Passiflora foetida
(red fruit passion flower)

The following summary is from Witt and Luke (2017):

Description

Evergreen climber with tendrils (slender, usually twisting structures on the stems or leaves that aid in ‘climbing’); stems sometimes angular (to 15 m high); tendril at the base of each leaf stalk together with a stipule (thread-like appendage) covered with sticky glands; stems have an unpleasant odour.

Origin

Argentina, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, French Guiana, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Surinam, Uruguay, USA and Venezuela.

Reason for Introduction

Medicine, ground cover and ornament.

Invades

Roadsides, disturbed areas, crops, plantations, forest edges/gaps, savannahs and riparian zones.

Impacts

In parts of Malaysia, it is a serious weed of maize and rubber. It also impacts negatively on coconut production in the Pacific; on maize, sugarcane and cotton in Thailand; on oil palm in Indonesia; on taro in Samoa; and on various other crops in Sarawak. It is an alternate host for the vectors of a number of diseases affecting cultivated passion fruit. P. foetida leaves contain cyanide, which if consumed by goats, mainly during the dry season, result in poisoning with symptoms such as apathy, tachycardia, tachypnea, jugular venous pulse, incoordination, bellowing, mydriasis, and sternal recumbence followed by lateral recumbence.

P. foetida is native to Central America, South America and the West Indies (Killip, 1938), but is now widely naturalized throughout the tropics and subtropics.

The most probable means of spread of P. foetida is deliberate introduction due to its ornamental interest; possible ways include mail orders as, for example, it is sold and bought in Europe.

P. foetida is especially common along roadsides, around houses and sheds, along fences and in waste areas throughout the tropics and subtropics. It requires warm, moist soil and air conditions for at least half of the year, moderate to high soil fertility, support for the vines, and freedom from cultivation for several months. In permanently moist soils it may exhibit an annual or a perennial life cycle, whilst in areas with a strong dry season it is more likely to exist as an annual vine.

The plant grows on a wide range of soils from peats through loams to sands, as well as on soils derived from corals and volcanic debris.

P. foetida occurs in a very wide range of crops, pastures and plantations.

P. foetida is generally a fairly weakly growing climbing herb. It reproduces solely by seed which is probably spread by small mammals (MacDougal, 1994), because of its fruit features (Amela Garcia, unpublished data), and in contaminated trash and soil after the fruits have been allowed to mature. Dormant, but viable seeds are able to survive in the soil for many years. Germination most commonly occurs in cropland after cultivation where the soil has been disturbed and is moist and warm. It is also commonly seen in uncultivated and neglected areas such as along roadsides and fencelines, riverbanks, and other occasionally disturbed sites. The plant grows best where there is support (such as taller plants), in the absence of which it may form mats over the ground and other low-growing plants.

Genetics

De Melo et al. (2001) observed regular pairing and regular chromosome segregation during meiosis.

Physiology and phenology

Germination

Germination percentage and germination speed, with or without arile, are low and slow, respectively, but the initial time of emergency is minor with arile (Amela Garcia et al., 2001).

Phenological variation

P. foetida produces flowers and fruits between October and February in Brazil (Da Costa Sacco, 1980) and throughtout the year, mainly from September to May in Argentina (Deginani, 1998).

Reproductive biology

Propagation

Seeds obtained by spontaneous self-pollination, induced self-pollination, geitonogamous pollination and natural pollination were viable and the major germination percetage ocurred 2 months after sowing (Amela Garcia et al., 2000).

Shoot regeneration from mature endosperm of P. foetida was obtained by Mohamed et al. (1996). The regenerated plants flowered, although fruit set was not observed.

Breeding system and pollination

P. foetida is self-compatible, pollinated mainly by Ptiloglossa tarsata and rarely by Pseudaugochloropsis sp. in Chaco, Argentina (Amela Garcia and Hoc, 1998). Janzen (1968) cited several species of Ptiloglossa as pollinators in Central America and Frankie et al. (1983) noted the constancy of this visitor. However, Gottsberger et al. (1988) observed species of Centris and Xylocopa pollinating in Brazil. Amela Garcia and Hoc (2001) compared the pollinators of six species of Passiflora and concluded that P. foetida is served by pollinators of medium size, in contrast to species with bigger and stronger flowers. Besides, the early and short anthesis of P. foetida is correlated with the mainly matinal activity of its most important pollinator, Ptiloglossa tarsata.

Fruit production

Fruit production by free pollination is high (Amela Garcia and Hoc, 1998).

