Juncus effusus (common rush)
Index
- Pictures
- Identity
- Summary of Invasiveness
- Taxonomic Tree
- Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
- Description
- Plant Type
- Distribution
- Distribution Table
- History of Introduction and Spread
- Introductions
- Habitat
- Habitat List
- Hosts/Species Affected
- Host Plants and Other Plants Affected
- Biology and Ecology
- Climate
- Soil Tolerances
- Means of Movement and Dispersal
- Pathway Causes
- Pathway Vectors
- Impact Summary
- Economic Impact
- Environmental Impact
- Threatened Species
- Risk and Impact Factors
- Uses
- Uses List
- Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
- Prevention and Control
- Gaps in Knowledge/Research Needs
- References
- Contributors
- Distribution Maps
Don't need the entire report?
Generate a print friendly version containing only the sections you need.
Generate reportIdentity
Top of pagePreferred Scientific Name
- Juncus effusus
Preferred Common Name
- common rush
Other Scientific Names
- Juncus bogotensis Kunth
- Juncus communis E. Mey
- Juncus griscomii Fernald
- Juncus laevis Wallr.
- Juncus polyanthemus BUCHEN.
International Common Names
- English: bog rush; Japanese mat rush; soft rush
- Spanish: junco de esteras; junquera
- French: jonc à lier; jonc diffus; jonc épars
- Chinese: deng xin cao
Local Common Names
- Colombia: junco; junco chiquito; totora; totorilla
- Japan: igusa
EPPO code
- IUNEF (Juncus effusus)
Summary of Invasiveness
Top of pageJ. effusus is a perennial in the rush family (Juncaceae). It is a wetland species with a broad, nearly global distribution. Across its broad range numerous morphological entities have been described at the subspecific or varietal level. The species has been introduced to Hawaii, Australia and New Zealand. In addition, several subspecies have been introduced outside of their native ranges and often occur sympatrically with J. effusus subspecies in their native ranges.
Where J. effusus is native it is a desirable species in natural wetland habitats, but can become weedy in wet agricultural areas. Where introduced it can displace native plants, alter habitat structure and outcompete rare plant species. In Hawaii, it competes with rare species, including three species listed as Endangered by the US Fish and Wildlife Service. It can often be a weed of agriculture, particularly displacing desirable forage species in livestock pastures. Introduced subspecies could hybridize with native subspecies where they occur together.
Taxonomic Tree
Top of page- Domain: Eukaryota
- Kingdom: Plantae
- Phylum: Spermatophyta
- Subphylum: Angiospermae
- Class: Monocotyledonae
- Order: Cyperales
- Family: Juncaceae
- Genus: Juncus
- Species: Juncus effusus
Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
Top of pageJuncus is a genus with a worldwide distribution, consisting of about 300 species (Brooks and Clemants, 2000). J. effusus was described by Linnaeus in 1753. The species has a wide global distribution and exhibits morphological variation across its range. Because of this variation the delineation of species limits and infraspecific taxa has been problematic and controversial. According to Zika (2003), “The Juncus effusus L. complex vexes systematists”.
The Juncus effusus complex consists of J. effusus and close relatives, particularly J. conglomeratus and J. pylaei, although many other species with narrow distributions have been described. Some authors break this complex up into more than one species, e.g. (Hämet-Ahti, 1980; Balslev, 1996; Kirschner, 2002; Weakley, 2016), or treat these taxa at the level of variety (Fernald and Wiegand, 1910). Many subspecies or varieties have also been described including subsp. solutus and others (Hämet-Ahti, 1980; Kirschner, 2002; Zika, 2003). In contrast, some treat it as a highly variable species, lumping all of the above taxa into the single variable species, J. effusus, such as Engelmann (1868), and recently Brooks and Clemants (2000).
Authors who treat the J. effusus complex as a group of 3 species, and with J. effusus consisting of several subspecies, e.g. Hämet-Ahti (1980) and Kirschner (2002), note that some of these taxa have become naturalized outside of their natural ranges. J. conglomeratus, native of the Old World, is naturalized in North America, New Zealand, and Venezuela. J. pylaei, native of northeastern North America, is naturalized in the northwestern USA. J. effusus subsp. effusus, native of the Old World, is naturalized in the Americas, eastern Asia, and Australia. J. effusus subsp. solutus, native to eastern North America, is naturalized in western North America. Complicating matters further, J. effusus forms hybrids with other species, including J. conglomeratus, J. inflexus and J. pallidus (Wilcox, 2010).
