Weeds CRC: Enviroweeds Archive Titles

Please click on a letter to list all weeds in archive beginning with that letter.

Panicum manximum - Guinea grass
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006
From: Stone, Lynley <LynleyS@calm.wa.gov.au>

I would like to know where in Australia Panicum maximum (Megathyrsus maximus) is invading native vegetation, and what impact it is having. Information is light -on when it comes to impacts. I know it is a weed of roadsides and disturbed areas, but is it getting into the bush?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Guinea Grass is a huge problem in Coastal Central Queensland. It is encouraged by fire and destroys native vegetation because of the heat produced. Rural Fire Brigades make it worse by conducting so-called "Hazard Reduction" burns which only generates more Guinea Grass next year. Can be treated with Glyphosate but needs plenty of follow-up.

Panicum virgatum - Red switch grass
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004
From: Peter Symes <Peter.Symesrbg.vic.gov.au>

I am seeking some information on whether this grass has been observed naturalising in Victoria or similar climatic zones in Australia?

While there is some North American literature available that indicates weedy tendencies, there seems to be a lack of Australian information?

Our anecdotal research to date is that while this plant has been grown in Victoria and the horticultural trade for over ten years, no evidence of recruitment has yet been observed.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004
From: Rod Randall <RPRandallagric.wa.gov.au>

Panicum virgatum is a national (AQIS) and Western Australian quarantine weed. It has not naturalised in Australia but it can be found for sale in some Victorian nurseries. How they got the material? I don't know.

Its origin is Central and North America so can obviously establish over a vast range of climates and habitats.

Panicum virgatum cv. 'Rotstrahlbusch' or Red Switch Grass is a selected red leaved line. There appears to be no difference from 'normal' switch grass except its red colour

Description: Warm season, sod forming, slow spreader Foliage tinged with red, medium textured, 90-120 cm Flowers Aug through Sept, 120-140 cm Culture: Moist fertile soil, full sun. Adapts to a wide range of soil conditions.

Darbyshire, S.J. (2003). Inventory of Canadian Agricultural Weeds. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. Ottawa, Ontario.

Forman, Jennifer (2003). "The introduction of American plant species into Europe: issues and Consequences." pp. 17-39 in Plant Invasions: Ecological Threats and Management Solutions. Edited by L.E. Child, J.H. Brock, G. Brundu, K. Prach, P. Pysek, P.M. Wade, and M. Williamson. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Ryves, T.B., Clement, E.J. and Foster, M.C. (1996) Alien Grasses of the British Isles. Botanical Society of the British Isles, London.

Hfliger, E. and Scholz, H. (1980) Grassweeds 1. Ciba-Geigy Ltd., Basel, Switzerland.

Holm, L. G., Pancho, J. V., Herberger, J. P. and Plucknett, D. L. (1979). "A Geographical Atlas of World Weeds". John Wiley and Sons NewYork, USA *Weed in: ARG; USA * - *Present in Flora in: HAW; IND; TRI

Behrendt, S. and Hanf, M. (1979) Grass Weeds In World Agriculture. BASF Aktiengesellschaft. Ludwigshaten am Rhein, Germany.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004
From: Michael Hansford <Michael.Hansforddpi.vic.gov.au>

I just checked Australia's virtual herbarium database and it shows records of this species at 6 sites in NSW.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004
From: Michael Hansford <Michael.Hansforddpi.vic.gov.au>

Well Rod, you were right. There is no evidence that this species has naturalised in Australia. And what about the 'sites' that appeared on the screen when I typed in this species name into the Australia's Virtual Herbarium site?

Apparently the above database is still 'under development' and should not be relied upon without checking with State herbariums as well. It's always best to check with State herbariums, as you have done.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004
From: Graeme Lorimer <Ecologyoptusnet.com.au>

There's nothing wrong with 'Australia's Virtual Herbarium'. Remember that herbaria contain horticultural specimens, agricultural specimens and specimens of wild plants. The distribution map of specimens of popular and interesting horticultural species (e.g. cultivars with reddish foliage) is likely to show where the species is grown, not just where it occurs in the wild.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004
From: Sandy Lloyd <slloydagric.wa.gov.au>

Fair enough, but if no distinction is made between cultivated and naturalised specimens it can create confusion (as it did in this case).

Parthenium hysterophorus
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Lloyd, Sandy
Sent: Friday, 2 May 2008

I just bumped into someone who had seen our media release on parthenium. He said he was on holiday in the NT recently and thought he saw parthenium growing on roadsides in Litchfield National Park.

Is that the case? Does anyone on the list know? If yes, is anything being done about it?
I notice there is a dot for the NT in the pamphlet on parthenium prepared by the Weeds CRC.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The dot on the Weed CRC pamphlet will almost certainly be referring to an old population that was found in NT in the late 1970's along Elsey Creek in the Mataranka district - from where it is thought to have been eradicated. As far as I know it hasn't been detected at that site since 1999.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Australia's Virtual Herbarium website shows two dots for Parthenium hysterophorus L. for the Northern Territory. One of the dots appears to be near the ?Mataranka area (as pointed out by Sheldon Navie) (Queensland Herbarium record - BRI), the second dot is to the east more or less near Limmen Bight(Northern Territory Herbarium record).

Parthenium hysterophorus L. is listed in: Kerrigan, R.A. & D.E.Albrecht (eds.) (29 January 2007) Checklist of NT Vascular Plant Species.
http://www.nt.gov.au/nreta/wildlife/plants/pdf/200701nt_checklist.pdf

For information about the current status of Parthenium hysterophorus L. in the Northern Territory, it is best to seek authoritative advice from either the Northern Territory Herbarium in Palmerston (DNA), or perhaps Dave Albrecht (Northern Territory Herbarium - Alice Springs (NT)).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've spoken with WONS coordinator Peter Austin and the NT noxious weed guys are on to it
I've put them in contact with the spotter, and they're planning to go out to Litchfield NP

Paspalum quadrifarium - Paspalum tussock
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have an infestation of Paspalum tussock in Sth Gippsland. Can anyone describe the life cycle of this plant and best ways to eradicate it including herbicides. It is mainly on roadsides and spreading.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Paspalum is from S. America, it is a perennial grass and while it can struggle along in a drought it is better suited to areas such as roadside table drains and around culverts where water lies. It flowers in late summer with a seed head reaching over a metre high if growing conditions are right. You can dig it up if you have the manpower, use Glyphosate and re-sow the area or the best treatment is to use a grass specific product such as Fusliade, Paspalum has a waxy leaf so a wetting agent is required to give the best results.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just a brief caution, there are quite a few species of Paspalum and I think Andrew's comments apply specifically to Paspalum dilatatum, not some of the other species such as P. distichum or P. quadrifarium. As has been raised in this forum before, it's a good idea to be quite precise about the use of plant names and specify scientific names wherever you can.

Pennisetum clandestinum - Kikuyu grass
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Has anyone had success in subdueing kikuyu in revegetation projects. This weed is persistant and swamps plants and hinders the restoration of the groundlayer. Has anyone had any success in getting rid of this weed.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the Auwahi dry forest on Maui (Hawaii) we have successfully controlled Kikuyu grass (Pennisetum clandestinum) with low percentage glyphosate (Roundup). Here kikuyu rarely if ever sets seed.

http://www.hear.org/starr/hiplants/images/600max/html/starr_040131_0047_pennisetum_clandestinum.htm

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ditto to this here in Sydney. I don't know of it seeding in this part of the world and 1:200 glyphosate works really well. Also had success with cut and paint in small delicate situations around natives susceptible to even low dose spray (eg Themeda) and I'd suspect wipe applications would be quite effective too.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006
From: Francoise Matter and Hugh Paterson <fmatter@bigpond.net.au>

There was an interesting article in the Friends of the Botanic Gardens newsletter.

RBG Sydney controlled Kikuyu in couch turf by using glyphosate at less than 1 mL per litre! They sprayed in winter when the couch is dormant and got quite good control of the Kikuyu.

I would like to try the same technique this winter where Kikuyu is growing through Phragmites and Microlaena.

If the issue is native shrubs and trees planted for revegetation consider a grass selective herbicide such as 2,2-DPA or Fusilade.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I reckon Kikuyu is very tameable. Here are some things worth knowing about controlling it:

1. As others have said, it seems quite susceptible to low rates of glyphosate. While someone talked about controlling it in winter in Sydney, that won't work well in Melbourne as the thing really does shut down in the colder months. The best time for control in the southern states is a sunny, mild morning after a period of rain. That's probably when it is most actively growing (and most easy to kill).

2. If you have a sportsfield or recreational turf adjacent, you can stop Kikuyu from entering the reveg zone by having a broad mulched/sprayed band (eg 1 m - could double as a path). You could also control the growth and stolon formation using a growth retardant called Trinexapac-ethyl (sold as 'Primo' in the turf grass industry and occasionally found in some retail nurseries as 'lawn tamer', though seems to be out of production now for domestic users). Personally I think Trinexapac-ethyl is ace – but expensive. I've used it to control edges of lawn (with a high rate) and general lawn growth to the point that I only had to mow the stuff once every 6-8 weeks in summer on swampy sandy soils at home in Mordialloc (normally every 1-2 weeks).

3. As others have pointed out, grass-specific herbicides may be very useful in some revegetation applications. I'd guess that Kikuyu is likely to be sensitive to lower rates of most grass-specific herbicides when actively growing.

Some notes on Trinexapac-ethyl
Trinexapac-ethyl (sold as Primo and Lawn Tamer) affects growth by interfering with production (and transformation) of gibberelins, which are a plant growth hormones. Gibberelins influence cell elongation, chilling tolerance, and photoperiod response. Primo is foliar absorped and shouldn't be applied if the grass is stressed - then it becomes a herbicide. With 2-3 treatments, Kikuyu slows right down for several months. Apparently it also has some positive effects on drought tolerance and 'lushness' for those interested in turf. On my reading of the MSDS, I thought it was pretty benign.

Overall, I think Kikuyu is possibly one of the better(?) environmental weeds to work with. I have often pondered the idea that it might be an ideal grass to have in a reveg site prior to site preparation - because it doesn't form a weed seed bank and is easily killed with low rates of herbicide. Before I field several abusive emails, I better add that when I say Kikuyu is 'better', it is only better if MANAGED. I recognise that left unchecked it can be disasterous. But I would rather deal with Kikuyu than Couch any day.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2006
From: Francoise Matter and Hugh Paterson <fmatter@bigpond.net.au>

A grass selective herbicide may be suitable. But most operators consider it is difficult to control couch in amoung desireable plants.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A short comment on KIkuyu, we are coast care group on nsw sth cst. Had success with glyophsate, low conc, and found that the dead kik forms a nice deep mulch kayer for planting into. Follow up is needed, we hand pull any survivving or shooting runners.

Interested in trying a grass specific herbicide, but what is impact on native grasses eg themeda and Imperata implexa? feedback welcome.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006
From: Alexandra Shackleton <ashackleton@geelongcity.vic.gov.au>

As an additional bit to the kykuyu story - here in Geelong (a bit drier than Melbourne, but otherwsie similar climate) we also use glyphosate with success. Anecdotally, I've also had a very rapid response (as in dead in 3 days) when I've sprayed immediately prior to extremely hot, dry weather. Most of our sites brown off in 2 -3 weeks, however I've done 2 sites this year where we've sprayed prior to a run of a couple of days of extreme heat (35 degrees plus) and it's been yellow in a day, and dead in 3. I'm not sure how much prior dry stress contributed to this.... Very little regrowth.

We have taken advantage of low water in a number of wetlands and creeksides this year and got into the creeklines to spray (the water has completely dried up). I am hopeful that in between spraying, drought and presumably flooding again at some point, it will be knocked back severely - possibly along with the couch.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This topic has embraced kikuyu and couch control as well as asking will the real couch grass please stand up. The preceding comments in this discussion have been very interesting and I may be able to add a little of use in situations where experience is scarce and people are often flying by the seat of their pants.

What follows are essentially the ramblings of an old retired agronomist, some of you may find them interesting if not entirely informative. Stop reading now if you are in a hurry.

Our Landcare experience in reserves at Rosedale on the Eurobodalla (far NSW South) Coast is similar to that of Christina Potts who cares for similar coast further south around Mystery Bay. Glyphosate 1:100 kills kikuyu leaving a protective mulch layer and the few runners that survive are later pulled or picked up at the next spray. For best results, it's best to let them grow a little before the next spray. We manage to spot-spray it without too much difficulty between other plants including Themeda in a landscaped beach carpark surround.

We have also had experience with both spot- and blanket-spraying over more extensive areas, not with kikuyu but with buffalo grass (Stenotaphrum secondatum), a legacy of former land use in the area and similar in habit to kikuyu. 1:100 glyphosate gives a good knockdown with minimal recovery. Over about six years we have reduced the grass cover by about 90% and allowed a large range of other spp to emerge; unfortunately not all of these are native species so the job does not stop there. Dead buffalo grass also provides a useful protective mulch similar to dead kikuyu and this is an essential component of our control strategy.

