Invasive Species Compendium

Detailed coverage of invasive species threatening livelihoods and the environment worldwide

Datasheet

Echinochloa pyramidalis

Toolbox

Datasheet

Echinochloa pyramidalis

Summary

  • Last modified
  • 27 September 2018
  • Datasheet Type(s)
  • Invasive Species
  • Pest
  • Preferred Scientific Name
  • Echinochloa pyramidalis
  • Taxonomic Tree
  • Domain: Eukaryota
  •   Kingdom: Plantae
  •     Phylum: Spermatophyta
  •       Subphylum: Angiospermae
  •         Class: Monocotyledonae
  • Summary of Invasiveness
  • E. pyramidalis, a perennial grass, has decidedly invasive characteristics with its vigorous shoot and rhizome growth and abundant seed production. As an aquatic, it also has the potential to be very da...

  • 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

  • Echinochloa pyramidalis (Lam.) Hitchc. & Chase (1917)

Other Scientific Names

  • Echinochloa guadeloupensis (Hack.) Wiegand (1921)
  • Echinochloa holubii (Stapf) Stapf (1920)
  • Echinochloa. senegalensis Mez (1917)
  • Panicum pyramidale Lam (1791)
  • Panicum quadrifarium Hochst.ex A.Rich. (1851)

International Common Names

  • English: antelope grass; limpopo grass; sil grass
  • Spanish: pasto limpago

Local Common Names

  • : olifantsgras
  • Germany: Atilopen gras; Atilopengras; Stachelhirse
  • India: water grass

Summary of Invasiveness

Top of page

E. pyramidalis, a perennial grass, has decidedly invasive characteristics with its vigorous shoot and rhizome growth and abundant seed production. As an aquatic, it also has the potential to be very damaging to sensitive aquatic habitats. Holm et al. (1979) record it as a major weed in its native area in Nigeria, Swaziland, Sudan and Madagascar. In Guyana, after being introduced and cultivated for some years, it was noticed as a weed in sugar cane in 1982 and increased rapidly to become one of the most troublesome weeds in the aquatic system of the Guyana Sugar Corporation (Bishundial et al., 1997). In Mexico, again after introduction as a fodder grass, it has become widely invasive in wetlands, tending to reduce native wetland species (López Rosas et al., 2010). Apart from its competitive growth, Wells et al. (1986) note its tendency to obstruct water flow. For the USA it is highly ranked as a potential invasive weed of the future (Parker et al., 2007) and it has been identified as a species ‘not authorized (for introduction) pending pest risk analysis’ (NAPPRA) (USDA-APHIS, 2012).

Taxonomic Tree

Top of page
  • Domain: Eukaryota
  •     Kingdom: Plantae
  •         Phylum: Spermatophyta
  •             Subphylum: Angiospermae
  •                 Class: Monocotyledonae
  •                     Order: Cyperales
  •                         Family: Poaceae
  •                             Genus: Echinochloa
  •                                 Species: Echinochloa pyramidalis

Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature

Top of page

Echinochloa holubii is sometimes treated as a separate species (e.g. by Chippindall, 1955), less robust and with a narrow inflorescence of short distant racemes, but more recent publications treat it as a depauperate form of E. pyramidalis associated with drier, less favourable habitats. This synonymy is endorsed by The Plant List (2012). The earliest name to be applied was Panicum pyramidale. Many synonyms have since been applied but none are in common current use. The plant exists as diploid and polyploid forms and shows considerable variability. Some varieties have been selected for commercial use e.g. those lacking irritant hairs on the sheaths; and in Malawi, cv. Chirundu is an upright variety and cv. Parfuri a creeping type (FAO, 2012). Hybrids with the closely related E. obtusiflora have been artificially created by Yabuno (1988) but there are no reports of natural hybrids in the field.

The main English common name ‘antelope grass’ refers to its rampant stolons leaping across waterways. The Bayer code is ECHPY (Bayer, 1982).

Description

Top of page

A robust, rhizomatous, reedlike perennial, erect to 3 or 4 m high, along the edges of water, but also developing spongy horizontal stems spreading for many meters across the water surface, or open mud, rooting at the nodes. Leaves up to 60 cm long, 2 cm wide, glabrous when growing in the water, but erect plants can have sharp, irritating hairs on the leaf and sheath. Ligule a line of hairs. Inflorescence green or purplish, up to 30 cm long with many overlapping racemes up to 10 cm long, simple or branched. Spikelets elliptic, plump, 3–4 mm long, glabrous or shortly hairy, with longer hairs on the veins. Upper glume as long as the spikelet; lower glume less than half as long. Lower lemma awnless or with an occasional awn up to 1 or 2 mm long. Upper glume 2–3 mm. (Mainly from Chippindall 1955; Clayton and Renvoize 1982; and Clayton 1989).

Plant Type

Top of page Aquatic
Grass / sedge
Herbaceous
Perennial
Seed propagated
Vegetatively propagated

Distribution

Top of page

E. pyramidalis is native to Africa and widely distributed across the continent. Whether it is native or introduced in Madagascar is uncertain. However, it has been introduced to many other countries outside Africa as a fodder grass. It is not known to have naturalized and/or become a problem in most of those countries, but has done so in Guyana and Mexico. Distribution is associated with wetlands, rivers and irrigation systems; hence these are more important factors in distribution than climatic type, though its range is limited by sensitivity to frost.

