Plant Assessment Form
More Anthoxanthum odoratum resources
Anthoxanthum odoratum
Common Names: sweet vernal grass; vanilla grass
Evaluated on: 12/27/04
List committee review date:
Re-evaluation date:
Evaluator(s)
Elizabeth Brusati, project manager
California Invasive Plant Council
1442A Walnut St. #462, Berkeley, CA 94709
510-843-3902
edbrusati@cal-ipc.org
Peter J. Warner; ecologist
California State Parks
P. O. Box 603, Little River, CA 95456
707-937-9172; 707-937-2278
corylus@earthlink.net
List committee members
Carla Bossard
John Randall
Cynthia Roye
Jake Sigg
Peter Warner
General Comments
More quantitative data and observational evidence on the distribution and impacts of this common plant in California are needed to strengthen this assessment.
|
|
Overall Score ?
Plant scoring matrix
Based on letter scores from Sections 1 through 3 below
Impact | Invasiveness | Distribution | | |
A | A B | Any | High | No Alert |
A | C D | Any | Moderate | Alert |
B | A B | A B | Moderate | No Alert |
B | A B | C D | Moderate | Alert |
B | C D | Any | Limited | No Alert |
C | A | A B | Moderate | No Alert |
C | A | C D | Limited | No Alert |
C | B | A | Moderate | No Alert |
C | B | B D | Limited | No Alert |
C | C | Any | Limited | No Alert |
D | Any | Any | Not Listed | No Alert |
Limited
|
Alert Status ?
Plant scoring matrix
Based on letter scores from Sections 1 through 3 below
Impact | Invasiveness | Distribution | Alert |
A | A or B | C or D | Alert |
B | A or B | C or D | Alert |
No Alert
|
Documentation ?
The total documentation score is the average
of Documentation scores given in Table 2.
Reviewed Scientific Publication | 4 points |
Other Published Material | 3 points |
Observational | 2 points |
Anecdotal | 1 points |
Unknown or No Information | 0 points |
3 out of 5
|
|
|
Score |
Documentation |
|
1.1 |
?Impact on abiotic ecosystem processes
Consider the impact on the natural range and variation of abiotic ecosystem processes and system-wide parameters in ways that significantly diminish the ability of native species to survive and reproduce. Alterations that determine the types of communities that can exist in a given area are of greatest concern. Examples of abiotic processes include:
- fire occurrence, frequency, and intensity;
- geomorphological changes such as erosion and sedimentation rates;
- hydrological regimes, including soil water table;
- nutrient and mineral dynamics, including salinity, alkalinity, and pH;
- light availability (e.g. when an aquatic invader covers an entire water body that would otherwise be open).
Select the one letter below that best describes this species' most severe impact on an abiotic ecosystem process:
A. Severe, possibly irreversible, alteration or disruption of an ecosystem process.
B. Moderate alteration of an ecosystem process.
C. Minor alteration of an ecosystem process.
D. Negligible perceived impact on an ecosystem process.
U. Unknown.
|
U. Unknown |
Reviewed Scientific Publication |
Impact?
Section 1 Scoring Matrix |
Q 1.1 | Q 1.2 | Q 1.3 | Q 1.4 | Score |
A | A | Any | Any | A |
A | B | A,B | Any | A |
A | B | C,D,U | Any | B |
A | C,D,U | Any | Any | B |
B | A | A | Any | A |
B | A | B | A | A |
B | A | B,C | B-D,U | B |
B | A | C,D,U | A | A |
B | A | C,D,U | B-D,U | B |
B | B | A | A | A |
B | C,D,U | A | A | B |
B | B-D | A | B-D,U | B |
B | B-D | B-D,U | Any | B |
B | D,U | C,D,U | A-B | B |
B | D,U | C,D,U | C,D,U | C |
C-D,U | A | A | Any | A |
C | B | A | Any | B |
C | A,B | B-D,U | Any | B |
C | C,D,U | Any | Any | C |
D | A,B | B | Any | B |
D | A,B | C,D,U | Any | C |
D | C | Any | Any | C |
D | D,U | Any | Any | D |
U | A | B,C | Any | B |
U | B,C | A,B | Any | B |
U | B,C | C,D,U | Any | C |
U | U | Any | Any | U |
Four-part score
UBDD
Total Score
C
|
1.2 |
?Impact on plant community
Consider the cumulative ecological impact of this species to the plant communities it invades. Give more weight to changes in plant composition, structure, and interactions that involve rare or keystone species or rare community types. Examples of severe impacts include:
- formation of stands dominated (>75% cover) by the species;
- occlusion (>75% cover) of a native canopy, including a water surface, that eliminates or degrades layers below;
- significant reduction or extirpation of populations of one or more native species.
