Plant Assessment Form
More Ehrharta calycina resources
Ehrharta calycina
Synonyms: Aira capensis L.f., Ehrharta ascendens Schrad, E. auriculata Steud., E. geniculata (Thunb) Thunb., E. laxiflora Schrad., R. ovata Nees, E. paniculataSw.ex Poir, E. undulata Nees ex Trin., Melica festucoides Licht ex Trin., Melica geniculata Thunb., Trochera calycina (Sm. P. Beauv,)
Common Names: purple veldtgrass; African veldtgrass; perennial veldt grass
Evaluated on: 8/16/04
List committee review date: 27/08/2004
Re-evaluation date:
Evaluator(s)
Cynthia L. Roye, Associate State Park Resource Ecologist
Natural Resources Division, California State Parks
P.O. Box 942896, Sacramtnto, CA 94296-0001
(916) 653-9083
croye@parks.ca.gov
List committee members
Joe DiTomaso
Peter Warner
Jake Sigg
John Randall
Cynthia Roye
Alison Stanton
General Comments
This plant constitutes a serious weed that is hard to control. As of 2004 it is primarily found in coastal southern California although populations do occur in Sonoma County.
|
|
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 |
High
|
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 |
3.5 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.
|
A. Severe |
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
AABD
Total Score
A
|
| 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.
|
B. Moderate |
Reviewed Scientific Publication |
| 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.
|
A. Severe |
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
17
Total Score
A
|
| 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
|
A. Increases rapidly |
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
|
A. Increasing rapidly |
Reviewed Scientific Publication |
| 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 |
Reviewed Scientific Publication |
| 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 |
Other Published Material |
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:
Alters fire cycle.enter text here
Sources of information:
Pickart, A.J. in Bossard et al., eds. 2000. Invasive plants of California's wildlands. Univ. of CA Press;
|
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:
"Displaces natives at an alarming rate" per TNC Weed Report. Can inhibit the return of native vegetation, become a dominant, sometimes growing in pure stands, and maintain dominance indefinitely. Frequent fires may lead to type conversion and may threatern rare endemics sauch as Arctostaqphylos morroensis.
Sources of information:
Odion, D.and C. Tyler. 2002. Are long fire-free periods needed to maintain the endangered, fire-recruiting shrub Arctostaphylos morroensisn(Ericaceae). Conservation Ecology 6 (2):4 as accessed online @:http://www.consecol.org/vol6/iss2/art4; Smith, Trish and Smith, Kara Woodruff, 1998-99 Weed Survey, The Nature Conservancy, Guadalupe-Nipomo and Lanphere Preserves; Unknown. 1996. Veldtgrass and beachgrass control. Final Report of the Successful Creation of Wetlands and Restoration of Uplands at San Antonio Terrace Vandenberg AFB, California. Pgs 2-91 - 2-96; Holland, V.L. date unknown. The El Moro Elfin Forest, Introduction as accessed 10/8/03 at: http://biosci.calpoly.edu/biosci/faculty/holland/ELFIN.html.
|
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:
Is a highly palatable pasture grass. May alter the substrate or limit the arthropod food base for California legless lizard, a Species of Special Concern; loss of bare sand eliminates habitat for the Western snowy plover, the Morro Bay kangaroo rat, and Morro Bay banded dune snail; Food host to butterfly larvae of several families where introduced in Australia.
Sources of information:
Magness, J. R. et al 1971. Food and feed crops of the United States. Interregion Research Project IR-4, IR Bul. 1 (Bul. 828 New Jersey Agr. Expt. Sta.)as cited by Hoare, D.B. Ehrharta calycina accessed 5/5/04 at: http://www.fao.org/ag/AGP/AGPC/doc/GBASE/Safricadata/ercal.htm; California Department of Fish and Game. Habitat and Planning Branch. California's Plants and Animals as accessed 5/5/04 at: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/hcpb/cgi-bin/read_one.asp?specy=reptiles&idNum=17; Chipping, D. 1998. Ecological and geological impacts of exotic plants on coastal ecosystems and processes. PORC CONF CALIFORNIA WORLD OCEAN. 1410-1417 (abstract only) accessed 5/20/03 at: http://216.239.3.100/search?=cache:6APenHqbeSsj:www.nature.nps.gov/epmt/abstracts; South Australian Butterflies Caterpillar Foodhost list as accessed 10/8/03 at: http://users.chariot.net.au/~rgrund/foodhost1.htm
|
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. The genus Ehrharta is endemic to South Africa.