Based on his cytological studies, Yabuno (1973) believes East Africa is the centre of origin of the genus.

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

IndiaLocalisedIntroducedBor, 1960
-KarnatakaLocalisedIntroducedShukla, 1996
-ManipurPresentIntroducedShukla, 1996
-Tamil NaduPresentIntroducedJayakumar and Alagappan, 1990
NepalLocalisedIntroducedeFloras, 2012
PhilippinesPresentIntroducedPancho, 1991
Sri LankaPresentIntroducedGBIF, 2012

Africa

AngolaPresentNativePROTA, 2012
BeninPresentNativeHolm et al., 1979
BotswanaPresentNativeClayton, 1989
Burkina FasoPresentNativeHutchinson et al., 1972; USDA-ARS, 2012
BurundiPresentGwannon, 2012
CameroonWidespreadNativeHutchinson et al., 1972; USDA-ARS, 2012
ChadWidespreadNativePurseglove, 1976
Congo Democratic RepublicPresentNativeHolm et al., 1979
Côte d'IvoireWidespreadNativeHutchinson et al., 1972; USDA-ARS, 2012
Equatorial GuineaPresentNativeGwannon, 2012
EritreaPresentNativeGBIF, 2012
EthiopiaPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 2012
GabonPresentGBIF, 2012
GambiaPresentNativeHutchinson et al., 1972; USDA-ARS, 2012
GhanaPresentNativeHutchinson et al., 1972; USDA-ARS, 2012
GuineaPresentNativeGwannon, 2012
Guinea-BissauPresentNativeHutchinson et al., 1972
KenyaPresentNativeClayton and Renvoize, 1982; USDA-ARS, 2012
MadagascarPresentClayton and Renvoize, 1982
MalawiPresentNativeClayton, 1989; USDA-ARS, 2012
MaliPresentNativeHutchinson et al., 1972; USDA-ARS, 2012
MauritaniaPresentNativeGwannon, 2012
MozambiquePresentNativeClayton, 1989; USDA-ARS, 2012
NamibiaPresentPROTA, 2012
NigerPresentNativeHutchinson et al., 1972; USDA-ARS, 2012
NigeriaPresentNativeHutchinson et al., 1972
RwandaPresentNativePROTA, 2012
Saint HelenaPresentIntroducedGBIF, 2012
SenegalPresentNativeHutchinson et al., 1972; USDA-ARS, 2012
Sierra LeonePresentNativeHutchinson et al., 1972
SomaliaPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 2012
South AfricaWidespreadNativeChippindall, 1955
SudanPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 2012
SwazilandWidespreadNativeHolm et al., 1979
TanzaniaPresentNativeClayton and Renvoize, 1982
-ZanzibarPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 2012
TogoPresentNativeGBIF, 2012
TunisiaPresentNativeHolm et al., 1979
UgandaPresentNativeClayton and Renvoize, 1982; USDA-ARS, 2012
ZambiaPresentNativeClayton, 1989; USDA-ARS, 2012
ZimbabwePresentNativeClayton, 1989

North America

MexicoPresentIntroduced1960s Invasive Zuloaga and Morrone, 2003

Central America and Caribbean

BelizePresentIntroducedGwannon, 2012
Costa RicaPresentIntroducedZuloaga and Morrone, 2003
GuadeloupePresentIntroducedPROTA, 2012
GuatemalaPresentIntroducedZuloaga and Morrone, 2003
HondurasPresentIntroducedGwannon, 2012
Netherlands AntillesPresentIntroducedSmithsonian Institution, 2012
NicaraguaPresentIntroducedZuloaga and Morrone, 2003

South America

ArgentinaPresentIntroducedGBIF, 2012
BrazilPresentIntroducedGBIF, 2012
-ParaPresentIntroducedLopes et al., 2006, publ. 2007
-ParaibaPresentIntroducedAndrade et al., 2008
-Rio Grande do SulPresentIntroducedBraga et al., 2008
GuyanaPresentIntroduced Invasive Zuloaga and Morrone, 2003
VenezuelaPresentIntroducedCunha and Bryan, 1974

Europe

FranceUnconfirmed recordGBIF, 2012Doubtful herbarium record – probably referring to specimens form Guyana

Oceania

AustraliaPresentIntroducedHolm et al., 1979
-New South WalesPresentIntroducedAusGrass and, 2012
-QueenslandPresentIntroducedAusGrass and, 2012
-South AustraliaPresentIntroducedAusGrass and, 2012
-Western AustraliaPresentIntroducedAusGrass and, 2012
Papua New GuineaPresentIntroducedPROTA, 2012

History of Introduction and Spread

Top of page

The approximate dates of introduction are known for a few countries, specifically Mexico and Guyana – in the 1960s and 1970s respectively. It must have been introduced much earlier in India, given the reference to it in Bor (1960). Earliest dates for herbarium specimens recorded by GBIF (2012) are, for Australia, 1931, St Helena, 1974, Argentina 1977, Costa Rica 1982 and Peru, 1992. In Brazil, Lopes et al. (2007) note that E. pyramidalis had been cultivated in Para for at least 20 years. In all these cases it is believed the introductions were deliberate, and they may of course have been significantly earlier than these dates suggest. There are no certain instances of accidental introduction.