Examples of impacts usually less than severe include:
- reduction in propagule dispersal, seedling recruitment, or survivorship of native species;
- creation of a new structural layer, including substantial thatch or litter, without elimination or replacement of a pre-existing layer;
- change in density or depth of a structural layer;
- change in horizontal distribution patterns or fragmentation of a native community;
- creation of a vector or intermediate host of pests or pathogens that infect native plant species.
Select the one letter below that best describes this species' impact on community composition, structure and interactions:
A. Severe alteration of plant community composition, structure, or interactions.
B. Moderate alteration of plant community composition.
C. Minor alteration of community composition.
D. Negligible impact known; causes no perceivable change in community composition, structure, or interactions.
U. Unknown.
|
B. Moderate |
Reviewed Scientific Publication |
1.3 |
?Impact on higher trophic levels
Consider the cumulative impact of this species on the animals, fungi, microbes, and other organisms in the communities that it invades. Although a non-native species may provide resources for one or a few native species (e.g. by providing food, nesting sites, etc.), the ranking should be based on the species' net impact on all native species. Give more weight to changes in composition and interactions involving rare or keystone species or rare community types.
Examples of severe impacts include:
- extirpation or endangerment of an existing native species or population;
- elimination or significant reduction in native species' nesting or foraging sites, cover, or other critical resources (i.e., native species habitat), including migratory corridors.
Examples of impacts that are usually less than severe include:
- minor reduction in nesting or foraging sites, cover, etc. for native animals;
- minor reduction in habitat connectivity or migratory corridors;
- interference with native pollinators;
- injurious components, such as awns or spines that damage the mouth and gut of native wildlife species, or production of anti-digestive or acutely toxic chemical that can poison native wildlife species.
Select the one letter below that best describes this species' impact on community composition and interactions:
A. Severe alteration of higher trophic populations, communities, or interactions.
B. Moderate alteration of higher trophic level populations, communities, or interactions.
C. Minor alteration of higher trophic level populations, communities or interactions.
D. Negligible impact; causes no perceivable change in higher trophic level populations, communities, or interactions.
E. Unknown.
|
D. Negligible |
Observational |
1.4 |
?Impact on genetic integrity
Consider whether the species can hybridize with and influence the proportion of individuals with non-native genes within populations of native species. Mechanisms and possible outcomes include:
- production of fertile or sterile hybrids that can outcompete the native species;
- production of sterile hybrids that lower the reproductive output of the native species.
Select the one letter below that best describes this species' impact on genetic integrity:
A. Severe (high proportion of individuals).
B. Moderate (medium proportion of individuals).
C. Minor (low proportion of individuals).
D. No known hybridization.
U. Unknown.
|
D. None |
Reviewed Scientific Publication |
|
2.1 |
?Role of anthropogenic and natural disturbance in establishment
Assess dependence on disturbance, both human and natural, for establishment of this species in wildlands. Examples of anthropogenic disturbances include:
- grazing, browsing, and rooting by domestic livestock and feral animals;
- altered fire regimes, including fire suppression;
- cultivation;
- silvicultural practices;
- altered hydrology due to dams, diversions, irrigation, etc.;
- roads and trails;
- construction;
- nutrient loading from fertilizers, runoff, etc.
Examples of natural disturbance include:
- wildfire;
- floods;
- landslides;
- windthrow;
- native animal activities such as burrowing, grazing, or browsing.
Select the first letter in the sequence below that describes the ability of this species to invade wildlands:
A. Severe invasive potential: this species can establish independent of any known natural or anthropogenic disturbance.
B. Moderate invasive potential: this species may occasionally establish in undisturbed areas but can readily establish in areas with natural disturbances.
C. Low invasive potential: this species requires anthropogenic disturbance to establish.
D. No perceptible invasive potential: this species does not establish in wildlands (though it may persist from former cultivation).
U. Unknown.
|
B. Moderate |
Reviewed Scientific Publication |
Invasiveness?
Section 2 Scoring Matrix |
Total points | Score |
17-21 | A |
11-16 | B |
5-10 | C |
0-4 | D |
More than two U's | U |
Total Points
12
Total Score
B
|
2.2 |
?Local rate of spread with no management
Assess rate of spread in existing localized infestations where the proportion of available habitat invaded is still small when no management measures are implemented.