Couch - kill it or protect it? It matters little whether the couch is native or exotic if, for whatever reason (disturbance, introduction through improperly disposed of waste, etc), it is spreading and eliminating other desirable species. It is intrinsically invasive and in the wrong situation can be unwanted. Then use whatever safe and convenient means at your disposal to control or eliminate it. I see no reason for sparing an out-of-control plant simply because it is a native species unless, unlike the ubiquitous couch (notwithstanding confusion over its systematics), it is a sparsely distributed species.

Couch's resistance to control using glyphosate is well established. In the mid 70s when glyphosate was new and we were all very excited about this new wonder, researchers at the then Gatton Agricultural College (Qld) were getting good control of broadleaf weeds and, I think, some grass spp using lower rates than the usual 1:100 on couch grass lawns. I can't recall the details but similar findings are undoubtedly available courtesy of Google.

I note in these threads frequent comments along the lines that glyphosate is most successful on actively growing plants and this is quite true in most instances. However, glyphosate is systemic in its action and success rate is primarily a function of the amount of chemical the plant takes up. Provided the plant is relatively active and proper spray technique is used, uptake is a function of leaf area. The leaf area of grasses is at a maximum just before the seed heads emerge and this is when plant uptake is at a maximum. There may be little point in applying glyphosate to plants, grass or otherwise, where the leaf area is at a minimum, eg defoliated by slashing, insects or drought.

On the topic of maximum leaf area: Johnson grass (Sorghum halepense) is a serious warm season weed of cropping, it's large (to 2 m high) with substantial rhizomes that take some beating. Glyphosate will control it if you can get maximum uptake sufficient to get down into the rhizomes. Non-chemical control was to plough it repeatedly before it got too big (no more than 60 cm high) and before the rhizomes could develop much. When glyphosate first came along (1970s) there was considerable difficulty in persuading farmers to hold off spraying until the plant reached flag leaf stage - the last leaf to emerge before the seed head emerged - because this is when leaf area is at a maximum and hence maximum uptake can be achieved. It's also when the plant is nearly highest, it simply went against the prevailing wisdom.

I hope these jottings may be of use to you in deciding what best to do in your own case, no two situations are identical. Where the directions on the label are silent, a little insight seasoned with innovation and ingenuity often wins the day.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am new to this but if you used Fusilade on your Kikuyu, this chemical will not destroy your Broadleaf Vegetation.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am writing to enquire whether any members of the Enviroweeds discussion group may know how long Kikuyu seed is viable. I am trying to replace a Kikuyu lawn with Microlaena, however after over a year I am not winning. New kikuyu is growing from seed, not rhizomes. Every time I weed the new Kikuyu seedlings out, I disturb the soil, causing more germination. Knowing the seed viability will help me decide if it is worth continuing. Any advice would be appreciated.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Kikuyu grass was originally introduced into Southern California from Australia for use as erosion control along ditches and banks."

That's another one you owe us. These producers talk about everything except seed viability, but you might try contacting them directly:

And yes, these are the people who want to introduce their "improved" cultivars to the world.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't think that your comments blaming kikuya on us are quite fair -where do you think a plant with a name like kikuya came from - it certainly isn't an Australian native, probably from Africa I would guess. It may have come to you via Australia, but that is a different matter.

It can certainly get 'pesty', but it is also an excellent lawn grass, particularly in places like school grounds and public parks, where it can take an incredible beating - especially in dry summers prevailing in southern Oz. (I am a retired primary teacher)

I believe that it is also a useful pasture grass - further north in New South Wales, I have read that it is the dominant grass on successful dairy farms.

My observation is that it does not grow far into healthy areas of our native bush in southern Victoria - it doesn't appear to like the shade or the competitiion. It is also grown in a lot of beach-side parks, but does not go far into coastal sand dunes before it 'runs out of steam'.

It is widely grown in the public camping areas at my favourite Wilsons Promontory National Park - but it is not a signifigant invader of the surrounding native bush.

I must admit that it was the existing 'lawn grass' when we built our home on this block (black sandy coastal soil) and I do spend a reasonable amount of gardening time keeping it out of my vegetable and flower beds, but it makes a great low maintenance lawn (no watering necessary). The whipper-snipper and some 'Zero' (glysophate) applied with a paint brush keeps it in order.

It is the old definition of a plant growing in the wrong place being a weed. Few people would argue that the Olive is not a useful plant, but you will read contributions to this network about the problems of the olive as a weed.

And by the way, some months ago you made passing mention of an "Australian Pine" which was a weed in your locality. I asked you then for it's botanical name, to which you have not yet responded. A number of Australian plants have the common name 'such and such pine' but I don't know any native members of the genus pinus.

I won't even mention the Monterey Pine (pinus radiata) - mall the way from California. A useful timber tree, but also an environmental weed.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Australian pine is a serious weed of beaches and barrier islands in Florida. Casuarina equisetifolia, C. glauca, and C. cunninghamiana, the first species being the most common (what you call the horsetail tree), are all found here, and are all commonly named "Australian pine" (or, as we say, "Casuarina spp.").

Like melaleuca (Melaleuca quinquenervia), Australian pine (C. equisetifolia) was purposely brought here by us, so any mention of 'blame' should only be taken in jest. We also deliberately introduced Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius) and cogon grass (Imperata cylindrica), among many others, and we import new exotics daily.

Unfortunately, Florida and the US do not follow a 'white list' process for plant imports (or anything else). We (i.e., government) have to demonstrate harm from a species before one can be 'blacklisted' from import, at which point it's usually too late. Weedos over here are very envious of Australia's biosecurity measures, so we're going to pick on you whenever we get a chance. Just think of us as a jealous sibling.

What the kikuyu (from tropical east Africa) question tells us is that even when we get a plant declared a Noxious Weed, we can have people who want to de-list it because they see a potential for economic gain. That is the major failing of our plutocracy here; we place moneymaking ahead of all other social and environmental concerns.

The other lesson we should learn from kikuyu is that our electronic networking allows expert from around the world to offer advice to a country that is contemplating doing something stupid. Not that they (especially US), will listen, but it weakens the economic argument when several countries offer evidence of cost and harm from introducing a new species somewhere.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In warmer climates Kikuyu is much more invasive. It is not bad in dry forests with reasonable canopy but it is very destructive in riparian situations. Department of Land and Water Conservation in NSW is strongly against its use anywhere near watercourses.

Pennisetum spp.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have attached the presentation given by Mai Mai Than of Myanmar at our Hanoi workshop. She has problems with three species of Pennisetum (polystachyon, pedicellatum, purpureum) introduced into Myanmar from Australia in 1967 & 1976 for pasture. They are causing problems for Forestry in teak plantations. Basically she wants to know how to control the problem and is looking for suggestions. She has mentioned biocontrol which is as you say is unlikely for a grass. Reading between the lines I assume they don't have a lot of money for a herbicide option. Any comments would be welcome from the Enviroweeds network.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We deal with polystachyon and pedisellatum within parks in the northern part of the Northern Territory. Both are very invasive especially if left to seed and then burnt. Ultimately we treat the plants with 1% Glyphosate. As with any weed it’s best to treat prior to flowering. If already flowering and/or seeding then cut seed heads of and carefully dispose of with fire.

There have been a couple of papers written, can’t remember by who but the trails were done in either the NT or QLD, on studies on seed viability and strike rate. They found that up to 90% of seed will germinate in one season and seed left in the ground is generally not viable in the second year. Therefore, if treated quickly and before seed is set it is possible to eradicate Pennisetum. We managed to eradicate small satellite populations of polystachyon that turned up on road sides, most likely from vehicles. The first year we sprayed the plants with 1% Glyphosate during the end of the wet season. There was a follow up in the second year which was mostly surveying the sites for germination and in the third year the plants were gone.

Slashing is not a viable option as plants that are slashed during the growth stage manage to re-shoot and still set seed even though they are much smaller than other mature plants left untreated. We have observed plants being mowed in lawns that re-shoot to 10cm and put out seed.

Can anyone provide information about this suggested sterile species of Pennisetum?

Previously known as Pennisetum setaceum ‘Rubrum’ now being listed as Pennisetum advena ‘Rubrum’.

Is it true that it is sterile? Is it safe to plant this species as an alternative to other weedy Pennisetum sp.?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The use of the name Pennisetum setaceum 'Rubrum' was always wrong and considering the flak the Nursery Industry gets for selling it under that 'wrong' name as Pennisetum setaceum, the weed, it always suprises me why it took them so long to work out its right name.

The plant in question Pennisetum x advena Wipff & Veldkamp 'Rubrum' is a cross between Pennisetum setaceum (Forssk.) Chiov. x Pennisetum macrostachys (Brongn.) Trin.

I'm not aware that it is sterile, but even so the hybrid has been around a long while now and behaves very well. Even if it doesn't self pollinate its possible it does cross pollinate but I've seen no data to support either position or claim.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

According to the Wipff & Veldkamp (authors of P. advena), it occasionally reproduces by aposporous apomixis (i.e. seed production without fertilisation). They describe it occasionally persisting but not spreading substantially in subtropical USA. Although P. setaceum and P. macrostachyum are mentioned as part of the nomencatural confusion, they don't actually suggest it is a hybrid (although I've seen that others have subsequently).

I hope the ID has been rigorously checked, and that it remains as benign as has been reported. If anyone wanted to submit a flowering specimen, I'd be happy to check the ID.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wipff, J.K.; Veldkamp, J.F. (1999). Pennisetum advena sp. nov. (Poaceae: Paniceae): a common ornamental grass throughout the southern United States. Sida 18: 1031–1036.

My recall of the paper is that the species had sterile seeds in the USA. I also understand that the species does not spread by rhizomes or stolons. It has not naturalised in Australia as far as I am aware.

It would appear that cultivar Rubrum is grown in Australia, at least this is how the species that generally has dark red leaves is labelled for sale in NSW. It is assumed that this species name is assigned correctly but I defer to a plant taxonomist on this one. I understand that the herbarium in Brisbane has done some work on the species.

I acknowledge Rod Randall's comments and assume that the naming issue arose from the USA and was repeated once imported into Australia.

http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/156536/fountain-grass-alert.pdf

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Plants perennial, or annual in temperate climates; cespitose. Culms 1-1.5 m, erect, sometimes branching above, pubescent beneath the panicle; nodes glabrous. Leaves burgundy (rarely green); sheaths glabrous, margins ciliate; ligules 0.5-0.8 mm; blades 33-52 cm long, 6-11 mm wide, flat, antrorsely scabridulous, margins ciliate basally, midvein not noticeably thickened. Panicles 23-32 cm long, 30-58 mm wide, fully exerted from the sheaths, flexible, drooping, burgundy (rarely pale or whitish-green); rachises terete, pubescent. Fascicles 10-17 per cm, disarticulating at maturity; fascicle axes 1-2 mm, with 1-3 spikelets; outer bristles 43-68, 1.2-18.5 mm, terete, scabrous; inner bristles 4-10, 11.7-25 mm, long-ciliate; primary bristles 21.3-33.6 mm, ciliate, noticeably longer than the other bristles. Spikelets 5.3-6.5 mm; pedicels 0.1-0.3 mm; lower glumes 0.5-1 mm, veinless; upper glumes 1.9-3.6 mm, 0-1-veined; lower florets staminate; lower lemmas 4.7-6.1 mm, 5(6)-veined; lower paleas 4.5-5 mm; anthers 2-2.5 mm; upper florets not disarticulating at maturity; upper lemmas 5.2-6.1 mm, 5-veined; anthers 2.5-2.7 mm. Caryopses concealed by the lemma and palea at maturity. 2n = 54.

The origin of Pennisetum advena is uncertain. It is frequently cultivated as an ornamental, usually being sold as Pennisetum setaceum 'Rubrum'.

A clumping semi-evergreen grass 4-5+ feet tall with dark burgundy-red foliage and red plumes that rise above the foliage. This grass seems to be completely evergreen (red) in frost free zones, but goes deciduous with frost and it is root hardy to 20° F. Plant in full sun and water sparingly to control height. Looks best if it is cut back in late winter to expose new foliage. This clone rarely seeds out. Drought and heat resistant. For many years most nurseries and references have listed this plant as a variety of Pennisetum setaceum, either 'Rubrum' or 'Cupreum'. While it superficially resembles Pennisetum setaceum, a declared noxious weed in the western US, this plant has been described by some grass taxonomists as actually being P. macrostachys and we listed it this way for several years but the name was confusing to many people and we reverted to the admitably incorrect name that most people were familiar with. Recent work in preparation for the grass sections of the Flora of North America, which will include naturalized and cultivated grasses, indicates that the name chosen for this plant will be Pennisetum advena or perhaps P. x advena. Dr. Joseph K. Wipff, previously with Texas A&M and now a turfgrass breeder, wrote the section on Pennisetum and has indicated that Red Fountain Grass is most likely a cross between P. setaceum and S. macrostachys (AKA 'Burgundy Giant'). As a hybrid the name would most appropriately be Pennisetum x advena 'Rubra'. The latin word advena means "newly arrived" or "stranger".

