Invasive Species Compendium

Detailed coverage of invasive species threatening livelihoods and the environment worldwide

Datasheet

Ischaemum rugosum
(saramollagrass)

Toolbox

Datasheet

Ischaemum rugosum (saramollagrass)

Summary

  • Last modified
  • 21 November 2019
  • Datasheet Type(s)
  • Invasive Species
  • Pest
  • Host Plant
  • Preferred Scientific Name
  • Ischaemum rugosum
  • Preferred Common Name
  • saramollagrass
  • Taxonomic Tree
  • Domain: Eukaryota
  •   Kingdom: Plantae
  •     Phylum: Spermatophyta
  •       Subphylum: Angiospermae
  •         Class: Monocotyledonae
  • Summary of Invasiveness
  • I. rugosum is a C4 grass species widely cultivated and naturalized in moist, tropical habitats around the world (

Don't need the entire report?

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

Generate report

Pictures

Top of page
PictureTitleCaptionCopyright
I. rugosum inflorescences, Ghana.
TitleInflorescences
CaptionI. rugosum inflorescences, Ghana.
Copyright©Chris Parker/Bristol, UK
I. rugosum inflorescences, Ghana.
InflorescencesI. rugosum inflorescences, Ghana.©Chris Parker/Bristol, UK
I. rugosum foliage plus inflorescences, Sierra Leone.
TitleFoliage
CaptionI. rugosum foliage plus inflorescences, Sierra Leone.
Copyright©Chris Parker/Bristol, UK
I. rugosum foliage plus inflorescences, Sierra Leone.
FoliageI. rugosum foliage plus inflorescences, Sierra Leone.©Chris Parker/Bristol, UK
Inflorescence terminal, apparently simple when young, but separating with age into its two constituent racemes, usually 7-10 cm long.
TitleInflorescence - line drawing
CaptionInflorescence terminal, apparently simple when young, but separating with age into its two constituent racemes, usually 7-10 cm long.
CopyrightNOVARTIS
Inflorescence terminal, apparently simple when young, but separating with age into its two constituent racemes, usually 7-10 cm long.
Inflorescence - line drawingInflorescence terminal, apparently simple when young, but separating with age into its two constituent racemes, usually 7-10 cm long.NOVARTIS
Leaf blades acuminate, lower ones narrowed gradually to the base, which is densely hairy; ligule variable, a brownish membrane, 6 mm deep.
TitleLeaf and ligule - line drawing
CaptionLeaf blades acuminate, lower ones narrowed gradually to the base, which is densely hairy; ligule variable, a brownish membrane, 6 mm deep.
CopyrightNOVARTIS
Leaf blades acuminate, lower ones narrowed gradually to the base, which is densely hairy; ligule variable, a brownish membrane, 6 mm deep.
Leaf and ligule - line drawingLeaf blades acuminate, lower ones narrowed gradually to the base, which is densely hairy; ligule variable, a brownish membrane, 6 mm deep.NOVARTIS
I. rugosum can be identified by the distinctive, prominent transverse ribs or ridges on the lower glume of the spikelet.
TitleSpikelets - line drawing
CaptionI. rugosum can be identified by the distinctive, prominent transverse ribs or ridges on the lower glume of the spikelet.
CopyrightNOVARTIS
I. rugosum can be identified by the distinctive, prominent transverse ribs or ridges on the lower glume of the spikelet.
Spikelets - line drawingI. rugosum can be identified by the distinctive, prominent transverse ribs or ridges on the lower glume of the spikelet.NOVARTIS
a, Ligule; b, sessile and stalked spikelet; c, sessile spikelet - lower glume (G1), ventral view; d1-2, sessile spikelet - upper glume (G2), dorsal and ventral views; e, lower lemma (L1), ventral view; f, lower palea (P1), ventral view; g, upper lemma (L2), lateral view; h, upper palea (P2), ventral view; i, caryopsis, two views.
TitleWhole plant - line drawing
Captiona, Ligule; b, sessile and stalked spikelet; c, sessile spikelet - lower glume (G1), ventral view; d1-2, sessile spikelet - upper glume (G2), dorsal and ventral views; e, lower lemma (L1), ventral view; f, lower palea (P1), ventral view; g, upper lemma (L2), lateral view; h, upper palea (P2), ventral view; i, caryopsis, two views.
CopyrightSEAMEO-BIOTROP
a, Ligule; b, sessile and stalked spikelet; c, sessile spikelet - lower glume (G1), ventral view; d1-2, sessile spikelet - upper glume (G2), dorsal and ventral views; e, lower lemma (L1), ventral view; f, lower palea (P1), ventral view; g, upper lemma (L2), lateral view; h, upper palea (P2), ventral view; i, caryopsis, two views.
Whole plant - line drawinga, Ligule; b, sessile and stalked spikelet; c, sessile spikelet - lower glume (G1), ventral view; d1-2, sessile spikelet - upper glume (G2), dorsal and ventral views; e, lower lemma (L1), ventral view; f, lower palea (P1), ventral view; g, upper lemma (L2), lateral view; h, upper palea (P2), ventral view; i, caryopsis, two views.SEAMEO-BIOTROP

Identity

Top of page

Preferred Scientific Name

  • Ischaemum rugosum Salisb.

Preferred Common Name

  • saramollagrass

Other Scientific Names

  • Andropogon arnottianus Steud.
  • Andropogon griffithsiae Steud.
  • Andropogon rugosus Steud.
  • Andropogon segetus (Trin.) Steud.
  • Colladoa distachya Cav.
  • Ischaemum colladoa Spreng.
  • Ischaemum royleanum Miq.
  • Ischaemum segetum Trin.
  • Ischaemum tashiroi Honda
  • Meoschium arnottianim Nees
  • Meoschium griffithii Nees et Arn.
  • Meoschium noyleanum Nees ex Steud.
  • Meoschium rugosum (Salisb.) Nees
  • Tripsacum distachyum (Cav.) Poir.

International Common Names

  • English: muraino grass; ribbed murain-grass; saramolla grass; wrinkled duck-beak; wrinkled grass
  • Spanish: mazorquila

Local Common Names

  • Brazil: capim macho; capim-pelego
  • Cambodia: smao srauv
  • Colombia: trigillo
  • Cuba: pata de cao
  • Dominican Republic: yerba de papo
  • Fiji: co muraina
  • India/Tamil Nadu: kaddukken pillu
  • India/West Bengal: mararo
  • Indonesia/Java: blemben
  • Malaysia: colok chine
  • Myanmar: ka-gyi-the-myet
  • Philippines: trini trogo
  • Sri Lanka: kudukedu
  • Suriname: Saramacca grass
  • Thailand: yaa-daeng

EPPO code

  • ISCRU (Ischaemum rugosum)

Summary of Invasiveness

Top of page

I. rugosum is a C4 grass species widely cultivated and naturalized in moist, tropical habitats around the world (Clayton et al., 2015; USDA-ARS, 2015). It is an opportunistic and effective colonizer of open and disturbed areas, swamps, and along roadsides. It is a serious weed in many crops, especially in paddy fields and sugarcane plantations (Holm et al., 1977; Baki and Manidool, 1992). I. rugosum is a highly invasive grass which can produce up to 4,000 seeds per plant and has the potential to grow even in shaded areas (Holm et al., 1977; PROTA, 2015). I. rugosum is listed as invasive in Costa Rica, Cuba, the Dominican Republic and Fiji (Kairo et al., 2003; Chacon and Saborio, 2012; Oviedo Prieto et al., 2012; PIER, 2015). In the USA, the Department of Agriculture considers it a noxious weed; plants found growing within the continental USA should be promptly reported to that agency (Barkworth et al., 2003). 