Select the one letter below that best describes the rate of spread:
A. Increases rapidly (doubling in <10 years)
B. Increases, but less rapidly
C. Stable
D. Declining
U. Unknown
|
B. Increases less rapidly |
Observational |
2.3 |
?Recent trend in total area infested within state
Assess the overall trend in the total area infested by this species statewide. Include current management efforts in this assessment and note them.
Select the one letter below that best describes the current trend:
A. Increasing rapidly (doubling in total range statewide in <10 years)
B. Increasing, but less rapidly
C. Stable
D. Declining
U. Unknown
|
B. Increasing less rapidly |
Observational |
2.4 |
?Innate reproductive potential (see Worksheet A)
Assess the innate reproductive potential of this species. Worksheet A is provided for computing the score.
|
B. Moderate |
Other Published Material |
2.5 |
?Potential for human-caused dispersal
Assess whether this species is currently spread: or has high potential to be spread: by direct or indirect human activity. Such activity may enable the species to overcome natural barriers to dispersal that would not be crossed otherwise, or it may simply increase the natural dispersal of the species. Possible mechanisms for dispersal include:
- commercial sales for use in agriculture, ornamental horticulture, or aquariums;
- use as forage, erosion control, or revegetation;
- presence as a contaminant (seeds or propagules) in bulk seed, hay, feed, soil, packing materials, etc.;
- spread along transportation corridors such as highways, railroads, trails, or canals;
- transport on boats or boat trailers.
Select the one letter below that best describes human-caused dispersal and spread:
A. High: there are numerous opportunities for dispersal to new areas.
B. Moderate: human dispersal occurs, but not at a high level.
C. Low: human dispersal is infrequent or inefficient.
D. Does not occur.
U. Unknown.
|
B. Moderate |
Observational |
2.6 |
? Potential for natural long-distance dispersal
We have chosen 1 km as the threshold of "long-distance." Assess whether this species is frequently spread, or has high potential to be spread, by animals or abiotic mechanisms that can move seed, roots, stems, or other propagules this far. The following are examples of such natural long-distance dispersal mechanisms:
- the species' fruit or seed is commonly consumed by birds or other animals that travel long distances;
- the species' fruits or seeds are sticky or burred and cling to feathers or hair of animals;
- the species has buoyant fruits, seeds, or other propagules that are dispersed by flowing water;
- the species has light propagules that promote long-distance wind dispersal;
- The species, or parts of it, can detach and disperse seeds as they are blown long distances (e.g., tumbleweed).
Select the one letter below that best describes natural long-distance dispersal and spread:
A. Frequent long-distance dispersal by animals or abiotic mechanisms.
B. Occasional long-distance dispersal by animals or abiotic mechanisms.
C. Rare dispersal more than 1 km by animals or abiotic mechanisms.
D. No dispersal of more than 1 km by animals or abiotic mechanisms.
U. Unknown.
|
C. Rare |
Other Published Material |
2.7 |
?Other regions invaded
Assess whether this species has invaded ecological types in other states or countries outside its native range that are analogous to ecological types not yet invaded in your state (see Worksheets B, C, and D for California, Arizona, and Nevada, respectively, in Part IV for lists of ecological types). This information is useful in predicting the likelihood of further spread within your state.
Select the one letter below that best describes the species' invasiveness in other states or countries, outside its native range.
A. This species has invaded 3 or more ecological types elsewhere that exist in your state and are as yet not invaded by this species (e.g. it has invaded Mediterranean grasslands, savanna, and maquis in southern Europe, which are analogous to California grasslands, savanna, and chaparral, respectively).
B. Invades 1 or 2 ecological types that exist but are not yet invaded in your state.
C. Invades elsewhere but only in ecological types that it has already invaded in the state.
D. Not known as an escape anywhere else.
U. Unknown.
|
C. Already invaded |
Reviewed Scientific Publication |
|
3.1 |
?Ecological amplitude/Range (see Worksheet C)
Refer to Worksheet C and select the one letter below that indicates the number of different ecological types that this species invades.
A. Widespread: the species invades at least three major types or at least six minor types.
B. Moderate: the species invades two major types or five minor types.
C. Limited: the species invades only one major type and two to four minor types.
D. Narrow: the species invades only one minor type.
U. Unknown.
|
B. Moderate |
Other Published Material |
Distribution?