Some localized have been described as new species that were later considered introductions of J. effusus. For example, J. luxurians was described from New Zealand, but was later considered to be conspecific with J. effusus which is probably introduced (Edgar, 1964).
Description
Top of pageThe following description has been adapted from Kirschner (2002).
J. effusus is a perennial plant, with culms to 1.5 m tall, densely caespitose with short rhizomes. Stem terete, without leaf blades, green, smooth to inconspicuously ridged; ridges 40-70, pith continuous, cataphylls 3(-4). Inflorescence pseudolateral (appearing lateral), diffuse or rarely dense, of 50-120 separate flowers. Lower bract usually several times longer than inflorescence, appearing as extension of culm. Tepals 1.5-3 mm long, outer ones longest, lanceolate, apiculate, green to light brown with scarious margin. Stamens 3 (-6); anthers 0.4-0.7 mm long, slightly shorter than filaments. Style very short; stigmas 0.6-1 mm long. Capsule (1.61) 2-2.5 mm long, subequal to or slightly exceeding perianth, subspheroid to ovoid, broadly ellipsoid or obovate, obtuse or slightly retuse, not or shortly mucronate, unilocular, triseptate, light brown. Seeds 0.5 × 0.2-0.3 mm, obliquely ovoid, reticulate, without appendages.
Distribution
Top of pageJ. effusus has a broad native range, occurring in Europe, western and central Asia, North America to South America, and the Caribbean (Brooks and Clemants, 2000; Kirschner, 2002; Missouri Botanical Garden, 2016; USDA-NRCS, 2016). Delineation of the native and introduced range of J. effusus is complicated by taxonomic problems in the J. effusus complex. For the purposes of this datasheet, the range is for J. effusus as delineated by Kirschner (2002), excluding segregate taxa such as J. conglomeratus and J. pylaei. Further complicating discussions of native and introduced ranges is the infraspecific taxonomy of the species. Different subspecies have been introduced within the ranges of other subspecies. Overall Kirschner (2002) stated that “it is almost impossible to distinguish primary and secondary occurrences”. Most floras treating J. effusus and allies do not present good data on ranges of native verses introduced subspecies.
At the species level, J. effusus has been introduced to Hawaii, Australia, and New Zealand. Various subspecies, particularly subsp. effusus and subsp. solutus have been introduced outside of their native ranges. J. effusus subsp. effusus is native to Europe, southwest Asia, and northern Africa. It has been introduced from North America to South America, eastern Asia, Australia, Mauritius, Madagascar, Argentina, and Chile. J. effusus subsp. solutus is native to eastern North America, with populations in the western USA probably representing introductions.
J. effusus subsp. laxus is native to Atlantic islands, sub-Saharan Africa, Madagascar and nearby islands, and possibly Spain and Portugal. It has been introduced to the Cape Province of South Africa. J. effusus subsp. pacificus is native to western North America from Baha California to Alaska. J. effusus subsp. austrocalifornicus is native to southern California to northern Mexico. No introduced populations of these latter two subspecies have been reported (Kirschner, 2002).
Distribution Table
Top of pageThe 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: 17 Dec 2021Continent/Country/Region | Distribution | Last Reported | Origin | First Reported | Invasive | Reference | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Africa |
|||||||
Algeria | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Burundi | Present | Native | subsp. laxus | ||||
Congo, Democratic Republic of the | Present | Native | subsp. laxus | ||||
Ethiopia | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Gabon | Present | Native | |||||
Kenya | Present | Native | subsp. laxus | ||||
Madagascar | Present | Native | |||||
Mauritius | Present | Introduced | subsp. effusus | ||||
Morocco | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Réunion | Present | Native | subsp. laxus | ||||
Rwanda | Present | Native | subsp. laxus | ||||
Saint Helena | Present | Introduced | Tristan de Cunha, St. Helena | ||||
South Africa | Present | Native | |||||
Tanzania | Present | Native | subsp. laxus | ||||
Uganda | Present | Native | subsp. laxus | ||||
Zimbabwe | Present | Native | subsp. laxus | ||||
Asia |
|||||||
Afghanistan | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Armenia | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Azerbaijan | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Bhutan | Present | Native | |||||
China | Present | Native | |||||
-Anhui | Present | Native | |||||
-Fujian | Present | Native | |||||
-Gansu | Present | Native | |||||
-Guangdong | Present | Native | |||||
-Guangxi | Present | Native | |||||
-Guizhou | Present | Native | |||||
-Hebei | Present | Native | |||||
-Heilongjiang | Present | Native | |||||
-Henan | Present | Native | |||||
-Hubei | Present | Native | |||||
-Hunan | Present | Native | |||||
-Jiangsu | Present | Native | |||||
-Jiangxi | Present | Native | |||||
-Jilin | Present | Native | |||||
