Invasive Species Compendium

Detailed coverage of invasive species threatening livelihoods and the environment worldwide

Datasheet

Ludwigia peploides
(water primrose)

Toolbox

Datasheet

Ludwigia peploides (water primrose)

Summary

  • Last modified
  • 06 November 2018
  • Datasheet Type(s)
  • Invasive Species
  • Preferred Scientific Name
  • Ludwigia peploides
  • Preferred Common Name
  • water primrose
  • Taxonomic Tree
  • Domain: Eukaryota
  •   Kingdom: Plantae
  •     Phylum: Spermatophyta
  •       Subphylum: Angiospermae
  •         Class: Dicotyledonae
  • Summary of Invasiveness
  • L. peploides is a productive emergent aquatic perennial native to South and Central America, parts of the USA, and likely Australia (

  • There are no pictures available for this datasheet

    If you can supply pictures for this datasheet please contact:

    Compendia
    CAB International
    Wallingford
    Oxfordshire
    OX10 8DE
    UK
    compend@cabi.org
  • Distribution map More information

Don't need the entire report?

Generate a print friendly version containing only the sections you need.

Generate report

Pictures

Top of page
PictureTitleCaptionCopyright

Identity

Top of page

Preferred Scientific Name

  • Ludwigia peploides (Kunth.) P.H. Raven, 1963

Preferred Common Name

  • water primrose

Other Scientific Names

  • Jussiaea diffusa auct non Forssk
  • Jussiaea gomezii Ram. Goyena, 1909
  • Jussiaea patibilcensis Kunth., 1823
  • Jussiaea peploides Kunth., 1823
  • Jussiaea polygonoides Kunth., 1823
  • Jussiaea repens var. peploides (Kunth.) Griseb., 1866
  • Ludwigia adscendens var. peploides (Kunth.) H. Hara, 1953
  • Ludwigia clavellina var. peploides (Kunth.) H. Hara

International Common Names

  • English: California water primrose; creeping water primrose; creeping water primrose; floating primrose; floating primrose willow; floating primrose willow; floating water primrose; marsh purslane
  • Spanish: berro de clavo; berro de clavo; clavo de playa; clavo de playa; duraznillo de agua; enramada de las taraias; flor de arenal; flor de arenal; flor de laguna; onagraria
  • French: Jussie d'Orx

Local Common Names

  • Germany: Flutende Heusenkraut

EPPO code

  • LUDPE (Ludwigia peploides)

Summary of Invasiveness

Top of page

L. peploides is a productive emergent aquatic perennial native to South and Central America, parts of the USA, and likely Australia (USDA-ARS, 1997). It was introduced in France in 1830 and has become one of the most damaging invasive plants in that country (Dandelot et al., 2008). It is often sold as an ornamental, which likely explains its introduction to Europe. It has been more recently introduced to areas beyond its native range in the USA, where it is often considered a noxious weed (INVADERS, 2009; Peconic Estuary Program, 2009). L. peploides is adaptable, and tolerates a wide variety of habitats where it can transform ecosystems both physically and chemically. It sometimes grows in nearly impenetrable mats; it can displace native flora and interfere with flood control and drainage systems, clog waterways and impact navigation and recreation (Peconic Estuary Program, 2009). The plant also has allelopathic activity that can lead to dissolved oxygen crashes, the accumulation of sulphide and phosphate, ‘dystrophic crises’ and intoxicated ecosystems (Dandelot et al., 2005).

 

Taxonomic Tree

Top of page
  • Domain: Eukaryota
  •     Kingdom: Plantae
  •         Phylum: Spermatophyta
  •             Subphylum: Angiospermae
  •                 Class: Dicotyledonae
  •                     Order: Myrtales
  •                         Family: Onagraceae
  •                             Genus: Ludwigia
  •                                 Species: Ludwigia peploides

Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature

Top of page

Ludwigia, the only genus in the Jussiaeeae tribe, is both very large and very diverse, with around 82 species in 23 sections (Zardini et al., 1991). L. peploides belongs to sect. Oligospermum, whose members are morphological very closely related. Four subspecies have been recorded: Ludwigia peploides subsp. glabrescens (Kuntze) Raven, Ludwigia peploides subsp. montevidensis (Sprengel) Raven, Ludwigia peploides (Kunth.) Raven subsp. peploides, and Ludwigia peploides subsp. stipulacea (Ohwi) Raven (USDA-ARS, 1997; Jiarui et al., 2007).