Sources of information:
Rossiter, R.C. 1947. Studies on perennial Veldt grass. Commonwealth of Australia Council for Scientific and Industrial Research. Bulletin 227. 1947.
|
| 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
Other Published Material
|
Describe role of disturbance:
Can establish in mature maritime chaparral, readily establishes in dunes, areas with some natural disturbance. Disturbance may aid spread.
Sources of information:
Holland, V.L. date unknown. The El Moro Elfin Forest, Introduction as accessed 10/8/03 at: http://biosci.calpoly.edu/biosci/faculty/holland/ELFIN.html.; Baird. A. M. 1977. Abstract of: Regeneration after fire in Kings Park, Perth, Western Australia. Journal of Royal Society of Western Australia, 60 (1):1-22; Unknown. 1996. Veldt grass and beachgrass control. Final Report of the successful creation of wetlands and restoration of San Antonio Terrace, Vandenberg AFB, California. Pgs. 2-91 - 2-96.
|
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
Other Published Material
|
Describe rate of spread:
Can increase > 100% in one year when untreated per D. Walters, 1996, as cited by Chesnut. 1999.
Sources of information:
Chesnut, J. 1999. A review of weed threats to the Nipomo Dunes: Final Draft. Accessed in .pdf from http://www.special-places.org/library.htm, 5/5/04; Unknown. 1996. Veldt grass and beachgrass control. Final Report of the successful creation of wetlands and restoration of San Antonio Terrace, Vandenberg AFB, California. Pgs. 2-91 - 2-96.
|
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
|
A
Reviewed Scientific Publication
|
Describe trend:
Sources of information:
Veldt grass and beachgrass control. Final Report of the successful creation of wetlands and restoration of San Antonio Terrace, Vandenberg AFB, California. Pgs. 2-91 - 2-96.enter text here
|
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:
Seeds, bulblets, rhizomes,prostrate form roots at nodes where there is soil contact, is essentially cross-fertile although a small percentage of plants germinate from selfing. Resprouts following fire. Has large seed bank (75,000 seeds/sq. m.). Sprouts in both light and dark conditions suggesting this species can sprout from seeds on the soil surface or from buried seeds. In Australia germination can occur at any time of year with suitable moisture, per Smith et al.`.
Sources of information:
Rossiter, R.C. 1947. Studies on perennial Veldt grass. Commonwealth of Australia Council for Scientific and Industrial Research. Bulletin 227. 1947; Smith et al. 1999. Comparitive seed germination ecology of Austrostipa compressa and Ehrharta calycina (Poaceae) in a Western Australian Banksia woodland. Australian Journal od Ecology 24:35-42; Chipping, D. 1998. Ecological and geological impacts of exotic plants on coastal ecosystems and processes. PORC CONF CALIFORNIA WORLD OCEAN. 1410-1417 (abstract only) accessed 5/20/03 at: http://216.239.3.100/search?=cache:6APenHqbeSsj:www.nature.nps.gov/epmt/abstracts; South Australian Butterflies Caterpillar Foodhost list as accessed 10/8/03 at: http://users.chariot.net.au/~rgrund/foodhost1.htm
|
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 intentionally introduced to California in 1929 in sandy coastal areas of San Luis Obispo and northern Santa Barbara Counties for forage improvement and sand stabilization. Is still considered a "crop" plant as seen on the Purdue list of New Crops.
Sources of information:
Magness, J. R. et al 1971. Food and feed crops of the United States. Interregion Research Project IR-4, IR Bul. 1 (Bul. 828 New Jersey Agr. Expt. Sta.); Pickart, A. 1996. Interoffice memorandum to Lynn Lozier regarding the status of Veldt grass at Guadalupe-Nipomo Dunes. Pickart, A. 2000. IN: Bossard et al. 2000; Purdue Univeresity. 2000. List of new crops as accessed on the web at:http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/indices/index_efgh.html; and the NRCS list http://plant-materials.nrcs.usda.gov/pubs/capmcra2000.pdf.
|
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:
Florets fall near parent plant and can disperse short distances with wind. Most plants enlarge by developing new culms around perimeter of base plant. May disperse with water and soil movement.
