Cyperus iria (rice flatsedge)
Index
- Pictures
- Identity
- Taxonomic Tree
- Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
- Description
- Distribution
- Distribution Table
- Risk of Introduction
- Habitat
- Hosts/Species Affected
- Host Plants and Other Plants Affected
- Growth Stages
- Biology and Ecology
- Notes on Natural Enemies
- Impact
- Uses List
- Detection and Inspection
- 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
- Cyperus iria L. (1753)
Preferred Common Name
- rice flatsedge
Other Scientific Names
- Chlorocyperus iria (L.) Rikli (1895)
International Common Names
- English: grasshopper's cyperus
Local Common Names
- Bangladesh: barachucha
- Brazil: tiririca-do-brejo
- Cambodia: kak kangkep
- India: morphula
- Indonesia: dekeng wangin; djekeng; nyur-nyuran; rumput jekeng kunyit; umbung
- Japan: kogomegeyatsuri
- Korea, DPR: chambang-donsani
- Malaysia: rumput menderong
- Nepal: chow; guchen; mothey; ochumani
- Pakistan: khana
- Philippines: alinang; ballayang; payong-payong; sirau-sirau; sudsud; taga-taga
- Thailand: kok huadaeng; yaa rangkaa khaao
- USA: rice flatsedge
EPPO code
- CYPIR (Cyperus iria)
Taxonomic Tree
Top of page- Domain: Eukaryota
- Kingdom: Plantae
- Phylum: Spermatophyta
- Subphylum: Angiospermae
- Class: Monocotyledonae
- Order: Cyperales
- Family: Cyperaceae
- Genus: Cyperus
- Species: Cyperus iria
Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
Top of pageC. iria was first described by Linnaeus (1753). It originated in the Old World tropics and subtropics and is one of approximately 650 species in the genus Cyperus (Haines and Lye, 1983). Courtoisia, Kyllinga, Mariscus and Pycreus are included in the genus Cyperus (Haines and Lye, 1983) though they are often cited as genera in their own right. Under the classification of Lye (1981), C. iria is in the subgenus Cyperus which contains about 300 species, including the common and important sedge weeds C. rotundus and C. esculentus.
Description
Top of pageThe inflorescence is simple or compound, usually open, 1-20 cm long and 1-20 cm wide, with groups of spikes which are either sessile or on 0.5-15.0 cm long peduncles (rays). Inflorescence bracts (involucre) are leafy, three to five (occasionally seven), the lower one longer than the inflorescence, 5-30 cm long, 1-6 mm wide. The spikes are sessile or almost so, elongate, and rather dense. Spikelets are erect-spreading, crowded, 6-24-flowered, 2-13 mm long, 1.5-2.0 mm wide, golden to yellowish-green.
Glumes are broad-ovate, 1.0-1.6 mm long, golden-brown. There are two or three stamens. The style is 3-branched. The fruit is a small achene (nutlet), 1.0-1.5 mm long, 0.6-0.7 mm wide, obovate, triangular in cross section, dark-brown to almost black; the surface is almost smooth. These descriptions are based on Haines and Lye (1983) and Holm et al. (1977).
Distribution
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: 25 Feb 2021Continent/Country/Region | Distribution | Last Reported | Origin | First Reported | Invasive | Reference | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Africa |
|||||||
Burkina Faso | Present | ||||||
Eswatini | Present | ||||||
Gambia | Present | ||||||
Ghana | Present | ||||||
Kenya | Present | ||||||
Mali | Present | ||||||
Nigeria | Present | ||||||
Senegal | Present | ||||||
Tanzania | Present | ||||||
Uganda | Present | ||||||
Asia |
|||||||
Afghanistan | Present | ||||||
Bangladesh | Present | ||||||
Bhutan | Present | ||||||
Brunei | Present | ||||||
Cambodia | Present | ||||||
China | Present | Original citation: Wang, 1990 | |||||
-Anhui | Present | ||||||
-Guangdong | Present | Original citation: Wang, 1990 | |||||
-Hebei | Present | Original citation: Wang, 1990 | |||||
-Jiangsu | Present | ||||||
-Shaanxi | Present | Original citation: Wang, 1990 | |||||
-Xinjiang | Present | Original citation: Wang, 1990 | |||||
-Yunnan | Present | Original citation: Wang, 1990 | |||||
Hong Kong | Present | ||||||
India | Present | Present based on regional distribution. | |||||
-Andaman and Nicobar Islands | Present | ||||||
-Andhra Pradesh | Present | ||||||
-Assam | Present | ||||||
-Haryana | Present | Original citation: Malik et al. (1981) | |||||