Section 3 Scoring Matrix |
Q 3.1 | Q 3.2 | Score |
A | A, B | A |
A | C,D,U | B |
B | A | A |
B | B,C | B |
B | D | C |
C | A,B | B |
C | C,D | C |
D | A | B |
D | B,C | C |
D | D | D |
A,B | U | C |
C,D | U | D |
U | U | U |
Total Score
B
|
3.2 |
?Distribution/Peak frequency (see Worksheet C)
To assess distribution, record the letter that corresponds to the highest percent infested score entered in Worksheet C for any ecological type.
|
B. Moderate |
Observational |
Scores are explained in the "Criteria for Categorizing Invasive Non-Native Plants that Threaten Wildlands".
Section 1: Impact |
Question 1.1 Impact on abiotic ecosystem processes?
Consider the impact on the natural range and variation of abiotic ecosystem processes and system-wide parameters in ways that significantly diminish the ability of native species to survive and reproduce. Alterations that determine the types of communities that can exist in a given area are of greatest concern. Examples of abiotic processes include:
- fire occurrence, frequency, and intensity;
- geomorphological changes such as erosion and sedimentation rates;
- hydrological regimes, including soil water table;
- nutrient and mineral dynamics, including salinity, alkalinity, and pH;
- light availability (e.g. when an aquatic invader covers an entire water body that would otherwise be open).
Select the one letter below that best describes this species' most severe impact on an abiotic ecosystem process:
A. Severe, possibly irreversible, alteration or disruption of an ecosystem process.
B. Moderate alteration of an ecosystem process.
C. Minor alteration of an ecosystem process.
D. Negligible perceived impact on an ecosystem process.
U. Unknown.
|
U
Reviewed Scientific Publication
|
Identify ecosystem processes impacted:
Sources of information:
|
Question 1.2 Impact on plant community composition, structure, and interactions?
Consider the cumulative ecological impact of this species to the plant communities it invades. Give more weight to changes in plant composition, structure, and interactions that involve rare or keystone species or rare community types. Examples of severe impacts include:
- formation of stands dominated (>75% cover) by the species;
- occlusion (>75% cover) of a native canopy, including a water surface, that eliminates or degrades layers below;
- significant reduction or extirpation of populations of one or more native species.
Examples of impacts usually less than severe include:
- reduction in propagule dispersal, seedling recruitment, or survivorship of native species;
- creation of a new structural layer, including substantial thatch or litter, without elimination or replacement of a pre-existing layer;
- change in density or depth of a structural layer;
- change in horizontal distribution patterns or fragmentation of a native community;
- creation of a vector or intermediate host of pests or pathogens that infect native plant species.
Select the one letter below that best describes this species' impact on community composition, structure and interactions:
A. Severe alteration of plant community composition, structure, or interactions.
B. Moderate alteration of plant community composition.
C. Minor alteration of community composition.
D. Negligible impact known; causes no perceivable change in community composition, structure, or interactions.
U. Unknown.
|
B
Reviewed Scientific Publication
|
Identify type of impact or alteration:
Outcompetes other grasses (1). Live plants have allelopathic effect (2) but root material may improve growth of some other grasses (3). Develops dense surface root mat (1). Invades disturbed areas and prevents re-establishment of native species (4).
Not observed to completely displace either native or non-native plants, even as a dominant species in heavily invaded areas (5). Anthoxanthum shoots depressed germination of grass seed but tended to promote germination of legumes (2). Decomposing roots of Anthoxanthum increased growth of subsequent plants (of other species) (3). However, personal observations (5) suggest that this plant does not severely alter species composition, even in heavily infested coastal prairie.
Sources of information:
1. Pitcher D., and M. J. Russo. 1988. Element Stewardship Abstract for Anthoxanthus odoratum. The Nature Conservancy, Washington, D.C. http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu/esadocs/documnts/anthodo.html.
2. Scott D. 1975. Allelopathic interactions of resident tussock grassland species on germination of oversown seed. New Zealand Journal of Experimental Agriculture 3: 135-141.
3. Newbery D. McC. 1979. The effects of decomposing roots on the growth of grassland plants. Journal of Applied Ecology 16: 613-622.
4. U.S. Forest Service, Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry. Pacific Islands Ecosystems at Risk. http://www.hear.org/pier/species/anthoxanthum_odoratum.htm
5. Warner, PJ. Personal observations. Marin, Sonoma, Mendocino Counties, 1996-2005. 707/937-2278; corylus@earthlink.net
|
Question 1.3 Impact on higher trophic levels?
