Lepidium draba (hoary cress)
- Summary of Invasiveness
- Taxonomic Tree
- Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
- Plant Type
- Distribution Table
- History of Introduction and Spread
- Habitat List
- Hosts/Species Affected
- Host Plants and Other Plants Affected
- Growth Stages
- Biology and Ecology
- Air Temperature
- Rainfall Regime
- Soil Tolerances
- Natural enemies
- Notes on Natural Enemies
- Means of Movement and Dispersal
- Pathway Vectors
- Plant Trade
- Impact Summary
- Environmental Impact
- Impact: Biodiversity
- Threatened Species
- Social Impact
- Risk and Impact Factors
- Uses List
- Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
- Prevention and Control
- Links to Websites
- Distribution Maps
Don't need the entire report?
Generate a print friendly version containing only the sections you need.Generate report
PicturesTop of page
IdentityTop of page
Preferred Scientific Name
- Lepidium draba L. (1753)
Preferred Common Name
- hoary cress
Other Scientific Names
- Cardaria draba (L.) Desv.
International Common Names
- English: heart-podded hoary cress; perennial peppergrass; thanet cress; white top; white weed
- Spanish: capellans (Argentina); coclearia falsa (Argentina); descamisada (Argentina); lepidio; wancy (Argentina)
- Arabic: qinnaibrah
- Portuguese: erva fome
Local Common Names
- Canada: cranson dravier; perennial peppergrass
- Chile: cardaria
- Denmark: hjerteskulpet karse
- Egypt: lislis; nafal
- Finland: kynsimokrassi
- France: cranson dravier; lepidier; pain blanc; passerage; passerage drave
- Germany: Gemeine Pfeilkresse; Pfeilkresse; Stengelumfassende
- Iran: ozmak
- Iraq: hoary cress; jinnaibrah
- Italy: cocola
- Lebanon: kunaybrah
- Netherlands: pijlkruidkers
- Norway: honningkarse
- Saudi Arabia: gana barri; harf mashrigi; lislis; nafal
- South Africa: hoary cardaria; peperbos cardaria
- Spain: babol; berro; capellanes; falsa coclearia; floreta; mastuerzo; mastuerzo oriental; papolas
- Sweden: valsk krasse
- Turkey: cok senelik yabani tere; kir teresi
- CADDR (Cardaria draba)
Summary of InvasivenessTop of page
Lepidium draba is found in a wide range of habitats ranging from roadsides (highly disturbed sites) to rangelands, meadows and pastures, cultivated fields, home gardens, national parks and wasteland. It exists at high and low latitudes, above and below sea level. It is found under irrigation and in soils of high moisture content and also exists in arid regions. It invades all soil types, although it prefers alkaline conditions and can germinate in saline soils. All of these characteristics and adaptations provide exceptional advantages for this noxious weed and reflect its high potential to invade different agricultural systems. The absence of L. draba plants from plantations or sites where it has not been reported may not be due to the species' ability to invade, survive, grow or develop in these sites but rather to the absence of initial infestation. The weed can invade both agricultural and natural ecosystems (Larson et al., 2000). In summary, L. draba is a serious threat to agriculture and the environment. It is of a high ecological tolerance and is potentially harmful to human and animal health. Its ability to invade and reproduce by different means and to host plant pathogenic agents make this weed invasive with significant problems to man and natural resources.
Taxonomic TreeTop of page
- Domain: Eukaryota
- Kingdom: Plantae
- Phylum: Spermatophyta
- Subphylum: Angiospermae
- Class: Dicotyledonae
- Order: Capparidales
- Family: Brassicaceae
- Genus: Lepidium
- Species: Lepidium draba
Notes on Taxonomy and NomenclatureTop of page
Lepidium draba was previously considered to be in the genus Cardaria, but was placed into the genus Lepidium on the basis of recent molecular evidence which showed that all Cardaria species nested within Lepidium (Al-Shehbaz et al., 2002). Cardaria species have historically been placed in and out of Lepidium, but it appears that they have now found a stable phylogenetic and taxonomic position (http://www.sidney.ars.usda.gov/hoarycress/taxonomyandsys.html).
Two subspecies of L. draba are recognized: L. draba subsp. draba, previously known as Cardaria draba (heart-podded hoary cress); and L. draba subsp. chalepense, previously known as Cardaria chalepensis and C. draba var. repens (lens-podded hoary cress). Cardaria pubescens (globe-podded hoarycress) is now named Lepidium appelianum Al-Shehbaz as the name Lepidium pubescens is already in use for a different species in South America.
DescriptionTop of page
L. draba is an annual or perennial herb (Zohary, 1966), sprouting and regenerating by adventitious buds on the extensive root system. It is often wrongly described as being rhizomatous, but it does not have true rhizomes in the sense of underground stems.
Stems are erect, subglabrous or grey-pubescent. Height approximately 10-50 cm, with a deep tap root or branched woody rootstock. Stems simple or branched above, covered with shallowly-toothed ovoid leaves clasping the stem with arrow-shaped bases, erect, arising from branching, woody stock. Basal leaves petioled, spatulate to narrowly-obovate, dentate-repand. The upper part of the stem branches into several many-flowered, long-stalked racemes of white flowers.
Leaves up to 10 x 4.5 cm, the radial ones more or less petiolate, spatulate or obovate-oblong, entire or dentate-repand, sometimes lyrately-lobed; stem leaves sessile, lanceolate to ovate with downward-pointed lobes at base, usually acute, dentate or entire, spreading to erect, oblong-lanceolate to broadly elliptical or ovate, sagittate-amplexicaul, acute or obtuse, entire or dentate.
The inflorescence is a dense flat-tapped corymbose panicle, terminal, pedicels 2-10 mm long (Zohary, 1966). Flowers are white and measure 3-4 mm. Sepals 1.5-2 x 1 mm, spreading, glabrous, scarious-white-margined. Petals twice as long as sepals, white; anthers yellow. Fruiting racemes elongated with pedicels 8-12 mm long; about 2-3 times as long as fruit, more or less horizontal ascending or spreading, teretefiliform. Fruits are pale brown, cordate-silicate, up to 5 mm, unwinged, transversely ovoid-cordate or heart-shaped, tipped by about 1 mm long persistent style and capitate stigma, sometimes one of the two cells rudimentary, valves reticulate, glabrescent, somewhat turgid, netted when dry, do not break open but break up into one-seeded portions which are then dispersed two-valved. Seeds solitary, ovoid, 2 mm long, 1.5 mm wide, slightly compressed, ellipsoidal, reddish-brown (Boulos, 1988).
