Maryland Invasive Plant Advisory Committee to Meet for First Time

A News Release from the Maryland Department of Agriculture

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 

CONTACT: Julie Oberg, 410-841-5888 or Vanessa Orlando, 410-841-5889


MEETING NOTICE: Invasive Plant Advisory Committee to Meet for First Time
General Assembly Created Committee to Develop Risk Assessment Protocols

ANNAPOLIS, MD (January 23, 2012) - The Maryland Department of Agriculture's
(MDA) Invasive Plants Advisory Committee, established during the 2011
Legislative Session as an advisory body to the Secretary, will meet for the
first time on Friday, January 27, at 9 a.m. at MDA headquarters in
Annapolis. The Committee's charge is to advise the Secretary on regulations
that should be adopted to establish a risk assessment protocol for invasive
plants and to establish lists of invasive plants using the protocol. This
first meeting will focus on organizing the 11-member committee and setting
goals and timelines for completing the first year's task for establishing a
science-based risk assessment protocol for invasive plants.

"The nursery and landscape industry is the second largest agriculture sector
in Maryland, second only to our poultry industry," said Agriculture
Secretary Buddy Hance. "It is critical that we do all we can to prevent and
control the potential damage that invasive plants can inflict on our plant
and animal communities in natural areas, wildlands, managed areas, farms and
even the backyards of residents. The members of this committee have
considerable expertise and experience with invasive plants and they are well
regarded within industry. I look forward to receiving their
recommendations." 

The committee is chaired by Carol Holko, MDA's Assistant Secretary of Plant
Industries and Pest Management. The full text of the bill which created the
committee can be found at:
http://mlis.state.md.us/2011rs/chapters_noln/Ch_142_hb0831T.pdf. 

Invasive species, gardening and nature in the 1860s

Invasive species problems can sometimes divide gardeners from environmentalists. The work of the gardener in choosing the right plant is viewed with suspicion when that plant is not known to be from the local ecosystem. A fear that the gardener's choices may hop the garden fence and take up residence in the forests, woodlands, and other natural areas, may give rise to the erroneous notion that gardeners are only thinking about themselves. However, the history of horticulture and, therefore, gardening in America as well as Europe is the history of making community decisions as to the landscape both particular and in general. Gardeners were thinking and practicing green before the current movement was born. A major point of horticultural discussion for over three centuries has been the proper role of gardening and the greater landscape. The challenge for gardeners and landscape designers was and is to find a balance between the localized landscape needs and the impact of these needs on the greater environment. It is interesting for me to read about our current choices between formal gardening and the preservation of our natural areas in essays and articles written over 150 years ago. Note the description of purple loosestrife a present day disruptive plant in many natural ecosystems with a long history as a workhorse of the ornamental, managed landscape.

"BOTANICAL NOTES OF THE YEAR. DURING 1865 but few plants new to the  British Isles have been observed, at least, as regards the higher orders, though, among the lower, various novelties have been recorded….Now is the season for " Seed-Catalogues," the authors of which appear to have generally some rather loose ideas regarding the extent of the British Flora: a list of the "plants new to Britain," which are given as natives of that favoured country, would take up considerable space. Our Crowfoot tribe is increased by a new Columbine (Aquilegia glandulosa); our Candytuft receives a companion, under the name of Iberis coronaria; Dianthus punctatus is ranked with our British pinks; Impatiens noli-metangere finds a brother in I. glandulifera; and many other examples might be added. The name Lythrum Salicaria is not, we may suppose, sufficiently grand for our Purple Loosestrife, as this plant is rechristened Lythrum roseum superbum! More than one firm offer for sale a mixture of flowerseeds for woodland walks, shrubberies, railway embankments, &c. ; but as botanists we may hope that their customers in this department are few; for does not Nature herself supply an abundant and beautiful " mixture" of flowers, and grasses, and ferns, in far better taste than we can hope to emulate, or attempt to improve upon ? There are those who would endeavour to "paint the lily and add perfume to the rose," but no lover of nature will wish to be ranked among them." (Edited by: M. C. Cooke. Feb1, 1866. Science-gossip, Volumes 1-3. Robert Hardwicke, London. p.39)

"NOTES ON A FEW PLANTS SUITABLE FOR THE WILD GARDEN…Of the old double Pæony (Pæonia officinalis) I have three colours—pink, a bright rosy orimson, and the old dark maroon, and a white I think not quite so robust (I should like to know whether there are any other colours). They like a rich, deep loam, but will live and bloom in soil not quite so good. For effect they are best planted on a moist bank side quite above the eye. The flowers are heavy and sprawl about, and would be lost amongst the Grass. They are mueh better under the shade of trees, as the flowers fade in the full sun. If in a garden, they should have three or four sticks and a cord round to support them. The Oriental Poppy (Papaver orientale) and its var. bracteatum, flowers a brilliant scarlet and crimson, size of a dinner plate; would make glorious masses of colour. They are tap. rooted and rather difficult to transplant, but when once rooted are not easy to get quit of. Lyme Grass (Elymus glaucifolius) is a grand-looking Grass, quite tropical in appearance, and worthy of a prominent position. I believe it is naturally a marsh plant. At first it was planted on my rockery, but it ran about so that I was obliged to have taken up. I then had a large sanitary pipe sunk in the rock, in which it was planted, and here it has flourished for some years past without a drop of water, excepting what it gets from the clouds. Its beauty is, however, somewhat hidden by the encroachment of another fine

Slant, Solomon's Seal (Polygonatum multiflorum), a plant that will grow in the worst soil and situation possible, but worthy of the best; it is beet planted on a level with the eye, and you then see the beautiful arching of the stems, and the lovely pendant white bells beneath. It seems to like stony, dry places. There is a pink Spire* (S. venusta), 1 believe, a splendid plant when well grown (all Spireas like moisture). It should have plenty of room to develop its beauties. As a contrast to this, but equally fine, is Lythrum roseum superbum; in any soil, but plenty of moisture, it will make a mass of rosy colour. The Day Lilies (Hemerocallis fulva and flava), easily grown; the foliage is rather coarse for a border, But then what lovely flowers! tawny yellow and yellow, the latter fragrant withal; and then, if you have a damp, or, better, wet spot in your garden, what so beautiful as the Marsh Marigold (Caltha palustris)? The single form is finer than the double. A few plants together glitter like gold in the sun. The small-leaved Cotoneaster (C. microphylla) is one of the most useful shrubs I know. It makes a nice covering for a wall where more choice and tender things would not grow ; but nowhere does it look more lovely than when rambling about amongst old logs, or hanging over alow wall. All the above are hardy and robust, and will hold their own when established, and will increase in beauty from year to year." (Edited by: William Robinson. Gardening illustrated, Volume 7 .1886. p. 303)

 

Landscapes, literacy, ecosystems services & sustainability

The way we approach our understanding of landscapes influences the policies we support and the attitudes we keep. How we “see” a flower, field or forest has consequences for how we “use” them. Our fragmented, parochial, limited time horizon, decision making matrix is a reflection of why our social systems are stressed. Our collective challenges, our great social causes, are all filtered through the fuzzy goal of immediate self interest versus long term social or public value. If a memory of childhood includes recollections English Ivy lined garden pathways, then there should be no denying this ornamental addition to the current garden desire. And more importantly, the cost of managing it in parks and natural areas should be born by someone else, or better just ignored. It is the immediacy of a strong interaction that attracts self interested actions, not the outcomes of weak interactions barely noticed in the present.