Introductions

Top of page
Introduced toIntroduced fromYearReasonIntroduced byEstablished in wild throughReferencesNotes
Natural reproductionContinuous restocking
Guyana 1970s Yes Yes Bishundial et al. (1997) First noted 1982
Mexico 1960s Forage (pathway cause) Yes Yes Tapia et al. (1962)
Philippines 1980s Yes Yes

Risk of Introduction

Top of page

The risk of introduction is relatively high as E. pyramidalis is widely valued as a fodder grass, for soil conservation, and/or as a means of alleviating pollution from heavy metals or sewage. Accidental introduction is quite possible but somewhat unlikely as a contaminant of seed lots as it is not common as a weed of crops.

Habitat

Top of page

E. pyramidalis is a semi-aquatic species, almost invariably associated with water, though the ‘E. holubii’ form may be found in slightly drier situations. It is usually associated with badly drained black clays ("black cotton" soils) (FAO, 2012) and in Natal, South Africa, it is associated with the ‘backswamp’ community which receives regular flooding from the adjacent river and resultant deposits of silt and clay (Patrick and Ellery, 2007). Hence it thrives along the borders of rivers and canals and spreads by floating culms across the water. In the Sudd region of the White Nile in Sudan it dominates seasonally flooded grasslands (Lock et al., 1988). In the relatively dry northern Sahel region of West Africa it utilizes retreating wet season flood water (Gillet, 1975). It is moderately tolerant of anaerobic soil conditions (Moraes et al., 2001). In Africa, biomass was maximal at the end of a seasonal flooding to 1 m (Scholte, 2007) but in Mexico it been severely suppressed by prolonged (16 month) flooding to a depth of 40 cm after an initial cutting to soil level (Zuloaga and Morrone, 2003).

Although associated with regularly, if not permanently flooded, conditions, E. pyramidalis is moderately tolerant of dry conditions and provides excellent forage during the dry season in seasonally flooded situations.

In Brazil, E. pyramidalis was among the more productive species tested in a mangrove area, suggesting some tolerance of salinity (Nascimento et al., 1988). Work in Cameroon confirmed that it was tolerant of salinity levels with electrical conductivity of 2, 3, 6 and 9 dS.m-1 under both drained and flooded conditions for a 100 day period (Pare et al., 2011).

It is indifferent to day length (Evans et al., 1964), i.e. day neutral.

Habitat List

Top of page
CategorySub-CategoryHabitatPresenceStatus
Terrestrial
Terrestrial – ManagedCultivated / agricultural land Secondary/tolerated habitat Harmful (pest or invasive)
Managed grasslands (grazing systems) Secondary/tolerated habitat Productive/non-natural
Industrial / intensive livestock production systems Secondary/tolerated habitat Productive/non-natural
Terrestrial ‑ Natural / Semi-naturalRiverbanks Principal habitat Natural
Wetlands Principal habitat Natural
Freshwater
Irrigation channels Principal habitat Harmful (pest or invasive)
Reservoirs Secondary/tolerated habitat Natural
Rivers / streams Secondary/tolerated habitat Natural
Ponds Secondary/tolerated habitat Natural

Hosts/Species Affected

Top of page

E. pyramidalis is considered a weed in the rice fields of Australia, India, Philippines, and tropical America (Pancho, 1991; López Rosas, 2007) and also in Africa (e.g. Kent et al., 2001). Other irrigated crops such as sugar cane are also affected directly or indirectly as a result of E. pyramidalis infesting irrigation channels, restricting water flow and/or encroaching into the crop (Bushundial et al., 1991; Bishundial et al., 1997).

Host Plants and Other Plants Affected

Top of page
Plant nameFamilyContext
Oryza sativa (rice)PoaceaeMain
Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)PoaceaeMain

Growth Stages

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

Biology and Ecology

Top of page

Genetics 

Chromosome number 2n= 18 (diploid), 36 or 54 (Yabuno 1970; Missouri Botanic Garden, 2012).

Yabuno (1970) reports that whereas most members of the genus are fully self-fertile, E. pyramidalis is partially self-incompatible. 

Reproductive Biology

Reproduction of E. pyramidalis occurs from seed but also by vegetative spread of both rhizomes and stolons. It has very variable morphology, depending on the conditions, with very tall erect forms just away from the water’s edge, while plants rooted in the water form rampant spongy, leafy stems which grow rapidly across the water. Seed production is high, but no information has been found on conditions for seed germination. 

Physiology and Phenology

E. pyramidalis is a C4 grass (Howard-Williams and Walker, 1974). It has varied growth forms, being erect when not flooded, but forming horizontal, trailing stolons on open water. Although flourishing under very wet and flooded conditions it continues to grow well during seasonal drier weather and provides valuable dry season forage, especially following burning. 

No information has been found on longevity of seed or of perennating plants. 

Nutrition

There appear to have been few studies of the nutritional requirements of E. pyramidalis. In most situations where it is used as a crop, it is growing in relatively fertile soils regularly enriched by seasonal flooding. It apparently thrives on high soil nutrient levels but exact requirements have not been documented. 

