Sagittaria latifolia (broadleaf arrowhead)

Identity

Preferred Scientific Name

• Sagittaria latifolia Willd, 1805

Preferred Common Name

• broadleaf arrowhead

Other Scientific Names

• Sagittaria chinensis Pursh (1814)
• Sagittaria engelmanniana ssp. longirostra (Micheli) Bogin (1955)
• Sagittaria esculenta T.J. Howell (1903)
• Sagittaria gracilis Pursh (1814)
• Sagittaria hastata Purs (1814)
• Sagittaria latifolia var. latifolia Willd.
• Sagittaria latifolia var. obtusa (Engelm.) Wieg (1908)
• Sagittaria latifolia var. pubescens (Muhl. ex Nutt.) J.G. Sm. (1894)
• Sagittaria longirostra (Micheli) J.G. Sm (1894)
• Sagittaria obtusa Muhl. ex Willd., non Thunb.
• Sagittaria ornithorhyncha Small (1933)
• Sagittaria planipes Fern. (1947)
• Sagittaria pubescens Muhl. ex Nutt. (1813)
• Sagittaria variabilis var. obtusa Engelm. (1856)
• Sagittaria viscosa C. Mohr (1897)

International Common Names

• English: arrow plantain; arrowhead; common arrowhead; duck-potato; indian potato; muskrat potato; sturgeon potato; swamp potato; tule potato; wapato; wapatoo; wappato
• Spanish: bayoneta; chubacuaro; hojilla; platanillo
• French: sagittaire à larges feuilles; sagittaire latifoliée; sagittaire obtuse

Local Common Names

• Czech Republic: šídlatka širolistá
• Denmark: hjertebladet slangerod
• Germany: Breitblatt-Pfeilkraut
• Italy: sagittaria americana
• Netherlands: breed pijlkruid,
• Norway: lækjeholurt

Taxonomic Tree

• Domain: Eukaryota
•     Kingdom: Plantae
•         Phylum: Spermatophyta
•             Subphylum: Angiospermae
•                 Class: Monocotyledonae
•                     Order: Alismatales
•                         Family: Alismataceae
•                             Genus: Sagittaria
•                                 Species: Sagittaria latifolia

Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature

The Alismataceae has 11 genera and some 95 species, all of which are aquatic, with a cosmopolitan distribution. Sagittaria is one of the larger genera in the Alismataceae, with 20 species. Most of them are found in the New World (Preston and Croft, 1997). Sagittaria latifolia has been divided into two varieties, based upon whether or not the whole vegetative plant is pubescent (Bogin, 1955; Rataj, 1972). However, for Haynes and Holm-Nielsen (1993, 1994) this character alone is insufficient for recognition of the varieties, so it is considered to be a single species (Novelo, 2003; FNA, 2009). S. latifolia Willd. (1805) is the accepted name by IPNI (2009).

Description

Herbs, perennial, to 45 cm, arising from stout, tuberous rhizomes; stolons present; corms present. Root depth, minimum 0.45 cm (USDA-NRCS, 2009). Leaves erect, those submerged, if present, linear and ribbon-like, emersed ones with blades sagittate, lateral lobes as long as terminal one, linear or ovate-deltate, 2-20 cm long, 0.5-12 cm wide; terminal lobe deltate to ovate-deltate or linear, 3-25 cm long, 0.7-35 cm wide, apex acuminate to subobtuse; petioles 20-70 cm long. Inflorescences racemes, rarely panicles, of 3-9 whorls, emersed, 4.5-28.5, (4-23) cm; peduncles 10-59 cm; bracts connate more than or equal to 1/4 total length, elliptic to lanceolate, 3-8 mm, delicate, not papillose; fruiting pedicels spreading, cylindric, 0.5-3.5 cm. Flowers to 4 cm diameter; unisexual (and the plants monoecious or dioecious), lower flowers pistillate, upper ones staminate, and usually with some perfect flowers in the middle, or rarely all flowers perfect, scapes few, 15-70 (-90) cm long, shorter than or slightly longer than leaves, each with 2-7 verticils of flowers, pedicels 0.5-6 cm long, bracts 2-3 per flower, papery, lanceolate to deltate, 0.5-1 (-1.5) cm long, usually gibbous; sepals ovate, 5-10 mm long; petals white, very broadly elliptic, 1-2 cm long, abruptly narrowed into a claw. 

