Ecological Amplitude and Distribution ScoreHighly domesticated or a weed <strong>of</strong> agriculture (0–4) 4A few cultivars have been developed, and they are commerciallysold. They are used <strong>for</strong> erosion control and oil spill mediationalong shorelines (Materne 2000, USDA 2002, Walkup 2004).Known level <strong>of</strong> impact in natural areas (0–6) 6In Willapa Bay, Washington, Spartina alterniflora has displacedapproximately 20% <strong>of</strong> critical habitat <strong>for</strong> wintering and breedingaquatic birds (WAPMS 2004). In Cali<strong>for</strong>nia, it has invaded SanFrancisco and Humboldt Bays, threatening to trans<strong>for</strong>m openmudflats into a single-species tall grass community (Daehler2000, Daehler and Strong 1994). A population established in theSiuslaw estuary in Oregon, and numerous sites are known fromWashington (Jacono 1998).Role <strong>of</strong> anthropogenic and natural disturbance in5establishment (0–5)Spartina has been recorded as established on sites with noanthropogenic disturbances (Daehler 2000, Jacono 1998,WAPMS 2004).Current global distribution (0–5) 3Smooth cordgrass is native to the Atlantic and Gulf Coast marshes<strong>of</strong> North America. Its introduced range includes the west coast<strong>of</strong> North America, Europe, and New Zealand (Baird and Thieret1993, Daehler 2000, WAPMS 2004).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)Spartina alterniflora occurs in all coastal states fromNewfoundland to Florida and Texas (USDA 2002, WAPMS2004). It is declared noxious in Oregon and Washington (InvaderDatabase <strong>System</strong> 2003).Total <strong>for</strong> Ecological Amplitude and Distribution 23/25Feasibility <strong>of</strong> ControlScoreSeed banks (0–3) 0The seeds remain viable <strong>for</strong> only 8–12 months, and they do notwithstand desiccation. The species does not have a persistent seedbank (Daehler 2000, Mooring et al. 1971, WAPMS 2004).Vegetative regeneration (0–3) 2After removal <strong>of</strong> aboveground growth plant can resprout(WAPMS 2004).Level <strong>of</strong> ef<strong>for</strong>t required (0–4) 4Smooth cordgrass can grow on very s<strong>of</strong>t, deep mud, makinginfestations nearly inaccessible by foot or boat. Hand pulling ordigging seedlings is suggested <strong>for</strong> small infestations (less than 5acres). Special care should be taken to remove both shoots androots. Shading small Spartina clones with woven geotextile fabricwas successful in Oregon. Mowing and herbicide treatment canlimit growth and seed set (Daehler 2000, Sytsma et al. 2003).Total <strong>for</strong> Feasibility <strong>of</strong> Control 6/10Total score <strong>for</strong> 4 sections 86/100§Spergula arvensis L.<strong>Ranking</strong> SummaryEcoregion known or expected to occur inSouth CoastalYesInterior BorealYesArctic AlpineYesPotential Max. ScoreEcological Impact 40 2Biological Characteristics and Dispersal 25 11Amplitude and Distribution 25 14Feasibility <strong>of</strong> Control 10 5Relative Maximum 42Climatic ComparisonCollected in<strong>Alaska</strong> regions?CLIMEXsimilarity?South Coastal Yes –Interior Boreal Yes –Arctic Alpine No YesSpergula arvensis is documented in the south coastal and interiorboreal ecogeographic regions <strong>of</strong> <strong>Alaska</strong> (Hultén 1968, Welsh1974, AKEPIC 2005, UAM 2004). The CLIMEX matchingprogram indicates the climatic similarity between the arcticalpine ecogeographic region <strong>of</strong> <strong>Alaska</strong> and areas where Spergulaarvensis has been documented is moderately high. This speciesrange include Røros and Dombås, Norway (Lid and Lid 1994),which have a 76% and 63% climatic match with Nome. Spergulaarvensis is known to occur in arctic regions <strong>of</strong> Norway andGreenland (Lid and Lid 1994, Natur Historiska RiksmuseetDatabase 2005). Thus establishment <strong>of</strong> corn spurry in the arcticalpine ecogeographic region is likely.common names: corn spurryEcological ImpactScoreImpact on Ecosystem Processes (0–10) 0Corn spurry has not been observed in undisturbed areasin <strong>Alaska</strong> (UAM 2006, AKEPIC 2006). It is unlikely thatmeasurable impacts to ecosystem processes occur due to itspresence.Impact on Natural Community Structure (0–10) 0Corn spurry establishes in an existing layer and very likelyincreases the density <strong>of</strong> the layer (Mann 1934) in ruderalor roadside plant communities. No impact on the naturalcommunity structure has been documented.Impact on Natural Community Composition (0–10) 0Corn spurry has not been observed in undisturbed areas in<strong>Alaska</strong> (UAM 2006, AKEPIC 2006); no perceived impacts onnative populations have been documented.Impact on Higher Trophic Levels (0–10) 2Corn spurry is readily eaten by livestock and poultry and likelycan be used by wildlife species as a food. Corn spurry is analternate host <strong>for</strong> a number <strong>of</strong> viruses (Royer and Dickinson1999). Flowers <strong>of</strong> corn spurry are self-pollinating, neverthelessbees, solitary wasps, and syrphids are occasionally seen visitingthe flowers (New 1961).Total <strong>for</strong> Ecological Impact 2/40B-124
