Invasive Species Compendium

Detailed coverage of invasive species threatening livelihoods and the environment worldwide

Datasheet

Juncus ensifolius
(swordleaf rush)

Toolbox

Datasheet

Juncus ensifolius (swordleaf rush)

Summary

  • Last modified
  • 15 November 2018
  • Datasheet Type(s)
  • Invasive Species
  • Preferred Scientific Name
  • Juncus ensifolius
  • Preferred Common Name
  • swordleaf rush
  • Taxonomic Tree
  • Domain: Eukaryota
  •   Kingdom: Plantae
  •     Phylum: Spermatophyta
  •       Subphylum: Angiospermae
  •         Class: Monocotyledonae
  • Summary of Invasiveness
  • Juncus ensifolius is a mostly pioneering or ruderal species of rush that readily establishes in disturbed wet soils, often from buried seeds.  Within its native range in western North America it is widespread a...

  • 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

  • Juncus ensifolius Wikstrom

Preferred Common Name

  • swordleaf rush

Other Scientific Names

  • Juncus brunnescens Rydberg
  • Juncus saximontanus A. Nelson
  • Juncus xiphioides var. montanus Engelm.
  • Juncus xiphioides var. triandrus Engelm.

International Common Names

  • English: dwarf rush; equitant-leaved rush; iris-leaved rush; Sword-leaved rush

Local Common Names

  • Australia: three-stamened rush
  • Austria: Schwertblatt-Simse
  • Belgium: Zwaardrus
  • Canada: daggerleaf rush; dagger-leaved rush
  • Canada/Quebec: jonc à épées
  • Denmark: Sværd-siv
  • Finland: miekkavihvilä
  • France: jonc nain
  • Germany: Schwertblättrige Binse; Swertbinse; Zwergbinse
  • Netherlands: Dwergbies; Swurdblêdrusk; Zwaardrus
  • New Zealand: three-stamened rush
  • Norway: Sverdsiv
  • Sweden: Svärdtåg
  • UK: three-stamened rush

Summary of Invasiveness

Top of page

Juncus ensifolius is a mostly pioneering or ruderal species of rush that readily establishes in disturbed wet soils, often from buried seeds.  Within its native range in western North America it is widespread and infrequent to common, typically a minor, secondary or at most co-dominant species in natural wetlands. Limited reports suggest that it behaves similarly in east Asia (Tachibana et al., 2001), where it is also native. Although it is recognized as having “potential for weediness” (Marr and Trull, 2002), it is not generally viewed as an aggressive invader within its native range and is widely used in wetland restoration and as a landscape plant. There are no published studies documenting its rate of growth, spread or dispersal.

Scattered occurrences in eastern North America are considered by some to be disjunct, rare, native populations worthy of tracking or protection, and by others to be introduced. It appears most likely that these populations result from combinations of accidental and deliberate human introductions and dispersal by animals (e.g. by migrating waterfowl).

In Europe, Australia, New Zealand and Hawaii, J. ensifolius has apparently become naturalized in the 20th Century following deliberate (gardening) and accidental (as a contaminant in seed mixes and peat) introductions.  There appear to be no reports of it spreading outside its native range in Asia, but it has been introduced in constructed experimental wetlands in Israel. Occurrences in the introduced range are being monitored (both formally by government agencies, and informally by interested botanists), but there are no records of targeted control action. There is no evidence that J. ensifolius causes harm to human health, but there is some ambiguity as to whether it causes, or has the potential to cause, economic or environmental harm. It is recorded as a threat to several endangered plant species in Hawaii, but even in that case the situation is not entirely clear.

Taxonomic Tree

Top of page
  • Domain: Eukaryota
  •     Kingdom: Plantae
  •         Phylum: Spermatophyta
  •             Subphylum: Angiospermae
  •                 Class: Monocotyledonae
  •                     Order: Cyperales
  •                         Family: Juncaceae
  •                             Genus: Juncus
  •                                 Species: Juncus ensifolius

Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature

Top of page

Two varieties are recognized in the Flora of North America (Brooks and Clemants, 2000): (1) Juncus ensifolius var. ensifolius, which has 3 stamens and purple brown flowerheads, and (2) Juncus ensifolius var. montanus (Engelmann) C. L. Hitchcock, which has 6 stamens and paler brown flowerheads.  The ranges of the two varieties overlap, but var. montanus appears to be restricted to a somewhat smaller range centred on the Rocky Mountain region of western North America, whereas var. ensifolius extends along the Pacific Rim coastline.  Invasive populations found outside the native range appear to be mostly var. ensifolius, as suggested by the common name in the UK, New Zealand and Australia. This variety has the darker, more attractive flowerheads preferred for ornamental use.

Many synonyms can be found in older taxonomies and herbarium specimens. Both subtaxa were considered as varieties of J.xiphioides E. Meyer:  (J. xiphiodes var. triandrus Engelm. for the 3-stamened variety; J. xiphiodes var. montanus Engelm. for the six-stamened montane variety).  The montane variety has also been treated as a separate species (J. saximontanus A. Nelson; J. brunnescens Rydberg), or alternatively as J. ensifolius var. brunnescens (Rydberg) Cronquist.

In international botanical circles, the common name for J. ensifolius most often refers to its sword- or dagger-shaped leaves.  In horticultural circles (i.e. online nurseries) J. ensifolius is commonly sold as “dwarf rush” (or translations thereof) due to its low stature compared to other cultivated rushes. A cultivar named “Flying Hedgehogs”, notable for its “cute” spiny flowerheads, is marketed online (e.g. Dave’s Garden, 2015; Mr. Fothergill's, 2015).

Description

Top of page

The following description is from Brooks and Clemants (2000): A rhizomatous, perennial herb (graminoid), typically growing in dense clumps 20 – 60 cm tall. Rhizomes 2--3 mm diam. Culms erect, 2--6 mm diam. Cataphylls 0 or 1--2, straw-colored, apex narrowly acute. Leaves: basal 1--3, cauline 2--6, straw-colored; auricles absent; blade 2--25 cm x 1.5--6 mm. Inflorescences panicles or racemes of 2--50 heads or heads solitary, 2--14 cm, erect or ascending branches; primary bract erect; heads 3--70-flowered, obovoid to globose, 7--11 mm diam. Flowers: tepals green to brown or reddish brown, lanceolate; outer tepals 2.7--3.6(--4) mm, apex acuminate; inner tepals 2.2--3(--3.5) mm, nearly equal, apex acuminate; stamens 3 or 6; anthers ½ to equal filament length. Capsules included to slightly exserted, chestnut to dark brown, 1-locular, oblong, 2.4--4.3 mm, apex obtuse proximal to beak. Seeds elliptic to obovate, 0.4--1 mm, occasionally tailed.

Plant Type

Top of page Grass / sedge
Perennial
Seed propagated
Vegetatively propagated

Distribution

Top of page

Juncus ensifolius occurs as a widespread, frequent to common native wetland plant from near sea level to subalpine elevations throughout western North America and along the Pacific Rim from California to Alaska, extending through the Aleutian Islands and the Kurile Islands of the Russian Far east to Hokkaido Island, Japan.  In western North America it can be found on both sides of the Rocky Mountains, extending eastward to the western edge of the Great Plains in Saskatchewan (where it is considered rare), South Dakota to eastern Colorado, and central Mexico.

There are disjunct locations along the remote shoreline of Hudson Bay in far northeastern Ontario and northwest Quebec, and also along the Delaware River in New York.  These occurrences were for many years considered native, and are still considered by some to be worth tracking or protecting (Oldham, 1999; Bouchard et al., 1983; New York Natural Heritage Program, 2015); the species is listed as endangered in New York (New York Natural Heritage Program, 2015). However, although human introduction to remote areas of Ontario and Quebec seems unlikely, most sources now consider the U.S. occurrences east of the Great Plains to be introduced (Brooks and Clemants, 2000; Weldy et al., 2015). It appears most likely that these populations result from combinations of accidental and deliberate human introductions and dispersal by animals (e.g. by migrating waterfowl). Other long-disjunct specimens have more recently been reported in Rhode Island and Vermont (BONAP, 2015; latter not verified with a herbarium specimen). J. ensifolius is widespread along disturbed roadsides and waterways in Wisconsin and has also been found at several locations in Michigan (Marr and Trull, 2002). In the Great Lakes region of the USA, the species has been described as “spreading but tough to eradicate” and ranked as “medium priority”, but did not require “early detection and rapid control” in Northern Wisconsin (NCWMA, 2014) and although it was tracked, it was not considered a “priority invasive” by the Great Lakes Indian Fish & Wildlife Commission (Falck et al., 2006), listed as a regulated or restricted species in Wisconsin (Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2015), or prohibited or restricted in other Great Lakes states.

In Europe, Australia, New Zealand and Hawaii the species has apparently become naturalized in the 20th Century following deliberate (gardening) and accidental (as a contaminant in seed mixes and peat) introductions. In Hawaii, Daehler (2005) did not rank it as a “disruptive invader” in upper montane environments, but it was later listed in a final rule under the Federal Endangered Species Act as posing a threat to several endangered plant species on Hawaii Island (US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2013). In Austria a 2002 government publication ranked its status as “impermanent” (non-invasive) and “so far without effects” (Essl and Rabitsch, 2002).

There appear to be no reports of spread outside the native range in Asia, but the species has been introduced in constructed experimental wetlands in Israel (Iasur-Kruh et al., 2010).