Sources of information:
DiTomaso, J. and E. Healy. In Prep. Weeds of California and Other Western States. Unpublished.
|
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:
Is found in Australialian bushlands and in New Zealand. Threatens blue gum woodlands in Australia; is found of coastal areas of Texas. . enter text here
Sources of information:
Vidler, S. 2003 Compiler. Australian flora and fauna threatened by invasive plants. Weeds CRC, September 2003; US Army Corps of Engineers. Non-native Plant Species (NNIPS) profiles. Appendix D as accessed online @http:// www.hnd.usace.army.mil/techinfo/ CPW/PWTB200-1-18/.%5CPWTB%20200-1-18_AppendixD.pdf
|
| 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
|
Imported seed from Australia in 1920s . Its use was advocated for soil/sand stabilization and as a forage crop during 1950s and 60s. Was planted on dunes and ranches in coastal San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara counties. In California noe primarily found in dune scrub, coastal scrub and maritime chaparral, and coast live oak woodlannds. The plant has been reported from 10 California State Park units; Gaviota SP, Andrew Molera SP, Julia Pfeiffer Burns SP, Point Lobos SR, Sonoma Coast SB, Crystal Cove SP, Torrey Pines SR, Los Osos Oaks SR, Montana de Oro SP, and Sunset SB. It has been recognized as a major threat to the Nipomo Dunes Complex and to the terraces at Vandenberg AFB. Is also on the California Native Plant Society's East Bay Chapter list of top twenty pest plants.
Occupies coastal dunes, coastal scrub, coastal live oak forests, maritime chaparral.; coastal prairie, 4 Major types, six minor types.
Sources of information:
Chesnut, J. 1999. A review of weed threats to the Nipomo Dunes: final draft. The lLand Conservancy of San Luis Obispo. 40 pages; Pickart. 2000. IN: Bossard et al. 2000; Natural Resources Division, California Statte Parks 2002. Natural Resources Condition Assessment, California Department of Parks and Recreation, Sacramento, CA; The El Moro Elfin Forest, Introduction as accessed 10/8/03 at: http://biosci.calpoly.edu/biosci/faculty/holland/ELFIN.html.
|
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
Other Published Material
|
Describe distribution:
The plant has been reported from 10 California State Park units; Gaviota SP, Andrew Molera SP, Julia Pfeiffer Burns SP, Point Lobos SR, Sonoma Coast SB, Crystal Cove SP, Torrey Pines SR, Los Osos Oaks SR, Montana de Oro SP, and Sunset SB. It has been recognized as a major threat to the Nipomo Dunes Complex and to the terraces at Vandenberg AFB.
Occupies coastal dunes, coastal scrub, coastal live oak forests, maritime chaparral.; 3 Major types, five minor types.
Sources of information:
Chesnut, J. 1999. A review of weed threats to the Nipomo Dunes: final draft. The lLand Conservancy of San Luis Obispo. 40 pages; Pickart. 2000. IN: Bossard et al. 2000; Natural Resources Division, California Statte Parks 2002. Natural Resources Condition Assessment, California Department of Parks and Recreation, Sacramento, CA; The El Moro Elfin Forest, Introduction as accessed 10/8/03 at: http://biosci.calpoly.edu/biosci/faculty/holland/ELFIN.html.
|
| 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 |
Yes |
| Seeds remain viable in soil for three or more years |
Unknown |
| Viable seed produced with both self-pollination and cross-pollination |
Yes |
| Has quickly spreading vegetative structures (rhizomes, roots, etc.) that may root at nodes |
Yes |
| Fragments easily and fragments can become established elsewhere |
Unknown |
| Resprouts readily when cut, grazed, or burned |
Yes |
| Total points: |
8
|
| 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:
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 | C, 5% - 20% |
| desert | |
| interior | |
| Scrub and Chaparral | coastal bluff scrub | D, < 5% |
| coastal scrub | D, < 5% |
| Sonoran desert scrub | |
| Mojavean desert scrub (incl. Joshua tree woodland) | |
| Great Basin scrub | |
| chenopod scrub | |
| montane dwarf scrub | |
| Upper Sonoran subshrub scrub | |
| chaparral | D, < 5% |
| Grasslands, Vernal Pools, Meadows, and other Herb Communities | coastal prairie | D, < 5% |
| 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 | D, < 5% |
| 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): |
A |
|
Distribution (highest score): |
C |
Infested Jepson Regions
Click here for a map of Jepson regions
- Central West
- Great Valley
- Northwest
- Southwest