Ecological and environmental issues that swirl around ecosystems and biomes are hampered because of the growing lack of landscape literacy possessed by policy makers and their constituencies. Literacy is the ability to read, write, listen and comprehend, and speak a language. I think that there is an analogous set of abilities and skills that I call landscape literacy; the ability to read, work with knowledgeably, design, use and comprehend the intricate relationships of both natural and ornamental landscapes. Landscape literacy refers then to reading and working at a level adequate for communicating ideas about ecosystem services at a level that lets one understand the complex interactions of the system. These ideas at high level of literacy would include regulating, providing, provisioning and informing ecosystem services.

Most of the traditional problems and challenges of landscape management focus on the two higher level eco-system services, providing and informing. From aesthetics to resources that can provide material for personal and commercial use, our land use planning is concerned with enhancing an supporting these high level ecosystem services with understanding of the implications of additional stress onto the ecosystem in question. The assumption that natural resources are infinite permeates local land use and development policies in urban and suburban metropolitan areas. When we add the needs of those stakeholders who are either in economic challenged communities or historically under-served areas, we compound the problems of creating sound land use consensus. We have neither a common grammar for our ornamental landscape nor a well comprehended syntax for our natural areas.

The call for sustainable landscapes has been heard but not understood. Sustainable designs do not intentionally include invasive species, and may require some measure of certification that the flora and fauna is not itself a vector for invasive pathogens or insects. The idea that beauty may be more than color combinations and texture, is met with some resistance as is the reverse that there is a need for some order in landscapes that are functional in close proximity to human activities. Sustainability looks at the entirety of nature through asymmetrical temporal lenses communicating the past to the future through the present. (adapted from Crutchfield. 2009.http://www.physorg.com/news171800572.html) The collision of desires between our near-term aesthetic and economic sensibilities and the long-term requirements of the ecosystem and its ability to support out short term needs is in perpetual conflicted opposition.

Invasive species beauty springs forth

Springtime in the Mid Atlantic brings out the flowers and fragrances of blossoming trees and shrubs; and, if your knowledge of the landscape is high, the conundrum of the dangerous beauty of invasive species. Like roses in a corn field, purple loosestrife along streams and lionfish escaped from aquariums, the sweep of Callery pears (Pyrus calleryana), also know as Bradford pears, highlights the dichotomy between short term pleasure and long term cost throughout the woodlands of Maryland.

The seeming street and parking lot tree of choice is in full bloom competing with the Japanese cherries. The well-behaved cherries stay in place and are not seen in the woods and natural areas. The promiscuous pears produce hybrid off-spring that multiple unchecked on public and private lands creating a snow-like blanket of white along the roads and by-ways. The beauty is magnificent at a distance the smell up close is memorable; the damage to cars as limbs crash on roof tops is insurable.

Like the rose in the garden, the Bradford pear is beautiful in bloom, but is otherwise a weed competing for scarce resources and lowering the the harvest yield. Gardeners are very aware that some plants run amok and need to be controlled, removed and not planted near the garden. The Bradford pear damages the yield (services) of the ecosystem in to which is spreads. The non native tree creates biological deserts or monocultures reducing the amount of diversity. The homogenization of the landscape destroys the sense of place special to each location.

Amelanchier laevis, Allegheny serviceberry, is a wonderful native that can replace the pear. Also in the same genus are several other serviceberries (shadbush, serviceberry, sarvisberry, juneberry, Saskatoon, shadblow, shadwood, sugarplum, and wild-plum) such as Amelanchier canadensis and Amelanchier x grandiflora.

Another native worth considering in the landscape as an alternative to the ubiquitous pear is the green hawthorn (Crataegus viridis). Unlike the invasive pear, the hawthorn has four seasons of landscape ornamental interest from spring flowers, and summer foliage, to fall color and winter berries. The invasive Bradford pear hides its true destructive nature behind a fleeting spring display. As Vergil might have written: “Quidquid id est, timeo Prunos et dona ferentis”

Sustainability in the Landscape & Invasive Species

Why are invasive species so bad? One answer is that they negatively impact ecosystems; they bring an imbalance which at the very least causes stress and may under extreme conditions begin to destroy integral relationships and interaction necessary to a functioning ecosystem. The introduction of kudzu or Lythrum may result in a monoculture or biological desert. The complex web of food chains between trophies levels is eliminated and the system simplified. The ecosystem resources ability to provide services are correspondingly reduced to, for example, a possible regulating service such as erosion control on the part of kudzu or an informing service (aesthetics) on the part of Lythrum . The complex web of weak ecological interactions is reduced.

Sustainability in a certain sense is the process of maintaining the homeostatic relationships of an ecosystem. Invasive species reduce the efficiency of an ecosystem by replacing a web of weak interactions with a few strong interactions. Invasive species interfere with the feedback mechanism of an ecological system. An addition of a top predator such as mute swans, feral swine or cats can quickly bring an imbalance to the system. The feedback mechanisms which would normally tend the system towards equilibrium no longer function and the system begins to fragment.

The premise that this is a bad thing, the imbalance and degradation of the ecosystem is based upon an assumption that the ecosystem services as a resource have a value and a cost. A person who assumes that the resources are infinitely available would take strong issue with the idea that his or her use of these services should be restricted or should cost. The introduction of an invasive species, therefore, is an extranality to which the person is entitled by right. This sets up the dichotomy between market preference and public value. Our economic system and assumptions is based upon this infinite resource premise; it is hard to borrow money if you own a bog without a plan to drain it and pave it. A bog has “no” value for it generates no measurable return (ecotourism aside).

This in a world of infinite ecosystem services (regulating, provisioning, and providing) which are considered free, the introduction of Hedera helix, English ivy, in Maryland is not a problem but rather a solution to a short term landscape need accordingly a use of a high level ecosystem service, that of informing. The possible negative impacts to lower level ecosystem services are not easily measurable in a market preference sense and thus are not taken into consideration.
A sustainable landscape would “value” the complete palette of services attempting to support complex interactions and relationships. At the very least it would try to do no harm. So we wobble between our values system and our market choices a dynamic political tension with no linear solutions and great probability of unintended consequences no matter which side we take. Do nothing is not an option.

Invasive Species: Selling on the Front Lines

Sunday, I took to the sales floor of the garden center to help with sales. Within five minutes of getting there, invasive species opportunities arose in force. As I was helping a customer select a few native plants for her shade garden, I saw and heard a gentleman running after the nursery’s IPM consultant shouting, “Wait! I need to get information on an invasive plant for the shade. Wait!”

Of course the consultant moved on and my wife directed the anxious customer in my direction, pointing out with the approval of the consultant that I was the invasive guy. “I need an invasive plant for my shade garden,” the customer said.

Customer service dictates that rule number one should come into play. Rule number one in retail: The customer is always right. Rule number two: If the customer is wrong, see rule number one.

I now had the delicate job of explaining that he had just approached the National Invasive Species Council Advisory Committee's acting vice chair, and that perhaps there was some information that I could share before we went too far in the actual selection of an invasive species for his garden. I pointed out that on the continuum of bad choices, we could offer to sell him natural area (Maryland) public enemy number one, English ivy, or perhaps just slightly less problematic, periwinkle, and if I had talked him out of those two, Japanese spurge might seal the deal and my doom. Fortunately, he had decided for personal reasons of style and taste that pachysandra was out, and that he had enough vines already.

