Bromus sterilis (barren brome)
Index
- Pictures
- Identity
- Taxonomic Tree
- Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
- Description
- Plant Type
- Distribution
- Distribution Table
- Habitat
- Habitat List
- Hosts/Species Affected
- Host Plants and Other Plants Affected
- Growth Stages
- Biology and Ecology
- Rainfall
- Rainfall Regime
- Soil Tolerances
- Notes on Natural Enemies
- Means of Movement and Dispersal
- Plant Trade
- Impact Summary
- Impact
- Risk and Impact Factors
- Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
- Prevention and Control
- References
- Distribution Maps
Don't need the entire report?
Generate a print friendly version containing only the sections you need.
Generate reportPictures
Top of pageIdentity
Top of pagePreferred Scientific Name
- Bromus sterilis L.
Preferred Common Name
- barren brome
Other Scientific Names
- Anisantha sterilis (L.) Nevski
- Genea sterilis (L.) Dumort.
International Common Names
- English: barren bromegrass; poverty brome; sterile brome
- Spanish: bromo esteril
- French: brome stérile
Local Common Names
- Denmark: gold hejre
- Finland: hietakattara
- Germany: Taube Trespe
- Italy: forasacco rosso
- Japan: arechi-no-cha-hiki
- Netherlands: ijle dravik
- Spain: barbas de macho estéril
- Sweden: sandlosta
EPPO code
- BROST (Bromus sterilis)
Taxonomic Tree
Top of page- Domain: Eukaryota
- Kingdom: Plantae
- Phylum: Spermatophyta
- Subphylum: Angiospermae
- Class: Monocotyledonae
- Order: Cyperales
- Family: Poaceae
- Genus: Bromus
- Species: Bromus sterilis
Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
Top of pageA modern re-assessment of the taxonomy and nomenclature of the annual taxa within the mainly Mediterranean/southwestern Asiatic Bromus section Genea is given by Sales (1993) in which B. sterilis, B. diandrus and B. rigidus are considered as varieties of one species while recognizing that they have often been treated as separate species in recent floras. For the purposes of this Compendium, these three taxa are covered by separate species datasheets.
Description
Top of pageDistribution
Top of pageDistribution Table
Top of pageThe 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.
Last updated: 17 Feb 2021Continent/Country/Region | Distribution | Last Reported | Origin | First Reported | Invasive | Reference | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Africa |
|||||||
Algeria | Present | Native | |||||
Egypt | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
Libya | Present | Native | |||||
Morocco | Present | Native | |||||
Tunisia | Present | Native | Invasive | ||||
Asia |
|||||||
Afghanistan | Present | Native | |||||
Armenia | Present | Native | |||||
Azerbaijan | Present | Native | |||||
Georgia | Present | Native | |||||
Iran | Present | Native | |||||
Iraq | Present | Native | |||||
Israel | Present | Native | |||||
Jordan | Present | Native | |||||
Lebanon | Present | Native | |||||
Syria | Present | Native | |||||
Turkey | Present | Native | |||||
Turkmenistan | Present | Native | |||||
Uzbekistan | Present | Native | |||||
Europe |
|||||||
Albania | Present | Native | |||||
Austria | Present | Native | |||||
Belgium | Present | Native | |||||
Bulgaria | Present | Native | |||||
Cyprus | Present | Native | |||||
Czechia | Present | Native | Invasive | Original citation: Stolcová (2002) | |||
Czechoslovakia | Present | Native | |||||
Denmark | Present | Native | |||||
Finland | Present | Introduced | |||||
France | Present | Native | |||||
-Corsica | Present | Native | |||||
Germany | Present | Native | |||||
Greece | Present | Native | |||||
-Crete | Present | Native | |||||
Hungary | Present | Native | |||||
Ireland | Present | Native | |||||
Italy | Present | Native | |||||
-Sardinia | Present | Native | |||||
-Sicily | Present | Native | |||||
Netherlands | Present | Native | |||||
Norway | Present | Native | |||||
Poland | Present | Native | |||||
Portugal | Present | Native | |||||
-Azores | Present | Native | |||||
Romania | Present | Native | |||||
Russia | Present | Present based on regional distribution. | |||||
-Central Russia | Present | ||||||
-Southern Russia | Present | Native | |||||
-Western Siberia | Present | Native | |||||
Serbia and Montenegro | Present | Native | |||||
Spain | Present | Native | |||||
-Balearic Islands | Present | Native | |||||
Sweden | Present | Native | Invasive | ||||
Switzerland | Present | Native | Invasive | ||||
Ukraine | Present | Native | |||||
United Kingdom | Present | Native | Invasive | ||||
North America |
|||||||
United States | Present | Present based on regional distribution. | |||||