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004
From: Andrew Coughlan <coughlanispdr.net.au>

A colleague of mine has convinced landscape designers not to use Pennisetum setaceum as a plant in the Sutherland local government area. The landscape planners have now raised the question about P. alopecuroides.

My question. Is P. alopecuroides being miss-identified as P. setaceum? The landscape designers would like to continue to use P. alopecuroides in the Sydney region. Does P. alopecuroides occur naturally in this area?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004
From: Tony Rodd <tonyroddisp.net.au>

Andrew, I think it's the other way around: P. setaceum (African fountain grass) is being passed off as P. alopecuroides (swamp foxtail).

P. setaceum, with long, arching, pink seedheads, is certainly not native and will proliferate on dry embankments etc, though I have not seen much sign of it invading natural areas around Sydney.

P. alopecuroides, beloved of municipal landscapers in the last 5 years or so, has shorter, erect, bottlebrush-shaped creamish or straw-coloured to pinkish seedheads. It has often been regarded as native but also ranges widely through Asia and Africa as far as southern Europe. But I note that the new AUSGRASS CD (publ. by the Flora of Australia people in Canberra) says it is 'Introduced'. Even so, it has been present in natural areas for a long time, though perhaps mainly in slightly disturbed sites.

One place I recall seeing P. alopecuroides occurring, apparently naturally, was in the south end of Royal National Park, in the grassland between Burning Palms and Palm Jungle. This was about 15 years ago, before it came into cultivation. It's still there. The distribution map in AUSGRASS shows it scattered all around Australia including the tropics.

----
Sorry, but I misread the entries in AUSGRASS - thought I was reading the P.alopecuroides entry when in fact it was the bottom of the P. setaceum page.

P. alopecuroides IS regarded as NATIVE, and its range is tropical and temperate Asia and the Pacific, as well being widespread in eastern Australia, from northeastern Tas to about Cairns.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004
From: Neville Walsh <Neville.Walshrbg.vic.gov.au>

For what it's worth, my view is that P. alopecuroides is naturalised through a large part of its range in Australia, possible all. R.O. Webster, in his treatment of the Australia Paniceae (Cramer, 1987), regards it as introduced. Its Victorian occurrences are undoubtedly introductions, appearing suddenly in areas and expanding locally in suitable habitats (typically most pasture). It is generally assumed to be accidentally introduced with hay. Ausgrass in fact notes the species as introduced in the key, but is non-committal in notes for the species. It is true that it was collected early (Robert Brown named it as P. compressum, having collected it in NSW between 1802 and 1805). Many other species Brown collected in Australia during that period are comfortably enough accepted as early introductions though. In Victoria, as elsewhere, P. setaceum was long sold as 'native' P. alopecuroides. It, like P. alopecuroides is now a problematic weed, but continues to be sold and grown (groan).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003
From: Rachel McFadyen <Rachel.McFadyen@nrm.qld.gov.au>

Please note that the sale or purchase of any of the list of 20 Class 3 weeds is now an offense in Queensland, with fines of up to $60,000. An example of this is a wholesale trade price list distributed from a nursery in Victoria where Pennisetum setaceum (called crimson fountain grass) was in the spring/summer catalogue and of course is on the list of class 3 pests. Anyone in Queensland who purchases this plant makes themselves liable to the fine.

Pereskia aculeata - Leaf cactus
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2004
From: Conor Neville <futurescentre@spiderweb.com.au>

Would anyone know how to control Leaf Cactus (Pereskia aculeata) in small areas (<10m2). I Have found it, in small densities, in Kin Kin. Kin Kin is a locality, ~20k's nw of Noosa Qld, subtropical climate. One suggestion has been to inject 100% glyphosate into stems. Does anyone have any experience with this technique?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't know what Leaf Cactus looks like, but a neighbour of mine modified a cattle drench for injecting glyphosate into the "leaves" of Wheel Cactus (Opuntia robusta). He found that it was best to create a hole with a screw driver in the wheel, before inserting the cattle drench, to lessen the blocking up of the drench with the pulp inside the cactus. He used 5ml per "leaf".

Our Landcare group is also experimenting with spraying the cactus under relatively humid, overcast conditions using glyphosate and a surfacant. We are getting good results.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Weeds CRC has a management guide for the weed http://www.weeds.crc.org.au/documents/wmg_leaf_cactus.pdf

The document doesn't give control details, but does relay experience from South Africa, where they use a herbicide in diesel and apply it to the cut stem. This may be Garlon 600 (triclopyr 600g/L), as I've heard of it's use on prickly pear in a similar manner.

The infosheet also suggests that anyone finding this weed should report it to the relevant State authority - in QLD's case this is the Department of Natural Resources and Mines. Local contact is Jenny Reeve, Land Protection Officer - 0408 453852; or to the Senior Project Officer - Strategic Weed Control, Phil Maher on 34055530.

Phyla canescens, Phyla nodiflora, Lippia canescens, Lippia nodiflora Lippia or Matgrass
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Can someone tell me if Phyla canescens is the same plant as the Phyla nodiflora which is still around in the nursery trade? There was an article in The Land newspaper recently about the threat represented by Phyla canescens to agriculture and remnant riparian veg in the Murray-Darling Basin in NSW and Queensland. It is spread in floods. I can't find any reference to Phyla canescens in any of my books, so I wonder if it is a recent name change from P nodiflora. I know the latter has a fair bit of weed potential from its behaviour in my own garden before I managed to eradicate it.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

According to the Royal Horticulture Dictionary of Gardening these are two separate species.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thought I should post a summary of the responses I got to my query as to whether Phyla canescens and P nodiflora are synonyms, or whether they are two different species, possibly with different weed potential. responses were quite contradictory, so the subject is still a bit murky. Answers were as follows:

Phyla canescens (Kunth.) Greene is the name usually applied to what was formerly known as Phyla nodiflora(Michx.) Greene var. canescens (Kunth.) Moldenke - in other words the subspecies was raised to specific rank. In Australian terms they are essentially synonymous, tho there are occasional reports of 'true' P. nodiflora from time to time.

P. canescens is also spreading in riparian zones (particularly along inland drainage systems) and along the open channel system that networks thru northern Victoria.

It is probably indigenous (= pre-European) to the floodplains of the monsoon north (eg. the Top End of the NT), but the weedy material in eastern Australia almost certainly derives from its American occurrence.

There was a flurry of activity on this forum around August last year which I have attempted to capture for you in a Word document attached. It doesn't directly answer your query but points to a 1993 revision of the genus by Munir which may do so. However, there is other evidence.

Flora of NSW Vol 3 p615 lists only Phyla nodiflora (L.) Greene as occurring in all states except Vic suggesting that P.canescens is exotic or at least not found widely in NSW. This doesn't necessarily mean the two spp are not the same. Shepherd et al (2001), Plants of importance to Australia is more recent than that review and undoubdtedly reflects what is contained in Munir. Shepherd et al lists Phyla nodiflora (L.) Greene as synonymous with Lippia nodiflora (L.) Michx as well as Phyla canescens (Kunth) Greene being synonymous with Lippia canescens (Kunth). This suggests that P.nodiflora and P.canescens are not the same species but you should refer to Munir. Their behaviour in gardens or the bush may not differ much however, I am not familiar with the latter.

Phyla nodiflora was hawked around Canberra in the early 70s by the local SGAP as Lippia nodiflora, the change to Phyla was reflected in Ed. 1 (1973) of their local book. I grew it here and it covered a bank in next to no time and threatened to keep going across the garden so I sprayed it out with Roundup but had to follow up with hand weeding for a couple of seasons. I had also planted it on the decomposed granite nature strip where it competes, only just, with weedy grasses, does not spread and does not bother me, it needs water here. I have heard it called Condamine couch grass, it grows on waterways of the SW Darling Downs and has been used in gardens around there, not without some regret it would appear if that name is anything to go by.

Rod
I have copied this to enviroweeds as others may be interested. The reference covering names of Phyla in Australia is:

Munir, A.A. (1993). A taxonomic revision of the genus Phyla Lour. = (Verbenaceae) in Australia. J. Adelaide Bot. Gard. 15: 109-128.

The Flora of Victoria lists Lippia canescens, Lippia nodiflora and Phyla nodiflora as synonyms of Phyla canescens. I assume from this that Phyla canescens is simply the currently accepted name for what has generally been regarded as either Lippia nodiflora or Phyla nodiflora in the past although the taxonomic history of nomenclature for this troublesome plant is considerably more complicated and was reviewed in a paper in the Journal of the Adelaide Botanic Gardens some years ago (I have just searched unsuccessfully for my copy of this paper). Regards, David Cameron

These are definitely two separate Phyla species. One is considered weedy, the other less so (but I guess it depends on where you are and how they impact).
There was a review of their taxonomy recently, but I can't think of where it was published for the moment (I seem to recall a journal from the SA Botanic Gardens??). If you are interested, I can track down the formal references for you. I did a bit of research into this issue myself last year, and realise how hard it is to come by good information on these species. Good luck, and let me know if I can be of further assistance, Tony Willis

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 09 Aug 2002 15:19:42 +0930
From: Ben Taylor <ben.tayloradelaide.edu.au>

I am an honours student at the University of Adelaide looking into the ecology of Lippia (Phyla canescens) on the floodplain of the Lower Murray. If anyone has any information on Lippia or is working on it, I would like to hear from you.

Picris echioides - Ox tongue thistle
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006
From: Phillip BIRCHALL <indigenousgardens@bigpond.com>

I'm looking for some assistance with information for Picris echioides (ox tongue thistle). I am trying to research this weed to find out more about its lifecycle and control methods. I would be greatful if anyone has any photos of it or be able to direct me to where there might be some good info. I have researched a number of books and web sites that I know of with little success.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006
From: Rod Randall <RPRandall@agric.wa.gov.au>

I ran a google search for "Picris echioides" in the Advanced options, with the Exact Phrase search and found 29,000 hits and with images search, 209 hits with some very nice pics including closeups, seeds, pressed specimens etc.

This is a very common species in southern Australia and while its mentioned in lots of publications that's about all it gets, a mention.

If it has herbicides registered for its control it will be listed at the APVMA website

http://services.apvma.gov.au/PubcrisWebClient/

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006
From: Jonathan Boow <Jonathan.Boow@arc.govt.nz>

This species is now known as Helminthotheca echioides, perhaps you'll have more luck searching with this name.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006
From: Sheldon <S.Navie@uq.edu.au>

Picris echioides is now called Helminthotheca echioides - so it might be a good idea to search under this name too.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006
From: Scott Watson <Scott.Watson@roads.vic.gov.au>

I don't know what sort of information you're chasing, but I often see it growing and can tell you that:

+ it had a name change a long time ago, to Helminthotheca echioides
+ it's ubiqutous on the basalt plains
+ it has raspy annoying leaves that scratch your legs... not enough to bleed but enough to make you say 'i hate this plant'
+ it is probably easily controlled at rosette stage (late autumn/early winter?) with broadleaf herbicide
+ seed dispersal - the daisy seed floats all over the place (hence it is ubiquitous)
+ my impression is that it grows most densely on the plains and around wetlands - not so much on dryer rises.
+ i think it likes the fertility of young volcanic soils and the moisture retentive quality of heavy clays
+ it doesn't seem to occur in continually well grazed pasture - i'm guessing it is palatable to stock
+ probably called a biennial, but it is possible individuals grow as annuals as well

I probably have incidental photos of it - just can't lay my hands on them quickly...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006
From: Francoise Matter and Hugh Paterson <fmatter@bigpond.net.au>

Checking on Infopest there are few options namely Barracuda, Jaguar, Totril and Gallery 750.

The last is pre-emergent and only for certain crops. Totril is only for onions.

The first two may be suitable. They both contain Bromonxynil and Diflufenican. Registered for cereal crops and clover or lucerne pastures or cover crops in vineyards. Control ox tongue at 2 leaf stage. Sounds like using a sledge hammer to crack a nut.

It is another case of a minor weed that would be susceptible to a range of common broad leaf herbicides or glyphosate but none are registered so a permit would be needed. Do a small scale field trial.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006
From: Terry Parks <H.T.Parks@heliograph.net>

This is far more what I'm trying to find. We have over four acres of lavender, comprising 7,500 plants, so we do indeed have a very large "nut" and I am looking for a suitable sledge hammer.

