Competitive Ability (0–3) 2Dalmatian toadflax seedlings are easily outcompeted byestablished perennial species; however, once it is establishedtoadflax suppresses other vegetation by competition <strong>for</strong> limitedsoil moisture (Carpenter and Murray 1998, Robocker 1970).The taproots <strong>of</strong> mature Dalmatian toadflax may reach depths<strong>of</strong> 4–10 feet, and lateral roots can extend 12 feet from the plant(Zouhar 2003). This extensive root system improves waterresource efficiency and provides an effective anchor, preventingdestruction by grazing animals or cultivation (Saner et al. 1995).Thicket-<strong>for</strong>ming/Smothering growth <strong>for</strong>m (0–2) 1Dalmatian toadflax is capable <strong>of</strong> <strong>for</strong>ming dense colonies throughadventitious buds from creeping root systems; however, it doesnot have a climbing or smothering growth habit (Carpenter andMurray 1998).Germination requirements (0–3) 0Germination and seedling establishment requires open groundwith reduced competition from native vegetation (Grieshop andNowierski 2002).Other invasive species in the genus (0–3) 3Linaria vulgaris P. Mill. and L. genistifolia (L.) P. Mill. (Royer andDickinson 1999, USDA 2002, Whitson et al. 2000).Aquatic, wetland or riparian species (0–3) 1Dalmatian toadflax is most commonly found on roadsides, wasteareas, clearcuts, overgrazed pastures, and rangelands, and in plantcommunities that are open or disturbed (Beck 2001). It also hasbeen reported from gravel bars and riparian pastures in Coloradoand Utah (Carpenter and Murray 1998, Zouhar 2003).Total <strong>for</strong> Biological Characteristics and Dispersal 14/25Ecological Amplitude and Distribution ScoreHighly domesticated or a weed <strong>of</strong> agriculture (0–4) 4Cultivation <strong>of</strong> the Dalmatian toadflax in England occurred asearly as the 19th century. The species is still sold in Europe andAsia (Alex 1962).Known level <strong>of</strong> impact in natural areas (0–6) 4Dalmatian toadflax invades shrub–steppe communities inWashington and likely displaces native grass and <strong>for</strong>bs. It is foundin ponderosa pine communities in Washington and Idaho. InOregon, Dalmatian toadflax is found in grasslands and on gravelbars in riparian communities. In Colorado, this species invadesgravel bars, riparian pastures, and open meadows, and spreadsalong rivers. It may compete with cottonwood seedlings <strong>for</strong>establishment sites on gravel bars. It may also invade mountainshrubland and shortgrass prairie communities adjacent toriparian corridors (Rutledge and McLendon 1996). In Utah,Dalmatian toadflax is found in oak, quaking aspen, sagebrush,mountain brush, and riparian communities (Carpenter andMurray 1998, Saner et al. 1995, Zouhar 2003).Role <strong>of</strong> anthropogenic and natural disturbance in3establishment (0–5)Disturbance promotes toadflax invasion and it may be necessary<strong>for</strong> establishment to occur. Dalmatian toadflax can invadecommunities with anthropogenic and naturally-occurringdisturbances. However, once it is established, toadflax readilyspreads into adjacent nondisturbed areas (Beck 2001, Zouhar2003).Current global distribution (0–5) 3Dalmatian toadflax is native <strong>of</strong> Southeastern Europe andSouthwestern Asia. The present world distribution includesmost <strong>of</strong> Europe and Asia, and it has been introduced to Japan,Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, and South and NorthAmerica (Alex 1962, Royer and Dickinson 1999, Saner et al.1995).Extent <strong>of</strong> the species U.S. range and/or occurrence <strong>of</strong>5<strong>for</strong>mal state or provincial listing (0–5)This species occurs throughout the continental U.S. and in almostevery Canadian province (Alex 1962, Royer and Dickinson 1999,Saner