-Alabama | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Arizona | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Arkansas | Present | Introduced | |||||
-California | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Colorado | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Connecticut | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Delaware | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Hawaii | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Idaho | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Illinois | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Indiana | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Kentucky | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Maryland | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Massachusetts | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Michigan | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Mississippi | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Missouri | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Nevada | Present | Introduced | |||||
-New Jersey | Present | Introduced | |||||
-New Mexico | Present | Introduced | |||||
-New York | Present | Introduced | |||||
-North Carolina | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Ohio | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Oklahoma | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Oregon | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Pennsylvania | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Rhode Island | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Tennessee | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
-Texas | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Utah | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Virginia | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Washington | Present | Introduced | |||||
-West Virginia | Present | Introduced | |||||
Oceania |
|||||||
Australia | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
-Victoria | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
New Zealand | Present | Introduced | 1867 | Invasive |
Habitat
Top of pageHabitat List
Top of pageCategory | Sub-Category | Habitat | Presence | Status |
---|---|---|---|---|
Terrestrial | ||||
Terrestrial | Managed | Cultivated / agricultural land | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
Terrestrial | Managed | Managed forests, plantations and orchards | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
Terrestrial | Managed | Disturbed areas | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
Terrestrial | Managed | Rail / roadsides | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
Terrestrial | Managed | Urban / peri-urban areas | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
Terrestrial | Natural / Semi-natural | Natural forests | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
Hosts/Species Affected
Top of pageHost Plants and Other Plants Affected
Top of pagePlant name | Family | Context | References |
---|---|---|---|
Beta vulgaris (beetroot) | Chenopodiaceae | Main | |
Cicer arietinum (chickpea) | Fabaceae | Main | |
Helianthus annuus (sunflower) | Asteraceae | Main | |
Hordeum vulgare (barley) | Poaceae | Main | |
Lens culinaris subsp. culinaris (lentil) | Fabaceae | Main | |
Triticum aestivum (wheat) | Poaceae | Main | |
Triticum turgidum (durum wheat) | Poaceae | Main | |
Vicia faba (faba bean) | Fabaceae | Main |
Biology and Ecology
Top of pageB. sterilis has a chromosome number of 2n=14 (Anon., 2000). However, a new polyploid number (2n=28) was reported by Queiros (1981).
Physiology and Phenology
The germination of B. sterilis seeds was inhibited by Pfr (the far-red-light-absorbing form of phytochrome). The degree of inhibition was dependent on the proportion of Pfr which had established in the seed. This inhibition was transitory and at 15°C was evident in 40% of seeds 1.5 days after sowing. Pfr inhibition persisted more at temperatures below 15° than at temperatures above 15°C which were inhibitory to germination anyway. The inhibitory effect of Pfr was also increased in conditions of low substrate moisture content (Hilton, 1984). Andersson et al. (2002) confirmed that germination of B. sterilis in Sweden is strongly inhibited by light, while there was much variation in dormancy. Longevity of B. sterilis is relatively short, with few seeds persisting beyond 12 months under field conditions (Lutman et al., 2003).
Optimum germination of B. sterilis seeds under laboratory conditions was achieved at about 15-25°C and soil depths of 0.5 cm (Mikulka, 1987).