 

Description

Top of page

L. peploides is an emergent and floating herbaceous perennial macrophyte. It has glabrous or pubescent stems 1-30 dm that can creep horizontally as well as grow vertically. Early growth resembles a rosette of rounded leaves growing on the water’s surface. Alternate leaves are polymorphic and less than 10 cm long and oblong to round, often lanceolate at flowering. The species exhibits root dimorphism and has adventitious roots that form at nodes and ensure oxygen uptake. Flowers are 5-merous (pentamerous), grow from leaf axils, are bright yellow, and can be from 7 to 24 mm long. Fruit is in a five-angled reflexed capsule, about 3 cm long that contains 40-50 seeds 1.0-1.5 mm long, embedded in the inner fruit wall (EPPO, 2004; The Jepson Online Interchange, 2009).

 

Plant Type

Top of page Aquatic
Herbaceous
Perennial
Seed propagated
Vegetatively propagated

Distribution

Top of page

L. peploides is native to South and Central America, parts of the USA, as well as perhaps Australia (McGregor et al., 1996; USDA-ARS, 1997). A number of sources indicate that L. peploides is ‘likely’ to be native to Australia, but there is some disagreement regarding its nativity to Australia (CEH, 2007). Recent reports of the plant from New York and Washington, USA indicate that its range may be expanding in the USA (Peconic Estuary Program, 2009; Washington State Department of Ecology, 1994-2009; The Jepson Online Interchange, 2009). L. peploides subsp. peploides and glabrescens are native to the USA, whereas the subspecies montevidensis is widely recognized as having been introduced (Estes and Thorp, 1974). L. peploides is also reported as having been introduced to Belgium, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, Switzerland, the UK, Portugal and Cuba (CEH, 2007).

 

Distribution Table

Top of page

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.

Continent/Country/RegionDistributionLast ReportedOriginFirst ReportedInvasiveReferenceNotes

Asia

CambodiaPresentGBIF, 2009
IndonesiaPresentPresent based on regional distribution.
-JavaPresentGBIF, 2009
JapanPresentPresent based on regional distribution.
-ShikokuPresentIntroducedZardini et al., 1991
MalaysiaPresentGBIF, 2009
TaiwanPresentGBIF, 2009
ThailandPresentGBIF, 2009
TurkeyPresentEPPO, 2014

Africa

Burkina FasoPresentGBIF, 2009
MadagascarPresentGBIF, 2009
MaliPresentGBIF, 2009

North America

MexicoPresentNativeZardini et al., 1991; EPPO, 2014
USARestricted distributionEPPO, 2014
-AlabamaPresentNativeZardini et al., 1991; EPPO, 2014
-ArizonaPresentEPPO, 2014
-ArkansasPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014
-CaliforniaWidespreadNativeThe Jepson Online Interchange, 2009; EPPO, 2014
-DelawarePresentGBIF, 2009; EPPO, 2014
-District of ColumbiaPresentGBIF, 2009
-FloridaPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014
-GeorgiaPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014
-IllinoisPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014
-IndianaPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014
-IowaPresentGBIF, 2009
-KansasPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014
-KentuckyPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014
-LouisianaPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014
-MarylandPresentEPPO, 2014
-MississippiPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014
-MissouriPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014
-NebraskaPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014
-New JerseyPresentGBIF, 2009; EPPO, 2014
-New MexicoPresentGBIF, 2009; EPPO, 2014
-New YorkPresent, few occurrencesIntroduced Invasive Peconic Estuary Program, 2009; EPPO, 2014
-North CarolinaPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014
-OhioPresentGBIF, 2009; EPPO, 2014
-OklahomaPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014
-OregonPresentGBIF, 2009; EPPO, 2014
-PennsylvaniaPresentGBIF, 2009; EPPO, 2014
-South CarolinaPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014
-TennesseePresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014
-TexasPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014
-VirginiaPresentGBIF, 2009; EPPO, 2014
-WashingtonPresent, few occurrencesIntroduced Invasive Washington State Department of Ecology, 1994-2009
-West VirginiaPresentGBIF, 2009; EPPO, 2014
-WisconsinPresentEPPO, 2014

