea Savanna Region of Nigeria. Adv. Entomol. 2013, 1, 10–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Acero, L.H. Fresh siam (Chromolaena odorata) weed leaf extract in the control of housefly (Musca domestica). Int. J. Food Eng. 2017, 3, 56–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Abugri, A.D. The Efficacy of Ethanolic Root and Leaf Extract of Chromolaena odorata in Controlling Sitophilus zeamais in Stored Maize. Master’s Thesis, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  111. Cobbinah, J.R.; Moss, C.; Golob, P.; Belmain, S.R. Conducting Ethanobotanical Surveys: An Example from Ghana on Plants Used for the Protection of Stored Cereals and Pulses; NRI Bulletin 77, Working Paper; Natural Resources Institute, University of Greenwich: London, UK, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  112. Mbah, O.I.; Okoronkwo, M.O. An assessment of two plant product efficacy for the control of the maize weevil (Sitophilus zeamais Motschulsky) in stored maize. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 2008, 3, 494–498. [Google Scholar]
  113. Pimentel, D.; Herz, M.; Glickstein, M.; Zimmerman, M.; Allen, R.; Becker, K. Renewable energy: Current and potential issues. BioScience 2002, 52, 1111–1120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Girardet, H.; Mendonça, M. A Renewable World: Energy, Ecology, Equality: A Report for the World Future Council; Green Books: Totnes, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  115. Liao, R.; Gao, B.; Fang, J. Invasive plants as feedstock for biochar and bioenergy production. Bioresour. Technol. 2013, 140, 439–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Lu, J.; Zhu, L.; Hu, G.; Wu, J. Integrating animal manure-based bioenergy production with invasive species control: A case study at Tongren Pig Farm in China. Biomass Bioenergy 2010, 34, 821–827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Mugido, W.; Blignaut, J.; Joubert, M.; De Wet, J.; Knipe, A.; Joubert, S.; Cobbing, B.; Jansen, J.; Le Maitre, D.; van der Vyfer, M. Determining the feasibility of harvesting invasive alien plant species for energy. S. Afr. J. Sci. 2014, 110, 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  118. Amaducci, S.; Perego, A. Field evaluation of Arundo donax clones for bioenergy production. Ind. Crops Prod. 2015, 75, 122–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Van Meerbeek, K.; Appels, L.; Dewil, R.; Calmeyn, A.; Lemmens, P.; Muys, B.; Hermy, M. Biomass of invasive plant species as potential feedstock for bioenergy production. Biofuel Bioprod. Biorefin. 2015, 9, 273–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Melane, M. Evaluation of the Potential of Non-Woody Invasive Plant Biomass for Electricity Generation. Master’s Thesis, University of Stellenbosch, Stellenbosch, South Africa, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  121. Dahunsi, S.O.; Oramusi, S.; Efeovbokhan, V.E.; Olayanju, A.; Zahedi, S.; Ojediran, J.O.; Izebere, J.O.; Aladegboye, O.J. Anaerobic conversion of Chromolaena odorata (Siam weed) to biogas. Energy Rep. 2018, 4, 691–700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Das, K.; Duarah, P. Invasive alien plant species in the roadside areas of Jorhat, Assam: Their harmful effects and beneficial uses. Int. J. Eng. Res. Appl. 2013, 3, 353–358. [Google Scholar]
  123. Maroyi, A. Use of weeds as traditional vegetables in Shurugwi District, Zimbabwe. J. Ethnobiol. Ethnomed. 2013, 9, 60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  124. Atyosi, Z.; Ramarumo, J.F.; Maroyi, A. Alien plants in the Eastern Cape Province in South Africa: Perceptions of their contributions to livelihoods of local communities. Sustainability 2019, 11, 5043. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  125. Ramaano, R. The Effects of Chromolaena odorata on Tree Growth Dynamics at Buffelsdraai Landfill Site. Master’s Thesis, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  126. Blackmore, A.C. Seed dispersal of Chromolaena odorata reconsidered. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on the Biological Control and Management of Chromolaena odorata, Bangalore, India, 14–18 October 1996. [Google Scholar]
  127. Day, M.D.; Bofeng, I.; Nabo, I. Successful biological control of Chromolaena odorata (Asteraceae) by the gall fly Cecidochares connexa (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Papua New Guinea. In Proceedings of the 13th International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds, Waikoloa, HI, USA, 11–16 September 2011. [Google Scholar]