-Liaoning | Present | Native | |||||
-Shandong | Present | Native | |||||
-Sichuan | Present | Native | |||||
-Tibet | Present | Native | |||||
-Yunnan | Present | Native | |||||
-Zhejiang | Present | Native | |||||
Georgia | Present | Native | |||||
Hong Kong | Absent, Unconfirmed presence record(s) | Not listed by Bentham (1861), Corlett (1992) or others | |||||
India | Present | Native | |||||
-Sikkim | Present | Native | |||||
Indonesia | Present | Native | |||||
Iran | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Iraq | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Japan | Present | Native | |||||
Laos | Present | Native | |||||
Malaysia | Present | ||||||
Nepal | Present | Native | |||||
Philippines | Absent, Unconfirmed presence record(s) | Probably refers to J. decipiens subsp. medianus | |||||
South Korea | Present | Native | |||||
Sri Lanka | Present | Native | |||||
Taiwan | Present | Native | |||||
Thailand | Present | Native | |||||
Turkey | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Vietnam | Present | Native | |||||
Europe |
|||||||
Albania | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Austria | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Belarus | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Belgium | Present | Native | |||||
Bulgaria | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Cyprus | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Czechoslovakia | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Denmark | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Estonia | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Faroe Islands | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Finland | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
France | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
-Corsica | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Germany | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Greece | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Hungary | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Iceland | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Ireland | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Italy | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Latvia | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Lithuania | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Netherlands | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
North Macedonia | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Norway | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Poland | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Portugal | Present | Native | |||||
-Azores | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
-Madeira | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Romania | Present | Native | Invasive | ||||
Russia | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
-Central Russia | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
-Eastern Siberia | Present | Native | |||||
-Northern Russia | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
-Russian Far East | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
-Southern Russia | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
-Western Siberia | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Serbia and Montenegro | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Spain | Present | Native | subsp. effusus, subsp. laxus | ||||
-Balearic Islands | Present | Native | |||||
-Canary Islands | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Svalbard and Jan Mayen | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Switzerland | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
Ukraine | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
United Kingdom | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
North America |
|||||||
Canada | Present | Present based on regional distribution. | |||||
-British Columbia | Present | Native | |||||
-Manitoba | Present | Native | |||||
-New Brunswick | Present | Native | |||||
-Newfoundland and Labrador | Present | Native | subsp. effusus, subsp. solutus | ||||
-Nova Scotia | Present | Native | |||||
-Ontario | Present | Native | |||||
-Prince Edward Island | Present | Native | subsp. effusus | ||||
-Quebec | Present | Native | |||||
Costa Rica | Present | Native | |||||
El Salvador | Present | Native | |||||
Guadeloupe | Present | Native | |||||
Guatemala | Present | Native | |||||
Haiti | Present | Native | |||||
Honduras | Present | Native | |||||
Mexico | Present | Native | |||||
United States | Present | Introduced | subsp. effusus | ||||
-Alabama | Present | Native | |||||
-Alaska | Present | Native | |||||
-Arizona | Present | Native | |||||
-Arkansas | Present | Native | |||||
-California | Present | Native | |||||
-Colorado | Present | Native | |||||
-Connecticut | Present | Native | |||||
-Delaware | Present | Native | |||||
-District of Columbia | Present | Native | |||||
-Florida | Present | Native | |||||
-Georgia | Present | Native | |||||
-Hawaii | Present | Introduced | 1900 | Invasive | |||
-Idaho | Present | Native | |||||
-Illinois | Present | Native | |||||