Taxonomic Tree

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

Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature

Top of page

Poaceae is one of the largest families in the Angiosperms including over 700 genera and 11,000 species widely distributed in all regions of the world (Stevens, 2012). Ischaemum includes approximately 81 species, all of which are native to tropical regions. This genus name is derived from the Greek ischion, hip or hip-joint socket. (Barkworth et al., 2003; Stevens, 2012). Ischaemum rugosum is a highly variable species. Two varieties have been distinguished: var. rugosum, which has developed pedicelled spikelets, and var. segatum, in which the pedicelled spikelets are much reduced; these varieties are not separated geographically (Mannetje and Jones, 1992).

Description

Top of page

I. rugosum is a vigorous annual (in strongly desiccating soil) or short-lived perennial, tufted, sometimes with stilt roots, rooting at the nodes, with erect, slanting or ascending, often much-branched culms, up to 1.5 m tall. The species can be identified by the distinctive, prominent transverse ribs or ridges on the lower glume of the spikelet. The spinal awns are prominent and the nodes of the culm are tufted and hairy.

The leaf sheaths are usually loose, up to 16 cm long, glabrous or hairy like the blades, with some long, slender, bulbous-based hairs on the margin and at the base at the node (Gilliland et al., 1971). The leaf blades are acuminate, the lower ones narrowed gradually to the base; 30 cm long x 1.5 cm wide; the margin is cartilaginous and scabrid, the base densely hairy. The ligule is variable, a brownish membrane, 6 mm deep.

The inflorescence is terminal, apparently simple when young, but separating with age into its two constituent racemes, usually 7-10 cm long; each raceme with the spikelets arranged in pairs, one sessile, one pedicelled, on one side of the triangular, hairy rachis. Sessile spikelet, callus thick, lower glume keeled and membraneous, 5 mm long with distinct transverse ridges (hence 'rugosum'; upper glume ovate-acute, keeled 5.2 mm long; lower floret usually male, 4.6 mm long; epper lemma with a twisted awn up to 20 mm long; anthers 3, 2 mm long; grain ovoid, brown, 2 mm long. Pedicelled spikelet on a stout pedicel, 1 mm long; lower glume ovate-acute, 4.4 mm long; upper glume boat-shaped, keeled, acute, 4.1 mm long; lower lemma hyaline, 3-nerved, the margins folded; palea similar, 2-nerved, upper lemma male, 3 mm, hyaline without an awn or with a very small, thin one (Gilliland et al., 1971).

Plant Type

Top of page Annual
Grass / sedge
Perennial
Seed propagated
Vegetatively propagated

Distribution

Top of page

I. rugosum is a native of tropical and subtropical Asia and the west Pacific, and is widely distributed in Malaysia, Sri Lanka, India, Myanmar, Thailand, Indonesia, Philippines, Vietnam and throughout the tropics (Bor, 1960; Gilliland et al., 1971; Clayton et al., 2015). It is one of the most serious weeds in rice in Sri Lanka, India, Madagascar, Thailand, Fiji and Suriname (Holm et al., 1977). It is a weed of rice in countries including Brazil, Ghana, Peru, the Philippines, Cambodia, Guinea, Liberia, Malaysia (Sarawak), Senegal , Venezuela and Trinidad. Some authorities list it as introduced in Africa (Flora of China Editorial Committee, 2015), although a distribution map at e-monocot.org includes tropical west and east Africa in the native range.

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.

Last updated: 23 Apr 2020
Continent/Country/Region Distribution Last Reported Origin First Reported Invasive Reference Notes

Africa

Burkina FasoPresentHutchinson and Dalziel (1972); Clayton et al. (2015)
Côte d'IvoirePresentNativeClayton et al. (2015)
GambiaPresentNativeClayton et al. (2015)
GhanaPresent, LocalizedHolm et al. (1977); Clayton et al. (2015); EPPO (2020)
GuineaPresent, LocalizedHolm et al. (1977); Clayton et al. (2015); EPPO (2020)
Guinea-BissauPresentHutchinson and Dalziel (1972); Clayton et al. (2015)
KenyaPresentClayton and Renvoize (1982); Clayton et al. (2015)
LiberiaPresent, LocalizedHolm et al. (1977); Clayton et al. (2015); EPPO (2020)
MadagascarPresentHolm et al. (1979); Clayton et al. (2015)
MaliPresentNativeClayton et al. (2015)
MauritaniaPresentNativeClayton et al. (2015)
NigeriaPresentIntroducedUSDA-ARS (2015)
SenegalPresent, LocalizedHolm et al. (1977); Clayton et al. (2015); EPPO (2020)
Sierra LeonePresentHutchinson and Dalziel (1972); Clayton et al. (2015)
TanzaniaPresentClayton and Renvoize (1982); Clayton et al. (2015)
-Zanzibar IslandPresentClayton and Renvoize (1982)
TogoPresentNativeClayton et al. (2015)