Consider the cumulative impact of this species on the animals, fungi, microbes, and other organisms in the communities that it invades. Although a non-native species may provide resources for one or a few native species (e.g. by providing food, nesting sites, etc.), the ranking should be based on the species' net impact on all native species. Give more weight to changes in composition and interactions involving rare or keystone species or rare community types.
Examples of severe impacts include:
- extirpation or endangerment of an existing native species or population;
- elimination or significant reduction in native species' nesting or foraging sites, cover, or other critical resources (i.e., native species habitat), including migratory corridors.
Examples of impacts that are usually less than severe include:
- minor reduction in nesting or foraging sites, cover, etc. for native animals;
- minor reduction in habitat connectivity or migratory corridors;
- interference with native pollinators;
- injurious components, such as awns or spines that damage the mouth and gut of native wildlife species, or production of anti-digestive or acutely toxic chemical that can poison native wildlife species.
Select the one letter below that best describes this species' impact on community composition and interactions:
A. Severe alteration of higher trophic populations, communities, or interactions.
B. Moderate alteration of higher trophic level populations, communities, or interactions.
C. Minor alteration of higher trophic level populations, communities or interactions.
D. Negligible impact; causes no perceivable change in higher trophic level populations, communities, or interactions.
E. Unknown.
|
D
Observational
|
Identify type of impact or alteration:
Planted as a forage crop, so is probably palatable to livestock. Browsing of coastal prairie plants suggest that the plant is used by wild animals, perhaps rabbits, voles, mice, and deer (1). very casual observations and anecdotes suggest that this plant does not negatively affect native animal species, but is a palatable plant.
Sources of information:
1. Warner, PJ. Personal observations, Salt Pt. State Park (Sonoma Co.), and Mendocino Co. (various locations), 1996-2005. 707/937-2278; corylus@earthlink.net
|
Question 1.4 Impact on genetic integrity?
Consider whether the species can hybridize with and influence the proportion of individuals with non-native genes within populations of native species. Mechanisms and possible outcomes include:
- production of fertile or sterile hybrids that can outcompete the native species;
- production of sterile hybrids that lower the reproductive output of the native species.
Select the one letter below that best describes this species' impact on genetic integrity:
A. Severe (high proportion of individuals).
B. Moderate (medium proportion of individuals).
C. Minor (low proportion of individuals).
D. No known hybridization.
U. Unknown.
|
D
Reviewed Scientific Publication
|
none no native Anthoxanthum spp.
Sources of information:
Hickman, J. C. (ed.) 1993. The Jepson Manual, Higher Plants of California. University of California Press. Berkeley, CA enter text here
|
Section 2: Invasiveness |
Question 2.1 Role of anthropogenic and natural disturbance in establishment?
Assess this species' dependence on disturbance: both human and natural: for establishment in wildlands. Examples of anthropogenic disturbances include:
- grazing, browsing, and rooting by domestic livestock and feral animals;
- altered fire regimes, including fire suppression;
- cultivation;
- silvicultural practices;
- altered hydrology due to dams, diversions, irrigation, etc.;
- roads and trails;
- construction;
- nutrient loading from fertilizers, runoff, etc.
Examples of natural disturbance include:
- wildfire;
- floods;
- landslides;
- windthrow;
- native animal activities such as burrowing, grazing, or browsing.
Select the first letter in the sequence below that describes the ability of this species to invade wildlands:
A. Severe invasive potential: this species can establish independent of any known natural or anthropogenic disturbance.
B. Moderate invasive potential: this species may occasionally establish in undisturbed areas but can readily establish in areas with natural disturbances.
C. Low invasive potential: this species requires anthropogenic disturbance to establish.
D. No perceptible invasive potential: this species does not establish in wildlands (though it may persist from former cultivation).
U. Unknown.
|
B
Observational
|
Describe role of disturbance:
Needs to germinate in disturbed areas (1). However, it does germinate and spread into marginally optimal habitats that lack regular disturbance, such as observed at forest edges in Mendocino County (2). Adult transplants in New Zealand could survive without disturbance, but seedlings could not germinate without it. Germination occurred near back-country huts and rivers (1). But, Anthoxanthum appears to germinate well in relatively undisturbed sites, perhaps where competition from other herbaceous perennials and annuals is minimal (2).