Pinus halepensis - Aleppo pine
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005
From: Diana Forsyth <Forsyth.Diana@abc.net.au>

Does anyone know if the Lone Pine (or Aleppo Pine - Pinus halepensis) has become an environmental weed anywhere in Australia? Seedlings are being sold to schools around Australia for Anzac Day. It's a nice idea, but is it a weed?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005
From: Rod Randall <RPRandall@agric.wa.gov.au>

I agree the idea is nice but the choice of species leaves a lot to be desired.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005
From: Andreas Glanznig <AGlanznig@wwf.org.au>

The new CSIRO report, "Jumping the Garden Fence: invasive garden plants in Australia and their environment and agricultural impacts" identifies Aleppo pine as one of the top 10 invasive garden plants still being sold in South Australia.

It is a declared plant in SA and WA, but still listed for sale in nurseries in Vic, NSW and SA.

The report includes a fact sheet on this weed, and is on-line on the WWF web site at:

http://www.wwf.org.au/News_and_information/Publications/PDF/Report/jumping_the_garden_fence.pdf

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005
From: Michael Mulvaney <Michael.Mulvaney@environment.nsw.gov.au>

About 15 years ago I completed a PhD on why some woody plants have become weeds and others haven't. One of the key findings was that our weeds come from amongst those plants which have had the longest and most numerous planting histories. There is an apparent connection between a plant being a weed and having had an opportunity to become so. Thus radiata pine is a common weed because it has been planted in massive numbers in a wide variety of locations, from some of which it has been able to spread and thrive. The first record of Pinus halepensis being planted in Australia that I know of is in 1817 correspondence of William Macarthur (of Camden Park near Sydney) who was one of Australia's first nurseryman and sold to many of Australia's homestead owners from about 1820 -1860. Pinus halepensis is also a fairly common listing (ie it occurs in the majority) of about 150 nursery catalogues that I studied for the cities of Sydney, Melbourne and A

From the above I would suggest that it is probably already reasonably well distributed around south-eastern Australia and has a reasonable opportunity to spread and become a weed. As part of my study I searched bushland in Canberra, Sydney, Adelaide and Melbourne for environmental weeds. I found Pinus halepensis as an environmental weed in the bushland of Adelaide and Melbourne, where it was able to dominant several areas of at least 30m x 30m. The occasional odd plant could also be found in the bushland around Canberra.

Thus you are right to worry about its weed potential, but perhaps a few plants at a few schools will not greatly add to the number of plants or introduction pressure within the suburbs of south-eastern Australia. However, the war memorial should advise that the seedling not be plant within or within say 100m of a bushland area.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005
From: Sheldon Navie <S.Navie@uq.edu.au>

I saw an article about this on television a couple of days ago showing a massive number of these pine seedlings at a nursery and saying how they had all descended (i.e. been cultivated) from the single tree that came from "Lone Pine" at Gallipoli all those years ago. The interviewer found it hard to believe that "all these" seedlings came from just that single tree!

It was a very positive article and they obviously had no idea about the environmental damage that distributing these plants could cause.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005
From: Sally Vidler <Sally.Vidler@nrm.qld.gov.au>

And here it is on the garden escapes list for the Adelaide region...

http://www.weeds.crc.org.au/documents/fs26_alternatives_garden_plants.pdf

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005
From: aabr <aabr@zip.com.au>

Here is a link to the Lone Pine planting PR. Is it worth while putting out some media about this debacle?

http://www.enhancetv.com.au./features/history/anzac/0305anzac.htm

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005
From: Tony Rodd <tonyrodd@isp.net.au>

The Lone Pine is not Pinus halepensis but P. brutia. See Spencer, Horticultural Flora of SE Aust., vol. 1 (1995).

Long before I looked up this reference I had identified the Gallipoli pines planted at the War Memorial in Hyde Park, Sydney as P. brutia. It differs from P. halepensis in its stalkless cones and longer needles.

But it's P. halepensis that is widely planted in south-eastern Australia, especially in climates a bit too dry for P. radiata, and is presumably the species that has become naturalised in some places.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005
From: Doug Bickerton <Bickerton.Doug@saugov.sa.gov.au>

In their publication "The Environmental Weed Risk of Revegetation and Forestry Plants", Virtue and Melland (2003) write that P. brutia "has not been officially recorded as naturalised in SA", however.... "it is likely that P. brutia seedlings will establish at least as well as P. halepensis in native vegetation in SA". P. halepensis is a major weed on Eyre Peninsula and Yorke Pensinsula, SA.

Pistachia chinensis - Chinese Pistachio
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Warning! Our latest woody weed is Pistacia chinensis, spreading (via appreciative birds!) into urban gardens, street verges and Canberra's Nature Parks. Strongly promoted as both a garden and street tree by gardening experts, we are now seeing a seedling explosion in our Nature Parks: we have taken out 1000s over the last four years, and this is obviously only the beginning. Is this another example of no research before release? Another willow debacle? As the Pistacia chinensis is dioecious (unisexual) nurseries should be able to sell only male plants if cloning is possible. I would welcome further information from other urban areas of Australia where the tree has been widely recommended and planted.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jeremy Smith from the University of New England wrote a paper on the spread of pistacia around Armidale, Northern NSW. Elevation 1000m with climate similar to Canberra. Pied Currawongs, starlings and perhaps silvereyes disperse seeds.

Mapping of infestation best done in Autumn when leaves change to reds and yellows.

ref is Smith JMB, Borgis S and Seifert V 2000. Studuies in Urban Ecology: the first wave of biological invasions by Pistacia chinensis in Armidale, New South Wales, Australia. Australian Geographical Studies, 38(3), 263-274.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is approposal to plant Chinese pistachio in a subdivision adjacent to bushland in Woodend, Victoria. Could anyone tell me if this species is likely to become a weed in this area, or if this plant causes problems elsewhere.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Csurhes, S. and Edwards, R. (1998) Potential Environmental Weeds in Australia, Candidate Species For Preventative Control. Biodiversity Group, Environment Australia, Canberra, ACT.

Groves, R.H. & Hosking, J.R. (1997) Recent Incursions of Weeds to Australia. Technical Series NB0 3. CRC for Weed Management Systems, Australia.

Randall, R.P. (2001). Garden thugs, a national list of invasive and potentially invasive garden plants. Plant Protection Quarterly 16 (4), 138-171.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Chinese pistachio is well and truely established and spreading around Armidale in northern NSW.

Widely planted as a street tree (drought and frost hardy), great autumn colours and deciduous to let the sun in in winter.

Small fuit (<1cm) colour varies from yellow, red, blue and green - very colourful. Some of the first fruit to appear ahead of pyracantha, privets and cotneasters therefore has the pick of the generalist seed dispersers.

Major seed dispersers are starlings and Pied Currawongs. If you got those look out.

For published work use JMB Smith in an author search - published in Australian Geographer or Australian Geographical Studies.

Pittosporum tenufolium - 'James Stirling'
Pittosporum undulatum - Sweet Pittosporum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Can anyone tell us whether Pittosporum undulatum and P bicolor will hybridise? We have a friend who would like to grow P bicolor (local to the area) but is concerned that she may be using seed contaminated by nearby infestations of P undulatum (not naturally local).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

N.G.Walsh & D.E. Albrecht (1996, Flora of Victoria Vol.3 p.535) state that the two spp. "occasionally hybridize, the hybrid (= P. undulatum var. emmettii W.M.Curtis) having been recorded from the Dandenong, Otway and Strzelecki Ranges, Wilsons Promontory, East Gippsland, New South Wales and Tasmania". Both spp. are native to E. Gippsland, so some genetic interchange may have been occurring naturally. Crosses between undulatum & bicolor are also discussed by G.W.Carr (1993 Flora of Victoria Vol. 1 p. 267), who notes that "Rare putative hybrids between naturalized P. undulatum and P. tenuifolium of New Zealand ... have been collected in Victoria (Carr, unpub. data)." Trudi.L. Mullett (2002.The biology of Australian weeds 41. Pittosporum undulatum Vent., Plant Protection Quarterly 17(4), 130-139) provides some additional info. She says that "! Individuals display characters intermediate between" the two spp. "although morphological attributes are quite variable within and between individuals"

It is probable that undulatum is now present in gardens, naturalised populations and naturally over a high proportion of the range of bicolor in Victoria, so it may be difficult to be confident that one has non-hybrid seed. Using non-local provenance material is not advisable. Presumably a skilled propagator would be able to differentiate and eliminate hybrids at the seedling stage. Albrecht & Walsh say that bicolor seedlings "are curious in having 3 cotyledons" - suggesting that such a task would be quite straightforward.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Absolutely. The Flora of Victoria states that the two species occasional hybridize in many parts of Victoria.

From what I have read, it seems that natural hybrids do occur where the two species grow naturally in close proximity. But, where Pittosporum undulatum is naturalized beyond its native range hybrids between the two species also occur and are regarded as being weedy.

In fact, the "Friends of Sherbrooke Forest" website (http://home.vicnet.net.au/~donvrac/weeds.htm) lists this hybrid as one of the priority environmental weeds for control in Sherbrooke Forest in the Dandenong Ranges east of Melbourne.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Can anyone help Caroline with her query below on Pittosporum tenuifolium 'Green Pillar'? Please reply to Caroline at <radisichtim@telstra.com>.

---------------------------------------------------------
Message: Pittosporum tenuifolium 'Green Pillar'
I would like to find out if there is any information re above to indicate that it is an environmental weed or may have potential to be considered such. I have been unable to find anything indicating such. Also would you be able to advise if any Pittosporum tenuifolium is an environmental weed.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

According to the National list of naturalised invasive and potentially invasive garden plants Pittosporum tenuifolium is an environmental weed in Victoria. However, the Royal Botanic Gardens in Melbourne does not have this species listed as naturalised in Victoria according to their website. Therefore, it can't be a major problem in Victoria yet.

This species is native to New Zealand and Pittosporum tenuifolium 'Green Pillar' is just a commercial cultivar of this species.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Preston, C.D., Pearman, D.A. and Dines, T.D. (2002) New Atlas of the British & Irish Flora. An Atlas of the Vascular Plants of Britain, Ireland, the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands. Oxford University Press. Status: Naturalised

Inger Wallentinus (19??). Introduced Marine Algae and Vascular Plants in European Aquatic Enviroments. Department of Marine Botany, Göteborg University, Göteborg, Sweden. Appendix 1. Introduced vascular plants in aquatic environments in the different European areas, incuding also occasional species. Status: Naturalised

Randall, R.P. (2001). Garden thugs, a national list of invasive and potentially invasive garden plants. Plant Protection Quarterly 16 (4), 138-171. Status: Garden Escape

Mulvaney, M.J. (1991). Far from the Garden Path: An Identikit Picture of Woody Ornamanetal Plants Invading South-Eastern Australian Bushland. PhD Thesis. Dept. Biogeography and Geomorphology, Research School of Pacific Studies. Australian National University Status: Weed

John Hosking, NSW Department of Agriculture, Weed Database 30 April 2003 Status: Environmental Weed and Naturalised (in Victoria)

Clement, E.J. and Foster, M.C. (1994) Alien plants of the British Isles. Botanical Society of the British Isles, London. Status: Casual Alien

Randall, R.P. & Kessal, O. (2004) Revised Garden Thugs database. WWF Australia.
Status: Environmental Weed and Naturalised

Introduced (Naturalised) Species to the United States [USDA, NRCS 1999. The PLANTS database. National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70874-4490 USA.] Status: Naturalised

Carr, G.W., Yugovic, J.V. and Robinson, K.E. (1992). Environmental Weed Invasions in Victoria. Department of Conservation and Environment. Melbourne Status: Environmental Weed

Groves, R.H. & Hosking, J.R. (1997) Recent Incursions of Weeds to Australia. Technical Series N° 3. CRC for Weed Management Systems, Australia. Status: Weed

Check-list of the Flowering Plants and Ferns of Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly - 1994 C.N. French and R.J. Murphy. University of Exeter Status: Naturalised.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004
From: Forest Starr <fstarr@hawaii.edu>

Could someone please let us know if the mystery plant at the link below is Pittosporum undulatum, or not. This plant has been found in cultivation on Maui and is beginning to spread beyond the properties it is planted on. We have tentatively identified it as Pittosporum undulatum, a Hawaii State Noxious Weed, but future control efforts require a confirmation of ID. Any help from folks familiar with this species would be greatly appreciated.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree that image #31 is of a Pittosporum and that it resembles P. undulatum, however, the regular leaf undulations and silvery sheen on the upper surface suggest the New Zealand species Pittosporum eugenioides rather than P. undulatum. The most reliable feature distinguishing the two is the unit inflorescence shape which is a complex panicle in P. eugenioides and one to several simple stalked umbels in the axil of each subtending leaf in P. undulatum. The two are easily confused. The image seems to suggest a compound inflorescence hiding under the foliage in the upper right quadrant but the image quality is too poor to confirm this. Whilst P. undulatum is the more likely species to naturalize in warmer climates, P. eugenioides may well be suited to submontane elevations even in Hawaii. The closeup image #32 seems unmistakeably consistent with P. undulatum but still lacks the diagnostic features required to confirm the identity. If the scale of the image were known then capsule size might be conclusive since the capsule of P. undulatum is around one cm long while that of P. eugenioides is half that length.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Below are the 25 responses we received to the Pittosporum undulatum request. Thanks to all who helped.

yep. Sorry to tell you but it sure is Pittosporum undulatum . Another common name is Sweet pittosporum. Tho probably a bit more bitter sweet for you. Birds love it. It will love your climate and it especially loves nutrient-rich soils. Tim

Tim Scanlon
Planning Officer and Project Manager
NSW North Coast Weeds Advisory Committee
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes it looks like Pittosporum undulatum to me. The small cream-coloured fragrant flowers appear in spring in clusters at the tip of current year growth. It's a medium-sized rainforest tree from SE Australia. We have problems with it in the higher rainfall areas of Sth Australia where it is not indigenous (we have no rainforests): it displaces native vegetation and because of its greater resistance to fire it changes the fire intensity and therefore has an impact on the subsequent regeneration.