Korsmo (1954) provides detailed anatomical information of this weed, and Delorit (1970) contains illustrations and photographs of its seed.
Plant TypeTop of page Annual
DistributionTop of page
L. draba has been reported in many Asian and European countries of moderate climate, and has also spread as a noxious weed in relatively cold regions of Canada and USA. In addition, it has been reported in several African countries, such as South Africa.
Although native to Mediterranean and western and central Asia, L. draba has become widely naturalized in many parts of the world, probably as a contaminant of seed supplies. It is one of the worst weeds in all European countries (Clay, 1987) and is also widespread in arid and semi-arid regions of certain parts of the world, such as Africa (Al-Ahmad, 1982; Qasem, 1995). This wide distribution reflects the phenotypic plasticity of the weed, its adaptability and ability to grow and proliferate under different environmental conditions.
Distribution TableTop 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/Region||Distribution||Last Reported||Origin||First Reported||Invasive||Reference||Notes|
|Afghanistan||Restricted distribution||Native||Invasive||Holm et al., 1991; EPPO, 2014|
|Iran||Restricted distribution||Native||Invasive||Boluri, 1977; Ghadiri, 1994; EPPO, 2014|
|Iraq||Restricted distribution||Native||Invasive||EPPO, 2014|
|Israel||Restricted distribution||Native||Invasive||EPPO, 2014|
|Lebanon||Restricted distribution||Native||Invasive||Holm et al., 1991; EPPO, 2014|
|Saudi Arabia||Widespread||Native||Invasive||Chaudhary et al., 1981|
|Turkey||Restricted distribution||Native||Invasive||Holm et al., 1991; EPPO, 2014|
|South Africa||Restricted distribution||Invasive||Wells et al., 1986; Holm et al., 1991; EPPO, 2014|
|Tunisia||Widespread||Invasive||Holm et al., 1991|
|Zimbabwe||Present, few occurrences||Invasive||Holm et al., 1991|
|Canada||Restricted distribution||Introduced||Invasive||Mulligan and Findlay, 1974; EPPO, 2014|
|-Alaska||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Arizona||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Arkansas||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-California||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Colorado||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Connecticut||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Delaware||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Hawaii||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Idaho||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Illinois||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Indiana||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Iowa||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Kansas||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Kentucky||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Maine||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Maryland||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Massachusetts||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Michigan||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Minnesota||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Missouri||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Montana||Widespread||Introduced||Invasive||Brattain and Fay, 1980; Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Nebraska||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Nevada||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-New Hampshire||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-New Jersey||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-New Mexico||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-New York||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-North Dakota||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Ohio||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Oklahoma||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Oregon||Widespread||Introduced||Invasive||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987; Miller et al., 1994; Larson et al., 2000|
|-Pennsylvania||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Rhode Island||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-South Dakota||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Texas||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Utah||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Vermont||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Virginia||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Washington||Widespread||Introduced||Invasive||Tamaki et al., 1982; Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-West Virginia||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Wisconsin||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
|-Wyoming||Present||Introduced||Lorenzi and Jeffery, 1987|
Central America and Caribbean
|Guatemala||Present, few occurrences||Invasive||Holm et al., 1991|
|Argentina||Restricted distribution||Invasive||Rouquaud and Videla, 1996; EPPO, 2014|
|Chile||Present, few occurrences||Holm et al., 1991|
|Bulgaria||Widespread||Native||Invasive||Radev and Stefanov, 1974|
|Czech Republic||Absent, intercepted only||Native||Invasive||Stanzel, 1993|
|Czechoslovakia (former)||Widespread||Native||Invasive||Polak and Majkova, 1992|
|Former USSR||Widespread||Invasive||Holm et al., 1991|
|Greece||Restricted distribution||EPPO, 2014|
|Italy||Widespread||Invasive||Holm et al., 1991|
|Netherlands||Present, few occurrences||Holm et al., 1991|
|Portugal||Restricted distribution||EPPO, 2014|
|Romania||Widespread||Invasive||Sarpe et al., 1989|
|Russian Federation||Restricted distribution||EPPO, 2014|
|Spain||Restricted distribution||Native||Invasive||Guil et al., 1997; EPPO, 2014|
|Australia||Widespread||Native||Invasive||Heap and Mitchell, 1992|
|-New South Wales||Present||Invasive||Lazarides et al., 1997|
|-South Australia||Present||Invasive||Lazarides et al., 1997|
|-Tasmania||Present, few occurrences||Invasive||Holm et al., 1991; Lazarides et al., 1997|
|-Victoria||Present||Invasive||Lazarides et al., 1997|
|-Western Australia||Present||Invasive||Lazarides et al., 1997|
|New Zealand||Present, few occurrences||Holm et al., 1991|
History of Introduction and SpreadTop of page
L. draba is native to the Mediterranean and western and central Asia including the Balkans, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Irkutskaya Oblast, Turkey, Jordan, Syria, Iraq and Iran (http://www.nwcb.wa.gov/weed_info/hoarycress.html; http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/cardra/all.html). It has been widely introduced and naturalized throughout Europe and all other continents.
Seeds of L. draba were probably brought to the USA with contaminated lucerne seed. The weed is also thought to have been introduced as an impurity in mattress material in 1809 (http://www.co.steveday.clara.net/cress/guide.htm). It was first collected in California, USA, in 1876 (Groh, 1940). It has invaded over 100,000 ha in Oregon (Kiemnce and McInnis, 2002). It was first identified in Gallatin County, Montana, USA, in 1916 and has now invaded about 32,000 acres across the state (Elpel, 2000). It started to invade along the East Coast in the late 1990s, before gradually spreading to cover almost all parts of the continental USA except the south-east (Kiemnec and McInnis, 2002).
