37
Plant Risk Assessment & Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for Management Protocol for MN MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee www.mnnoxiousweeds.wikispaces.com Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and Landscape Association Berberis thunbergii – Japanese Barberry

Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Plant Risk Assessment & Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MNManagement Protocol for MN

MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committeewww.mnnoxiousweeds.wikispaces.com

Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and Landscape Association

Berberis thunbergii – Japanese Barberry

Page 2: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

History of the Noxious Weed Advisory History of the Noxious Weed Advisory CommitteeCommittee

• Early on, MN noxious weeds were ag weeds• MNLA became involved after listing of purple

loosestrife in the mid-1980’s• Excellent noxious weed plan developed in 2001-

2002, then program was de-funded by state budget cuts

• MDA convened study group in 2007, including stakeholders like the MNLA

Page 3: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

History of the Noxious Weed Advisory History of the Noxious Weed Advisory CommitteeCommittee

• In 2009, the MN legislature completed major revisions to MN Noxious Weed Law

• Three sections were added– Noxious Weed and Invasive Species Account– Grant Program– Advisory Committee

• In 2013, added category definitions to statute, including Specially Regulated

Page 4: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

• Advise the Commissioner regarding responsibilities under the noxious weed program

• Evaluate species– invasiveness, difficulty of control, cost of control,

benefits of a species, injury caused by a species• Develop weed categories for listing noxious weed

species and management criteria for each category• Recommend whether and where an

evaluated species should be listed• Reevaluate species every 3 years

Duties of the Noxious Weed Duties of the Noxious Weed Advisory CommitteeAdvisory Committee

Lythrum salicaria – Purple Loosestrife

Page 5: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Noxious Weed Advisory CommitteeNoxious Weed Advisory Committee

• Committee representation = Stakeholders

• Science-based/evidence-based species evaluation process, called a Risk Assessment

• Species evaluations DO NOT = listing, nor do they mean a species is “bad”

Page 6: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Plant Plant Risk Assessment Risk Assessment & Management & Management Protocol for MinnesotaProtocol for Minnesota

• A tool for objective assessment of:– potential risks associated with plant

introductions– regulation and management of harmful species

already in the state• Balances potential negative impacts

with recognized benefits• Decision-tree process

Page 7: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and
Page 8: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Petitioning Noxious Weeds

Page 9: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Risk Assessment for Japanese BarberryRisk Assessment for Japanese Barberry• Why conduct a risk assessment

for Japanese barberry (Berberis thunbergii)?– Japanese barberry was observed

naturalizing in forests in MN and was known to be an invasive species in the eastern U.S.

– Information about the level of risk posed by Japanese barberry in Minnesota was needed

New York,NY Dept. Env. Cons. photo

New Jersey,New Jersey Hills photo

Eastern US,Natalie Solomonoff photo

Southeastern Minnesota,MN DNR photo

Page 10: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Risk Assessment for Japanese BarberryRisk Assessment for Japanese Barberry

• Box 1: Is the plant species or genotype non-native?– Yes, it is native to Japan– Go to Box 3

Berberis thunbergii

Shade Tolerant Deer Resistant

Page 11: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Risk Assessment for Japanese BarberryRisk Assessment for Japanese Barberry

• Box 3: Is the plant species, or a related species, documented as being a problem elsewhere?– Yes

• US Forest Service Eastern Region Category 1 plant (non-native, highly invasive plants which invade native habitats and replace native species)

• Prohibited invasive plant in MA, NH• Naturalized in 30 states and 2 Canadian provinces

– Go to Box 6

Page 12: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Risk Assessment for Japanese BarberryRisk Assessment for Japanese Barberry

• Box 6: Does the plant species have the capacity to establish and survive in Minnesota?– Yes

• Used heavily in landscapes • Hardy in zones 4-9

– Go to Box 7

Page 13: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Risk Assessment for Japanese BarberryRisk Assessment for Japanese Barberry

• Box 7: Does the plant species have the potential to reproduce and spread in Minnesota?– Yes

• Known to naturalize in MN• Spreads by:

– Animal-transported seed to new sites– Layering branches within a site

• No natural controls are documented

– Go to Box 8Japanese barberry distributionwww.EDDMaps.org Sept. 2012

Page 14: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Afton State Park – June 2011Afton State Park – June 2011

Page 15: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Afton State Park – June 2011Afton State Park – June 2011

Page 16: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Afton State Park – June 2011Afton State Park – June 2011

Page 17: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Afton State Park – June 2011Afton State Park – June 2011

Page 18: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and
Page 19: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Box 8Box 8

• Box 8: Does the plant species pose significant human or livestock concerns or have the potential to significantly harm agricultural production, native ecosystems, or managed landscapes?– If yes, go to Box 9– If no, the plant species is not

currently believed to be a risk

Berberis thunbergii ‘Aurea’