Environmental Requirements 

Typical E. pyramidalis is an aquatic species associated with wetlands, rivers and irrigation systems; hence these are more important factors in distribution than climatic type, though its range is limited by sensitivity to frost. It is tolerant of moderate salinity and drought conditions. Although it can thrive on seasonal flooding to 1 m depth (Scholte, 2007), it is suppressed by more prolonged flooding after cutting to soil level (Zuloaga and Morrone, 2003).

Climate

Top of page
ClimateStatusDescriptionRemark
Af - Tropical rainforest climate Tolerated > 60mm precipitation per month
Am - Tropical monsoon climate Preferred Tropical monsoon climate ( < 60mm precipitation driest month but > (100 - [total annual precipitation(mm}/25]))
As - Tropical savanna climate with dry summer Preferred < 60mm precipitation driest month (in summer) and < (100 - [total annual precipitation{mm}/25])
Aw - Tropical wet and dry savanna climate Preferred < 60mm precipitation driest month (in winter) and < (100 - [total annual precipitation{mm}/25])
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 Tolerated Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, dry summers
Cw - Warm temperate climate with dry winter Tolerated Warm temperate climate with dry winter (Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, dry winters)

Latitude/Altitude Ranges

Top of page
Latitude North (°N)Latitude South (°S)Altitude Lower (m)Altitude Upper (m)
30 34

Air Temperature

Top of page
Parameter Lower limit Upper limit
Mean annual temperature (ºC) 32 18

Soil Tolerances

Top of page

Soil drainage

  • impeded
  • seasonally waterlogged

Soil reaction

  • acid
  • alkaline
  • neutral

Soil texture

  • heavy
  • medium

Natural enemies

Top of page
Natural enemyTypeLife stagesSpecificityReferencesBiological control inBiological control on
Chilo zacconius Herbivore not specific
Sesamia calamistis Herbivore not specific
Sesamia nonagrioides botanephaga Herbivore not specific

Notes on Natural Enemies

Top of page

Mohamed et al. (2004) record that Chilo partellus will feed on E. pyramidalis but preferred, and grew faster on, maize. In Ghana, larvae of the noctuids Sesamia calamistis, S. penniseti and S. botanephaga were collected on E. pyramidalis; also larvae of Chilo zacconius (Sampson and Kumar, 1986). There are no reports of serious damage to E. pyramidalis from insects or pathogens.

Means of Movement and Dispersal

Top of page

Natural Dispersal (Non-Biotic)

Local dispersal can occur by means of rhizomes or stolons, while wider dispersal is by seeds, most often carried by water. 

Vector Transmission (Biotic)

Spread can presumably occur to some extent by grazing animals, wild or domesticated. 

Accidental Introduction 

There are no documented cases of accidental introduction, though this could occur by transport of hay containing seed heads. 

Intentional Introduction 

Intentional introduction as a fodder or forage species has occurred many times, to a wide range of countries.

Pathway Causes

Top of page

Pathway Vectors

Top of page
VectorNotesLong DistanceLocalReferences
Aircraft Yes
Floating vegetation and debris Yes
Water Yes

Impact Summary

Top of page
CategoryImpact
Economic/livelihood Positive and negative
Environment (generally) Positive and negative

Economic Impact

Top of page

E. pyramidalis occurs as a weed of rice in Africa – commonly in Cote d’Ivoire, in lowland forest ecological zones (Kent et al., 2001) and in Asia and South America (Pancho, 1991). Pancho notes that it was introduced to the Philippines ‘recently’ and is now abundant in rice in Laguna. Its listing as a ‘serious’ or ‘principal’ weed in Nigeria, Swaziland, Sudan and Madagascar (Holm et al., 1979) is presumably also a result of occurrence in this crop. In Guyana it has become a serious weed of sugar cane (Bushundial et al., 1991; Bishundial et al., 1997).

Environmental Impact

Top of page

Impact on Habitats

In many wet and regularly flooded situations, E. pyramidalis can come to dominate the vegetation, as in many parts of Africa, where it may be a virtually climax vegetation, desirable for local livestock or wildlife. Where it is an exotic species, this may be quite undesirable, replacing local native species. López Rosas et al. (2005) concluded that, as a C4 species, it is more efficient in use of water than the native plants, as well as having a larger biomass, characteristics that can change the hydrological pattern of the wetland. 

Impact on Biodiversity

In Mexico, there is clear evidence that E. pyramidalis has replaced local flora including Sagittaria lancifolia, Laportea mexicana,Pontederia sagittata and Typha domingensis (López Rosas et al., 2010).