Achenes 2.5-4 mm long, dorsal margin winged, beak stout, extending at a right angle from the body, 0.5-1.5 mm long (Wagner et al., 1999; FNA, 2009).

Plant Type

Distribution

S. latifolia is a native species in the N. American continent and is well distributed throughout southeastern Canada and the eastern United States, being the commonest and most widespread species of the genus Sagittaria, overlapping with Sagittaria cuneata. It is found in temperate and subtropical wetlands throughout the continent and extending south to Central America, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Colombia, Ecuador and Venezuela (FNA, 2009; USDA-ARS, 2009; USDA-NRCS, 2009). It is introduced in the Hawaiian Islands (USDA-NRCS, 2009) and naturalized in several European countries.

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.

History of Introduction and Spread

S. latifolia outside its native range has been reported in Pacific islands and Europe. It has been introduced in French Polynesia (PIER, 2009); in 1916 to Hawaii where it is considered invasive (Stone et al., 1992). In Europe it was reported in Romania in 1931 (DAISIE, 2009), from here to Italy (1940), in the UK in 1941 (Preston and Croft, 1997), Austria in 1950, Germany in 1966 (NOBANIS, 2009) and is reported to be present in Belgium, France, the Czech Republic and Ukraine. In Europe it is established but it is not widely naturalized. 

Introductions

Risk of Introduction

S. latifolia has been introduced for ornamental and amenity purposes and has therefore been intentionally introduced into many countries in Europe. This species has escaped and established populations in the wild (DAISIE, 2009; NOBANIS, 2009); in most cases it has become established in the area in which it was originally planted, but it may be spreading along river banks (Preston and Croft, 1997).

S. latifolia is included in the Western Australian Prohibited List (GIST, 2003), and in New Zealand S. latifolia’s seeds are Regulated Weed Seeds and prohibited from all consignments (MAF Bisosecurity, 2009). In Europe S. latifolia is regulated at the national level for horticultural nurseries (Heywood and Brunel, 2008), so further introductions in these countries are therefore unlikely.

Habitat

S. latifolia is extremely frequent as an emergent plant on very wet soils, and it is classified as wetland obligate in wetland indicator status in America (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1988), forming colonies in shallow waters, in long bands following the curves of rivers, ponds and lakes. It is also found in ditches, in open woodlands that are prone to frequent flooding, in swamps, marshes, bogs, seeps and freshwater wetlands, stream-sides, ditches, floodplains, low-lying areas with wet mud, and the borders of lakes or ponds (Hickman, 1993; FNA, 2009). In Europe, it is found in shallow water in lowland and ponds, roadside ditches and at the edge of canals, stream and rivers and wetlands (Preston and Croft, 1997; NOBANIS, 2009). In Hawaii, it is naturalized in low elevation wetlands, slow streams, and taro paddies (Wagner et al., 1999).

Habitat List

Biology and Ecology

Genetics

2n = 22 (FNA, 2009).

Climate

Latitude/Altitude

Soil Tolerances

Soil drainage

• impeded

Soil reaction

• alkaline
• neutral

Soil texture

• light
• medium

Special soil tolerances

• shallow

Natural Enemies

Notes on Natural Enemies

Center et al. (1999) reported four native plant-feeding insects in USA found in Sagittaria spp. The most commonly encountered are arrowhead weevils, Listronotus spp. (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Brachycerinae: Rhytirrhinini), which feed on and breed in various species of Sagittaria (Alismataceae). The larvae feed and develop within the flower stalks (peduncles). Adults feed on the flowers and fruits. The adults of pickerel weed weevil, Onychylis nigrirostris (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Curculioninae: Erirhinini) feed on the surfaces of the leaves. The waterlily aphid, Rhopalosiphum nymphaeae (Homoptera: Aphididae) is extremely destructive in aquatic gardens and nurseries and is known to transmit at least five plant viruses. Waterlily leaf beetle, Pyrrhalta (=Galerucella) nymphaeae (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Galerucinae) adults feed on the leaves. The last three species are not specific to the genus Sagittaria.