Central America and Caribbean

BelizePresentEPPO, 2014
Costa RicaPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014
CubaPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014
Dominican RepublicPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014
El SalvadorPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997
GuatemalaPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997
HaitiPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997
HondurasPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014
JamaicaPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014
NicaraguaPresentNativeZardini et al., 1991; EPPO, 2014
PanamaPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997
Puerto RicoPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014

South America

ArgentinaPresentNativeZardini et al., 1991; EPPO, 2014
BoliviaPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014
BrazilPresentPresent based on regional distribution.
-BahiaPresentNativeZardini et al., 1991
-Mato GrossoPresentGBIF, 2009
-Mato Grosso do SulPresentGBIF, 2009
-ParanaPresentGBIF, 2009
-Rio de JaneiroPresentGBIF, 2009
-Rio Grande do SulPresentGBIF, 2009
-Santa CatarinaPresentNativeZardini et al., 1991
ChilePresentNativeZardini et al., 1991; EPPO, 2014
ColombiaPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014
EcuadorPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014
ParaguayPresentNativeZardini et al., 1991; EPPO, 2014
PeruPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014
UruguayPresentNativeZardini et al., 1991
VenezuelaPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997; EPPO, 2014

Europe

BelgiumPresentIntroducedCEH, 2007; EPPO, 2014
FranceWidespreadIntroduced Invasive Dandelot et al., 2005; EPPO, 2014
-CorsicaTransient: actionable, under eradicationEPPO, 2014
GermanyPresentEPPO, 2014
GreecePresentEPPO, 2014
ItalyPresentIntroducedCEH, 2007; EPPO, 2014
NetherlandsRestricted distributionIntroducedNPPO of the Netherlands, 2013; CEH, 2007; EPPO, 2014
PortugalPresentIntroducedCEH, 2007
SpainPresentIntroducedCEH, 2007; EPPO, 2014
SwitzerlandPresentIntroducedCEH, 2007
UKLocalisedIntroduced Invasive CEH, 2007; EPPO, 2014

Oceania

AustraliaPresentEPPO, 2014
-Australian Northern TerritoryPresentGBIF, 2009
-New South WalesPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997
-QueenslandPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997
-South AustraliaPresentGBIF, 2009
-VictoriaPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997
New ZealandPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 1997

History of Introduction and Spread

Top of page

L. peploides was introduced from the Americas to Montpellier in France in the 1830s, likely as a result of ornamental plantings. It has since become one of the most widespread and detrimental aquatic invasive plants in that country (Ruaux et al., 2009). L. peploides was recently introduced beyond its native range in King County in Washington State, USA (Washington State Department of Ecology, 1994-2009). It was first observed in New York, USA in 2003 in the Peconic River (Peconic Estuary Program, 2009).

Introductions

Top of page
Introduced toIntroduced fromYearReasonIntroduced byEstablished in wild throughReferencesNotes
Natural reproductionContinuous restocking
Australia   No No CEH (2007)
Belgium   No No CEH (2007)
California   Yes No The Jepson Online Interchange (2009)
Cuba   No No CEH (2007)
France 1830 Aquaculture (pathway cause) Yes No Dandelot et al. (2008)
Italy   No No CEH (2007)
Netherlands   No No CEH (2007)
New York 2003 No No Peconic Estuary Program (2009)
Portugal   No No CEH (2007)
Spain   No No CEH (2007)
Switzerland   No No CEH (2007)
UK   No No CEH (2007)
Washington   Aquaculture (pathway cause) No No Washington State Department of Ecology (1994-2009)

Risk of Introduction

Top of page

It is most likely that escape from aquaculture explains most of the adventive introductions; this plant is very commonly sold as an ornamental. Despite its very rapid growth, and invasive nature, it is still marketed and sold as an ornamental, so the risk of introduction, whether accidental or intentional, is still high. Its ability to spread rapidly through vegetative means, coupled with a high degree of phenotypic plasticity (Ruaux et al., 2009), also means that the plant is quite likely to establish upon release. The plant is listed as a noxious weed in Washington State (USA), South Africa, and was added to the EPPO Alert List in 2004.

 

Habitat

Top of page

L. peploides can be found in wetlands, on shorelines, in slow-flowing rivers, ponds, rice fields, marshes and in other freshwater environments (USACE-ERDC, 2009). It has proven to be relatively frost-tolerant in the UK (CEH, 2007). The plant grows in water up to 3 m deep and can reach up to 80 cm above the surface of the water (EPPO, 2004); it is also tolerant of flooding (CEH, 2007).