Plant densities of Bromus spp. (including B. sterilis) in Morocco varied from 330 to 661 plants/m², with a maximum height of 102 cm and a leaf area index of 6. The net daily assimilation rate was 4 g/m² and daily growth rates varied from 3.2 to 7.7 g/m². The nitrogen content of leaves varied from 3.8 to 4.1% and total protein content of seeds was 10.9%. The weight of 1000 kernels varied from 20 to 24 g (Hamal et al., 1998).
Rainfall
Top of pageParameter | Lower limit | Upper limit | Description |
---|---|---|---|
Dry season duration | 0 | 8 | number of consecutive months with <40 mm rainfall |
Soil Tolerances
Top of pageSoil drainage
- free
Soil reaction
- acid
- alkaline
- neutral
Soil texture
- heavy
- light
- medium
Special soil tolerances
- shallow
Notes on Natural Enemies
Top of pageMeans of Movement and Dispersal
Top of pagePlant Trade
Top of pagePlant parts liable to carry the pest in trade/transport | Pest stages | Borne internally | Borne externally | Visibility of pest or symptoms |
---|---|---|---|---|
True seeds (inc. grain) | seeds | Yes | Pest or symptoms usually visible to the naked eye |
Impact Summary
Top of pageCategory | Impact |
---|---|
Animal/plant collections | None |
Animal/plant products | None |
Biodiversity (generally) | Positive |
Crop production | Negative |
Environment (generally) | Positive |
Fisheries / aquaculture | None |
Forestry production | None |
Human health | None |
Livestock production | Negative |
Native fauna | None |
Native flora | Negative |
Rare/protected species | None |
Tourism | None |
Trade/international relations | None |
Transport/travel | None |
Impact
Top of pageRisk and Impact Factors
Top of page- Proved invasive outside its native range
- Highly adaptable to different environments
- Highly mobile locally
- Has high reproductive potential
- Has propagules that can remain viable for more than one year
- Negatively impacts agriculture
- Negatively impacts animal health
- Competition - monopolizing resources
- Pest and disease transmission
Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
Top of pagePrevention and Control
Top of pageDue to the variable regulations around (de)registration of pesticides, your national list of registered pesticides or relevant authority should be consulted to determine which products are legally allowed for use in your country when considering chemical control. Pesticides should always be used in a lawful manner, consistent with the product's label.
Cultural ControlCompared with chemical control, control by cultural methods such as crop rotation and delayed drilling may be more economic. Cultural techniques aimed at preventing the invasion of Bromus spp. from hedgerows are also important (Jarvis, 1982).
Mechanical Control
Deep tillage decreases Bromus spp. germination (Peters et al., 1993; Hamal et al., 2001), whereas shallow tillage increased seedling emergence and subsequent seedbank decline (Anderson, 1998). Long-term studies conducted in the UK showed that ploughing was the most effective method of control. In the absence of ploughing, B. sterilis built up in subsequent crops, and dramatically increased in the third year of cropping (Turley et al., 1996).
Chemical Control
Under field conditions, good control of B. sterilis was obtained by applying fluazifop-P (Milkulka, 1987; Boatman, 1993). Removal of competition by B. sterilis on wheat was obtained by sulfosulfuron applications in the UK, Denmark and Germany (Gibson and Kerchove, 1999). Best control was also achieved by autumn application of tri-allate, isoproturon, metoxuron and metoxuron + simazine (Orson , 1981; Pollard and Richardson, 1981; Rule, 1989; Jarvis, 1982). However, metoxuron applied in April was much less effective (Pollard and Richardson, 1981). Good to excellent control of B. sterilis was obtained using terbutryn or methabenzthiazuron (Milkulka, 1987). The fungicide tridemorph has been trialled as a selective herbicide for the control of Bromus sterilis in barley (Watt, 1983).
References
Top of pageAli SI; Jafri SMH; El Gadi A, 1989. Flora of Libya. Tripoli, Libya: Al Faateh University.
