Nothoscordum gracile_C151-02
Photo: UC Davis Weeds of California

Nothoscordum gracile Risk Assessment

Common names: false garlic

Nothoscordum gracile -- California

Primary tabs

Created by: Elizabeth D. Brusati
Created on: Wednesday, Jan 27th, 2016
Evaluation Summary
Summary: 
General Evaluation Information
Date of Evaluation: 
March 11, 2016
Evaluation Time (hrs): 
Not Recorded
Evaluation Status: 
Completed
Plant Information
Plant: 
Nothoscordum gracile
Plant Material: 
If the plant is a cultivar, and if the cultivar's behavior differs from its parent's (behavior), explain how: 
Regional Information
Region Name: 
California
Climate Matching Map
These maps were built using a toolkit created in collaboration between GreenInfo Network, PlantRight, Cal-IPC, and Agricultural Sustainability Institute at UC Davis.
Link to Climate Matching Map: 
Climate Matching Maps PDF: 
Invasive History and Climate Matching
1. Has the species (or cultivar or variety, if applicable; applies to subsequent "species" questions) become naturalized where it is not native?
Yes or No: 
Yes
Points: 
1
Confidence Level: 
Very High
Answer / Justification: 
"Widely naturalized" according to ARS-GRIN. USDA PLANTS shows it in California, Mississippi, Alabama, South Carolina, Tennessee, but it's not listed by Southeast EPPC.
Reference(s): 
2. Is the species (or cultivar or variety) noted as being naturalized in the US or world in a similar climate?
Yes or No: 
Yes
Points: 
2
Confidence Level: 
Very High
Answer / Justification: 
"Widely naturalized" according to ARS-GRIN. Naturalized in six California counties.
Reference(s): 
3. Is the species (or cultivar or variety) noted as being invasive in the U.S. or world?
Yes or No: 
Yes
Points: 
2
Confidence Level: 
High
Answer / Justification: 
Mostly a weed of disturbed sites, gardens, and urban areas. Mentioned as an environmental weed in Victoria, Australia, by Randall 2012 but the current invasive plant website does not mention. Information from Queensland states that it is an environmental problem in temperate coastal areas of Victoria, South Australia, New South Wales and Western Australia, and has spread into riparian areas, wetlands, estuarine areas and coastal sand dunes.
Reference(s): 
4. Is the species (or cultivar or variety) noted as being invasive in the US or world in a similar climate?
Yes or No: 
Yes
Points: 
3
Confidence Level: 
High
Answer / Justification: 
Mostly a weed of disturbed sites, gardens, and urban areas. Mentioned as an environmental weed in Victoria, Australia, by Randall 2012 but the current invasive plant info for Victoria does not mention it. Listed on the California Noxious Weed List due to impacts on agriculture: imparts an undesirable garlic or onion type flavor to contaminated food products including cereal grains, milk, meat, eggs, and poultry. Information from Queensland states that it is an environmental problem in temperate coastal areas of Victoria, South Australia, New South Wales and Western Australia, and has spread into riparian areas, wetlands, estuarine areas and coastal sand dunes.
Reference(s): 
5. Are other species of the same genus (or closely related genera) invasive in a similar climate?
Yes or No: 
No
Points: 
0
Confidence Level: 
High
Answer / Justification: 
Other species in the genus are listed as naturalized but none marked as an environmental or noxious weed.
Reference(s): 
6. Is the species (or cultivar or variety) found predominately in a climate matching the region of concern?
Yes or No: 
Yes
Points: 
2
Confidence Level: 
High
Answer / Justification: 
Areas in Spain, Australia, South Africa, and part of the US match California. Other areas don't. GBIF map = http://www.gbif.org/species/2855519
Reference(s): 
Impact on Native Plants and Animals
7. Does this plant displace native plants and dominate (overtop or smother) the plant community in areas where it has established?
Yes or No: 
No
Points: 
0
Confidence Level: 
Medium
Answer / Justification: 
Cannot find any information on impacts on native plant communities other than that it can spread into them.
Reference(s): 
8. Is the plant noted as promoting fire and/or changing fire regimes?
Yes or No: 
No
Points: 
0
Confidence Level: 
High
Answer / Justification: 
No mention of this.
Reference(s): 
9. Is the plant a health risk to humans or animals/fish? Has the species been noted as impacting grazing systems?
Yes or No: 
No
Points: 
0
Confidence Level: 
