Plant Assessment Form
More Atriplex semibaccata resources
Atriplex semibaccata
Synonyms: Atriplex denticulata, Atriplex flagellaris
Common Names: Australian saltbush; berry saltbush; creeping saltbush; scrambing berry saltbush
Evaluated on: 8/6/04
List committee review date: 27/08/2004
Re-evaluation date:
Evaluator(s)
John J. Knapp, Invasive Plant Program Manager
Santa Catalina Island Conservancy
PO Box 2739 Avalon, CA 90704
310.510.1299
knappweed@catalinaisp.com
Brianna Richardson, Project Manager
California Invasive Plant Council
1442-A Walnut St. #462, Berkeley, CA 94709
510.843.3902
brichardson@cal-ipc.org
List committee members
Joe DiTomaso
John Randall
Cynthia Roye
Alison Stanton
Jake Sigg
Peter Warner.
General Comments
Native origin--Australia.
On Santa Catalina Island, A. semibaccata populations are underestimated because the extent of large populations could not be recorded accurately due to the lack of visibility, which is restricted by other vegetation, flat topography, the species' prostrate habit, and distance in the case of aerial and coastal surveys.
|
|
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 |
Moderate
|
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.
|
C. Minor |
Other Published Material |
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
CADC
Total Score
B
|
| 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.
|
A. Severe |
Other Published Material |
| 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 |
Other Published Material |
| 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.
|
C. Minor/Low |
Other Published Material |
|
| 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 |
Other Published Material |
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
|
C. Stable |
Other Published Material |
| 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
|
C. Stable |
Other Published Material |
| 2.4 |
?Innate reproductive potential
(see Worksheet A)
Assess the innate reproductive potential of this species. Worksheet A is provided for computing the score.
|
A. High |
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 |
Other Published Material |
| 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.
|
B. Occasional |
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 |
Other Published Material |
|
| 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.
|
A. Widespread |
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.
|
C. Low |
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.
|
C
Other Published Material
|
Identify ecosystem processes impacted:
Alters fire intensity. Increases local soil moisture and nutrient content by bringing minerals, water, and chemicals to the soil surface. Can be used to revegetate mining sites. May reduce SE levels in soil. Minor alteration of fire, water, and nutrient regimes.
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.
|
A
Other Published Material
|
Identify type of impact or alteration:
A ground spreading plant, displaces native plants. One plant can form a mat up to 4 ft in diameter. Has a dramatic effect on island grassland populations. Forms dense stands, reduces native vegetation, creates thick ground cover.
Sources of information:
|
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
Other Published Material
|
Identify type of impact or alteration:
Seeds eaten by birds. Flowers used by the pygmy blue butterfly. No negative impacts to higher trophic levels documented in the literature. May cause damage through extirpation of native vegetation used as cover and for food. Could rate a "C."
Sources of information:
Randall, JM and MC Hoshovsky. 2000. Atriplex semibaccata. In, Invasive Plants of California's Wildlands. C. Bossard, J. Randall, M. Hoshovsky (eds.) 59-61. University Press, Los Angeles.
Las Pilitas Nursery website: www.laspilitas.com/butterflies
|
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.
|
C
Other Published Material
|
31 closely related California natives, some of which are rare or endangered. A. semibaccata can possibly hybridize with two Santa Catalina Island native slabush species (A. coulterie [listed as G2 by NatureServe] and A. pacifica [listed as G3 by NatureServe]). 46 native taxa are in the genus Atriplex in California. A. semibaccata hybridizes readily with A. spinibractea in Australia. No information currently exists on whether A. semibaccata is hybridizing with CA natives. Trials are being conducted on Catalina Island to try to produce a hybrid between A. semibaccata and two native spp
Sources of information:
Randall, JM and MC Hoshovsky. 2000. Atriplex semibaccata. In, Invasive Plants of California's Wildlands. C. Bossard, J. Randall, M. Hoshovsky (eds.) 59-61. University Press, Los Angeles.