Habitat List

Top of page
CategorySub-CategoryHabitatPresenceStatus
Terrestrial
 
Terrestrial ‑ Natural / Semi-naturalWetlands Present, no further details Harmful (pest or invasive)
Freshwater
 
Irrigation channels Present, no further details Harmful (pest or invasive)
Lakes Present, no further details Harmful (pest or invasive)
Reservoirs Present, no further details Harmful (pest or invasive)
Rivers / streams Present, no further details Harmful (pest or invasive)
Ponds Present, no further details Harmful (pest or invasive)

Hosts/Species Affected

Top of page

Impacts on the local environment by L. peploides can be devastating. The species possesses an allelopathic activity that has year-long effects on water quality and can lead to impoverished flora by decreasing seedling survival of vulnerable native taxa (Dandelot et al., 2008). L. peploides can also cause severe hypoxia and sometimes anoxia during the summer. It can also lead to reduced sulphate and nitrate levels and increased sulphide and phosphate concentrations. These combined effects have the capability of fomenting what Dandelot et al. (2005) refer to as “a dystrophic crisis” and an intoxicated ecosystem. The plant has been reported to outcompete native Myriophyllum and Potamogeton species in France, which translates to a reduction in macroinvertebrate habitat (Dutartre, 1986; CEH, 2007). It also supplants native wetland grasses, some of which are used as forage for livestock (CEH, 2007).

 

Host Plants and Other Plants Affected

Top of page
Plant nameFamilyContext
Myriophyllum (watermilfoil)HaloragidaceaeWild host
Oryza sativa (rice)PoaceaeOther
PotamogetonWild host

Growth Stages

Top of page Pre-emergence, Seedling stage, Vegetative growing stage

Biology and Ecology

Top of page

Genetics

L. peploides (including all subspecies) is a diploid species with chromosomes numbering 16 (2n). Zardini et al. (1991) report that nearly all species in sect. Oligospermum can hybridize and produce vigorous offspring. The species has demonstrated a high degree of phenotypic plasticity.

Reproductive Biology

This species has a seasonal development pattern. In France, leaves appear at the surface of the water in early spring. Up to 50 cm of stem is produced by June, and flowering occurs from July to October. Aerial stems fall during November, and persistent organs fall to the sediment in a dense mat (Dandelot et al., 2008). This species reproduces primarily through clonal expansion; stem fragments are spread by animals, humans, and water currents (Ruaux et al., 2009). L. peploides is self-compatible and the species has a very high potential seed output (10,000 – 14,000 seeds per square metre) (Ruaux et al., 2009). In a study of locally collected seed material from nine populations in the middle Loire River in France, fruits had a buoyancy duration of around 2 weeks, and fruits were very frequently viable, indicating that although clonal expansion is the species’ primary means of reproduction, sexual reproduction may be an important means of survival and spread (Ruaux et al., 2009).

Physiology and Phenology

This species can grow in a broad range of habitats due to its high degree of genetic polymorphism and phenotypic plasticity (Ruaux et al., 2009). Its allelopathic properties mean it is an ecosystem engineer, and by making habitats unsuitable for native flora, it increases its competitive potential (Dandelot et al., 2008).

 

Climate

Top of page
ClimateStatusDescriptionRemark
Am - Tropical monsoon climate Tolerated Tropical monsoon climate ( < 60mm precipitation driest month but > (100 - [total annual precipitation(mm}/25]))
Aw - Tropical wet and dry savanna climate Tolerated < 60mm precipitation driest month (in winter) and < (100 - [total annual precipitation{mm}/25])
BS - Steppe climate Tolerated > 430mm and < 860mm annual precipitation
Cf - Warm temperate climate, wet all year Preferred Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, wet all year
Cs - Warm temperate climate with dry summer Preferred Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, dry summers
Df - Continental climate, wet all year Tolerated Continental climate, wet all year (Warm average temp. > 10°C, coldest month < 0°C, wet all year)
Ds - Continental climate with dry summer Tolerated Continental climate with dry summer (Warm average temp. > 10°C, coldest month < 0°C, dry summers)
Dw - Continental climate with dry winter Tolerated Continental climate with dry winter (Warm average temp. > 10°C, coldest month < 0°C, dry winters)

Latitude/Altitude Ranges

Top of page
Latitude North (°N)Latitude South (°S)Altitude Lower (m)Altitude Upper (m)
49 -40