-Indiana | Present | Native | |||||
-Iowa | Present | Native | |||||
-Kansas | Present | Native | |||||
-Kentucky | Present | Native | |||||
-Louisiana | Present | Native | |||||
-Maine | Present | Native | |||||
-Maryland | Present | Native | |||||
-Massachusetts | Present | Native | |||||
-Michigan | Present | Native | |||||
-Minnesota | Present | Native | |||||
-Mississippi | Present | Native | |||||
-Missouri | Present | Native | |||||
-Montana | Present | Native | |||||
-Nebraska | Present | Native | |||||
-Nevada | Present | Native | |||||
-New Hampshire | Present | Native | |||||
-New Jersey | Present | Native | |||||
-New Mexico | Present | Native | |||||
-New York | Present | Native | |||||
-North Carolina | Present | Native | |||||
-North Dakota | Present | Native | |||||
-Ohio | Present | Native | |||||
-Oklahoma | Present | Native | |||||
-Oregon | Present | Native | |||||
-Pennsylvania | Present | Native | |||||
-Rhode Island | Present | Native | |||||
-South Carolina | Present | Native | |||||
-Tennessee | Present | Native | |||||
-Texas | Present | Native | |||||
-Vermont | Present | Native | |||||
-Virginia | Present | Native | |||||
-Washington | Present | Native | |||||
-West Virginia | Present | Native | |||||
-Wisconsin | Present | Native | |||||
Oceania |
|||||||
Australia | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
-New South Wales | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
-Queensland | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
-South Australia | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
-Tasmania | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
-Victoria | Present | Introduced | Invasive | subsp. effusus | |||
New Zealand | Present, Widespread | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
Papua New Guinea | Absent, Unconfirmed presence record(s) | Specimens are of J. decipiens var. meadianus (Wilson, and Johnson, 2001) | |||||
South America |
|||||||
Argentina | Present | Native | |||||
Bolivia | Present | Native | |||||
Brazil | Present | Native | |||||
-Minas Gerais | Present | Native | |||||
-Parana | Present | Native | |||||
-Rio Grande do Sul | Present | Native | |||||
-Santa Catarina | Present | Native | |||||
-Sao Paulo | Present | Native | |||||
Chile | Present | Native | |||||
Colombia | Present | Native | |||||
Ecuador | Present | Native | |||||
Peru | Present | Native | |||||
Venezuela | Present | Native |
History of Introduction and Spread
Top of pageJ. effusus was introduced to Australia by 1840 (AVH, 2016), New Zealand by 1871 (Esler and Astridge, 1987) and to Hawaii by 1900 (Wester, 1992). Wagner et al. (1999) states that the species has spread from cultivation in Hawaii.
Introductions
Top of pageIntroduced to | Introduced from | Year | Reason | Introduced by | Established in wild through | References | Notes | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Natural reproduction | Continuous restocking | |||||||
Australia | by 1840 | Yes | No | Kirschner (2002) | ||||
Hawaii | by 1900 | Yes | No | Wester (1992) | ||||
New Zealand | by 1871 | Yes | No | Esler and Astridge (1987) |
Habitat
Top of pageJ. effusus is an obligate wetland species. The species grows in a wide range of freshwater wetland habitats including marshes, swamps, wet pastures, and ditches, primarily where water stands for only part of the year (Adamson, 1935; Hämet-Ahti, 1980; Balslev, 1996; Weakley, 2016), and in treeless vegetation in the Australian alps (McDougall et al., 2005). It can grow to elevations of up to 2500 m (Brooks and Clemants, 2000).
Habitat List
Top of pageCategory | Sub-Category | Habitat | Presence | Status |
---|---|---|---|---|
Terrestrial | Managed | Cultivated / agricultural land | Present, no further details | |
Terrestrial | Managed | Managed grasslands (grazing systems) | Present, no further details | |
Terrestrial | Managed | Disturbed areas | Present, no further details | |
Terrestrial | Natural / Semi-natural | Riverbanks | Present, no further details | |
Terrestrial | Natural / Semi-natural | Wetlands | Present, no further details | |
Freshwater | Irrigation channels | Present, no further details | ||
Freshwater | Lakes | Present, no further details | ||
Freshwater | Reservoirs | Present, no further details | ||
Freshwater | Rivers / streams | Present, no further details | ||
Freshwater | Ponds | Present, no further details |
Hosts/Species Affected
Top of pageIn Europe J. effusus has been recorded as a weed of fodder plantings, pastures, cereals, and root crops (Weber and Gut, 2005). It is a weed of cranberry (Vaccinium macrocarpon) production, invading fields and obstructing irrigation ditches (Ghantous and Sandler, 2015). It can colonize rice fields as soon as they are taken out of production (Elliott, 1821).
Host Plants and Other Plants Affected
Top of pagePlant name | Family | Context | References |
---|---|---|---|
Vaccinium macrocarpon (cranberry) | Ericaceae | Main |
Biology and Ecology
Top of pageGenetics
J. effusus has a chromosome number of n=40, 42 (Balslev, 1996; Brooks and Clemants, 2000). No genetic analysis of J. effusus has been done on a regional or global basis.