Doug Bickerton
Ecologist, Habitat Management
Dept for Environment & Heritage
Sth Australia
-----------------------------------------------------------

Looks like it to me....... though there are other Pittosporum spp. In cultivation. P. undulatum is quite weedy in parts of Western Australia eg Margaret River you know the deal with these plants that have attractive fruits - birds eat them and spread the seeds

...good luck, you'll have a battle on your hands, it's a weed in several places, including Jamaica: http://www.bangor.ac.uk/~afs101/iwpt/project1.html some refs on this webpage fyi: http://members.lycos.co.uk/WoodyPlantEcology/docs/web-sp15.htm
S.
Lloyd, Sandy
---------------------------------------------------------

I'm pretty confident it is P.undulatum - invasive in the Adelaide Hills (Sthrn Mt Lofty Ranges) and south-western Victoria.

Neville D. Crossman
Research Fellow
Systematic Conservation Planning Group
School of Earth and Environmental Sciences
University of Adelaide, Waite Campus
President, Weed Management Society of SA Inc.
Chair, 15th Australian Weeds Conference Organising Committee
--------------------------------------------------------

Let me be probably the 500th person to respond. Sure looks like P. undulatum to me, but without details of fls and fruit dimensions couldn't rule out NZ P. eugenioides which has smaller fruits and capsules, and bigger, more complex inflorescencse. You've likely eliminated this though.

...P. eugenioides is showing a bit of weed potential here, but is nowhere near the problem of P. undulatum (which is, paradoxically, also native here).

Yes, this is Pittosporum undulatum, a native of wet sclerophyll and some warm rainforest associations in south-eastern Australia. The species has become naturalised in adjacent parts of Australia (eg Melbourne), where once established, it appears to alter mircoclimatic conditions and fire regimes facilitating compositional change to forest understorey. Introduced birds are involved in dispersal of its seed.

John Westaway
Department of Environment and Conservation
Australia
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi there, I would say your guess is right ... looking at the photos. Leaves 8cm or more? Any floral characters? Fruits bi - valved? I am happy to do DNA analysis to confirm for you. Please contact me if interested.

Dr. Chrissen Gemmill
Senior Lecturer
Centre of Biodiversity and Ecology Research (CBER)
and Pacific Biosystematics Research Lab (PBRL)
Department of Biological Sciences
University of Waikato, Private Bag 3105
Hamilton 2001, New Zealand

Attached are some images from the Plants Directory (http://members.dodo.com.au/~orkology
<http://members.dodo.com.au/%7Eorkology> ) of Pittosporum undulatum.

Certainly, what you have suggests this species. The fruit shown in the image here are immature - ripe fruit are orange with red seeds inside covered ina sticky resin.

Botanist, Native Vegetation Mapping Program
Dept of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources
Centre for Natural Resources
Ecosystem Processes and Biodiversity Unit
Australia

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Forest and Kim,
Yes.

Plant #32 is definitely P. undulatum. #31 looks like it too- but would like to know if those fruits start out orange before they go woody and brown like that. (that would confirm it). Are the seeds really sticky? hey also start out orange and then go brown as they ripen.

Pittosporum undulatum is a problem is areas to which it is not native even in Australia - partly because it is distributed by introduced birds (particularly European blackbirds) and due to changes in fire regime (low temperature control burns, rather than wildfires). (Gleadow and Ashton 1981,82 Australian J Botany papers).

My suggestion is to pull it out, poison the stumps and do follow up weeding as it seeds heavily (I presume in this environment a medium intensity control burn is out of the question). There is very little seed stored in the soil from year to year so with vigilance it is possible to get on top of it. If you don't, it will take over and suppress regeneration of most your native species- that's what I found here. It's not just the shade, I think it has an allelopathic effect although that it pretty hard to prove.

A recognize the plant as 'Pittosporum undulatum'. It's also a problem in South Brazil. For more information you can check http://www.institutohorus.org.br/download/fichas/Pi_undulatum.htm (site in Portuguese)

Rafael Dudeque Zenni
The Nature Conservancy do Brasil
Estagi=E1rio - Iniciativa das Esp=E9cies Ex=F3ticas Invasora

Hi Forest,
They both look like P. undulatum to me. They are spreading into riparian areas on Catalina Island near where landscaped plantings occur.
John

John Knapp
Invasive Plant Program Manager
Catalina Island Conservancy
P.O. Box 2739
Avalon, CA 90704

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Chris Buddenhagen, Botany Department, Charles Darwin Foundation Casilla
17-01-3891 Avenida 6 de Diciembre N36-109 y Pasaje California Quito, ECUA
DOR

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Forest,
I am sure that you folks already thought of this but Bishop should be able to give a positive ID.
Ryan
Ryan Smith
Project Coordinator
O'AHU INVASIVE SPECIES COMMITTEE=20

Hi all

You are correct in identification. This plants natural range is where Ilive. Partially recognised as a weed here (Sydney Australia). Bird dispersed. Successful through changed fire regime, urbanisation and nutrient rich urban run-off. Several unpublished papers and conference posters available on request.

I am no botanist but have controlled hundreds of them and they are easily (?) controlled with drill and fill but the soil changes that they make take some time to rectify

From the photos (which aren't great), that certainly looks like Pittosporum to me. If so, I would strongly advise you to eradicate them. I can't vouch for it in a tropical environment, but in a temperate to sub-tropical environment the thing goes crazy.

Cheers,
Scott Watson
Senior Horticulture/Ecology Officer
VicRoads Design : Landscape Section
-----------------------------------------------------------------

That looks like the same plant that I identified as P. undulatum from Camp Smith in Halawa (Oahu). Of course I'm not a botanical expert. But here is the picture in case you want to compare..

If I fell over the plant pictured in the dark I would immediately say, "That's bloody Pittosporum undulatum." I live in the cooler highlands (2000 ft) of Canberra but we have a beach house on the Far South Coast of NSW (addresses below) where Pu is ubiquitous. It provides a green backdrop in our largely bush (locally indigenous spp) garden (soil: deep sand) but grows on the shaly ridges and doesn't mind salt spray - we have used it - tentatively and gingerly - in plantings to stabilise beach dunes. As a garden specimen it has its uses as a screen, it grows up and becomes leggy shading out much below or perhaps exerting some allelopathic effect on competitors, not itself. It can be cut back to any level and it starts again. It flowers there in Aug-Sept and exudes a great scent.

Pu has glossy, hairless ls, fls whitish to white, fruits yellow opening to reveal sticky dark red seeds 2-3 mm dia, beloved of birds who spread it. There are "mucilage ducts in petioles, visible with a lens after cutting" - which I only read for the first time in answering your call. There are few P.spp it can be confused with. Crushed ls and cut stems have a characteristic scent, the sap (mucilage?) is sticky, goes dark on your hands and is hard to remove - all of which is of little diagnostic use when there may be no other spp with to compare it.

Unfortunately I do not have experience with other P. sp except P. revolutum which has dull green leathery ls, softly hairy below with larger fruits, also yellow, and opening to reveal yellow inside and larger 5-7 mm seeds bright red. (The open bivalve capsule, yellow inside and the bright red retained seeds make a powerful display, wonderful bird attractant.) It is a smaller plant, often suckering (I regularly mow over small ones and they continue to come up) but hardly a weed, ie persistent but not invasive in our area.

Where we are Pu seems not to be invasive so much as joining canopies with age to shade out competition. In other areas where fire has been suppressed it has become dominant and its shading and possible allelopathic effect make it a savage competitor severely modifying lots of indigenous habitats. Fire has be ensuppressed at Rosedale and does not seem to have made it too invasive.

No doubt several persons more sage than I, and better systematic botanists to boot, will reply with additional information. A book which might be useful in your situation where so many plants beloved of ourselves have become your pests is:

Williams,J.B., Harden, G.J. and McDonald, W.J.F., (1984) Trees and shrubs in rainforests of New South Wales & southern Queensland. Botany Dept, University of New England, Armidale NSW. P142. ISBN0 85834 555 2.

David.
David H. Mackenzie
CSIRO Land and Water
------------------------------------------------------------

Looks like it to me based on the foliage but the fruits you have must be old. When they are ripe they are bright yellow-orange colour, not black.

David
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

G'day Forest
I am familiar with Pittosporum undulatum and your photos certainly look like it to me. I am a bush regeneration (environmental weed control) contractor. This species is indigenous where I live but becomes invasive when fire is excluded.
Regards Hugh
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

I find it hard to tell if this is Pittosporum undulatum from the photo. From the foliage it appears to be: leaves in fairly tight whorls, right shape, undulate margins. Are the leaves of your plant dark green shiney above, much paler below with a clearly visible network of darker veins (as is the case for P. undulatum)? But I would expect the mature fruit to be bright orange (then openning to expose the sticky coloured seeds). If the fruit in the photo are mature and black/dark it must be another speices. However, if the fruit in the photo are over-mature, seeds have been shed and they are dieing, then it could be P. undulatum.

Other possibilities include other Pittosporum species, species in the Lauraceae etc.

John Healey
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Having read David Cameron's response, trust his advice before mine. I reckon he's probably right. I don't know P. eugenioides, but I'd agree the undulations on the leaf in the photo are more regular than P. undulatum around here. I thought perhaps that might be a phenotypic response to the Hawaian climate. I also thought the leaves looked a bit narrow.

Cheers and good luck (not that you need it - you're already living in Hawaii),
(a slightly jealous) Scott Watson
Senior Horticulture/Ecology Officer
VicRoads Design : Landscape Section
----------------------------------------------

Whilst P. undulatum is the more likely species to naturalize in warmer climates, P. eugenioides may well be suited to submontane elevations even in Hawaii. The closeup image #32 seems unmistakeably consistent with P. undulatum but still lacks the diagnostic features required to confirm the identity. If the scale of the image were known then capsule size might be conclusive since the capsule of P. undulatum is around one cm long while that of P. eugenioides is half that length.

David Cameron
Senior Botanist
Flora Information System Curator & Threatened Species Officer
Threatened Species and Communities Section
Biodiversity and Natural Resources Division
Department of Sustainability and Environment
Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research

P undulatum is a native of this far north coast of New South Wales where I live. It has a very bad reputation for becoming seriously weedy when it gets outside its regular zone.

In flower it has a perfume of exquisite beauty - hence known as "Sweet Pittosporum" locally.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have just received a post on Envirotalk asking for proof of the affects of Pittosporum undulatum on communities in which they become weedy and suggesting we may be doing the wrong thing by controlling them (and weed populations in general) in respect to the health of the environment and planet in general.

So does anyone have any good solid information on the affects of this species in particular to illustrate why it should be controlled? If not will go chase some myself but thought I could get better information off this list.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jocelyn Howell (Cunninghamia 8 (1) 2003, p 153) discusses the issue reasonably well.

If you are after detailed scientific studies on affects of Pittosporum, I am not aware of any, but if you consider that one of the key reasons for the "problematic" nature of Pittosporum is the change to fire regimes, then there is an enormous array of studies showing that fire exclusion can be just as damaging to biodiversity as frequent bushfire. One of the key impacts of fire exclusion or repeated cool burning in the Sydney region is the spread of fire sensitive species such as Pittosporum (amongst other factors including stormwater and nutrient changes).

The posting on Envirotalk basically takes the approach that intervening in succession is somehow anathema to caring for nature. There is now no such thing as an environment that is not influenced by human management decisions, be they to intervene or to not intervene.

Extremist views both ways with regard to Pittosporum miss the point. Sometimes it is a desirable part of achieving better biodiversity outcomes, and sometimes it works against this. The management of Pittosporum needs to be part of a strategy to achieve well thought out long term goals. Sometimes it should stay other times it will impede natural regeneration of desirable species. But the real danger pointed out by Howell is to have a blanket category of Pittosporum as a plant that should not be there.

There is a fine example of a Pittosporum at Brush Farm in Ryde of a Pittosporum in a moist gully with a trunk diameter almost 800 mm across, looking as natural a part of any ecosystem as I have seen. On the other hand on sandstone ridgetops in urban Sydney, their presence will eventually lead to a complete shift of community in the absence of fire, through changes to light interception in particular, but anecdotal evidence shows that they also have some allelopathic effect.