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

IsraelPresent only in captivity/cultivationIntroduced2006Iasur-Kruh et al., 2010Constructed wetland at Tel-Aviv wastewater treatment plant
JapanPresentPresent based on regional distribution.
-HokkaidoPresentNativeTachibana et al., 2001Associated with disturbed mire sites

North America

CanadaPresentBrooks and Clemants, 2000
-AlbertaLocalisedNative Not invasive Moss and Packer, 1982; NatureServe, 2016Vulnerable. Found only in the south and west (Rocky Mountains). Both varieties.
-British ColumbiaWidespreadNative Not invasive Klinkenberg, 2016; NatureServe, 2016Apparently absent from northeastern BC. Both varieties.
-OntarioPresent, few occurrencesNative Not invasive Riley, 2003Disjunct, lower Harricana River at James Bay. Possibly extirpated
-QuebecPresent, few occurrencesNative Not invasive Bouchard et al., 1983; Riley, 2003Disjunct, James Bay region. Ranked as critically imperiled.
-SaskatchewanLocalisedNative Not invasive Breitung, 1957; Harms, 2006Southern and central Saskatchewan (Cypress Hills, Duck Lake). Both varieties present but rare. Var. ensifolius is considered Threatened and var. montanus Endangered
MexicoLocalisedNativeBrooks and Clemants, 2000; Consortium of Midwest Herbaria, 2015South as far as Veracruz, Puebla, and Guerrero; range includes Baja California, Chihuahua and Durango
USAPresentBrooks and Clemants, 2000
-AlaskaWidespreadNative Not invasive Hultén, 1968Coastal areas only, including Aleutian Islands. North as far as Anchorage
-ArizonaLocalisedNative Not invasive Rocky Mountain Herbarium, 2015
-CaliforniaWidespreadNative Not invasive Consortium of California Herbaria, 2015Both varieties
-ColoradoPresentNative Not invasive NatureServe, 2015; Rocky Mountain Herbarium, 2015Reported both as widespread and as imperiled
-HawaiiLocalisedIntroduced1911 Invasive Wester, 1992; Wagner et al., 1999; Daehler, 2005Upper elevations on Islands of Hawai’i and Maui
-IdahoWidespreadNative Not invasive Consortium of Pacific Northwest Herbaria, 2015
-MichiganPresent, few occurrencesIntroducedMarr and Trull, 20022 sites in Ottawa National Forest; 1 in Big Island Lake wilderness
-MontanaWidespreadNativeConsortium of Pacific Northwest Herbaria, 2015East to Powder River County; northeast to Box Elder
-NevadaWidespreadNative Not invasive Consortium of Intermountain Herbaria, 2015
-New MexicoLocalisedNative Not invasive Rocky Mountain Herbarium, 2015Grant, Santa Fe, Taos, Colfax and McKinley Counties
-New YorkPresent, few occurrencesNew York Natural Heritage Program, 2015; Weldy et al., 2015Delaware River bank; roadside ditch in Sullivan County. Designated as endangered in the state. Uncertain whether native or introduced
-North DakotaAbsent, unreliable recordBONAP, 2015; USDA-ARS, 2015No verified herbarium records
-OregonWidespreadNative Not invasive Consortium of Pacific Northwest Herbaria, 2015Both varieties
-PennsylvaniaPresent only in captivity/cultivationIntroducedCaribbean Garden, 2015Live plants shipped worldwide from Pottstown, PA
-Rhode IslandPresent, few occurrencesIntroducedEastern Illinois University, 2015Mitigation wetland, West Greenwich, Kent County
-South DakotaLocalisedNative Not invasive Rocky Mountain Herbarium, 2015Black Hills
-TexasAbsent, unreliable recordUSDA-ARS, 2015No verified records
-UtahWidespreadNative Not invasive Goodrich, 1986Both varieties
-VermontAbsent, unreliable recordIntroducedBONAP, 2015; New England Wild Flower Society, 2015Washington County
-WashingtonWidespreadNative Not invasive Consortium of Pacific Northwest Herbaria, 2015
-WisconsinWidespreadIntroduced1971 Invasive Judziewicz and Nekola, 1997Reported as common in roadside ditches in 1986
-WyomingPresentNative Not invasive NatureServe, 2015; Rocky Mountain Herbarium, 2015Reported both as widespread and as vulnerable

Europe

AustriaPresent, few occurrencesIntroduced1989 Not invasive Wittmann and Pilsl, 1997; Essl and Rabitsch, 2002
BelgiumPresent, few occurrencesIntroduced2006 Invasive Verloove, 2015Near Jabbeke, Hergenrath, & Wingene
FinlandPresent, few occurrencesIntroduced1971Pohjakallio and Hämet-Ahti, 1974; Piirainen, 2004Mainly in the south west, but also in Uusimaa. Has disappeared at 2 locales
GermanyLocalisedIntroduced1970Runge, 1972; Koch, 1991In various parts of Germany
LuxembourgLocalisedIntroduced1987Foyer, 1987
NetherlandsPresent, few occurrencesIntroduced1974Adema and Mennema, 1976; Meijden and Holverda, 1987; Stolwijk and Zijlstra, 1995; Werkgroep Florakartering Drenthe, 2016In Drenthe, Twente and Utrecht. Occurrence expanded considerably between 1974 and 1986.
NorwayPresent, few occurrencesIntroduced2000Grøstad, 2003; Piirainen, 2004In Larvik, SE Norway, and Snåsa, Nord-Trondelag
Russian FederationPresentPresent based on regional distribution.
-Russian Far EastLocalisedNativeProbatova et al., 2004South Kurile Islands
SwedenPresent, few occurrencesIntroduced1982Christofferson, 1984; Danielsson and Nilsson, 1988In Harjedalen, Smaland and more recently Norrbotten
UKPresent, few occurrencesIntroduced1956Kent, 1958; Clement and Foster, 1994; Poland, 2005

Oceania

AustraliaPresentPresent based on regional distribution.
-VictoriaLocalisedIntroduced2000 Invasive Atlas of Living Australia, 2015In the Australian Alps
New ZealandLocalisedIntroduced1940 Invasive NZPCN, New Zealand Plant Conservation NetworkBay of Plenty, Westland, Canterbury

History of Introduction and Spread

Top of page

J. ensifolius has apparently been introduced to eastern North America and (during the 20th century) western Europe, Australia, New Zealand and Hawaii, both deliberately and accidentally; see the Distribution table for the years in which it was first reported and the sources of this information. It is an attractive and easily cultivated ornamental that is used horticulturally in artificial bog, wetland and pond gardens and can be purchased from commercial growers in North America (e.g. Caribbean Garden, 2015) and Europe (e.g. Le Jardin du Pic Vert, 2015). It is also believed to have arrived in Europe accidentally as a contaminant in commercial grass seed, hay or other animal feeds, and as dormant, viable seed in peat and commercial soil mixtures containing peat (Piirainen, 2004). Within North America, its recent use as botanical material in wetland restoration projects (Woosaree, 2000; Adamus and Holzhauser, 2006) has probably contributed to spread within and beyond its native range. Machine disturbances such road construction, ditching and diking that create puddles or areas of wet, compacted soil have also enhanced the opportunities for J. ensifolius to become more abundant, or to spread into habitats where it was formerly absent. 

At many of the locations where it has been observed outside of its natural range, J. ensifolius has naturalized and spread relatively quickly, for example along roadside ditches or the margins of ponds. This spread creates opportunities for further dispersal of both seeds and rhizome fragments by wildlife, livestock, pets, vehicles, machinery and foot traffic (e.g., Dörr 1995). Because the seeds can remain viable for decades in a soil or peat seedbank, opportunities for additional spread are considerable.

In Eastern North America, the status of J. ensifolius as a rare native plant or as an invasive alien is ambiguous.  In northern Quebec and Ontario it appears to have established at a remote, undeveloped location (near the shoreline of James Bay -- Riley, 2003) where opportunities for deliberate or accidental human introduction are low.  These disjunct populations are treated as native, and it seems likely that the species was dispersed by waterfowl, as James Bay is a major staging area for migrating geese and other birds (e.g. Jeffries et al., 2003). In New York State, J. ensifolius is considered by some as a rare native plant, while others believe that these eastern U.S. populations were introduced by humans (Weldy et al., 2015).  By contrast, in Wisconsin and Michigan, it is widely recognized by public agencies an invasive alien whose populations are increasing, although not yet requiring active control (Marr and Trull, 2002; Judziewicz and Nekola, 1997).  It has been collected in Rhode Island (Eastern Illinois University, 2015) and there are unsubstantiated reports that it has been observed in Vermont (BONAP, 2015).  

There appear to be no reports of the species spreading outside its native range in Asia, but it has been introduced in constructed experimental wetlands in Israel (Iasur-Kruh et al., 2010).

Occurrences in Europe, New Zealand, Australia, Hawaii and the mid-western to eastern USA (i.e. throughout the non-native range) are being monitored (both formally by government agencies, and informally by interested botanists), but there are no records of targeted control action. In Austria, for example, a 2002 government publication ranked its status as “impermanent” (non-invasive) and “so far without effects” (Essl and Rabitsch, 2002). European records range from just one or a few plants discovered at a new locality to active spreading over many square meters of disturbed ground.  The cumulative evidence (see citations in Distribution table) indicates that the plant is becoming more widespread, frequent and abundant.

Risk of Introduction

Top of page

Risks of further introduction are high because the species is sold worldwide via the internet as an ornamental plant (e.g. Caribbean Garden, 2015; Le Jardin du Pic Vert, 2015) and because many founder populations are located in high traffic areas along roadways and trails.  Growing worldwide interest in wetland restoration and mitigation creates more opportunities for international introductions (e.g. Iasur-Kruh et al., 2010).

Habitat

Top of page

J. ensifolius is a facultative wetland species (Washington Native Plant Society, 2015) that also occurs on seasonally wet disturbed soils in upland sites.  Climatically, it is a cool temperate species that occurs marginally in boreal forests (i.e. in the southern boreal and along coastlines) and at high elevations in warmer climates (e.g. montane wetlands in Hawaii; alpine resorts in Australia).  In humid, coastal environments and cooler climates it has a broad ecological niche that encompasses estuaries, rainforest edges, roadsides and subalpine meadows, whereas in hotter, desert environments it is more narrowly restricted to riparian, wetland and sheltered habitats (e.g. adjacent to a waterfall). A characteristic feature of almost all habitats is that the soils are seasonally, but not continuously, inundated. Over most of its range, J. ensifolius is associated with disturbed soils, often proliferating in wet ditches, roadsides, and reservoir draw-down zones, or following events such as volcanic mudslides, flooding or forest fires. Although it does not tolerate shade, J. ensifolius is not strictly an early seral species, and appears to be sensitive to grazing. In riparian meadows of the US Rocky Mountains, for example, it is regarded as an indicator species of later successional stages with high stability, biotic integrity and minimal grazing disturbance (Winward, 2000; Jones, 2005).

