Title: Moraea miniata (Andrews) Sweet.

Scientific Name:

Moraea miniata (Andrews) Sweet.

Common Names:

Cape tulip (two leaf)



Image via GBIF

Distribution:



Distribution map via GBIF


Invasiveness Assessment

ESTABLISHMENT


1. Germination requirements? Life cycle of H. miniata is much the same as H. flaccida, though H. miniata does not produce viable seed. Reproduction is from corms only. “…corms germinate after autumn rains.” (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001)

2. Establishment requirements? “It does not establish well on shaded sites,” but as a weed of grazing it does establish in pastures. (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001)

3. How much disturbance is required? “Occurs in semi-arid and sub-humid subtropical scrublands.” Establishes in grazed pastures where there is ample light and little competition. Disturbed situation. (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001)

GROWTH / COMPETITIVE


4. Life form? Annual herb. Perennial herb reproducing from corms. Geophyte. (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001)

5. Allelopathic properties? None reported.

6. Tolerates herb pressure? “…the weed is generally avoided by grazing animals. This avoidance… encourages the weed to persist.” Consumed but not preferred.(Parsons and Cuthbertson, 1992)

7. Normal growth rate? “Patches can be very dense with almost 7,000 corms per square metre recorded in some areas.” With such dense infestations, the plant would take advantage of moisture and nutrients to the detriment of other species, retarding their growth. Growth rate possibly equal to similar species. (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 1992)

8. Stress tolerance to frost, drought, w/logg, sal. etc? A recommended method of control is to use fire to clear debris from the infested area. This will maximise the amount of rainfall taken up by the soil and stimulate germination. Additionally, it is thought that burning has some direct stimulation on germination. Corms survive low intensity (grass) fires. In ornamental situations, it is recommended to protect bulbs from frost. (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 1992; ABC Flora)

REPRODUCTION


9. Reproductive system? Reproduces by cormils that are produced in leaf axils, and around the main corm at the base of the plant. Vegetative reproduction only. (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001)

10. Number of propagules produced? “It is estimated that in an established patch of two-leaf cape tulip there can be up to 200,000 cormils per square metre.” Plants produce large numbers of propagules, possibly more than 2,000 per plant. (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001)

11. Propagule longevity? “The cormils of two-leaf cape tulip live longer than the seed of the one-leaf species,and may remain dormant in soil for at least 8 years.” Long-lived propagules. (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001)

12. Reproductive period? Annual herb. Plants are 2 to 3 years old before they flower and produce seeds. (Two-leaf cape tulip produces seed, but it is not viable.) Seedling plants produce cormils. “… established infestations of cape tulip consist of plants of varying maturity, from non-flowering seedlings and plants 1 or 2 years old, to flowering plants 2 or 3 years old and older.” Plants produce propagules for more than 3 years. (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001)

13. Time to reproductive maturity? Seedling plants produce cormils. Produces viable propagules in less than one year. (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001)

DISPERSAL


14. Number of mechanisms? As with one leaf cape tulip, “The dried plants, with seed capsules intact, break off at ground level and are blown about by wind and carried in running water.” (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001)

15. How far do they disperse? “… the most important method of dispersal at present is in hay or silage cut from infested paddocks.” Distribution of propagules in such material would extend beyond one kilometre. (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001)


Impact Assessment

RECREATION


1. Restrict human access? An erect perennial herb with two or three annual leaves to 2 cm wide, and flowers to 60 cm high. Even in dense infestations, the plant would not inhibit human access. (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001)

2. Reduce tourism? Dense infestations in open situations cover large areas and, during flowering, look attractive. The presence of the weed would be obvious during this period, but it would have little impact on recreational activities. (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001)

3. Injurious to people? All parts of the plant are poisonous if ingested. “There is a known human fatality in South Africa as a result of eating corms.” (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001)

4. Damage to cultural sites? Because of its ability to form dense infestations (patches of up to 7,000 corms per square metre have been recorded), the weed would present a moderate negative visual effect if occurring in cultural sites. (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001)

ABIOTIC


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

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

7. Increase soil erosion? Aerial parts of the plant are only present for five to six months each year. However, the root system while not deep is fine and fibrous. With dense infestations (up to 7,000 corms per square metre), the soil integrity would not be subjected to significant soil erosion. However, where the plant occurs in seasonal wetland situations some erosion may occur. “Cape tulip corms can be spread by floodwaters.” (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001; Carr et al. 1992; Hawkins et al. 2001)

8. Reduce biomass? It grows best in open situations such as grasslands (pasture), competes with and replaces desirable plants in pastures. Direct replacement of biomass. (Hawkins et al. 2001)

9. Change fire regime? Although it can grow at very high densities, the change in fuel load is minimal. Not likely to alter the fire risk. (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001)

