Pennisetum purpureum (Schumach. 1827) NPS photo by National Tropical Botanical Gardens |
Richard R. Rodriguez, CPA, asked me to post his comment on my
blog from October 09, 2012 Pennisetum
purpureum - Biofuel, ornamental specimen, invasive species, weed with a
tendency towards hybrid cultivars with common names like Napier grass or king
grass,
Normally I would just post his comment, but given the nature of hiscomments, I thought he was owed a more detailed response.
Here are his comments:
"Need more information from your research to agree with your statements. Giant King Grass is NOT invasive.Giant King Grass actually has 80% of its roots mass in the top 18 to 24” of the soil. The other 20% are small hair like roots that can ...go deeper and break down each year and regenerate new roots. In summary, very little of the root system is deeper than 24”. The roots could never get to an aquifer. A major benefit of GKG is its ability to stop run off water and erosion loss of surface water that would normally run into the ocean".
Mr. Rodriguez, CPA, in his request for more information on
this invasive plant mentions root depth which is not part of any weed risk
assessment currently used in the United States (or for that matter anywhere
else I know about).
Here, then is the information from the University of Hawai'i's risk assessment of the highly invasive
species Pennisetum purpureum (Schumach.
1827) as requested by Mr. Richard R. Rodriguez, CPA:
4.01 Produces
spines, thorns or burrs y=1, n=0 n No
evidence of spines, thorns or burrs. Wagner,W.
L., D. R. Herbst & S. H. Sohmer. 1990. Manual of flowering plants of
Hawaii.University of Hawaii at Press. Honolulu.
4.02 Allelopathic y=1, n=0 n Not allelopathic. http://plants.usda.gov/cgi_bin/topics.cgi
4.03 Parasitic y=1, n=0 n No
evidence.
4.04 Unpalatable
to grazing animals y=1, n=-1 n (1)Medium
palatability. (2)The grass is valued for its … palatability…' (1)http://plants.usda.gov/cgi_bin/topics.cgi (2)Bogdan, A.V. 1977. Tropical pasture and
fodder plants. Longman, London
4.05 Toxic to
animals y=1, n=0 n "(1)Not
toxic. (2)Seiler et al. (1979) report
fatal nitrate poisonings in cattle whose diet consisted solely of Napier grass.
Levels of nitrate averaged 28.3 mg/g with some samples as high as 44 mg which
levels in the same species from non-toxic areas was 3.9 mg/g. (due to grown in
soil with excessive N) 3)It is one of the most valuable forage, soilage and
silage crops in the wet tropics
" (1)http://plants.usda.gov/cgi_bin/topics.cgi
(2)http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/duke_energy/Pennisetum_purpureum.html#Toxicity
3)http://www.ecoport.org/default.htm
4.06 Host for
recognized pests and pathogens y=1, n=0 n This
website lists 88 species of fungi that are found on P. purpureum (only a few
generalists are economically important.) http://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases/all/FindRecOneFungusFrame.cfm
4.07 Causes
allergies or is otherwise toxic to humans y=1,
n=0 n No evidence.
4.08 Creates a
fire hazard in natural ecosystems y=1,
n=0 Not fire
resistant and high fire tolerance. http://plants.usda.gov/cgi_bin/topics.cgi
4.09 Is a shade
tolerant plant at some stage of its life cycle y=1,
n=0 n Shade intolerant. http://plants.usda.gov/cgi_bin/topics.cgi
4.1 Tolerates a
wide range of soil conditions (or limestone conditions if not a volcanic
island) y=1, n=0 y 1)
It is a rapid colonizer of disturbed areas and prospers in a broad range of
conditions. 2)Requires a rich soil 3)However, it will also grow on poorly
drained soils to dry sandy soils of low fertility. 1) http://aquat1.ifas.ufl.edu/mcplnt1p.html
2)http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/duke_energy/Pennisetum_purpureum.html
3)http://www.ecoport.org/default.htm
4.11 Climbing or
smothering growth habit y=1, n=0 n No
evidence. Not a vine.
4.12 Forms dense
thickets y=1, n=0 y 'Forms dense perennial stands, difficult to
penetrate, which inhibits establishment of other vegetation.' http://www.hear.org/pier/pepur.htm
5.01 Aquatic y=5, n=0 n Semi-aquatic
grass http://aquat1.ifas.ufl.edu/mcplnt1p.html
5.02 Grass y=1, n=0 y Perennial grass. http://plants.usda.gov/cgi_bin/topics.cgi
5.03 Nitrogen
fixing woody plant y=1, n=0 n
5.04 Geophyte
(herbaceous with underground storage organs -- bulbs, corms, or tubers) y=1, n=0 n
6.01 Evidence of
substantial reproductive failure in native habitat y=1, n=0 n No evidence.
