Carpobrotus edulis (hottentot fig)

Pictures

Picture	Title	Caption	Copyright
Title Habit Caption Mat of Carpobrotus edulis planted on roadside, with flowers, one maturing pink, South Africa. Copyright ©Chris Parker/Bristol, UK	Habit	Mat of Carpobrotus edulis planted on roadside, with flowers, one maturing pink, South Africa.	©Chris Parker/Bristol, UK

Identity

Preferred Scientific Name

• Carpobrotus edulis (L.) L. Bolus

Preferred Common Name

• hottentot fig

Other Scientific Names

• Carpobrotus acinaciformis (L.) L.Bolus (1925)
• Mesembryanthemum edule L. (1759)

International Common Names

• English: ice plant (UK); kaffir fig (UK)
• Spanish: balsamo; higo del cabo; higo marino; patat frita
• French: figue marine
• Portuguese: choroes

Local Common Names

• Germany: Hottentottenfeige; Pferdefeige
• Italy: fico degli Ottentotti
• Portugal: bálsamo
• South Africa: Cape fig; ghaukum; ghoenavy; hottentosvy; ikhambi-lamabulawo; kaapsevy; rankvy; sour fig; suurvy; umgongozi; vyerank
• UK: Sally-my-handsome
• USA: freeway iceplant

EPPO code

• CBSED (Carpobrotus edulis)

Summary of Invasiveness

C. edulis is a perennial plant native to South Africa, where it can be found growing on coastal and inland slopes round the fringes of Cape Province. It has been widely introduced elsewhere and has become a popular plant for growth as an ornamental or for ground cover. However, it can readily and rapidly spread to form deep, dense mats which smother other low-growing native vegetation, especially in coastal habitats. The plant can also causes changes to soil pH.

In California, USA, the plant poses a threat to several rare and endangered plant species. It has also been reported as a severe threat to native plant communities and ecosystems in the Mediterranean Basin because of the flexibility of its mating system and high seed production.  In Australia it has a ‘high’ risk assessment score of 9.5 (PIER, 2008).

Taxonomic Tree

• Domain: Eukaryota
•     Kingdom: Plantae
•         Phylum: Spermatophyta
•             Subphylum: Angiospermae
•                 Class: Dicotyledonae
•                     Order: Caryophyllales
•                         Family: Aizoaceae
•                             Genus: Carpobrotus
•                                 Species: Carpobrotus edulis

Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature

The original name for this species was Mesembryanthemum edule L. It was renamed Carpobrotus edulis by Brown in 1926 and by Bolus in 1927. These two authorities are both in current use. Typical C. edulis has yellow flowers fading to pink. Forms with flowers pink or purple from the time of opening may be referred to as C. acinaciformis. Stace (1991) and some other authorities still treat them as distinct species in Britain and Suehs et al.(2001; 2004a,b) describe important differences in their genetic, ecological and reproductive characteristics in France. Both forms are regarded as invasive in France. However, C. acinaciformis is now generally treated as C. edulis var. rubescens and will be included as part of C. edulis in this datasheet. Two other varieties of C. edulis recognised by Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh (2008) are var. edulis and var. chrysophthalmus. Where appropriate, distinction will be made according to variety.

Description

Stems spreading or prostrate, up to 3 m long, forming large mats, sometimes rooting at the nodes. Leaves succulent, triangular in section, 4-14 cm long, 8-17 mm wide, opposite, slightly connate at the base, bright green or slightly glaucous, waxy, often tinged red along edges and becoming generally reddish or orange with age; adaxial and lateral surfaces distinctly concave; keel denticulate, sometimes only in upper portion; tips obtuse to acute. The flowers have superficial similarity to those of Compositae but the numerous ‘florets’ are in fact petalloid staminodes. The flowers are terminal or on side shoots, 4-9 cm diameter; peduncles 10-50 mm long. Calyx yellow-green, 4-6-lobed up to 6 cm long. Staminodes 50-150; in var. edulis, yellow changing to pink; in other vars. pink or purple from the start; usually densely streaked when dry; stamens 400-600, 6-7-seriate. Styles 8-14, free; nectary glands united to form a ring round the ovary which is conical, barely compressed, convex on top up to 3 cm in diameter. Seeds 1 x 1.5 mm, dark brown when ripe, obovate, flat, finely reticulate, on a funicle, 2-3 mm (Preston and Sell, 1988; PIER, 2008).

