Salpichroa origanifolia (Lam.) Baill.

Title: Salpichroa origanifolia (Lam.) Baill.

Scientific name:

Salpichroa origanifolia (Lam.) Baill.

Common name(s):

pampas lily-of-the-valley

More images (via ALA)

Habitat: Temperate regions mainly on alkaline sandy soils in warm, often semi-arid situations (Parsons and Cuthbertson 1992). It is a weed of urban areas where it grows on home sites and neglected areas, trailing over fences, low bushes etc. (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 1992). Pampas lily-of-the-valley invades dry coastal vegetation, heathland and heathy woodland, lowland grassland and grassy woodland, dry sclerophyll forest and woodland, damp sclerophyll forest and riparian vegetation (Carr et al., 1992).

Distribution:

Original source via GBIF

Invasiveness Assessment

ESTABLISHMENT

1. Germination requirements? Seeds germinate from spring to early summer (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 1992).

2. Establishment requirements? Establishes under moderate canopy/litter cover (e.g. in woodlands and sclerophyll forests) (Carr et al, 1992).

3. How much disturbance is required? Establishes as an environmental weed minor disturbed natural ecosystems (e.g. heathland/heathy woodland, sclerophyll forest, riparian vegetation) (Carr et al, 1992).

GROWTH / COMPETITIVE

4. Life form? Perennial herb-aerial growth dies in autumn and new growth develops in late winter and spring therefore geophyte (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 1992).

5. Allelopathic properties? None described.

6. Tolerates herb pressure? Is grazed. However, assured to recover quickly: 1- has a thick, woody, extensive rootstock: 2 – not mentioned by Parsons and Cuthbertson (1992) as control technique.

7. Normal growth rate? “Once firmly established (it) smothers all other vegetation killing large shrubs and trees” (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 1992).

8. Stress tolerance to frost, drought, w/logg, sal. etc? Tolerates drought (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 1992).

REPRODUCTION

9. Reproductive system? Reproducing from roots and by seed (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 1992).

10. Number of propagules produced? Fruit containing several seeds. Has numerous stems trailing to 3 m long. ~ 100 berries per plant x 20 seeds per berry = at least 2,000 seeds per plant (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 1992).

11. Propagule longevity?

12. Reproductive period? Perennial herb (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 1992).

13. Time to reproductive maturity? Due to the rapid growth rate of this perennial herb, assumed to be around two years after germination (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 1992).

DISPERSAL

14. Number of mechanisms? Roots – cultivation equipment, road graders and garden refuse. Seeds – contaminated equipment, clothing, mud birds and other animals (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 1992).

15. How far do they disperse? Above mechanisms could transport many seeds > 200 m / 1 km.

Impact Assessment

RECREATION

1. Restrict human access? A semi-erect, semi-prostrate perennial herb, with stems to 3 metres in length. Unlikely to impeded individual access (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001).

2. Reduce tourism? Infestations occur in medium to large populations and would be noticeable to visitors. Not likely to inhibit recreational activities (Carr et el, 1992).

3. Injurious to people? “It is claimed to be poisonous to stock but no losses have been reported in Australia. The fruit is sometimes used in preserves and is sold in the markets of Argentina and Paraguay for this purpose.” (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001). Consider harmless.

4. Damage to cultural sites? “Once firmly established pampas lily-of-the-valley smothers all other vegetation, killing large shrubs and fruit trees.” (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001). On cultural sites it would have a moderate visual effect.

ABIOTIC

5. Impact flow? Terrestrial species (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001).

6. Impact water quality? Terrestrial species (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001).

7. Increase soil erosion? Extensive perennial root system to 1 metre deep. Not likely to contribute to soil erosion (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001).

8. Reduce biomass? “…grows on home sites and neglected areas, trailing over fences, low bushes etc.” (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001). Biomass may increase.

9. Change fire regime? No evidence to suggest the plant would support fire or its establishment. Increase in biomass may result in a minor change to the frequency of fire.

COMMUNITY HABITAT

10(a) Impact on composition of high value EVC? EVC=Grassy woodland (E); CMA=Corangamite; Bioreg=Otway Plain; VH CLIMATE potential “Once firmly established, pampas lily-of-the-valley smothers all other vegetation, [and] killing large shrubs.” Current distribution is limited. High impact on low and mid strata (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001; Carr et al, 1992).

10(b) Impact on medium value EVC? EVC=Coastal dune scrub (D); CMA=Port Phillip; Bioreg=Victorian Volcanic Plain; VH CLIMATE potential. Impact as in 10(a) above. (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001; Carr et al, 1992).

10(c) Impact on low value EVC? EVC=Heathy woodland (LC); CMA=Port Phillip; Bioreg=Gippsland Plain; H CLIMATE potential. Impact as in 10(a) above. (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001; Carr et al, 1992).

11. Impact on structure? “Once firmly established, pampas lily-of-the-valley smothers all other vegetation, killing large shrubs and fruit trees, and making vegetable and flower culture difficult.” (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001). Serious impact on all strata. Possibly monoculture.

12. Effect on threatened flora? None documented.

FAUNA

13. Effect on threatened fauna? None documented.

14. Effect on non-threatened fauna? While limited in distribution, it does occur in medium to large populations. Would limit food source for native species (Carr et al, 1992).

15. Benefits fauna? No known benefits

16. Injurious to fauna? Claimed to be poisonous but no evidence of this in Australia (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001).

PEST ANIMAL

17. Food source to pests? “Rats, mice and ants are known to disperse seed in urban areas.” (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001). Possible limited food source to pests.

18. Provides harbor? Growth habit may provide limited harbor for rodents.

AGRICULTURE

19. Impact yield? No evidence; not a weed of agriculture.

20. Impact quality? Not a weed of cropping. No evidence of stock eating the plant.

21. Affect land values? Not a weed of agriculture.

22. Change land use? No

23. Increase harvest costs? No evidence.

24. Disease host/vector? None evident.

Feedback

Do you have additional information about this plant that will improve the quality of the assessment? If so, we would value your contribution.

Assessment ratings originally made by the Victorian Department of Primary Industries.

The entry of this assessment was made possible through the generous support of The Weed's Network.

plants.usda.gov/m…

Attachments:

tn_pampas_lily_valley_climber.jpg
tn_pampas_lily_valley_flowers.jpg
Pampas via ala.JPG
Capture.JPG

referenced by (2)

wra1029: Common Name - P (via pampas lily-of-the-valley)wra1008: Common Names - L (via lily of the valley vine)

Article: wra2111 (permalink)
Categories: :wra:s, :wra:inv1, :wra:invmh, :wra:inv2, :wra:inv3, :wra:inv4, :wra:invml, :wra:inv5, :wra:invl, :wra:inv6, :wra:inv7, :wra:invh, :wra:inv8, :wra:inv9, :wra:inv10, :wra:inv11, :wra:invm, :wra:inv12, :wra:inv13, :wra:inv14, :wra:inv15, :wra:imp1, :wra:impl, :wra:imp2, :wra:impml, :wra:imp3, :wra:imp4, :wra:imp5, :wra:imp6, :wra:imp7, :wra:imp8, :wra:imp9, :wra:imp10a, :wra:impmh, :wra:imp10b, :wra:imp10c, :wra:imp11, :wra:imph, :wra:imp12, :wra:impm, :wra:imp13, :wra:imp14, :wra:imp15, :wra:imp16, :wra:imp17, :wra:imp18, :wra:imp19, :wra:imp20, :wra:imp21, :wra:imp22, :wra:imp23, :wra:imp24
Date: 14 October 2009; 2:46:15 PM AEDT

Author Name: David Low
Author ID: adminDavid