HabitatTop of page
L. draba is a ruderal perennial weed (Simova-Tosic et al., 1996), widely reported from coastal, maritime and montane habitats. It is widespread on arable land, waste ground and roadsides (Morris, 1982; Qasem, 1993). Cropping systems such as limited tillage systems may favour its spread (Fernandez-Quintanilla et al., 1984) and it is especially vigorous under irrigation. It is found on a variety of loamy soils, from light to heavy, and prefers neutral to alkaline soils (Olah, 1979). It favours disturbed soils (turned and/or cultivated) with moderate moisture, especially roadsides, ditch banks, sub-irrigated pastures and rangeland (Elpel, 2000), or overgrazed and other areas where native plants face growth problems (http://mtwow.org/whitetop.html). It grows under open conditions, without shade, in different economically important crops and is found along roadsides. It is also reported in 6- to 9.6-year-old communities of saltcedar (Tamarix ramosissima) with 25% coverage (Brothrson et al., 1984) and occurs in Purshia tridentate/Festuca scabrella and Pseudoroegneria spicata habitats (Guenther et al., 1993). In other parts of the USA, it is associated with Artemesia tridentata subsp. tridentata and A. tridentata subsp. wyomingensis communities (McInnis et al., 1993). In Jordan, it is widely spread from the north of the country (1600 m above sea level; annual rainfall of 500-600 ml) to the drier regions of the centre and north-east, which receive less than 150-200 ml annual rainfall. Thick populations of low, vigorous plants, receiving the lowest annual rainfall, have been found close to the desert and sporadic plants or small patches have been recorded in lucerne in the Jordan Valley at 355 m below sea level (Qasem, unpublished data). L. draba has been observed at altitudes as high as 2100 m in the Alps and up to 1600 m in Iran (Holm et al., 1997); at 1700-2400 m in Baha plateau, Saudi Arabia; and at 200 m above sea level in Argentina (Conticello and Gandullo, 1991).
Habitat ListTop of page
|Terrestrial ‑ Natural / Semi-natural||High altitudes, uplands||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Terrestrial – Managed||Cultivated / agricultural land||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Protected agriculture (e.g. glasshouse production)||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Managed forests, plantations and orchards||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Managed grasslands (grazing systems)||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Disturbed areas||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Rail / roadsides||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Urban / peri-urban areas||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Natural forests||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Natural grasslands||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Riverbanks||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Wetlands||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Deserts||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Coastal areas||Present, no further details|
Hosts/Species AffectedTop of page
Although L. draba has been reported in more than 38 countries, only a limited number of host crops have been mentioned. As it is a perennial weed, it prefers non- or less-disturbed habitats and thus is commonly found as a weed of fruit trees and rangelands. However, it also has a strong ability to invade field crops and to cause great yield losses through competition or allelopathy, or both.
Host Plants and Other Plants AffectedTop of page
|Avena sativa (oats)||Poaceae||Main|
|Beta vulgaris var. saccharifera (sugarbeet)||Chenopodiaceae||Main|
|Crocus sativus (saffron)||Iridaceae||Main|
|Fragaria ananassa (strawberry)||Rosaceae||Other|
|Gossypium hirsutum (Bourbon cotton)||Malvaceae||Other|
|Helianthus annuus (sunflower)||Asteraceae||Main|
|Hordeum vulgare (barley)||Poaceae||Main|
|Lens culinaris subsp. culinaris (lentil)||Fabaceae||Other|
|Malus domestica (apple)||Rosaceae||Main|
|Medicago sativa (lucerne)||Fabaceae||Main|
|Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)||Solanaceae||Main|
|Pistacia vera (pistachio)||Anacardiaceae||Main|
|Pyrus communis (European pear)||Rosaceae||Main|
|Secale cereale (rye)||Poaceae||Other|
|Solanum tuberosum (potato)||Solanaceae||Main|
|Triticum aestivum (wheat)||Poaceae||Main|
|Triticum turgidum (durum wheat)||Poaceae||Main|
|Vitis vinifera (grapevine)||Vitaceae||Main|
|Zea mays (maize)||Poaceae||Main|
Growth StagesTop of page Flowering stage, Post-harvest, Pre-emergence, Seedling stage, Vegetative growing stage
Biology and EcologyTop of page
L. draba is self-incompatible and is pollinated by insects (Lacey and Lacey, 1985).
Physiology and Phenology
L. draba produces large amounts of seed, some 2300 seeds per stem or 1200-4800 seeds per plant have been recorded (Elpel, 2000). In temperate zones such as Canada, the flowering period is from May to July, with mature seed produced 1 month later. The minimum temperature for germination reported by Brown and Porter (1942) was 0.5°C, the maximum was 40°C, and the optimum was between 20 and 30°C. Light was not required for germination but enhanced germination rates, whereas oxygen levels below 10% and above 55% were unfavourable to germination. Seeds buried at a depth of 10-15 cm for 3 years rapidly decreased in viability; however, they were reported to retain viability in the soil for about 2 years (Elpel, 2000). Kiemnec and Larson (1991) observed that germination of L. draba decreased with lower osmotic potential. Increases in salinity up to an electrical conductivity (EC) of 12 ds/m had no effect on germination, but root growth was reduced by decreases in osmotic potential.
L. draba perennates by rootstocks that have abundant resources, and can overwinter and produce vigorous new shoots in the spring. Miller et al. (1994) reported similar phenology of the weed in different locations, despite differences in drought occurrence between the study sites. They reported 13C translocation to below-ground tissues occurring within 1 hour of labelling, which reached a peak within 24 hours. However, the greatest enrichment of roots occurred during the flowering stage. The peak in below-ground carbon allocation occurred at a stage when leaf conductance was declining rapidly. The same authors concluded that the short period of maximum carbon allocation below ground, the large proportion of subterranean tissue, and the wide variation of phenology among plants at a given time may account for the difficulty in chemically controlling L. draba.
Neururer (1986) concluded that undiversified rotations, minimal tillage, chemical selection and inappropriate control timing within a rotation are factors that have contributed to an increasing proliferation of perennial weeds in sugarbeet, including L. draba. The weed competes highly for soil moisture in arid regions, and its growth increases with increasing water consumption (Al-Ahmad, 1982).
L. draba reproduces by seeds, root stock, and creeping roots or rhizomes (http:mtwow.org/whitetop.html). It can spread vegetatively at a rate of 2 m/year (Prach, 1988); a single plant can spread over an area of 3.6 m in diameter in 1 year (Miller, 1986) and fragments can give rise to new shoots throughout the season (Miller et al., 1994). The majority (approximately 76%) of the weed biomass is located below the ground and the deeply penetrating, creeping roots make it difficult to eradicate. If the weed is left unchecked, it soon colonizes large areas, choking the other plants present.
Branching patterns generally start with development of the first roots from the radicle in the initial 2-3 weeks of growth; first-order lateral roots grow outwards and then downwards to become vertical roots. Secondary lateral roots and shoot buds usually develop just below where the lateral roots turn downwards. Buds at or below the soil surface may become subterranean roots that are able to produce shoot buds later, whereas buds higher up the plant become rosettes. New crowns form rapidly from adventitious buds on upper roots if the crown is damaged. In this way, dense colonies of the weed can easily exclude other vegetation (Holm et al., 1997).
Air TemperatureTop of page
|Parameter||Lower limit||Upper limit|
|Mean annual temperature (ºC)||1||40|
|Mean maximum temperature of hottest month (ºC)||25||36|
|Mean minimum temperature of coldest month (ºC)||10||15|
RainfallTop of page
|Parameter||Lower limit||Upper limit||Description|
|Dry season duration||4||5||number of consecutive months with <40 mm rainfall|
|Mean annual rainfall||150||700||mm; lower/upper limits|
Rainfall RegimeTop of page Winter
Soil TolerancesTop of page
Special soil tolerances
Natural enemiesTop of page
|Natural enemy||Type||Life stages||Specificity||References||Biological control in||Biological control on|
|Phoma macrostoma||Pathogen||Caesar et al., 2012|
|Psylliodes wrassei||Herbivore||Growing point|
Notes on Natural EnemiesTop of page
L. draba is implicated as a host of several economically important pests and diseases which include, Beet western yellows virus, Tobacco mosaic virus and Pieris brassicae (Mushtaque and Mohyuddin, 1984) to name a few. L. draba, is also attacked by several insect and mite species and Hinz et al., (2003) list 211 different organisms that attack L. draba to varying degrees of specificity. Only three of the herbivores, Aceria draba, Ceutorhynchus cardariae and Ceutorhynchus turbatus, are considered host specific enough to have potential as biological control agents of this noxious weed. Some others such as Pieris brassicae (Mushtaque and Mohyuddin, 1984), can attack many other plant species including some important crops. L. draba can therefore serve as an alternative host for these agricultural pests.
Means of Movement and DispersalTop of page
L. draba is a very difficult weed to control because its roots penetrate deep into the soil, store food reserves and can regenerate quickly after being fragmented during tillage. Irrigation facilitates the dispersal and invasion of L. draba by transporting root material from neglected ditch banks (Mulligan and Findlay, 1974). Wind currents may play a role in its seed or root dissemination.
L. draba produces large numbers of seeds which can pass through the digestive tract of livestock unharmed, and which are also difficult to separate from crop seeds of similar size, such as lucerne.
Seeds or fragments can be mechanically transmitted from infested to clean areas through seed-contaminated agricultural machines and other vehicles which pass through the patches of this weed in roadsides, waste areas, national parks or range lands (http://mtwow.org/whitetop.html). Tillage is an important practice responsible on transmitting root segments from infested to clean fields (www.nwcb.wa.gov/weed_info/hoarycress.html).
Packed agricultural materials contaminated with seeds or root fragments of L. draba is another possible means of introduction (http://mtwow.org/whitetop.html) and contaminated crop seeds such as lucerne may have a significant role in its introduction or dispersal (Elpel, 2000).
L. draba may be introduced intentionally to new regions in the world either as seeds for human consumption in the form of flavouring agent or food additives (http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/cardra/aa.html) or as an ornamental plant for use in home or public gardens, or national parks. The whole plant may be introduced as a green vegetable to certain parts of the world because of its high nutritional value (Guil et al., 1997).
Pathway VectorsTop of page
Plant TradeTop of page
|Plant parts liable to carry the pest in trade/transport||Pest stages||Borne internally||Borne externally||Visibility of pest or symptoms|
|Stems (above ground)/Shoots/Trunks/Branches||stems|
|True seeds (inc. grain)||seeds|
|Plant parts not known to carry the pest in trade/transport|
|Growing medium accompanying plants|
Impact SummaryTop of page
|Fisheries / aquaculture||None|
ImpactTop of page
L. draba is a serious weed of maize, cereals, potatoes, sugarbeet, sunflower, tobacco, vegetables and vineyards in Europe. It is a principal weed of barley in the former Soviet Union, cereals in Australia and Jordan, orchards in Jordan, Spain and Switzerland, sugarbeet in Iran, and pastures and rangelands of South Africa and USA. It is also a common weed of barley in Canada and Greece; cereals in Iran, Tunisia and Turkey; citrus in Australia; lucerne in the Czech Republic; oats in Canada and Greece; rye in Greece; and vineyards in Iran, Greece and Turkey (Holm et al., 1997). It has the potential to reduce the value of high-value wheat lands in the USA (http://www.nwcb.wa.gov/weed_info/hoarycress.html), is host to various agricultural pests and serves as a reservoir host for different viruses including sugarbeet and rape infection by Beet western yellows virus in former Czechoslovakia (Polak and Majkova, 1992).
Although L. draba can be found growing under different cropping systems of field crops and orchards, its toxicity and unpalatability to cattle make it difficult to control through grazing. The limited number of possible biocontrol agents effectively attacking this species, its phenotypic plasticity and geographical tolerance also contribute to its significant success as an agricultural pest.
Environmental ImpactTop of page
L. draba has been reported as a weed of high allelopathic activity against different crop species, including many wheat and barley cultivars (Qasem, 1993a, b, 1994, 1995), several vegetable crops (Obaid, 1996; Qasem, 2001; Obaid and Qasem, 2002) and wheat, lucerne, crested wheatgrass, bluebunch wheatgrass and hoary cress (Kiemnec and McInnis, 2002). Shoot and root extracts, water leachates and dried residues of L. draba added to the soil all inhibited germination, growth and development of different crop species. L. draba has been known to replace fields of lucerne if left uncontrolled (Mulligan and Findlay, 1974; Pacific Northwest Extention Service, 1974). Seedlings are capable of extracting significant amounts of moisture from the soil and Brattain and Fay (1980) observed that for each 2-week delay in controlling L. draba, loss of soil moisture increased substantially. It increases soil erosion and decreases desirable plants and pushes out the native plants (http://mtwow.org/whitetop.html).
Impact: BiodiversityTop of page
L. draba invades rangelands and arid regions in different parts of the world. It is self-incompatible and pollinated by insects (Lacey and Lacey, 1985). It is a very aggressive weed species, which competes strongly with native plants and can eventually eliminate desirable plants completely (http://www.colostate.edu/Depts/CoopExt/TRA/whtop.html).
Threatened SpeciesTop of page
|Threatened Species||Conservation Status||Where Threatened||Mechanism||References||Notes|
|Grindelia fraxinipratensis (ash meadows gumplant)||NatureServe NatureServe; USA ESA listing as threatened species USA ESA listing as threatened species||California; Nevada||Competition - monopolizing resources||US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2007a|
|Holocarpha macradenia (Santa Cruz tarplant)||NatureServe NatureServe; USA ESA listing as threatened species USA ESA listing as threatened species||California||Competition - monopolizing resources; Ecosystem change / habitat alteration||US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2014|
|Silene spaldingii (Spalding's catchfly)||USA ESA listing as threatened species USA ESA listing as threatened species||Idaho; Montana; Oregon; Washington||Competition - monopolizing resources||US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2007b|
|Thysanocarpus conchuliferus (Santa Cruz Island fringepod)||USA ESA listing as endangered species USA ESA listing as endangered species||California||Competition - monopolizing resources||US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2009b|
|Zeltnera namophila||No Details||California; Nevada||Competition - monopolizing resources||US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2009a|
Social ImpactTop of page
L. draba is a perennial weed which is difficult to control. Control methods therefore add appreciably to the cost of farm operations. The abundance and spread of L. draba as a ruderal and segetal weed species creates other problems in outcompeting useful plants and causing a potential fire hazard. Its allelopathic activity impacts negatively on the environment and species biodiversity, and its toxic properties impose hazards to humans and animal welfare. In general, the widespread growth habit of the weed, tolerance to environmental conditions and high regenerative potential by seeds and rhizomes make L. draba a significant threat to humans and their activities. L. draba has been reported as one of the exotic weed species invading Yellowstone National Park, USA, causing substantial impact on the park's natural and cultural resources and receiving a high management priority (Olliff et al., 2001).
Risk and Impact FactorsTop of page Invasiveness
- Invasive in its native range
- Proved invasive outside its native range
- Highly adaptable to different environments
- Tolerates, or benefits from, cultivation, browsing pressure, mutilation, fire etc
- Highly mobile locally
- Has high reproductive potential
- Has propagules that can remain viable for more than one year
- Damaged ecosystem services
- Ecosystem change/ habitat alteration
- Negatively impacts agriculture
- Negatively impacts human health
- Negatively impacts animal health
- Negatively impacts tourism
- Reduced amenity values
- Reduced native biodiversity
- Competition - monopolizing resources
- Pest and disease transmission
- Highly likely to be transported internationally accidentally
- Highly likely to be transported internationally deliberately
- Difficult to identify/detect as a commodity contaminant
- Difficult/costly to control
UsesTop of page
L. draba has been reported as an edible wild species in Spain, with a crude protein content higher than leaves of spinach and cabbage (Guil-Guerrero et al., 1997). Crude protein levels between 7.7 and 28.8% have been reported (Szabo et al., 1974; McInnis et al., 1993), with the stems containing more protein than the leaves. L. draba is reported to contain 1.23% of erucic acid (Guil et al., 1997). At one time, the seeds of L. draba were ground and used as a substitute for pepper (Mulligan and Findlay, 1974) and the whole plant collected in certain parts of the world and cooked for human consumption. The flowers of L. draba serve as pollen and nectar sources for many insects (http://www.nwcb.wa.gov/weed_info/hoarycress.html).
McInnis et al. (1993) reported L. draba to be unpalatable to livestock and to contain potentially toxic glucosinolates, although sheep consumed it during the early growth stages and cattle ingested large quantities of seed heads. As sulfur levels can range from 0.73 to 2.69% and high levels of this element are probably due to the presence of glucosinolates and their hydrolysis products, sheep and cattle grazing in weed-infested rangelands should be given supplemental iodine. Mature and non-lactating animals should be utilized or access to the plant restricted because, if sufficient amounts are ingested, milk flavour can be affected.
Dornberger and Lich (1982) reported that extracts from aerial parts of L. draba had cytotoxic activity and interfered with the nucleic acid metabolism of bacteria during screening for antimicrobial substances.
Uses ListTop of page
Human food and beverage
- Spices and culinary herbs
Similarities to Other Species/ConditionsTop of page
L. draba subsp. draba has been previously confused with the other hoary cresses, L. draba subsp. chalepense (formerly Cardaria chalepensis and C. draba var. repens) and L. appelianum (formerly Cardaria pubescens) in North America. These are primarily weeds of arable land.
Distinctions between the hoary cresses are based on a few fruit characters: L. draba subsp. draba has a fruit shaped like an inverted heart, with a persistent style, hairless and deflating at maturity, usually containing two seeds; in L. draba subsp. chalepense, the fruit is oval- to lens-shaped, has a slightly longer style than in subsp. draba, and it stays inflated at maturity, usually containing four seeds; the fruit of L. appelianum is globose, hairy and remains inflated when mature, usually containing four seeds.
Lepidium sativum, L. latifolium, L. spinescens, L. spinosum and L. aucheri have a racemose inflorescence, simple or paniculate, and ebracteate. Their petals are equal, longer or sometimes shorter than sepals, or extremely reduced. L. draba and L. appelianum have corymbose, flowering racemes, whereas L. draba subsp. draba has white petals twice as long as the sepals and its leaves are not clasping.
Prevention and ControlTop of page
Soil cultivation can prevent reproduction of L. draba by creeping roots (Lipa, 1983), whereas direct drilling of cereals encourages growth (Fernandez-Quintanilla et al., 1984). Rouquand and Videla (1996) found that a combination of hoeing and glyphosate or weed removal when above-ground biomass was at a maximum in August and September, followed by glyphosate application in February, was the most effective strategy for control of L. draba. In Canada, L. draba was eliminated in 3 years following intensive tillage (24 operations at 2-week intervals) with disc or sub-surface cultivators (Holm et al., 1997). The seeds were killed after being buried in moist compacted manure for 1 month (http://www.nwcb.wa.gov/weed_info/hoarycress.html). Early spring blowing and planting to a cereal crops can control L. draba (Mulligan and Findlay, 1974) and out-compete the weed through dense stands of perennial grasses and legumes such as lucerne (Elpel, 2000). Grazing by sheep and goats is effective when the weed is the most abundant food source, or at the bud stage. Cattle eat L. draba more in the spring and grazing may be effective, but only at early growth or seed pod stages. Although the weed is nutritious, it is generally unpalatable and not attractive when other sources of food are available. In addition, it can cause a lot of health complications to grazing animals due to its content of glucosinolate glycosides. In general, the best management of L. draba is probably through a combination of competitive crops, tillage and herbicides.