Sources of information:
1. Jesson, L., D. Kelly, and A. Sparrow. 2000. The importance of dispersal, disturbance, and competition for exotic plant invasions in Arthur's Pass National Park, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Botany 38(3): 451-468.enter text here
2. Warner, PJ. Personal observations. Marin, Sonoma, Mendocino Counties, 1996-2005. 707/937-2278; corylus@earthlink.net
|
Question 2.2 Local rate of spread with no management?
Assess this species' rate of spread in existing localized infestations where the proportion of available habitat invaded is still small when no management measures are implemented.
Select the one letter below that best describes the rate of spread:
A. Increases rapidly (doubling in <10 years)
B. Increases, but less rapidly
C. Stable
D. Declining
U. Unknown
|
B
Observational
|
Describe rate of spread:
Other than very limited observational evidence, no information. However, Anthoxanthum does spread into uninvaded areas at a relatively slow rate, based on observations with hand-pulling and subsequent reintroduction into those areas (some of which could be due to regeneration from rhizomes, and not from seeds only) (1). very much a guess based on limited personal observations.
Sources of information:
1. Warner, PJ. Personal observations. Marin, Sonoma, Mendocino Counties, 1996-2005. 707/937-2278; corylus@earthlink.net
|
Question 2.3 Recent trend in total area infested within state?
Assess the overall trend in the total area infested by this species statewide. Include current management efforts in this assessment and note them.
Select the one letter below that best describes the current trend:
A. Increasing rapidly (doubling in total range statewide in <10 years)
B. Increasing, but less rapidly
C. Stable
D. Declining
U. Unknown
|
B
Observational
|
Describe trend:
Anthoxanthum has been well established in California for a very long time, perhaps over 100 years. Most suitable habitat appears to have been exploited, so the trend appears virtually stable (1). However, one observation suggests that upland, moist sites may have been invaded more recently (2), but is this based upon long-time observations, or other evidence, that it was not present until recently? Assessment based on history of establishment and land uses for grazing, along with observations (1).
Sources of information:
1. Warner, PJ. Personal observations. Marin, Sonoma, Mendocino Counties, 1996-2005. 707/937-2278; corylus@earthlink.net
2. Hayes, G. Personal communication to P. Warner, 2004. grey@elkhornslough.org.
|
Question 2.4 Innate reproductive potential?
Assess the innate reproductive potential of this species. Worksheet A is provided for computing the score.
|
B
Other Published Material
|
Describe key reproductive characteristics:
Short-lived, perennial, outcrossing grass (1). Significant differences in morphological traits can develop as adaptations to soil conditions (1). Reproduces from seeds. Self-incompatible. In North Carolina, produced 58 - 1257 seeds/plant (2). Some seeds able to germinate after a year's dormancy (2). Other studies found that buried seeds were not viable after 10 months (2). Seeds have awns that allow them to move within the soil (2). Biology depends upon habitat of a particular population, with higher turnover rates and shorter life of individuals in ecologically marginal populationsn (2).
Sources of information:
1. Kiang Y.T. 1982. Local differentiation of Anthoxanthum odoratum L. populations on roadsides. American Midland Naturalist 107(2): 340-350
2. Pitcher and Russo 1988.
|
Question 2.5 Potential for human-caused dispersal?
Assess whether this species is currently spread: or has high potential to be spread: by direct or indirect human activity. Such activity may enable the species to overcome natural barriers to dispersal that would not be crossed otherwise, or it may simply increase the natural dispersal of the species. Possible mechanisms for dispersal include:
- commercial sales for use in agriculture, ornamental horticulture, or aquariums;
- use as forage, erosion control, or revegetation;
- presence as a contaminant (seeds or propagules) in bulk seed, hay, feed, soil, packing materials, etc.;
- spread along transportation corridors such as highways, railroads, trails, or canals;
- transport on boats or boat trailers.
Select the one letter below that best describes human-caused dispersal and spread:
A. High: there are numerous opportunities for dispersal to new areas.
B. Moderate: human dispersal occurs, but not at a high level.
C. Low: human dispersal is infrequent or inefficient.
D. Does not occur.
U. Unknown.
|
B
Observational
|
Identify dispersal mechanisms:
Near-certain transport along roads (1,2), by mowing equipment, on hiker's shoes (2). I found no information on this, but the literature mentions it occurring along roadsides and in pastures, so presumably seeds could be transported on road equipment or other vehicles. The fact that it occurs near backcountry huts in New Zealand implies that it was transported by hikers (1). Very likely, this species is spread primarily through human impacts, such as mowing and hiking, and especially along roads and trails (2).