Reproductive Biology
The species is self-compatible (Michalski and Durka, 2012).
Physiology and Phenology
It flowers from early summer through autumn (Álvarez, 1981; Brooks and Clemants, 2000; Weakley, 2016).
Longevity
J. effusus is a long-lived perennial (Brooks and Clemants, 2000).
Climate
Top of pageClimate | Status | Description | Remark |
---|---|---|---|
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])) | |
Aw - Tropical wet and dry savanna climate | Preferred | < 60mm precipitation driest month (in winter) and < (100 - [total annual precipitation{mm}/25]) | |
BS - Steppe climate | Preferred | > 430mm and < 860mm annual precipitation | |
BW - Desert climate | Preferred | < 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) |
Soil Tolerances
Top of pageSoil drainage
- free
- impeded
- seasonally waterlogged
Soil reaction
- acid
- alkaline
- neutral
- very acid
Soil texture
- light
- medium
Means of Movement and Dispersal
Top of pageNatural Dispersal
According to Balslev (1996) swelling of the seed coat when wet causes the inflorescence to turn into heavy, slimy mass, causing the culms to bend to the ground, depositing seeds. The very small seeds have high potential for long-distance dispersal (Michalski and Durka, 2012).
Accidental Introduction
Despite the introduction of J. effusus to new geographic regions, there is little data on causes of introduction. Introductions were probably accidental. Wagner et al. (1999) states that the species has spread from cultivation in Hawaii.
Pathway Vectors
Top of pageVector | Notes | Long Distance | Local | References |
---|---|---|---|---|
Floating vegetation and debris | Yes | |||
Land vehicles | Yes | |||
Livestock | Yes | |||
Soil, sand and gravel | Yes | |||
Water | Yes | Yes |
Impact Summary
Top of pageCategory | Impact |
---|---|
Economic/livelihood | Positive and negative |
Environment (generally) | Positive and negative |
Economic Impact
Top of pageIn its native range and introduced range J. effusus is a weed of a variety of wet agricultural habitats, including wet pastures and wet agricultural habitats. In the USA it can invade cranberry production areas and impede drainage in adjacent ditches (Ghantous and Sandler, 2015). It can limit grazing for cattle in poorly drained pastures, which do not graze the species (Bakker et al., 1984; Rana and Sellers, 2009). In Europe it is a weed of fodder plantings, pastures, cereals, and root crops (Weber and Gut, 2005).
Environmental Impact
Top of pageImpact on Habitats
Because of its large stature J. effusus can displace other native species (Ervin and Wetzel, 2002), reducing species diversity. It is a troublesome weed in cutaway peatlands in Europe, outcompeting young conifers that have been planted in restoration programs (McCorry and Renou, 2003).
Impact on Biodiversity
J. effusus competes with rare species in Hawaii, including three species listed as Endangered by the US Fish and Wildlife Service. These include Phyllostegia hispida in Molokai, Phyllostegia mannii in Molokai and Maui, and Sanicula purpurea in Maui (US Fish and Wildlife Service 2011a,b,c).
Threatened Species
Top of pageThreatened Species | Conservation Status | Where Threatened | Mechanism | References | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Phyllostegia hispida (hispid phyllostegia) | USA ESA listing as endangered species | Hawaii | Competition - shading; Competition (unspecified) | US Fish and Wildlife Service (2011a) | |
Phyllostegia mannii (Mann's phyllostegia) | NatureServe; USA ESA listing as endangered species | Hawaii | Allelopathic; Competition - shading | US Fish and Wildlife Service (2011b) | |
Sanicula purpurea (purpleflower blacksnakeroot) | CR (IUCN red list: Critically endangered); USA ESA listing as endangered species | Hawaii | Competition - shading; Competition (unspecified) | US Fish and Wildlife Service (2011c) |
Risk and Impact Factors
Top of page- Invasive in its native range
- Proved invasive outside its native range
- Has a broad native range
- Abundant in its native range
- Highly adaptable to different environments
- Is a habitat generalist
- Tolerates, or benefits from, cultivation, browsing pressure, mutilation, fire etc
- Pioneering in disturbed areas
- Tolerant of shade
- Long lived
- Has high reproductive potential
- Gregarious
- Has propagules that can remain viable for more than one year
- Reproduces asexually
- Altered trophic level
- Changed gene pool/ selective loss of genotypes
- Ecosystem change/ habitat alteration
- Modification of successional patterns
- Monoculture formation
- Negatively impacts agriculture
- Reduced native biodiversity
- Threat to/ loss of endangered species
- Threat to/ loss of native species
- Allelopathic
- Competition - monopolizing resources
- Competition - shading
- Competition (unspecified)
- Highly likely to be transported internationally accidentally
- Difficult to identify/detect as a commodity contaminant
- Difficult/costly to control
Uses
Top of pageEconomic Value
Human uses of J. effusus are currently limited. It has been used traditionally for weaving, including material for sleeping mats, chair seats, and baskets, and the pith serves as a wick for candles and lamps (Porcher, 1869; Balslev, 1996). In China the pith is used for drawing hot Camellia oleifera tea seed oil.