  128. Desmier de Chenon, R.; Sipayung, A.; Sudharto, P. A decade of biological control against Chromolaena odorata at the Indonesian Oil Palm Research Institute in Marihat. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on Biological Control and Management of Chromolaena odorata, Durban, South Africa, 23–25 October 2000. [Google Scholar]
  129. Uyi, O.O.; Igbinosa, I.B. The status of Chromolaena odorata and its biocontrol in West Africa. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on Biological Control and Management of Chromolaena odorata, Durban, South Africa, 23–25 October 2000. [Google Scholar]
Sustainability 12 06505 g001 550
Figure 1. Papers on Chromolaena odorata’s benefits to human well-being and livelihoods.
Figure 1. Papers on Chromolaena odorata’s benefits to human well-being and livelihoods.
Sustainability 12 06505 g001
Table
Table 1. Ethnopharmacological uses of Chromolaena odorata in different countries.
Table 1. Ethnopharmacological uses of Chromolaena odorata in different countries.
Plant PartUsesCountryRefrences
LeavesCholesterol, dyspepsia, hypertension, vertigo, and dietIndonesia[59]
LeavesCoughThailand[52]
LeavesDiarrheaNigeria[60]
LeavesDiabetes and eye problemsIndia[46]
LeavesGonorrheaGuatemala[61]
LeavesInsecticideNepal[62]
LeavesMalariaBenin and Ghana[44,55,63]
LeavesSkin infectionsVietnam[44]
LeavesWoundGhana, India, Nigeria, Thailand[45,64,65,66,67]
LeavesWoundVietnam[50,51,67]
LeavesWoundIvory Coast[68]
LeavesWoundNepal[62]
Not mentioned Not mentionedTanzania[13]
Table
Table 2. Chromolaena odorata utilisation in crop production.
Table 2. Chromolaena odorata utilisation in crop production.
PracticeCropCountry Reference
FallowArachis hypogaea L. Cameroon, Ghana, Nigeria[75,80,81]
FallowDioscorea rotundata PoirGhana[81]
FallowManihot esculenta CrantzCameroon, Ghana, Nigeria[75,80,82]
FallowOryza sativa L.Laos[83]
FallowZea mays L.Cameroon; Ghana, Ivory Coast; Nigeria[75,76,81,84]
FallowNot mentionedCameroon[85]
FallowNot mentionedIvory Coast[71]
Liquid organic fertilizerOryza sativa L.Indonesia[86]
MulchAbelmoschus esculentus L. MoenchIndia[87]
MulchBrassica campestris L.India[88]
MulchDioscorea rotundata PoirNigeria[78]
MulchOryza sativa L.India[88]
MulchZea mays L.Nigeria, Ghana[79,89]
MulchZingiber officinale Rosc.India[90]
Table
Table 3. Chromolaena odorata utilisation as a livestock feed additive in different countries.
Table 3. Chromolaena odorata utilisation as a livestock feed additive in different countries.
Plant PartLivestockCountryReferences
Leaf mealLayer chickens Nigeria[40,92,96]
Leaf mealBroiler chickensNigeria[99]
Leaf mealBroiler chickensGhana, Nigeria[97,100]
Leaf mealGoatsNigeria, Tanzania, Vietnam[91,101,102]
Leaf mealRabbitsNigeria[104]
Table
Table 4. Chromolaena odorata utilisation in crop protection.
Table 4. Chromolaena odorata utilisation in crop protection.
FormulationCropPest ControlledCountryReferences
Leaf extractBrassica oleracea var. capitata L.Plutella xylostella (L.) Ghana[103]
Leaf extractBrassica oleracea var. capitata Brevicoryne brassicae (L.) Ghana[103]
Leaf extractBrassica oleracea var. capitata VariousGhana[106]
Leaf extractVigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.Anoplocnemis spp., Clavigralla spp., Nezara viridula L. and Riptortus spp.Nigeria[108]
Leaf extractVarious vegetablesMusca domestica L.Philippines[109]
Leaf extractZea mays L. grainSitophilus zeamais Motschulsky Ghana[110]
Leaf powderVigna unguiculata grainPost-harvest pestsGhana[111]
Leaf powderZea mays grainPost-harvest pestsGhana[111]
LeavesZea mays grainSitophilus zeamais Motschulsky Nigeria[112]

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Mugwedi, L. Harnessing Opportunities Provided by the Invasive Chromolaena odorata to Keep It under Control. Sustainability 2020, 12, 6505. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12166505

AMA Style

Mugwedi L. Harnessing Opportunities Provided by the Invasive Chromolaena odorata to Keep It under Control. Sustainability. 2020; 12(16):6505. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12166505

Chicago/Turabian Style

Mugwedi, Lutendo. 2020. "Harnessing Opportunities Provided by the Invasive Chromolaena odorata to Keep It under Control" Sustainability 12, no. 16: 6505. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12166505

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop