Feasibility <strong>of</strong> ControlScoreSeed banks (0–3) 3The majority <strong>of</strong> seeds germinate in the first 4 years, but someviable seeds remain in the soil <strong>for</strong> more than 6 years (Chepil1948).Vegetative regeneration (0–3) 0Common pepperweed has no ability to resprout (Densmore et al.2001).Level <strong>of</strong> ef<strong>for</strong>t required (0–4) 1Common pepperweed can be easily control by hand pulling orherbicide applications. Due to the large, long lived seed bank,several treatments may be necessary (Densmore et al. 2001).Total <strong>for</strong> Feasibility <strong>of</strong> Control 4/10Total score <strong>for</strong> 4 sections 22/88§Lepidium latifolium L. common names: perennial pepperweed, tall whitetop<strong>Ranking</strong> SummaryEcoregion known or expected to occur inSouth CoastalInterior BorealArctic AlpineNoYesYesPotential Max. ScoreEcological Impact 40 28Biological Characteristics and Dispersal 22 17Amplitude and Distribution 25 16Feasibility <strong>of</strong> Control 7 6Relative Maximum 71Climatic ComparisonCollected in<strong>Alaska</strong> regions?CLIMEXsimilarity?South Coastal No NoInterior Boreal No YesArctic Alpine No YesLepidium latifolium has not been documented in <strong>Alaska</strong> (Hultén1968, Welsh 1974, AKEPIC 2004, UAM 2004). The native range<strong>of</strong> Lepidium latifolium includes southwestern Russia and westernSiberia (Gubanov et al 2003). The CLIMEX matching programshows that climatic similarity between <strong>Alaska</strong> and areas wherethe species is documented is high. Kazan, Penza, and Gorkiy,Russia have 72%, 68%, and 67% similarity with Anchorage, and59%, 53%, and 53% with Fairbanks, respectively. Nome has 58%,56%, and 57% climatic similarity with Kazan, Penza, and Gorkiy,respectively. Climatic similarity between Juneau and areas wherethe species is documented is low. This suggests that establishment<strong>of</strong> perennial pepperweed may be possible in the interior borealand arctic alpine ecogeographic region <strong>of</strong> <strong>Alaska</strong>.Ecological ImpactScoreImpact on Ecosystem Processes (0–10) 7Perennial pepperweed may retard natural succession onpreviously disturbed areas. The roots <strong>of</strong> this species fragmenteasily, allowing soil erosion to occur more frequently in infestedareas (Renz 2000). This plant also takes salt ions from deep in thesoil pr<strong>of</strong>ile, and transports them near the soil surface, drasticallyincreasing soil salinity (Blank and Young 2002, Blank and Young2004).Impact on Natural Community Structure (0–10) 7Perennial pepperweed creates a large monospecific layer anddisplaces native plants (Corliss 1993, Renz 2000).Impact on Natural Community Composition (0–10) 7Perennial pepperweed can displace native plant and animalspecies. It particularly interferes with regeneration <strong>of</strong> riparianplant species such as willows and cottonwoods (Young et al.1995). Stands <strong>of</strong> perennial pepperweed increase soil salinity;this favors halophytes and reduces other species, therebyshifting plant composition and diversity (Renz 2000). Perennialpepperweed creates a litter layer that prevents the emergence andestablishment <strong>of</strong> annual native plants (Renz 2000).Impact on Higher Trophic Levels (0–10) 7Perennial pepperweed degrades nesting and <strong>for</strong>aging sites <strong>for</strong>waterfowl by outcompeting grasses. It also prevents willow andcottonwood regeneration, altering riparian species’ habitats(Howald 2000).Total <strong>for</strong> Ecological Impact 28/40Biological Characteristics and Dispersal ScoreMode <strong>of</strong> Reproduction (0–3) 3Perennial pepperweed reproduces by seed or vegetatively froman intact root system or from pieces <strong>of</strong> the underground stems.The plant is capable <strong>of</strong> producing thousands <strong>of</strong> seeds annually(Howald 2000, Renz 2000).Long-distance dispersal (0–3) 2The seeds have no adaptations <strong>for</strong> long-distance dispersal;however, they are capable <strong>of</strong> being transported by wind, water,and possibly by waterfowl (Howald 2000). Root fragments canbe transported in streams and establish new populations (Renz2000).Spread by humans (0–3) 2It was likely introduced to North America as a contaminant <strong>of</strong>sugar beet seed. Recent infestations in Cali<strong>for</strong>nia are due to seedor plant fragments contaminating rice straw bales (Howald 2000).Allelopathic (0–2) 0Allelopathic potential has not been recorded.Competitive Ability (0–3) 3Infestations <strong>of</strong> perennial pepperweed are extremely competitiveand very few plant species can establish within these stands(Renz 2000). Extensive creeping root system enhances thecompetitiveness <strong>of</strong> perennial pepperweed <strong>for</strong> water and nutrients.Allocation <strong>of</strong> carbohydrate reserves to below ground organs isimportant <strong>for</strong> rapid shoot development in the spring (Renz 2000).Thicket-<strong>for</strong>ming/Smothering growth <strong>for</strong>m (0–2) 1Perennial pepperweed creates large monospecific stands that cangrow to over 3 feet in height (Corliss 1993, Douglas et al. 1998,Renz 2000, Whitson et al. 2000).B-62
Germination requirements (0–3)UThe seeds rapidly germinate in laboratory conditions, but fewseedlings are observed in the field. Reasons <strong>for</strong> this are unknown.Population is mostly maintained by vegetative growth from rootsegments (Renz 2000).Other invasive species in the genus (0–3) 3Lepidium campestre (L.) Ait.f., L. densiflorum Schrad.,L. perfoliatum L., and L. ruderale L. (Royer and Dickinson 1999,USDA 2002).Aquatic, wetland or riparian species (0–3) 3This species can invade a wide range <strong>of</strong> habitats including riparianareas, wetlands, marshes, estuaries, irrigation channels, and floodplains, as well as meadows, crop fields, roadsides, and rangelands(Renz 2000).Total <strong>for</strong> Biological Characteristics and Dispersal 17/22Ecological Amplitude and Distribution ScoreHighly domesticated or a weed <strong>of</strong> agriculture (0–4) 2Perennial pepperweed is primarily a weed <strong>of</strong> rangeland, pastures,and hay meadows. It can occasionally invade croplands (Whitsonet al. 2000).Known level <strong>of</strong> impact in natural areas (0–6) 1Perennial pepperweed invades brackish to saline wetlands andnative hay meadows throughout Cali<strong>for</strong>nia. It is well establishedin marshes <strong>of</strong> the San Francisco Bay (Howald 2000).Role <strong>of</strong> anthropogenic and natural disturbance in5establishment (0–5)Perennial pepperweed can established on disturbed areas andmay disperse into minimally managed or undisturbed habitats.This plant is known to establish in areas with no natural oranthropogenic disturbances (Howald 2000).Current global distribution (0–5) 3Perennial pepperweed is native to Southeastern Europe andSouthwestern Asia. It is naturalized throughout Europe, NorthAmerica, and Australia (Renz 2000).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)Perennial pepperweed is found in all western states. It is reportedfrom three Canadian provinces. Lepidium latifolium is declareda noxious weed in 13 American states, including <strong>Alaska</strong> (<strong>Alaska</strong>Administrative Code 1987, Invaders Database <strong>System</strong> 2003,USDA 2002).Total <strong>for</strong> Ecological Amplitude and Distribution 16/25Feasibility <strong>of</strong> ControlScoreSeed banks (0–3)USeeds lack a hard coat and do not seem to be capable <strong>of</strong> survivinglong periods in the soil, thus seed viability is likely to be short(Renz 2000), but seed longevity remains unknown.Vegetative regeneration (0–3) 2Perennial roots can remain dormant in the soil <strong>for</strong> several years.New plants readily grow from pieces <strong>of</strong> rootstock less than 1-inchlong (Wotring et al. 1997 cited in Howald 2000).Level <strong>of</strong> ef<strong>for</strong>t required (0–4) 4Once established, perennial pepperweed can be very difficult toremove. Mechanical methods are unlikely to control perennialpepperweed because new plants quickly regenerate from pieces<strong>of</strong> rootstock. Chemical methods have been used successfully;however, most effective herbicides cannot be applied near orover water. No biological control agents have been introducedto control perennial pepperweed due to several importantcultivated crops within this family (canola, mustard, cabbage,and kale), and several threatened and endangered native species<strong>of</strong> Lepidium in the United States. Old stems and litter take severalyears to degrade, and it may be necessary to remove the litter,which prevents germination and establishment <strong>of</strong> desirable plantspecies. If soil salinities are dramatically increased, an intensivesoil remediation program may be necessary be<strong>for</strong>e native speciescan reestablish. Areas must be monitored since it can recover fromdormant root fragments (Howald 2000, Renz 2000).Total <strong>for</strong> Feasibility <strong>of</strong> Control 6/7Total score <strong>for</strong> 4 sections 67/93§B-63
- 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 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 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