Habitat List

Top of page
CategorySub-CategoryHabitatPresenceStatus
Brackish
Inland saline areas Secondary/tolerated habitat Natural
Estuaries Secondary/tolerated habitat Natural
Lagoons Secondary/tolerated habitat Natural
Terrestrial
 
Terrestrial – ManagedCultivated / agricultural land Secondary/tolerated habitat Natural
Protected agriculture (e.g. glasshouse production) Secondary/tolerated habitat Productive/non-natural
Managed forests, plantations and orchards Secondary/tolerated habitat Natural
Managed grasslands (grazing systems) Secondary/tolerated habitat Natural
Disturbed areas Principal habitat Natural
Disturbed areas Principal habitat Productive/non-natural
Rail / roadsides Principal habitat Natural
Urban / peri-urban areas Secondary/tolerated habitat Natural
Urban / peri-urban areas Secondary/tolerated habitat Productive/non-natural
Terrestrial ‑ Natural / Semi-naturalNatural forests Secondary/tolerated habitat Natural
Natural grasslands Secondary/tolerated habitat Natural
Riverbanks Principal habitat Natural
Riverbanks Principal habitat Productive/non-natural
Wetlands Principal habitat Harmful (pest or invasive)
Wetlands Principal habitat Natural
Wetlands Principal habitat Productive/non-natural
Cold lands / tundra Secondary/tolerated habitat Natural
Scrub / shrublands Secondary/tolerated habitat Natural
Freshwater
 
Irrigation channels Secondary/tolerated habitat Natural
Irrigation channels Secondary/tolerated habitat Productive/non-natural
Lakes Secondary/tolerated habitat Natural
Lakes Secondary/tolerated habitat Productive/non-natural
Reservoirs Secondary/tolerated habitat Natural
Reservoirs Secondary/tolerated habitat Productive/non-natural
Rivers / streams Secondary/tolerated habitat Natural
Rivers / streams Secondary/tolerated habitat Productive/non-natural
Ponds Secondary/tolerated habitat Natural
Ponds Secondary/tolerated habitat Productive/non-natural

Hosts/Species Affected

Top of page

There is no evidence that J. ensifolius currently causes significant economic damage to any crop plants, although it apparently occurs as a minor  contaminant in grass seed mixes (Piirainen, 2004) or commercial peat (Kirschner, 2002). It is recorded as a competitor of seven endangered species in Hawaii – see the 'Host Plants/Plants Affected' and 'Threatened Species’ tables for more information.

Host Plants and Other Plants Affected

Top of page
Plant nameFamilyContext
Cyanea marksii (Marks' cyanea)CyaneidaeWild host
Cyanea tritomantha (`aku)CyaneidaeWild host
Cyrtandra nanawaleensisGesneriaceaeWild host
Cyrtandra wagneriGesneriaceaeWild host
Phyllostegia floribunda (Hawai'i phyllostegia)LamiaceaeWild host
Platydesma remyi (Hawai'i pilo kea)RutaceaeWild host
Pritchardia lanigeraArecaceaeWild host

Growth Stages

Top of page Vegetative growing stage

Biology and Ecology

Top of page

Genetics

Phylogenetic (cladistic) analysis of the Juncaceae performed using rbcL nucleotide sequences and chloroplast DNA (Drábková et al., 2003, 2004, 2006; Drábková, 2010) has confirmed that J. ensifolius is most closely related to other species of Juncus, subgenus Juncus, section Iridifolii, including J. oxymeris and J. xiphioides (also centred in the western US), and to species of section Ozophyllum (broadly distributed in eastern North America, Europe and the Far East).  J. ensifolius was found to differ from other species in lacking most of the anticodon domain of the trnF gene (Drábková et al., 2004). The chromosome number of J. ensifolius var. ensifolius, tested at disparate locations (Snogerup, 1963; Taylor and Mulligan, 1968; Harriman and Redmond, 1976; Probatova et al., 2004) was consistently 2n = 40. It is unclear whether the chromosome number of var. montanus (which differs from var. ensifolius in having 6 rather than 3 stamens) has been tested. 

Reproductive Biology

Juncus ensifolius reproduces both sexually and asexually (by means of rhizomes).  The flowers are wind-pollinated.  In Juncus species, flowers are bisexual. An individual flower opens only once for a few hours and very rarely for longer than 24 h (Buchenau, 1890, 1892, cited by Michalski and Durka, 2007). Plants grown at a botanical garden in Germany produced 1802 ± 324 (SD) pollen grains per flower and 49.0 ± 3.2 ovules per flower.  The pollen/ovule ratio of 37 ± 5 is unusually low for a wind-pollinated species, and the high rate of ovule production is thought to be advantageous in the open, ruderal and disturbed habitats favoured by this species (Michalski and Durka, 2010).  Many Juncus species appear to be capable of self-fertilization (Michalski and Durka, 2007; Huang et al., 2013), favouring higher energy investment in ovules. J. ensifolius may be one such species, as it does appear to produce prolific seeds, even in founder populations.

Juncus seeds are tiny, and those of J. ensifolius are small compared to other rushes (152,000/g). They are released when seed capsules shatter shortly after maturity (Hurd and Shaw, 1992).  J. ensifolius is common in soil seedbanks, and viable seeds are often found in mature forest vegetation where the species is absent from above-ground vegetation (Clark, 1991; Yearsley, 1993; Harmon and Franklin, 1995; Tu et al., 1998; Duncan, 2003; Reynolds and Cooper, 2011), suggesting that seeds can remain viable for decades to centuries.  Heating field-collected soil samples to 50oC stimulated germination of buried viable seed compared to unheated soils, but no germination occurred in soils heated to 150oC (Clark, 1991).  Light and chilling (30 days at 3-5o C) are recommended for germination in the nursery (Hurd and Shaw, 1992), but other reports suggest that seeds will readily germinate within 2 weeks without presoaking or stratification if sown on the soil surface or in shallow water (Steinfeld, 2001).

J. ensifolius spreads and forms loose to dense turfs or swards by means of slender, horizontal rhizomes. New plants can become established from rhizome fragments deposited in moist soil. Disturbance or damage to the rhizomes stimulates the production of new shoots from dormant or adventitious buds.  In cultivation it is not as strongly rhizomatous as J. balticus, for example, and is usually sold and planted out as a bareroot seedling stock, rather than as a rhizome cutting with buds (Whitacre, 2014).

Physiology and Phenology

Klarich (1977) studied respiration and photosynthetic rates of J. ensifolius in water taken from 3 reaches of the Madison River, Wyoming, USA. The pH of the water was lowest < 7.6) and free carbon dioxide was highest (8 ppm) in the upper reach where J. ensifolius was most abundant (1.6% cover).  Lower in the river (pH 8, free CO2 = 1 ppm) J. ensifolius was rare to absent. Photosynthetic rates, and the ratio of net photosynthesis to respiration were highest in carbon dioxide-rich waters from the upper reach of the river, while % light saturation levels were highest in the low carbon reach further down the river.  The rates of photosynthesis in J. ensifolius were much lower than those of the dominant macrophytes in the river, probably because they were true aquatic plants while J. ensifolius is only semi-aquatic and was thus ecologically marginal in the flowing river.

In an intertaxa laboratory comparison of 76 species of angiosperms (Wiley and Wilkins, 2006), the relative mean concentration of sulphur found in J. ensifolius (-0.94) was found to be very close to the mean of all species tested (-1.0), slightly lower than other wetland species tested (J. effusus -0.52; Carex nigra 0.39) but higher than most of the important food and forage grasses tested (typically -1.2 to -1.8). Other than these few studies, there does not appear to have been any physiological or experimental work done on J. ensifolius.

Within its native and introduced range, J. ensifolius most often grows in a cool temperate to southern boreal environment with a distinct winter dormant season, the length of which varies by several months depending on elevation, latitude and proximity to the ocean.  In moist, cool environments it is unlikely that there is a summer dormant period, although the wet soils in which it grows may experience a substantial draw-down in moisture levels from mid-summer to autumn. During this period, growth shifts from vegetative growth to seed maturation.  Typically in the Northern Hemisphere, flowering occurs in June and July (see Michalski and Durka, 2010, for other Juncus spp.) and seeds mature in August and September (Steinfeld, 2001), with capsules opening soon after maturation to shed the seed (Hurd and Shaw, 1992). In mild climates, it is likely that recharging of soil moisture in the fall initiates a period of root and possibly shoot growth prior to winter. 

Longevity

J. ensifolius is a perennial with rhizomatous growth and commonly reproduces vegetatively. Its longevity has not been studied, but like most rhizomatous perennials it probably lives for long periods of time (at least many decades).  Seeds appear to have extended longevity (decades to centuries) in the soil (e.g. Clark, 1991; Harmon and Franklin, 1986).

Population Size and Structure

Patches of J. ensifolius described in the literature range from single plants or small clumps to extended patches covering dozens to hundreds of square meters.  These populations probably result from a combination of sexual and vegetative propagation as seeds germinate from the seed bank or recent dispersal and genets then expand in size through rhizomatous growth.

Nutrition

Seedlings in nursery cultivation are fertilized once weekly with all-purpose plant food (15-30-15) (Tilley, 2011). There are no published studies of plant nutrition in the wild.

Associations

In Hokkaido, Japan, J. ensifolius was found to grow with Carex michauxiana subsp. asiatica, Agrostis scabra and J. effusus in a mire that was disturbed by human trampling (Tachibana et al., 2001).

On Amchitka Island in the Aleutians, it was found in shallow pools of water surrounded by Empetrum heath in association with J. triglumis and Eriophorum russeolum [E. chamissonis] (Shacklette et al., 1969).

In British Columbia, Cowan (1945) described a low elevation Juncus-Carex-Isoetes lakeshore mudflat plant community on Vancouver Island that was submerged from October-June and grew prolifically from June-August.  Dominant species were Ranunculus flammula, Carex lenticularis, C. viridula,J. supiniformis and Isoetes maritima.  In the same area, J. ensifolius was also common in a Carex sitchensis [C. aquatilis var. dives]-Oenanthe sarmentosa-Deschampsia cespitosa meadow that resulted from the gradual filling-in of former lakes and ponds. Brett et al. (2001) described a J. ensifolius – Alnus viridis [A. alnobetula] association on a moist floodplain with a fluctuating water table —J. ensifolius and other graminoids formed the understorey. 