With further conversation, I was able to introduce him to Christmas fern, and then frantically began to look for Asarum canadensis, only to find that we did not have any in stock. The entire dialogue left me thinking how much work there is to be done at the retail level. We need to provide information in a fashion that allows our customers to make informed choices. Trying to be positive about a negative when someone is trying to give you his money is a touchy, dicey proposition.

Having recovered from this first engagement on the sales floor, I moved to our euphemistically named “chemical” room. I have tried without success to get our staff to call this something else, anything else for years, but after 80 years in business I am stuck with a name appropriate to the 1950’s. A continuous stream of radio traffic from staff includes the phrase :chemical” room while drecting customers to our organic choice area. The irony is apparent only to me So, I thought I would go see what our customers were doing.

Of course, when a customer sees a bug, those who choose the “chemical” room want the maximum toxicity. They usually are not in quibbling mode, so working this part of the business takes a certain deftness on one’s feet not to enrage a home-owner with natural solutions or a live and let live theory of the problem. I was expecting to hear, “Sell me an easy to use, weapon of mass destruction, not to oexpensive solution to my pest challenge.”

What I heard instead, inspired this posting. “I just took some stems and seeds from my buddleia plant to my vacation house and threw them in the woods. They are growing just fine. Can I take some stems this fall after the leaves drop and stick them in the area around the back of my property; will they root?” I was to say the least astonished. I said, “Can I perhaps have discussion with you,” after my sales person told the ladies that I was the wrong person to have overheard the conversation; that I was the resident invasive species…guy, but I did not hear the guy part.

This customer was trying, it turns out, to combat awful weeds along the property line, honey suckle, multiflora roses, et al, by planting or encouraging butterfly friendly plants. Hence the butterfly bush program. After giving the by now standard, this is who I try to be speech, by now refined a little, I pointed out that while she was indeed attracting butterflies, she was missing the point by not planting host plants for the eggs and caterpillars that would eventually become the creatures of beauty she was trying to encourage. I noted that she was bringing one problem to combat another problem and iin the end just encouraging the final destruction of the butterfly habitat she was trying to encourage.

These two chance encounters within the same hour, sent me to the keyboard, to write about invasive species, mostly to those who already know about the problem. Trying to reach my own customers, who walked past my three foot by five foot warning signs and my staff who thinks I have lost my mind, brings to mind Seneca, I think, per aspera ad astra.

Mayapples in April

Podophyllum peltatum, commonly know as Mayapple, is one of my favorite plants, when it is in bloom in April. Known as Devil's apple, hog apple, Indian apple, umbrella plant, wild lemon, and American mandrake (though it should not be confused with true mandrake, Mandragora officinarum, an unrelated Old World plant whose roots have been used throughout history for medicines and potions).
Picture of a Mayapple flower
When I first assessed the botanical and horticultural possibilities of my home, I notice that I would be blessed with almost all of the major invasive species that are found outside of Washington D.C. Along with my two callery pears at the front entrance, I found I had a woodland full of multiflora rose, English ivy, Japanese stiltgrass, and garlic mustard, along with a healthy dose of mile-a-minute weed.
Picture of English ivy, multflora rose, garlic mustard all invasive species & the Mayapples I am seeking to encourage and protect.

But I also noticed in my spring survey, hundreds if not thousands of Mayapples. When I mowed the area for the first time, I was careful to mark each seedling Mayapple and skirted the area, marking the outline of the patches with dead limbs of trees. I used this marking system because I knew that the Mayapple would be dormant through the summer and I wanted to avoid compacting the soil with my large mower.

My neighbor came over to introduce himself and told me apologetically that I had missed quite a few patches. I told him that Mayapples sell for around ten dollars each at retail, and he told me that he had just mowed all his weeds down. I noted that he had just reduced his garden net worth by a thousand dollars.
Pictures of Mayapples growing on the side of a gentle slope

I am fortunate that the property had a large swale descending towards a ravine which seems ideal for the native plants. They are on the north-west side of the old farm field and get just enough light from the hedgerow trees which grew up when farming stopped a few decades ago. My Mayapples grow up to 18”tall growing in naturalized patches, Each plant had two leaves with a rather large white flower (this year, 2008, they have become to bloom to bloom in late April. Because fo the gentle slopes that the plants have settled, it is rather easy to view the flowers, which in a flat planting can remain hard to see. Later in early summer the plants will develop yellow-green berries. The species is toxic (poisonous) to another native, the eastern white tailed deer. Poison is a good thing because we have a family of twelve living in the ravines around our 6 acres.

Native deer have the following menu specifications: 1. Any plant purchased for over 100.00 dollars; for instance collectible hostas, the more expensive the early the deer find it and consume it,, 2. Any native which is not poisonous, 3. Any plant bought for its blooms, 6. Vegetable garden plants which would be good for your dinner. 7 Anything left with the exception of plants on the invasive species watch list for the given area, 8. Your car’s bumper.

Sometimes, I hear well-meaning gardeners tell me that native plants are no maintenance plants. What they mean to say is that traditional gardening practices may not be needed, but, there are some gardening practices which must be used even in native gardening. Weeding is big on the list. I have included a picture of my next patch to salvage. The reader may notice the opportunities for me to practice high maintenance gardening as I work to control the English Ivy, remove the garlic mustard, and control the multiflora rose. This is definitely not no-maintenance, and will in fact take several years.

Picture of an invasive species and Mayapples : early dedection and rapid response know to gardeners as weeding

Each year around this time, I walk the swale and look for seedlings to avoid mowing, as I work to expand the naturalized colonies. I would like to plant native azaleas, but the deer pressure is too great, so I mostly dream of what might be if we could only get our eco-system into some semblance of balance. I hope to begin carefully interspersing native ferns do that I can have something besides non-native grasses during the summer and the ever persistent pressure from invasives that the dormant Mayapples provide.

I occasionally dig some roots after the berries drop to start new colonies, and will do the same when I begin to plant ferns. Because, in a sense, I am caring for the Mayapples they are becoming domesticated and not truly native species. This is part of the challenge that gardeners face when confronted by the no cultivar stakeholder position. Either you go into a native collection and take genetic material diminishing the total available for the random interaction of pollination, or you carefully propagate, and in the process create domesticated plants, which are a selection from the wild, and therefore your own personal cultivar.

Picture of a Mayapple seedling

Sustainable conservation landscaping carries with its guidelines the use of traditional gardening design principles such as form, color and texture. Bringing a sense of order, gently guiding plant placement can be done with natives. Doing nothing and letting whatever wants to grow when it wants to grow is to create a truly natural garden and certainly is a valid garden concept, but it is not the only concept.

Gardening is like cooking. There are many cakes to be made; we all have our favorites. We can decide to cook in a healthy fashion and still bake different cakes. So to with garden designs; we can agree to garden using sustainable principles and yet create different gardens.

Invasive Notes Nandina

There are many pictures on-line, most of which are the property of commercial or educational sites. I do not have the time to ask permission for the number I would need to correctly attribute. If you have pictures which I may use and attribute of specific nandina cultivars, please contact me. I will try in the next few months to add pictures to this posting.