Sources of information:
1. Jesson et al. 2000.
2. Warner, PJ. Personal observations. Marin, Sonoma, Mendocino Counties, 1996-2005. 707/937-2278; corylus@earthlink.net
|
Question 2.6 Potential for natural long-distance dispersal?
We have chosen 1 km as the threshold of "long-distance." Assess whether this species is frequently spread, or has high potential to be spread, by animals or abiotic mechanisms that can move seed, roots, stems, or other propagules this far. The following are examples of such natural long-distance dispersal mechanisms:
- the species' fruit or seed is commonly consumed by birds or other animals that travel long distances;
- the species' fruits or seeds are sticky or burred and cling to feathers or hair of animals;
- the species has buoyant fruits, seeds, or other propagules that are dispersed by flowing water;
- the species has light propagules that promote long-distance wind dispersal;
- The species, or parts of it, can detach and disperse seeds as they are blown long distances (e.g., tumbleweed).
Select the one letter below that best describes natural long-distance dispersal and spread:
A. Frequent long-distance dispersal by animals or abiotic mechanisms.
B. Occasional long-distance dispersal by animals or abiotic mechanisms.
C. Rare dispersal more than 1 km by animals or abiotic mechanisms.
D. No dispersal of more than 1 km by animals or abiotic mechanisms.
U. Unknown.
|
C
Other Published Material
|
Identify dispersal mechanisms:
Seed dispersed by wind, water, and animals, but no information on the distance of dispersal. U.S. Forest Service, Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry. Pacific Islands Ecosystems at Risk. http://www.hear.org/pier/species/anthoxanthum_odoratum.htm
Sources of information:
|
Question 2.7 Other regions invaded?
Assess whether this species has invaded ecological types in other states or countries outside its native range that are analogous to ecological types not yet invaded in your state (see Worksheets B, C, and D for California, Arizona, and Nevada, respectively, in Part IV for lists of ecological types). This information is useful in predicting the likelihood of further spread within your state.
Select the one letter below that best describes the species' invasiveness in other states or countries, outside its native range.
A. This species has invaded 3 or more ecological types elsewhere that exist in your state and are as yet not invaded by this species (e.g. it has invaded Mediterranean grasslands, savanna, and maquis in southern Europe, which are analogous to California grasslands, savanna, and chaparral, respectively).
B. Invades 1 or 2 ecological types that exist but are not yet invaded in your state.
C. Invades elsewhere but only in ecological types that it has already invaded in the state.
D. Not known as an escape anywhere else.
U. Unknown.
|
C
Reviewed Scientific Publication
|
Identify other regions:
Native to Eurasia. Has invaded New Zealand (1), Taiwan (2), Chile (open areas, dry soils, humid rock, seaside areas, etc. (3). In US, ranges from northern Florida to southern Canada along east coast, and west to Mississippi River. On west coast, occurs from northern California to Vancouver Island (4). Present on TNC preserves in Oregon, west of the Cascades to the coast (4). In Hawaii, naturalized in pastures, disturbed areas in wet forest, and subalpine shrubland (5). From the literature, Anthoxanthum has probably invaded most, if not all, suitable habitats here in California. However, more evidence of ecotypes invaded (especially upland sites away from the immediate coast) could alter this assessment.
Sources of information:
1. Jesson et al. 2000
2. Kuoh, C.-S., G.-I. Liao, and M-Y. Chen. 1999. Two new naturalized grasses in Taiwan. Taiwania 44(4): 514-519.
3. Baeza, C. M., T. F. Stuessy, and C. Marticorena. 2002. Notes on the Poaceae of the Robinson Crusoe (Juan Fernandez) Islands, Chile. Brittonia 54(3): 154-163.
4. Pitcher and Russo 1988
5. U.S. Forest Service, Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry, Pacific Islands Ecosystems at Risk
|
Section 3: Distribution |
Question 3.1 Ecological amplitude/Range?
Refer to Worksheet C and select the one letter below that indicates the number of different ecological types that this species invades.