Page 20: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Box 8 – Questions to ConsiderBox 8 – Questions to Consider

• 8A: Does the plant have toxic qualities, or other detrimental qualities, that pose a significant risk to livestock, wildlife, or people?– No– Go to Question B

Berberis thunbergii var. atropurpurea

‘Rose Glow’

Page 21: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Box 8 – Questions to ConsiderBox 8 – Questions to Consider

• 8B: Does, or could, the plant cause significant financial losses associated with decreased yields, reduced crop quality or increased production costs?– No– Go to Question C

Berberis thunbergii and var. atropurpureaSmall size, desirable habit, and unique colors

Page 22: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Box 8 – Questions to ConsiderBox 8 – Questions to Consider

• 8C: Can the plant aggressively displace native species through competition (including allelopathic effects)?– Forms dense thickets in native areas,

according to studies on the Eastern seaboard (Silander and Klepis 1999, Harrington et. al. 2006) and MN DNR observations in MN.

– No mention found of allelopathy. – If yes, go to Box 9; if no go to additional

questions under Box 8

Page 23: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Box 8 – Questions to ConsiderBox 8 – Questions to Consider

• 8D: Can the plant hybridize with native species resulting in a modified gene pool and potentially negative impacts on native populations?– No– Go to Question E

Berberis thunbergii ‘Golden Nugget’

Page 24: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Box 8 – Questions to ConsiderBox 8 – Questions to Consider

• 8E: Does the plant have the potential to change native ecosystems (adds a vegetative layer, affects ground or surface water levels, etc.)?

– Soil under Japanese barberry has a higher pH and higher nitrification and mineralization rates (Ehrenfeld et al. 2001).

– Japanese barberry leaf litter is higher in nitrogen than native species and decomposes more rapidly (Ehrenfeld et al. 2001).

– Soils under Japanese barberry differ in microbial community structure and function (Kourtev et al. 2002).

– Timing of nutrient uptake and deposition differs from native species, and altering soil functions could contribute to ecosystem-level changes (Ehrenfeld et al. 2001, Ehrenfeld 2004).

– Ehrenfeld et al. (2001) note that while densities of Japanese barberry start out low, over time they alter the soil by increasing nutrient levels; this makes the site more favorable for additional Japanese barberry plants, leading to dense populations and more altered soils over time. Cassidy et al. (2004) found that Japanese barberry does better on sites with higher nitrogen.

– If yes, go to Box 9; if no go to additional questions under Box 8

Page 25: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Box 8 – Questions to ConsiderBox 8 – Questions to Consider

• 8F: Does the plant have the potential to introduce or harbor another pest or serve as an alternate host?

– This has not been documented, but there is some concern.– Common barberry (Berberis vulgaris) has been widely eradicated because it is a host of

wheat rust. Japanese barberry is not a host of wheat rust. However, Connolly et al. (2013) note that Berberis x ottawensis (B.thunbergii x B.vulgaris) is relatively common in the wild in Mass. and Conn. and may be capable of producing some viable seed and pollen.

– Emerging wheat rust Ug99: If this rust strain reaches North America it would cause extensive damage to US crops and cause millions/billions in crop losses. At this time there is no evidence that Japanese barberry can serve as a host to the stem rust fungus Ug99. Because other barberry species are hosts and not all Japanese barberry cultivars have been tested (some may be hybrids), Canada is not allowing additional Japanese barberry cultivars into Canada except those that are already on its approved list.

– If yes, go to Box 9; if no the species is not currently believed to be a risk

Page 26: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Box 8Box 8

• Box 8: Does the plant species pose significant human or livestock concerns or have the potential to significantly harm agricultural production, native ecosystems, or managed landscapes?– If yes, then go to box 9– If no, then the plant species

is not currently believed to be a risk

Berberis thunbergii var. atropurpurea

Page 27: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and
Page 28: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Box 9Box 9

• Does the plant species have clearly defined benefits that outweigh associated negative impacts?– If yes, go to Box 11 and determine if the species

should be designated as a Specially Regulated Plant

– If no, go to Box 10 to determine if the species should be designated as a Prohibited or Restricted Noxious Weed

Page 29: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Box 9 – Questions to ConsiderBox 9 – Questions to Consider

• 9D: Is a non-invasive, alternative plant material commercially available that could serve the same purpose as the plant of concern?

– Sterile cultivars of Japanese barberry are under development at the University of Connecticut. Additionally, there are currently available Japanese barberry cultivars that have relatively low seed production.