At Mt. Rainier, Washington state (Dunwiddie, 1986), J. ensifolius grew in saturated, seasonally inundated soil adjacent to a pond in association with Carex spp. and Eriophorum polystachion [E. angustifolium]. Nearby, at Mt. St. Helens (Moral, 1999), J. ensifolius was the dominant herb in a primary successional wetland association with Salix sitchensis, J. bufonius, J. articulatus and Brachythecium moss on relatively dry pumice with high pH, and as a secondary species in wetter Salix sitchensisEquisetum arvense and Typha latifolia – J. bufonius associations with lower pH.

In the US Intermountain region (Idaho, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Colorado) J. ensifolius commonly occurs in sedge-willow associations adjacent to streambanks (Winward, 2000; Jones, 2005; Hough-Snee et al., 2013).  Typical associates include Carex utriculata, C. nebraskensis, C. aquatilis, Salix melanopsis, S. boothii, S. drummondiana,S. geyeriana, S. exigua, Agrostis scabra and Poa pratensis with the relative proportions of these species reflecting the degree of cattle and elk grazing disturbance.  Higher cover of J. ensifolius is considered indicative of low grazing pressure (Winward, 2000).

Outside its natural range, where J. ensifolius is naturalized or adventive, its most common associates are cosmopolitan weeds associated with highly disturbed habitats. Genera and species that have been repeatedly recorded as associates in Europe, Oceania and eastern North America  include Juncus, Plantago, Lotus, Phleum, Agrostis, Rumex, Ranunculus, Trifolium, Equisetum, and Carex (Adema and Mennema, 1976; Koch, 1991; Stolwijk and Zijlstra, 1995; Marr and Trull, 2002; Grøstad, 2003; US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2013; Atlas of Living Australia, 2015). 

Environmental Requirements

A seasonally fluctuating water table including temporary, but not year-round, inundation appears to be the most prominent feature of J. ensifolius habitats.  In humid climates, standing water does not appear to be obligatory – J. ensifolius is considered a facultative rather than an obligate wetland or aquatic species (Washington Native Plant Society, 2015).  Soils can be sandy or clayey, but are never well- or rapidly-drained. J. ensifolius appears to tolerate mildly saline soils (coastal and inland) and a wide range of soil pH.

Climatically its habitats can be described as cool, moist temperate.  In the south temperate to Mediterranean zone it appears to be mostly limited to high elevations (e.g. subalpine forests and parkland), whereas in the north temperate zone it is common near sea level.

Climate

Top of page
ClimateStatusDescriptionRemark
BS - Steppe climate Tolerated > 430mm and < 860mm annual precipitation
BW - Desert climate Tolerated < 430mm annual precipitation
Cf - Warm temperate climate, wet all year Preferred Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, wet all year
Cs - Warm temperate climate with dry summer Preferred Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, dry summers
Df - Continental climate, wet all year Preferred Continental climate, wet all year (Warm average temp. > 10°C, coldest month < 0°C, wet all year)
ET - Tundra climate Tolerated Tundra climate (Average temp. of warmest month < 10°C and > 0°C)

Latitude/Altitude Ranges

Top of page
Latitude North (°N)Latitude South (°S)Altitude Lower (m)Altitude Upper (m)
61 44

Air Temperature

Top of page
Parameter Lower limit Upper limit
Absolute minimum temperature (ºC) -47
Mean annual temperature (ºC) -1 23
Mean maximum temperature of hottest month (ºC) 19 36
Mean minimum temperature of coldest month (ºC) -26 8

Rainfall

Top of page
ParameterLower limitUpper limitDescription
Dry season duration011number of consecutive months with <40 mm rainfall
Mean annual rainfall2836903mm; lower/upper limits

Rainfall Regime

Top of page Uniform
Winter

Soil Tolerances

Top of page

Soil drainage

  • impeded
  • seasonally waterlogged

Soil reaction

  • acid
  • alkaline
  • neutral

Soil texture

  • heavy
  • light
  • medium

Special soil tolerances

  • saline

Natural enemies

Top of page
Natural enemyTypeLife stagesSpecificityReferencesBiological control inBiological control on
Bipolaris palousensis Pathogen Leaves
Cercospora juncina Pathogen Leaves to genus
Claviceps Pathogen Inflorescence to genus
Paratylenchus elongatus Parasite Roots to genus
Phaeosphaeria alpina Pathogen Leaves/Stems not specific
Uromyces junci-effusi Pathogen Leaves to genus

Notes on Natural Enemies

Top of page

Fungi: Uromyces junci-effusi (formerly Nigredo junci-effusi) is a rust in the family Puccinaceae that produces spots on the leaves of Juncus spp. in North America (Garrett, 1919). It is the most widely reported fungus on J. ensifolius (Farr and Rossman, 2015). Phaeosphaeria alpina is an ascomycete fungus that parasitizes the leaves, stems and foliar parts of a wide variety of grasslike plants in Europe and North America.  It was collected on J. ensifolius in an alpine meadow at Revelstoke, British Columbia (Shoemaker and Babcock, 1989). Bipolaris palousensis (also palousense) is a leaf spot or “blotch” fungus collected on J. ensifolius  foliage in Washington (1948) and Oregon (1957) (Sprague, 1961; Manamgoda et al., 2012).  Bipolaris are important pathogens of graminoids worldwide and this is the only Bipolaris reported on Juncus ensifolius; however, it remains a doubtful species as the existing specimen is in poor condition (Alcorn, 1991; Manamgoda et al., 2012). Cercospora juncina is another leaf spot fungus found on species of Juncus (Kasai, 1922), including J. ensifolius (Farr and Rossman, 2015). A species of Claviceps, a floral pathogen known as “ergot” that infects the ovaries of graminoids, has been found on J. ensifolius and several other Juncus spp. in Canada and California, but has not been identified at the species level because only conidia were present (Alderman et al., 2004).

A nematode (Gracilacus elongata [Paratylenchus elongatus]) has been described as parasitic on J. ensifolius in California (Abdel-Rahman and Maggenti 1988).

Although insects commonly feed on Juncus species, especially their seeds (Hurd and Shaw, 1992), J. ensifolius is not identified as a host plant on any insect-host plant database.

Muskrats (Ondatra zibethicus) are known to feed on the roots/rhizomes of J. ensifolius. Waterfowl (e.g. Canada geese – Branta spp.), deer, elk (Cervus canadensis), cattle and horses can cause significant damage by grazing.

Means of Movement and Dispersal

Top of page

Natural Dispersal

Seeds and rhizome fragments are naturally dispersed by water.

Vector Transmission (Biotic)

Seeds and rhizome fragments can be carried or eaten by animals, especially birds (see for example Rehm, 2015).

Accidental Introduction

This can take place through trade and transport of hay, grass seed mixtures and peat (Piirainen, 2004); seeds can be spread by vehicles or other machinery.

Intentional Introduction

J. ensifolius is planted in artificial wetlands (e.g. Iasur-Kruh et al., 2010) for environmental enhancement and wildlife food, and in garden ponds for its ornamental value and to attract wildlife. It is shipped intra- and internationally through the live plant nursery trade, native plant seed sales and probably also in wetland restoration seed mixes. Examples of its online availability for ornamental purposes include Caribbean Garden (2015) and Le Jardin du Pic Vert (2015).

Pathway Causes

Top of page
CauseNotesLong DistanceLocalReferences
Animal productionAccidentally transported in hooves, faeces, fur. Yes Yes
Breeding and propagationDeliberately for wetland restoration or ornamental use Yes Yes
Crop productionAccidental contaminant in hay, peat or soil Yes Yes Kirschner, 2002
Digestion and excretionProbably transported by waterfowl, deer, livestock Yes Yes Cowan, 1945; Koch, 1991
DisturbanceDominant means of local accidental spread is by disturbance of wet soil, e.g. in ditch construction Yes
Escape from confinement or garden escape Yes
Flooding and other natural disasters Yes
ForageUsed as livestock forage by Paiute people of Oregon Yes Mahar, 1953
HitchhikerAccidental contaminant in seeds/peat/soil, with other aquatic plants, or on people or vehicles Yes Dörr, 1995; Pohjakallio and Hämet-Ahti, 1974; Poland, 2005
HorticultureAccidental contaminant in commercial seed, peat or soil Yes Grøstad, 2003
Intentional releaseDeliberately introduced in wetland restoration and artificial ponds Yes Adamus and Holzhauser, 2006; Woosaree, 2000
Internet salesCan be purchased from native seed suppliers and nurseries in North America and Europe Yes
Landscape improvement Yes
Medicinal useUsed medicinally by the Hoh and Quileute peoples of Washington state Yes Yes Reagan, 1936
Nursery tradeNursery stock sold in USA & Europe Yes
Ornamental purposesDeliberately introduced outside native range as an attractive feature for ponds & bog gardens Yes
People foragingBulbs eaten as food by Swinomish peoples of Washington State Yes Gunther, 1973
People sharing resources Yes Yes Gunther, 1973; Schenck and Gifford, 1952
Seed tradeSeed sold for native plant restoration Yes NZPCN, New Zealand Plant Conservation Network
SmugglingLikely to occur Yes

Pathway Vectors

Top of page
VectorNotesLong DistanceLocalReferences
Land vehicles Yes
Livestock Yes
Machinery and equipment Yes NZPCN, New Zealand Plant Conservation Network
Mulch, straw, baskets and sod Yes
Pets and aquarium species Yes NZPCN, New Zealand Plant Conservation Network
Soil, sand and gravel Yes NZPCN, New Zealand Plant Conservation Network
Water Yes NZPCN, New Zealand Plant Conservation Network

Impact Summary

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

Economic Impact

Top of page

No significant economic impact has as yet been reported.  Although J. ensifolius has been reported as a significant invader of wetlands in the Midwest-Great Lakes region of the United States, it is not yet ranked as sufficiently important to warrant targeted control action (Keller, 2007).  In Hawaii, it has been reported as a significant threat to the survival of endangered and threatened indigenous plant species, but no economic analysis of the degree of threat has been undertaken, and it is not evident whether or not control action has been undertaken.  Similarly, in Europe, New Zealand and Australia, although J. ensifolius has been identified as invasive (or adventive and potentially invasive), there are no records yet of economic loss and no evidence of targeted control action.

Environmental Impact

Top of page

Impact on Biodiversity

In the upper montane wetlands of Hawaii, Juncus ensifolius is listed as a threat to several endangered native Hawaiian plant species (US Fish and Wildlife Service 2012, 2013), listed in the Threatened Species Table. The US Fish and Wildlife Service (2012 and 2013, on pp. 63951 and 64665 respectively) report it as a competitor with endangered species in “lowland wet ecosystems” only.  This may  be an error as other literature sources indicate that it occurs in upper montane wet ecosystems in Hawaii (e.g. Daehler, 2005), which is more consistent with its climatological niche.