Asia

BangladeshPresent, LocalizedHolm et al. (1979); Clayton et al. (2015); EPPO (2020)
BhutanPresentNativeFlora of China Editorial Committee (2015)
BruneiPresentWaterhouse (1993)
CambodiaPresent, LocalizedHolm et al. (1977); EPPO (2020)
ChinaPresent, LocalizedHolm et al. (1977); EPPO (2020)
-GuangdongPresentNativeFlora of China Editorial Committee (2015)
-GuangxiPresentNativeFlora of China Editorial Committee (2015)
-GuizhouPresentNativeFlora of China Editorial Committee (2015)
-HainanPresentNativeFlora of China Editorial Committee (2015)
-SichuanPresentNativeFlora of China Editorial Committee (2015)
-YunnanPresentNativeFlora of China Editorial Committee (2015)
IndiaPresent, LocalizedNativeGilliland et al. (1971); Oviedo Prieto et al. (2012); Clayton et al. (2015); EPPO (2020)
-Andaman and Nicobar IslandsPresentNativeClayton et al. (2015)
-AssamPresentNativeClayton et al. (2015)
-Himachal PradeshPresentBawa and Singh (1991); Clayton et al. (2015)
-Jammu and KashmirPresentNativeClayton et al. (2015)
-KeralaPresentSudhakara and Nair (1986)
-Madhya PradeshPresentChandrakar et al. (1993)
-PunjabPresentCABI (Undated)Original citation: Sandhu & Tarlok Singh, 1993
-SikkimPresentNativeClayton et al. (2015)
-UttarakhandPresentNativeClayton et al. (2015)
IndonesiaPresent, LocalizedGilliland et al. (1971); Holm et al. (1979); EPPO (2020)
-JavaPresentNativeClayton et al. (2015)
-Lesser Sunda IslandsPresentNativeClayton et al. (2015)
-SumatraPresentNativeClayton et al. (2015)
JapanPresentNativeClayton et al. (2015)Nansei-shoto
-Ryukyu IslandsPresentNativeClayton et al. (2015)
LaosPresentWaterhouse (1993)
MalaysiaPresent, LocalizedGilliland et al. (1971); Clayton et al. (2015); EPPO (2020)
-Peninsular MalaysiaPresentYong and Goh (1977); Azmi (1988); Clayton et al. (2015)
-SarawakPresentHolm et al. (1977)
MyanmarPresent, LocalizedGilliland et al. (1971); Clayton et al. (2015); EPPO (2020)
NepalPresentNativeClayton et al. (2015)
PakistanPresentNativeClayton et al. (2015)
PhilippinesPresent, LocalizedGilliland et al. (1971); Clayton et al. (2015); EPPO (2020)
SingaporePresentWaterhouse (1993); Chong et al. (2009)
Sri LankaPresent, LocalizedGilliland et al. (1971); Chandrasena (1989); Clayton et al. (2015); EPPO (2020)
TaiwanPresentNativeFlora of China Editorial Committee (2015)
ThailandPresent, LocalizedGilliland et al. (1971); Noda et al. (1985); Clayton et al. (2015); EPPO (2020)
VietnamPresent, WidespreadGilliland et al. (1971); Clayton et al. (2015)

North America

Costa RicaPresentIntroducedInvasiveChacón and Saborío (2012)Highly invasive
CubaPresent, LocalizedIntroducedInvasiveAntigua (1993); Oviedo Prieto et al. (2012); EPPO (2020)
Dominican RepublicPresent, LocalizedHolm et al. (1979); Kairo et al. (2003); EPPO (2020)
HaitiPresentIntroducedAcevedo-Rodríguez and Strong (2012)
JamaicaPresent, LocalizedHolm et al. (1979); Acevedo-Rodríguez and Strong (2012); EPPO (2020)
MexicoPresentIntroducedUSDA-ARS (2015)
NicaraguaPresentIntroducedClayton et al. (2015)
PanamaPresentIntroducedClayton et al. (2015)
Puerto RicoPresentIntroducedCABI (Undated)Original citation: US National Herbarium
Saint LuciaPresentIntroducedNaturalizedGraveson (2012)Naturalized
Trinidad and TobagoPresent, LocalizedHolm et al. (1977); Acevedo-Rodríguez and Strong (2012); EPPO (2020)
U.S. Virgin IslandsPresent, LocalizedEPPO (2020)
United StatesPresentCABI (Undated a)Present based on regional distribution.
-MarylandPresentIntroducedUSDA-NRCS (2015)Noxious weed
-TexasPresentIntroducedBarkworth et al. (2003)Noxious weed

Oceania

AustraliaPresentCABI (Undated a)Present based on regional distribution.
-Northern TerritoryPresentNativeClayton et al. (2015)
-QueenslandPresentHawton (1992); Clayton et al. (2015)
-Western AustraliaPresentNativeClayton et al. (2015)
Federated States of MicronesiaPresentNativeClayton et al. (2015)
FijiPresent, LocalizedHolm et al. (1977); Smith (1979); EPPO (2020)
GuamPresentInvasiveMeyer (2000); PIER (2015)
Northern Mariana IslandsPresentNativeClayton et al. (2015)
Papua New GuineaPresentNativeClayton et al. (2015)
Wallis and FutunaPresentPIER (2015)

South America

BrazilPresent, LocalizedHolm et al. (1977); EPPO (2020)
-AmapaPresentIntroducedNaturalizedFilgueiras (2015)Naturalized
-CearaPresentIntroducedNaturalizedFilgueiras (2015)Naturalized
-GoiasPresentIntroducedNaturalizedFilgueiras (2015)Naturalized
-Mato Grosso do SulPresentLorenzi (1982)
-Minas GeraisPresentCarvalho and Alcântara (1990)
-ParaPresentIntroducedNaturalizedFilgueiras (2015)Naturalized
-ParanaPresentLorenzi (1982)
-Rio de JaneiroPresentLorenzi (1982)
-Sao PauloPresentLorenzi (1982); CABI (Undated)
ColombiaPresent, LocalizedHolm et al. (1979); Clayton et al. (2015); EPPO (2020)
EcuadorPresentIntroducedClayton et al. (2015)
French GuianaPresentIntroducedNaturalizedFunk et al. (2007)Naturalized
GuyanaPresent, LocalizedHolm et al. (1979); Funk et al. (2007); EPPO (2020); CABI (Undated)
PeruPresent, LocalizedHolm et al. (1977); Clayton et al. (2015); EPPO (2020)
SurinamePresent, LocalizedHolm et al. (1977); Funk et al. (2007); EPPO (2020)
VenezuelaPresentIntroducedUSDA-ARS (2015)

History of Introduction and Spread

Top of page

I. rugosum has been introduced across tropical habitats of the world to develop permanent pastures and to be used as forage and animal fodder (Baki and Manidool, 1992; FAO, 2005; PROTA, 2015). In the West Indies, it appear in herbarium collections made in 1904 in Cuba, 1928 in Trinidad and Tobago, 1966 in western Puerto Rico (Añasco), and 1970 in the Dominican Republic (US National Herbarium).

Risk of Introduction

Top of page

The risk of introduction of I. rugosum is high. This grass has been intentionally introduced in tropical and subtropical regions. It has escaped from cultivation and once established it rapidly colonizes new areas forming dense mats which are very difficult to control because the species has developed resistance to herbicides  (Ortiz et al., 2013). 

Habitat

Top of page

I. rugosum is an opportunistic and effective colonizer of open, disturbed or newly cleared areas. Although it is a sun-loving plant, it can persist in sites receiving only 30-35% of full sunlight. It occurs at altitudes of up to 2400 m in the Philippines. It is particularly well adapted to wet sites and is often found in ricefields or low-lying areas that are periodically flooded. It can tolerate acid soils of pH 4.0 (Mannetje and Jones, 1992). I. rugosum has been found on banks in fallow rice-fields, in wet and often slightly saline grassy places and other damp places (Henderson, 1959; Flora of China Editorial Committee, 2015). It is common throughout Malaysia, especially near the sea, and in sandy areas inland (Gilliland et al., 1971). 