– Alternatives are suggested on various websites (all of these suggestions may not be appropriate for MN):

– MN Department of Natural Resources / Leatherwood (Dirca palustris), Downy Arrowwood (Viburnum rafinesquianum), American Hazel (Corylus americana), Beaked Hazel (Corylus cornuta)

– Midwest Invasive Plant Network / Tilia cordata (Littleleaf linden), Buxus spp. (Boxwood 'Glencoe' or 'Green Velvet'), Ribes alpinum 'Green Mound' (Alpine Currant), Fothergilla major (Large Fothergilla), Cotoneaster divaricatus (Spreading Cotoneaster), Ilex verticillata (Winterberry Holly), Rosa rubrifolia (Redleaf Rose), Rosa 'Knockout' (Knockout Roses), Cotinus coggygria (Smoke bush), Physocarpus opulifolius 'Diablo,' 'Summer Wine', Coppertina' and 'Center Glow' (Ninebark), Weigela florida 'Wine and Roses', ('Wine and Roses' Weigela)

– National Park Service / Bayberry (Myrica pensylvanica), Ink-berry (Ilex glabra), winterberry (Ilex verticillata), Arrow-wood (Viburnum dentatum), Mountain Laurel (Kalmia latifolia), Ninebark (Physocarpus

opulifolius), and hearts-a-burstin' (Euonymus americana)

Page 30: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Box 9 – Questions to ConsiderBox 9 – Questions to Consider

• 9D: Is a non-invasive, alternative plant material commercially available that could serve the same purpose as the plant of concern?– Natural resource organizations list alternatives– Survey of horticultural industry

indicated that members did not see a viable alternative to Japanese barberry

Berberis thunbergii ‘Cherry Bomb’

Page 31: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Box 9 – Questions to ConsiderBox 9 – Questions to Consider

• 9B: Is the plant an introduced species and can its spread be effectively and easily prevented or controlled, or its negative impacts minimized, through carefully designed and executed management practices?

– The spread of Japanese barberry cannot be easily prevented or controlled once it is introduced.

– Birds can spread seed.– Offspring of cultivars (such as purple or yellow-leaved forms) can be green making

it difficult to tell which cultivar was a parent to a naturalized barberry plant (Lehrer et al. 2006). However, there are cultivars with low seed production which may be less likely to be invasive. The Connecticut Nursery and Landscape Association implemented a voluntary phase-out of 25 heavy-seeding Japanese barberry cultivars in 2010.

– It is difficult to control the spread of woody species once they are widely distributed. Methods for Japanese barberry control are similar to those for buckthorn or other woody invasives – very time and labor intensive.

– If yes go to Box 11, if no go to Question 9C

Page 32: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Box 9 – Questions to ConsiderBox 9 – Questions to Consider

• 9B: Is the plant an introduced species and can its spread be effectively and easily prevented or controlled, or its negative impacts minimized, through carefully designed and executed management practices?

– The spread of Japanese barberry cannot be easily prevented or controlled once it is introduced.

– Birds can spread seed.– Offspring of cultivars (such as purple or yellow-leaved forms) can be green making

it difficult to tell which cultivar was a parent to a naturalized barberry plant (Lehrer et al. 2006). However, there are cultivars with low seed production which may be less likely to be invasive. The Connecticut Nursery and Landscape Association implemented a voluntary phase-out of 25 heavy-seeding Japanese barberry cultivars in 2010.

– It is difficult to control the spread of woody species once they are widely distributed. Methods for Japanese barberry control are similar to those for buckthorn or other woody invasives – very time and labor intensive.

– If yes go to Box 11, if no go to Question 9C

Page 33: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

CT Voluntary Phase-OutCT Voluntary Phase-Out

Note: New research by Knight et al. (2011) demonstrates that low-fecundity cultivars may still be invasive and that the only “safe” cultivars are sterile cultivars that cannot produce viable seed or reproduce asexually.

Page 34: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

NWAC Recommendation• Box 11 – Should the plant species be allowed in Minnesota via a

species-specific management plan; designate as specially regulated?• Answer – Yes. The Connecticut Nursery and Landscape Association

implemented a voluntary phase-out of 25 heavy-seeding Japanese selections in 2010. Wisconsin is proposing a three-year phase-out and eventual ban of the same CT selections. Minnesota should implement a three-year phase-out of the seediest Japanese barberry selections (using the CT list), followed by a ban of those seediest selections. Future selections with >600 seeds/plant should be banned as well. Ongoing sterility and invasiveness research on Japanese barberry should be monitored closely. If and when horticulturally-acceptable seedless cultivars of Japanese barberry are developed and successfully in trade, revisions should be considered in the seediness level of Japanese barberry cultivars considered “acceptable to plant”.

Page 35: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and
Page 36: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Current Status = Step 4Current Status = Step 4

Page 37: Plant Risk Assessment & Management Protocol for MN MN Noxious Weed Advisory Committee  Tim Power, Minnesota Nursery and

Questions?Questions?www.mnnoxiousweeds.wikispaces.com

Berberis thunbergii – Fruits & Seedling