COMMUNITY HABITAT


10(a) Impact on composition of high value EVC? EVC=Plains grassland (E); CMA=Glenelg Hopkins; Bioreg=Victorian Volcanic Plain; VH CLIMATE potential. “Severely impedes the growth and regeneration of indigenous ground-flora.” Major displacement of ground-flora. (Muyt 2001)

10(b) Impact on medium value EVC? EVC=Grassy dry forest (D); CMA=Port Phillip; Bioreg=Central Victorian Uplands; VH CLIMATE potential. It competes with and replaces desirable plants in pastures, but it does not establish well on shaded sites. “Severely impedes the growth and regeneration of indigenous ground-flora.” May not establish as large a population as in plains grassland, but still has a high potential to affect ground-flora. (Muyt 2001; Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001)

10(c) Impact on low value EVC? Not likely to occur in low value EVCs in Victoria.

11. Impact on structure? It competes with and replaces desirable plants in pastures, but it does not establish well on shaded sites. “Severely impedes the growth and regeneration of indigenous ground-flora.” (Muyt 2001; Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001)

12. Effect on threatened flora? Threatens ANZECC rated rare or threatened native plant species. (Groves et al. 2003)

FAUNA


13. Effect on threatened fauna? None reported.

14. Effect on non-threatened fauna? Displaces desirable plants reducing food availability. Reduces carrying capacity. Although it is limited in distribution in natural ecosystems, it is present in medium to large populations where it does infest. (Carr et al., 1992; Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001)

15. Benefits fauna? Cockatoos eat the corms readily after cultivation, apparently without ill effects. (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001)

16. Injurious to fauna? All parts of the plant are toxic, whether green or dry. Can be tolerated by cockatoos. (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001)

PEST ANIMAL


17. Food source to pests? Not documented. Cockatoos eat the corms readily after cultivation, apparently without ill effects. Potential for similar birds to also use the corms as a source of food. (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001)

18. Provides harbor? Growth habit would not provide harbor.

AGRICULTURE


19. Impact yield? M. miniata occurs mostly in grazing areas and is a serious weed of pasture. It replaces desirable pasture plants thus reducing carrying capacity considerably. (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001; Hawkins et al. 2001)

20. Impact quality? It is not a problem weed in cropping situations. Reduced pasture may impact on the live weight of stock. “The most important method of dispersal at present is in hay or silage cut from infested paddocks.” This produce may be rejected for sale. No serious changes due to this weed being seen in community – product not rejected for sale. (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001)

21. Affect land values? “Cape tulips can be difficult and expensive to eradicate.” Control on arable land and permanent pasture can be achieved, but “cultivation must be carried out for at least 4 years to exhaust the supply of dormant corms in the soil.” Considering the cost and time involved, the presence of this weed is likely to reduce the value of land. (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001; Hawkins et al. 2001)

22. Change land use? “Cape tulips can be difficult and expensive to eradicate.” Chemical control may discourage farmers due to associated pasture damage. Land may have to be used for another agricultural activity (e.g. cropping or forestry). Plant is tolerated – stock get resistant to toxic properties – unlikely to change land use. (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001)

23. Increase harvest costs? No known impact on harvest costs.

24. Disease host/vector? None evident.



Assessment ratings originally made by the Victorian Department of Primary Industries.
The entry of this assessment was made possible through the generous support of Nature's Weeding Centre.




Feedback

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



Attachments:
https___inaturalist-open-data.s3.amazonaws.com_photos_236464781_original.jpg
Capture.JPG
Related Articles
referenced by (1)
wra997: Common Name - C (via Cape tulip)
Article: wra8748 (permalink)
Categories: :wra:m, :wra:inv1, :wra:invmh, :wra:inv2, :wra:invml, :wra:inv3, :wra:inv4, :wra:inv5, :wra:invl, :wra:inv6, :wra:inv7, :wra:inv8, :wra:inv9, :wra:inv10, :wra:invh, :wra:inv11, :wra:inv12, :wra:inv13, :wra:inv14, :wra:inv15, :wra:impl, :wra:imp1, :wra:impml, :wra:imp2, :wra:imp3, :wra:imph, :wra:imp4, :wra:imp5, :wra:imp6, :wra:imp7, :wra:imp8, :wra:imp9, :wra:imp10a, :wra:impmh, :wra:imp10b, :wra:imp10c, :wra:imp11, :wra:imp12, :wra:imp13, :wra:imp14, :wra:imp15, :wra:imp16, :wra:imp17, :wra:imp18, :wra:imp19, :wra:imp20, :wra:impm, :wra:imp21, :wra:imp22, :wra:imp23, :wra:imp24
Date: 10 March 2023; 4:44:16 PM AEDT

Author Name: David Low
Author ID: adminDavid