Environmental requirements

The minimum rainfall required for P. foetida is 900 mm (Luna Ercilla, 1992). The preferred temperature range is 19-29°C for seedlings and 13-38°C for adult plants (Vanderplank, 1997). It is a heliophytic and selectively hygrophytic species (Da Costa Sacco, 1980). P. foetida var. vitacea has been encountered up to 1100 m in Paraguay, Uruguay and northern Argentina (Killip, 1938).

Waterhouse (1994) noted that in excess of 200 insects have been recorded attacking Passifloraceae in South and Central America. Many of these, however, are polyphagous and little is known about natural enemies specific to P. foetida. The chrysomelid beetle Diabrotica speciosa eats the flowers of P. foetida (Amela García and Hoc, 1998). Other Chrysomelidae eat the leaves (Cordo et al., 2004). The most noteworthy group are the heliconiine butterflies, of which Agraulis vanillae, Dione juno, Dryas julia, Eueides aliphera and E. isabella are recorded as pests of Passiflora edulis, although the larvae of other species are occasionally found on Passiflora spp.. Heliconius hecale attacks P. foetida in Central and South America and has some potential as a biological control agent (Waage et al., 1981). In Argentina, Agraulis vanillae maculosa leaves the eggs on the tendrils of P. foetida and on adjacent plants; the larvae eat the flower buds and juvenile leaves (Cordo et al., 2004). In Costa Rica, Euptoieta hegesia and also Agraulis vanillae feed on it (Janzen, 1991). In Hawaii, USA, the fungus Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. passiflorae attacks P. foetida, P. tripartita and P. ligularis but not P. suberosa or the cultivated species, P. edulis f. flavicarpa (Gardner, 1989). P. foetida is also attacked by the passion fruit woodiness virus in New Guinea and adjacent regions of northern Australia (Davis et al., 2002), Soybean mosaic virus, with symptoms in the leaves in Colombia (Castillo et al., 2001) and Xylella fastidiosa (Hernández Garboza and Ochoa Corona, 1994). Dassanayake and Hicks (1992) used purified virus preparations from P. foetida to study the serological relationship among passiflora viruses.

Environmental

• Erosion control or dune stabilization

Medicinal, pharmaceutical

• Traditional/folklore

Several other species of Passiflora are minor weeds throughout the tropics, especially of wasteland and at the edges of native vegetation. They are similar to P. foetida in general form but lack the distinctive glandular hairs which usually cover the shoots and always occur on the bracts surrounding the flowers and fruits. The unique very similar species is P. chrysophylla, the only difference between them being that P. foetida has pedicellate glands on petioles and leaves margins and P. chrysophylla, has sessile glands on the sepals (Deginani, 2001). Cultivated species of passion fruit (Passiflora edulis) may sometimes escape and become naturalized in disturbed native vegetation.

Due 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 Control

P. foetida may best be controlled by uprooting, either directly, or during interrow cultivation and interplant hoeing. It cannot be smothered out, since it tolerates low light intensities and also tends to climb over taller plants. Good field hygiene is important in minimizing the spread and proliferation of the weed; plants should be controlled by whatever means available before they flower and set seed. Composting material should be free of dormant weed seeds.

Grazing is unlikely to be effective due to the objectionable smell (and no doubt taste) of bruised foliage.

Chemical Control

Chemical control is only worthwhile in graminaceous crops such as sugarcane or improved pastures, or where the herbicide can be directed away from crop foliage, since foliar application to broad-leaved crops would damage them. Henty and Pritchard (1975) and Kostermans et al. (1987) report that picloram, asulam and ametryne may give shoot kill only in sugarcane in Queensland, Australia, and that amitrole can be used as a directed spray in rubber. Webb and Feez (1987) report that fluroxypyr gives excellent selective control of P. foetida in both sugarcane and sorghum.

The following herbicides are registered for use against Passiflora foetida in Queensland, Australia: diuron + fluroxypyr, atrazine, atrazine + dicamba, fluroxypyr, and 2,4-D + ioxynil (Hamilton 1997).

Biological Control

No attempts have been made at biological control of P. foetida in the field. Some work has been conducted, however, to establish the potential for biological control of the Pasifloraceae. Gardner (1989) showed that a number of weedy Passiflora spp. were susceptible to vascular wilt caused by Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. passiflorae while the cultivated species P. edulis f. flavicarpa was not. Waage et al. (1981) examined the host ranges of a number of heliconius butterflies with a view to their potential for biological control. Chavez et al. (1999) successfully transmited viral pathogens of Passiflora edulis to P. foetida by grafting, mechanical inoculation, and the aphid Aphis gossypii and the chrysomelid beetles Diabrotica sp., Cerotoma sp. and Colaspis sp. However, aphid resistance in the field seems high due the the sticky hairs (Dassanayake and Hicks, 1994), as well as against other insects less than 2 mm (Janzen, 1968).