-Himachal Pradesh | Present | ||||||
-Jammu and Kashmir | Present | ||||||
-Karnataka | Present, Widespread | ||||||
-Kerala | Present | ||||||
-Madhya Pradesh | Present | ||||||
-Manipur | Present | ||||||
-Meghalaya | Present | ||||||
-Odisha | Present | ||||||
-Punjab | Present | Original citation: Sidhu et al. (1982) | |||||
-Tamil Nadu | Present | ||||||
-Uttar Pradesh | Present | ||||||
-West Bengal | Present | ||||||
Indonesia | Present | Original citation: Kostermans et al., 1987 | |||||
Japan | Present, Widespread | ||||||
-Honshu | Present | ||||||
-Kyushu | Present | ||||||
-Ryukyu Islands | Present | ||||||
-Shikoku | Present | ||||||
Laos | Present | ||||||
Malaysia | Present | ||||||
-Peninsular Malaysia | Present | ||||||
Myanmar | Present | ||||||
Nepal | Present | ||||||
Pakistan | Present | ||||||
Philippines | Present, Widespread | ||||||
Singapore | Present | ||||||
South Korea | Present | ||||||
Sri Lanka | Present | ||||||
Taiwan | Present | ||||||
Thailand | Present | ||||||
Vietnam | Present | ||||||
North America |
|||||||
Cuba | Present | Original citation: Wazniak, 1976 | |||||
Dominican Republic | Present | ||||||
Puerto Rico | Present | ||||||
Trinidad and Tobago | Present | ||||||
United States | Present | ||||||
-Louisiana | Present | Original citation: Baker and Shrefler (1983) | |||||
-Mississippi | Present | ||||||
Oceania |
|||||||
Australia | Present | ||||||
-Queensland | Present | ||||||
Fiji | Present | ||||||
New Zealand | Present | ||||||
South America |
|||||||
Brazil | Present | ||||||
-Amazonas | Present | ||||||
-Bahia | Present | ||||||
-Espirito Santo | Present | ||||||
-Goias | Present | ||||||
-Maranhao | Present | ||||||
-Mato Grosso do Sul | Present | ||||||
-Minas Gerais | Present | ||||||
-Para | Present | ||||||
-Parana | Present | ||||||
-Piaui | Present | ||||||
-Rio de Janeiro | Present | ||||||
-Rondonia | Present | ||||||
-Santa Catarina | Present | ||||||
-Sao Paulo | Present | ||||||
Colombia | Present | Original citation: Häfliger et al. (1982) | |||||
Ecuador | Present | ||||||
Venezuela | Present | Original citation: Häfliger et al. (1982) |
Habitat
Top of pageHosts/Species Affected
Top of pageHost Plants and Other Plants Affected
Top of pagePlant name | Family | Context | References |
---|---|---|---|
Oryza sativa (rice) | Poaceae | Main |
Biology and Ecology
Top of pageChromosome numbers vary in C. iria (n=56, 64) and intraspecific variation in genotype and phenotype occurs (Bir et al., 1992). Natural hybridization can occur between C. iria and C. microiria (Chozin and Yasuda, 1991) to produce progeny of new-type plants of similar dormancy to the parents, showing clear segregation in spikelet characteristics and floret morphology. C. iria has Kranz-type leaf anatomy and, like C. rotundus, has two layers of bundle sheath cells (Lin et al., 1982). This is indicative of C4 photosynthesis which is generally not a characteristic of weeds growing in wet habitats.
Notes on Natural Enemies
Top of pageImpact
Top of page
C. iria is rated by Holm et al. (1977) as one of the three most important weeds of rice in Sri Lanka, India and the Philippines. It is a principal weed in Indonesia and Japan and a common weed in Fiji, Thailand and the USA. It is principally a weed of rice around the world but Holm et al. (1977) also noted its occurrence in bananas, cassava, groundnuts, maize, pastures, pineapples, sweet potatoes, tea and vegetables. It is difficult to separate the competitive effects of C. iria from those of other components of the weed flora but the weed caused 40% yield reductions in rice (Ampong-Nyarko and DeDatta, 1991).
The costs of controlling C. iria, whether manual, mechanical or chemical, are significant. C. iria is a host for several pests of rice. In Cuba, it is a host of the rice nematodes Pratylenchus zeae and Hirschmanniella spinicaudata (Fernandez and Ortega, 1982). Criconemella onoensis is a rice nematode which uses C. iria as a host in the southern USA. Complete control of the weed is necessary before nematicides (e.g. fensulfothion) can be effective in increasing rice yields (Hollis, 1972).