Recently, I was asked by Susan Harris (Sustainable Gardening Blog) if nandina species were invasive. Simple I thought; how difficult could this be? Wrapped in taxonomic confusion, marketed as a great plant with no pest problems,(violating the Tallamy dynamic)[1]: “Nandina has no serious insect or disease pests and is an amazingly trouble-free plant”[2], and featured in some cases, both as a perfect ornamental and an invasive within the same state, I have kept myself busy trying to arrive at a determination. [picture: www.sbs.utexas.edu/]

As with many things in life which are important there is no easy answer to the question of nandina invasiveness. Nandina is most likely an invasive species under specific conditions. As of this posting, I have not collected enough information to list the conditions, nor even suggest what they may be. I should think that if there is on-the-ground evidence of substantial invasion into significant area in a particular eco-region, a gardener so inclined to choose this species would choose some other species to plant. Please cinbtact me with pictures and specfic site information as to an invasion at jpeter@behnkes.net.

From Florida, for example there is the following: “[A] plant with such beautiful color and low maintenance has a place in any landscape. It can be used as a groundcover, shrub, hedge, screen, border, specimen, container or planter for mass planting or accent. It is splendid as a foundation plant if kept below five feet.” The same information sheet states further on: “Nandina has invaded and become naturalized in woodlands of three counties in North Carolina. It has also invaded woodlands in northern Florida, Georgia and Alabama, displacing native vegetation. It has been found forming dense groves in habitats of Florida Caverns State Park, affecting the native flora. It has been reported as an invasive plant in Jackson, Gadsden, Leon, Wakulla and Citrus counties.”[3]

My unscientific, completely anecdotal research has led me to offer up an invasive species axiom. Because of the lack of funding for on-going study, I find that I must look at the invasive species much as the United States Supreme Court looked at pornography; I know it when I see it. This of course, means that I am offering a personal opinion as valid as any other. From Dave’s Garden site I read, “On Jul 31, 2003, suncatcheracres from Old Town, FL wrote: Every home I have ever lived in the Coastal South has had some type of nandina in the yard, and I have never, ever, noticed that it was invasive. It may be that our plants were mostly in the shade, or in the back of borders, where they were never much fertilized, or that they never had any water other than rainwater. Or that the soil was quite sandy. But whatever the conditions, year in and year out, this was always an attractive, airy looking, evergreen shrub with beautiful fall and early winter red berries my mother cut for Christmas decorations.“[4]

There is also considerable information about the challenge of nandina seed germination. From NC State University we find that “Germination can be a challenge and is normally slow due to a rudimentary embryo and slow rate of embryo development. Fruits should be harvested when mature in the fall. Removal of the fleshy pulp is recommended and is easily accomplished by maceration. Seeds sown in the fall outdoors will germinate in 2 years.”[5] Such information might well lead one to think there is limited invasive possibilities for nandinas.

This anecdotal information is contrasted by more personal views such as “On Jul 30, 2003, knightspassion from Raleigh, NC wrote: "Heavenly bamboo is not aggressive in my North Carolina Piedmont garden. My nandina is in quite heavy shade in a woodland garden area and looks very nice with my other evergreen shrubs and trees e.g. euonymous and maples. It thrives even under drought conditions under maples that suck up all the water. I would not use this plant in a bed or in the sun since it could create a problem under good growing conditions. It seeds itself somewhat readily, and birds spread seed as well, but not anything that can't be kept up with in the shade if you don't want new plants.”[6]

North Carolina State University’s Department of Horticultural Science provides a description for the scientifically inclined. “Nandina is a monotypic genus indigenous from India to central China (Huxley and others 1992; Krüssmann 1985; Ohwi 1984). It was introduced into Japan from China before the sixteenth century (Coats 1992). The species is a broadleaf evergreen, upright, flat-topped shrub reaching a height of 1.5 to 2.4 m with a spread of 1.0 to 1.5 m that can spread by root suckers into large colonies (Dirr 1990; Whitcomb 1996). Plants are characterized by numerous, unbranched stems with horizontal branches. However, with age, they tend to become leggy and open, unless pruned properly (Flint 1997). The species is hardy to USDA Zone 6 (Dirr 1990) and will remain evergreen in USDA Zones 7B8. It becomes deciduous when exposed to colder temperatures (Gibson 1982). In Japan, nandina is called nanten,Asacred-bamboo,@ as fruiting twigs are sold in winter to decorate altars, both in temples and private homes (Coats 1992; Krüssmann 1985; Richards and Kaneko 1988). There, nandina is planted close to the entrances of homes because the plant is used to comfort family members who have bad dreams. The wood has an aromatic flavor and is considered by the Japanese to be flavorful and suitable for toothpicks (Coats 1992). The plant is reputed to have medicinal properties effective in treatment of various ailments (Ikuta 1994). Nandina is cultivated commonly in the United States because of several desirable landscape attributes. The new, finely dissected leaves are bronze to red, becoming blue-green with age, and turning a dull purple to bright red in winter (Flint 1997). Flowers occur in large panicles held above the foliage and are followed in the fall by showy, bright red berries produced in clusters that persist throughout the winter. The stems give the appearance of bamboo (Flint 1997). Plants are adaptable to many different soils; they tolerate sun, shade, and drought; and they are pest free (Dirr 1990; Whitcomb 1996).”[7]

Nandinas occur “…under forest canopies and near forest edges. [The species] is shade tolerant. Seedlings [are] frequent in [the] vicinity of old plantings. [There is] varying leaf colors in the various cultivars, some of which do not produce viable seeds. [It] colonizes by root sprouts and spreads by animal-dispersed seeds. [Nandina domestica is] from eastern Asia and India [arriving] in the early 1800s. [It was] widely planted as an ornamental [and is] now escaped and spreading from around old homes.”[8]

The following are Nandina domestica cultivars unless otherwise noted

Cultivars and Varieties
· Nandina domestica is a broadleaf evergreen shrub growing 6 – 8 ft. high; Bluish-green leaves turning to reddish purple in winter. Flowers in May are 8 – 15 in. terminal panicles opening to six-petaled, ¼ in. wide blooms, white with yellow anthers; Globular red fruit, 1/3 in., ripen in September and October and persist through the winter. [9]

· ‘Alba’ is a 4- to 6-inch shrub with white berries and yellowish-green foliage, which turns yellow in fall. This cultivar is more susceptible to cold damage than the species. [10]

· ‘Arbor Dwarf'; is 1.5-2ft with ripe fruit on Nandina domestica shrubby specimen of Nandina domestica.[11]

· `Colerno` (Patent PP11453). “The present invention relates to a new and distinct cultivar of Nandina, botanically known as Nandina domestica, and hereinafter referred to by the cultivar name Colerno. The new Nandina is a product of a planned breeding program conducted by the Inventors in San Antonio, Tex. The objective of the breeding program was to create new Nandinas with unique leaf color. The new Nandina originated from a self-pollination of plants of an unnamed selection of Nandina domestica. The cultivar Colerno was discovered and selected by the Inventors as a single plant within a population of progeny plants in a controlled environment in San Antonio, Tex. in June, 1991. The selection of this plant was based on its unique and long-lasting dark red purple-colored young foliage in contrast to the typical green-colored young foliage of the other progeny plants. Asexual reproduction of the new Nandina by terminal cuttings taken in a controlled environment in San Antonio, Tex. has shown that the unique features of this new Nandina are stable and reproduced true to type in successive generations. Plants of the new Nandina have not been observed under all possible environmental conditions. The phenotype may vary somewhat with variations in environment such as temperature, daylength, light intensity, nutrition and water status without, however, any variance in genotype. The following traits have been repeatedly observed and are determined to be the unique characteristics of `Colerno`. These characteristics in combination distinguish `Colerno` as a new and distinct cultivar: 1. Upright, compact and dense plant habit. 2. Low vigor, slow growth rate. 3. Unique dark red purple-colored young foliage and dark green-colored mature foliage. Dark red purple color of young foliage is retained year-round.”[12]