et al. 1995, USDA 2002). Linaria dalmatica is declareda noxious weed in nine American states and three Canadianprovinces (Invader Database <strong>System</strong> 2003).Total <strong>for</strong> Ecological Amplitude and Distribution 19/25Feasibility <strong>of</strong> ControlScoreSeed banks (0–3) 3Seeds stored at room temperature remain viable <strong>for</strong> 13 years,under field conditions in Washington seed longevity was 10 years(Robocker 1970).Vegetative regeneration (0–3) 2This species is capable <strong>of</strong> resprouting from the vegetative buds inlateral roots that are found in the upper 2–12 inches <strong>of</strong> soil (Alex1962). Vegetative spread is possible from root fragments as shortas 0.5 inches (Zouhar 2003).Level <strong>of</strong> ef<strong>for</strong>t required (0–4) 4Successful control can be obtained by pulling or herbicideapplications. Five insect species have been approved by the USDA<strong>for</strong> release as biological control agents. Since the seeds can remaindormant <strong>for</strong> up to 10 years and the plant also spreads throughvegetative propagation, control measures must be repeated everyyear <strong>for</strong> at least 10 years to completely remove a stand (Beck 2001,Carpenter and Murray 1998).Total <strong>for</strong> Feasibility <strong>of</strong> Control 9/10Total score <strong>for</strong> 4 sections 58/100§B-66
Linaria vulgaris P. Miller.<strong>Ranking</strong> SummaryEcoregion known or expected to occur inSouth CoastalInterior BorealArctic AlpineYesYesYesPotential Max. ScoreEcological Impact 40 22Biological Characteristics and Dispersal 25 17Amplitude and Distribution 25 21Feasibility <strong>of</strong> Control 10 9Relative Maximum 61Climatic ComparisonCollected in<strong>Alaska</strong> regions?common names: yellow toadflax, butter and eggs,wild snapdragonCLIMEXsimilarity?South Coastal Yes –Interior Boreal Yes –Arctic Alpine No YesLinaria vulgaris has been collected in the south coastal [Seward,Sitka, Juneau, and Skagway (Hultén 1968, UAM 2004)] andinterior boreal [Anchorage, Wasilla, and Fairbanks (AKNHP2003, Hultén 1968, UAM 2004)] ecoregions in <strong>Alaska</strong>. It hasnot been documented in the arctic alpine ecoregion. Using theCLIMEX matching program, climatic similarity between Nomeand areas where the species is documented is high. The nativerange <strong>of</strong> the species includes Røros, Norway, Zlatoust, Russia, andStensele, Sweden (Hultén 1968), which has a 76%, 71%, and 70%climatic match with Nome, respectively.Ecological ImpactScoreImpact on Ecosystem Processes (0–10) 5Yellow toadflax likely reduces soil moisture and nutrientavailability and appears to alter soil texture (M.L. Carlson pers.obs.) This rhizomatous plant <strong>of</strong>ten grows at very high densities indry and nutrient poor soils in <strong>Alaska</strong> and very likely it is reducingessential resources <strong>for</strong> other species. Additionally, a large volume<strong>of</strong> below ground biomass is produced in generally organic poorsoils, which also tends to bind the soils.Impact on Natural Community Structure (0–10) 5Yellow toadflax is capable <strong>of</strong> <strong>for</strong>ming dense colonies throughadventitious buds on creeping rhizomes (Carpenter and Murray1998). Along trails and other disturbed sites in south-central<strong>Alaska</strong> it <strong>for</strong>ms a new layer apparently excluding both tallherbaceous and shorter graminoid native species (M.L. Carlsonpers. obs.).Impact on Natural Community Composition (0–10) 7This plant can displace native perennial species (Carpenter andMurray 1998, Whitson et al. 2000).Impact on Higher Trophic Levels (0–10) 5Yellow toadflax produces a poisonous glucoside that is reportedto be unpalatable to moderately poisonous <strong>for</strong> livestock. Itcan reduce <strong>for</strong>aging sites (Whitson et al. 2000). Toadflax is analternate host <strong>for</strong> tobacco mosaic virus (Royer and Dickinson1999). This species is highly attractive to bumblebee (Bombusspp.) and halictid bee (Halictus spp.) pollinators and may alterpollination ecology <strong>of</strong> sites where it occurs (M.L. Carlson pers.obs.). Flowers are also attacked by number <strong>of</strong> insect predators(Arnold 1982, M.L. Carlson pers. obs., Goltz 1988)Total <strong>for</strong> Ecological Impact 22/40Biological Characteristics and Dispersal ScoreMode <strong>of</strong> Reproduction (0–3) 3Yellow toadflax reproduces by seeds and vegetatively. Seed countper individual is difficult as the definition <strong>of</strong> individual is uncleardue to its clonal propagation. Darwent et al. (1975) in Albertarecorded up to 824 seeds per stem. Stevens (1932) reported 2,280seeds per plant with nine stems. Nadeau and King (1991) foundseed production <strong>of</strong> 210,000 seed per m². Common toadflax alsohas the ability to reproduce vegetatively from adventitious budson the roots (Bakshi and Coupland 1960, Nadeau et al. 1991,Nadeau et al. 1992).Long-distance dispersal (0–3) 3Seeds can be carried by the wind (Royer and Dickinson 1999);however, Nadeau and King (1991) report that 80% <strong>of</strong> seedsfell within 50 cm and a tiny fraction fell more than 1.5 m <strong>of</strong> theparent plant. This species may also be dispersed by water and ants(Rutledge and McLendon 1996). The seeds are small (1–2 mmlong), flattened with papery wings.Spread by humans (0–3) 3Yellow toadflax is an ornamental plant and has escapedcultivation (Rutledge and McLendon 1996). Toadflax can spreadalong highways (Densmore et al. 2001). It has been found as acontaminant in commercial seed, hay, and ship ballast. It is stillsold by some nurseries (Beck 2001, Zouhar 2001).Allelopathic (0–2) 0<strong>Non</strong>eCompetitive Ability (0–3) 3This species is a strong competitor <strong>for</strong> soil moisture withestablished perennials and winter annuals. It is adapted to a widerange <strong>of</strong> environmental conditions (Carpenter and Murray 1998,Rutledge and McLendon 1996).Thicket-<strong>for</strong>ming/Smothering growth <strong>for</strong>m (0–2) 1Yellow toadflax is capable <strong>of</strong> <strong>for</strong>ming colonies through buds fromcreeping rhizomes (Carpenter and Murray 1998). However, ingeneral, it is not taller than the surrounding vegetation (M.L.Carlson pers. obs.). In a study <strong>of</strong> common toadflax in Alberta, adensity <strong>of</strong> 180 stems per m² was recorded; but, in most areas thisplant occurs at densities <strong>of</strong> 20 stems per m² or less (Darwent et al.1975).Germination requirements (0–3) 0Yellow toadflax requires open soil <strong>for</strong> germination (Densmore etal. 2001). Germination success is generally low, especially withcompetition (Rutledge and McLendon 1996, Zouhar 2003).Other invasive species in the genus (0–3) 3Linaria dalmatica (L.) P. Mill. is declared noxious in someAmerican states and Canadian provinces (Invader Database<strong>System</strong> 2003, USDA, NRCS 2002).Aquatic, wetland or riparian species (0–3) 1Yellow toadflax is most commonly found along roadsides, fences,rangelands, croplands, clearcuts, and pastures (Carpenter andMurray 1998). But, it has been reported from cottonwood andspruce dominated riparian habitats in Colorado (Carpenter andMurray 1998, Zouhar 2003); and it is found along the shoreline<strong>of</strong> Cook Inlet and Turnagain Arm (AKEPIC 2004, M. Shephardpers. comm.).Total <strong>for</strong> Biological Characteristics and Dispersal 17/25B-67
- 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 100 and 101: Leucanthemum vulgare Lam.Ranking Su
- 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