Habitat List

Top of page
CategorySub-CategoryHabitatPresenceStatus
Terrestrial
Terrestrial – ManagedCultivated / agricultural land Present, no further details Harmful (pest or invasive)
Cultivated / agricultural land Present, no further details Natural
Managed grasslands (grazing systems) Present, no further details Harmful (pest or invasive)
Managed grasslands (grazing systems) Present, no further details Natural
Managed grasslands (grazing systems) Present, no further details Productive/non-natural
Disturbed areas Present, no further details Harmful (pest or invasive)
Disturbed areas Present, no further details Natural
Rail / roadsides Present, no further details Harmful (pest or invasive)
Rail / roadsides Present, no further details Natural
Terrestrial ‑ Natural / Semi-naturalNatural grasslands Present, no further details Harmful (pest or invasive)
Natural grasslands Present, no further details Natural
Wetlands Present, no further details Harmful (pest or invasive)
Wetlands Present, no further details Natural

Hosts/Species Affected

Top of page

I. rugosum is found mainly in rice, but also amongst other crops which are grown under wetland conditions. It is also sometimes found in sugarcane (Holm et al., 1977). It is named by Holm et al. (1977) as a weed of six or more crops in Cuba, Colombia, Malaysia and China, and of between two and five crops in Peru and Guyana.

Host Plants and Other Plants Affected

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

Biology and Ecology

Top of page

Genetics

The chromosome number reported for I. rugosum is 2n = 18, 20 (Baki and Manidool, 1992).

Longevity

I. rugosum has the potential to grow as an annual or perennial grass (Ortiz et al., 2013).

Physiology and Phenology

The seeds of I. rugosum germinate well at temperatures between 20 and 40°C and only emerge from the upper soil level (0-5 cm) (Rijn and Verhagen, 1980). The seeds germinate in the wet season and grow vigorously. In Malaysia, I. rugosum cannot germinate when submerged under water (Itoh, 1991); after emergence, it grows easily under flood conditions. In the Philippines, some plants may produce 4000 seeds, but fewer seeds are produced in Suriname (Holm et al., 1977). In Fiji, I. rugosum flowers and fruits twice per year, in February and October (Holm et al., 1977). The seeds have a dormant period after they have matured. The seed ripens and shatters immediately so that a constant supply of seeds falls back into the soil resulting in ever-increasing stands of the weed. The spread of I. rugosum and the severity of competition may depend on differences in ecotypes of the weed which may exist in several parts of the world (Holm et al., 1977).

Environmental requirements

Although I. rugosum is a sun-loving plant, it can persist in sites receiving only 30-35% of full sunlight. It occurs at altitudes of up to 2400 m in the Philippines. It is particularly well adapted to wet sites and can tolerate acid soils of pH 4.0 (Mannetje and Jones, 1992).

Climate

Top of page
ClimateStatusDescriptionRemark
Af - Tropical rainforest climate Preferred > 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])

Air Temperature

Top of page
Parameter Lower limit Upper limit
Mean annual temperature (ºC) 20 35

Rainfall

Top of page
ParameterLower limitUpper limitDescription
Mean annual rainfall8002000mm; lower/upper limits

Soil Tolerances

Top of page

Soil drainage

  • free

Soil reaction

  • acid

Soil texture

  • light
  • medium

Notes on Natural Enemies

Top of page

There are no major pests or diseases which affect I. rugosum. Infestation of the weed by Puccinia spp. is commonly observed; this may reduce the quantity and quality of the weed available for animal feed, but does not warrant control by chemicals (Mannetje and Jones, 1992).

I. rugosum is an alternative host of the viruses causing rice and maize leaf blight galls, and of Pyricularia sp. In addition, Diopsis thoracica, Nephotettix modulatus, Epilachna similis and Pteronemobolius sp. have been found attacking I. rugosum in ricefields during the heading stage of rice (Alghazali and Domingo, 1982).

Means of Movement and Dispersal

Top of page

I. rugosum reproduces by seed and vegetatively by stolons and rhizomes with a cycle of 130 days. Seeds can be dispersed by wind, water, or as a seed contaminant in soil, gravel, or crops. 

Pathway Causes

Top of page
CauseNotesLong DistanceLocalReferences
DisturbanceNaturalized on heavily grazed areas Yes Yes PROTA, 2015
ForageUsed to establish permanent pastures Yes Yes PROTA, 2015

Pathway Vectors

Top of page
VectorNotesLong DistanceLocalReferences
Debris and waste associated with human activitiesAgricultural weed Yes Yes PROTA, 2015
Soil, sand and gravelSeed contaminant Yes Yes PIER, 2015

Impact Summary

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

Economic Impact

Top of page

I. rugosum is a serious weed in many crops, particularly in rice (Holm et al., 1977). It is one of the most serious weeds of rice in Sri Lanka, India, Madagascar, Thailand, Fiji and Suriname (Holm et al., 1977) and is a serious weed of rice in Brazil, Ghana, Peru, the Philippines, Cambodia, Guinea, Liberia, Malaysia (Sarawak), Senegal and Trinidad. It is an aggressive weed, whose most-favoured habitat is in wetland rice (Moody et al., 1984). In one trial, I. rugosum was shown to be more competitive to rice than Echinochloa crus-galli or E. colona (Antigua, 1993).

I. rugosum was the third most troublesome weed in field trials on clay loam at Raipur, India (Chandrakar et al., 1993). Intensive infestation by this weed caused a 48% loss in rice yield in Malaysia (Itoh, 1991). In some instances, crop losses of up to 100% can occur if a whole ricefield is abandoned (Ooi, 1988). Ooi (1988) reported a serious infestation by I. rugosum in the area of the Manik river (Sg. Manik area) in north-west Peninsular Malaysia. Molinate did not provide effective control and farmers reverted to traditional hand weeding, which was laborious and time-consuming; the cost of labour for hand-weeding in the Chui Chak area was 494 ringgit/ha (approximately 190 US dollars/ha).

Over 25% loss of the total yield of transplanted rice cultivar PR-08 in India occurred when I. rugosum was allowed to compete for 40 days; the loss in yield increased with the delay in weed removal (Tarlok-Singh et al., 1991). Chandrasena (1989) surveyed 147 weeds in ricefields in Sri Lanka and noted that 44 species occurred in at least 20% of the fields; these weeds included E. crus-galli, E. colona and I. rugosum. I. rugosum is the third most important weed of flooded rice in Cuba (Colon and Antigua, 1989), and the most difficult weed problem in Venezuelan rice fields (Ortiz et al., 2015).