A. Widespread: the species invades at least three major types or at least six minor types.
B. Moderate: the species invades two major types or five minor types.
C. Limited: the species invades only one major type and two to four minor types.
D. Narrow: the species invades only one minor type.
U. Unknown.
|
B
Other Published Material
|
Introduced to North America as meadow grass in 1700's and escaped from cultivation (1). Observational evidence suggests that this taxon is restricted to coastal areas, primarily north of the San Francisco Bay Area. Anthoxanthum is widespread in coastal prairie habitats, and also invades moist, open sites in closed cone pine and north coast coniferous forests (2). Assessment based on limited observations in 3 counties along northern California coast.
Sources of information:
1. Pitcher and Russo. 1988
2. Warner, PJ. Personal observations. Marin, Sonoma, Mendocino Counties, 1996-2005. 707/937-2278; corylus@earthlink.net
|
Question 3.2 Distribution/Peak frequency?
To assess distribution, record the letter that corresponds to the highest percent infested score entered in Worksheet C for any ecological type.
|
B
Observational
|
Describe distribution:
Anthoxanthum is virtually ubiquitous in coastal prairie habitat from the Russian River north through Mendocino County, and probably further north (1). Although not as common further south, it does invade upland grassland habitats and disturbed sites in the Santa Cruz Mountains (2). Assessment based on limited and undocumented observations - a cautious guess.
Sources of information:
1. Warner, PJ. Personal observations. Marin, Sonoma, Mendocino Counties, 1996-2005. 707/937-2278; corylus@earthlink.net
2. Hayes, G. Personal communication to P. Warner, 2004. grey@elkhornslough.org.
|
Reaches reproductive maturity in 2 years or less |
Yes |
Dense infestations produce >1,000 viable seed per square meter |
Yes |
Populations of this species produce seeds every year. |
Yes |
Seed production sustained over 3 or more months within a population annually |
No |
Seeds remain viable in soil for three or more years |
No |
Viable seed produced with both self-pollination and cross-pollination |
No |
Has quickly spreading vegetative structures (rhizomes, roots, etc.) that may root at nodes |
No |
Fragments easily and fragments can become established elsewhere |
No |
Resprouts readily when cut, grazed, or burned |
Yes |
Total points: |
5
|
Total unknowns: |
0 |
Total score: |
B?
Scoring Criteria for Worksheet A
A. High reproductive potential (6 or more points).
B. Moderate reproductive potential (4-5 points).
C. Low reproductive potential (3 points or less and less than 3 Unknowns).
U. Unknown (3 or fewer points and 3 or more Unknowns).
|
Related traits:
Seeds produced annually from most plants; responds vigorously to grazing, mowing, or burning.
Worksheet B - Arizona Ecological Types is not included here
(sensu Holland 1986)
Major Ecological Types |
Minor Ecological Types |
Code?
A means >50% of type occurrences are invaded;
B means 20% to 50%;
C means 5% to 20%;
D means present but <5%;
U means unknown (unable to estimate percentage of occurrences invaded)
|
Marine Systems | marine systems | |
Freshwater and Estuarine | lakes, ponds, reservoirs | |
Aquatic Systems | rivers, streams, canals | |
estuaries | |
Dunes | coastal | |
desert | |
interior | |
Scrub and Chaparral | coastal bluff scrub | |
coastal scrub | |
Sonoran desert scrub | |
Mojavean desert scrub (incl. Joshua tree woodland) | |
Great Basin scrub | |
chenopod scrub | |
montane dwarf scrub | |
Upper Sonoran subshrub scrub | |
chaparral | |
Grasslands, Vernal Pools, Meadows, and other Herb Communities | coastal prairie | B, 20% - 50% |
valley and foothill grassland | |
Great Basin grassland | |
vernal pool | |
meadow and seep | |
alkali playa | |
pebble plain | |
Bog and Marsh | bog and fen | |
marsh and swamp | |
Riparian and Bottomland habitat | riparian forest | |
riparian woodland | |
riparian scrub (incl.desert washes) | |
Woodland | cismontane woodland | |
piñon and juniper woodland | |
Sonoran thorn woodland | |
Forest | broadleaved upland forest | |
North Coast coniferous forest | C, 5% - 20% |
closed cone coniferous forest | C, 5% - 20% |
lower montane coniferous forest | |
upper montane coniferous forest | |
subalpine coniferous forest | |
Alpine Habitats | alpine boulder and rock field | |
alpine dwarf scrub | |
|
Amplitude (breadth): |
B |
|
Distribution (highest score): |
B |
Infested Jepson Regions
Click here for a map of Jepson regions
- Cascade Range
- Central West
- Great Valley
- Northwest
- Sierra Nevada
- Southwest