Mechanical control seems an ineffective method of control because hand-weeding is impractical for perennial weed control, where weeds regenerate from below-ground vegetative parts. The weed must be tall enough to pull out from the soil, but hidden rhizomes or creeping roots below the soil surface can re-establish the weed. Mowing with a lawn mower or weed whacker can reduce the competitive ability of the weed and its ability to produce seeds if practised on time, but it is confined to small area and is ineffective against buried seeds and creeping roots or rhizomes. Cultivation may be a time- and energy-consuming method of control for perennial weed infestation unless it is repeated many times at the proper time and under the proper conditions, short intervals and during re-budding stage of L. draba, but may also enhance rhizome dissemination and increase infestation in wet soil.
The herbicide 2,4-D has been widely used for control, but must be applied for 3 years or more at the early bud stage before flowering or in the late autumn rosette stage (Holm et al., 1997). Herbicides that have been found to be useful include chlorsulfuron (Swinnerton et al., 1984; Chirita and Henegar, 1985), 2,4-D + dicamba, bromoxynil + MCPA or 2,4-D at emergence in winter wheat. Effective control of L. draba in oats was obtained with chlorsulfuron, trisulfuron and fluroxypyr (Heap and Mitchell, 1992) and with glyphosate, atrazine + nopon 11E oil or a mixture of atrazine + sun 11E oil at the two-leaf stage in maize (Dobrovodski, 1975). In maize, a combination of eradicance, atrazine and 2,4-D was most effective and gave good control (Naederi and Khajehpour, 1997). In lucerne, Hernado et al. (1987) and Kontsiotou (1982) found that secbumeton gave good results, whereas in lentil, prometryn provided the best control of different broadleaved weeds including L. draba, and gave the highest crop yields.
In fruit tree orchards, norflurazon (Monserrat-Delgado, 1995), simazine at pre-emergence followed by glyphosate (Sarpe et al., 1989), simazine + paraquat, aminotriazole + diuron + bromacil + glyphosate, or terbumeton have all been used (Budoi et al., 1981). Glyphosate (Kafadaroff, 1977; Brattain and Fay, 1980) has been used successfully in vineyards and in oak plantations (Wallis, 1978; Waterhouse and Mahoney, 1983). Combination treatment of 24% urea and 6% yolk gave excellent control in pistachio fields (Davarynejad and Ak, 2001). Other effective herbicides reported were chlorsulfuron or metsulfuron applied during the budding or early bloom stages; picloram, but with little effect (Elpel, 2000); and imazethapyr, which provided >90% control in lucerne/Dactylis glomerata pastures only during the year of application (Stougaard et al., 1999).
Problems in the chemical control of L. draba have been reported by Julliard and Ancel (1973) in France, by MAFF (1977) in the UK and by the Tasmanian Department of Agriculture (1978) regarding aminotriazole, glyphosate and metribuzin. However, the short period of maximum C allocation to the below-ground tissues, the large proportion of below-ground tissues, and the wide variation of phenology among plants at a given time may account for the difficulty in chemical control of L. draba (Miller et al., 1994).
Lipa (1981) studied the monophagous silver mite, Aceria drabae, as a suitable species for biological control of L. draba. It did not attack any other crucifer growing in the vicinity of the weed, and was able to colonize it successfully. The mite first attacks the flowers, penetrating the seeds; flower heads become completely damaged and infested plants do not set seed (Lipa, 1976; Lipa et al., 1977). The seed feeding beetle, Ceuthorhynchus turbatus, has also been found to attack L. draba (Lipa, 1974). Sobhian (1976) observed the chrysomelid Colaphellus hoeftii feeding on L. draba in Iran. The adults and larvae were capable of denuding young plants of vegetation and preventing them from flowering. Larvae fed on groups of immature plants. At the initiation of the biological control programme by CABI in 2001, literature and fieldwork in Europe identified at least 211 species associated with L. draba, of which five weevils, one flea beetle, two gall midges and one gall mite had potential as biological control agents. Six of these species have been under investigation: Ceutorhynchus turbatus (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) attacks the seeds; Psylliodes wrasei (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) feeds on developing shoots and vegetative points, and C. merkli (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) mines the stems of hoary cress. The remaining species form galls in the inflorescences (Aceria draba (Acari: Eriophyidae), stems/petioles (Ceutorhynchus cardariae) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae); and roots (Ceutorhynchus assimilis (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). By 2018, only three species, A. draba, C. cardariae and C. turbatus, have been have been prioritized as promising biological control agents.
Volatile materials from leaves of Artemisia absinthium have been reported to inhibit growth of L. draba seedlings and aqueous extracts of its leaves can prevent germination (Chirca and Fabian, 1973).
Integrated control of L. draba includes prevention, education, early detection and eradication. Prevention is integrated with cultural, physical, mechanical, biological, chemical and monitoring methods of control and includes banning hay, grinding seeds with lucerne hay or barley grain, thus reducing weed emergence by 98-100%. Rigorous processing during manufacturing of hay/grain pellets can reduce the risk of disseminating weed seeds from pelleted feed (Cash et al., 1998). Only certified weed-seed-free hay should be used, equipment should be pressure-cleaned before entering national parks and common gardens (Olliff et al., 2001), new infestations should be surveyed, and vehicles (especially the undercarriage) should be careful cleaned by washing after driving out of an infested area (http://mtwow.org/whitetop.html).