I. rugosum is a potential alternate host of rice tungro viruses in India (Mallick et al., 1999).

Risk and Impact Factors

Top of page Invasiveness
  • Proved invasive outside its native range
  • Has a broad native range
  • Abundant in its native range
  • Highly adaptable to different environments
  • Is a habitat generalist
  • Tolerates, or benefits from, cultivation, browsing pressure, mutilation, fire etc
  • Pioneering in disturbed areas
  • Tolerant of shade
  • Highly mobile locally
  • Benefits from human association (i.e. it is a human commensal)
  • Fast growing
  • Has high reproductive potential
  • Reproduces asexually
Impact outcomes
  • Altered trophic level
  • Damaged ecosystem services
  • Ecosystem change/ habitat alteration
  • Modification of fire regime
  • Modification of hydrology
  • Modification of nutrient regime
  • Modification of successional patterns
  • Monoculture formation
  • Negatively impacts agriculture
  • Reduced native biodiversity
  • Threat to/ loss of native species
Impact mechanisms
  • Competition - monopolizing resources
  • Competition - smothering
  • Rapid growth
  • Rooting
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
  • Difficult to identify/detect in the field
  • Difficult/costly to control

Uses

Top of page

I. rugosum is cultivated in pastures and used as forage and animal fodder. It also provides suitable material for compost and mulch. The grain is eaten by people in times of scarcity (Baki and Manidool, 1992).

Uses List

Top of page

Animal feed, fodder, forage

  • Fodder/animal feed
  • Forage

Human food and beverage

  • Cereal

Diagnosis

Top of page

I. rugosum can be identified by the prominent transverse ribs or ridges on the lower glume of the spikelet; these are distinctive and can be seen with the naked eye. The prominent spinal awns and the tufted, hairy nodes of the culm are also good diagnostic characters.

Similarities to Other Species/Conditions

Top of page

Many other Ischaemum species occur in South-East Asia, of which several may occur as weeds. I. rugosum differs from most of these in being usually an erect annual. It can be identified by the prominent, transverse ribs or ridges on the lower glume of the spikelet; these are distinctive and can be seen with the naked eye. The prominent spinal awns and the tufted, hairy nodes of the culm are also good diagnostic characters. Among the other species, I. timorense also has narrowed leaf bases but is a creeping plant rooting at the nodes; I. muticum differs in being perennial with a thick, creeping rhizome and no awns; I. indicum has a similar growth habit to I. timorense but has lower glumes which are winged towards the apex; I. magnum is a robust, erect perennial without awns. Other species may be encountered, especially in other parts of the world.

Prevention and Control

Top of page

Due to the variable regulations around (de)registration of pesticides, your national list of registered pesticides or relevant authority should be consulted to determine which products are legally allowed for use in your country when considering chemical control. Pesticides should always be used in a lawful manner, consistent with the product's label.

Prevention

Preventive measures including clean seed, clean soil and weed-free farm implements and machinery are vital in preventing early infestations of I. rugosum. In a study of rice seeds, most samples were found to be contaminated by 20 weed species including I. rugosum (Fujisaka et al., 1993). The use of certified rice seed is recommended to prevent re-infestation (Antigua, 1993).

Biological Control

There is little information on the pests and pathogenic fungi which attack I. rugosum. It is recommended that surveys of such pests are conducted in countries where I. rugosum is a major weed. Puccinia spp. have been recorded on the weed, but host screening is vital because the pathogen may infect crops.

Chemical Control

In a field trial conducted in Malaysia in 1988-89, 11 herbicides were evaluated in rice cv. MR 84. Thorough field preparation and sound agronomic practices reduced the incidence of I. rugosum from 100 to 22% (Lo, 1990); effective herbicides included bensulfuron, pyrazosulfuron and 2, 4-D + EPTC, fenoxaprop, propanil, propanil + molinate and thiobencarb.

Fields trials conducted by Itoh (1991) in wet-seeded rice (second season, 1990) showed that molinate + propanil followed by 2, 4-D IBE provided effective control. In another trial, unweeded plots gave 63 g/m² dry weight of I. rugosum, compared with 0 g/m² for fenoxaprop-ethyl (35 days after sowing) or 3 g/m² for propanil + molinate (7 days after sowing).

On sandy loam in India, the most effective treatments against Echinochloa crus-galli and I. rugosum in transplanted rice were thiobencarb + piperophos and anilofos, resulting in the lowest dry weight of weeds (Gill et al., 1991). In dry seeded rice of North Queensland, Australia, I. rugosum was the dominant weed in areas of poor water management; adequate control of various weeds was achieved using propanil (Hawton, 1992).

For selective control in rice, Ampong-Nyarko and de Datta (1991) indicate susceptibility to bifenox, butachlor, fenoxaprop, oxyfluorfen, pendimethalin and propanil, moderate limited susceptibility to thiobencarb and resistance to molinate. Fenoxaprop-P-ethyl has effectively controlled I. rugosum and Echinochloa spp. in rice in India (Singh et al., 2004).

Germination of I. rugosum seeds in the laboratory was reduced by pendimethalin but the herbicide did not reduce rice seed germination; thiobencarb affected the germination of rice seeds but also caused rotting of seeds of I. rugosum; oxadiazon reduced germination of I. rugosum and killed the weed at a higher concentration (Bhatia and Sandhu, 1989). In Venezuela, the herbicide bispyribac-sodium has been used to control I. rugosum. However, the grass has shown resistance to this herbicide (Ortiz et al., 2013). The weed in Venezuela is also showing resistance to profoxydim (Ortiz et al., 2015).

Integrated Weed Management

Over-reliance on a single approach for weed control has resulted in the dominance of certain weed species via succession. For example, the widespread use of molinate for the control of Echinochloa spp. in rice fields has resulted in succession by Leptochloa chinensis and I. rugosum (Ho et al., 1990). The launch of the Integrated Weed Management (IWM) campaign by the Malaysian Agricultural Development Authority (MADA) in 1989, reduced infestation by Echinochloa spp. and increased rice yields by 27% compared with the previous season (Ho et al., 1990). Tillage and crop rotation were also included in IWM in wheat areas in India (Kolar and Mehra, 1992), because I. rugosum is reported to be tolerant of butachlor. A combination of cultural practices including flooding and residue mulching together with herbicide application has been tested for I. rugosum control in rice by Lim et al. (2015).

References

Top of page

Acevedo-Rodríguez P; Strong MT, 2012. Catalogue of the Seed Plants of the West Indies. Smithsonian Contributions to Botany, 98:1192 pp. Washington DC, USA: Smithsonian Institution. http://botany.si.edu/Antilles/WestIndies/catalog.htm

Alghazali AM; Domingo JS, 1982. Weeds hosts of some rice pests in North Western Sierra Leone, Rokupr. International Rice Research Newsletter, 7(2):10.

Ampong-Nyarko K; Datta SK de, 1991. Handbook for weed control in rice. Manila, Philippines: International Rice Research Institute.

Antigua G, 1993. Integrated weed management of rice in Cuba. Proceedings of a monitoring tour and workshop on integrated pest management of rice in the Caribbean, held in Guyana and Trinidad & Tobago, October 7-11, 1991 [edited by Armenta Soto, J.L.] Cali, Colombia; Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT), 129-135

Azmi M, 1988. Weed competition in rice production. Proceedings of the National Seminar and Workshop on Rice Field Weed Management, 141-152

Baki BB; Manidool C, 1992. Ischaemum rugosum Salisb. Record from Proseabase [ed. by Mannetje L't, \Jones, R. M.]. Bogor, Indonesia: PROSEA (Plant Resources of South-East Asia) Foundation.