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
  • Pioneering in disturbed areas
  • Long lived
  • 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
  • Ecosystem change/ habitat alteration
  • Negatively impacts agriculture
  • Negatively impacts aquaculture/fisheries
  • Transportation disruption
Impact mechanisms
  • Competition - monopolizing resources
  • Rapid growth

Uses

Top of page

E. pyramidalis is widely used, both in Africa and where introduced to other parts of the world, for forage, fodder, hay or silage. The types with glabrous or smooth leaf-sheaths are used for hay: those with hairy leaf-sheaths are unpleasant to handle. After seasonal flooding, it continues to grow through the dry season, the old growth sometimes being first burnt off - a common African grazing cycle (FAO, 2012). In Malawi several varieties (cv. Chirundu is an upright variety and cv. Parfuri a creeping type) yield about 25,000 kg green matter per hectare in February, rather less at a second cut in July and before flowering (FAO, 2012). Andrade et al. (2008), in Brazil, studied in detail the growth of E. pyramidalis following cutting (simulating grazing) and concluded that maximum leaf number (5.5) was achieved after 25 days and that this was therefore a suitable frequency to allow grazing. Braga et al. (2008), also in Brazil, concluded that 45 days were needed for maximum yield as hay. In Guyana total dry matter production with cutting at 3-, 4- or 5-week intervals was 21.3, 27.2 and 27.6 t/ha, respectively (Smith et al., 1991). Kuri cattle graze on the inundated antelope grass around Lake Chad (Pursglove, 1976).

In Guyana, a stocking rate of 1.3 heifers/ha on E. pyramidalis pasture gave equivalent weight gain (300g/heifer/day) to the optimum 1.1/ha (Seaton et al., 1994). Also in Guyana, sheep given 4.5 kg chopped E. pyramidalis per day thrived, provided they received supplemental cereal and minerals (Davis et al, 1994). In Nigeria goats were maintained satisfactorily on E. pyramidalis (Adebowale et al., 1988) harvested at 6 week intervals. At this stage crude protein was 98.2 g/kg. Older material had lower protein content. 

Cunha and Bryan (1974) found palatability to cattle of E. pyramidalis to be relatively high, especially when young. Although extremely coarse, indigenous animals graze it readily to ground level at the end of the dry season. The young growth is very palatable after the old material has been burnt off. 

No toxicity has been reported.

Uses List

Top of page

Animal feed, fodder, forage

  • Fodder/animal feed
  • Forage

Environmental

  • Boundary, barrier or support
  • Erosion control or dune stabilization
  • Soil conservation

Detection and Inspection

Top of page

Preliminary work is reported from Kenya, to identify and survey E. pyramidalis by satellite imagery (Schmidt and Skidmore, 2001).

Similarities to Other Species/Conditions

Top of page

E. obtusiflora is a closely related species occurring in northern tropical Africa which has been artificially hybridized with E. pyramidalis (Yabuno, 1988), but is readily distinguished by its annual habit up to only 1 m high, and obtuse spikelets. The American species, E. polystachya and Old World E. stagnina (= E. scabra), each resemble E. pyramidalis in robustness and their trailing culms but E. stagnina lacks rhizomes, and both have conspicuous awns, generally absent in E. pyramidalis (McKenzie et al., 1992).

Prevention and Control

Top of page

SPS Measures 

For the USA, E. pyramidalis is highly ranked as a potential invasive weed of the future (Parker et al., 2007) and it has been identified as a species ‘not authorized (for introduction) pending pest risk analysis’ (NAPPRA) (USDA-APHIS, 2012). 

Control 

Cultural control and sanitary measures 

Bishundial et al. (1997) suggest a range of means to reduce the spread of E. pyramidalis in irrigated sugarcane, including: the avoidance of cutting and moving to feed livestock; maximising competition from the crop by fertilizing after chemical or other control measures; and reducing spread from pastures by planting vetiver grass (Vetiveria zizanioides) around the edges and Cynodon dactylon on banks. They further report promising results from the use of Leersia hexandra as a competitor. 

Physical/mechanical control 

E. pyramidalis has been controlled by disking, shading, cutting to soil level, and prolonged flooding, in various combinations (López Rosas et al., 2010). But Bishundial et al. (1997) caution that great care is needed to dispose of cut material safely, well away from the cropped area, or buried 1 m deep. 

Chemical control 

Among a range of herbicides tested by Bushundial et al. (1991), best results were obtained with a mixture of asulam and dalapon. Later work by the same team (Bishundial et al. 1997) reported that asulam and asulam mixtures with dalapon, paraquat, diuron or atraziine gave ‘acceptable’ control. Hexazinone plus paraquat also gave good control when used as a basal and foliar treatment, but none of these prevented eventual regrowth. For complete kill in non-crop areas, imazapyr was effective at 120 g/ha. In sugar cane, the recommendation remained the repeated use of asulam when the weed is about 30 cm tall. López Rosas et al. (2010) refer to tests with glyphosate, but this had been less successful than soil disking and shading.          

Monitoring and Surveillance 

Preliminary work is reported from Kenya to identify and survey E. pyramidalis by satellite imagery (Schmidt and Skidmore, 2001).

References

Top of page

Adebowale EA, 1988. Nutritive evaluation of Echinochloa pyramidalis using West African Dwarf goats. In: Goat production in the humid tropics. Proceedings of a workshop at the University of Ife, Ile-Ife, Nigeria, 20-24 July 1987 [ed. by Smith, O.B.\Bosman, H.G.]. Wageningen, Netherlands: Pudoc, 96-100.

Andrade AC; Rodrigues BHN; Azevêdo DMMR; Magalhães JA; Carvalho KSde, 2008. Morphogenetic characteristics of "Canarana" (Echinochloa pyramidalis Lam.) at different ages of regrowth. (Características morfológicas da Canarana-Ereta-Lisa (Echinochloa pyramidalis Lam.) em diferentes idades de rebrotação.) Revista Cientifica de Producao Animal, 10(1):37-49.