ReferencesTop of page
Boulos L, 1988. The weed flora of Kuwait. Kuwait: Kuwait University
Brown JF, Porter R, 1942. The viability and germination of seeds of Convolvus arvensis L. and other perennial weeds. Iowa State Agricultural Experimental Station Research Bulletin, 294:475-504
Budoi G, Lazaroiu A, Sarpe N, Costache N, 1981. Researches regarding the efficiency of some herbicides applied in a vine plantation. Lucrari Stiintifice Institutul Agronomic "Nicolp Balcescu" Bucuresti, B, Horticultura, 24:75-77
Caesar AJ, Lartey RT, Caesar-Ton-That TC, 2012. First report of a root and crown disease of the invasive weed Lepidium draba caused by Phoma macrostoma. Plant Disease, 96(1):145. http://apsjournals.apsnet.org/loi/pdis
Carretero JL, 1989. The cropland weeds of the Valencian community (Spain). Proceedings of the 4th EWRS symposium on weed problems in Mediterranean climates. Vol. 2. Problems of weed control in fruit, horticultural crops and rice., 99-112; 19 ref
Conticello L, Gandullo R, 1991. Survey of summer weeds in the upper valley of Rio Negro y Neuquen. Proceedings of the 12th Argentine meeting on weeds and their control, Mar del Plata, Argentina, 9-11 October 1991., Vol. 1:19-26; 22 ref
Cooley AW, 1999. Whitetop (Hoary cress) Cardaria draba highly competitive plant species. (Online) Available http://www.colostate.edu/Depts/CoopExt/TRA/whtop.html
Dornberger K, Lich H, 1982. Screening nach antimikrobiell sowie potentiell cancerostatisch wirksamen pflanzeninhalstoffen. Pharmazie 37(3): 215-221
Elpel TJ, 2000. Botany in a Day, 4th Edition. HOPS Press: Pony, MT
EPPO, 2014. PQR database. Paris, France: European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization. http://www.eppo.int/DATABASES/pqr/pqr.htm
Fernandez-Quintanilla C, Navarrete L, Sanchez Giron V, Hernanz JL, 1984. The influence of direct drilling on the weed flora of cereal crops in central Spain. In: Comptes-rendus du 7Fme Colloque International sur l'écologie, la biologie et la Systématique des Mauvaises Herbes. Paris, France: COLUMA/EWRS, 1:431-436
Great Plain Flora Association, 1986. Flora of the Great Plains. Kansas, USA: University Press of Kansas
Groh H, 1940. Hoary cresses in Canada. Science Agriculture, 20:750-756
Guenther GE, Wambolt CL, Frisina MR, 1993. Characteristics of bitterbrush habitats that influence canopy cover and mule deer browsing. Journal of Environmental Management, 36:175-181
Guil JL, Rodriquez-Garcia I, Torija E, 1997. Nutritional and toxic factors in selected wild edible plants. Plant Foods for Human Nutrition, 51(2):99-107
Heap JW, Mitchell GJ, 1992. Yield increases in cereals following control of two perennial weeds in Southern Australia. Proceedings of the 1st International Weed Control Congress Melbourne, Australia; Weed Science Society of Victoria, Vol. 2:216-218
Hinz HL, Cripps M, Fu W, Medina K, Recher H, 2003. Biological control of whitetops, Lepidium draba and L. appelianum. In: Annual Report, CABI Switzerland, 2002. 73 pp
Hinz, H. L., Bourchier, R. S., Schwarzläder, M., 2013. Lepidium draba L., L. chalepense L., L. appelianum Al-Shehbaz, hoary cresses (Brassicaceae). In: Biological control programmes in Canada 2001-2012, [ed. by Mason, P. G., Gillespie, D. R.]. Wallingford, UK: CABI. 332-337. http://www.cabi.org/cabebooks/ebook/20133355780 doi: 10.1079/9781780642574.0332
Holm LG, Doll J, Holm E, Pancho JV, Herberger JP, 1997. World Weeds: Natural Histories and Distribution. New York, USA: John Wiley & Sons Inc
Julliard B, Ancel J, 1973. New possibilities for the control of perennial weeds in the vineyard. Compte Rendu de la 7e Conference du COLUMA (Comite Francais de Lutte contre les Mauvaises Herbes)., 787-800
Korotyaev BA, 2000. A new species of Ceutorhynchus Germar, 1824 living on Cardaria draba in Southeastern Europe (Coleoptera, Curculionidae). Acta Zoologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 46(4):305-308; 2 ref
Korsmo E, 1954. Weed seeds [Ugressfro]. Oslo, Norway: Gyldendal Norsk Forlag
Lacey JR, Lacey CA, 1985. Controlling pasture and range weed in Montana. Bulletin 362. Bozeman, MT: Montana State University, Cooperative Extension Service. 33 p
Landolt PJ, 2002. Survival and development of Lacanobia subjuncta (Grote & Robinson) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) larvae on common weeds and crop plants of Eastern Washington state. Pan-Pacific Entomologist, 78(1):1-6; 8 ref
Lipa JJ, 1974. Survey and study of insects associated with cruciferous plants in Poland and surrounding countries. Final report. Survey and study of insects associated with cruciferous plants in Poland and surrounding countries. Final report. Poznan, Poland: Laboratory of Biological Control, Institute of Plant Protection
Lipa JJ, 1976. A new record of Aceria drabp (Nal.) (Eriophyiidae, Acarina) on a weed Cardaria draba L. (Cruciferae) in Poland. Bulletin de l'Academie Polonaise des Sciences (Serie des Sciences Biologiques), 24(8):457-459
Lipa JJ, 1978. Preliminary studies on the species Aceria drabp (Nal.) (Acarina, Eriophyiidae) and its potential for the biological control of the weed Cardaria draba L. (Cruciferae). Prace Naukowe Instytutu Ochrony Roslin, 20(1):139-155
Lipa JJ, 1983. Usefulness of Aceria drabp in biological control of hoary cress. Proceedings of the 10th International Congress of Plant Protection. Volume 2. Plant protection for human welfare. Croydon, UK: British Crop Protection Council, 773
Lipa JJ, Studzinski A, Malachowska D, 1977. Insects and mites associated with cultivated and weedy cruciferous plants (Cruciferae) in Poland and central Europe. Warsaw, Poland: Polish Academy of Sciences
MAFF, 1997. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Agricultural Development and Advisory Service. Herbicides for the control of perennial weeds in strawberries. Review of development work 1976 South West region. London, UK: HMSO, 82
Mazih A, 2015. Status of citrus IPM in the southern Mediterranean basin Morocco, North Africa. Acta Horticulturae [XII International Citrus Congress - International Society of Citriculture, Valencia, Spain.], No.1065:1097-1103. http://www.actahort.org/books/1065/1065_138.htm