· ‘Compacta’ or dwarf nandina only reaches 4 to 5 feet in height and has lacy foliage, which turns red in fall.[13]

· ‘Compacta Nana’ or ‘Gulf Stream’TM is a slow-growing, 3- to 4- foot shrub with dark blue-green summer foliage and red winter foliage. It does not have any berries. [14]

· ‘Firehouse’ Vivid reddish/purple color in the fall and winter.[15]

· ‘Fire Power’ is a very compact plant to 2 feet tall and wide. It has red-tinged leaves in summer and bright red leaves in winter.[16]

· ‘Greray’ (Patent PP08530) A new variety of Nandina domestica having significant and improved characteristics not known to exist in either the variety "Harbour Dwarf" of which this new plant is a genetic mutant or the general species Nandina domestica. These characteristics include a symmetrical, densely mounding and compact form.[17] “This invention relates to the discovery and asexual propagation of a new and distinct variety of Nandina domestica (a member of the Berberidacia family that is commonly known as "Heavenly Bamboo"). The new plant variety was discovered as a mutant of the Nandina domestica nana cultivar named "Harbour Dwarf" in a cultivated bed of "Harbour Dwarf" plants that were growing in the Greenleaf Nursery Company, El Campo, Tex. The new variety of Nandina domestica nana has been named "Greray". The "Greray" mutant exhibited vastly different growing characteristics than those common to the "Harbour Dwarf" variety-particularly in that the "Greray" variety has a dwarf habit of growth when compared to the Nandina domestica progenitor "Heavenly Bamboo", but it is not as dwarf as its parent Nandina domestica nana "Harbour Dwarf". The new "Greray" variety is symmetrical, densely mounding and compact in form which differentiates and distinguishes it not only from its parent "Harbour Dwarf" and from its progenitor "Heavenly Bamboo", but also from related cultivars such as the variety called "Compacta". The new "Greray" cultivar is freely branching from basal and lateral buds and thus forms a tight compact globe. Its leaves are tripinnately compound. Testing and evaluation has shown the "Greray" variety to be stable in its distinguishing characteristics over several succeeding generations upon asexual propagation by using shoot cuttings and by tissue culturing at a nursery in El Campo, Tex. The "Greray" variety fully lives up to the "Heavenly Bamboo" common name often given to this family of plants. Orange hued new growth radiates crown-like upward while refreshing green mature growth extends horizontally to present a perky, full foliaged appearance. The refined texture of this plant is desirable for formal or casual settings. The fullness and controlled height of this dwarf nandina make it a prime choice when accent or foundation plantings are needed. The accompanying drawings illustrate the new "Greray" variety in color as grown in a nursery in El Campo, Tex. and also enable comparing "Greray" to its progenitor "Heavenly Bamboo", to its parent "Harbour Dwarf", and to another related Nandina domestica cultivar known as "Compacta"; the photographs also show the coloration of new, semi-mature and mature foliage of the new "Greray" variety.” [18]

· ‘Harbour Dwarf’ (this plant was named for Mr. C.L.Harbour in 1956: my thanks for sending this information and the spelling correction to me September 2008 to Ralph Rushing, Rushing Nursery, Inc., 3220 Redstone Drive West, Semmes, Alabama 36575) is a freely spreading, low-growing (to 2 feet) plant. In some types, underground stems or rhizomes send up stems several inches from the parent plant, making it a good groundcover. Winter foliage ranges in color from orange red to bronzy red.[19]

· ‘Jaytee’, ‘Harbour Belle’™ (Plant Patent No.14668) (according to Mr. Rushing of Rushing Nursery in Alabama, 'Harbor Belle' is the correct spelling}; [sometimes known incorrectly as] Harbor Dwarf; Fine compound leaves with burgundy fall color; Grows 2 - 3 ft. tall. Flowers and berries reported.[20]

· ‘Lowboy’ flowers and produces red berries, reaches 3 feet in height, and has red fall foliage. [21]

· ‘Monfar’ ‘Sienna Sunrise’™ (Plant Patent No.14693); A new and distinct nandina, characterized by its upright, mounded, dwarf and compact plant habit; developing leaves burgundy red in color; burgundy red coloration retained throughout the year; freely branching habit; and hardy to USDA Hardiness Zone 6B. [22] Intense fiery red new foliage cools to lush medium green in summer. Red highlights reappear in fall and winter. Perfect choice for high profile accents or in mass groupings for intense color. Evergreen. Sun or part shade. Slow growth 3 to 4 feet tall, 2 to 3 feet wide. Cutting grown.[23] “The present invention relates to a new and distinct cultivar of Nandina, botanically known as Nandina domestica, and hereinafter referred to by the name ‘Monfar’. The new Nandina is a product of a cross-pollination during the spring of 1993 of two unidentified selections of Nandina domestica, not patented. The new Nandina was discovered and selected by the Inventor in a controlled environment in Earleville, Md. during the summer of 1996, as a single plant within the progeny resulting from the cross-pollination. Asexual reproduction of the new Nandina by cuttings taken in a controlled environment in Earleville, Md., since June, 1996, has shown that the unique features of this new Nandina are stable and reproduced true to type in successive generations. The cultivar Monfar has not been observed under all possible environmental conditions. The phenotype may vary somewhat with variations in environment and cultural practices such as temperature and light intensity without, however, any variance in genotype. The following traits have been repeatedly observed and are determined to be the unique characteristics of ‘Monfar’. These characteristics in combination distinguish ‘Monfar’ as a new and distinct cultivar of Nandina: Upright, mounded, dwarf and compact plant habit. Developing leaves burgundy red in color; burgundy red coloration retained throughout the year. Freely branching habit. Hardy to USDA Hardiness Zone 6B. Compared to plants of the parent selections, plants of the new Nandina are much more dwarf and have shorter internodes. Plants of the new Nandina also differ from plants of the parent selections in leaf coloration. In addition, plants of the parent selections usually produce flowers and berries whereas plants of the new Nandina do not produce flowers and berries. Plants of the new Nandina can be compared to plants of the Nandina cultivar Gulf Stream, disclosed in U.S. Plant Pat. No. 5,656. In side-by-side comparisons conducted in Earleville, Md., plants of the new Nandina differed from plants of the cultivar Gulf Stream primarily in developing foliage coloration as plants of the new Nandina produced burgundy red-colored leaves whereas plants of the cultivar Gulf Stream produced orange-colored leaves. Plants of the new Nandina can also be compared to plants of the Nandina cultivar Moon Bay, disclosed in U.S. Plant Pat. No. 5,659. In side-by-side comparisons conducted in Earleville, Md., plants of the new Nandina differed from plants of the cultivar Moon Bay in developing foliage coloration as plants of the new Nandina produced burgundy red-colored leaves whereas plants of the cultivar Moon Bay produced light green-colored leaves. In addition, plants of the new Nandina were larger than plants of the cultivar Moon Bay.”[24]