How they should be managed all depends on the context of what is trying to be achieved so its important to avoid the good guy bad guy approach to managing bushland dynamics and make sure that any action is part of a well thought out plan.

These comments come from a person who has removed many a Pitto, and will continue to do so, but I am concerned that some of the decision making is a little to absolutist, especially in Blue Gum High Forest remnants around Sydney.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 06 Sep 2004
From: Mary Greenwood <mary.greenwood

studentmail.newcastle.edu.au>

I have not read the following, but it has a reference to P.u. it the list of contents.

Cronk, Quentin C. B
Plant invaders : the threat to natural ecosystems Quentin C.B. Cronk and Janice L. Fuller London ; New York : Chapman & Hall, 1995 Edition 1st ed

also
Rose, S. 1997 Influence of suburban edges on invasion of Pittosporum undulatum into the bushland of northern Sydney, Australia Australian Journal of Ecology, Mar1997, Vol. 22
Issue 1, p89, 0p; (AN 8334397)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mullett T.L. (2001). "Effects of the native environmental weed Pittosporum undulatum Vent. (sweet pittosporum) on plant biodiversity" in Plant Protection Quarterly, 16(3), p.117-121.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For what it is worth I agree with Frank, and not just for Pittosporum either. A well thought out plan saves time and money, and reduces the chances of actually reducing species diversity (flora and fauna). I have personally been responsible for woody weed crusades that have probably caused more problems than they solved - luckily I think I have learned from it.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am a bushcare workaholic at Narrawallee on the NSW south coast. The southern end of our area has almost turned into a Pitto & asparagus fern duo-culture. The northern end is so far clear of the Pittos although seedlings are sprouting all over the place and there is one adult tree. Our group has been told not to pull them out by our Council Coordinator (a bit late as I'd already pulled out hundreds of babies. Shhhhh). But we REALLY want to keep our endemic plants only and not risk losing this wonderland of coastal plants and one particular area that is in the transition stage of changing slowly into rainforest.

I can't seem to find any mention of it being declared as a weed. If you have any information you can pass on to me, I'd be forever grateful.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003
From: Jackie Miles <jmilesacr.net.au>

Re Wendy's query, Pittosporum undulatum is native to the south coast, but tends to increase under a regime of infrequent fires, and to spread out of the locations like gullies that it was formerly restricted to by fires. It is in fact an agent of transition towards rainforest in that it colonises infrequently burnt areas and in the process makes them less likely to burn by shading out potentially flammable groundcover plants and other shrubs. So the "easy" way to prevent its spread is to burn more frequently, but in locations close to towns this is not always so easy because people tend to view fire with fear and suspicion, perhaps not aware that you can create just as many changes to vegetation by not burning as you can by burning.

It would not be appropriate to list it as a weed, but there does need to be some recognition of the way it changes landscapes, and discussion among land managers as to whether they want to see this happen or if not how to manage veg to prevent it.

Another aspect of its spread is the correlation with bell miners, who seem to like the dense "wet" understorey it creates. They can then cause ill health in the eucalypt canopy, and once the canopy weakens the understorey thickens up. I guess that process is OK in situations where the understorey includes rainforest species and there is some topographic protection from fires so that rainforest is a viable alternative veg community for that site in the long term. But if the site is likely to burn sooner rather than later, then by allowing pittosporum to take over we are potentially losing understorey diversity to no good purpose if a fire is just going to come along and knock the pittosporum out again. Down here on the far south coast what often takes over after bell miners weaken the canopy is just a "scrub" composed of things like Cassinia, with few rainforest elements. I doubt many people would see it as desirable.

Sorry, no hard and fast answer to the question, just a few ideas to kick around.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003
From: Don Jewell <dhjewellsurf.net.au>

I can't resist joining in the discussion on Sweet Pittosporum - my favourite (or more accurately, most feared environmental weed)

It is certainly a native of Southern New South Wales and Eastern Victoria, but is arguably the most dangerous environmental weed of Southern Victoria.

It spreads quickly by means of it's orange berries which are eaten by a variety of native and exotic birds (as has been noted by other contributors to the Enviroweeds Network) - two imported pests in the black bird and the fox being among the 'ususal suspects'. The fox ranges over a large area, increasing its effectiveness as a 'spreading agent'.

Left alone, it will quickly form dense shade canopies and (apparently) develop an area of soil at the base of larger plants where not much else will grow.

Not only does it flourish in what might seem it's natural habitat of the cool moist rainforests of the Dandenong Ranges and the like, but it does very well on coastal sandy soils, which are very dry in summer.

Working with the Friends of the Royal Botanic Gardens - Cranbourne (which is partly a reserve to protect remnant indigenous vegetation - mainly sandy coastal soils) we used to have family excursions to pull up seedling Sweet Pittosporum plants - with a prize for the most ! Most of us adults gave up counting when we got into the hundreds, and many of the younger children couldn't count far enough! And this without walking more than 100 metres.

Part of the problen is that it is an attractive looking small tree - shiny green leaves, regular shape, scented flowers, orange berries. I have had trouble persuading residents in the small Coastal Village of Cannons Creek to cut down the attractive small tree that is providing shade and scent in their garden or nature strip.

One of the vexed questions is - where is it indigenous, what is it's natural range ? My suggestion is that the relevant authorities (Catchment Management Authorities) with help the Departmant of Sustainability and Environment should get together and define it's range - perhaps as far west from the N.S.W. - Vic. border (near Mallacoota) as Wilsons Promontory. Say to Foster or Leongatha - or perhaps the South Gippsland Shire ?

As a keen member of the Friends of the Prom, I am glad that it does not appear to have (yet ?) invaded the Prom, but is certainly found on the isthmus connecting the Prom National Park to the mainland.

This might be entirely arbitary, but I suggest that we need a "line drawn in the sand" somewhere, and outside it's "natural range" Pittosporum undulatum should be declared a Regionally Prohibited weed.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003
From: Graeme Lorimer <Ecologyoptusnet.com.au>

Pittosporum undulatum is certainly not indigenous in the Dandenong Ranges, where it is among the worst environmental weeds.

It cannot be made 'Regionally Prohibited' under the Victorian Catchment and Land Protection Act 1984, because its characteristics do not match the legal requirements at all well. The appropriate category is 'Regionally Controlled'. It is easy to determine Sweet Pittosporum's natural Victorian distribution in terms of the regions that are recognised under this Act, and also those in which it is not a problem. The 'Regionally Controlled' category could be applied in the remaining regions. Nothing could be done under that Act to deal with regions where the species occurs naturally but is expanding outside its natural range and becoming a problem.

Municipal Councils have other powers to regulate the growing of plant species, as well as to exempt certain species from controls that apply to removal of vegetation.

Sweet Pittosporum is one of quite a few species that become big problems due to humans changing the environment enough to let the species escape from their naturally confined range. Other species include Leptospermum laevigatum, Acacia retinodes and some members of the Acacia longifolia group. Reduced fire frequency is the most common cause of the problem, in my experience.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003
From: Roger Cook <RogerChume.vic.gov.au>

As a professional bushland regenerator in Hume City Council, I do not usual ly encounter this weed in this lower rainfall municipality. However, in my role as President of Kinglake Landcare and long involvement in Friends of Kinglake National Park, I see the devastating effects regularly in the higher rainfall hills (1 metre and over per annum). Pittosporum undulatum has spread rapidly along the roadsides and neighbouring properties between Whittlesea and Kinglake West, is appearing in gardens,and appears to be hybridising with our indigenous Pittosporum bicolor (Banyalla). My son and I recently observed what appears to be an example of hybridisation just near the viewing deck for Masons Falls at Kinglake West. We have alerted the authorities and hope they respond quickly as they grow rapidly and will probably require a large scale cut'n'paint operation to remedy if not treated early.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003
From: Rob Richardson <richardsonweedinfo.com.au>

Trudi Mullett did a fantastic amount of work on Pittosporum undulatum and this has been published in the Biology of Australian Weeds series. This particular article appeared in Plant Protection Quarterly Vol 17 (4) 130-140.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003
From: Ross Macleay <lizardlandbigpond.com>

Here on NSW north coast it is common, indigenous and not a problem. The only situation it even gives a hint of its problematic potential is in a certain proclivity to colonise road edges.

It is interesting how the balance tips in its favour. Although fire looks like a management tool, I wonder how much of its spread is related to changes in fire alone (as is often noted)? Other factors might be dispersal species changes, herbivore changes, disturbance regime changes, climate change, and perhaps these are exacerbated by differences in competitive plant species between say up here and down south.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003
From: Graeme Lorimer <Ecologyoptusnet.com.au>

I stick with the fire hypothesis to explain most of the expansion of Pittosporum undulatum in central southern Victoria. The species is sensitive to fire if the flames reach the tops of the plants, which would have occurred every decade or so until the 20th century in the area I'm talking about. I have not seen germination from soil-stored seed after bushfires, either. These facts alone are enough to explain most of the expansion.

Expansion into fire-sensitive vegetation such as gullies in the Dandenongs or Kinglake areas can be understood, I think, as a consequence of Europeans:

* reducing fire frequency so that there are fewer barriers of fire-prone vegetation to impede the species' march across the map.

The expansion occurs into areas where there is no significant alteration to fauna that disperse the seed. I don't know what sort of herbivore fauna you propose might browse the pittosporums so heavily as to make a big difference to their survival fitness, but the weed problem extends to areas where there are lots of kangaroos, wallabies, possums and wombats (none of which seem to browse the pittosporums). Climate change is not an explanation since the problem far predates any anthropogenic climate change. I'm not sure what you meant by 'disturbance regime changes', Ross.

'Differences in competitive plant species' is obviously a factor: Fire-adapted vegetation communities don't have any effective competitors for pittosporums.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003
From: Lee Andresen <andresensydney.dialix.com.au>

Here at Angels Beach on the Ballina Coast (where Sweet Pittosporum is an endemic indigenous species and not at all a weed) its most prolific development is in fact when planted along road edges in severely degraded areas (eg the moon-landscape site of a road-bridge construction zone) with foreign soil diesel-spoiled and full of weeds has been replanted with a suite of natives, and the Piittosporum undulatum does BEST of them all!! With a fair knowledge of the most likely dispersal vectors on this particular beach I'd say it's spread by birds principally.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003
From: Rod Randall <RPRandallagric.wa.gov.au>

Just a minor point of clarification. The word 'endemic' when applied to a plant means a plants native range is confined to a particular region. ie Eucalyptus caesia is endemic to the southwest of Western Australia. Using endemic and indigeous together is like talking about 'a round circle'....

On a related issue I get the feeling that many people find it difficult to imagine any plant within its native range can act as a weed. The Victorian Weed Science Society held a seminar on this issue a while back (where any proceedings developed, my memory is suggesting yes??) and some enviroweeds discussions in the past have debated the issue.

Yes, natives can be weedy, but worry about it only if they are causing problems.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003
From: Lee Andresen <andresensydney.dialix.com.au>

Thanks to Rod Randall for clarifying the use of "endemic" in ecology. I had been taught by other bush regenerators to call a species "endemic" when what was being referred to was not merely that it was an Australian Native but that we were using stock drawn from plants already existing in our area and hence which were (presumably) genetically "special" to that local area. That seems to fit Rod's usage, so I agree that calling Pittosporum Undulatum "endemic" would only be correct usage if we were referring to using locally seeded stock (ie endemic sources) for reafforestation. Fixed that one up! I am correct in calling it nevertheless "local" I presume - meaning it occurs locally and has been regarded as having "always" been here since records began - ie neither introduced nor naturalised as far as is known. On the Far North NSW Coast three of our most common "native weeds" are Leptospermum laevigatum, Schefflera actinifolia and Acacia saligna - one from the bottom end, one from the top and one from the far west. All are invasive on dunes and coastal wetlands and need constant control.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003
From: Sally Vidler <sally.vidleradelaide.edu.au>

Sorry to be pedantic, but it is still incorrect to use the term "endemic" when referring to the use of "local stock", when I believe you mean "local provenance". That is, the seed is sourced from nearby indigenous (or local native) vegetation, thereby preserving the genetic diversity of local plant populations.

This does not make the plant endemic. Endemism, as Rod correctly defined, refers to a species being "restricted or peculiar to a locality or region".

The local native plants which occur naturally in your region can be said to be indigenous. SOME may be endemic to your local area.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003
From: Adrian Daniell <A.Danielllatrobe.edu.au>

AARRRGGGHHHH...terminology gone mad. Sally and Rod are correct, but I think its about time we actually started using correct terms to describe what we mean ie put together a lexicon of terms to acurately describe what they mean. On my list of things to do get rid of the term 'provenance'...does anyone actually know what it means? Well it depends on who you talk to. For example the term 'provenance' in forestry means a trial of seed from a single tree and testing the range of variation found under a set of conditions...is that what we want? If you talk to enough people from different backgrounds when the conversation get around to 'provenance' there is much nodding of heads and agreement when there is nothing of the sort.