Plant Type

Distribution

C. edulis is a sub-tropical species, native to South Africa, growing on coastal and inland slopes round the fringes of Cape Province. From there it has been introduced as an ornamental and for erosion control into many other sub-tropical and temperate countries, but particularly to Europe, USA, Australia, New Zealand, South America, North Africa, and to some Pacific and Atlantic Islands.

Distribution Table

The distribution in this summary table is based on all the information available. When several references are cited, they may give conflicting information on the status. Further details may be available for individual references in the Distribution Table Details section which can be selected by going to Generate Report.

Introductions

Risk of Introduction

While not readily spread accidentally at the international level, there is continued significant risk of deliberate introduction as an ornamental, being readily available from nursery businesses via the internet.

Habitat

C. edulis is naturally a plant of coastal habitats, on cliffs and sand-dunes, salt marshes and coastal scrub, but it also flourishes on roadsides and railway lines inland. It is widely planted as a soil binder on embankments and as an ornamental in coastal districts.  

Habitat List

Biology and Ecology

Genetics  

Chromosome number of C. edulis vars edulis and rubescens is 2n = 18 (Preston and Sell, 1988).

Hybridisation can occur with C. chilensis in California, USA and these hybrids show hybrid vigour and also behave invasively (Vilà and D'Antonio, 1998a; Weber and D'Antonio, 1999 ; Schierenbeck et al., 2005). There is also apparently hybridization between the different varieties within C. edulis (Preston and Sell, 1988). 

Reproduction

Typical C. edulis is completely self-fertile, while ‘C. acinaciformis’ is only slightly self-fertile. Thus C. edulis shows high flexibility in its mating system and high seed production, while ‘C. acinaciformis’, shows strong clonality, high hybrid vigour, and potential for continued introgression from C. edulis genes (Suehs et al., 2004b). Pollinating agents include Coleoptera, Diptera, Hymenoptera, Lepidoptera and possibly snails (Preston and Sell, 1988). Mature fruits do not release the seeds for at least 3 years (D’Antonio, 1990), dispersal depending on frugivorous mammals – see Movement and Dispersal. Numerous seeds are embedded in each fruit (Weber, 2003) and may number over 1000 per m² (PIER, 2008). When seeds are eventually released to the soil through rotting of the fruit they may remain viable in the soil for two years (D’Antonio, 1990).

Physiology and Phenology

Germination of seeds is enhanced by passage through the gut of animals (D’Antonio, 1990). Once established the plants spread vigorously by prostrate stems which root at the nodes. Flowering in California continues from January through May and fruits mature from March through to November. Flowering in UK is from May to July, and in South Africa from August to October. Flowers open only in the afternoon.

Climate

Latitude/Altitude

Air Temperature

Rainfall

Rain Regime

Soil Tolerances

Soil drainage

• free
• seasonally waterlogged

Soil reaction

• acid
• neutral

Soil texture

• heavy
• light
• medium

Special soil tolerances

• saline
• shallow

Natural Enemies

Notes on Natural Enemies

Scale insects Pulvinariella mesembryanthemi and Pulvinaria delottoi were noted to be causing serious damage to the plant in California (Dahlsten and Hall, 1999). This was regarded as undesirable as the plant was being used as a roadside groundcover. Hence efforts were made to control the scale insects with insecticides and by biological control. These efforts were largely successful (Frankie and Hagen, 1986).