· ‘Moon Bay’™ (Plant Patent No. 5659); Dwarf with a mounded habit, 1 ½ - 2 ½ ft. high; Shiny, light green summer leaves with red hues in winter. No flowers reported.[25] I am not sure about the cultivar name. Cultivar.[26]

· ‘Monum’, ‘Plum Passion’™ (Plant Patent No. 12069); this nandina has new growth (which) is deep purplish red; deep green in summer; reddish purple in winter; narrow leaflets; moderate growth rate. 4 to 5 feet by 3 to 4 feet[27] From the patent documentation: “The present invention relates to a new and distinct variety of Nandina domestica, a member of the Berberidaceae family, commonly known as Heavenly Bamboo. This new `Monum` variety resulted from a naturally occurring, whole plant mutation discovered in a cultivated planting of the Nandina domestica variety `Compacta` (unpatented). `Monum` appeared different from `Compacta` plants growing in #5 nursery containers in Azusa, Calif., and was initially discovered around May 1993. The `Monum` variety differs from `Compacta` and other Heavenly Bamboo plants known to the inventor due to its narrower, longer leaf and its unique, vibrant seasonal foliage coloration. In the spring, the `Monum` foliage is deep purplish-red turning to dark green in the summer and reddish purple in the winter. Nandina domestica `Monum` has more vibrant seasonal foliage coloration than the parent Nandina domestica `Compacta` or any other known Nandina domestica cultivars known to the inventor. `Monum` has been asexually reproduced by shoot tip culture and cuttings since its discovery in 1993 in Azusa, Calif. However, via extensive asexual propagation of this plant and observation of resulting progeny, it has been proven that the novel, exceptional characteristics of this new variety are fixed, stable, and that the new variety reproduces true to type through asexual propagation.”[28]

· ‘Moyer’s Red’ is a tall-growing form, maturing to a height of 6 feet, which develops good cold weather red pigment in the leaves. The flowers and fruits are also pinker and redder than the species. [29]

· ‘Nana’ or ‘Nana Purpurea’ or ‘Atropurpurea Nana’ grows to 2 feet with mottled green foliage that turns purplish-red in winter. [30] This plant does not flower or set fruit. ‘Atropurpurea Nana’ is a rather ugly, reddish plant[31]

· ‘'Pygmaea' is a deciduous shrub which typically grows 4-5' tall (shorter in areas where it dies to the ground in winter). Features a clump of erect, cane- or bamboo-like stems with compound leaves which are divided into narrow, lacy leaflets (1-2" long). This cultivar grows shorter and has lacier foliage than the species. Leaves emerge coppery in spring, turn to green in summer and finally change to reddish-purple in fall. Tiny whitish flowers appear in late spring in loose, erect, terminal clusters (6-12" long). Flowers are followed by heavy sprays of red berries which persist from fall to spring, providing winter interest. Synonymous with the cultivars 'Compacta' and 'Nana'.[32]

· ‘Richmond’ is slender and upright, much like the species plant, but with smaller, more delicate foliage. It looks a little more like a small tree. Tightly packed mauve-pinkish buds bloom white and are followed in autumn and winter by masses of shiny red berries which stay on the bush for months and are set off to advantage by the green leaves. The stems of this cultivar are also reddish.[33]

· 'Robinet' is without information[34]

· 'Royal Princess' is a large, upright shrub; Narrow leaves, turning reddish-purple in winter; Height of 6 - 8 ft. Small white flowers. Large panicles of bright red berries. [35]

· ‘Sunray’ This nandina has small, star-shaped white flowers with compact growing, dense evergreen shrub-like habit, 4' tall by 3' wide. It has orange-red foliage in the winter and has copper leaves which when mature become a soft green.[36] There is some internet indication that this trade-mark cultivar is Nandina ‘Greray”.[37]

· ‘Umpqua Chief’ has new foliage emerges copper or purple-red and turns blue-green; Grows 5 - 6 ft. tall. White flowers followed by red berries. [38]

· ‘Variegata’—a Japanese cultivar with light white variegation when grown in shade; grows to 3–6 ft at maturity. [39]

· ‘Umpqua Princess’ is an upright shrub with evergreen leaves that change to reddish-purple in fall. It reaches a mature height of between three and five feet. Leaves are pinate to 3-pinate with lance-shaped leaflets. Bears conical panicles to 16 inches long, of small star-shaped, white flowers with large, yellow anthers. Red berry-like clusters are persistant through winter, and can be used in arrangements or eaten by birds. Found along the foundation of older homes, you may inherit a plant that needs some selective pruning. Do not whack the entire plant back so that all canes are the same height. Selectively prune, staggering the heights of each cane.[40]

· ‘Umpqua Warrior’ reaches up to nine feet in height at maturity. It is an upright shrub with evergreen leaves that change to reddish-purple in fall. Leaves are pinate to 3-pinate, with lance-shaped leaflets. Bears conical panicles, to 16 inches long, of star-shaped, white flowers with large, yellow anthers. An abundance of red berry-like clusters are persistant through winter, and can be used in arrangements or eaten by birds. Found along the foundation of older homes, you may inherit a plant that needs some selective pruning.[41]

· ‘Woods Dwarf’ is a rounded form to 4 feet with dense, crimson red foliage in winter. [42]

· ‘Yellow Berries’ is similar to the species but the foliage lacks the typical reddish tinge. [43] The berries are yellow.[44]

· Nandina filamentosa 'Threadleaf', known also as 'San Gabriel' and 'Kirajuse' Finely dissected leaves give this plant a lacy, fern-like appearance; New foliage is reddish becoming bright green in summer and turning orange, bronze or purplish red in fall; Slow growing; Some sources give a mature height of 1 - 2 ft., others say 3 - 4 ft. Pinkish white flowers reported in late spring and summer.[45]

In the interesting but not entirely relevant section of this essay we find some interesting factoids. “Cyanide poisoning has occurred when livestock have eaten the berries, although birds eat the berries without concern. Keep them away from young children or those who might find the attractive bright red fruit interesting enough to put into their mouths. If the plants are in an area where young children might have access to the attractive red fruit, prune off the flower panicles after the spring bloom for several years. The berries have been used in holiday decorations, where they should be kept away from little fingers. Domestic pets do not seem to be attracted to the fruit. This plant has hit the invasive plant list in a number of states. It has not been identified as a problem yet in California, but keep a careful watch. If you see Nandina suckers appearing in areas where they are not desired, the plant may be spreading out of bounds.[46] I must assume that if you follow the dead heading practice stated above, you will one keep it from being too invasive and too eliminate a major reason to use it in a landscape.