I use 'source population' instead of 'provenance' since it clearly implies more than one individual (unless there is only one.. but that doesn't change the underlying principle) and where it comes from eg the 'source population' of this Bursaria spinosa is Plenty Gorge at such and such. And since that's what the discussions a generally about we should say it.

Sorry to add to the ruckus..but language is a very loaded subject and it has been a long day.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003
From: Hugh Paterson <goodbushpnc.com.au>

The plants which have the same range of genetic composition as the plants on the site are said to be "local provenance" not "endemic". So we have three terms Indigenous - native to the area. Endemic - native to the area only, not native anywhere else. Local Provenance - genetic composition the same as the local population.

The area of local provenence depends on gene flow by pollination and seed dispersal. The actual exent of local provenance can really only be determined by DNA analysis of many samples across the area.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003
From: Tein McDonald <teinmozemail.com.au>

I am aware that the term 'endemic' is used by some field practitioners of bush regeneration to describe seed stock coming from a specific area. This is understandable - but I believe it is not really useful to have the same word for two different concepts that arise in the same field.

Over the last 25 years I have observed many horticulturists using 'endemic' as if it is a refinement of 'indigenous', meaning 'locally indigenous'. Certainly many of us have been looking for a simpler term for 'locally indigenous' for many years as it becomes ambigous when combined with 'non' as 'non locally indigenous' . But the fact is that 'endemic' is already taken.

I believe that, in bush regeneration courses in NSW, pains are taken by teachers to convey that this term describes a species ONLY found in the area nominated (whether western Sydney, eastern Australia or planet earth). This sort of discussion, however, is really important to keep our language as accurate as it can be, without losing sight of the need to find new terms to convey important concepts as needed by practitioners.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003
From: Judy and Mike Hines <hines.mjbigpond.com>

The discussion on this topic has been most interesting and highlights the need for defined terminology and reference to standard dictionary definitions. Not being an academic, I cannot offer such definitions. An entry in "The NSDL Scout Report for the Life Sciences, November 14, 2003" may provide a useful reference.

The National Biological Information Infrastructure (NBII) and Cambridge Scientific Abstracts (CSA) recently launched the Biocomplexity Thesaurus -- "a major new resource for the bioinformatics community." The Biocomplexity Thesaurus integrates five existing CSA and NBII thesauri that cover the biological, environmental, and social sciences. The user interface is as simple as can be -- just type in a phrase, term, or root word and the search engine does the rest. No Boolean logic, quotation marks, or parentheses needed. Clicking on the hyperlinked terms in the results list will launch a new search, allowing users to rotate the thesaurus to explore different facets of a particular concept. [RS]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I run a native nursery in central victoria. I have a customer who asked me about the above plant. I am wondering if it is a environmental weed here. I don't know anything about it, whether it is native or not.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pittosporum tenuifolium is native to New Zealand. Common names: kohuhu, black matipo, tawhiwhi

This plant in widely planted in Australia (possibly naturalised in Victoria), the USA and Great Britain and has naturalised in the USA, and the UK.

Inger Wallentinus (19??). Introduced Marine Algae and Vascular Plants in European Aquatic Enviroments. Department of Marine Botany, GF6teborg University, GF6teborg, Sweden. Appendix 1. Introduced vascular plants in aquatic environments in the different European areas, incuding also occasional species. (southwest Britian, intentionally introduced)

Randall, R.P. (2001). Garden thugs, a national list of invasive and potentially invasive garden plants. Plant Protection Quarterly 16 (4), 138-171.

Clement, E.J. and Foster, M.C. (1994) Alien plants of the British Isles. Botanical Society of the British Isles, London. (garden escape)

Introduced (Naturalised) Species to the United States [USDA, NRCS 1999. The PLANTS database. National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70874-4490 USA.]

Carr, G.W., Yugovic, J.V. and Robinson, K.E. (1992). Environmental Weed Invasions in Victoria. Department of Conservation and Environment. Melbourne (dispersed by birds)

Groves, R.H. & Hosking, J.R. (1997) Recent Incursions of Weeds to Australia. Technical Series NB0 3. CRC for Weed Management Systems, Australia.

Check-list of the Flowering Plants and Ferns of Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly - 1994 C.N. French and R.J. Murphy. University of Exeter (naturalised)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pittosporum tenuifolium James Stirling has naturalised at several sites through out the Dandenong Ranges. I believe there are some particularly large plants close to the Kallista township where this species has been established for a number of years. Probably best to speak to Parks Vic Fern Tree Gully to get all the details. It has invaded Mountain Ash wet forest in the area and also goes feral in peoples yards. It seems to be restricted to high rainfall areas ie 900mm+ through out the Dandenong's. Pittosporum eugenioides has also gone feral invading similar veg communities. I have a feeling that both tenuifolium and eugenioides can hybridise with our local Pittosporum bicolor as Ive seen intermediates with both species. There are some quite large Pittosporum eugenioides in the Ferny Creek area with parent plants nearby probably the result of plantings 30-40 years ago. I suspect that we will get a better understanding of how weedy Pittosporum tenuifolium is over the next few years as plants mature and set seed.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rob Dabal wrote:
I have a feeling that both tenuifolium and eugenioides can hybridise with our local Pittosporum bicolor as Ive seen intermediates with both species.

Rob or others working in the Dandenongs - it will be worth submitting material of these "intermediates" to the herbarium in Melbourne so any hybridisation can be documented, it always seems far more menacing to me when things not only go feral but then start to hybridise, look at willows :-(

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Despite listing by Carr, Yugovic & Robinson in "Environmental Weed Invasions in Victoria" 1992, this plant was not on the Herbarium of Victoria's naturalised list until recently, because specimens of naturalised material had not been submitted. For instance it is mentioned, but not as a naturalised alien, in "Flora of Victoria Volume 3", and no addition or correction was provided in the Vol. 4 (1999). The new 'Weed Spotters' program and 'Weed Alert' system in Victoria are in part intended to address this deficiency.

FoV 3:534 says: "a popular garden species, differing from P. eugenoides in the maroon flowers that are solitary in axils or in small cymes. Many cultivars are known, with leaves that are variously variegated and/or purplish. The cultivar ...'James Stirling' has leaves considerably smaller than typical (usually c. 2 cm long). It is widely planted as a fast-growing, lightly screening hedge."

I've had two reports in recent years of numerous seedlings around established garden plants in the Dandenongs. The species is on the negotiating list of plants to be banned from sale in Victoria.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pitto James Stirling is a cultivar of Pittosporum tenuifolium and therefore will not naturalise in the form planted. Cultivar Pittos here in NZ do produce off spring and revert to the parent or particular variant the cultivar was derived from. NZ being long and with many climate ranges produces many forms of the same species. Plant breeders have taken advantage of this to create many Pitto forms.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In response to Chris McKain's message, one shouldn't assume that a cultivar of a species won't beget cultivar progeny in the wild. Grevilleas that are found naturalised in Victoria are frequently cultivars from garden parents.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cultivars are normally just a commercial selection from within a species selected for its leaf or flower colour, form or some other desirable characteristic. Cultivars are in no way less invasive than other types within a species and in some cases have proven to be more invasive. As horticulture is the major vector for new plants and the plants introduced are often selected for commercial or other characters its often the only form of the species we see.

I have collected over 60 named cultivars as weeds and the majority are selections from a well known weedy species.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sweet Pittosporum Pittosporum undulatum indigenous to eastern Victoria, New South Wales and Queensland is a highly invasive critter here in the Yarra Ranges. A number of veg communities are effected from riparian floodplains to grassy woodlands. Our main control method has been drill and fill which is usually very successful.

A community groups I work with has trialed a non-herbicide control technique. Trees and shrubs are ring barked with a pruning saw or bow saw, the cut being 10-15mm into the sapwood depending on the size of the plant, bark is then stripped to just below ground level. The theory is that any possible growing points are removed and hence the treated Pittosporum slowly dies unable to resprout and unable to sustain itself. However the practitioner must be absolutely meticulous in ensuring that ALL bark is removed. We began this method at a reserve in December/January this year and have noticed a slow and steady leaf drop of treated plants and no apparent effect on untreated individuals adjacent to them. Foliage appears to be yellowing and younger foliage is nearly always wilted. I estimate that it will take 2-3 years for complete leaf drop to occur given the current rate. I must stress that this is a small trial and not a proven technique however I though it might be useful to share the information. I'm interested in other people observations and/or experiments. Is the timing appropriate, does success depend on location ie perhaps it will work in drier climates but less successful in moist areas? Is 10-15mm deep enough to get into the cambium?

An advantage I see is that leaf drop is a much slower process than traditional drill and fill, possibly enabling fauna that may use Pittosporum to seek alternative habitat. Less leaf litter, or rather leaf litter extended over a 2-3 year period, may also enable groundflora and other species to recruit earlier than they otherwise may. Which raises another important question, does anybody know if Pittosporum undulatum has an allelopathic effect? Is its impact on groundflora the result of significantly increased leaf litter volume or chemical suppression or a combination of both?

Disadvantage of the technique is the time required ie its labour intensive, however no specific herbicide training is required if people employ this technique.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is not Pittosporum but...
I have routinely used a similar method now for several years on Privet, Camphor Laurel and Celtis sinensis. Not so meticulous as yours, it simply involves making a ring about 15cm wide around the trunk with a hammer. Using a hammer is very quick and easy - but you MUST WEAR GOGGLES. I dont go to the ground (except in the case of Celtis which, in summer, strips easily to the ground and needs a wider ring anyway) and I have to follow up - (2-4 quick returns to check and hit off the odd shoots that sprout below the ring). Since I am returning anyway (followup, followup, followup,...) I find it all very convenient. Still these may be easier species to kill than Pittosporum. Privet takes 2 years, camphor 2-5 to die. (I have accidentally ringbarked Native Guava and Brush Box and they both healed very quickly. The method also works reasonably well on Citrus limona but is no good on Black Willow)

Note. I specifically do not remove any more than the bark, nor do I cut into the sapwood. This results in MUCH MORE VIGOROUS shooting from below the ring.

In the case of privet in particular, ground flora recruitment is one of the delights because in nearly all sites I have worked good native groundflora (tree seedlings and groundferns and sedges and grasses) has competed vigourously to the disaddvantage of seedling privets. Mind you I am working in moist gullies in tall moist eucalypt country and the seedlings are typical local rainforest species. It may well be different with Pittosporum in different drier or more open kinds of communities. For instance, one of the occasional recruits here (NSW north coast) is good old Pittosporum undulatum - but it is not a problem here, nor does it appear to exert any allelopathic effects on other locals.

This lack of understorey thing reported under many weed canopies is an interesting thing. I suspect that allelopathy is only a minor factor in most such cases. Site history, site isolation, and the absence of the proper germination and recruitment requirements of natives (be they light, seed, smoke, fire, fungus free, bare soil, etc etc beyond simply allelopathy) are, I suspect, more important.

Polygonum aviculare - Wire weed
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004
From: <michael@australianecosystems.com.au>

I have an approximately 3ha site in south east Melbourne. We are revegetating a grassy woodland/wetland/meadow. It is a an artificially constructed revegetation area. Plantings are in early establishment ( 2-3 months old), mainly grasses, lomandras, dianellas and so forth... We have a big wire weed (Polygonum aviculare) problem. The wire weed is getting big, I am concerned that our previous treatments with herbicides have been unsuccessful (timing, resistance or unexpected rain ?).

I have a few methods at my disposal.

1) Handweeding- not practical in this situation.
2) Roundup+MCPA+Synetrol- usually works.
3) R'up + Goal @ 75ml/ha.
4) Kamba M

Any ideas or comments would be greatly appreciated.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004
From: Andrew Coughlan <coughlan@ispdr.net.au>

The question from me and my colleagues is:

Why do you insist on planting ground cover native species in an area where full control of ground covering weed species has not been achieved?

My suggestion is that you remove the planted (?native?)species, gain control of the weeds with long-term seed viability - three to five for wire weed (using years over months as a time-frame), then have another attempt at revegetation.

Effective weed control in this manner may show that revegetation is unnecessary as the local native plant species tend to get the idea when habitat is provided.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004
From: <michael@australianecosystems.com.au>

In response to your question,
" Why do you insist on planting ground cover native species in an area where full control of ground covering weed species has not been achieved?"

We began preparing this site almost a year ago. The site has had several hits with herbicides prior to planting. At the time of planting we had got the site to the point where there were no ground covering weed species.

We operate in a commercial situation and our contract required us to have the site planted by a certain time. We are now to maintain the site for four years before handing over to the landowner.

The client would not be to pleased if we were to spray out the whole site and start again at a cost of around 1 million.

