Invasiveness Ranking System for Non-Native Plants of Alaska

More documents

Recommendations

Info

B. Invasiveness Ranking1. Ecological Impact1.1. Impact on Natural Ecosystem ProcessesA. No perceivable impact on ecosystem processes 0B.Has the potential to influences ecosystem processes to a minor degree (e.g., has a perceivable but mildinfluence on soil nutrient availability)3C.Has the potential to cause significant alteration of ecosystem processes (e.g., increases sedimentation ratesalong streams or coastlines, reduces open water that are important to waterfowl)7D.May cause major, possibly irreversible, alteration or disruption of ecosystem processes (e.g., the speciesalters geomorphology; hydrology; or affects fire frequency, altering community composition; species fixessubstantial levels of nitrogen in the soil making soil unlikely to support certain native plants or more likelyto favor non-native species)10U. UnknownScoreDocumentation:Identify ecosystem processes impacted:Rational:Sources of information:1.2. Impact on Natural Community StructureA. No perceived impact; establishes in an existing layer without influencing its structure 0B. Has the potential to influences structure in one layer (e.g., changes the density of one layer) 3Has the potential to cause significant impact in at least one layer (e.g., creation of a new layer or eliminationC.7of an existing layer)D. Likely to cause major alteration of structure (e.g., covers canopy, eradicating most or all layers below) 10U. UnknownScoreDocumentation:Identify type of impact or alteration:Rational:Sources of information:1.3. Impact on Natural Community CompositionA. No perceived impact; causes no apparent change in native populations 0Has the potential to influences community composition (e.g., reduces the number of individuals in one orB.more native species in the community)Has the potential to significantly alters community composition (e.g., produces a significant reduction inC.the population size of one or more native species in the community)Likely to cause major alteration in community composition (e.g., results in the extirpation of one or severalD. native species, reducing biodiversity or change the community composition towards species exotic to thenatural community)U. UnknownScoreDocumentation:Identify type of impact or alteration:Rational:Sources of information:1.4. Impact on higher trophic levels (cumulative impact of this species on the animals, fungi, microbes, and otherorganisms in the community it invades)A. Negligible perceived impact 0B. Has the potential to cause minor alteration 3Has the potential to cause moderate alteration (minor reduction in nesting/foraging sites, reduction inC.7habitat connectivity, interference with native pollinators, injurious components such as spines, toxins)Likely to cause severe alteration of higher trophic populations (extirpation or endangerment of an existingD.10native species/population, or significant reduction in nesting or foraging sites)U. UnknownScore3710C-2
Documentation:Identify type of impact or alteration:Rational:Sources of information:Total PossibleTotal2. Biological Characteristics and Dispersal Ability2.1. Mode of reproductionA. Not aggressive reproduction (few [0-10] seeds per plant and no vegetative reproduction) 0B. Somewhat aggressive (reproduces only by seeds (11-1,000/m²) 1C. Moderately aggressive (reproduces vegetatively and/or by a moderate amount of seed, 1,000/m²) 3U. UnknownScoreDocumentation:Describe key reproductive characteristics (including seeds per plant):Rational:Sources of information:2.2. Innate potential for long-distance dispersal (bird dispersal, sticks to animal hair, buoyant fruits, wind-dispersal)A. Does not occur (no long-distance dispersal mechanisms) 0B. Infrequent or inefficient long-distance dispersal (occurs occasionally despite lack of adaptations) 2Numerous opportunities for long-distance dispersal (species has adaptations such as pappus, hooked fruitcoats,etc.)C.3U. UnknownScoreDocumentation:Identify dispersal mechanisms:Rational:Sources of information:2.3. Potential to be spread by human activities (both directly and indirectly—possible mechanisms include: commercialsales, use as forage/revegetation, spread along highways, transport on boats, contamination, etc.)A. Does not occur 0B. Low (human dispersal is infrequent or inefficient) 1C. Moderate (human dispersal occurs) 2D. High (there are numerous opportunities for dispersal to new areas) 3U. UnknownScoreDocumentation:Identify dispersal mechanisms:Rational:Sources of information:2.4. AllelopathicA. No 0B. Yes 2U. UnknownScoreDocumentation:Describe effect on adjacent plants:Rational:Sources of information:C-3
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:
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:
Page 60 and 61:
Cirsium vulgare (Savi) TenRanking S
Page 62 and 63:
Competitive Ability (0-3) 3Due to i
Page 64 and 65:
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:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Galeopsis bifida Boenn. and G. tetr
Page 78 and 79:
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:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Competitive Ability (0-3) 3Hydrilla
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Leucanthemum vulgare Lam.Ranking Su
Page 102 and 103:
Competitive Ability (0-3) 2Dalmatia
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Lonicera tatarica L. common names:
Page 108 and 109:
Other invasive species in the genus
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
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:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
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:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
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:
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:
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 218 and 219: 2.5. Competitive abilityA. Poor com
Page 220: 4. Feasibility of Control4.1. Seed
show all

Invasiveness Ranking System for Non-Native Plants of Alaska

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?