Continuing the theme of interestingly non-invasive information we found medicinal uses for nandina. “The roots and stems are antitussive, astringent, febrifuge, stomachic and tonic[147[47], 74[48]]. A decoction is used in the treatment of fever in influenza, acute bronchitis, whooping cough, indigestion, acute gastro-enteritis, tooth abscess, pain in the bones and muscles and traumatic injuries[147]. It is especially useful in the treatment of children's coughs[174]. There is a danger that an overdose can cause respiratory paralysis[174]. A decoction of the leaves is tonic[218[49]]. The fruit is febrifuge and tonic[218]. Another report says that it is toxic, so great care should be employed if using it[147]. The root is antirheumatic[218]. Young shoots contain high concentrations of laetrile - up to 20% on a zero moisture basis[218].”[50]

“Much like beautyberry, nandina is a naturalizing plant. It is considered invasive in the mountainous regions of South Carolina, but not on the coastal plain.”[51] I would venture to say that Nandina spp. are dynamic opportunists which can exploit favorable conditions creating situations which could be labeled invasive. “In the right setting, it's a lovely shrub. In a mixed border, or in the wrong setting, it's invasive and aggressive, spreading by underground runners and getting too tall too quickly. We've removed several LARGE shrubs that were planted in front of windows, and effectively blocked all light coming into the room; two years later, we're still finding new sprouts that keep popping up.[52] Perhaps the hint of potential trouble for natural areas can be found in “Be certain you really, really like this plant and want to keep it forever. It is extremely difficult to get rid of, as even the smallest piece of root will resprout.”[53]

States with suspected infestations are shown in gray.[54]

As a parting note, given the completely anecdotal nature of this species review, I offer up the Global Compendium of Weeds listing of attributes and in the notes the reference citations. “agricultural weed, cultivation escape, environmental weed, garden thug, naturalised, sleeper weed, weed”[55]













[1] Insects and plants evolve together and a result is the abilty of certain insects to eat certain species specifically. Planting eco-region aliens which are genetically inedible reduces biological diversity. Traditional gardeners look for plants which are not eaten by insect life which tend to be exotic species. This nandinas, which are sold for many reasons, are desirable plants for traditional gardeners because they do not need applications of pesticides. So gardeners can claim to be environmentally friendly beacise of the reduced use of chemicals.
[2] David Hensley and Jay Deputy; Department of Horticulture Published by the College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources (CTAHR) and issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension work, Acts of May 8 and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Charles W. Laughlin, Director and Dean, Cooperative Extension Service, CTAHR, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822.L http://www.ctahr.hawaii.edu/oc/freepubs/pdf/OF-26.pdf
[3] Seminole County Government 1101 East First Street Sanford, FL 32771 407-665-0311: http://www.seminolecountyfl.gov/commsrvs/coopext/articles.asp?articleID=524
[4] © 2000-2008 Dave's Garden. All Rights Reserved
[5] Overcoming Seed Dormancy: Trees and Shrubs , 1/99 HIL-8704, Erv Evans, Extension Associate
Frank A. Blazich, Professor Department of Horticultural Science: http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/depts/hort/hil/hil-8704.html
[6] © 2000-2008 Dave's Garden. All Rights Reserved; Jul 30, 2003, knightspassion from Raleigh, NC wrote: http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/go/1547/
[7] Dr. Jull is an assistant professor at the University of Wisconsin=s Department of
Horticulture, Madison, Wisconsin; Dr. Blazich is professor of plant propagation and tissue culture
at North Carolina State University’s Department of Horticultural Science, Raleigh, North Carolina. http://www.nsl.fs.fed.us/wpsm/Nandina.pdf
[8] The Bugwood Network, USDA Forest Service & USDA APHIS PPQ. The University of Georgia - Warnell School of Forest Resources and College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences - Dept. of Entomology Last updated on Wednesday, November 05, 2003 at 01:37 PM Questions and/or comments to the Bugwood Webmaster: http://www.invasive.org/eastern/srs/SB_N.html
[9] Sandra Wilson (IRREC) and Gary Knox (NFREC), Department of Environmental Horticulture, UF: http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:FcVGNUT5TbwJ:www.fngla.org/reports/58/report1.pdf+nandina+cultivar&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=7&gl=us [10] Prepared by Marjan Kluepfel, HGIC Information Specialist, and Bob Polomski, Extension Consumer Horticulturist, Clemson University: http://hgic.clemson.edu/factsheets/hgic1071.htm
[11] © 2004 Arizona Board of Regents. All contents copyrighted. All rights reserved. http://ag.arizona.edu/pima/gardening/aridplants/Nandina_domestica.html
[12] Copyright 2004-2007 FreePatentsOnline.com. All rights reserved http://www.freepatentsonline.com/PP11453.html
[13] Prepared by Marjan Kluepfel, HGIC Information Specialist, and Bob Polomski, Extension Consumer Horticulturist, Clemson University: http://hgic.clemson.edu/factsheets/hgic1071.htm
[14] Prepared by Marjan Kluepfel, HGIC Information Specialist, and Bob Polomski, Extension Consumer Horticulturist, Clemson University: http://hgic.clemson.edu/factsheets/hgic1071.htm
[15] © 2000-2008 Dave's Garden. All Rights Reserved; Apr 2, 2006, Suze_ from Bastrop County, TX
(Zone 8b) http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/go/86799/
[16] Prepared by Marjan Kluepfel, HGIC Information Specialist, and Bob Polomski, Extension Consumer Horticulturist, Clemson University: http://hgic.clemson.edu/factsheets/hgic1071.htm
[17] Copyright 2004-2007 FreePatentsOnline.com. All rights reserved http://www.freepatentsonline.com/PP08530.html
[18] Copyright 2004-2007 FreePatentsOnline.com. All rights reserved.: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/PP08530.html?highlight=nandina,domestica&stemming=on [19] Prepared by Marjan Kluepfel, HGIC Information Specialist, and Bob Polomski, Extension Consumer Horticulturist, Clemson University: http://hgic.clemson.edu/factsheets/hgic1071.htm
[20] Sandra Wilson (IRREC) and Gary Knox (NFREC), Department of Environmental Horticulture, UF: http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:FcVGNUT5TbwJ:www.fngla.org/reports/58/report1.pdf+nandina+cultivar&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=7&gl=us [21] Edward F. Gilman, professor, Environmental Horticulture Department, Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, 32611: This document is Fact Sheet FPS-421, one of a series of the Environmental Horticulture Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida. Publication date: October, 1999 Please visit the EDIS Web site at http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/: http://hort.ifas.ufl.edu/shrubs/NANDOMA.PDF
[22] Copyright 2004-2007 FreePatentsOnline.com. All rights reserved.: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/PP14693.html
[23] Monrovia: http://www.monrovia.com/monroviaweb.nsf/8c104835579b67e18825685f006acdf8/ea3c57b002bd386185256f5b00801572!OpenDocument
[24] Copyright 2004-2007 FreePatentsOnline.com. All rights reserved.: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/PP14693.html
[25] Sandra Wilson (IRREC) and Gary Knox (NFREC), Department of Environmental Horticulture, UF: http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:FcVGNUT5TbwJ:www.fngla.org/reports/58/report1.pdf+nandina+cultivar&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=7&gl=us [26] The chaos in the industry as to the correct use of trade marks and patents, varietal appellations and cultivar designation is robust and on-going. .
[27] Select Nandina domestica Cultivars: http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/depts/hort/consumer/factsheets/shrubs/cultivars/nandina_domestica-table.html
[28] Copyright 2004-2007 FreePatentsOnline.com. All rights reserved http://www.freepatentsonline.com/PP12069.html
[29] Prepared by Marjan Kluepfel, HGIC Information Specialist, and Bob Polomski, Extension Consumer Horticulturist, Clemson University: http://hgic.clemson.edu/factsheets/hgic1071.htm
[30] Prepared by Marjan Kluepfel, HGIC Information Specialist, and Bob Polomski, Extension Consumer Horticulturist, Clemson University: http://hgic.clemson.edu/factsheets/hgic1071.htm
[31] Edward F. Gilman, professor, Environmental Horticulture Department, Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, 32611: This document is Fact Sheet FPS-421, one of a series of the Environmental Horticulture Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida. Publication date: October, 1999 Please visit the EDIS Web site at http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/: http://hort.ifas.ufl.edu/shrubs/NANDOMA.PDF
[32]© Missouri Botanical Ga rden, 2001-2006: http://www.mobot.org/gardeninghelp/plantfinder/plant.asp?code=L240
[33] © 2000-2008 Dave's Garden. All Rights Reserved On Dec 9, 2004, smiln32 from Oklahoma City, OK
(Zone 7a) http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/go/86802/
[34] © 2000-2008 Dave's Garden. All Rights Reserved On Dec 9, 2004 http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/b/Berberidaceae/Nandina/domestica/cultivar/0/
[35] Sandra Wilson (IRREC) and Gary Knox (NFREC), Department of Environmental Horticulture, UF: http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:FcVGNUT5TbwJ:www.fngla.org/reports/58/report1.pdf+nandina+cultivar&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=7&gl=us [36] Copyright 2008 Lancaster Farms, Inc. All rights reserved: http://www.lancasterfarms.com/cgi-bin/orderdetails.pl?upc=12345609910&textPassword=&guide=yes
[37] JC Raulston Arboretum, Department of Horticultural Science, NC State University, Campus Box 7522
Raleigh, NC 27695-7522; (919) 515-3132 http://www.ncsu.edu/jcraulstonarboretum/photography/photograph_collection/photograph_collection_family_name_listing.php [38] Sandra Wilson (IRREC) and Gary Knox (NFREC), Department of Environmental Horticulture, UF: http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:FcVGNUT5TbwJ:www.fngla.org/reports/58/report1.pdf+nandina+cultivar&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=7&gl=us [39] David Hensley and Jay Deputy; Published by the College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources (CTAHR) and issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension work, Acts of May 8 and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Charles W. Laughlin, Director and Dean, Cooperative Extension Service, CTAHR, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822.L http://www.ctahr.hawaii.edu/oc/freepubs/pdf/OF-26.pdf
[40] BackyardGardener.com http://www.backyardgardener.com/plantname/pd_49a0.html
[41] BackyardGardener.com: http://www.backyardgardener.com/plantname/pd_9a73.html
[42] Prepared by Marjan Kluepfel, HGIC Information Specialist, and Bob Polomski, Extension Consumer Horticulturist, Clemson University: http://hgic.clemson.edu/factsheets/hgic1071.htm
[43] Prepared by Marjan Kluepfel, HGIC Information Specialist, and Bob Polomski, Extension Consumer Horticulturist, Clemson University: http://hgic.clemson.edu/factsheets/hgic1071.htm
[44] Prepared by Marjan Kluepfel, HGIC Information Specialist, and Bob Polomski, Extension Consumer Horticulturist, Clemson University: http://hgic.clemson.edu/factsheets/hgic1071.htm
[45] Sandra Wilson (IRREC) and Gary Knox (NFREC), Department of Environmental Horticulture, UF: http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:FcVGNUT5TbwJ:www.fngla.org/reports/58/report1.pdf+nandina+cultivar&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=7&gl=us [46] Published in the Contra Costa Times on December 26, 2003: http://ccmg.ucdavis.edu/CCTimes/122603.htm
[47] A Barefoot Doctors Manual. Running Press ISBN 0-914294-92-X
[48] Kariyone. T Atlas of Medicinal Plants.
[49] Medicinal Plants of China Reference Publications, Inc. 1985 ISBN 0-917256-20-4, Duke. J. A. and Ayensu. E. S.
[50] Plant information taken from the Plants For A Future - Species Database. Copyright (c) 1997-2000.
WEB search engine by Rich Morris - Home Page- Contact Info: Plants for a Future, Blagdon Cross, Ashwater, Beaworthy, Devon, EX21 5DF, UK. http://www.ibiblio.org/pfaf/cgi-bin/arr_html?Nandina+domestica
[51] Copyright © 1997 - 2008 the Evening Post Publishing Co.: http://www.charleston.net/news/2007/nov/04/berried_treasures21028/
[52] © 2000-2008 Dave's Garden. All Rights Reserved: On Aug 31, 2001, Terry from Murfreesboro, TN
(Zone 7a) wrote: http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/go/1547/
[53]© 2000-2008 Dave's Garden. All Rights Reserved: On Jan 25, 2003, jkom51 from Oakland, CA, (Zone 9b) wrote: http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/go/1547/
[54] http://www.invasive.org/eastern/srs/SB_N.html
[55] Citations copied with errors and errata directly from: http://www.hear.org/gcw/species/nandina_domestica/
Bargeron, C.T., D.J. Moorhead, G.K. Douce, R.C. Reardon & A.E. Miller (Tech. Coordinators). 2003. Invasive Plants of the Eastern U.S.: Identification and Control. USDA Forest Service - Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team. Morgantown, WV USA. FHTET-2003-08 (CD version: Nov 2003)