Arthropod rice pests which use C. iria as a host plant include Scotinophara latiuscula (Barrion and Litsinger, 1987), Nisia atrovenosa (Cruz and Dela-Cruz, 1986), Lissorhoptrus brevirostris (Meneses-Carbonell and Carbonell, 1985), Nymphula depunctalis (Pillai and Nair, 1979), Baliothrips biformis and B. holorphnus (Ananthakrishnan and Kandasamy, 1977).
Pathogens of rice that have been reported on C. iria include Pyricularia oryzae [Magnaporthe grisea] (Singh and Singh, 1988), Rhizoctonia solani (Gokulapalan and Nair, 1983) and Acrocylindrium oryzae [Sarocladium oryzae] (Balakrishnan and Nair, 1981). Also the nematode Pratylenchus zeae (Waterhouse, 1994).
Detection and Inspection
Top of pageSimilarities to Other Species/Conditions
Top of pageA very experienced eye is required to distinguish the seeds of C. iria from those of other Cyperus species.
Prevention 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 ControlThe principles of good weed management in rice, such as those advocated by Ampong-Nyarko and DeDatta (1992), are applicable to C. iria in rice and other crops. These include the need to prepare clean seedbeds, prevent seed production, establish a healthy and vigorous crop and avoid contamination of crop seed at harvest. C. iria is susceptible to many of the usual methods of weed control in rice and other crops. These include hand-pulling, manual and mechanical tillage and trampling in puddled fields. Flooding has a major suppressive effect during the early growth stages of C. iria (Civico and Moody, 1979) but established plants are difficult to control in this way and can tolerate 90 cm of floodwater for four days (Singh et al., 1983).
Biological Control
At present there are no biological control agents for C. iria but Phoma cyperi sp. nov., a pathogen of C. iria, may have some potential.
Chemical Control
A number of herbicides are approved for use in rice but their use is dictated by the conditions used to grow the crop, e.g. whether the crop is irrigated, rainfed lowland, upland and deepwater. C. iria is susceptible to the herbicides commonly used in rice: bensulfuron, bentazone, bifenox + 2,4-D, butachlor, butralin, 2,4-D, MCPA, molinate, oxadiazon, pendimethalin, piperophos + dimethametryn, pretilachlor + antidote (e.g. fenclorim), propanil, thiobencarb, thiobencarb + 2,4-D. Cinmethylin and fluorodifen were also active against C. iria (Ampong-Nyarko and DeDatta, 1991). Paraquat and glyphosate can both be used as non-selective, post-emergence herbicides against C. iria, for example in land preparation using zero-tillage.
Integrated Weed Management
Integrated weed management is recommended for cost-effective weed control; combinations of treatments such as: planting clean seed into a weed-free seedbed; sowing crop at optimum spacing; good water control; applying appropriate herbicides or cultivations; and harvesting crop grain which is not contaminated by weeds may be combined for an effective integrated control strategy.
References
Top of pageAmpong-Nyarko K; DeDatta SK, 1991. A Handbook for Weed Control in Rice. Manila, Philippines: International Rice Research Institute.
Anon, 1968. Weeds found in Cultivated land in Taiwan, Volumes 1 & 2. Taipei, Taiwan: College of Agriculture, National Taiwan University.
Barnes DE; Chan LG, 1990. Common Weeds of Malaysia and their Control. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Ancom Berhad Persiaran Selangor.
Clayton WD, 1972. Gramineae. In: Hutchinson J, Dalziel JM, Hepper FN, 1972. Flora of West Tropical Africa. Vol 3. Part 2. London, UK: Crown Agents, 349-512.
Cruz CG; Dela-Cruz CG, 1986. Host plant range of the planthopper Nisia atrovenosa. International Rice Research Newsletter, 11(2):26-27.
Groves RH, 1991. Weeds of tropical Australia. Tropical grassy weeds., 189-196; 9 ref.
Haines RW; Lye KA, 1983. The Sedges and Rushes of East Africa. Nairobi, Kenya: East African Natural History Society.
Hollis JP, 1972. Nematicide-weed interaction in rice fields. Plant Disease Reporter, 56(5):420-424.
HSfliger E; Kühn U; HSmet-Ahti L; Cook CDK; Faden R; Speta F, 1982. Monocot Weeds 3. Basle, Switzerland: Documenta Ciba-Geigy.
Kaul MK, 1986. Weed Flora of Kashmir Valley. Jodhpur, India: Scientific Publishers, 422 pp.
Linnaeus C, 1753. Species plantarum vol. I. Holmiae.
Lye KA, 1981. Studies in African Cyperaceae 18. Two new subgenera of Cyperus. Nordic Journal of Botany, 1:57-61.