Bayer AG, 1982. Important crops of the world and their weeds, Ed. 2. Leverkusen, Germany: Bayer AG, 1682 pp.

Bishundial DP; Dasrat B; Rajkumar A; Kumar D, 1997. Management of antelope grass (Echinochloa pyramidalis) in sugarcane water ways. In: Proceedings of the West Indies Sugar Technologists 26th Conference, 22-26 September 1997. Bridgetown, Barbados: Sugar Association of the Caribbean, 164-168.

Bor NL, 1960. The Grasses of Burma, Ceylon, India and Pakistan (Excluding Bambusae). Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press.

Braga AP; Braga ZCAda C; Rangel AHdo N; Lima Júnior DMde; Maciel Mdo V, 2008. Green mass production and effect of cut age on chemical composition of canarana erecta hay Echinochloa pyramidalis, Hitch. (Produção de massa verde e efeito da idade de corte sobre a composição químico-bromatológica do feno de canarana erecta lisa (Echinochloa pyramidalis, Hitch).) Caatinga, 21(4):1-5. http://periodicos.ufersa.edu.br/index.php/sistema/article/view/831/405

Bushundial DP, 1991. Recent work on the control of Echinochloa pyrimidalis (Lam.) Hitch. and Chase and Echinochloa polystachya (Kunth) Hitchc. Proceedings of the 24th West Indies Sugar Techologists' Conference, Kingston, Jamaica, 8-12 April 1991., 279-285.

Chippindall LKA, 1955. Part 1. A guide to the identification of grasses in South Africa. In: The grasses and pastures of South Africa [ed. by Meredith, D.]. Cape Town, South Africa: Central News Agency, 361.

Clayton WD, 1989. Gramineae. XXIV. Paniceae R. Br. In: Launert E, Pope GV, eds. Flora Zambesiaca, Volume 10, Part 3. London, UK: Flora Zambesiaca Management Committee.

Clayton WD; Renvoize SA, 1982. Gramineae (Part 3) In: Polhill RM, ed. Flora of Tropical East Africa. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Balkema, 451-898.

Cunha ER; Bryan WB, 1974. Preliminary study of pasture grasses in the Orinoco Delta. 2. Acceptability to the grazing animal. In: Colloque sur l'intensification de la production fourragere en milieu tropical humide et son utilisation par les ruminants (24-29 Mai 1971).: Parra C., O.; Bryan, W. B. : Preliminary study of pasture grasses in the Orinoco Delta. 1. Management and fertilization. Paris, France: INRA., 197-201.

Davis P; Muñoz H; Mansaram M; DeGroot P, 1994. Performance of Barbados Blackbelly sheep on a cut-and-carry system. In: Annual review conference proceedings of the National Agricultural Research Institute with the Caribbean Agricultural Research and Development Institute (CARDI), October 20-23, 1992, Mon Repos, East Coast Demerara, Guyana [ed. by Seaton, J.\Broomes, V.\Cumberbatch, N.\Forde, B\Munroe, L.]. Mon Repos, Guyana: National Agricultural Research Institute, 107-112.

eFloras, 2012. Annotated checklist of the flowering plants of Nepal. Annotated checklist of the flowering plants of Nepal. eFloras. http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=110

Evans LT; Wardlaw IF; Williams CN, 1964. Environmental control of growth. In: Grasses and Grasslands [ed. by Barnard, C.]. London, UK: Mcmillan, 102-125.

FAO, 2012. Grassland Species Profiles. Grassland Species Profiles. Rome, Italy: FAO. http://www.fao.org/ag/AGP/AGPC/doc/GBASE/Default.htm

Fonkou T; Agendia P; Kengne I; Akoa A; Derek F; Nya J; Dongmo F, 2005. Heavy metal concentrations in some biotic and abiotic components of the Olezoa wetland complex (Yaoundé-Cameroon, West Africa). Water Quality Research Journal of Canada, 40(4):457-461.

Fonkou T; Fonteh MF; Kanouo MD; Akoa A, 2010. Performances of vegetated beds with Echinochloa pyramidalis in the purification of wastewater from distillery in sub-Saharan Africa. Tropicultura, 28(2):69-76.

Fryxell JM; Sinclair ARE, 1988. Seasonal migration by white-eared kob in relation to resources. African Journal of Ecology, 26(1):17-31.

GBIF, 2012. Global Biodiversity Information Facility. Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF). http://data.gbif.org

Gibbs Russell GE; Watson L; Koekemoer M; Smook L; Barker NP; Anderson HM; Dellwitz MJ, 1990. Grasses of Southern Africa. Memoirs of the Botanical Survey of South Africa No 58. Pretoria, South Africa: National Botanic Grdens/ Botanical Research Institute.

Gillet H, 1975. Plant cover and pastures of the Sahel. MAB Technical Notes, No.1:21-27.

Gwannon, 2012. Gwannon.com, the Natural Species Search Engine. Gwannon.com, the Natural Species Search Engine. Gwannon.com. http://www.gwannon

Holm L; Pancho J; Herberger J; Plucknett D, 1979. A Geographical Atlas of World Weeds. New York, USA: John Wiley & Sons.