Soil Tolerances

Top of page

Soil drainage

  • free
  • impeded
  • seasonally waterlogged

Natural enemies

Top of page
Natural enemyTypeLife stagesSpecificityReferencesBiological control inBiological control on
Auleutes bosqi Herbivore to genus
Lysathia flavipes Herbivore to genus
Lysathia ludoviciana Herbivore Inflorescence/Leaves not specific
Onychylis nigrirostris Herbivore to genus
Tyloderma Herbivore Leaves to genus

Notes on Natural Enemies

Top of page

The water primrose beetle, Lysathia ludoviciana has been observed to selectively feed on L. peploides (Campbell and Clark, 1983). The beetle is native to the southern USA and Caribbean region; its USA distribution has been reported to include Texas, Georgia, South Carolina, Ohio and Alabama (Habeck and Wilkerson, 1980). Several species from Argentina, including Tyloderma spp., Auleutes bosqi, Onychylis sp. nr. nigrirostris and Lysathia flavipes have been reported to have L. peploides as their only host (Cordo and DeLoach, 1982); however, the use of non-native biological control agents can be a risky endeavour.

 

Means of Movement and Dispersal

Top of page

Natural Dispersal

L. peploides disperses mainly through the movement of plant parts in water, and simple hydrochory can generate substantial propagule pressure. However, sexual reproduction and transportation of the resulting seeds may also be an important means of dispersal (Ruaux et al., 2009).

Vector transmission

Stems can be carried by animals to new locations, where new populations can establish and grow via vegetative expansion (Ruaux et al., 2009). Studies quantifying the pressure due to natural vectors have not yet been conducted.

Accidental Introduction

Release from ornamental plantings of L. peploides is likely primarily responsible for the introduction of the species in its adventive range. L. peploides has been historically valued as an ornamental; ornamental plantings likely explain its introduction to Europe (Ruaux et al., 2009). Although still available from online distributors, current educational efforts aim to decrease the probability that this plant will be intentionally introduced, and hopefully cut down on accidental release in areas where this plant has been declared a noxious weed. Hitchhikers are often present in horticultural plantings and can thus be included in orders of non-invasive plants. It is possible that this plant may unintentionally be introduced by people intending to cultivate a comparatively harmless plant.

Intentional Introduction

L. peploides has showy bright-yellow flowers that make it an interesting candidate for aquaculture. Additionally, the plant demonstrates a high degree of phenotypic plasticity, which allows it to adapt to a broad range of growing conditions and water regimes (Ruaux et al., 2009). Unfortunately, the very characteristics that make it a hardy and amenable garden specimen, also lend it the ability to invade a broad range of habitats where it very often is invasive (Ruaux et al., 2009). This plant is still offered for sale through internet horticultural distributors, so the probability of intentional introduction is quite high. Current educational efforts aim to decrease the possibility that this plant will be intentionally introduced, and will hopefully reduce the chances of accidental release in areas where this plant has been declared a noxious weed.

 

Impact Summary

Top of page
CategoryImpact
Cultural/amenity Positive and negative
Economic/livelihood Positive and negative
Environment (generally) Negative
Human health Negative

Economic Impact

Top of page

L. peploides can double its biomass in 15 to 20 days in slow flowing water (EPPO, 2004), and the resulting mats can drastically reduce water flow (Dandelot et al., 2008). Along with closely related Ludwigia grandiflora, L. peploides is considered by some to cause the most damage in aquatic systems across many regions of France, blocking slow-moving waterways, and impacting irrigation and drainage in lakes, ponds and ditches (Ruaux et al,. 2009). The plant can also cause hyper-sedimentation and silting (Dandelot et al., 2008). In France, the plant can displace native wetland grasses that serve as forage for livestock (CEH, 2007). In Chile it is reported as a weed of rice (Ramírez, 1991).

 

Environmental Impact

Top of page

This species has an allelopathic effect that impacts water quality throughout the year. When the plant is at nuisance levels, the effects on dissolved oxygen, sulphide, phosphate, and pH levels can lead to impoverished flora by decreasing seedling survival of vulnerable native taxa (Dandelot et al., 2008). Its tendency to grow in thick mats also contributes to physical alteration of the environment, making it unsuitable for sensitive species.