Monserrat Delgado A, 1995. Experiments with herbicides in new plantations of citrus crops. Proceedings of the 1995 Congress of the Spanish Weed Science Society, Huesca, Spain, 14-16 November 1995., 239-244
Mulligan GA, Findlay JN, 1974. The biology of Canadian weeds. 3. Cardaria draba, C. chalepensis, and C. pubescens. Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 54(1):149-160
Mummenhoff K, 1995. Should Cardaria draba (L.) Desv. be classified within the genus Lepidium L. (Brassicaceae)? Evidence from subunit polypeptide composition of RUBISCO. Feddes Repertorium, 106(1-2):25-28
Obaid KAS, 1996. Allelopathic effects of some common weeds on certain vegetable crops grown in Jordan. MSc. Thesis. Amman, Jordan: University of Jordan
Olliff T, Renkin R, McClure C, Miller P, Price D, Reinhart D, Whipple J, 2001. Managing a complex exotic vegetation program in Yellowstone National Park. Western North American Naturalist, 61(3):347-358
Pacific Northwest Extension Service, 1974. Hoary cress. PNW 116. Corvallis, OR; Pullman, WA; Moscow, ID: Pacific Northwest Extension Service. 3 p
Qasem JR, 1993. Aqueous extract effects of hoary pepperwort [Cardaria draba (L.) Desv.] on wheat (Triticum durum L.) and barley (Hordeum vulgare L.). MU`TAH Lil-Buhooth Wa Al-Dirasat, Series B:Natural and Applied Sciences Series), 8(5):63-79
Qasem JR, 1995. Allelopathic effect of some arable land weeds on wheat (Triticum durum L.):a survey. Dirasat. Series-B, Pure and Applied Sciences, 22(4):81-87
Sanda V, Popescu A, 1993. Goenotaxonomy and structure of phytocoenoses of the Chenopodietea class in the vegetation of Romania. Revue-Roumaine de Biologie. Serie de Biologie Vegetale, 38(1):15-26
Sarpe N, Neamtu I, Antohi I, 1989. Contributions to the elaboration for some programmes of integrated control of annual and perennial weeds in vineyards. Proceedings of the 4th EWRS symposium on weed problems in Mediterranean climates. Vol. 1. Problems of weed control in fruit, horticultural crops and rice, 263-269
Schneider B, Marcone C, Kampmann M, Ragozzino A, Lederer W, Cousin MT, Seemnller E, 1997. Characterization and classification of phytoplasmas from wild and cultivated plants by RFLP and sequence analysis of ribosomal DNA. European Journal of Plant Pathology, 103(8):675-686; 38 ref
Sforza R, Bourgoin T, Wilson SW, Boudon-Padieu E, 1999. Field observations, laboratory rearing and descriptions of immatures of the planthopper Hyalesthes obsoletus (Hemiptera: Cixiidae). European Journal of Entomology, 96(4):409-418; 47 ref
Swinnerton PW, Davis RC, 1984. Conservation tillage farming in the Wimmera with chlorsulfuron. Proceedings of the seventh Australian weeds conference, 1984, Volume I [edited by Madin, R.W.] Perth, Australia; Weed Society of Western Australia, 29-35
Szelag Z, 1997. Additions to the flora of Nida Basin. Fragmenta Floristica et Geobotanica, Series Polonica, 4:33-37
Tamaki G, Nawrocka B, Fox L, Annis B, Gupta RK, 1982. Comparison of yellow holocyclic and green anholocyclic strains of Myzus persicae (Sulzer): transmission of beet western yellows virus. Environmental Entomology, 11(1):234-238
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2007. Ash Meadows Gumplant (Grindelia fraxino-pratensis). Five-year Review: Summary and Evaluation. In: Ash Meadows Gumplant (Grindelia fraxino-pratensis). Five-year Review: Summary and Evaluation : US Fish and Wildlife Service.22 pp. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_year_review/doc1865.pdf
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2007. Recovery Plan for Silene spaldingii (Spalding's Catchfly). In: Recovery Plan for Silene spaldingii (Spalding's Catchfly) : US Fish and Wildlife Service.203 pp. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery_plan/071012.pdf
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2009. Centaurium nomaphilum (Spring-loving centaury). 5-year Review: Summary and Evaluation. In: Centaurium nomaphilum (Spring-loving centaury). 5-year Review: Summary and Evaluation : US Fish and Wildlife Service.32 pp. http://www.fws.gov/ecos/ajax/docs/five_year_review/doc2569.pdf
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2009. Thysanocarpus conchuliferus (Santa Cruz Island Fringepod). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. In: Thysanocarpus conchuliferus (Santa Cruz Island Fringepod). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation : US Fish and Wildlife Service.18 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2014. Holocarpha macradenia (Santa Cruz tarplant). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. In: Holocarpha macradenia (Santa Cruz tarplant). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation : US Fish and Wildlife Service.48 pp. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_year_review/doc4365.pdf
USDA Soil Conservation Services, 1994. Plants of the U.S.-alphabetical listing. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Services. 954 p
Vafabakhsh K, 2001. The effects of chemical and mechanical control of weeds in saffron fields on dynamics and productivity of weeds and saffron. The BCPC Conference: Weeds, 2001, Volume 1 and Volume 2. Proceedings of an international conference held at the Brighton Hilton Metropole Hotel, Brighton, UK, 12-15 November 2001, 329-332; 5 ref
Voss EG, 1985. Michigan flora. Part II. Dicots (Saururaceae-Cornaceae). Bulletin 59. Bloomfield Hills, MI: Cranbrook Institute of Science: Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Herbarium. 724 p
Wells MJ, Balsinhas AA, Joffe H, Engelbrecht VM, Harding G, Stirton CH, 1986. A catalogue of problem plants in South Africa. Memoirs of the botanical survey of South Africa No 53. Pretoria, South Africa: Botanical Research Institute
Zohary M, 1966. Flora Palaestina. Jerusalem, Israel: Israel Academy of Science and Humanities
ContributorsTop of page
22/01/18 Updated by:
Philip Weyl, CABI, Delémont, Switzerland
Distribution MapsTop of page
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/