DiTomaso, J., E. Healy. Weeds of California and Other Western States. Not yet published.
Personal communication: B. Richardson w/ John Knapp. Email 8/10/2004.
Harden, G.J. 1990. Flora of New South Wales volume 1. New South Wales University Press.
Hickman, J.C. (ed.). 1993. The Jepson manual of higher plants of California. Pp. 501-505. University of California Press, Berkeley.
|
| 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.
|
C
Other Published Material
|
Describe role of disturbance:
Prefers areas that have been heavily grazed or disturbed. Readily establishes in areas newly developed, roadsides, margins of cultivated fields, coastal marshes. Most establishment attributed to disturbance.
Sources of information:
Randall, JM and MC Hoshovsky. 2000. Atriplex semibaccata. In, Invasive Plants of California's Wildlands. C. Bossard, J. Randall, M. Hoshovsky (eds.) 59-61. University Press, Los Angeles.
Harden, G.J. 1990. Flora of New South Wales volume 1. New South Wales University Press.
Wilken, D. and Hannah, L. 1998. Channel Islands National Park Species Literature Review. Unpublished.
|
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
|
C
Other Published Material
|
Describe rate of spread:
Naturalized in localzed areas on Santa Catalina Island prior to 1921. Naturalzed widely by 1966 and 2003. Spread by seed and vegetatively is slow. A large amount of unifested habitat exists on Catalina Island.
Sources of information:
Millspaugh, C.F. and Nuttall, L.W. 1923. Flora of Santa Catalina Island. Pp. 91-92. Field Museum of Natural History, Botany v.5. Chicago.
Thorne, R.F. 1967. A flora of Santa Catalina Island, California. Aliso, 6(3):1-77.
Knapp, J.J. 2003. Prioritized invasive plant management for the Santa Catalina Island Conservancy. Unpublished.
USDA. No Date. Conservation plant characteristics for: Australian saltbush. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service.
Observational, Peter Warner, Joe DiTomaso, 2004
|
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
|
C
Other Published Material
|
Describe trend:
Species not targeted for removal on Catalina as of 2003 (1). Occupies 53,559,275 square ft. on Santa Catalina Island (2). Common on Anacapa Island and in a wide range of habitats on other Northern Channel Islands such as grasslands and disturbed habitats (3). Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve (4). Inland Empire California State Parks (5). A. semibaccata is too widespread for control measures.
Sources of information:
|
Question 2.4 Innate reproductive potential?
Assess the innate reproductive potential of this species. Worksheet A is provided for computing the score.
|
A
Other Published Material
|
Describe key reproductive characteristics:
Reproduces by seed only. Flowers April-December. Seeds produced summer-December. Likely self-pollinating (other Atriplex are). Seeds produced in "large numbers," though others state low seed abundance. Seed persistance in soil is unknown. Resprouts when cut. Produces seed annually on Catalina Island. 6 points.
Sources of information:
Randall, JM and MC Hoshovsky. 2000. Atriplex semibaccata. In, Invasive Plants of California's Wildlands. C. Bossard, J. Randall, M. Hoshovsky (eds.) 59-61. University Press, Los Angeles.
Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve. 2000. Weed control by species. Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve. Pp. 1-57.
Wilken, D. and Hannah, L. 1998. Channel Islands National Park Species Literature Review.
Randall, J.M. and Hoshovsky, M.C. 2000. Atriplex semibaccata. In, Invasive Plants of California's Wildlands. (eds.) C. Bossard, J. Randall, and M. Hoshovsky. Pp. 59-61. University Press, Los Angeles.
Knapp, J.J. 2004. Prioritized invasive plant management plan for the Santa Catalina Conservancy. Unpublished.
