Plant Assessment Form

More Bromus tectorum resources

Bromus tectorum

Common Names: cheatgrass; downy brome

Evaluated on: 2/8/03

List committee review date: 10/02/2003

Re-evaluation date:

Evaluator(s)

Joe DiTomaso
UC Davis
Weed Science Program, Robbins Hall, Univ. California, Davis CA 95616
530-754-8715
DiTomaso@vegmail.ucdavis.edu

List committee members

Carla Bossard
John Randall
Peter Warner
Doug Johnson
John Hall
Dana Backer
Cindy Roye
Matt Brooks

General Comments

No general comments for this species

Table 2. Criteria, Section, and Overall Scores

Overall Score? High

Alert Status? No Alert

Documentation? 3 out of 5

Score

Documentation

1.1

?Impact on abiotic ecosystem processes

A. Severe

Reviewed Scientific Publication

Impact?
Four-part score AABD Total Score
A

1.2

?Impact on plant community

A. Severe

Reviewed Scientific Publication

1.3

?Impact on higher trophic levels

B. Moderate

Reviewed Scientific Publication

1.4

?Impact on genetic integrity

D. None

2.1

?Role of anthropogenic and natural disturbance in establishment

A. Severe

Other Published Material

Invasiveness?
Total Points
14 Total Score B

2.2

?Local rate of spread with no management

A. Increases rapidly

Reviewed Scientific Publication

2.3

?Recent trend in total area infested within state

C. Stable

Observational

2.4

?Innate reproductive potential
(see Worksheet A)

A. High

Reviewed Scientific Publication

2.5

?Potential for human-caused dispersal

B. Moderate

Other Published Material

2.6

? Potential for natural long-distance dispersal

C. Rare

Other Published Material

2.7

?Other regions invaded

C. Already invaded

Other Published Material

3.1

?Ecological amplitude/Range
(see Worksheet C)

A. Widespread

Other Published Material

Distribution?
Total Score A

3.2

?Distribution/Peak frequency
(see Worksheet C)

