Leucanthemum vulgare Lam.<strong>Ranking</strong> SummaryEcoregion known or expected to occur inSouth CoastalInterior BorealArctic AlpineYesYesYesPotential Max. ScoreEcological Impact 40 20Biological Characteristics and Dispersal 25 15Amplitude and Distribution 25 18Feasibility <strong>of</strong> Control 10 8Relative Maximum 61Climatic ComparisonCollected in<strong>Alaska</strong> regions?CLIMEXsimilarity?South Coastal Yes –Interior Boreal Yes –Arctic Alpine No YesOxeye daisy has been collected in the south coastal region inJuneau, Seward, Ketchikan and in the interior boreal region inAnchorage and Fairbanks (Hultén 1968, Welsh 1974, Densmoreet al. 2001, Furbish et al. 2001, UAM 2003). Using the CLIMEXmatching program, climatic similarity between Nome and areaswhere the species is documented is high. Range <strong>of</strong> the speciesincludes Kirov, Russia and Fort McMurray, Alberta (Hultén1968), which has a 66% and 63% climatic match with Nome,respectively.Ecological ImpactScoreImpact on Ecosystem Processes (0–10) 5Oxeye daisy increases the potential <strong>for</strong> soil erosion in heavilyinfested areas (Densmore et al. 2001, Noxious Weed ControlBoard 2005).Impact on Natural Community Structure (0–10) 3Oxeye daisy can <strong>for</strong>m dense populations (Noxious Weed ControlBoard 2005) and <strong>for</strong>m a tall-<strong>for</strong>b layer above a graminoid and low<strong>for</strong>blayer in <strong>Alaska</strong> (M. Carlson pers. obs.)Impact on Natural Community Composition (0–10) 5Oxeye daisy can decrease native plant species diversity. It is ableto replace up to 50% <strong>of</strong> the grass species in pastures (Royer andDickinson 1999, Warner et al. 2003).Impact on Higher Trophic Levels (0–10) 7The entire plant has a disagreeable odor and grazing animalsavoid it. Moreover, the plant contains polyacetylenes andthiophenes that are generally highly toxic to insect herbivores.Oxeye daisy can host chrysanthemum stunt, aster yellows, andtomato aspermy viruses (Royer and Dickinson 1999), and severalnematode species (Townshend and Davidson 1962).Total <strong>for</strong> Ecological Impact 20/40Biological Characteristics and Dispersal ScoreMode <strong>of</strong> Reproduction (0–3) 3Oxeye daisy can spread both vegetatively and by seed. Stevens(1932) found the number <strong>of</strong> seeds per plant with 3 heads was 510.Dorph-Peterson (cited in Howarth and Welliams 1968) reportedseed production <strong>of</strong> 1,300–4,000 fruits per plant, and up to 26,000fruits <strong>for</strong> a vigorous plant.Long-distance dispersal (0–3) 2The seeds have no special adaptations to aid dispersal, but they aresmall and water, wind, and animals can carry the seeds into newareas (Noxious Weed Control Board 2005, Warner et al. 2003).common names: oxeye daisySpread by humans (0–3) 3The seeds can be dispersed with timber, contaminated <strong>for</strong>agegrass, and legume seed. <strong>Plants</strong> also continue to appear <strong>for</strong> salein nurseries (Noxious Weed Control Board 2005, Warner et al.2003).Allelopathic (0–2) 0Oxeye daisy is not allelopathic (USDA, NRCS 2002).Competitive Ability (0–3) 3Oxeye daisy is highly competitive <strong>for</strong> limiting factors (Rutledgeand McLendon 1996).Thicket-<strong>for</strong>ming/Smothering growth <strong>for</strong>m (0–2) 2Oxeye daisy <strong>for</strong>ms dense colonies up to 2 feet tall (Hultén 1968,Royer and Dickinson 