Means of Movement and Dispersal

Seeds can be dispersed in animal droppings, as in rabbit and rat pellets (Bourgeois et al., 2005; Morzaria-Luna and Zedler, 2007). Passage through the gut of these and other mammals such as black-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus) and mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) also helps to enhance germination rates of C. edulis, though not of C. chilensis (Vilà and D'Antonio, 1998b).

Birds do not eat the fruits but gulls can assist spread by taking vegetative fragments as nesting material (Preston and Sell, 1988).

Pathway Causes

Pathway Vectors

Impact Summary

Environmental Impact

The extensive vegetative growth of this plant leads to the formation of extensive impenetrable mats up to 50 cm deep, which may cover large areas, displacing native beach vegetation and preventing the establishment of native plants. In California, the plant poses a threat to several rare and endangered plant species. Soils under mats of this plant are becoming increasingly acidic (Weber, 2003; PIER, 2008).

Suehs et al. (2004a,b) conclude that both C. edulis and ‘C. acinaciformis’ should be considered as harmful invasive plants posing severe threats to native plant communities and ecosystems in the Mediterranean Basin, the former because of the flexibility of its mating system and high seed production, and the latter because of its strong clonality, high hybrid vigour, and potential for continued introgression.

Risk assessment for Australia is 9.5 (‘high’) (PIER, 2008).

Risk and Impact Factors

Impact mechanisms

• Competition - monopolizing resources
• Competition - smothering
• Hybridization
• Interaction with other invasive species
• Rapid growth

Impact outcomes

• Altered trophic level
• Damaged ecosystem services
• Ecosystem change/ habitat alteration
• Modification of nutrient regime
• Modification of successional patterns
• Monoculture formation
• Negatively impacts cultural/traditional practices
• Reduced native biodiversity
• Soil accretion
• Threat to/ loss of native species

Invasiveness

• Benefits from human association (i.e. it is a human commensal)
• Fast growing
• Has high genetic variability
• Has high reproductive potential
• Has propagules that can remain viable for more than one year
• Long lived
• Pioneering in disturbed areas
• Proved invasive outside its native range
• Reproduces asexually
• Tolerates, or benefits from, cultivation, browsing pressure, mutilation, fire etc

Likelihood of entry/control

• Difficult/costly to control
• Highly likely to be transported internationally deliberately

Uses

The main use of C. edulis is as an ornamental or ground cover plant in gardens, parks, and on roadsides. It has also been widely used to stabilise sand dunes and other unstable soil situations (Moretti, 1939).

The pollen of C. edulis is a particularly good food source for the predatory mite Amblyseius swirskii and the weed may therefore make a beneficial contribution to the biological control of pests in citrus in Israel (Ragusa and Swirski, 1975). Similar studies on other mite species Amblyseius chilenensis, A. hibisci, A. limonicus, Typhlodromus athiasae, T. phialatus, T. occidentalis, Hypoaspis aculeifer, Euseius stipulatus also suggest comparable value (Swirski and Dorzia, 1969; Swirski et al., 1970; Ragusa et al., 1986; Ferragut et al., 1987; Reuveny et al., 1996).

It is used as a traditional medicinal plant (GRIN, 2008), some anti-cancer properties have been shown by methanolic extracts of C. edulis (Ordway et al., 2003); and also anti-bacterial properties (van de Watt and Pretorius, 2001).

In South Africa the astringent fruits are made into jam, pickle or chutney. The name Carpobrotus means ‘edible fruit’.

Uses List

Environmental

• Amenity
• Erosion control or dune stabilization
• Firebreak
• Land reclamation
• Landscape improvement
• Revegetation
• Soil conservation

General

• Botanical garden/zoo

Medicinal, pharmaceutical

• Traditional/folklore

Ornamental

• Propagation material
• Seed trade

Similarities to Other Species/Conditions

C. chilensis is also a coastal species with rose-magenta flowers, differing from C. edulis in its glaucous, blue-green foliage and shorter leaves, 3-5 cm long. C. glaucescens also has mainly purple flowers but narrower leaves, less than 1 cm wide and the filaments and base of the petals are white (yellow in C. edulis var. chrysophthalmus).