A. High

Other Published Material

Table 3. Documentation

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.	A Reviewed Scientific Publication
Identify ecosystem processes impacted: Changes the frequency, extent, and timing of wildfires. In many areas that have been invaded by cheatgrass the natural fire cycle has shortened from every 60-100 years to every 3-5 years. Early fine fuel of downy brome forms a continuum between shrubs and bunchgrasses allowing fires to carry farther. The shorter fire frequency has eliminated many shrubs in these communities. As fires become even more frequent, the area will be dominated by annual grasses alone, with the loss of surface soil, nutrients, and near permanent deterioration of the site. Sources of information: Young, J. 2000. Bromus tectorum. In, Invasive Plants of Californias Wildlands. Eds., C. Bossard, J. Randall, M. Hoshovsky. UC Press, Berkeley; Whisenant, S.G. 1990. Changing fire frequencies on Idahos Snake River Plains. USDA For. Ser. Gen Tech. Rep INT-276, 4-10; West, N.E. 1979. Basic synecological relationships of sagebrush-dominated lands in the Great Basin and the Colorado Plateau. Pp. 33-41 In Anon. The Sagebrush Ecosystem: A Symposium, Utah State University, College of Natural Resources, Logan, Utah; Whisenant, S.G. 1989. Changing fire frequencies on Idaho's Snake River Plains: Ecological and management implications. Proceedings-Symposium on Cheatgrass Invasion, Shrub Die-off, and Other Aspects of Shrub Biology and Management. General Technical Report INT-276 Forest Service Intermountain Research Station, November 1990; Many others papers, see Mosley, J.C., S.C. Bunting and M.E. Manoukian. 1999. Cheatgrass. In, Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds. Eds. R.L. Sheley and J.K. Petroff. Oregon State Univ. Press, Corvallis for review and other citations.
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 Reviewed Scientific Publication
Identify type of impact or alteration: Can displace native vegetation by outcompeting them for soil moisture. Downy brome is well adapted to fire and often dominates plant communities after fire (Melgoza et al. 1990). Changes in fire frequency can complete alter vegetation and lead to monotypic stands of downy brome. Sources of information: Melgoza, G., R.S. Nowak, and R.J. Tausch. 1990. Soil water exploitation after fire: Competition between Bromus tectorum (cheatgrass) and two native species. Oecologia 83:7-13; Young, J. 2000. Bromus tectorum. In, Invasive Plants of Californias Wildlands. Eds., C. Bossard, J. Randall, M. Hoshovsky. UC Press, Berkeley; Many others papers, see Mosley, J.C., S.C. Bunting and M.E. Manoukian. 1999. Cheatgrass. In, Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds. Eds. R.L. Sheley and J.K. Petroff. Oregon State Univ. Press, Corvallis for review and other citations.
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.	B Reviewed Scientific Publication
Identify type of impact or alteration: Has had a negative effect on wildlife, particularly due to change in fire frequency. Does have a positive impact of forage for wildland in spring. Slow-moving fauna such as desert tortoises are sometimes killed in the rapidly moving fires. The effects on native game species are largely unknown, but expected to be similar to livestock. Sources of information: Young, J. 2000. Bromus tectorum. In, Invasive Plants of Californias Wildlands. Eds., C. Bossard, J. Randall, M. Hoshovsky. UC Press, Berkeley
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
Hybridization with other species rarely occurs under natural conditions. Unlikely to hydridize with other native Bromus species. No evidence that this has occurred. Sources of information: Upadhaya, M.K., R. Turkington, and D. McIlvride. 1986. The biology of Canadian weeds. 75. Bromus tectorum L. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 66:689-709; Rice, K.J., and R.N. Mack. 1991. Ecological genetics of Bromus tectorum: intraspecific variation in phenotypic plasticity. Oecologia 88:84-90.
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.	A Reviewed Scientific Publication
Describe role of disturbance: Cultivation and subsequent land abandonment, excessive livestock grazing and repeated fires can all interact to proliferate downy brome. However, it can also thrive in areas that have never been cultivated or grazed by domestic livestock. Movement into grasslands and scrublands appear to be initially in disturbed areas, but it is then capable of moving into undisturbed sites. In undisturbed sites, cheatgrass will most commonly spread along soil cracks and work its way outward into the natural community. Sources of information: See Mosley, J.C., S.C. Bunting and M.E. Manoukian. 1999. Cheatgrass. In, Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds. Eds. R.L. Sheley and J.K. Petroff. Oregon State Univ. Press, Corvallis for review and other citations; Douglas, B.J., A.G. Thomas and D. A. Derksen. 1990. Downy brome (Bromus tectorum) invasion into southwestern Saskatchewan. Canadian J. Plant Sci. 70:1143-1151; Rice, K.J., and R.N. Mack. 1991. Ecological genetics of Bromus tectorum: A hierarchical analysis of phenotypic variation. Oecologia 88:77-83.
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	A Reviewed Scientific Publication
Describe rate of spread: Can double in less than 10 years. Because downy brome now occupies 100 million acres in the US and was only introduced a bit over 100 years ago, it is clear that it is capable of doubling its infestation level within 10 years. Sources of information: Mosley, J.C., S.C. Bunting and M.E. Manoukian. 1999. Cheatgrass. In, Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds. Eds. R.L. Sheley and J.K. Petroff. Oregon State Univ. Press, Corvallis.
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 Observational
Describe trend: Probably is remaining stable throughout the west, including California. Because it has occupied the full extent of its range, it is likely to be stable at this time. Sources of information: Observational information.
Question 2.4 Innate reproductive potential? Assess the innate reproductive potential of this species. Worksheet A is provided for computing the score.	A Reviewed Scientific Publication
Describe key reproductive characteristics: Young, J. 2000. Bromus tectorum. In, Invasive Plants of Californias Wildlands. Eds., C. Bossard, J. Randall, M. Hoshovsky. UC Press, Berkeley; Mosley, J.C., S.C. Bunting and M.E. Manoukian. 1999. Cheatgrass. In, Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds. Eds. R.L. Sheley and J.K. Petroff. Oregon State Univ. Press, Corvallis; Young, J.A. and R.A. Evans. 1985. Demography of Bromus tectorum in Artemisia communities. In: J. White (ed.). The Population Structure of Vegetation. Dr. W. Junk Publishers, Dordrecht, Netherlands; Upadhaya, M.K., R. Turkington, and D. McIlvride. 1986. The biology of Canadian weeds. 75. Bromus tectorum L. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 66:689-709. Sources of information: Spread by attachment to human clothing or by clinging to hair and fur of livestock. Contaminated grain seed probably was the early method of dispersal. Seeds can also be dispersed as a contaminant in hay and straw or by mud clinging to machinery. Not as important in downy brome at it is in other longer awned annual grasses.
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: Spread by attachment to human clothing or by clinging to hair and fur of livestock. Contaminated grain seed probably was the early method of dispersal. Seeds can also be dispersed as a contaminant in hay and straw or by mud clinging to machinery. Not as important in downy brome at it is in other longer awned annual grasses. Sources of information: Young, J. 2000. Bromus tectorum. In, Invasive Plants of Californias Wildlands. Eds., C. Bossard, J. Randall, M. Hoshovsky. UC Press, Berkeley; Mosley, J.C., S.C. Bunting and M.E. Manoukian. 1999. Cheatgrass. In, Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds. Eds. R.L. Sheley and J.K. Petroff. Oregon State Univ. Press, Corvallis
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: Spread by wind, attachment to animal fur, or by small rodents. Animals can also transport seed in their feces and hooves. Movement by natural means probably not very long distance. Sources of information: Young, J. 2000. Bromus tectorum. In, Invasive Plants of Californias Wildlands. Eds., C. Bossard, J. Randall, M. Hoshovsky. UC Press, Berkeley
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: Has invaded other areas of Europe, southern Russia, west central Asia, most of North America, Japan, South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Iceland, and Greenland. Native to southern Europe, northern Africa, and southwestern Asia. One of the most widely invasive species around the world. Sources of information: Young, J. 2000. Bromus tectorum. In, Invasive Plants of Californias Wildlands. Eds., C. Bossard, J. Randall, M. Hoshovsky. UC Press, Berkeley; Mosley, J.C., S.C. Bunting and M.E. Manoukian. 1999. Cheatgrass. In, Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds. Eds. R.L. Sheley and J.K. Petroff. Oregon State Univ. Press, Corvallis; Upadhaya, M.K., R. Turkington, and D. McIlvride. 1986. The biology of Canadian weeds. 75. Bromus tectorum L. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 66:689-709.
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
First introduced to the US in 1861 into the east coast and first found in California around Yosemite in 1900. Most common in sagebrush/bunchgrass communities, although its distribution extends to higher-elevation juniper, pinyon-juniper, and pine woodlands. Sources of information: Young, J. 2000. Bromus tectorum. In, Invasive Plants of Californias Wildlands. Eds., C. Bossard, J. Randall, M. Hoshovsky. UC Press, Berkeley; Mosley, J.C., S.C. Bunting and M.E. Manoukian. 1999. Cheatgrass. In, Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds. Eds. R.L. Sheley and J.K. Petroff. Oregon State Univ. Press, Corvallis
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.	A Other Published Material
Describe distribution: Widespread throughout California. Dominant annual grass on sagebrush rangelands on the Modoc Plateau and along the eastern Sierra Nevada to Owens Valley. Also in the coniferous forest zone. Widespread throughout the Great Basin. Less common in valley grasslands. Most common introduced annual grass in the United States. Today, Bromus tectorum is the dominant species on more than 100 million acres of the Intermountain west. Although Bromus tectorum can be found in both disturbed and undisturbed shrub-steppe and intermountain grasslands (e.g., where dominant grasses are Agropyron spicatum = Pesudorogneria spicata and Festuca idahoensis), the largest infestations are usually found in disturbed shrub-steppe areas, overgrazed rangeland, abandoned fields, eroded areas, sand dunes, road verges, and waste places. Sources of information: Young, J. 2000. Bromus tectorum. In, Invasive Plants of Californias Wildlands. Eds., C. Bossard, J. Randall, M. Hoshovsky. UC Press, Berkeley; Mosley, J.C., S.C. Bunting and M.E. Manoukian. 1999. Cheatgrass. In, Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds. Eds. R.L. Sheley and J.K. Petroff. Oregon State Univ. Press, Corvallis; Whisenant, S.G. 1989. Changing fire frequencies on Idaho's Snake River Plains: Ecological and management implications. Proceedings-Symposium on Cheatgrass Invasion, Shrub Die-off, and Other Aspects of Shrub Biology and Management. General Technical Report INT-276 Forest Service Intermountain Research Station, November 1990; Carpenter, A.T. and T.A. Murray. 2002. Bromus tectorum. The Nature Conservancy. Element Stewardship Abstract http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu/esadocs/documnts/bromtec.html