Howard-Williams C; Walker BH, 1974. The vegetation of a tropical African lake: classification and ordination of the vegetation of Lake Chilwa (Malawi). Journal of Ecology, 62(3):831-853.

Hutchinson J; Dalziel JM; Hepper FN, 1972. Flora of West Tropical Africa, Vol. III. London, UK: Crown Agents for Oversea Governments and Administrations.

Jayakumar K; Alagappan RM, 1990. Studies on rice-based cropping systems. International Rice Research Newsletter, 15(4):31.

Kengne IM; Kengne ES; Akoa A; Bemmo N; Dodane PH; Koné D, 2011. Vertical-flow constructed wetlands as an emerging solution for faecal sludge dewatering in developing countries. Journal of Water, Sanitation and Hygiene for Development, 1(1):13-19. http://www.iwaponline.com/washdev/001/0013/0010013.pdf

Kent R; Johnson DE; Becker M, 2001. The influences of cropping system on weed communities of rice in Côte d'Ivoire, West Africa. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 87(3):299-307.

Lock M, 1988. Ecology of plants in the swamps and floodplains. The Jonglei Canal: impact and opportunity [ed. by Howell, P.\Lock, M.\Cobb, S.]. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 146-174.

Lopes ELN; Fernandes AR; Grimaldi C; Ruivo Mde LP; Rodrigues TE; Sarrazin M; 2006, publ. 2007. Chemical characteristics of a Gleysoil under different soil use systems along the Guamá river banks in Belém, Pará. (Características químicas de um Gleissolo sob diferentes sistemas de uso, nas margens do rio Guamá, Belém, Pará.) Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi, Ciências Naturais, 1(1):127-137. http://scielo.iec.pa.gov.br/scielo.php?script=sci_serial&pid=1981-8114&lng=pt&nrm=iso

López Rosas H, 2007. Respuesta de un humedal transformado por la invasión de la gramínea exótica Echinochloa pyramidalis (Lam.) Hitchc. & A. Chase a los disturbios inducidos (cambios en el hidroperiodo, apertura de espacios y modificación de la intensidad lumínica) ([English title not available]). Veracruz, Mexico: Instituto de Ecología, A.

López Rosas H; López-Barrera F; Moreno-Casasola P; Aguirre-León G; Cázares-Hernández E; Sánchez-Higueredo L, 2010. Indicators of recovery in a tropical freshwater marsh invaded by an African grass. Ecological Restoration, 28(3):324-332. http://er.uwpress.org/cgi/reprint/28/3/324

López Rosas H; Moreno-Casasola P; Mendelssohn IA, 2005. Effects of an African grass invasion on vegetation, soil and interstitial water characteristics in a tropical freshwater marsh in La Mancha, Veracruz (Mexico). Journal of Plant Interactions, 1:187-195.

McKenzie PM; Michael PW; Urbatsch LE; Noble RE; Proctor GR, 1992. First record of Echinochloa stagnina (Poaceae) for Puerto Rico and key to the Echinochloa in the West Indies. SIDA, Contributions to Botany, 15(3):527-532.

Missouri Botanical Garden, 2012. Tropicos database. St Louis, USA: Missouri Botanical Garden. http://www.tropicos.org/

Mohamed HM; Khan ZR; Overholt WA; Elizabeth DK, 2004. Behaviour and biology of Chilo partellus (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) on maize and wild gramineous plants. International Journal of Tropical Insect Science, 24(4):287-297.

Moraes MGde; Alves JD; Oliveira LEMde, 2001. Effects of anaerobiosis induced by flooding in seedlings of six herbaceous species. (Efeitos da anaerobiose induzida por alagamento em plântulas de seis espécies herbáceas.) Ciência e Agrotecnologia, 25(4):941-951.

Nascimento CNBdo; Carvalho LODde M; Camarão AP; Salimos EP, 1988. Evaluation of forage grasses on a mangrove area of Marajo island. (Avaliacão de gramíneas forrageiras em área de mangue da ilha de Marajó.) Boletim de Pesquisa - Centro de Pesquisa Agropecuária do Trópico Úmido, No.93. 18pp.

Noirard C; Berre Mle; Ramousse R; Sépulcre C; Joly P, 2004. Diets of sympatric hippopotamus (Hippopotamus amphibius) and zebus (Bos indicus) during the dry season in the "W" National Park (Niger Republic). Game & Wildlife Science [Wildlife: a natural resource. Proceedings of the 6th International Wildlife Ranching Symposium, 6-9 July 2004, Paris, France.], 21(3):423-431.