Impact: Biodiversity

Top of page

When invasive, this species causes declines in biodiversity (EPPO, 2004) through shading, competitive exclusion, and chemical allelopathic alteration of the growing environment. Due to the species’ allelopathic activity, it poses a severe threat to vulnerable native flora (Dandelot et al., 2005). Additionally the plant provides little in terms of suitable habitat. The dense surface matting excludes the growth of native species, shades out submersed aquatic vegetation, and is inhospitable for fish and invertebrates. As well as providing unsuitable habitat, it is also of little use as a food source; it contains saponins and calcium oxalate, which make it unpalatable to most herbivores. Where it is invasive, it often has far reaching and negative effects on multiple trophic levels (Dandelot et al., 2008).

 

Threatened Species

Top of page
Threatened SpeciesConservation StatusWhere ThreatenedMechanismReferencesNotes
Thamnophis gigas (giant garter snake)VU (IUCN red list: Vulnerable) VU (IUCN red list: Vulnerable); USA ESA listing as threatened species USA ESA listing as threatened speciesCaliforniaEcosystem change / habitat alterationUS Fish and Wildlife Service, 2012

Social Impact

Top of page

This plant can grow very densely, impeding navigation and interfering with hunting, fishing and other recreational activities (CEH, 2007). Dense matting also provides excellent mosquito habitat, which is compounded by the tendency of the mats to exclude fish that prey on mosquito larvae.

Risk and Impact Factors

Top of page Invasiveness
  • Invasive in its native range
  • Proved invasive outside its native range
  • Has a broad native range
  • Abundant in its native range
  • Highly adaptable to different environments
  • Is a habitat generalist
  • Fast growing
  • Has high reproductive potential
  • Has propagules that can remain viable for more than one year
  • Reproduces asexually
  • Has high genetic variability
Impact outcomes
  • Altered trophic level
  • Damaged ecosystem services
  • Ecosystem change/ habitat alteration
  • Infrastructure damage
  • Modification of hydrology
  • Modification of natural benthic communities
  • Modification of nutrient regime
  • Monoculture formation
  • Negatively impacts agriculture
  • Negatively impacts cultural/traditional practices
  • Negatively impacts human health
  • Negatively impacts animal health
  • Negatively impacts livelihoods
  • Negatively impacts aquaculture/fisheries
  • Negatively impacts tourism
  • Reduced amenity values
  • Reduced native biodiversity
  • Soil accretion
  • Threat to/ loss of native species
  • Transportation disruption
Impact mechanisms
  • Allelopathic
  • Competition - monopolizing resources
  • Competition - shading
  • Competition - smothering
  • Pest and disease transmission
  • Rapid growth
Likelihood of entry/control
  • Highly likely to be transported internationally deliberately
  • Difficult to identify/detect in the field
  • Difficult/costly to control

Uses

Top of page

Economic Value

There has been some study regarding the use of this plant in the treatment of wastewater. It is capable of producing large amounts of biomass in the presence of elevated nitrogen levels (Rejmánková, 1992). However, it may be less adept at removing dissolved phosphorus, as an Australian study reports it had negative growth in all phosphorus concentrations investigated (Wen and Recknagel, 2002). Additionally, the plant has attractive yellow flowers that make it an interesting specimen for water gardening.

Social Benefit

Water garden enthusiasts may have an aesthetic appreciation of this species. It shows some potential for use in wastewater treatment (Rejmánková, 1992) although other studies have concluded that many other species are preferable to L. peploides in wastewater processing. Little information is available regarding other beneficial social uses of the plant.

Environmental Services

Due to the plant’s phenotypic plasticity, it could possibly be used in the reclamation of severely impacted ecosystems. However, its tendency towards invasiveness coupled with its allelopathic potential make this plant a poor candidate for restoration projects, at least for projects outside the plant’s native range.

 

Uses List

Top of page

Environmental

  • Revegetation

General

  • Botanical garden/zoo
  • Sociocultural value

Ornamental

  • Propagation material
  • Seed trade

Similarities to Other Species/Conditions

Top of page

L. peploides is very likely to be confused with other Ludwigia species. Zardini et al. (1991) report that taxa of sect. Oligospermum are “notoriously difficult taxonomically; morphological distinctions between them are often not sharp. The entire sect. Oligospermum is a polyploid complex whose members form a very closely related group. L. peploides is especially similar to Ludwigia grandiflora and Ludwigia hexapetala. These plants can be distinguished by their flowers. L. peploides stems grow more horizontally and their petals are usually 1.0-1.5 cm long, and anthers are 1.0-1.7 mm, whereas L. grandiflora and L. hexapetala stems grow vertically and have larger petals and anthers. Additionally, the small leaves at the base of the flower are triangular to egg-shaped in L. peploides, whereas those of L. hexapetala are ovate (EPPO, 2004).