Another natural enemy is the smut fungus: up to five species of the genus Doassansia have been reported to attack S. latifolia, including Doassansia sagittariae. The fungi develop in leaves, but the general growth of the host plants is not noticeably affected (Piepenbring and Hagedorn, 2002). Another natural enemy is the nutria which causes deleterious effects due to high herbivory on S. latifolia and S. platyphylla (Grace and Ford 1996; Evers et al., 1998).

Means of Movement and Dispersal

Natural Dispersal (Non-Biotic)

The tubers can be dispersed by water in streams and rivers.

Vector Transmission (Biotic)

The seeds could be dispersed by animals.

Accidental Introduction

There are no reports that this species has been accidentally introduced.

Intentional Introduction

S. latifolia has been introduced for ornamental and amenity purposes and has therefore been intentionally introduced to many countries in Europe. This species has escaped and established populations in the wild (DAISIE, 2009; NOBANIS, 2009).

Pathway Causes

Pathway Vectors

Impact Summary

Economic Impact

S. latifolia can spread quickly and occupy artificial channels and drainage ditches, but it has not yet been reported to have any economic impacts.

Environmental Impact

It could threaten wetland habitats but this has not yet been reported.

Risk and Impact Factors

Impact mechanisms

• Rapid growth

Impact outcomes

• Modification of successional patterns
• Monoculture formation

Invasiveness

• Abundant in its native range
• Benefits from human association (i.e. it is a human commensal)
• Fast growing
• Gregarious
• Has a broad native range
• Has high genetic variability
• Has high reproductive potential
• Has propagules that can remain viable for more than one year
• Highly adaptable to different environments
• Highly mobile locally
• Invasive in its native range
• Is a habitat generalist
• 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

• Highly likely to be transported internationally deliberately
• Highly likely to be transported internationally illegally

Uses

Economic Value

The starchy tuber of S. latifolia has been used since ancient times as a food and trading commodity by native Americans, who call it wapato (Kuhnlein and Turner, 1991; Darby, 1996; Spurgeon, 1996), as well as by Chinese and Japanese immigrants in California (Bogin, 1955). The Chinese, on coming to California, used it for food and may have cultivated it to some extent. S. latifolia is extensively cultivated in the San Francisco Bay area in California to supply the Chinese markets, and the tubers are commonly to be found on sale. This is believed to have extended the plant’s range into the southern part of the state (Mason, 1957). It is also used as a medicinal plant.

Environmental Services

S. latifolia tolerates and assimilates high levels of nutrients, particularly phosphorus (Boyd, 1970). For this reason S. latifolia is often selected for use in municipal and domestic wastewater treatment systems, constructed wetlands and stormwater runoff treatment, and for wetland enhancement, restoration, and creation (Marburger, 1993). Muskrats eat the whole plant including tubers, leaves, and seeds. For canvas-back duck (Aythya valisineria), S. latifolia and Cyperus esculentus make up 94% of its diet (Hohman et al., 1990).

This species is important as food and cover for aquatic animal life (Thunhorst, 1993). The emergent and submerged leaves are used as shelter for different species of fish and macroinvertebrates (USDA-NRCS, 2002). These dense patches are important spawning and nursery grounds for some species of fish. Many shorebirds, other waterfowl, and aquatic mammals like the otter, beavers, North American porcupines and muskrat eat the whole plant including tubers, leaves, and seeds. 

Uses List

Environmental

• Wildlife habitat

Human food and beverage

• Flour/starch

Ornamental

• Propagation material
• Seed trade

Similarities to Other Species/Conditions

In its native range, S. latifolia could be confused with S. cuneata. Both species have white or bluish tubers, which are edible. A diagnostic feature distinguishing the two species is the beak on the fruit of S. cuneata, which is ascending to erect and <0.5 mm; the beak on the fruit of S. latifolia is spreading and 1-2 mm (USDA-NRCS, 2002). In Europe, it may be confused with the native S. sagittifolia (Preston and Croft, 1997). It can be identified to genus using vegetative characters but ripe fruit is required for identification to species; the alien taxa apparently rarely produce ripe fruit. Consequently, it is rarely possible to identify them with confidence. In some cases, it may not be possible to separate S. latifolia from S. sagittifolia without flowers; however, the extremely fine long leaves apparently do not occur in S. sagittifolia. When in flower, S. sagittifolia has entirely white petals and yellow anthers, whereas in S. latifolia there is a purple spot at the base of the petal (Lansdown, 2008).