6.02 Produces
viable seed. y=1, n=-1 y if
grown from seed, it is started in a nursery and transplanted http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/duke_energy/Pennisetum_purpureum.html
6.03 Hybridizes
naturally y=1, n=-1 (1)P. purpureum hybridizes with P.
americanum readily under artificial conditions. No evidence of natural
hybridization. (2) 'Many cultivars and
hybrids occur, a well known example is Banagrass, a cross with P. glaucum.' -
again no evidence that this occurs naturally. Bogdan,
A.V. 1977. Tropical pasture and fodder plants. Longman, London
6.04 Self-compatible
or apomictic y=1, n=-1 y A
selfed progeny of the 'Merkeron' cultivar was produced (also, likely to be
apomictic) http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/proceedings1993/V2-294.html#Napiergrass
6.05 Requires
specialist pollinators y=-1, n=0 n Probably
not. Most grasses are wind pollinated - the flower morphology does not reveal
adaptation to a specialist pollinator.
6.06 Reproduction
by vegetative fragmentation y=1,
n=-1 y is sometimes stoloniferous with a creeping rhizome.
(sreads slowly this way) http://www.ecoport.org/default.htm
6.07 Minimum
generative time (years) 1
year = 1, 2 or 3 years = 0, 4+ years = -1 See
left 1 R. Criley, UH department of
Horticulture (but assessment was given with low confidence, could required 2
years)
7.01 Propagules
likely to be dispersed unintentionally (plants growing in heavily trafficked
areas) y=1, n=-1 n Propagules
do not have any means of attachment.
7.02 Propagules
dispersed intentionally by people y=1,
n=-1 y Pasture grass, sometimes grown as an ornamental.
7.03 Propagules
likely to disperse as a produce contaminant y=1,
n=-1 y "Weed: potential seed contaminant (fide Weed
CIBA)
(Stalks are cut and transported for feeding livestock. Some
seeds are likely transported (accidentally) in the process)" http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/taxon.pl?27208
7.04 Propagules
adapted to wind dispersal y=1,
n=-1 y plumose spikelets
7.05 Propagules
water dispersed y=1, n=-1 n
7.06 Propagules
bird dispersed y=1, n=-1 n
7.07 Propagules
dispersed by other animals (externally) y=1,
n=-1 n Propagules do not have any means of attachment.
7.08 Propagules
survive passage through the gut y=1,
n=-1 n No evidence.
8.01 Prolific seed
production (>1000/m2) y=1,
n=-1 n 'Pennisetum purpureum produces, with occasional
exception little or no seed, …' Bogdan,
A.V. 1977. Tropical pasture and fodder plants. Longman, London
8.02 Evidence that
a persistent propagule bank is formed (>1 yr) y=1, n=-1 n (1)Caryposis 2 mm long. (2)'Pennisetum purpureum produces, with
occasional exception little or no seed, …'3)Does not readily produce viable
seed in many countries, (1)Wagner,W.
L., D. R. Herbst & S. H. Sohmer. 1990. Manual of flowering plants of
Hawaii.University of Hawaii at Press.
(2)Bogdan, A.V. 1977. Tropical pasture and fodder plants. Longman,
London 3)http://www.fleppc.org/pdf/Pennisetum%20purpureum.pdf
8.03 Well
controlled by herbicides y=-1,
n=1 y "(1)Foliar application of 1%-3% Roundup Pro. If
non-target damage is a concern, cut stems to ground level and allow sprouts to
reach 8-12 inches and treat the same as Neyraudia above. Broadcast 3-5
quart/acre Roundup Pro, 2 quart/acre Arsenal, or 1 quart Arsenal and 2 quart
Roundup Pro.
(2)The herbicide glyphosate provides acceptable control in
aquatic sites " (1)http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/BODY_WG209#TABLE_1 (2)http://aquat1.ifas.ufl.edu/mcplnt1p.html
8.04 Tolerates, or
benefits from, mutilation, cultivation, or fire y=1,
n=-1 y 1) No resprout ability. 2)Resprouts easily from small
rhizomes left after mechanical control 3) regrows following frequent clipping
(harvesting for animal fodder) 1)
http://plants.usda.gov/cgi_bin/topics.cgi
2)http://www.fleppc.org/pdf/Pennisetum%20purpureum.pdf
3)http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/duke_energy/Pennisetum_purpureum.html
8.05 Effective
natural enemies present locally (e.g. introduced biocontrol agents) y=-1, n=1 Biological
controls for napier grass are unknown in Florida. http://aquat1.ifas.ufl.edu/mcplnt1p.html
Total
score: 16 -> Highly Invasive
Risk assessment from University of Hawai'i
1 comment:
I have made a tally of the Hawaii report scores for each category and they do not add up to 16, which appears to be what gives the highly invasive rating. I can actually only add up to about 4. Could you comment on this, perhaps let me know what I am missing here?
Post a Comment