USDA. No Date. Conservation plant characteristics for: Australian saltbush. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service.
|
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
Other Published Material
|
Identify dispersal mechanisms:
Was promoted as livestock forage, as a ground cover, for erosion control, and to attract birds. Recently promoted as a fire-rsistant ground cover and for reclamation of mined sites in the southwest. Seeds dispersed by human activities. Disposal of soil from urban areas to the Interior may transport seed to new locales. Sold horticulturally. Currently sold horticulturally and for revegetation. Readily moved by soil transport.
Sources of information:
Randall, JM and MC Hoshovsky. 2000. Atriplex semibaccata. In, Invasive Plants of California's Wildlands. C. Bossard, J. Randall, M. Hoshovsky (eds.) 59-61. University Press, Los Angeles.
DiTomaso, J., E. Healy. Weeds of California and Other Western States. Not yet published.
de Villiers, AJ, MW van Rooyen, GK Theron, AS Claassens. 1996. Tolerance of six Namaqualand pioneer species ot saline soil conditions. South African Journal of Plant and Soil 14(1): 38-42.
Las Pilitas Nursery website: www.laspilitas.com/butterflies
Wilken, D. and L. Hannah. 1998. Channel Islands National Park Species Literature Review.
Knapp, JJ. Personal observations from 2001-2004 on Santa Catalina Island, CA. 310.510.1299.
Observational, Peter Warner, Joe DiTomaso, 2004.
|
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.
|
B
Other Published Material
|
Identify dispersal mechanisms:
Fruits are dispersed by frugivores: mammals, birds, reptiles, and ants. Seeds dispersed by water, in mud or soil movement, and animals. Fleshy bright red fruits make them attractive to vectors, and have been found as a dietary constitute of several fauna, which can disperse the seeds over long distances.
Sources of information:
Randall, JM and MC Hoshovsky. 2000. Atriplex semibaccata. In, Invasive Plants of California's Wildlands. C. Bossard, J. Randall, M. Hoshovsky (eds.) 59-61. University Press, Los Angeles.
DiTomaso, J., E. Healy. Weeds of California and Other Western States. Not yet published.
Wilken, D. and L. Hannah. 1998. Channel Islands National Park Species Literature Review.
Observational, Peter Warner, Joe DiTomaso, 2004.
|
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
Other Published Material
|
Identify other regions:
Found in NV, AZ, NM, UT, TX. Introduced to South Africa, Chile, Tasmania, Hawaii, Canary Island, South America, central Asia. Similar habitats to those invaded in CA.
Sources of information:
DiTomaso, J., E. Healy. Weeds of California and Other Western States. Not yet published.
Wilken, D, L. Hannah. 1998. Atriplex semibaccata R. Br. (Chenopodiaceae) Australian saltbush, creeping saltbush. Santa Barbara Botanic Garden.
de Villiers, AJ, MW van Rooyen, GK Theron, AS Claassens. 1996. Tolerance of six Namaqualand pioneer species ot saline soil conditions. South African Journal of Plant and Soil 14(1): 38-42.
Wilken, D. and L. Hannah. 1998. Channel Islands National Park Species Literature Review.
|
| 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.
|
A
Other Published Material
|
Introduced to CA as livestock forage, Tulare Co in 1910. Found in margins of grassland, scrub, shrubland, and salt marshes, waste places, and woodland below 3,280 ft. Found in the Mojave and Sonoran deserts, and arid parts of the South Coast, Central Coast, SF Bay area, and Central Valley to Glenn Co. Coastal areas and salt marshes from San Diego to Mendocino Co, as well as all Channel Islands. Common in grasslands on Santa Cruz Island. On Santa Catalina Island, 3308 populations were recorded and the following is the percentage of habitat type invaded: bare soil-2.8%, beach-3.1%, coastal scrub-0.1%, coastal scrub/grassland-6.3%, grassland-0.56%, non-native scrub-0.00%, and riparian-0.17% (2). In 1966, coastal bluff scrub was also invaded on Santa Catalina Island (3). Also found in coastal marsh (4). Considered a regional noxious weed by CDFA. Found in at least 6 major and 11 minor ecotypes in CA.