Prevention and Control

Prevention

SPS measures

Gaps in Knowledge/Research Needs

As Marburger (1993) suggests, there is still much to be learned about S. latifolia’s ecology and physiology as regards its use for wetland restoration; and overall it is necessary to know more about its invasive character in its introduced range and the precise nature of its impacts.

References

BiolFlor, 2009. Search and information system on vascular plants in Germany. Search and information system on vascular plants in Germany. Department of Community Ecology, UFZ - Centre for Environmental Research. http://www.ufz.de/biolflor/index.jsp

Biosecurity MAF, 2009. New Zealand import health standard bnz.gcfp.phr importation of grains/seeds for consumption, feed or processing plant health requirements. Wellington, New Zealand: MAF Biosecurity.

Bogin C, 1955. Revision of the genus Sagittaria. Mem. New York Bot. Gard, 9:179-233.

Boyd CE, 1970. Chemical Analyses of Some Vascular Aquatic Plants. Archiven für Hydrobiologie, 67:78-85.

Bryson CT, 2004. Interactive Encyclopedia of North American Weeds, Version 3. Southern Weed Science Society. Interactive Encyclopedia of North American Weeds, Version 3. Southern Weed Science Society. ThunderSnow.

Center TD, Dray FA, Jubinsky GP, Grodowitz MJ, 1999. Insects and Other Arthropods That Feed on Aquatic and Wetland Plants. Insects and Other Arthropods That Feed on Aquatic and Wetland Plants. [U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. Technical Bulletin No. 1870.]

Clarke E, Baldwin AH, 2002. Responses of wetland plants to ammonia and water level. Ecological Engineering, 18(3):257-264.

DAISIE, 2009. Sagittaria latifolia. Delivering Alien Invasive Species Inventories for Europe, DAISIE. European Invasive Alien Species Gateway. http://www.europe-aliens.org/speciesFactsheet.do?speciesId=632#

Darby MC, 1996. Wapato for the people; an ecological approach to understanding the native American use of Sagittaria latifolia on the lower Columbia River. Oregon, USA: Portland State University.

Delesalle VA, Blum S, 1994. Variation in germination and survival among families of Sagittaria latifolia in response to salinity and temperature. International Journal of Plant Sciences, 155(2):187-195.

Dorken ME, Barrett SCH, 2003. Gender plasticity in Sagittaria sagittifolia (Alismataceae), a monoecious aquatic species. Plant Systematics and Evolution, 237(1-2):99-106.

Dorken ME, Barrett SCH, 2003. Life-history differentiation and the maintenance of monoecy and dioecy in Sagittaria latifolia (Alismataceae). Evolution, 57(9):1973-1988.

Dorken ME, Barrett SCH, 2004. Phenotypic plasticity of vegetative and reproductive traits in monoecious and dioecious populations of Sagittaria latifolia (Alismataceae): a clonal aquatic plant. Journal of Ecology (Oxford), 92(1):32-44.

Dorken ME, Barrett SCH, 2004. Sex determination and the evolution of dioecy from monoecy in Sagittaria latifolia (Alismataceae). Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 271(1535):213-219. http://www.pubs.royalsoc.ac.uk/proc_bio_homepage.shtml

Dorken ME, Friedman J, Barrett SCH, 2002. The evolution and maintenance of monoecy and dioecy in Sagittaria latifolia (Alismataceae). Evolution, 56(1):31-41.

Ellett CW, 1959. The Ustilaginales (smut fungi) of Ohio. The Ohio Journal of Science, 59(5):313.

Evers DE, Sasser CE, Gosselink JG, Fuller DA, Visser JM, 1998. The impact of vertebrate herbivores on wetland vegetation in Atchafalaya Bay, Louisiana. Estuaries, 21(1):1-13.