Medium
Answer / Justification: 
No mention of it being toxic. Has been cultivated which implies that it's edible. Irina: Many species in Alliaciae are known to be toxic to domestic dogs and cats. Not sure if that extends to this species
Reference(s): 
10. Does the plant produce impenetrable thickets, blocking or slowing movement of animals, livestock, or humans?
Yes or No: 
No
Points: 
0
Confidence Level: 
High
Answer / Justification: 
Grows about 0.5 m tall. No indication that it creates dense stands that outcompete other vegetation.
Reference(s): 
Reproductive Strategies
11. Does this species (or cultivar or variety) reproduce and spread vegetatively?
Yes or No: 
Yes
Points: 
1
Confidence Level: 
Very High
Answer / Justification: 
Reproduces both by seed and vegetatively by underground bulblets.
Reference(s): 
12. If naturally detached fragments from this plant are capable of producing new plants, is this a common method of reproduction for the plant?
Yes or No: 
Yes
Points: 
1
Confidence Level: 
Medium
Answer / Justification: 
In some plants aerial bulbils are produced that are clones of the parent plants. I'm assuming these could detach and create new plants and therefore would count for this question.
Reference(s): 
13. Does the species (or cultivar or variety) commonly produce viable seed?
Yes or No: 
Yes
Points: 
1
Confidence Level: 
Very High
Answer / Justification: 
Yes, numerous black seeds that are highly viable.
Reference(s): 
14. Does this plant produce copious viable seeds each year (> 1000)?
Yes or No: 
No
Points: 
0
Confidence Level: 
Medium
Answer / Justification: 
No information on seed numbers per plant so I am being conservative and answering no.
Reference(s): 
15. Is there significant germination (>25%) of seeds the next growing season, with no requirement of an infrequent environmental condition for seeds to germinate (i.e. fire) or long dormancy period?
Yes or No: 
Points: 
Confidence Level: 
Answer / Justification: 
No information
Reference(s): 
16. Does this plant produce viable seed within the first three years (for an herbaceous species) to five years (for a woody species) after germination?
Yes or No: 
Yes
Points: 
1
Confidence Level: 
Medium
Answer / Justification: 
Given that it's a small forb, I am assuming yes.
Reference(s): 
17. Does this plant continuously produce seed for >3 months each year or does seed production occur more than once a year?
Yes or No: 
No
Points: 
0
Confidence Level: 
Very High
Answer / Justification: 
Flowers May - June in California so only two months. (But from Sept-Jan in Australia.)
Reference(s): 
Dispersal
18. Are the plant’s propagules frequently dispersed long distance (>100 m) by mammals or birds or via domestic animals?
Yes or No: 
No
Points: 
0
Confidence Level: 
High
Answer / Justification: 
Seeds and bulbs don't have obvious adaptations for this and this form of dispersal is not mentioned.
Reference(s): 
19. Are the plant’s propagules frequently dispersed long distance (>100 m) by wind or water?
Yes or No: 
Yes
Points: 
1
Confidence Level: 
High
Answer / Justification: 
Seeds can be dispersed by wind and water.
Reference(s): 
20. Are the plant’s propagules frequently dispersed via contaminated seed (agriculture or wildflower packets), equipment, vehicles, boats or clothing/shoes?
Yes or No: 
Yes
Points: 
1
Confidence Level: 
High
Answer / Justification: 
Seeds can be dispersed in garden waste, while bulblets are dispersed in contaminated soil.
Reference(s): 
Evaluation Notes

Queensland information: http://keyserver.lucidcentral.org/weeds/data/080c0106-040c-4508-8300-0b0...

Reviewed by Irina Irvine, NPS Santa Monica Mountains NRA

Total PRE Score

  • < 13 : accept (low risk of invasiveness)
  • 13 - 15 : evaluate further
  • > 15 : reject (high risk of invasiveness)

PRE Score: 
16
Number of questions answered: 
19
Screener Confidence (%): 
80.0
PRE Content Access and Privacy
Organization: 
California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC)
Evaluation visibility: 
Public - accessible to all site users

Review this Evaluation

720

Click on the button below to mark this evaluation as "Reviewed". Once you click the button, please wait a second, and the site will return to this Evaluation and your name will be on the "Reviewers List" in the right hand column (below the Evaluation Summary). For more information, please see the help page on How to Review an Evaluation?

Vertical Tabs