Barkworth ME; Capels KM; Long S; Piep MB; eds, 2003. Flora of North America. Volume 25. Magnoliophyta: Commelinidae (in part): Poaceae, part 2. New York, USA: Oxford University Press, 783 pp.

Bawa R; Singh R, 1991. Nutrient dynamics and budgets in Himalayan grasslands: I Nitrogen. International Journal of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 17(2):101-119.

Bhatia RK; Sandhu KS, 1989. Relative toxicities of herbicides to germinating paddy and weed seeds. Indian Journal of Weed Science, 21(102):83-87.

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

Carvalho DA de; Alcantara ENde, 1990. Weeds occurring in rice crops in the Zona de Mata region, Minas Gerais. Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira, 25(1):25-28

Caton BP; Mortimer M; Hill JE, 2004. A practical field guide to weeds of rice in Asia. Los Baños, Philippines: IRRI, 116 pp.

Chacón E; Saborío G, 2012. Red Interamericana de Información de Especies Invasoras, Costa Rica ([English title not available]). San José, Costa Rica: Asociación para la Conservación y el Estudio de la Biodiversidad. http://invasoras.acebio.org

Chandrakar BL; Tripathi RS; Tuteja SS; Taunk, 1993. Effect of application timings and formulations of anilofos in broadcast seeded semi dry rice (Oryza sativa). Integrated weed management for sustainable agriculture. Proceedings of an Indian Society of Weed Science International Symposium, Hisar, India, 18-20 November 1993 Hisar, Haryana, India; Indian Society of Weed Science, Vol. III:13-15

Chandrasena JPNR, 1989. A survey of rice-field weeds in Ratnapura and Kurunegala districts of Sri Lanka. Journal of the National Science Council of Sri Lanka, 17(2):187-211

Chong KY; Tan HTW; Corlett RT, 2009. A checklist of the total vascular plant flora of Singapore: native, naturalised and cultivated species. Singapore: Raffles Museum of Biodiversity Research, National University of Singapore, 273 pp. http://lkcnhm.nus.edu.sg/nus/pdf/PUBLICATION/LKCNH%20Museum%20Books/LKCNHM%20Books/flora_of_singapore_tc.pdf

Clayton WD; Govaerts R; Harman KT; Williamson H; Vorontsova M, 2015. World Checklist of Poaceae. Richmond, UK: Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. http://apps.kew.org/wcsp/

Clayton WD; Renvoize SA, 1982. Flora of Tropical East Africa. Graminea (Part 3). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: A.A. Balkema, 448 pp.

Colon C; Antigua G, 1989. Main weeds of flooded rice in Cuba. Ciencia y Tecnica en la Agricultura, Arroz, 12(2):137-142

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

Filgueiras TS, 2015. Ischaemum in the list of species of the flora of Brazil. Ischaemum in Lista de Espécies da Flora do Brasil. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Jardim Botânico do Rio de Janeiro. http://floradobrasil.jbrj.gov.br/jabot/floradobrasil/FB13294

Flora of China Editorial Committee, 2015. Flora of China. St. Louis, Missouri and Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA: Missouri Botanical Garden and Harvard University Herbaria. http://www.efloras.org/flora_page.aspx?flora_id=2

Fujisaka S; Guino RA; Lubigan RT; Moody K, 1993. Farmers' rice seed management practices and resulting weed seed contamination in the Philippines. Seed Science and Technology, 21(1):149-157

Funk V; Hollowell T; Berry P; Kelloff C; Alexander SN, 2007. Checklist of the plants of the Guiana Shield (Venezuela: Amazonas, Bolivar, Delta Amacuro; Guyana, Surinam, French Guiana). Contributions from the United States National Herbarium, 584 pp.

Gill HS; Walia US; Brar LS, 1991. Herbicides for controlling weeds in transplanted rice. Oryza, 28(3):353-357

Gilliland; HB; Holttum RE; Bor NL; Burkill NM, 1971. A revised Flora of Malaya, Grasses. Singapore: Singapore Botanical Gardens, Vol III.

Graveson R, 2012. The Plants of Saint Lucia (in the Lesser Antilles of the Caribbean). The Plants of Saint Lucia (in the Lesser Antilles of the Caribbean). http://www.saintlucianplants.com

Hawton D, 1992. Effect of propanil, 2,4,5-T and other herbicides on Echinochloa colona (L.) Link and Cyperus iria L. in dry seeded rice. Tropical Pest Management, 38(3):310-313

Henderson MR, 1959. Malayan Wild Flowers. Part I. Monocotyledons. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Caxton Press Ltd.

Ho NK; Zuki IM; Asna BO, 1992. The implementation of strategic extension campaign on integrated weed management in the Muda area, Malaysia. Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on plant protection in the tropics, Genting Highlands, Malaysia, 20-23 March 1990 [edited by Ooi, P.A.C.; Lim, G.S.; Teng, P.S.] Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; Malaysian Plant Protection Society, Vol. 6:234-241

Holm LG; Pancho JV; Herberger JP; Plucknett DL, 1979. A geographical atlas of world weeds. New York, USA: John Wiley and Sons, 391 pp.

Holm LG; Plucknett DL; Pancho JV; Herberger JP, 1977. The World's Worst Weeds. Distribution and Biology. Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: University Press of Hawaii.

Hutchinson J; Dalziel JM, 1972. Flora of West Tropical Africa. Volume 3. 2nd edition. London, UK: Crown Agents.

Itoh K, 1991. Life cycles of rice field weeds and their management in Malaysia. Tropical Agriculture Research Centre, Tsukuba, Japan. Penang, West Malaysia: Cheong Seng Chan Sendirian Berhad.

Kairo M; Ali B; Cheesman O; Haysom K; Murphy S, 2003. Invasive species threats in the Caribbean region. Report to the Nature Conservancy. Curepe, Trinidad and Tobago: CAB International, 132 pp. http://www.issg.org/database/species/reference_files/Kairo%20et%20al,%202003.pdf

Kolar JS; Mehra SP, 1992. Changing scenario of weed flora in agroecosystems of Punjab. In: Dhaliwal GS, Hansra BS, Jerath N, eds. Changing scenario of our environment. Ludhiana, India: Punjab Agricultural University, 252-262.

Lim CAA; Awan TH; StaCruz PC; Chauhan BS, 2015. Influence of environmental factors, cultural practices, and herbicide application on seed germination and emergence ecology of Ischaemum rugosum Salisb. PLoS ONE, 10(9):e0137256. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0137256

Lo NP, 1992. Control of Ischaemum rugosum and other grasses in direct seeded rice. Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on plant protection in the tropics, Genting Highlands, Malaysia, 20-23 March 1990 [edited by Ooi, P.A.C.; Lim, G.S.; Teng, P.S.] Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; Malaysian Plant Protection Society, Vol. 6:219-223

Lorenzi H, 1982. Weeds of Brazil, terrestrial and aquatic, parasitic, poisonous and medicinal. (Plantas daninhas de Brasil, terrestres, aquaticas, parasitas, toxicas e medicinais.) Nova Odessa, Brazil: H. Lorenzi, 425 pp.