(See also the ‘Gaps in Knowledge’ section).

Threatened Species

Top of page
Threatened SpeciesConservation StatusWhere ThreatenedMechanismReferencesNotes
Cyanea marksii (Marks' cyanea)CR (IUCN red list: Critically endangered) CR (IUCN red list: Critically endangered); USA ESA listing as endangered species USA ESA listing as endangered speciesHawaiiCompetition; Rapid growthUS Fish and Wildlife Service, 2012; US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2013
Cyanea tritomantha (`aku)VU (IUCN red list: Vulnerable) VU (IUCN red list: Vulnerable); USA ESA listing as endangered species USA ESA listing as endangered speciesHawaiiCompetition; Rapid growthUS Fish and Wildlife Service, 2012; US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2013
Cyrtandra nanawaleensisUSA ESA listing as endangered species USA ESA listing as endangered speciesHawaiiCompetition; Rapid growthUS Fish and Wildlife Service, 2012; US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2013
Cyrtandra wagneriNatureServe NatureServe; USA ESA listing as endangered species USA ESA listing as endangered speciesHawaiiCompetition; Rapid growthUS Fish and Wildlife Service, 2012; US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2013
Phyllostegia floribunda (Hawai'i phyllostegia)NatureServe NatureServe; USA ESA listing as endangered species USA ESA listing as endangered speciesHawaiiCompetition; Rapid growthUS Fish and Wildlife Service, 2012; US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2013
Platydesma remyi (Hawai'i pilo kea)EN (IUCN red list: Endangered) EN (IUCN red list: Endangered); USA ESA listing as endangered species USA ESA listing as endangered speciesHawaiiCompetition; Rapid growthUS Fish and Wildlife Service, 2012; US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2013
Pritchardia lanigeraEN (IUCN red list: Endangered) EN (IUCN red list: Endangered); USA ESA listing as endangered species USA ESA listing as endangered speciesHawaiiCompetition; Rapid growthUS Fish and Wildlife Service, 2012; US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2013

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
  • Pioneering in disturbed areas
  • Benefits from human association (i.e. it is a human commensal)
  • Has propagules that can remain viable for more than one year
  • Reproduces asexually
Impact outcomes
  • Ecosystem change/ habitat alteration
  • Reduced native biodiversity
  • Threat to/ loss of endangered species
  • Threat to/ loss of native species
Impact mechanisms
  • Competition - monopolizing resources
  • Competition - shading
  • Competition - smothering
  • Competition
  • Rapid growth
Likelihood of entry/control
  • Highly likely to be transported internationally accidentally
  • Highly likely to be transported internationally deliberately
  • Difficult to identify/detect as a commodity contaminant

Uses

Top of page

Economic Value

J. ensifolius is commonly planted and performs well in mitigation wetlands developed to offset loss of wetlands elsewhere.  In Western Canada it was one of the leading wetland plants sold in the native plant industry in 1998 and 1999 when the industry as a whole (wetlands plus upland environments) grossed approximately $7 million annually (Woosaree, 2000). No information is available on the current value of seed and plant sales.

Social Benefit

J. ensifolius is a popular and attractive amenity plant in garden ponds where it also enhances the wildlife values of backyard gardens.  Its use in wetland restoration (e.g. Adamus and Holzhauser, 2006) also provides health and recreational benefits associated with having functional wetlands near communities. Historically the plant was used by indigenous peoples in western North America, but only in a minor way.  There are records indicating that Karok children were taught to weave mats and baskets using J. ensifolius fibre, although more durable materials were used by experienced weavers (Schenk and Gifford 1952).  There was also some use of the seeds, roots, rhizomes and other plant parts as food, fodder and medicine among the Hoh, Paiute, Quilete and Swinomish peoples of Oregon and Washington (Reagan, 1936; Mahar, 1953; Gunther, 1973).    

Environmental Services

As an important wetland plant, both in disturbed and intact environments, J. ensifolius contributes to a variety of wetland ecosystem services including regulating the supply and quality of water, absorbing chemicals and filtering pollutants and sediments, reducing soil erosion, decomposing suspended solids and neutralizing harmful bacteria, carbon sequestration and forage and shelter for animal life.

It has been used in upland (Zabinski and Cole, 2000) and wetland (Adamus and Holzhauser, 2006) ecosystem restoration projects within its native range in western North America, and has been either deliberately or unintentionally introduced in wetland mitigation and artificial wetland construction projects undertaken outside of its native range, for example on Rhode Island (Eastern Illinois University, 2015) and in Israel (Iasur-Kruh et al., 2010).

Wildlife Habitat

J. ensifolius is a moderately important forage species for deer and American elk (Cervus canadensis) (Cowan, 1945; Marquez, 1988) in western North America, particularly near the Pacific coast where it is common in wet meadows. The wetland, riparian and estuarine meadow habitats where it grows are exceptionally important for a wide range of wildlife, but little is known about its nutritional quality and the degree to which it is preferred relative to other forage species.  A wide variety of shorebirds, songbirds, gamebirds and waterfowl eat the seeds.  Larger waterfowl such as Canada geese (Branta spp.) will graze on the leaves. Muskrats eat the roots and rhizomes. Smaller animals use J. ensifolius as shelter and nesting material and lay their eggs among the rhizomes, stems and leaves (Rehm, 2015).

Uses List

Top of page

Environmental

  • Amenity
  • Erosion control or dune stabilization
  • Landscape improvement
  • Revegetation
  • Soil conservation
  • Wildlife habitat

General

  • Botanical garden/zoo
  • Laboratory use
  • Sociocultural value

Materials

  • Fibre

Medicinal, pharmaceutical

  • Traditional/folklore

Ornamental

  • Propagation material
  • Seed trade

Detection and Inspection

Top of page

J. ensifolius is a low-statured plant that would be difficult to detect remotely, although ditchlines and areas with wet soil and shallow standing water that can be identified from images should be targeted in surveys.  It can be readily identified visually by its combination of flattened leaves and dark, globular seedheads. Similar species can be readily distinguished as described in the ‘Similarities to Other Species’ section.

Similarities to Other Species/Conditions

Top of page

J. ensifolius is a very distinctive plant because of its dagger or sword-shaped leaves (folded and flattened at the base like those of an iris) and the fact that it almost always bears prominent clusters of densely globular dark, purplish-brown flowers and fruit below or at the tip of the foliage.  Throughout much of its native range and in Europe there are no other plants that combine these two features and it is unlikely to be confused with any other species.  However in the southwestern USA (California and adjacent states) and in east Asia there are several other rushes in the section Iridifolii (Kirschner et al., 1999) with flattened iris-like leaves that could possibly be confused with J. ensifolius. In most of these species the flowerheads are less evidently globular and paler in colour or the inflorescences are more diffuse, radiating outwards well above the leaves. J. xiphioides is a larger plant with spreading, brown inflorescences, whose range overlaps with J. ensifolius in California, Nevada and Arizona. J. oxymeris, which extends north from California to southern British Columbia, is also a larger plant with a more diffuse inflorescence with pointed fruit capsules (in British Columbia, although rare and at its northern limit, it is often confused with the more common J. ensifolius (Lomer, 2011)). J. macrandrus, endemic to California, has greenish-brown to greenish inflorescences that radiate star-like at some distance above the foliage. J. phaeocephalus, a tall rush that ranges from Baja California to southern Washington, and J. polycephalus, found in the southeastern U.S. outside the range of J. ensifolius, bear their fruit in open panicles with long stalks.  J. alatus, found in east Asia, and J. prismatocarpus, widely distributed through east Asia to New Zealand and Australia, also have loose, pale inflorescences. In New Zealand, J. ensifolius may be confused with the native J. prismatocarpus, which also has flattened, multitubular septate leaves (NZPCN, 2015).

Prevention and Control

Top of page

There is no available literature on the prevention and control of J. ensifolius invasion. Initial development of management practices, where management is necessary, must therefore be derived indirectly from other sources, including generic practices recommended for other invasive species.

Public Awareness

As online plant nurseries are selling J. ensifolius internationally, an initial step in building public awareness would be to contact growers offering this species for sale online and advise them that it is considered invasive and should not be sold to customers outside of its home range in western North America.  This step is probably most relevant to growers selling it to customers in Hawaii, where it is identified under an order in the Endangered Species Act as threatening endangered Hawaiian plant species (US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2013).

Physical/Mechanical Control

J. ensifolius has been shown to be sensitive to ungulate grazing in the western U.S., so potential control measures could involve repeated mowing or controlled grazing. Goats and sheep have been employed to control other Juncus spp., in New Zealand and Australia (Rolston et al. 1981; MLA, 2007), but unless very carefully regulated, these animals may cause greater environmental damage than they prevent. On wet ground, repeated mowing may not be feasible due to low trafficability and therefore may be only of limited value (Sellers and Farrell, 2015).

Movement Control

Collaborative intervention with nursery associations and native plant societies to reduce or prevent sales of this species outside of its native range are probably the most promising avenue for reducing further spread beyond existing occurrences. 

Biological Control

Although J. ensifolius has a number of natural enemies (see ‘Natural Enemies’ section), there are no reports of their use for biological control.

Chemical Control

There is no information available on the sensitivity of J. ensifolius to herbicides. In a recent trial, chemical formulations containing 2, 4–D amine were the most successful among 5 chemical products tested for control of J. effusus in Florida (Sellers and Farrell, 2015). High water tables and the potential for runoff may limit the use of chemical control agents for this species in sensitive environments.

Monitoring and Surveillance (Incl. Remote Sensing)

No information is available on this subject, but as a low-statured plant J. ensifolius will be more difficult to monitor remotely than larger invasive plants.  Most of the habitats where it grows do not have tree cover and may be suitable for low-level aerial photography.

Ecosystem Restoration

There is no published literature describing ecosystem restoration to address invasion by J. ensifolius.  Such action may have been undertaken in montane wetlands in Hawai’i Volcanoes National Park to restore endangered plants reportedly threatened by this species, but J. ensifolius is not listed by Belfield et al (2011) among the alien species subjected to control actions.