Worksheet A - Innate reproductive potential

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	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	No
Total points:	7
Total unknowns:	0
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:

Worksheet B - Arizona Ecological Types is not included here

Worksheet C - California Ecological Types

(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
Aquatic Systems	estuaries
Dunes	coastal
	desert
	interior
Scrub and Chaparral	coastal bluff scrub
	coastal scrub	D, < 5%
	Sonoran desert scrub
	Mojavean desert scrub (incl. Joshua tree woodland)
	Great Basin scrub	A, > 50%
	chenopod scrub
	montane dwarf scrub
	Upper Sonoran subshrub scrub
	chaparral	D, < 5%
Grasslands, Vernal Pools, Meadows, and other Herb Communities	coastal prairie	C, 5% - 20%
	valley and foothill grassland	A, > 50%
	Great Basin grassland
	vernal pool
	meadow and seep
	alkali playa
	pebble plain
Bog and Marsh	bog and fen
Bog and Marsh	marsh and swamp
Riparian and Bottomland habitat	riparian forest
	riparian woodland
	riparian scrub (incl.desert washes)
Woodland	cismontane woodland	B, 20% - 50%
	piñon and juniper woodland
	Sonoran thorn woodland
Forest	broadleaved upland forest
	North Coast coniferous forest
	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 Habitats	alpine dwarf scrub
	Amplitude (breadth):	A
	Distribution (highest score):	A

Infested Jepson Regions

Click here for a map of Jepson regions

Cascade Range
Central West
Great Valley
Northwest
Sierra Nevada
Southwest
Modoc Plateau
Sierra Nevada East
Desert Province
Mojave Desert
Sonoran Desert

California Invasive Plant Council

Protecting California’s environment and economy from invasive plants

Plant Assessment Form

More Bromus tectorum resources

Bromus tectorum

Evaluator(s)

List committee members

General Comments

Table 2. Criteria, Section, and Overall Scores

Table 3. Documentation

Worksheet A - Innate reproductive potential

Related traits:

Worksheet C - California Ecological Types

Infested Jepson Regions