Lubigan RT; Moody K, 1990. Competition between transplanted rice and Ischaemum rugosum. Journal of Plant Protection in the Tropics, 7(3):147-153.

Mallick SC; Chowdhury AC, 1999. Ischaemum rugosum - a potential alternative host of rice tungro viruses in West Bengal. International Rice Research Newsletter, 24(8):28-29.

Mannetje LT; Jones RM, 1992. Plant Resources of South-East Asia. Wageningen, Netherlands: Pudoc Scientific Publishers.

Meyer JY, 2000. Preliminary review of the invasive plants in the Pacific Islands (SPREP member countries). In: Invasive species in the Pacific: A technical review and draft regional strategy [ed. by Sherley G]. Samoa: South Pacific Regional Environment Programme, 190 pp.

Moody K; Munroe CE; Lubigan RT; Paller ES, 1984. Major Weeds of the Philippines. University of Philippines, Los Banos, Philippines: Weed Science Society of the Philippines.

Noda K; Teerawatsakul M; Prakongvongs C; Chaiwiratnukul L, 1985. Major Weeds in Thailand. Bangkok, Thailand: Department of Agriculture.

Ooi GHC, 1988. Saturn D the almost perfect herbicide for weed control in rice fields. Proceedings of the National Seminar and Workshop on Rice Field Weed Management, 179-184

Ortiz A; Blanco S; Arana G; López L; Torres S; Quintana Y; Pérez P; Zambrano C; Fischer A, 2013. Current status in resistance of Ischaemum rugosum Salisb. to herbicide bispiribac-sodio in Venezuela. (Estado actual de la resistencia de Ischaemum rugosum Salisb. al herbicida bispiribac-sodio en Venezuela.) Bioagro, 25(2):79-89. http://www.ucla.edu.ve/bioagro/Rev25(2)/1.MS%201230.pdf

Ortiz A; Moreno JP; Matheus R; López-Méndez L; Torres S; Zambrano C; Quintana Y; Pérez P; Fischer A, 2015. Current status of resistance Ischaemum rugosum Salisb., to herbicide profoxydim in Venezuela. Revista de la Facultad de Agronomía, Universidad del Zulia, 32(1):21-40. http://revfacagronluz.org.ve/journal.htm

Oviedo Prieto R; Herrera Oliver P; Caluff MG, et al. , 2012. National list of invasive and potentially invasive plants in the Republic of Cuba - 2011. (Lista nacional de especies de plantas invasoras y potencialmente invasoras en la República de Cuba - 2011). Bissea: Boletín sobre Conservación de Plantas del Jardín Botánico Nacional de Cuba, 6(Special Issue 1):22-96.

PIER, 2015. Pacific Islands Ecosystems at Risk. Honolulu, USA: HEAR, University of Hawaii. http://www.hear.org/pier/index.html

PROTA, 2015. PROTA4U web database. Grubben GJH, Denton OA, eds. Wageningen, Netherlands: Plant Resources of Tropical Africa. http://www.prota4u.info

Richards-Haynes C; Myint A; Persaud S, 1993. Weed incidence on selected rice farms in Guyana. Proceedings of a monitoring tour and workshop on integrated pest management of rice in the Caribbean, held in Guyana and Trinidad & Tobago, October 7-11, 1991 [edited by Armenta Soto, J.L.] Cali, Colombia; Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT), 125-128

Rjin PJ Van; Verhagen L, 1980. Germination and emergence characteristices of Indigefera astragalina, I. rugosum, O. barthii and Sesbania sesban. Proceedings 6th International Colloquium on Weed Ecology, Biology and Systematics. Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1:57-62.

Sandhu KS; Tarlok Singh, 1993. Weed composition in rice fields of Punjab. Journal of Research, Punjab Agricultural University, 30(3-4):127-134

Singh VP; Govindra Singh; Mahendra Singh, 2004. Effect of fenoxaprop-p-ethyl on transplanted rice and associated weeds. Indian Journal of Weed Science, 36(3/4):190-192.

Smith AC, 1979. Flora Vitiensis nova: A new flora of Fiji. Volume I. Lawai, Kauai, Hawaii, USA: National Tropical Botanical Garden, 494 pp.

Stevens PF, 2012. Angiosperm Phylogeny Website. http://www.mobot.org/MOBOT/research/APweb/

Sudhakara K; Nair RR, 1986. Weed control in rice under semi-arid system. Agricultural Research Journal of Kerala, 24(2), 211-215.

Tarlok Singh; Kolar JS; Sandhu KS, 1991. Critical period of competition between wrinkle grass (Ischaemum rugosum Salisb.) and transplanted paddy. Indian Journal of Weed Science, 23(1-2):1-5

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

USDA-NRCS, 2015. The PLANTS Database. Baton Rouge, USA: National Plant Data Center. http://plants.usda.gov/

Waterhouse DF, 1993. The Major Arthropod Pests and Weeds of Agriculture in Southeast Asia. ACIAR Monograph No. 21. Canberra, Australia: Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research, 141 pp.

Yong SH; Goh AK, 1977. Weeds in padi-fields (Peninsular Malaysia). Weeds in padi-fields (Peninsular Malaysia). Cawangan Pemeliharaan Tanaman, Jabatan Pertanian., 74 pp.

Distribution References

Acevedo-Rodríguez P, Strong M T, 2012. Catalogue of the Seed Plants of the West Indies. Washington, DC, USA: Smithsonian Institution. 1192 pp. http://botany.si.edu/Antilles/WestIndies/catalog.htm

Antigua G, 1993. Integrated weed management of rice in Cuba. In: Proceedings of a monitoring tour and workshop on integrated pest management of rice in the Caribbean, held in Guyana and Trinidad & Tobago, October 7-11, 1991. [Proceedings of a monitoring tour and workshop on integrated pest management of rice in the Caribbean, held in Guyana and Trinidad & Tobago, October 7-11, 1991.], [ed. by Armenta Soto JL]. Cali, Colombia: Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT). 129-135.

Azmi M, 1988. Weed competition in rice production. In: Proceedings of the National Seminar and Workshop on Rice Field Weed Management. [Proceedings of the National Seminar and Workshop on Rice Field Weed Management.], 141-152.

Barkworth M E, Capels K M, Long S, Piep M B, 2003. Flora of North America, Vol. 25. Magnoliophyta: Commelinidae (in part): Poaceae, part 2. i-xxv + 783 pp.

Bawa R, Singh R, 1991. Nutrient dynamics and budgets in Himalayan grasslands. 1. Nitrogen. International Journal of Ecology and Environmental Sciences (India). 17 (2), 101-119.