Social Benefit
In China, the outer epidermis is used as a wick for applying the oil to the body for relieving pain. The pith is also used as a tranquilizer and diuretic (Eisenberg et al., 2009).
Uses List
Top of pageEnvironmental
- Erosion control or dune stabilization
- Land reclamation
- Revegetation
General
- Botanical garden/zoo
Materials
- Baskets
Medicinal, pharmaceutical
- Source of medicine/pharmaceutical
- Traditional/folklore
Ornamental
- Potted plant
Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
Top of pageIf segregated as distinct species J. effusus can be difficult to distinguish from J. conglomeratus and J. pylaei. Both of these latter species have coarsely grooved, firm culms below the inflorescence with 10-20 ridges, perianth 2.7-3.6 mm long, and sepals that are longer than the capsule and petals. In contrast J. effusus has a soft, finely grooved culm with 25-30 striations, perianth 1.9-2.8 mm long, and sepals equalling the petals (Kirschner, 2002; Weakley, 2016). J. effusus is also similar to the closely related J. decipiens of eastern Asia. It is more slender than J. effusus, and culms have more densely packed pith (Wilson and Johnson, 2001).
Prevention and Control
Top of pageDue 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.
Containment/Zoning
Downey et al. (2010) assessed J. effusus as a low threat to New South Wales, Australia.
Control
Physical/Mechanical Control
Physical control of J. effusus is difficult. Repeated mowing has been used effectively in the UK. If mowing is conducted twice/year then biomass can be reduced by 98% (Rana and Sellers, 2009). DiTomaso and Kyser (2013) noted that while repeated mowing may be helpful, mowing more than once/year can often be difficult because of wet conditions. They also found that burning or grazing are not effective, and that hand pulling is not practical. Cultivation followed by reseeding may be effective (DiTomaso and Kyser, 2013). On former agricultural lands with high nutrient levels restoration probably requires topsoil removal, and liming may be of use (Smolders et al., 2008). Ghantous and Sandler (2015) has experimented with burning clumps of the species in cranberry production areas with some success, but on a small scale.
Biological Control
There is no biocontrol for J. effusus, and development of one is unlikely due to the threat to other Juncus species (Froude, 2002; DiTomaso and Kyser, 2013).
Chemical Control
DiTomaso and Kyser (2013) recommend that control of J. effusus can be achieved with herbicides. Formulations of 2,4-D applied in late spring, followed by elimination of grazing to allow reestablishment of native graminoids is recommended. Imazapic is also discussed as a control option with mixed success, although this herbicide is non selective and soil active. The use of 2,4-D is also recommended by Rana and Sellers (2009) for control in Florida pastures. Glyphosate gives good control and can be used with a weed wiper since the rush stands up well above the pasture.
Gaps in Knowledge/Research Needs
Top of pageThe taxonomy of the J. effusus complex is in serious need of revision (Brooks and Clemants, 2000). Additionally, the threat of hybridization of J. effusus and its subspecies with native taxa needs additional assessment.
References
Top of pageAcevedo-Rodriguez, P, Strong, MT, 2015. Flora of the West Indies. Washington DC, USA: Department of Botany, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution. http://botany.si.edu/antilles/WestIndies/index.htm
Adamson RS, 1935. A revision of the South African species of Juncus. Journal of the Linnean Society of London, Botany, 50(333):1-38.
Âlvarez MDCFC, 1981. Revisión del género" Juncus" L. en la Península Ibérica. II: subgéneros" Juncus" y" Genuini" Buchenau. Anales del Jardín Botánico de Madrid, 38(2):417-467.