1999, Whitson et al. 2000).Germination requirements (0–3) 2Studies indicate that 90 to 95% <strong>of</strong> germination occurs at 68 °F.Seedling germination is greater under increased moisture andis inhibited by continuous darkness. Dense ground cover canprevent establishment. Chilling and drought appear to have noeffect on germination rates (Howarth and Welliams 1968).Other invasive species in the genus (0–3) 0A number <strong>of</strong> Leucanthemum species has been introduced intoUnited States. <strong>Non</strong>e <strong>of</strong> them are listed as a weed (USDA, NRCS2002).Aquatic, wetland or riparian species (0–3) 0Oxeye daisy is common in pastures, waste areas, meadows, androadsides (Hultén 1968, Welsh 1974).Total <strong>for</strong> Biological Characteristics and Dispersal 15/25Ecological Amplitude and Distribution ScoreHighly domesticated or a weed <strong>of</strong> agriculture (0–4) 4Oxeye daisy was introduced to North America as an ornamentaland it is currently used and <strong>of</strong>ten sold commercially. Oxeye daisyis also a serious weed <strong>of</strong> 13 crops in 40 countries (Warner et al.2003, Noxious Weed Control 2005). The flowers are showy,making the plant a popular ornamental species.Known level <strong>of</strong> impact in natural areas (0–6) 4Oxeye daisy readily spreads into a variety <strong>of</strong> plant communities inCali<strong>for</strong>nia, including prairie, scrub, wet meadows, riparian <strong>for</strong>ests,and open-canopy <strong>for</strong>ests (Warner et al. 2003). It also is havingminor impacts on ecological processes in natural communitiesin Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado (Rutledge andMcLendon 1996).Role <strong>of</strong> anthropogenic and natural disturbance inestablishment (0–5)Oxeye daisy is a weed <strong>of</strong> disturbed areas. It requires disturbance<strong>for</strong> establishment and persistence (Densmore et al. 2001).Current global distribution (0–5) 5Oxeye daisy is native to Europe (Mediterranean to Scandinavia),and Siberia. Populations have established in eastern Asia, Iceland,Greenland, North and South America, Hawaii, Australia, andNew Zealand (Hultén 1968).Extent <strong>of</strong> the species U.S. range and/or occurrence <strong>of</strong><strong>for</strong>mal state or provincial listing (0–5)Oxeye daisy is noxious in Colorado, Indiana, Kentucky,Minnesota (Secondary Noxious Weed), Montana (Cat. 1), Ohio(Cat.1), Washington (Class B), and Wyoming. In the U.S. it isfound in every state. It is a noxious weed in Canada (Alberta,British Colombia, Manitoba, and Quebec) (Invaders Database<strong>System</strong> 2003, Royer and Dickinson 1999, USDA, NRCS 2002).Total <strong>for</strong> Ecological Amplitude and Distribution 18/2505B-64
Feasibility <strong>of</strong> ControlScoreSeed banks (0–3) 3The seeds <strong>of</strong> oxeye daisy may survive extended periods in the soil.Bossard et al. (2000) suggest that most oxeye daisy seeds remainviable <strong>for</strong> 20 years in the soil. Toole (1946) determine the viability<strong>of</strong> oxeye daisy seeds as 39 years. Chippindale and Milton (1934)found 8-, 22-, 24-, 50-, and 68-years old seeds in the soil beneathpastures.Vegetative regeneration (0–3) 2According to the PLANTS Database (USDA, NRCS 2002), oxeyedaisy has no resprout ability. However, Densmore et al. (2001)report that it sprouts from roots and stumps.Level <strong>of</strong> ef<strong>for</strong>t required (0–4) 3If infestations are small one or two chemical or mechanicaltreatments are required. Eradication <strong>of</strong> a large, well establishedpopulations can be difficult because <strong>of</strong> the abundant seedproduction and ability <strong>of</strong> rhizomes to resprout (Densmore et al.2001, Warner et al. 2003).Total <strong>for</strong> Feasibility <strong>of</strong> Control 8/10Total score <strong>for</strong> 4 sections 61/100§Linaria dalmatica L.