Prevention and Control

Control 

Mechanical Control

Mechanical control of C. edulis is feasible, but has to be very thorough to ensure there are no stem nodes or fruits left from which regeneration can occur. The transport and disposal of the large masses of plant material may also offer serious logistical problems (Fraga et al., 2006).

Chemical Control

The standard chemical treatment suggested by most sources is glyphosate, but high rates were found necessary in Portugal, where paraquat and simazine, and benzoylprop-ethyl also gave adequate control (Guerreiro, 1977).

Biological Control

GISP (2008) notes that options for biological control are limited. The plant may be damaged by Verticillium wilt but this can also harm many other crop species. Scale insects Pulvinariella mesembryanthemi and Pulvinaria delottoi believed to be introduced from South Africa, were noted to be causing serious damage to the plant in California (Dahlsten and Hall, 1999), but this was regarded as undesirable as the plant was being used as a roadside groundcover. Hence efforts were made to control the scale insecs by insecticide use and biological control. These efforts were largely successful (Frankie and Hagen, 1986). GISP (2008) comments ‘Nonetheless, scale insects have been observed to cause death of clones in California and could be more widely promoted in natural settings.’ In Australia, P. mesembryanthemi is said to be host specific to C. edulis (Collins and Scott, 1982).

References

Adamson RS, Salter TM, 1950. Flora of the Cape Peninsula. Capetown, South Africa: Juta.

Albert A, 2008. University of California. USA: University of California. http://ucce.ucdavis.edu/datastore/detailreport.cfm?usernumber=25&surveynumber=182

Bourgeois K, Suehs CM, Vidal E, Médail F, 2005. Invasional meltdown potential: facilitation between introduced plants and mammals on French Mediterranean islands. Écoscience, 12(2):248-256. http://www.ecoscience.ulaval.ca

Collins L, Scott JK, 1982. Interaction of ants, predators and the scale insect, Pulvinariella mesembryanthemi, on Carpobrotus edulis, an exotic plant naturalized in Western Australia. Australian Entomological Magazine, 8(5):73-78

Dahlsten DL, Hall RW, 1999. Handbook of Biological Control: Principles and Applications [ed. by Bellows TS, Fisher TW]. San Diego, New York: Academic Press, 1046 pp.

D'Antonio C, 1990. Seed production and dispersal in the non-native, invasive succulent Carpobrotus edulis (Aizoaceae) in coastal strand communities of Central California, 27(2):693-702.

De Montmollin B, Strahn W, 2005. The Top 50 Mediterranean Island Plants [ed. by IUCN]. Switzerland: IUCN. http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=MW-8twkYZdsC Page 93

EPPO, 2014. PQR database. Paris, France: European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization. http://www.eppo.int/DATABASES/pqr/pqr.htm

Ferragut F, Garcia-Marí F, Costa-Comelles J, Laborda R, 1987. Influence of food and temperature on development and oviposition of Euseius stipulatus and Typhlodromus phialatus (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Experimental and Applied Acarology, 3(4):317-329.

Fraga P, Estaún I, Olives J, Da Cunha G, Alarcón A, Cots R, Juaneda J, Riudavets X, 2006. Eradication of Carpobrotus (L.) N.E. Br. in Minorca. In: Invasive plants in Mediterranean Type Regions of the World [ed. by Brunel S] Strasbourg, France: Council of Europe Publishing, 289-297.

Frankie GW, Hagen KS, 1986. Ecology and biology of iceplant scales, Pulvinaria and Pulvinariella in California. California Department of Transportation Report No. FHWA-CA-HM-OZ [ed. by California Departmentof Transportation]. Sacramento, California: Division of Highway Maintenance.