 

Prevention and Control

Top of page

Prevention

L. peploides is valued as an ornamental, therefore educational programmes must be directed to educate the public about the dangers this plant poses outside its native range. Teaching users how to clean equipment in a way that decreases the chance of transmission is one way to lessen the impact of human-mediated transport. Additionally, information should be disseminated regarding the responsible propagation and cultivation of this species if it will continue to be sold as an ornamental.

Rapid Response

It is much easier and more effective to attempt to control this plant early in its introduction timeline. Small populations are effectively controlled by hand pulling, prior to significant clonal expansion.

Public Awareness

Numerous educational campaigns have been directed at informing the public about the danger of aquatic invasive species like L. peploides in areas where they pose a threat. Governmental organizations disseminate educational materials about the identification and control of this species, as well as the importance of preventive measures in slowing or stopping the spread of this plant. As the species is still widely available, there is an opportunity for education to happen at various points along the horticultural trade pathway from distributor to introduction.

Cultural Control and Sanitary Measures

As stem fragments are easily transportable, it is extremely important to decrease the instances of accidental introduction by addressing humans as vectors. By establishing guidelines on how to properly clean equipment, dispose of aquarium water, and identify target plants, it is likely that instances of accidental transportation and release will decrease.

Physical/Mechanical Control

A number of physical control measures including hand-pulling, rotovation, and mechanical harvesting may be used to control L. peploides; however, all fragments and roots must be removed to prevent re-establishment (CEH, 2007). It is likely that mechanical treatment of large populations would provide only temporary nuisance relief.

Movement Control

Plants can spread locally when seeds and fragments drift in water currents or are carried to new areas by animals, but most attention should be given to addressing forms of human-mediated transport. The availability of this plant as an ornamental, and its ability to spread vegetatively from small amounts of material indicate that controlling human behaviour and increasing awareness might be the most effective way to reduce introductions of L. peploides.

Biological Control

Sterile grass carp, Ctenopharyngodon idella, have been used to control L. peploides (Manuel, 1989). However, grass carp are non-selective herbivores that will almost certainly harm native species. Some study of native biological control measures has revealed promise in using highly specific herbivores to control the plant, although appropriate caveats regarding the introduction of a non-native control agent remain.

Chemical Control

Control of L. peploides is difficult. The plant has been used in the past to absorb herbicide residues in runoff water (CEH, 2007). Several herbicides have been used with reported success, including halosulfuron-methyl, glyphosate and triclopyr (CEH, 2007).

 

References

Top of page

Campbell JM, Clark WJ, 1983. Observations on host selection by Lysathia ludoviciana (Chrysomelidae), a beetle with potential for biological control of certain aquatic weeds. Texas Journal of Science, 35(2):165-167.

CEH, 2007. Defra report. Defra report. Wallingford, UK: Center for Ecology and Hydrology, unpaginated.

Cordo HA, DeLoach CJ, 1982. The flea beetle, Lysathia flavipes, that attacks Ludwigia (water primrose) and Myriophyllum (parrotfeather) in Argentina. Coleopterists Bulletin, 36(2):298-301

Dandelot S, Matheron R, Petit Jle, Verlaque R, Cazaubon A, 2005. [English title not available]. (Variations temporelles des parametres physiocochimiques et microbiologiquies de trois ecosystemes aquatiques (Sud-Est de la France) envahis par des Ludwigia.) C. R. Biologies, 328:991-999.

Dandelot S, Robles C, Pech N, Cazaubon A, Verlaque R, 2008. Allelopathic potential of two invasive alien Ludwigia spp. Aquatic Botany, 88(4):311-316. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T4F-4R9GGY9-2&_user=10&_coverDate=05%2F31%2F2008&_rdoc=7&_fmt=high&_orig=browse&_srch=doc-info(%23toc%234973%232008%23999119995%23683225%23FLA%23display%23Volume)&_cdi=4973&_sort=d&_docanchor=&_ct=14&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=840bccba60c7e7760705e2d50bdb6ff3

Dutartre A, 1986. Aquatic plants introduced in freshwater lakes and ponds of Aquitaine (France): dispersion and ecology of Lagerosiphon major and Ludwigia peploides. In: Proceedings, 7th international symposium on aquatic weeds. 93-98.