FNA, 2009. Sagitaria latifolia. Flora of North America, 22. St. Louis, MO: Missouri Botanical Garden. http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=1&taxon_id=222000347

GIST, 2003. The Global Invasive Species Team. Rod Randall's Weed List. The Global Invasive Species Team. Rod Randall's Weed List. http://www.invasive.org/gist/index.html

Glaettli M, Barrett SCH, 2008. Pollinator responses to variation in floral display and flower size in dioecious Sagittaria latifolia (Alismataceae). New Phytologist, 179(4):1193-1201. http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/loi/nph

Grace JB, Ford MA, 1996. The potential impact of herbivory on the susceptibility of the marsh plant Sagittaria lancifolia to saltwater intrusion in coastal wetlands. Estuaries, 19:13-20.

Haynes R, Holm-Nielsen L, 1993. Alismataceae. Flora Novo-Galiciana, 13:7-20.

Haynes RR, Holm-Nielsen LB, 1994. The Alismataceae. The Bronx, USA: New York Botanical Garden, 112 pp.

Hess HE, 1998. [English title not available]. (Bestimmungsschlassel zur Flora der Schweiz und angrenzender Gebiete.) Bestimmungsschlassel zur Flora der Schweiz und angrenzender Gebiete. Basel, Boston and Berlin.

Heywood V, Brunel S, 2008. Code of conduct on horticulture and invasive alien plants. In: Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, Standing Committee 28th meeting, Strasbourg, 24-27 November 2008.

Hickman JC, 1993. The Jepson manual. Higher plants of California. University of California Press, 1400 pp.

Hohman WL, Woolington DW, Devries JH, 1990. Food-habits of wintering canvasbacks in Louisiana. Canadian Journal of Zoology-Revue Canadienne De Zoologie, 68(12):2605-2609.

IPNI, 2009. International Plant Names Index. International Plant Names Index. http://www.ipni.org

Iverson LR, Ketzner D, Karnes J, 1999. Illinois Plant Information Network. Illinois Plant Information Network. Illinois Natural History Survey and USDA Forest Service. http://www.us/ne/delaware/ilpin/ilpin.html

Kaul RB, 1985. Reproductive phenology and biology in annual and perennial Alismataceae. Aquatic Botany, 22:153-164.

Kuhnlein HV, Turner NJ, 1991. Traditional plant foods of Canadian indigenous peoples. Nutrition, botany and use. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, xi + 633 pp.

Lansdown RV, 2008. A field guide to the riverine plants of Britain and Northern Ireland, including selected vascular plants, bryophytes, lichens and algae. Environment Agency, Thames Region, 316 pp.

Luijten SH, Odé B, 2007. [English title not available]. (Status en het voorkomen van een aantal belangrijke invasieve plantensoorten in Nederland.) FLORON-Rapport 47. Leiden: Stichting FLORON, 35 pp.

Marburger JE, 1993. Biology and management of Sagittaria latifolia Willd. (Broad-leaf arrow-head) for wetland restoration and creation. Res. Ecol, 1:248-255.

Martin SB, Shaffer GP, 2005. Sagittaria biomass partitioning relative to salinity, hydrologic regime, and substrate type: implications for plant distribution patterns in coastal Louisiana, United States. Journal of Coastal Research, 21(1):167-174. http://www.jcronline.org

Mason HL, 1957. A flora of the marshes of California. University of California Press, 878 pp.

Missouri Botanical Garden, 2009. Tropicos database. St Louis, USA: Missouri Botanical Garden. http://www.tropicos.org

Muenchow GE, Delesalle VA, 1994. Pollinators response to male floral display size in two Sagittaria (Alismataceae). American Journal of Botany, 81:568-573.

NOBANIS, 2009. North European and Baltic Network on Invasive Alien Species. Gateway to information on Invasive Alien species in North and Central Europe. North European and Baltic Network on Invasive Alien Species. Gateway to information on Invasive Alien species in North and Central Europe. http://www.nobanis.org

Novelo A, 2003. [English title not available]. (Alismataceae Fascículo 111.) Flora del Bajío y de regiones adyacentes. México: Instituto de Biología Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.