Odinga C; Otieno F; Adeyemo J, 2011. Investigating the effectiveness of aquatic plants (Echinocloa L and Cyperus L) in removing nutrients from wastewater: the case of Chemelil constructed wetland - Kenya. International Journal of Physical Sciences, 6(16):3960-3970. http://www.academicjournals.org/IJPS/PDF/pdf2011/18Aug/Odinga%20et%20al.pdf

Pancho JV, 1991. Grassy weeds in the Philippines. Tropical grassy weeds Wallingford, Oxon, UK; CAB International, 183-188

Pare MMN; Kone D; Kengne IM; Akoa A, 2011. Growth and yield potential of Echinochloa pyramidalis (Lam.) Hitchc & Chase: a forage plant used in vertical-flow constructed wetlands in Cameroon. African Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 5(8):622-632. http://www.academicjournals.org/AJest/PDF/pdf%202011/Aug/Pare%20et%20al.pdf

Parker C; Caton BP; Fowler L, 2007. Ranking nonindigenous weed species by their potential to invade the United States. Weed Science, 55(4):386-397. http://wssa.allenpress.com/wssaonline/?request=index-html

Patrick MJ; Ellery WN, 2007. Plant community and landscape patterns of a floodplain wetland in Maputaland, Northern KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. African Journal of Ecology, 45(2):175-183. http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/loi/aje

PROTA, 2012. PROTA4U web database. Grubben GJH, Denton OA, eds. Wageningen, Netherlands: Plant Resources of Tropical Africa. http://www.prota4u.org/search.asp

Purseglove JW, 1976. Tropical Crops: Monocotyledons. London, UK: Longmans, 618 pp.

Raghavan RS; Singh NP; Deshpande UR; Kulkarni BG, 1978. Additions to Poaceae of Karnataka State. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society, 75(3):935-937.

Sampson MA; Kumar R, 1986. Alternative host plants of sugar-cane stem-borers in southern Ghana. Insect Science and its Application, 7(4):539-541.

Sayer JA; Lavieren LPvan, 1975. The ecology of the Kafue lechwe population of Zambia before the operation of hydro-electric dams on the Kafue river. East African Wildlife Journal, 13(1):9-37.

Schmidt KS; Skidmore AK, 2001. Exploring spectral discrimination of grass species in African rangelands. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 22(17):3421-3434.

Scholte P, 2007. Maximum flood depth characterizes above-ground biomass in African seasonally shallowly flooded grasslands. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 23(1):63-72. http://www.journals.cup.org/action/displayJournal?jid=TRO

Seaton J; Cumberbatch N; Nedd S; Haynes A; Noble D; Knights H, 1994. Liveweight gain of heifers continuously grazing Echinochloa pyramidalis pastures at three stocking rates. In: Annual review conference proceedings of the National Agriculatural Research Institute with the Caribbean Agricultural Research and Development Institute (CARDI), October 20-23, 1992, Mon Repos, East Coast Demerara, Guyana. Mon Repos, Guyana: National Agricultural Research Institute, 102-105.

Shukla U, 1996. The Grasses of North-Eastern India. Jodhpur, India: Scientific Publishers, 325 pp.

Silva Sda; Soares ÂM; Oliveira LEMde; Magalhães PC, 2001. Physiological responses of promising grasses for sideline revegetation of hydroelectrical reservoirs subjected to water deficit. (Respostas fisiológicas de gramíneas promissoras para revegetação ciliar de reservatórios hidrelétricos, submetidas à deficiência hídrica.) Ciência e Agrotecnologia, 25(1):124-133.

Simon BK; Alfonso Y, 2011. AusGrass2. Grasses of Australia. Australia: CSIRO Publishing. http://ausgrass2.myspecies.info/

Smith J; Seaton J; Osuji P; D'Aguiar P; Chesney P; McBean M; Haynes A; Harding C; Cumberbatch N, 1991. Dry matter and crude protein yields of Echinochloa pyramidalis on coastal clay soil of Guyana. Turrialba, 41(1):69-75.

Smithsonian Institution, 2012. Flora of the West Indies. Flora of the West Indies., USA: Smithsonian Institution. http://botany.si.edu/antilles/westindies/

Tapia JC; Carrera CM; Buller RE, 1962. [English title not available]. (Zacate alemán para terrenos inundables del trópico.) Circular CIASE, No. 6.

The Plant List, 2012. The Plant List: a working list of all plant species. London, UK: Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. http://www.theplantlist.org/

USDA-APHIS, 2012. Plant Quarantine Pest Evaluation Data Sheets. Plant Quarantine Pest Evaluation Data Sheets., USA: US Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant health Inspection Service. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/plant_health/index.shtml

USDA-ARS, 2012. Germplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN). Online Database. Beltsville, Maryland, USA: National Germplasm Resources Laboratory. https://npgsweb.ars-grin.gov/gringlobal/taxon/taxonomysearch.aspx

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.

YABUNO T, 1970. Partial self-incompatibility in Echinochloa pyramidalis (Lamk.) Hitchc. et Chase. Idengaku Zasshi = Jap. J. Genet, 45:189-92.

Yabuno T, 1973. Cytological relationships between some Echinochloa species and Kenyan E. haploclada (Stapf) Stapf. Cytologia, 38(1):131-135.

Yabuno T, 1988. Cytological relationship between Echinochloa obtusiflora Stapf and the Kenyan diploid strain of E. pyramidalis (Lamk.) Hitchc. et Chase. Cytologia, 53(1):93-96.

Zuloaga FO; Morrone O, 2003. Echinochloa. Catalogue of New World grasses, 46:215-224. [Contributions of the U.S. National Herbarium.]

Contributors

Top of page

28/03/12 Original text by:

Chris Parker, Consultant, Bristol, UK

Distribution Maps

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