<strong>Ranking</strong> SummaryEcoregion known or expected to occur inSouth CoastalInterior BorealArctic AlpineNoYesNoPotential Max. ScoreEcological Impact 40 16Biological Characteristics and Dispersal 25 14Amplitude and Distribution 25 19Feasibility <strong>of</strong> Control 10 9Relative Maximum 58Climatic ComparisonCollected in<strong>Alaska</strong> regions?CLIMEXsimilarity?South Coastal No NoInterior Boreal No YesArctic Alpine N0 NoLinaria dalmatica has not been documented in <strong>Alaska</strong> (Hultén1968, AKEPIC 2004, UAM 2004). It was recently found insoutheastern Yukon Territory, Canada (B. Bennett pers. com.)The native range <strong>of</strong> Linaria dalmatica extends from Croatia,Moldavia, and Romania, southward and eastward around theBlack Sea in the countries <strong>of</strong> Bulgaria, Albania, Greece, Crete,Turkey, Syria, Iran, and Iraq (Alex 1962). The CLIMEX matchingprogram shows that climatic similarity between Anchorage andareas where the species is documented is high. Anchorage hasa 56% and 52% overlap <strong>of</strong> climate similarity with Erzurum andSivas, Turkey, and 74% and 73% with Banff and Calgary, Alberta,Canada, respectively. The introduced range <strong>of</strong> the species alsoincludes Saskatoon and Regina, Saskatchewan (Vujnovic andWein 1977), which have a 65% and 63% climate match withFairbanks, respectively. Climatic similarity between Nomeand Juneau and areas where the species is documented is low.This suggests that establishment <strong>of</strong> Dalmatian toadflax may bepossible in the interior boreal ecogeographic region <strong>of</strong> <strong>Alaska</strong>.Ecological ImpactScoreImpact on Ecosystem Processes (0–10) 3Dalmatian toadflax stands may reduce soil moisture and nutrientavailability. Infestations <strong>of</strong> Dalmatian toadflax lead to thedominance by other invasive species in the community (Zouhar2003).common names: Dalmatian toadflaxImpact on Natural Community Structure (0–10) 5The plant is capable <strong>of</strong> <strong>for</strong>ming dense colonies by creepingrhizomes (Carpenter and Murray 1998). On disturbed sites it can<strong>for</strong>m a new vegetation layer.Impact on Natural Community Composition (0–10) 3Dense colonies <strong>of</strong> Dalmatian toadflax can push out native grassesand other perennials, thereby altering the species composition innative communities (Carpenter and Murray 1998).Impact on Higher Trophic Levels (0–10) 5Dalmatian toadflax is considered unpalatable <strong>for</strong> grazinganimals. Severe infestations likely reduces <strong>for</strong>age quality.Flowers are attractive to bumblebee and halictid bees and mayalter pollination ecology <strong>of</strong> sites where it occurs (Carpenter andMurray 1998). It hybridizes with other members <strong>of</strong> the genus(Vujnovic and Wein 1977).Total <strong>for</strong> Ecological Impact 16/40Biological Characteristics and Dispersal ScoreMode <strong>of</strong> Reproduction (0–3) 3Dalmatian toadflax reproduces by seed and by vegetative buds onthe roots. New infestations usually originate from seed. Robocker(1970) found that the plant produces from 140 to 250 seedsper capsule and one Dalmatian toadflax plant could potentiallyproduce 500,000 seeds. New plants can be produced whenvegetative buds sprout from lateral roots that are found in theupper 2-12 inches <strong>of</strong> soil (Alex 1962).Long-distance dispersal (0–3) 2Most <strong>of</strong> the seeds fall within short distances <strong>of</strong> the parent plant.When seeds fall onto crusted snow, they can be blown across thesurface (Zouhar 2003). Dalmatian toadflax may also be dispersedby cattle, deer, and other browsing animals (Robocker 1970,Vujnovic and Wein 1997).Spread by humans (0–3) 2Dalmatian toadflax was probably introduced to North America asan ornamental, and it is still used as a garden plant in many areas(Alex 1962, Vujnovic and Wein 1997).Allelopathic (0–2) 0No records were found concerning allelopathy.B-65
- Page 1:
United StatesDepartment ofAgricultu
- Page 5 and 6:
IntroductionThe control of invasive
- Page 7 and 8:
Overview and aimsThe authors, repre
- Page 9 and 10:
The scoring from each system is ver
- Page 11 and 12:
While the relative ranks of species
- Page 13 and 14:
Figure 4. Ranks for Polygonum cuspi
- Page 15 and 16:
Biological Characteristics and Disp
- Page 17 and 18:
2.3. Potential to be spread by huma
- Page 19 and 20:
3.4. Current global distribution.A
- Page 21 and 22:
obs.), suggesting that establishmen
- Page 23 and 24:
DiscussionThe existing weed risk as
- Page 25 and 26:
AcknowledgementsThe U.S. Forest Ser
- Page 27 and 28:
Prather, T., S. Robins, L. Lake, an
- Page 29:
Appendices
- Page 32 and 33:
EcologicalimpactBiologicalcharacter
- Page 34 and 35:
Appendix A.2.Summary Scores Of Inva
- Page 36 and 37:
EcologicalImpactBiologicalCharacter
- Page 38 and 39:
Alliaria petiolata (Bieb.) Cavara &
- Page 40 and 41:
Biological Characteristics and Disp
- Page 42 and 43:
Ecological Amplitude and Distributi
- Page 44 and 45:
Feasibility of ControlScoreSeed ban
- Page 46 and 47:
Germination requirements (0-3) 2See
- Page 48 and 49:
Capsella bursa-pastoris (L.) Medik.
- Page 50 and 51: Spread by humans (0-3) 3The Siberia
- Page 52 and 53: Known level of impact in natural ar
- Page 54 and 55: Extent of the species U.S. range an
- Page 56 and 57: Centaurea solstitialis L.Ranking Su
- Page 58 and 59: Feasibility of ControlScoreSeed ban
- Page 60 and 61: Cirsium vulgare (Savi) TenRanking S
- Page 62 and 63: Competitive Ability (0-3) 3Due to i
- Page 64 and 65: Feasibility of ControlScoreSeed ban
- Page 66 and 67: Cytisus scoparius (L.) LinkRanking
- Page 68 and 69: Germination requirements (0-3) 3Orc
- Page 70 and 71: Digitalis purpurea L.Ranking Summar
- Page 72 and 73: Extent of the species U.S. range an
- Page 74 and 75: Feasibility of ControlScoreSeed ban
- Page 76 and 77: Galeopsis bifida Boenn. and G. tetr
- Page 78 and 79: Extent of the species U.S. range an
- Page 80 and 81: Heracleum mantegazzianumSommier & L
- Page 82 and 83: Hesperis matronalis L.Ranking Summa
- Page 84 and 85: Role of anthropogenic and natural d
- Page 86 and 87: Feasibility of ControlScoreSeed ban
- Page 88 and 89: Biological Characteristics and Disp
- Page 90 and 91: Competitive Ability (0-3) 3Hydrilla
- Page 92 and 93: Known level of impact in natural ar
- Page 94 and 95: Known level of impact in natural ar