GISP, 2008. Global Invasive Species Programme. Nairobi, Kenya: GSIP. http://www.gisp.org/index.asp

Gomes CT, Draper D, Rossell A, 1999. Impact of Carpobrotus edulis (L. On the autochthonous vegetation of the protected area Reserva Natural das Berlengas (Portugal) [ed. by 5th International Conference Ecology of Invasive Alien Plants , October 13-161999]. La Maddalena, Sardinia, Italy: 5th International Conference Ecology of Invasive Alien Plants, 13-16 October 1999.

Guerreiro AR, 1977. Evaluation trials for herbicides to control hottentot-fig (Carpobrotus edulis (L.) N.E.Br.). (Ensaios de comportamento de herbicidas contra os choroes (Carpobrotus edulis (L.) N.E. Br.).) In: Proceedings II Simposio Nacional de Herbologia, Oeiras, 1976, 125-134.

Livshits IZ, Mitrofanov VI, Sharonov AA, 1988. New species of mites of the family Siteroptidae (Acariformes, Tarsonemoidea). Zoologicheskii Zhurnal, 67(9):1314-1323.

Matthews S, Brand K, 2004. Africa invaded: the growing danger of invasive alien species [ed. by Matthews S, Brand K]. Cape Town, South Africa: Global Invasive Species Programme, 79 pp. http://www.gisp.org

Missouri Botanical Garden, 2008. Tropicos database. St Louis, USA: Missouri Botanical Garden. http://www.tropicos.org/

Moretti O, 1939. Report on the fixation of dunes at the Florentino Ameghino Dune Station, Miramar, Province of Buenos Aires. (Reseña de los trabajos sobre fijación de dunas en el vivero dunícola " Florentino Ameghino ", de Miramar (Prov. de Buenos Aires).) Revista Argentina de Agronomia, 6:62-4.

Morzaria-Luna HN, Zedler JB, 2007. Does seed availability limit plant establishment during salt marsh restoration? Estuaries and Coasts, 30(1):12-25. http://estuariesandcoasts.org/journal/ESTU2007/ESTU2007_30_1_12_25.pdf

Mulder C, 2003. The Northwest European Pollen Flora, 61: Aizoaceae. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology, 123(1/2):41-45.

Ordway D, Hohmann J, Viveiros M, Viveiros A, Molnar J, Leandro C, Arroz MJ, Gracio MA, Amaral L, 2003. Carpobrotus edulis methanol extract inhibits the MDR efflux pumps, enhances killing of phagocytosed S. aureus and promotes immune modulation. Phytotherapy Research, 17(5):512-519.

PIER, 2008. Pacific Islands Ecosystems at Risk. USA: Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry. http://www.hear.org/pier/index.html

Prescott A, Venning J, 1984. Flora of Australia Volume 4. Aizoaceae [ed. by ED]. Canberra, Australia: Australian Government Publishing Service.

Preston CD, Sell PD, 1988. The Aizoaceae naturalized in the British Isles, 17:217-245.

Ragusa S, Swirski E, 1975. Feeding habits, development and oviposition of the predacious mite Amblyseius swirskii Athias-Henriot (Acarina: Phytoseiidae) on pollen of various weeds. Israel Journal of Entomology, 10:93-103.

Ragusa S, Zedan MA, Sciacchitano MA, 1986. The effects of food from plant and animal sources on the development and egg production of the predaceous mite Hypoaspis aculeifer (Canestrini) (Parasitiformes, Dermanyssidae). Redia, 69:481-488.

Reuveny H, Palevsky E, Gerson U, 1996. Laboratory life history studies of the predaceous mite Typhlodromus athiasae (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Systematic and Applied Acarology, 1:45-53.

Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh, 2008. Flora Europaea, Database of European Plants (ESFEDS). Edinburgh, UK: Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh. http://rbg-web2.rbge.org.uk/FE/fe.html

Schierenbeck KA, Symonds VV, Gallagher KG, Bell J, 2005. Genetic variation and phylogeographic analyses of two species of Carpobrotus and their hybrids in California. Molecular Ecology, 14(2):539-547. http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/rd.asp?code=MEC&goto=journal

Stace C, 1991. New Flora of the British Isles [ed. by Cambridge University Press]. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Suehs CM, Affre L, Médail F, 2004. Invasion dynamics of two alien Carpobrotus (Aizoaceae) taxa on a Mediterranean island: I. Genetic diversity and introgression. Heredity, 92(1):31-40.

Suehs CM, Affre L, Médail F, 2004. Invasion dynamics of two alien Carpobrotus (Aizoaceae) taxa on a Mediterranean island: II. Reproductive strategies. Heredity, 92(6):550-556.

Suehs CM, Médail F, Affre L, 2001. Ecological and genetic features of the invasion by the alien Carpobrotus plants in Mediterranean island habitats. In: Plant invasions: species ecology and ecosystem management [ed. by Brundu G, Brock J, Camarda I, Child L, Wade M] Leiden, Netherlands: Backhuys Publishers, 145-157.

Swirski E, Amitai S, Dorzia N, 1970. Laboratory studies on the feeding habits, post-embryonic survival and oviposition of the predaceous mites Amblyseius chilenensis Dosse and Amblyseius hibisci Chant (Acarina: Phytoseiidae) on various kinds of food substances. Entomophaga, 15(pt. 1):93-106 pp.

Swirski E, Dorzia N, 1969. Laboratory studies on the feeding, development and fecundity of the predaceous mite Typhlodromus occidentalis Nesbitt (Acarina: Phytoseiidae) on various kinds of food substances. Israel Journal of Agricultural Research, 19(3):143-145.

Trinajstic I, 1998. Supplements to the flora of island of Korcula (Croatia). Acta Botanica Croatica, 57:95-98; 11 ref.

USDA-ARS, 2008. Germplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN). Online Database. Beltsville, Maryland, USA: National Germplasm Resources Laboratory. https://npgsweb.ars-grin.gov/gringlobal/taxon/taxonomysearch.aspx

USDA-NRCS, 2008. The PLANTS Database. Baton Rouge, USA: National Plant Data Center. http://plants.usda.gov/

Vilà M, D'Antonio CM, 1998. Fruit choice and seed dispersal of invasive vs. noninvasive Carpobrotus (Aizoaceae) in coastal California. Ecology, 79(3):1053-1060.

Vilà M, D'Antonio CM, 1998. Hybrid vigor for clonal growth in Carpobrotus (Aizoaceae) in coastal California. Ecological Applications, 8(4):1196-1205.

Watt Evan der, Pretorius JC, 2001. Purification and identification of active antibacterial components in Carpobrotus edulis L. Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 76(1):87-91.

Webb CJ, Sykes WR, Garnock-Jones PJ, 1988. Flora of New Zealand, Volume IV: Naturalised pteridophytes, gymnosperms, dicotyledons. Christchurch, New Zealand: Botany Division, DSIR, 1365 pp.

Weber E, 2003. Invasive plant species of the world: A reference guide to environmental weeds. Wallingford, UK: CAB International, 548 pp.

Weber E, D'Antonio CM, 1999. Phenotypic plasticity in hybridizing Carpobrotus spp. (Aizoaceae) from coastal California and its role in plant invasion. Canadian Journal of Botany, 77(10):1411-1418.

Contributors

06/05/08 Original text by:

Chris Parker, Consultant, UK

Distribution Maps

• = Present, no further details
• = Evidence of pathogen
• = Widespread
• = Last reported
• = Localised
• = Presence unconfirmed
• = Confined and subject to quarantine
• = See regional map for distribution within the country
• = Occasional or few reports

Download KML file Download CSV file

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Please click OK to ACCEPT or Cancel to REJECT

OK Cancel

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Please click OK to ACCEPT or Cancel to REJECT

OK Cancel