Novelo RA, Lot HA, 2001. Alismataceae. In: Flora fanerogámica del Valle de México. 992-996.

Piepenbring M, Hagedorn G, 2002. Global Information System for the Biodiversity of Plant Pathogenic Fungi (GLOPP). Global Information System for the Biodiversity of Plant Pathogenic Fungi (GLOPP). http://www.glopp.net/

PIER, 2009. Pacific Islands Ecosystems at Risk., USA: Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry. http://www.hear.org/pier/index.html

PIER, 2011. Pacific Islands Ecosystems at Risk., USA: Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry. http://www.hear.org/pier/index.html

Preston CD, Croft JM, 1997. Aquatic plants in Britain and Ireland. Aquatic plants in Britain and Ireland., 365 pp.

Rataj K, 1972. Revision of the genus Sagittaria. Part 2. The species of the West Indies, Central and South America. Ann. Zool. Bot, 78:1-61.

Rothman E, Bouchard V, 2007. Regulation of carbon processes by macrophyte species in a Great Lakes coastal wetland. Wetlands, 27(4):1134-1143. http://www.bioone.org/doi/abs/10.1672/0277-5212%282007%2927%5B1134%3AROCPBM%5D2.0.CO%3B2

Sarkissian TS, Barrett SCH, Harder LD, 2001. Gender variation in Sagittaria latifolia (Alismataceae): is size all that matters? Ecology, 82(2):360-373. http://www.esajournals.org/esaonline/?request=get-abstract&issn=0012-9658&volume=082&issue=02&page=0360

Skogerboe JG, Getsinger KD, 2001. Endothall species selectivity evaluation: Southern latitude aquatic plant community. Journal of Aquatic Plant Management, 39:129-135.

Smith JG, 1894. A revision of the North American species of Sagittaria and Lophotocarpus. Annu. Rep. Miss. Bot. Gard, 6:27-64.

Spurgeon T, 1996. Wapato (Sagittaria latifolia) in Katzie traditional territory, Pitt Meadow, British Columbia., USA: Simon Fraser University.

Stone CP, Smith CW, Tunison JT, 1992. Alien plant invasions in native ecosystems of Hawaii: management and research. Honolulu, HI, USA: University of Hawaii Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit.

Sutton DL, 1995, publ. 1996. Culture of common arrowhead. In: Proceedings of the Florida State Horticultural Society, No. 108. 414-418.

Thunhorst GA, 1993. Wetland planting guide for the Northeastern United States. St. Michaels, MD: Environmental Concern, Inc., 179 pp.

Torbick NM, Becker BL, Qi J, Lusch DP, 2008. Characterizing field-level hyperspectral measurements for identifying wetland invasive plant species. In: Invasive Species: Detection, Impact and Control [ed. by Wilcox, C. P. \Turpin, R. B.]. Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

US Fish and Wildlife Service, 1988. National list of vascular plant species that occur in wetlands. US Fish & Wildlife Service Biological Report, 88 (26.9).

USDA-ARS, 2009. 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, 2002. Duck potato, Sagittaria latifolia Willd. USDA-NRCS Northeast Plant Materials Program Plant Fact Sheet. USDA.

USDA-NRCS, 2009. The PLANTS Database. Baton Rouge, USA: National Plant Data Center. http://plants.usda.gov/

Vamosi JC, Vamosi SM, Barrett SCH, 2006. Sex in advertising: dioecy alters the net benefits of attractiveness in Sagittaria latifolia (Alismataceae). Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 273(1599):2401-2407. http://www.pubs.royalsoc.ac.uk/proc_bio_homepage.shtml

Wagner WL, Herbst DR, Sohmer SH, 1999. Manual of the flowering plants of Hawaii. Revised edition. Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: University of Hawaii Press/Bishop Museum Press, 1919 pp.

Weber E, Gut D, 2004. Assessing the risk of potentially invasive plant species in central Europe. Journal for Nature Conservation, 12(3):171-179.

Contributors

09/04/10 Original text by:

Manuel A. Duenas, Universidad de Cordoba, Dept. de Botanica, Ecologia y Fisiología Vegetal. Edificio C-4, Celestino Mutis, Campus de Rabanales, 4071-Cordoba, Spain

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