AVH, 2016. Australia's Virtual Herbarium. http://avh.ala.org.au/
Bakker JP, Leeuw JDe, Wieren SEVan, 1984. Micro-patterns in grassland vegetation created and sustained by sheep-grazing. Vegetatio, 55(3):153-161.
Balslev H, 1996. Juncaceae. New York, USA: New York Botanical Garden, 167 pp.
Brooks RE, Clemants SE, 2000. Juncaceae. In: Flora of North America north of Mexico, 22. New York, USA: Oxford Univ. Press, 211-267.
DiTomaso JM, Kyser G, 2013. Weed control in natural areas in the Western United States. California, USA: University of California Weed Research and Information Center.
Edgar E, 1964. The leafless species of Juncus in New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Botany, 2(2):177-204.
Eisenberg A, Amato PJ, Tao D, 2009. Kam Guilzhouh nyim Guangxxih di Benxtux Wenchual nyim Zihyuanc dih Gonxliix: Kam Local Indigenous Knowledge and Sustainable Resource Management in Guizhou and Guangxi Provinces, China. Ethnobotany Research and Applications, 7:67-113.
Elliott S, 1821. A sketch of the botany of South-Carolina and Georgia. Georgia, USA: Schenck.
Engelmann G, 1868. Revision of the North American species of the genus Juncus. St Louis, USA: G. Knapp.
Fernald ML, Wiegand KM, 1910. The North American variations of Juncus effusus. Rhodora, 12(137):81-93.
FOA, 2016. Flora Argentina. Flora Argentina. http://www.floraargentina.edu.ar/
Hamet-Ahti L, 1980. The Juncus effusus aggregate in eastern North America. Annales Botanici Fennici, 17(2):183-191.
Heiss-Dunlop S, Fillery J, 2006. Vascular flora of Motuora Island, Hauraki Gulf. Auckland Botanical Society, 61:113-120.
Howell CJ, 2008. Consolidated list of environmental weeds in New Zealand. Wellington, New Zealand: Science and Technical Pub., Department of Conservation, 42 pp. http://www.doc.govt.nz/documents/science-and-technical/drds292.pdf
Humbert H, Leroy J-F, 1946. Flore de Madagascar et des Comores (Flore de Madagascar et des Comores 38/39 38/39), 38-39. Paris, France: Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle.
Jessop JP, 1989. A list of the vascular plants of South Australia (Edition III). Journal of the Adelaide Botanic Garden:1-163.
Kirschner J, 2002. Species plantarum: flora of the world. Juncaceae 3: Juncus subg. Agathryon. Flora of the World. Canberra, Australia: Australian Biological Resources Study, 192 pp.
Lau A, Frohlich D, 2012. New plant records from O'ahu for 2009. Bishop Mus. Occas. Pap, 113:7-26.
McCorry M, Renou F, 2003. Ecology and management of Juncus effusus (soft rush) on cutaway peatlands. Forest Ecosystem Research Group Report Number 69, 69. Dublin, Ireland: University College Dublin.
Missouri Botanical Garden, 2016. Tropicos database. St. Louis, Missouri, USA: Missouri Botanical Garden. http://www.tropicos.org/
Olshansky IG, Fedoronchuk MN, 2011. Juncus L.(Juncaceae) in the flora of Ukraine, 68(5). 686-700.
Pele G, Ardelean A, Turcus V, 2008. Note about the invasive plants in the Arad County (West Romania). Studia Universitatis Vasile Goldis Seria Stiintele Vietii (Life Sciences Series), 18:353-358.
PIER, 2016. Pacific Island Ecosystems at Risk. Honolulu, USA: HEAR, University of Hawaii. http://www.hear.org/pier/index.html
Porcher FP, 1869. Resources of the southern fields and forests, medical, economical, and agricultural; being also a medical botany of the southern states; with practical information on the useful properties of trees, plants and shrubs. Charleston, USA: Walker, Evans and Cogswell.
USDA-NRCS, 2016. The PLANTS Database. Baton Rouge, USA: National Plant Data Center. http://plants.usda.gov/
Weakley AS, 2016. Flora of the Southern and Mid-Atlantic States. Working draft of 2015. North Carolina, USA: University of North Carolina Herbarium.
Weimarck H, 1946. Studies in Juncaceae: With Special Reference to the Species in Ethiopia and the Cape. Svensk Botanisk Tidskrift, 40(2):141-178.
Wester L, 1992. Origin and Distribution of Adventive Alien Flowering Plants in Hawai'i. In: Alien plant invasions in native ecosystems of Hawai`i: management and research. Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: University of Hawaii Press, 99-154.