Meneses-Carbonell R; Carbonell RM, 1985. Rice water weevil host plants in Cuba. International Rice Research Newsletter, 10(1):21-22.
Minh Si H, 1969. Weeds in South Vietnam. Saigon, Vietnam: Agricultural Research Institute, Ministry of Land Reform and Development of Agriculture and Fisheries.
Moody K; Munroe CE; Lubigan RT; Paller EC Jr, 1984. Major Weeds of the Philippines. Los Baños, Philippines: Weed Science Society of the Philippines, University of the Philippines at Los Baños.
Mukhopadhyay SK, 1982. Noxious aquatic vegetation of West Bengal. Abstracts of papers, Annual Conference of Indian Society of Weed Science, December 27-30, 1982. Haryana, India: Indian Society of Weed Science.
Napper DM, 1966. Cyperaceae of East Africa - IV. Cyperus L. Journal of the East African Natural History Society, 26(1):1-24.
Noda K; Teerawatsakul M; Prakongvongs C; Chaiwiratnukul L, 1985. Major Weeds in Thailand. Bangkok, Thailand: Department of Agriculture.
Park JK; Kim DS, 1971. Distribution of weeds and their competition with rice in Korea. Proceedings of the Asian-Pacific Weed Science Society Conference, 3.
Parker C, 1992. Weeds of Bhutan. Weeds of Bhutan., vi + 236 pp.
Ranjit JD; Bhattarai AN, 1988. Crop Weeds and their Control in Nepal. Kathmandu, Nepal: Winrock International/USAID.
Singh RK; Singh RP, 1985. Effect of water management practices on relative composition of weed flora in rice. Abstracts of papers, Annual Conference of Indian Society of Weed Science.
Terry PJ, 1981. Weeds and their control in the Gambia. Tropical Pest Management, 27(1):44-52.
Wang Z; Xin M; Ma D, 1990. Farmland Weeds in China. Agricultural Publishing House, 506 pp.
Waterhouse DF, 1994. Biological Control of Weeds: Southeast Asian Prospects. Canberra, Australia: ACIAR Monograph No 26.
Distribution References
Anon, 1968. Weeds found in Cultivated land in Taiwan., 1 & 2 Taipei, Taiwan: College of Agriculture, National Taiwan University.
Barnes DE, Chan LG, 1990. Common Weeds of Malaysia and their Control., Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Ancom Berhad Persiaran Selangor.
CABI, Undated. Compendium record. Wallingford, UK: CABI
CABI, Undated a. CABI Compendium: Status inferred from regional distribution. Wallingford, UK: CABI
Clayton WD, 1972. Gramineae. In: Flora of West Tropical Africa, 3 (2) [ed. by Hutchinson J, Dalziel JM, Hepper FN]. London, UK: Crown Agents. 349-512.
Haines RW, Lye KA, 1983. The Sedges and Rushes of East Africa., Nairobi, Kenya: East African Natural History Society.
Kaul M K, 1986. Weed flora of Kashmir Valley. Jodhpur, India: Scientific Publishers. 422pp.
Minh Si H, 1969. Weeds in South Vietnam., Saigon, Vietnam: Agricultural Research Institute, Ministry of Land Reform and Development of Agriculture and Fisheries.
Moody K, Munroe CE, Lubigan RT, Paller EC Jr, 1984. Major Weeds of the Philippines., Los Baños, Philippines: Weed Science Society of the Philippines, University of the Philippines at Los Baños.
Mukhopadhyay SK, 1982. Noxious aquatic vegetation of West Bengal. In: Abstracts of papers, Annual Conference of Indian Society of Weed Science, December 27-30, 1982, Haryana, India: Indian Society of Weed Science.
Noda K, Teerawatsakul M, Prakongvongs C, Chaiwiratnukul L, 1985. Major Weeds in Thailand., Bangkok, Thailand: Department of Agriculture.
Park JK, Kim DS, 1971. Distribution of weeds and their competition with rice in Korea. [Proceedings of the Asian-Pacific Weed Science Society Conference], 3
Parker C, 1992. Weeds of Bhutan. Thimphu, Bhutan: National Plant Protection Centre. vi + 236 pp.
Ranjit JD, Bhattarai AN, 1988. Crop Weeds and their Control in Nepal., Kathmandu, Nepal: Winrock International/USAID.
Singh RK, Singh RP, 1985. Effect of water management practices on relative composition of weed flora in rice. In: Abstracts of papers, Annual Conference of Indian Society of Weed Science,
Terry P J, 1981. Weeds and their control in the Gambia. Tropical Pest Management. 27 (1), 44-52.
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/