EPPO, 2004. EPPO alert list. EPPO alert list. Paris, France: European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization, unpaginated.

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

Estes JR, Thorp RW, 1974. Pollination in Ludwigia peploides subsp. glabrescens (Onagraceae). Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club, 101(5):272-276.

GBIF, 2009. Global Biodiversity Information Facility. http://data.gbif.org/species/

Habeck DH, Wilkerson R, 1980. The life cycle of Lysathia ludoviciana (Fall) (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) on parrotfeather, Myriophyllum aquaticum (Velloso) Verde. Coleopterists Bulletin, 34(2):167-170

INVADERS, 2009. Invaders database system. Invaders database system. Missoula, Montana, USA: University of Montana, unpaginated.

Jiarui C, Hoch PC, Raven PH, 2007. 1. Ludwigia Linnaeus, sp. Pl. 1:118 ["Ludvigia"]; 2: [1204]. 1753. Flora of China, 13. 400-404.

Manuel KL, 1989. Water Resources Research Institute, Report, 247. Water Resources Research Institute, University of North Carolina, 21-26.

McGregor MA, Bayne DR, Steeger JG, Webber EC, Reutebuch E, 1996. The potential for biological control of water primrose (Ludwigia grandiflora) by the water primrose flea beetle (Lysathia ludoviciana) in the Southeastern United States. Journal of Aquatic Plant Management, 34:74-76.

Peconic Estuary Program, 2009. Invasive Species in the Peconics. Invasive Species in the Peconics. Yaphank, New York, USA: Peconic Estuary Program, unpaginated.

Ramírez C, San Martín J, San Martín C, Contreras D, 1991. The chemical composition and energetic content of the biomass of weeds in rice fields in central Chile. Turrialba, 41(4):551-563.

Rejmánková E, 1992. Ecology of creeping macrophytes with special reference to Ludwigia peploides (H. B. K.) Raven. Aquatic Botany, 43(3):283-299.

Ruaux B, Greulich S, Haury J, Berton JP, 2009. Sexual reproduction of two alien invasive Ludwigia (Onagraceae) on the middle Loire River, France. Aquatic Botany, 90(2):143-148. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T4F-4T8HHJ0-4&_user=10&_coverDate=02%2F28%2F2009&_rdoc=9&_fmt=high&_orig=browse&_srch=doc-info(%23toc%234973%232009%23999099997%23733055%23FLA%23display%23Volume)&_cdi=4973&_sort=d&_docanchor=&_ct=20&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=241218d13425483cea8ec378aed81f36

The Jepson Online Interchange, 2009. The Jepson Manual [online]. Berkeley, California, USA: The Jepson Flora Project, University of California Berkeley, unpaginated.

US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2012. In: Giant Garter Snake (Thamnophis gigas). 5 Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. US Fish and Wildlife Service, 63 pp.. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_year_review/doc4009.pdf

USACE-ERDC, 2009. Aquatic Plant Information System (APIS). Aquatic Plant Information System (APIS). Vicksburg, Mississippi, USA: United States Army Corps of Engineers - Engineer Research and Development Center, unpaginated.

USDA-ARS, 1997. Germplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN). Online Database. Beltsville, Maryland, USA: National Germplasm Resources Laboratory. https://npgsweb.ars-grin.gov/gringlobal/taxon/taxonomysearch.aspx

Washington State Department of Ecology, 1994-2009. Non-native invasive freshwater plants. Non-native invasive freshwater plants. Olympia, Washington, USA: Washington State Department of Ecology, unpaginated.

Wen Li, Recknagel F, 2002. In situ removal of dissolved phosphorus in irrigation drainage water by planted floats: preliminary results from growth chamber experiment. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 90(1):9-15.

Zardini EM, Peng CI, Hoch PC, 1991. Chromosome numbers in Ludwigia sect. Oligospermum and sect. Oocarpon (Onagraceae). Taxon, 40(2):221-230.

Contributors

Top of page

14/12/09 Original text by:

Alison Mikulyuk, Wisconsin Dept of Natural Resources, Science Operations Center, 2801 Progress Rd, Madison, WI 53716, USA

Distribution Maps

Top of page
You can pan and zoom the map
Save map