Wilcox M, 2010. Hybrid rushes in the UK-sterility and fertility. BSBI News, 115:21-27.
Wilson KL, Johnson LAS, 2001. The genus Juncus (Juncaceae) in Malesia and allied septate-leaved species in adjoining regions. Telopea, 9(2):357-397.
Wu GF, Clemants SE, Wu ZY, Raven PH, 2000. Juncaceae. Flora of China, 24:44-69.
Wysong M, Hughes G, Wood KR, 2007. New Hawaiian plant records for the island of Moloka i. Bishop Museum Occasional Papers, 96:1-8.
Zika PF, 2003. The native subspecies of Juncus effusus (Juncaceae) in western North America. Brittonia, 55(2):150-156.
Distribution References
Acevedo-Rodriguez P, Strong MT, 2015. Flora of the West Indies., Washington DC, USA: Department of Botany, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution. http://botany.si.edu/antilles/WestIndies/index.htm
Âlvarez MDCFC, 1981. (Revisión del género" Juncus" L. en la Península Ibérica. II: subgéneros" Juncus" y" Genuini" Buchenau)., 38 (2) 417-467.
AVH, 2016. Australia's Virtual Herbarium., http://avh.ala.org.au/
Balslev H, 1996. Juncaceae. New York, USA: New York Botanical Garden. 167 pp.
CABI, Undated. CABI Compendium: Status inferred from regional distribution. Wallingford, UK: CABI
Edgar E, 1964. The leafless species of Juncus in New Zealand. In: New Zealand Journal of Botany, 2 (2) 177-204.
FOA, 2016. Flora Argentina. In: Flora Argentina, http://www.floraargentina.edu.ar/
Heiss-Dunlop S, Fillery J, 2006. Vascular flora of Motuora Island, Hauraki Gulf. In: Auckland Botanical Society, 61 113-120.
Humbert H, Leroy JF, 1946. (Flore de Madagascar et des Comores)., Paris, France: Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle. 38-39.
Jessop JP, 1989. A list of the vascular plants of South Australia (Edition III). In: Journal of the Adelaide Botanic Garden, 1-163.
Kirschner J, 2002. Species plantarum: flora of the world. In: Juncaceae 3: Juncus subg. Agathryon. Flora of the World, Canberra, Australia: Australian Biological Resources Study, 192. 192 pp.
Lau A, Frohlich D, 2012. New plant records from O'ahu for 2009. In: Bishop Mus. Occas. Pap, 113 7-26.
Missouri Botanical Garden, 2016. Tropicos database., St. Louis, Missouri, USA: Missouri Botanical Garden. http://www.tropicos.org/
Olshansky IG, Fedoronchuk MN, 2011. Juncus L.(Juncaceae) in the flora of Ukraine., 68 (5) 686-700.
Pele G, Ardelean A, Turcus V, 2008. Note about the invasive plants in the Arad County (West Romania). In: Studia Universitatis Vasile Goldis Seria Stiintele Vietii (Life Sciences Series), 18 353-358.
PIER, 2016. Pacific Island Ecosystems at Risk., Honolulu, USA: HEAR, University of Hawaii. http://www.hear.org/pier/index.html
USDA-NRCS, 2016. The PLANTS Database. Greensboro, North Carolina, USA: National Plant Data Team. https://plants.sc.egov.usda.gov
Weimarck H, 1946. Studies in Juncaceae: With Special Reference to the Species in Ethiopia and the Cape. In: Svensk Botanisk Tidskrift, 40 (2) 141-178.
Wester L, 1992. Origin and Distribution of Adventive Alien Flowering Plants in Hawai'i. In: Alien plant invasions in native ecosystems of Hawai`i: management and research, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: University of Hawaii Press. 99-154.
Wu GF, Clemants SE, Wu ZY, Raven PH, 2000. Juncaceae. In: Flora of China, 24 44-69.
Wysong M, Hughes G, Wood KR, 2007. New Hawaiian plant records for the island of Moloka i. In: Bishop Museum Occasional Papers, 96 1-8.
Distribution Maps
Top of pageSelect a dataset
Map Legends
-
CABI Summary Records
Map Filters
Unsupported Web Browser:
One or more of the features that are needed to show you the maps functionality are not available in the web browser that you are using.
Please consider upgrading your browser to the latest version or installing a new browser.
More information about modern web browsers can be found at http://browsehappy.com/