Gaps in Knowledge/Research Needs

Top of page

Three important gaps in our knowledge of J. ensifolius are:

(1) Invasiveness: Is it an aggressive species that actively interferes with native species and warrants direct control action or will it remain a minor associate of other wetland plants at most new locations?  In disturbed soils, does it disappear as succession proceeds?  Does it spread beyond ditches into undisturbed habitats? Assessments done to date have confirmed its presence at a growing number of sites but none have yet ranked it as a high priority for control.

In Hawai’i, it would be worthwhile clarifying the mechanisms by which J. ensifolius threatens each of the endangered species with which it was associated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (2013). All of these are much larger-statured plants than J. ensifolius, and at least a few of them do not appear to grow in cool, montane wetland (wet soil) situations. It is possible that presence of J. ensifolius represents a correlation with disturbed habitats rather than a cause of endangerment for these species.

Brooks and Clemants (2000) suggested that additional taxonomic work was needed to determine whether var. montanus warrants treatment as a separate species. From a plant invasions perspective, it would be of interest to determine whether both varieties exhibit invasive behaviour or whether the six-stamened variety is less weedy than the three-stamened var. ensifolius.

(2) Control measures: Treatments that kill the seed in contaminated peat, soil or hay and the efficacy of mowing or controlled grazing are two examples where more information about control measures would be useful. It may be possible to develop attractive sterile cultivars of this plant for the nursery trade.

(3) Distribution in Asia and other regions of the developing world:  Potential habitats exist near sea level in coastal temperate South America (Patagonia), southern Africa (equivalent climate to California) and temperate East Asia, and in cool, montane environments worldwide.

References

Top of page

Abdel-Rahman F; Maggenti AR, 1988. Gracilacus elongata n. sp. (Nemata: Criconematoidea) parasitic on Juncus ensifolius Wikstr. from Mendocino, California. Revue de Nématologie, 11(3):303-306.

Adamus P; Holzhauser N, 2006. Wetland restoration plan for the Yachats Commons Park, Yachats, Lincoln County, Oregon. Yachats, Oregon, USA: Yachats Commons Park Task Force, 25 pp. http://people.oregonstate.edu/~adamusp/Oregon_YachatsRestoration/Yachats%20wetland%20restoration%20plan.pdf

Adema F; Mennema J, 1976. Another new Juncus for the Netherlands. (Wederom een nieuwe Juncus voor Nederland.) Gorteria, 8:77-80.

Alcorn JL, 1991. New combinations and synonymy in Bipolaris and Curvularia, and a new species of Exserohilum.. Mycotaxon, 41(2):329-343.

Alderman SC; Halse RR; White JF, 2004. A reevaluation of the host range and geographical distribution of Claviceps species in the United States. Plant Disease, 88:63-81.

Atlas of Living Australia, 2015. Atlas of Living Australia. http://bie.ala.org.au/

Belfield T; Tunison T; Chase J; McDaniel S, 2011. Rare plant stabilization projects at Hawai'i Volcanoes National Park. Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit, University of Hawai'i, 121 pp. [Technical Report 174] http://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/handle/10125/33199/v174.pdf

BONAP, 2015. Taxonomic Data Center. North American vascular flora. North Carolina, USA: The Biota of North America Program. http://bonap.net/tdc

Bouchard A; Barabé D; Dumais M; Hay S, 1983. Les plantes vasculaires rares du Québec (The rare vascular plants of Québec). Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Musées nationaux du Canada, 75 pp. [Syllogeus no 48.]

Breitung AT, 1957. Annotated catalogue of the vascular flora of Saskatchewan. American Midland Naturalist, 58(1):1-72.

Brett RB; Klinka K; Qian H, 2001. Classification of high-elevation, non-forested plant communities in coastal British Columbia. Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada: Forest Sciences Department, University of British Columbia, vi + 72 pp. [Scientia Silvica Extension Series number 29.] http://www.researchgate.net/publication/29734771

Brooks RE; Clemants SE, 2000. Juncus. In: Flora of North America, vol. 22: Magnoliophyta: Alismatidae, Arecidae, Commelinidae (in part), and Zingiberidae [ed. by Flora of North America Editorial Committee]. New York, USA: Oxford University Press, 211-255.

Bruggen T van, 1985. The vascular plants of South Dakota, 2nd ed. Ames, Iowa, USA: Iowa State University Press, 476 pp.

Buchenau F, 1890. [English title not available]. (Monographia Juncacearum.) Botanische Jahrbücher fur Systematik, Pflanzengeschichte und Pflanzengeographie, 12:1-495. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/137458

Buchenau F, 1892. Über die Bestäubungs-Verhältnisse bei den Juncaceen. Jahrbücher fur Wissenschäftliche Botanik, 24:363-424.

Caribbean Garden, 2015. Caribbean Garden. Brooklyn, New York, USA: Etsy. https://www.etsy.com/il-en/shop/CaribbeanGarden

Christofferson I, 1984. [English title not available]. (Juncus ensifolius, svardtag, funnen i Sverige.) Svensk Botanisk Tidskrift, 78(2):72-74.

Clark D, 1991. The effect of fire on Yellowstone ecosystem seed banks. Bozeman, Montana, USA: Montana State University, x + 115 pp. http://scholarworks.montana.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1/7145/31762101826988.pdf

Clement EJ; Foster MC, 1994. Alien plants of the British Isles: a provisional catalogue of vascular plants (excluding grasses). Oundle, UK; Botanical Society of the British Isles, 590 pp.

Consortium of California Herbaria, 2015. Consortium of California Herbaria. Berkley, California, USA: Consortium of California Herbaria. http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/consortium/

Consortium of Intermountain Herbaria, 2015. Intermountain Regional Herbarium Network., USA: Consortium of Intermountain Herbaria. http://intermountainbiota.org

Consortium of Midwest Herbaria, 2015. Consortium of Midwest Herbaria., USA: Consortium of Midwest Herbaria. http://midwestherbaria.org

Consortium of Pacific Northwest Herbaria, 2015. Consortium of Pacific Northwest Herbaria. Seattle, Washington, USA: University of Washington Herbarium. http://www.pnwherbaria.org/

Cowan IM, 1945. The ecological relationships of the food of the Columbian black-tailed deer, Odocoileus hemionus columbianus (Richardson), in the coast forest region of southern Vancouver Island, British Columbia. Ecological Monographs, 15:109-39.

Daehler CC, 2005. Upper-montane plant invasions in the Hawaiian Islands: patterns and opportunities. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, 7(3):203-216.

Danielsson B; Nilsson Ö, 1988. New plants and new plant locations in Härjedalen. (Nya växter och nya växtlokaler i Härjedalen.) Svensk Botanisk Tidskrift, 82:305-313.

Dave's Garden, 2015. Plant Files. El Segundo, California, USA: Internet Brands. http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/

Drábková L, 2010. Phylogenetic relationships within Juncaceae: evidence from five regions of plastid, mitochrondrial and nuclear ribosomal DNA, with notes on morphology. In: Diversity, phylogeny and evolution in the monocotyledons [ed. by Seberg, O. \Peterson, G. \Barfod, A. S. \Davis, J. I.]. Aarhus, Denmark: Aarhus University Press, 389-416.

Drábková L; Kirschner J; Seberg O; Petersen G; Vlcek C, 2003. Phylogeny of the Juncaceae based on rbcL sequences, with special emphasis on Luzula DC. and Juncus L. Plant Systematics and Evolution, 240(1/4):133-147.

Drábková L; Kirschner J; Vlcek C, 2006. Phylogenetic relationships within Luzula DC. and Juncus L. (Juncaceae): a comparison of phylogenetic signals of trnL-trnF intergenic spacer, trnL intron and rbcL plastome sequence data. Cladistics, 22(2):132-143. http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/servlet/useragent?func=showIssues&code=cla

Drábková L; Kirschner J; Vlcek C; Paces V, 2004. TrnL-trnF intergenic spacer and trnL intron define major clades within Luzula and Juncus (Juncaceae): importance of structural mutations. Journal of Molecular Evolution, 59(1):1-10. http://springerlink.metapress.com/app/home/contribution.asp?wasp=n49lwnxwug2r1dkt9t0m&referrer=parent&backto=issue,1,15;journal,2,105;linkingpublicationresults,1:100107,1

Duncan CM, 2008. Seed bank response to juniper expansion in the semi-arid lands of Oregon, USA. Corvallis, Oregon, USA: Oregon State University, 81 pp. http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1957/9898/CMD%20Thesis%20Formatted.pdf

Dunwiddie PW, 1986. A 6000-year record of forest history on Mount Rainier, Washington. Ecology, 67(1):58-68.

Dörr E, 1995. New citizens from America in the Allgäu. (Neubürger aus Amerika im Allgäu.) Berichte der Bayerischen Botanischen Gesellschaft zur Erforschung der heimischen Flora, 65:71-79.

Eastern Illinois University, 2015. Stover-Ebinger Herbarium. Charleston, Illinois, USA: Eastern Illinois University. http://thekeep.eiu.edu/herbarium

Essl F; Rabitsch W, 2002. Neobiota in Österreich (Introduced species in Austria). Vienna, Austria: Federal Environment Agency, 432 pp.

Falck M; Garske S; Olson D, 2006. Invasive Species Program 2003-2006. Odanah, Wisconsin, USA: Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission, 47 pp. [Administrative Report 06-03.] https://data.glifwc.org/archive.bio/Administrative%20Report%2006-03.pdf

Farr DF; Rossman AY, 2015. Fungal databases, systematic mycology and microbiology laboratory, ARS-USDA. Washington DC, USA: ARS-USDA. http://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases/index.cfm

Foyer H, 1987. A finding of Juncus ensifolius Wikstr. in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg. (Een vondst van Juncus ensifolius Wikstr. in het Groothertogdom Luxemburg.) Dumortiera, 39:8-10.

Garrett AO, 1919. Smuts and rusts of Utah. Mycologia, 11(4):202-215.

Goodrich S, 1986. Utah flora: Juncaceae. The Great Basin Naturalist, 46:366-377.

Grøstad T, 2003. Juncus ensifolius Wikstr. found in Larvik, Vestfold county. (Juncus ensifolius Wikstr. funnet I Larvik kommune, Vestfold.) Blyttia, 61:48-50.

Gunther E, 1973. Ethnobotany of Western Washington (revised edition). Seattle, Washington, USA: University of Washington Press, 71 pp.