- Page 96 and 97: Role of anthropogenic and natural d
- Page 98 and 99: Feasibility of ControlScoreSeed ban
- Page 102 and 103: Competitive Ability (0-3) 2Dalmatia
- Page 104 and 105: Ecological Amplitude and Distributi
- Page 106 and 107: Lonicera tatarica L. common names:
- Page 108 and 109: Other invasive species in the genus
- Page 110 and 111: Known level of impact in natural ar
- Page 112 and 113: Biological Characteristics and Disp
- Page 114 and 115: Ecological Amplitude and Distributi
- Page 116 and 117: Melilotus alba MedikusRanking Summa
- Page 118 and 119: Melilotus officinalis (L.) Lam.Rank
- Page 120 and 121: Allelopathic (0-2)UThere is no data
- Page 122 and 123: Ecological Amplitude and Distributi
- Page 124 and 125: Biological Characteristics and Disp
- Page 126 and 127: Other invasive species in the genus
- Page 128 and 129: Role of anthropogenic and natural d
- Page 130 and 131: Plantago major L.Ranking SummaryEco
- Page 132 and 133: Competitive Ability (0-3) 1Annual b
- Page 134 and 135: Poa pratensis ssp. pratensis L.comm
- Page 136 and 137: Polygonum aviculare L. common names
- Page 138 and 139: Competitive Ability (0-3) 2Black bi
- Page 140 and 141: Other invasive species in the genus
- Page 142 and 143: Known level of impact in natural ar
- Page 144 and 145: Feasibility of ControlScoreSeed ban
- Page 146 and 147: Rumex acetosella L.Ranking SummaryE
- Page 148 and 149: Long-distance dispersal (0-3) 3The
- Page 150 and 151:
Current global distribution (0-5) 3
- Page 152 and 153:
Long-distance dispersal (0-3) 3Ragw
- Page 154 and 155:
Feasibility of ControlScoreSeed ban
- Page 156 and 157:
Sonchus arvensis L. common names: f
- Page 158 and 159:
Spread by humans (0-3) 3European mo
- Page 160 and 161:
Ecological Amplitude and Distributi
- Page 162 and 163:
Stellaria media (L.) Vill.Ranking S
- Page 164 and 165:
Taraxacum officinale ssp. officinal
- Page 166 and 167:
Aquatic, wetland or riparian specie
- Page 168 and 169:
Trifolium hybridum L.Ranking Summar
- Page 170 and 171:
Current global distribution (0-5) 3
- Page 172 and 173:
Long-distance dispersal (0-3) 2The
- Page 174 and 175:
Role of anthropogenic and natural d
- Page 176 and 177:
Vicia villosa RothRanking SummaryEc
- Page 178 and 179:
Current global distribution (0-5) 0
- Page 180 and 181:
Anderson, D. Phalaris. In J. C. Hic
- Page 182 and 183:
Best, K.F., G.G. Bowes, A.G. Thomas
- Page 184 and 185:
Cameron, E. 1935. A study of the na
- Page 186 and 187:
Corbin, J.D., M. Thomsen, J. Alexan
- Page 188 and 189:
Douglas, G.W. and A. MacKinnon. 199
- Page 190 and 191:
Frankton, C. and G.A. Mulligan. 197
- Page 192 and 193:
Haggar, R.J. 1979. Competition betw
- Page 194 and 195:
Howard, J.L. 2002. Descurainia soph
- Page 196 and 197:
Klinkhamer, P.G. and T.J. De Jong.
- Page 198 and 199:
MAFF - Ministry of Agriculture, Foo
- Page 200 and 201:
Miki, S. 1933. On the sea-grasses i
- Page 202 and 203:
Paddock, Raymond, E. III. Environme
- Page 204 and 205:
Proctor, V.W. 1968. Long-distance d
- Page 206 and 207:
Saner, M.A., D.R. Clements, M.R. Ha
- Page 208 and 209:
Stebbins, L.G. 1993. Tragopogon: Go
- Page 210 and 211:
Townshend, J.L. and T.R. Davidson.
- Page 212 and 213:
Washington State Department of Ecol
- Page 214 and 215:
Wolfe-Bellin, K.S. and K.A. Moloney
- Page 216 and 217:
B. Invasiveness Ranking1. Ecologica
- Page 218 and 219:
2.5. Competitive abilityA. Poor com
- Page 220:
4. Feasibility of Control4.1. Seed