CABI, Undated. Compendium record. Wallingford, UK: CABI

CABI, Undated a. CABI Compendium: Status inferred from regional distribution. Wallingford, UK: CABI

CABI, Undated b. CABI Compendium: Status as determined by CABI editor. Wallingford, UK: CABI

Carvalho D A de, Alcântara E N de, 1990. Weeds occurring in rice crops in the Zona de Mata region, Minas Gerais. (Plantas invasoras da cultura do arroz na Zona de Mata, Minas Gerais.). Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira. 25 (1), 25-28.

Chacón E, Saborío G, 2012. [English title not available]. (Red Interamericana de Información de Especies Invasoras, Costa Rica)., San José, Costa Rica: Asociación para la Conservación y el Estudio de la Biodiversidad. http://invasoras.acebio.org

Chandrakar B L, Tripathi R S, Tuteja S S, Taunk, 1993. Effect of application timings and formulations of anilofos in broadcast seeded semi dry rice (Oryza sativa). In: Integrated weed management for sustainable agriculture. Proceedings of an Indian Society of Weed Science International Symposium, Hisar, India, 18-20 November 1993. [Integrated weed management for sustainable agriculture. Proceedings of an Indian Society of Weed Science International Symposium, Hisar, India, 18-20 November 1993.], Hisar, Haryana, India: Indian Society of Weed Science. 13-15.

Chandrasena J P N R, 1989. A survey of rice-field weeds in Ratnapura and Kurunegala districts of Sri Lanka. Journal of the National Science Council of Sri Lanka. 17 (2), 187-211.

Chong K Y, Tan H T W, Corlett R T, 2009. A checklist of the total vascular plant flora of Singapore: native, naturalised and cultivated species. Singapore: Raffles Museum of Biodiversity Research, National University of Singapore. 273 pp. https://lkcnhm.nus.edu.sg/app/uploads/2017/04/flora_of_singapore_tc.pdf

Clayton W D, Renvoize S A, 1982. Flora of Tropical East Africa. Gramineae (Part 3). Rotterdam, Netherlands: A.A. Balkema. 448pp.

Clayton WD, Govaerts R, Harman KT, Williamson H, Vorontsova M, 2015. World Checklist of Poaceae., Richmond, UK: Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. http://apps.kew.org/wcsp/

EPPO, 2020. EPPO Global database. In: EPPO Global database, Paris, France: EPPO.

Filgueiras TS, 2015. Ischaemum in the list of species of the flora of Brazil. (Ischaemum in Lista de Espécies da Flora do Brasil)., Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Jardim Botânico do Rio de Janeiro. http://floradobrasil.jbrj.gov.br/jabot/floradobrasil/FB13294

Flora of China Editorial Committee, 2015. Flora of China., St. Louis, Missouri; Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA: Missouri Botanical Garden and Harvard University Herbaria. http://www.efloras.org/flora_page.aspx?flora_id=2

Funk V, Hollowell T, Berry P, Kelloff C, Alexander S N, 2007. Contributions from the United States National Herbarium, Washington, USA: Department of Systematic Biology - Botany, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution. 55, 584 pp.

Gilliland HB, Holttum RE, Bor NL, Burkill HM, 1971. A revised Flora of Malaya, Grasses., III Singapore, Singapore Botanical Gardens. 319 pp.

Graveson R, 2012. The Plants of Saint Lucia (in the Lesser Antilles of the Caribbean)., http://www.saintlucianplants.com

Hawton D, 1992. Effect of propanil, 2,4,5-T and other herbicides on Echinochloa colona (L.) Link and Cyperus iria L. in dry seeded rice. Tropical Pest Management. 38 (3), 310-313.

Holm L G, Plucknett D L, Pancho J V, Herberger J P, 1977. The world's worst weeds. Distribution and biology. Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: University Press of Hawaii. 610 pp.

Holm L, Pancho J V, Herberger J P, Plucknett D L, 1979. A geographical atlas of world weeds. New York, Chichester (), Brisbane, Toronto, UK: John Wiley and Sons. xlix + 391 pp.

Hutchinson J, Dalziel JM, 1972. Flora of West Tropical Africa., 3 (2nd) London, UK: Crown Agents.

Kairo M, Ali B, Cheesman O, Haysom K, Murphy S, 2003. Invasive species threats in the Caribbean region. Report to the Nature Conservancy. In: Invasive species threats in the Caribbean region. Report to the Nature Conservancy. Curepe, Trinidad and Tobago: CAB International. 132 pp. http://www.issg.org/database/species/reference_files/Kairo%20et%20al,%202003.pdf

Lorenzi H, 1982. Plantas daninhas de Brasil, terrestres, aquaticas, parasitas, toxicas e medicinais. Nova Odessa, Brazil: H. Lorenzi. 425 pp.

Meyer J Y, 2000. Preliminary review of the invasive plants in the Pacific Islands (SPREP member countries). In: Invasive species in the Pacific: A technical review and draft regional strategy. [ed. by Sherley G]. Samoa: South Pacific Regional Environment Programme. 190 pp.

Noda K, Teerawatsakul M, Prakongvongs C, Chaiwiratnukul L, 1985. Major Weeds in Thailand., Bangkok, Thailand: Department of Agriculture.

Oviedo Prieto R, Herrera Oliver P, Caluff M G, et al, 2012. National list of invasive and potentially invasive plants in the Republic of Cuba - 2011. (Lista nacional de especies de plantas invasoras y potencialmente invasoras en la República de Cuba - 2011). Bissea: Boletín sobre Conservación de Plantas del Jardín Botánico Nacional de Cuba. 6 (Special Issue No. 1), 22-96.

PIER, 2015. Pacific Islands Ecosystems at Risk., Honolulu, USA: HEAR, University of Hawaii. http://www.hear.org/pier/index.html

Smith AC, 1979. Flora Vitiensis nova: A new flora of Fiji., I Lawai Kauai, Hawaii, USA: National Tropical Botanical Garden. 494 pp.

Sudhakara K, Nair R R, 1986. Weed control in rice under semi-arid system. Agricultural Research Journal of Kerala. 24 (2), 211-215.

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

USDA-NRCS, 2015. The PLANTS Database. Greensboro, North Carolina, USA: National Plant Data Team. https://plants.sc.egov.usda.gov

Waterhouse D F, 1993. The major arthropod pests and weeds of agriculture in Southeast Asia. Canberra, Australia: ACIAR. v + 141 pp.

Yong S H, Goh A K, 1977. Weeds in padi-fields (Peninsular Malaysia). In: Weeds in padi-fields (Peninsular Malaysia). Cawangan Pemeliharaan Tanaman, Jabatan Pertanian. 74 pp.

Links to Websites

Top of page
WebsiteURLComment
GISD/IASPMR: Invasive Alien Species Pathway Management Resource and DAISIE European Invasive Alien Species Gatewayhttps://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.m93f6Data source for updated system data added to species habitat list.

Contributors

Top of page

13/04/15 Updated by:

Julissa Rojas-Sandoval, Department of Botany-Smithsonian NMNH, Washington DC, USA

Distribution Maps

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