Harmon JM; Franklin JF, 1995. Seed rain and seed bank of third- and fifth-order streams on the western slope of the Cascade Range. Portland, Oregon, USA: USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, 27 pp. [Research Paper PNW-RP-480.]

Harms VL, 2006. Annotated catalogue of Saskatchewan Vascular Plants. Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada: University of Saskatchewan, 116 pp. http://www.biodiversity.sk.ca/Docs/AnnotatedCatalogueSKVascPlants2006.pdf

Harriman NA; Redmond D, 1976. Somatic chromosome numbers of some North American species of Juncus L. Rhodora, 78(816):727-738.

Higashino PK; Cuddihy LW; Anderson SJ; Stone CP, 1988. Checklist of vascular plants of Hawaii Volcanoes National Park. Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 82 pp. [Technical Report 64.] http://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/handle/10125/4010/064.pdf

Hohla M, 2001. Dittrichia graveolens (L.) W Greuter, Juncus ensifolius Wikstr. and Ranunculus penicillatus (Dumort.) Bab. new to Austria, and other contributions to the knowledge of the flora of the Innviertel region and adjoining Bavaria. (Dittrichia graveolens (L.) W Greuter, Juncus ensifolius Wikstr. und Ranunculus penicillatus (Dumort.) Bab. Neu für Österreich und weitere Beiträge zur Kenntnis der Flora des Innviertels und des angrenzenden Bayerns.) Beiträge zur Naturkunde Oberösterreichs, 10:275-353.

Hough-Snee N; Roper BB; Wheaton JM; Budy P; Lokteff RL, 2013. Riparian vegetation communities change rapidly following passive restoration at a northern Utah stream. Ecological Engineering, 58:371-377. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925857413002930

Huang ShuangQuan; Xiong YingZe; Barrett SCH, 2013. Experimental evidence of insect pollination in Juncaceae, a primarily wind-pollinated family. International Journal of Plant Sciences, 174(9):1219-1228. http://www.jstor.org/stable/full/10.1086/673247

Hultén E, 1968. Flora of Alaska and neighboring territories: A manual of the vascular plants. Stanford, California, USA: Stanford University Press, 1008 pp.

Hurd EG; Shaw NL, 1992. Seed technology for Carex and Juncus species of the Intermountain Region. In: Proceedings of the Intermountain Forest Nursery Association Meeting, Park City, Utah, USA, August 12-16, 1991 [ed. by Landis, T.]. Fort Collins, Colorado, USA: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, 74-83. [US Forest Service General Technical Report RM-211.] http://www.rngr.net/publications/proceedings/1991/hurd.pdf

Iasur-Kruh L; Hadar Y; Milstein D; Gasith A; Minz D, 2010. Microbial population and activity in wetland microcosms constructed for improving treated municipal wastewater. Microbial Ecology, 59(4):700-709. http://springerlink.metapress.com/content/95066018186kt331/?p=262d40107b3c4952b08f57f6a81544e7&pi=7

Jefferies RL; Rockwell RF; Abraham KF, 2003. The embarrassment of riches: agricultural food subsidies, high goose numbers, and loss of Arctic wetlands - a continuing saga. Environmental Reviews, 11(4):193-232.

Jones WM, 2005. A vegetation index of biotic integrity for small-order streams in southwest Montana and a floristic quality assessment for western Montana wetlands. Helena, Montana, USA: Montana Natural Heritage Program, vii + 29 pp. + appendices. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/bibliography/56064

Judziewicz EJ; Nekola JC, 1997. Recent Wisconsin records for some interesting vascular plants in the western Great Lakes Region. The Michigan Botanist, 36:91-118.

Kasai M, 1922. The fungus Cercosporina juncicola sp. n. parasitic on the Rush. (Ueber den auf der Binse parasitisch lebenden Pilz Cercosporina jnncicola sp. n.) Berichte des Ohara Instituts fur Landwirtschaftliche Biologie, Okayama Universitat, 2(2):225-231 pp.

Keller J, 2007. Invasive species and the trade in ornamental plants. Notre Dame, Indiana, USA: Indiana Aquatic Invasive Plant Working Group, University of Notre Dame. http://www.inla1.org/pdf/kellerpresentation.pdf

Kent DH, 1958. Plant Notes - Juncus ensifolius WIKSTR. 1823. Proceedings of the Botanical Society of the British Isles, 3:49.

Kiffe K, 1988. Juncus ensifolius Wikstrom. 1823, a naturalized adventive plant? (Juncus ensifolius Wikstrom. 1823, eine sich einburgernde Adventivpflanze?.) Floristische Rundbriefe, 21(2):86-88.

Kirschner J, 2002. Juncaceae 2: Juncus subg. Juncus. Canberra, Australia: Australian Biological Resources Study, 336 pp. [Species Plantarum: Flora of the World, Part 7.]

Kirschner J; Novara LJ; Novikov VS; Snogerup S; Kaplan Z, 1999. Supraspecific division of the genus Juncus (Juncaceae). Folia Geobotanica, 34(3):377-390.

Klarich DA, 1977. Physiological ecology of aquatic macrophytes in the Madison River of Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming. Bozeman, Montana, USA: Montana State University. [PhD Thesis.]

Klinkenberg B (ed.), 2016. E-Flora BC: Electronic Atlas of the Plants of British Columbia. Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada: Lab for Advanced Spatial Analysis, Department of Geography, University of British Columbia. http://ibis.geog.ubc.ca/biodiversity/eflora/

Koch M, 1991. [English title not available]. (Zur Kenntnis von Juncus ensifolius Wikström 1823: Ein Neufund aus dem Südkreis von Osnabruck.) Osnabrücker Naturwissenschaftliche Mitteilungen, 17:171-174.

Le Jardin du Pic Vert, 2015. Le Jardin du Pic Vert ([English title not available]). Orchies, France: Le Jardin du Pic Vert. http://www.jardindupicvert.com

Lomer F, 2011. Rare plants of the Fraser Valley in the lowland zone, Part 3. Botanical Electronic News, 435. http://bomi.ou.edu/ben/ben435.html

Mahar JM, 1953. Ethnobotany of the Oregon Paiutes of the Warm Springs Indian Reservation. Portland, Oregon, USA: Reed College. [BA Thesis.]

Manamgoda DS; Cai Lei; McKenzie EHC; Crous PW; Madrid H; Chukeatirote E; Shivas RG; Tan YuPei; Hyde KD, 2012. A phylogenetic and taxonomic re-evaluation of the Bipolaris - Cochliobolus - Curvularia complex. Fungal Diversity, 56(1):131-144. http://www.springerlink.com/content/y651g70733443165/

Marquez M, 1988. Leadership behavior and foraging strategies of a herd of Roosevelt elk inhabiting the Oregon Coast Range. Corvallis, Oregon, USA: Oregon State University, 72 pp. [MS thesis.]

Marr JK; Trull SJ, 2002. Noteworthy collection: Michigan. Juncus ensifolius Wikstr. Michigan Botanist, 41(2):46-47.

McGee A; Feller MC, 1993. Seed banks of forested and disturbed soils in southwestern British Columbia. Canadian Journal of Botany, 71(12):1574-1583.

Meijden R van der; Holverda WJ, 1987. New finds of rare plants in 1985 and 1986. (Nieuwe vondsten van zeldzame planten in 1985 en 1986.) Gorteria, 13:221-242.

Meijden R van der; Holverda WJ, 1991. New finds of rare plants in 1988, 1989 and 1990. (Nieuwe vondsten van zeldzame planten in 1988, 1989 en 1990.) Gorteria, 16:125-147.

Michalski SG; Durka W, 2007. Sychronous pulsed flowering: analysis of the flowering phenology in Juncus (Juncaceae). Annals of Botany, 100:1271-1285.

Michalski SG; Durka W, 2010. Pollen and ovule production in wind-pollinated species with special reference to Juncus. Plant Systematics and Evolution, 286(3/4):191-197. http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=104878

MLA (Meat and Livestock Australia), 1993. Weed control using goats: A guide to using goats for weed control in pastures. North Sydney, New South Wales, Australia: Meat and Livestock Australia Ltd., 16 pp. http://www.mla.com.au/News-and-resources/Publication-details?pubid=3970

Moral R del, 1999. Predictability of primary successional wetlands on pumice, Mount St. Helens. Madroño, 46(4):177-186.

Moss EH; Packer JG, 1982. Flora of Alberta (2nd edition). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: University of Toronto Press, 687 pp.

Mr. Fothergill's, 2015. Mr. Fothergill's. Newmarket, UK: Mr. Fothergill's. http://www.mr-fothergills.co.uk

NatureServe, 2015. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life (Version 7.1). Arlington, Virginia, USA: NatureServe. http://explorer.natureserve.org

NatureServe, 2016. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life. Version 7. Arlington, Virginia, USA: NatureServe. http://explorer.natureserve.org/index.htm

NCWMA, 2014. Invasive Species List. Washburn, Wisconsin, USA: Northwoods Cooperative Weed Management Area. http://www.northwoodscwma.org/app/download/7117250411/NCWMA_invspp_list.xls

New England Wild Flower Society, 2015. Go Botany. Framington, Massachusetts, USA: New England Wildflower Society. https://gobotany.newenglandwild.org

New York Natural Heritage Program, 2015. Rare Plants: Active Inventory List. Albany, New York, USA: New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/66348.html

NZPCN (New Zealand Plant Conservation Network), 2015. New Zealand Plant Conservation Network. Wellington, New Zealand: New Zealand Plant Conservation Network. http://www.nzpcn.org.nz/

Oldham MJ, 1999. Natural heritage resources of Ontario: rare vascular plants. 3rd Edition. Peterborough, Ontario, Canada: Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Natural Heritage Information Centre, 56 pp. http://www.carmelacanzonieri.com/6321/readings/sitespecific/Ontario-RareVascularPlants.pdf

Piirainen M, 2004. A second occurrence of Juncus ensifolius in Norway. (Det andra fyndet av Juncus ensifolius i Norge.) Blyttia, 62(3):141-141.

Pohjakallio K; Hämet-Ahti L, 1974. A casual occurrence of Juncus ensifolius Wikstr. (Juncaceae) in southern Finland. Memoranda societatis pro fauna et flora Fennica, 49:61-62.