Anon, 2000. Codex Plantarum Vascularium Balearicum. Familia: POACEAE. (R. Br.) Barnh. Bulletin Torrey Botanical Club, 22:7.
Clapham AR; Tutin TG; Warburg EF; eds, 1952. Flora of the British Isles. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Cooper J; Moerkerk M, 2000. Bromus diandrus, Bromus rigidus. Weed ID/ Management. Australia. http://weedman.horsham.net.au/weeds/bromus_spp/bromus.htm.
Forde MB; Edgar E, 1995. Checklist of pooid grasses naturalised in New Zealand. 3. Tribes Bromeae ad Brachypodieae. New Zealand Journal of Botany 33:35-42.
Groza G, 1986. Analysis of the cormoflora in the Misid valley (Padurea Craiului mountains, Bihor province). Contributii Botanice, Universitatea Cluj Napoca, Gradina Botanica, 115-121.
Guinochet M; Vilmorin R de, 1984. Flore de France, Vols 1-5. Paris, France: Editions du CNRS.
Hoechst Schering AgrEvo, 1995. Weeds in Sugar Beet. Germany.
Hubbard CE, 1959. Grasses. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin Books.
INRA, 2001. HYPPA. Hypermedia for Plant Protection - Weeds. Dijon, France: Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique. http://www.dijon.inra.fr/malherbo/hyppa/hyppa-a/hyppa_a.htm.
Jahandiez E; Maire R, 1931. Catalogue des Plantes du Maroc. Algiers, Morocco: Minerva.
Jarvis RH, 1982. Brome grass control. Annual Review, Boxworth Experimental Husbandry Farm 1982, 5-7
Kosina R; Frey L, 1996. Embryo morphology in the genus Bromus (Poaceae). Proceedings of the first all-Polish workshop meeting devoted to grasses. First all-Polish scientific meeting "Taxonomy, karyology and distribution of grasses in Poland", Krakow, Poland, 15 November 1994. Fragmenta Floristica et Geobotanica, 41(2):563-576.
Lutman PJW; Peters NCB; Berry K; Hull RI; Perry NH; Wright KJ, 2003. The persistence of seeds of two populations of six arable weeds. Aspects of Applied Biology, 69:195-202.
Maire R, 1955. Flore de l’Afrique du Nord. Volume III, Encyclopédie Biologique, Lechevalier éditeur, Paris VI.
Mehner S; Manurung B; Gruntzig M; Habekuss A; Witsack W; Fuchs E, 2003. Investigations into the ecology of the Wheat dwarf virus (WDV) in Saxony-Anhalt, Germany. Zeitschrift für Pflanzenkrankheiten und Pflanzenschutz, 110(4):313-323.
Popov VI, 1994. On the new and rare adventive plant species of the St Petersburg district. Botanicheskii Zhurnal, 79(7):124-128.
Queiros M, 1981. Numeros cromossomicos para a flora portuguesa. Boletim da Sociedade Broteriana, 54:47-64.
Quezél P; Santa S, 1963. Nouvelle Flore de l'Algerie. Éditions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris, France.
Robinson BL; Fernald ML, 1908. Gray’s New Manual of Botany, seventh edition. A Handbook of the Flowering Plants and Ferns of the Central and Northeastern United States and adjacent Canada. USA: American Book Company.
Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh, 2004. Flora Europaea Database. Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh, UK. http://rbg-web2.rbge.org.uk/FE/fe.html.
Sergei L; Yavorska M; Yavorska OG; Kholodny MG, 2002. The Nonnative Flora of the Kiev (Kyiv) Urban Area, Ukraine: A Checklist and Brief Analysis. Kiev, Ukaraine: Institute of Botany, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine.
Stace C, 1991. New Flora of the British Isles. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Taleb A, 1997. Le brome: monographie. Revue de l’AMM, 1(1):2-6.