Sources of information:
Randall, JM and MC Hoshovsky. 2000. Atriplex semibaccata. In, Invasive Plants of California's Wildlands. C. Bossard, J. Randall, M. Hoshovsky (eds.) 59-61. University Press, Los Angeles.
DiTomaso, J., E. Healy. Weeds of California and Other Western States. Not yet published.
Millspaugh, C.F. and Nuttall, L.W. 1923. Flora of Santa Catalina Island. Pp. 91-92. Field Museum of Natural History, Botany v.5. Chicago.
Knapp, J.J. 2004. Prioritzed invasive plant management plan for the Santa Catalina Island Conservancy. Unpublished.
Thorne, R.F. 1967. A flora of Santa Catalina Island, California. Aliso, 6(3):1-77.
Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve. 2000. Weed control by species. Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve. Pp. 1-57.
Wilken, D. and Hannah, L. 1998. Channel Islands National Park Species Literature Review.
Stone, C.P., C.W. Smith, and J.T. Tunison, eds. 1992. Alien plant invasions in native ecosystems of Hawaii: Management and research. University of HawaiI Cooperative National Park Resources Unit, Honolulu, Hawaii.
|
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.
|
C
Observational
|
Describe distribution:
On Catalina Island, ranks a "C." Statewide distribution unknown.
Sources of information:
DiTomaso, J., E. Healy. Weeds of California and Other Western States. Not yet published.
Knapp, JJ. 2004. Prioritized invasive plant management plan for the Santa Catalina Island Conservancy. Unpublished.
Thorne, RF. 1967. A flora of Santa Catalina Island, California. Aliso 6(3): 1-77.
Observational, Peter Warner, Joe DiTomaso, 2004.
|
| Reaches reproductive maturity in 2 years or less |
Yes |
| Dense infestations produce >1,000 viable seed per square meter |
Unknown |
| Populations of this species produce seeds every year. |
Unknown |
| Seed production sustained over 3 or more months within a population annually |
Yes |
| Seeds remain viable in soil for three or more years |
Yes |
| Viable seed produced with both self-pollination and cross-pollination |
Yes |
| 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: |
6
|
| Total unknowns: |
2 |
| Total score: |
A?
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 in "large" numbers.
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 | U, Unknown |
| desert | |
| interior | |
| Scrub and Chaparral | coastal bluff scrub | U, Unknown |
| coastal scrub | C, 5% - 20% |
| Sonoran desert scrub | U, Unknown |
| Mojavean desert scrub (incl. Joshua tree woodland) | U, Unknown |
| Great Basin scrub | |
| chenopod scrub | |
| montane dwarf scrub | |
| Upper Sonoran subshrub scrub | U, Unknown |
| chaparral | |
| Grasslands, Vernal Pools, Meadows, and other Herb Communities | coastal prairie | U, Unknown |
| valley and foothill grassland | U, Unknown |
| Great Basin grassland | |
| vernal pool | |
| meadow and seep | |
| alkali playa | |
| pebble plain | |
| Bog and Marsh | bog and fen | |
| marsh and swamp | U, Unknown |
| Riparian and Bottomland habitat | riparian forest | |
| riparian woodland | |
| riparian scrub (incl.desert washes) | U, Unknown |
| Woodland | cismontane woodland | U, Unknown |
| piñon and juniper woodland | |
| Sonoran thorn woodland | |
| Forest | broadleaved upland forest | |
| North Coast coniferous forest | |
| closed cone coniferous forest | |
| lower montane coniferous forest | |
| upper montane coniferous forest | |
| subalpine coniferous forest | |
| Alpine Habitats | alpine boulder and rock field | |
| alpine dwarf scrub | |
|
Amplitude (breadth): |
D |
|
Distribution (highest score): |
C |
Infested Jepson Regions
Click here for a map of Jepson regions
- Central West
- Great Valley
- Southwest