Poland J, 2005. Juncus ensifolius Wikström: a 2nd British record. BSBI News, 98:47-48.

Probatova NS; Barkalov VYu; Rudyka EG, 2004. Chromosome numbers of selected vascular plant species from Sakhalin, Moneron and the Kurile Islands. Biodiversity and Biogeography of the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin, 1:15-23.

Reagan AB, 1936. Plants used by the Hoh and Quileute Indians. Transactions of the Kansas Academy of Science, 37:55-70. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3625277

Rehm J, 2015. The Wild Garden: Hansen's Northwest Native Plant Database. Salem, Oregon, USA: The Wild Garden. http://www.nwplants.com/business/catalog

Reynolds LV; Cooper DJ, 2011. Ecosystem response to removal of exotic riparian shrubs and a transition to upland vegetation. Plant Ecology, 212(8):1243-1261. http://springerlink.metapress.com/link.asp?id=100328

Rigg GB; ThompsonTG; Lorah JR; Williams KT, 1927. Dissolved gases in waters of some Puget Sound bogs. Botanical Gazette, 84(3):264-278.

Riley JL, 2003. Flora of the Hudson Bay Lowland and its postglacial origins [ed. by Riley, J. L.]. Ottawa, Canada: NRC Research Press, viii + 236 pp.

Rocky Mountain Herbarium, 2015. Rocky Mountain Herbarium. Laramie, Wyoming, USA: University of Wyoming. http://www.rmh.uwyo.edu/index.php

Rolston MP; Lambert MG; Clark DA; Devantier BP, 1981. Control of rushes and thistles in pasture by goat and sheep grazing. In: Proceedings of the 34th New Zealand Weed and Pest Control Conference. 117-121.

Runge F, 1972. Die Flora Westfalens, 2nd Edition (The flora of Westphalia, 2nd edition). Münster, Germany: Verlag Westfälische Vereinsdruckerei, 550 pp.

Schenck SM; Gifford EW, 1952. Karok Ethnobotany. Anthropological Records, 13(6):377-392.

Schuardt W, 1989. Juncus ensifolius Wikstrom, a foreign flora element in Bavaria. (Juncus ensifolius Wikstrom, ein fremdes Florenelement in Bayern.) Berichte der Bayerischen Botanischen Gesellschaft, 60:201-202.

Sellers B; Ferrell J, 2015. Soft rush (Juncus effusus) biology and control in pastures. Florida, USA: University of Florida, 2 pp. [University of Florida IFAS Extension Note SS-AGR-325.]

Shacklette HT; Durrell JW; Erdman JA; Keith JR; Klein WM; Krog J; Persson H; Skuja H; Weber WA, 1969. Vegetation of Amchitka Island, Aleutian Islands, Alaska. Washington, DC, USA: US Department of the Interior, 66 pp. + 23 plates. [Geological Survey Professional Paper 648.]

Shoemaker RA; Babcock CE, 1989. Phaeosphaeria. Canadian Journal of Botany, 67(5):1500-1599

Snogerup S, 1963. Studies in the genus Juncus III. Observations on the diversity of chromosome numbers. Botaniska Notiser, 116:142-156.

Snogerup S, 2010. Nordic species of Juncus sectt. Stygiopsis, Iridifolii and Juncus. (Juncaceae i Norden 3. Perenna Juncus-arter. Sektionerna Stygiopsis, Iridifolii och Juncus.) Svensk Botanisk Tidskrift, 104:339-350.

Sprague R, 1961. Some fungi on western Juncaceae. Research Studies of Washington State University, 29:77-83.

Sprague R, 1962. Some fungi on western species of Juncaceae. II. Research Studies of Washington State University, 30(4):169-173.

Steinfeld D, 2001. Experiences establishing native wetland plants in a constructed wetland. Native Plants Journal, 2(1):36-41.

Stolwijk PF; Zijlstra OG, 1995. Specific findings 1994. (Bijzondere vondsten 1994.) Niewsbrief FLORON- Floristische Werkgroep Twente, 13:1-7.

Tachibana H; Takahashi M; Sato M; Sasaki J, 2001. Microtopography and vegetation of disturbed area around the board walk in the Uryu-numa Mire, Western Hokkaido. Reports of the Taisetsuzan Institute of Science, 35:19-34.

Taylor RL; Mulligan GA, 1968. Flora of the Queen Charlotte Islands. Part 2. Cytological aspects of the vascular plants [Monograph, Research Branch, Canada Department of Agriculture, 4, 2]. 148 pp.

Tilley DJ, 2011. Propagation protocol for production of container Juncus ensifolius Wikstr. plants (USDA NRCS - Aberdeen Plant Materials Center, Aberdeen, Idaho). Native Plant Network. Moscow, Idaho, USA: University of Idaho, College of Natural Resources, Forest Research Nursery, 2 pp. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_PLANTMATERIALS/publications/idpmcot10368.pdf

Tu M; Titus JH; Tsuyuzaki S; Moral R del, 1998. Composition and dynamics of wetland seed banks on Mount St. Helens, Washington, USA. Folia Geobotanica et Phytotaxonomica, 33(1):3-16.

US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2012. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; Listing 15 species on Hawaii Island as endangered and designating critical habitat for 3 species; proposed rule. Federal Register 77(201): 63927-64018. https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2012/10/17/2012-24550/endangered-and-threatened-wildlife-and-plants-listing-15-species-on-hawaii-island-as-endangered-and

US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2013. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; Determination of endangered species status for 15 species on Hawaii Island; final rule. Federal Register, 78(209): 64637-64690. https://federalregister.gov/a/2013-24103

USDA-ARS, 2015. Germplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN). Online Database. Beltsville, Maryland, USA: National Germplasm Resources Laboratory. https://npgsweb.ars-grin.gov/gringlobal/taxon/taxonomysearch.aspx

Verloove F, 2015. Manual of the alien plants of Belgium. Meise, Belgium: Botanic Garden of Meise. http://alienplantsbelgium.be

Väre H, 2011. Jacob Fellman - the botanizing priest. Memoranda societatis pro fauna et flora Fennica, 87:1-20. http://www.ojs.tsv.fi/index.php/msff/article/viewFile/6603/5396

Wagner WL; Herbst DR; Sohmer SH, 1999. Manual of the flowering plants of Hawaii. Revised edition. Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: University of Hawaii Press/Bishop Museum Press, 1919 pp.

Walter E, 1998. The sword-leaved rush (Juncus ensifolius Wikstrom) also in Upper Franconia. (Die Schwertblattrige Binse (Juncus ensifolius Wikström): auch in Oberfranken.) Floristische Rundbriefe, 32(1):91-94.

Washington Native Plant Society, 2015. Native Plants for Western Washington Gardens and Restoration Projects. Seattle, Washington, USA, USA: Washington Native Plant Society. http://www.wnps.org/landscaping/herbarium/index.html

Weldy; T; Werier D; Nelson A, 2015. New York Flora Atlas. Albany, New York, USA: New York Flora Association. http://newyork.plantatlas.usf.edu/

Werkgroep Florakartering Drenthe, 2016. Bijzondere vondsten ([English title not available]). Drenthe, Netherlands: Werkgroep Florakartering Drenthe. http://www.wfdrenthe.nl/vondstentabel.htm

Wester L, 1992. Origin and distribution of adventive alien plants in Hawaii. In: Stone CP, Smith CW, Tunison JT, eds, Alien plant invasions in native ecosystems of Hawaii: management and research. Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: University of Hawaii Press, 99-154. http://www.hear.org/books/apineh1992/pdfs/apineh1992ii1wester.pdf

Whitacre J, 2014. Recommendations for using bare-root wetland plants. Bellingham, Washington, USA: Fourth Corner Nurseries. http://fourthcornernurseries.com/recommendations-for-using-bare-root-wetland-plants/

Willey N; Wilkins J, 2006. An analysis of intertaxa differences in sulfur concentration in angiosperms. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science, 169(5):717-727. http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/

Winward AH, 2000. Monitoring the vegetation resources in riparian areas. General Technical Report - Rocky Mountain Research Station, USDA Forest Service, No. RMRS-GTR-47: ii + 49 pp.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2015. Invasive Species. Madison, Wisconsin, USA: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/Invasives/

Wittman H, 1989. Rote Liste gefährdeter Farn- und Blütenpflanzen des Bundeslandes Salzburg (Red list of endangered ferns and flowering plants of the province of Salzburg). Salzburg, Austria: Amt der Salzburger Landesregierung, Naturschutzreferat, 70 pp.

Wittmann H; Pilsl P, 1997. Contributions to the flora of the province of Salzburg II. (Beiträge zur Flora des Bundeslandes Salzburg II.) Linzer biologische Beiträge, 29:385-506. http://www.zobodat.at/pdf/LBB_0029_1_0385-0506.pdf

Woosaree J, 2000. Market assessment of the native plant industry in Western Canada. Vegreville, Alberta, Canada: Alberta Research Council, x + 106 pp. [Report #ESD/LM/00-2.] http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/200975

Yearsley HK, 1993. Forest floor seed banks and their response to slashburning in some forest ecosystems of south central British Columbia. Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada: University of British Columbia, xi +136 pp. https://open.library.ubc.ca/cIRcle/collections/ubctheses/831/items/1.0075178

Zabinski C; Cole D, 2000. Understanding the factors that limit restoration success on a recreation-impacted subalpine site. Proceedings - Rocky Mountain Research Station, USDA Forest Service [Wilderness science in a time of change conference. Volume 5: Wilderness ecosystems, threats, and management, Missoula, Montana, USA, 23-27 May 1999.], No. RMRS-P-15(Vol. 5):216-221.

Links to Websites

Top of page
WebsiteURLComment
Atlas of Living Australiahttp://www.ala.org.au
Consortium of Midwest Herbaria (US)http://midwestherbaria.org/portal/
Consortium of Pacific Northwest Herbariahttp://pnwherbaria.org
Manual of the Invasive Plants of Belgiumhttp://alienplantsbelgium.be
New Zealand Plant Conservation Networkhttp://www.nzpcn.org.nz/
USDA Agriculture Research Service Fungal Databases – Fungal Host Distributionshttp://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases/fungushost/fungushost.cfm

Contributors

Top of page

05/12/2015 Original text by:

Sybille Haeussler, University of Northern British Columbia, British Columbia, Canada

Distribution Maps

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