Biological Characteristics and Dispersal ScoreMode <strong>of</strong> Reproduction (0–3) 3Corn spurry reproduces by seed. An average plant can produce2,000 to 7,000 seeds (New 1961, Trivedi and Tripathi 1982a, b).Long-distance dispersal (0–3) 1The seeds do not tend to spread long-distances, naturally.Occasionally they can be carried in digestive tracts <strong>of</strong> deer oron animal fur (New 1961, Guide to Weeds in British Columbia2002).Spread by humans (0–3) 3This species’ seeds can contaminate soil and crop seed (Volkart1924, Board 1952, Guide to Weeds in British Columbia 2002).The seeds can also be spread by vehicles or in mud on agriculturalequipment (New 1961).Allelopathic (0–2) 2Corn spurry causes strong inhibition <strong>of</strong> germination and growth<strong>of</strong> crops (Harrison and Peterson 1997, Peterson et al. 1998).Competitive Ability (0–3) 0Corn spurry has not been observed in closed plant communities.It is very susceptible to shade and is a less effective competitorthan perennial species (Fenner 1978a, b). In an experiment byFenner (1978b) the growth rate <strong>of</strong> corn spurry was higher in baresoil when compared to short and tall turf.Thicket-<strong>for</strong>ming/Smothering growth <strong>for</strong>m (0–2) 0Although corn spurry is capable <strong>of</strong> <strong>for</strong>ming a dense stand, up to7,000 seedlings per sq. yard (Mann 1939) it is a short plant anddoes not have a climbing or smothering growth habit (Welsh1974, Royer and Dickinson 1999, Whitson et al. 2000).Germination requirements (0–3) 2Germination <strong>of</strong> corn spurry is markedly higher in bare soilcompared to turf (Fenner 1978b). About 43% <strong>of</strong> seeds germinatedin bare soil, 35% in short turf, and 10% in tall turf <strong>of</strong> Festuca rubrain experiment (Fenner 1978b).Other invasive species in the genus (0–3) 0Other species <strong>of</strong> Spergula have been introduced into NorthAmerica but none <strong>of</strong> them appears to be particularly weedy(USDA, NRCS 2006).Aquatic, wetland or riparian species (0–3) 0Corn spurry is a plant <strong>of</strong> disturbed open habitats. It typicallyoccurs on cultivated fields (Royer and Dickinson 1999, Guide toWeeds in British Columbia 2002), roadsides, and sometimes theseashore (New 1961).Total <strong>for</strong> Biological Characteristics and Dispersal 11/25Ecological Amplitude and Distribution ScoreHighly domesticated or a weed <strong>of</strong> agriculture (0–4) 4Corn spurry is found as a weed in cultivated wheat, oats, and flax(New 1961). Records <strong>of</strong> fossils seeds suggest that corn spurryhas been a common weed <strong>of</strong> flax from the Iron Age (Jessen andHelbaek 1944 cited in New 1961).Known level <strong>of</strong> impact in natural areas (0–6) 0Corn spurry has been recorded only in disturbed habitats (New1961). It is not known to cause an impact in any natural areas.Role <strong>of</strong> anthropogenic and natural disturbance in0establishment (0–5)Corn spurry requires bare soil <strong>for</strong> successful establishment(Fenner 1978a, b).Current global distribution (0–5) 5Corn spurry originated from Eurasia. It occurs throughoutEurope and also in Asia, North and South Africa, North andSouth America, Australia, and New Zealand (Hultén 1968). Ithas been recorded above the Arctic Circle (Natur HistoriskaRiksmuseet Database 2005).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)Corn spurry is found in most American states, and nearly allCanadian provinces (Royer and Dickinson 1999, USDA, NRCS2006). Spergula arvensis is declared noxious in Alberta andQuebec (Rice 2006).Total <strong>for</strong> Ecological Amplitude and Distribution 14/25Feasibility <strong>of</strong> ControlScoreSeed banks (0–3) 3The seeds <strong>of</strong> corn spurry have been reported to remain viable <strong>for</strong>6–8 years in <strong>for</strong>merly cultivated soil (Chippindale and Milton1934, Roberts and Feast 1973).Viability <strong>of</strong> seeds was 18% after6.7 years, and less than 1% after 9.7 years in a seed viabilityexperiment conducted in Fairbanks (Conn and Deck 1995).Seeds <strong>of</strong> corn spurry were found viable after 22 years in soilbeneath pastures (Chippindale and Milton 1934).Vegetative regeneration (0–3) 2Corn spurry is able to produce new branches and <strong>of</strong>ten bearflowers and seeds when plants are cut <strong>of</strong>f 2–3 nodes from theground (New 1961).Level <strong>of</strong> ef<strong>for</strong>t required (0–4) 0Mechanical methods (hand pulling, hoeing, or grazing) be<strong>for</strong>eseeds set can be successful in the control <strong>of</strong> corn spurry. Controlactions must be repeated as soil disturbance induces germination<strong>of</strong> dormant seeds. Chemicals can be used, but corn spurry isresistant to several herbicides. Biocontrol methods are notdeveloped (New 1961, Guide to Weeds in British Columbia2002). Liming significantly reduces the density <strong>of</strong> corn spurry infield (Mann 1939).Total <strong>for</strong> Feasibility <strong>of</strong> Control 5/10Total score <strong>for</strong> 4 sections 32/100§5B-125
- 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 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 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