Tutin TG; Heywood VH; Burges NA; et al, 1980. Flora Europaea. Vol. 5: Alismataceae to Orchidaceae (Monocotyledones) Cambridge, UK: University Press.
USDA-ARS, 2004. 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, 2004. The PLANTS Database, Version 3.5. Baton Rouge, USA: National Plant Data Center. http://plants.usda.gov.
Valdes B; Rejdali M; Achhal-El kadmiri A; Jury SL; Montserrat JM, 2002. Checklist of Vascular Plants of N Morocco. Vol. 2. Madrid, Spain: Editions CSIC.
Valdes B; Talavera S; Fernadez-Galiano E, 1987. Flora Vascular de Andalucia Occidental, Vol. 3. Barcelona, Spain.
Weiller CM; Henwood MJ; Lenz J; Watson L, 1995. Pooideae (Poaceae) in Australia - Descriptions and Illustrations. Biodiversity and Biological Collections Web Server. http://biodiversity.uno.edu/delta/pooid/www/descr098.htm.
Distribution References
Ali SI, Jafri SMH, El Gadi A, 1989. Flora of Libya., Tripoli, Libya: Al Faateh University.
CABI, Undated. Compendium record. Wallingford, UK: CABI
CABI, Undated a. CABI Compendium: Status inferred from regional distribution. Wallingford, UK: CABI
CABI, Undated b. CABI Compendium: Status as determined by CABI editor. Wallingford, UK: CABI
Guinochet M, Vilmorin R de, 1984. (Flore de France)., 1-5 Paris, France: Editions du CNRS.
Jahandiez E, Maire R, 1931. Catalogue des plantes du Maroc. Algiers, Morocco: Minerva.
Kosina R, Frey L, 1996. Embryo morphology in the genus Bromus (Poaceae). In: Fragmenta Floristica et Geobotanica [Proceedings of the first all-Polish workshop meeting devoted to grasses. First all-Polish scientific meeting "Taxonomy, karyology and distribution of grasses in Poland", Krakow, Poland, 15 November 1994], 41 (2) 563-576.
Maire R, 1955. Flore de l'Afrique du Nord. Volume III. Paris, France: Lechevalier éditeur.
Quezél P, Santa S, 1963. (Nouvelle Flore de l'Algerie)., Paris, France: Éditions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.
Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh, 2004. Flora Europaea Database., Edinburgh, UK: Royal Botanic Garden. http://rbg-web2.rbge.org.uk/FE/fe.html
Sergei L, Yavorska M, Yavorska OG, Kholodny MG, 2002. The Nonnative Flora of the Kiev (Kyiv) Urban Area, Ukraine: A Checklist and Brief Analysis., Kiev, Ukaraine: Institute of Botany, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine.
Tutin TG, Heywood VH, Burges NA, 1980. Flora Europaea. Vol. 5: Alismataceae to Orchidaceae (Monocotyledones)., Cambridge, UK: University Press.
USDA-ARS, 2004. Germplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN). Online Database. Beltsville, Maryland, USA: National Germplasm Resources Laboratory. https://npgsweb.ars-grin.gov/gringlobal/taxon/taxonomysimple.aspx
USDA-NRCS, 2004. The PLANTS Database. Greensboro, North Carolina, USA: National Plant Data Team. https://plants.sc.egov.usda.gov
Valdes B, Rejdali M, Achhal-El kadmiri A, Jury SL, Montserrat JM, 2002. Checklist of Vascular Plants of N Morocco., 2 Madrid, Spain: Editions CSIC.
Valdes B, Talavera S, Fernadez-Galiano E, 1987. (Flora Vascular de Andalucia Occidental)., 3 Barcelona, Spain:
Distribution Maps
Top of pageSelect a dataset
Map Legends
-
CABI Summary Records
Map Filters
Unsupported Web Browser:
One or more of the features that are needed to show you the maps functionality are not available in the web browser that you are using.
Please consider upgrading your browser to the latest version or installing a new browser.
More information about modern web browsers can be found at http://browsehappy.com/