Thanks for your input though.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004
From: Ian Higgins <ian_higgins@nccma.vic.gov.au>

I've used Kamba M successfully to selectively kill dicotyledenous weeds amongst native grasses (including very young direct sown seedlings) and Lomandra longifolia. Your other herbicide options (2 &3) are not selective so would have to be very precisely applied.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004
From: Ian Higgins <ian_higgins@nccma.vic.gov.au>

Kamba M is a trade name for a mix of (from memory) dicamba and MCPA HTH

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004
From: Scott Watson <Scott.Watson@roads.vic.gov.au>

For the record...

In the past, one of VicRoads' contractors has reported sensitivity of Lomandra to either Dicamba or MCPA. The contractor used to play around with a herbicide called Lontrel to control broadleaf weeds (including Gorse, Conyza and Aster subulatus) among Lomandra. They seemed to think it showed some potential.

Out of curiosity, what are people's experiences with overspraying grass specific herbicides and broadleaf specific herbicides with species in the Cyperaceae (eg Carex, Lepidosperma) and Xanthorrhoeaceae (eg Lomandra)?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004
From: Ian Higgins <ian_higgins@nccma.vic.gov.au>

I should have mentioned that when using selective herbicides, I still try to avoid spraying the desirable plants if possible, so my Lomandras would have only been contacted by small quantities of spray (and spray drift). However, I am VERY confident with Kamba M's selectivity on species of (Austro)Danthonia, (Austro)Stipa, Elymus, Agrostis, Microlaena, Dichelachne.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004
From: <michael@australianecosystems.com.au>

My understanding is that the dicamba in MCPA can kill young Lomandra species and members of the Cyperraceae family. We have to watch it particularily around lomandras and carexes.

It also kills Angled Onion ( Allium sp?). I am confident using Kamba M around all grasses- however dicamba seems to affect a lot of monocotyldons. Eg. Liliaceae, Iridaceae etc...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004
From: Andrew Coughlan <coughlan@ispdr.net.au>

I work in local government in southern Sydney as a Noxious Weeds Officer. This has provided a good insight into weed management in revegetation and rehabilitation areas. I have extensive experience in supporting Bushcare/ Landcare initiatives. Familiarity with vicarious funding organisations is as normal.

The essence of my query/ comment was the use of ground cover plant species.

The establishment of shrub and tree layer species, in the degraded sites you describe, is great. Removal of persistent species (including the likes of cooch grass Cynodon sp., kikuyu Pennisetum clandestinum, wire weed Polygonum sp.and vetch Vicia spp.) where ground covers are present proves to be resource ineffective where the time and herbicide committment compromises ecological benefit.

I'll take a wind blown opportunistic weed over a human introduced perennial weed every time.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004
From: <michael@australianecosystems.com.au>

The type of ecological communities we specialise in revegetating are grassy woodlands, grassy wetlands and wetlands. In these systems shrub and tree layers are usually sparse if not non-existent (excepting melaleuca thickets).

I hope this answers your query.

Also thankyou to Graeme Lorimer for explaining the scenario I am working in so eloquently.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004
From: Ricky Ward <ecology_66@hotmail.com>

This advice may be wrong as I have no access to a ready reference on the problem plant but-Years ago in Brunswick by the Moonee Ponds Creek we had a cleared area - ex Kikuyu - sprayed - we and planted a few Red Gums, Poa lab. & 2 Danthonias in late winter.

By mid Jan the site looked horrid - no deaths but Conzya & a so-called Wireweed ( a rather prostrate plant) abundant, Kikuyu absent.

Within two years, with no spraying of the above ( maybe a little hand weeding) the site was covered with self sown Poas and Danthonias and the weeds had vanished.

Perhaps therefore you have an extra option - have a holiday and DO NOTHING.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004
From: <michael@australianecosystems.com.au>

Thanks for your advice. I have considered this option as there is plenty of Danthonia in the planting and also Disthichilis distichyphylla (Salt Grass) which will run rampant in time. THe Wireweed will die back later and seed prolifically. I am concerned though that next spring I will have a bigger problem as there will be less bare ground and therefore it will be harder to control drift and so forth.

I should know in the new year whether my current control methods have worked or not.

Portulaca oleracea - Pigweed
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006
From: Clarke <clarke@nex.net.au>

Can anyone suggest the best method of removing Portulaca oleracea?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006
From: Roger Cook <RogerC@hume.vic.gov.au>

Not really Charlie as in Melbourne it is indigenous and believe it was handy as a food source for both indigenous people and early white settlers.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006
From: Graeme Lorimer <Ecology@optusnet.com.au>

I'd question the idea that Pigweed is indigenous to the Melbourne area. I only ever see it growing in frequently disturbed spots such as on footpaths, ruts in nature strips and vegie patches. The only association that I have noticed with indigenous flora in the area is that Pigweed often pops up on the edge of revegetation beds where the mulch is thin and there is a bit of foot traffic to cause soil disturbance. It is certainly much more common in wasteland and untended areas of gardens than in native vegetation.

'Flora of Victoria' also disputes Pigweed's status as indigenous in this part of Australia.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006
From: Jeff Smith <jeffsmith64@hotmail.com>

I have always been under the impression that pigweed was indigenous, but I am willing to be educated. In terms of management however it shouldn't really matter. As Graeme points out it is a primary coloniser and loves bare open space, it doesn't like competition, it doesn't take over and dominate so I don't worry about it. In the long term, so long as something else is growing it usually just goes away.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006
From: John Martin <john.martin@cp.nsw.gov.au>

Here pigweed is a problem within turf as well as landscaped areas. Due to a lack of management I would say that it is definitely spreading regardless of competition with various grasses and regular mowing.

The flora of the Sydney region notes pigweed as a common weed and notes that it is eaten by Aboriginal people in central Australia, additionally a google search listed Portulaca oleracea as a traditional food of Mexican people.

Anyway, to get back to the original question, I've found that 1:100 glyphosate kills it readily.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006
From: Greg Balding <Greg.Balding@deh.gov.au>

Portulaca oleracea is indeed considered native to Central Australia (though given that it was named by Linneaus it is probably found in other parts of the world). Pitjantjatjara people call it wakati, use the seed for flour and chew the leaves if desperately thirsty. The little cups that the seeds are found in are known as ipi-ipi, which literally means little breasts.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006
From: Neville Walsh <Neville.Walsh@rbg.vic.gov.au>

A thin argument re 'nativeness' of P. oleracea in Vic., nothing very useful though, so don't waste your time unless you're interested. My suspicion is that P. oleracea, if native in Vic, is a species naturally only of our riverina, perhaps other scattered areas north of the divide and maybe a few 'warm' areas south (see below). At Melbourne Herbarium we have no pre-1900 records from near Melbourne (admittedly only a few post 1900, but species regarded as native were actively collected in the early days). However, we have many specimens from northern states pre-1900 (e.g. Darling catchment, Qld widely, central Aust, Darwin area). Early explorers were well aware of its use as an antiscorbutic, and it seems many collected it and forwarded specimens here to von Mueller for identification or interest. My theory regarding Victoria is slightly undermined by a Mueller collection from 1854 from 'Snowy River'. Possibly/probably though, this may have been from the rain-shadow area in the upper reaches where there are many spp. in common with Riverina and northern Vic. and many of these were collected by Mueller on the! same trip. Similarly I could envisage the species being native in the upper Tambo valley in Gippsland.
When describing the species, Linnaeus listed it from southern Europe, India, Ascension Islands and America. I think it's highly likely that the southern Australia occurrences originate from introductions from these or other areas. I have no problem with at least some of the northern Aust. occurrences being indigenous, but finer resolution of the 'species' might someday see it broken into several taxa. Herbarium material though is usually very poor and a disincentive to revision.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006
From: Roger Cook <RogerC@hume.vic.gov.au>

Thanks to Neville Walsh for fascinating info. I don't think of this discussion as time wasting, on the contrary I find it very interesting and satisfying that increasing numbers of people are interested and applying the info to bush regeneration etc. Many of us are aware that there are a group of plants such as, for example, Portulaca oleracea, Cotula australis, and Prunella vulgaris that have been argued about for years. Ultimately we have to assess if they are invasive, or pioneer species etc and treat them accordingly, perhaps giving some the benefit of the doubt unless evidence points otherwise. In these cases, we would not be actively planting them, but, would not embark on active eradication campaigns. It is important for us to be have respect and interest in the original flora and fauna and be open to continually extending the knowledge base of the plants and animals of this continent in particular.

Prairie ground cherry
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006
From: <Tereso.Morfe@dpi.vic.gov.au>

We're doing an ex ante benefit-cost analysis of a proposed biological control program for
prairie ground cherry in Australia.

To make some predictions on its potential spread, we need to have information about the total area currently infested by this weed particularly in South Australia and New South Wales. We have data for Victoria - from a survey done in 2004, so we have something begin with.

Can anyone lead us to the right information source? (sounding a bit desperate)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006
From: Michael Norris <menorris@ozemail.com.au>

Don't know that plant! So I looked it up on Google.

Nice picture on plantsdatabase.com/ showimage/25264.html with an invite to "Click here to discuss this photo". I tried to do that but needed to log in to http://davesgarden.com/ which is a USA site "By Gardeners... For Gardeners".

Maybe someone else can find time to do that. I thought it might be important as the photo came from "kennedyh", Churchill, Victoria!

Pseudoscleropodium purum - Neat feather-moss
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2005
From: Cathy Willis <Cathy.Willis@manningham.vic.gov.au>

Does any one have any information or experience in dealing with this invasive moss (or any moss) in environmentally sensitive areas? I am trying to find a way to control it amongst high quality native vegetation without damaging ground storey, native mosses or the soil. The infestations are too large for handweeding to be practicle and I'd like to avoid the disturbance and leaving bare soil anyway. Burning has not been successful (it returned fast).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2005
From: Rod Randall <RPRandall@agric.wa.gov.au>

Seems to me, inadvertant spreading by any form of cultivation or mechanical control would be highly inadvisable. It would also be good to know if these plants are producing sporophytres. If they are, well I'd just learn to live with it, as its beyond dealing with it it comes to that with spores being pretty much impossible to see let along stop from being moved via all manner of animals, water, wind, soil etc. Mosses are more like a pathogen than a plant and its probably better to look at the sorts of techniques pathologists use in dealing with fungal or rust problems.

Found this article online, may be of interest to you.

Norton G. Miller, and Norman Trigoboff (2001)A European Feather Moss, Pseudoscleropodium purum, Naturalized Widely in New York State in Cemeteries. The Bryologist: Vol. 104, No. 1, pp. 98-103.ABSTRACTPlants of Pseudoscleropodium purum, a moss native to central and western Europe, are well established in western, central, and eastern New York State, mainly in lawns of cemeteries, especially those with moist clayey soil, shade provided by conifers (Picea abies, Thuja occidentalis) in small groves, and periodic mowing. Male and female plants occur in Rensselaer County, New York cemeteries, but not in the same ones. Sporophytes have not been found, and reproduction appears to occur vegetatively as plants are cut and spread during lawn maintenance. If spore production is established within the naturalized range of this moss in the northeastern United States, the species may become more widespread, and possibly invasive. While the date and method of introduction into the State of New York are unknown, a 19th century specimen of P. purum from the West Coast of North America indicates that the moss may have reached that region as packing material in the late-1800's.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005
From: David Cameron <David.Cameron@dse.vic.gov.au>

David Meagher, co-author of "A Field Guide to the Mosses and Allied Plants of Southern Australia", offers the following advice to Cathy Willis:

I've had success in extinguishing it (at least temporarily) from a lawn by several spot applications of Munn's 'Moss Killer and Turf Algicide' over summer, but the problem in a large area is that if you don't get it all it will keep coming back, and back, and back. I certainly don't think it should be accepted as a hopeless case, as its potential for overrunning the bryoflora (and other flora no doubt) in grasslands and grassy woodlands is enormous, in my opinion.

Non-one has seen sporophytes in Australia, so it is probably reproducing entirely by fragmentation, and since it is dioicous we might be at least spared reproduction by spores.

I'd recommend some trials with (a) commercial moss killer, (b) iron sulfate mixed with clean sand, and (c) glyphosate. Even if it can't be extinguished, some sort of control is warranted.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005
From: Margaret Moir <olivehill@wn.com.au>

Can anyone suggest a place to find a photo of this? I'd be interested to see if it has invaded SWWA yet.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005
From: Rod Randall <RPRandall@agric.wa.gov.au>

A Google "image" search for Pseudoscleropodium purum turns up plenty of images

Pseudoscleropodium purum may be native to Europe but its been found in the Antarctic so its a fair bet its in WA. It is often used as packing material in plants in Europe and was probably originally introduced to Australia and much of the rest of the world in this manner.


	All information contained in this site remains the property of CRC for Australian Weed Management Use of this site is governed by Australian & International copyright laws. Privacy Policy \| ©2003 CRC for Australian Weed Management Click to download Adobe Acrobat Reader to view PDFs