Faith T. Campbell; American Lands Alliance; "Worst" Invasive Plant Species in the conterminous United States: weed (environmental weed)

Staples, George W., Derral Herbst & Clyde T. Imada (2000). Survey of Invasive or Potentially Invasive Cultivated Plants in Hawaii. A Special Publication of the Records of the Hawaii Biological Survey for 1999. Honolulu, Hawaii. (cultivation escape, environmental weed)

Germplasm Resources Information Network G.R.I.N. GRIN (naturalised)

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

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

Invasive and Exotic Weeds. Invasive List: The Source for Information and Images of Invasive & Exotic Species. A joint project of The University of Georgia's Bugwood Network, USDA Forest Service and USDA APHIS PPQ.

John Hosking, NSW Department of Agriculture, Weed Database 30 April 2003 (environmental weed, naturalised)

List of Florida's Most Invasive Species - Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council. (environmental weed)




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 (weed)

Randall, J.M. and Marinelli, J. eds (1996) Invasive plants: Weeds of the global garden. Brooklyn Botanical Garden Publications, Brooklyn, New York. [Ornamentals Invading Natural Areas in the Continental United States.] (environmental weed, garden thug)

Randall, R.P. & Kessal (agricultural weed, naturalised)

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

tion for its collections databases. Some groups in this list have been thoroughly scrutinized and do, in fact, represent an essentially complete checklist for the Hawaiian Islands. Other groups, however, are NOT complete, and only represent an unverified listing of what happens to be in the Bishop Museum specimen collection database. (naturalised)

The Exotic Plants of Southern Florida. Exotic Specifics. The Institute for Regional Conservation George D. Gann and Keith A. Bradley irc@regionalconservation.org 22601 S.W. 152 Ave. Miami, Florida 33170. (weed)

Wagner, W.L., Herbst, D.R. and Lorence, D.H. (2005). Naturalised Flora of the Hawaiian Islands website. (04/25/2006) (naturalised)

Wang, Z., Xin M., Ma D., Song, S., Wang, X., Yan, C., Zhang, D., Feng, W., Ma, E. and Chen, J. (1990). Farmland Weeds in China. A collection of coloured illustrative plates. Agricultural Publishing House. China. (agricultural weed, environmental weed)

d Resource Studies, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1 Cananon. (2002). The Common Weeds of Central Thailand. Weed Science Society of Thailand. (weed)

pbell; American Lands Alliance; Worst Invasive Plant Species in the conterminous United States: weed

Germplasm Resources Information Network G.R.I.N. GRIN