Invasive Species Compendium

Detailed coverage of invasive species threatening livelihoods and the environment worldwide

Datasheet

Ludwigia hyssopifolia
(water primrose)

Toolbox

Datasheet

Ludwigia hyssopifolia (water primrose)

Summary

  • Last modified
  • 16 November 2018
  • Datasheet Type(s)
  • Invasive Species
  • Pest
  • Host Plant
  • Preferred Scientific Name
  • Ludwigia hyssopifolia
  • Preferred Common Name
  • water primrose
  • Taxonomic Tree
  • Domain: Eukaryota
  •   Kingdom: Plantae
  •     Phylum: Spermatophyta
  •       Subphylum: Angiospermae
  •         Class: Dicotyledonae
  • Summary of Invasiveness
  • L. hyssopifolia is an extremely widespread weed of rice and wetlands across three continents. Holm et al. (1979) r...

Don't need the entire report?

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

Generate report

Pictures

Top of page
PictureTitleCaptionCopyright
a, Leaf; b, bracteole; c, flower, lateral view; d, flower, ventral view, its minutely dentate margin of sepals enlarged; e, flower without perianth; f, capsule; g, seed.
TitleL. hyssopifolia - line drawing
Captiona, Leaf; b, bracteole; c, flower, lateral view; d, flower, ventral view, its minutely dentate margin of sepals enlarged; e, flower without perianth; f, capsule; g, seed.
CopyrightSEAMEO-BIOTROP
a, Leaf; b, bracteole; c, flower, lateral view; d, flower, ventral view, its minutely dentate margin of sepals enlarged; e, flower without perianth; f, capsule; g, seed.
L. hyssopifolia - line drawinga, Leaf; b, bracteole; c, flower, lateral view; d, flower, ventral view, its minutely dentate margin of sepals enlarged; e, flower without perianth; f, capsule; g, seed.SEAMEO-BIOTROP

Identity

Top of page

Preferred Scientific Name

  • Ludwigia hyssopifolia (G. Don) Exell (1957)

Preferred Common Name

  • water primrose

Other Scientific Names

  • Fissendocarpa linifolia (Vahl) Bennet (1970)
  • Jussiaea fissendocarpa Haines
  • Jussiaea hyssopifolia G. Don (1932)
  • Jussiaea linifolia Vahl (1798)
  • Jussiaea micrantha Kunze (1851)
  • Jussiaea weddellii Micheli (1874)
  • Ludwigia linifolia (Vahl) R.S. Rao (1985)
  • Ludwigia micrantha (Kunze) Hara (1953)

International Common Names

  • English: seedbox
  • Spanish: mimbra; palo de agua

Local Common Names

  • Australia: ludwigia
  • China: cao long
  • Colombia: mimbra
  • Fiji: nai kisa
  • Indonesia: anggerman; cacdean; kayu ragi; lombokan; meligai
  • Malaysia: inai pasir; jinaleh
  • Philippines: basrigaua; mankatud; passau-hupai; taklang-duron
  • Thailand: tian na

Summary of Invasiveness

Top of page

L. hyssopifolia is an extremely widespread weed of rice and wetlands across three continents. Holm et al. (1979) record it as a ‘serious’ or ‘principal’ weed in Indonesia, Borneo, Thailand, Malaysia, Nigeria and Trinidad, and common in Colombia and the Philippines. More recent publications confirm its importance in Malaysia (Begum et al., 2008) and in Sri Lanka (Chandrasena, 1987). While usually no more than 1 m high, it can grow to 3 m in height according to some authorities. Although there is some uncertainty over its native distribution, it is recorded as introduced and invasive on several Pacific islands, including Fiji, Kosrae, Pohnpei, Upolu (Western Samoa) and Christmas Island (HEAR, 2012). It is thus an aggressive weed of rice and of wetlands that poses a real threat to these ecologies. It has recently been identified as a ‘new invader’ in Spain (Ferrer and Laguna, 2009; Ferrer et al., 2009). Although this may be a slight exaggeration of its status there it does apparently have the ability to naturalise well north of its current distribution.

Taxonomic Tree

Top of page
  • Domain: Eukaryota
  •     Kingdom: Plantae
  •         Phylum: Spermatophyta
  •             Subphylum: Angiospermae
  •                 Class: Dicotyledonae
  •                     Order: Myrtales
  •                         Family: Onagraceae
  •                             Genus: Ludwigia
  •                                 Species: Ludwigia hyssopifolia

Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature

Top of page

There has been some nomenclatural confusion due to the L. hyssopifolia synonym, Jussiaea linifolia Vahl, resulting in occasional assumption that this also equates with Ludwigia linifolia Poir. However, L. linifolia Poir.is a quite distinct species in a different section of the genus. The common name 'water primrose' is a general term for Ludwigia spp.

Description

Top of page

L. hyssopifolia is an erect aquatic or semi-aquatic annual herb, up to 2 or even 3 m high, stem base spongy and swollen with aerenchyma, sometimes becoming woody, upper stem ribbed. Often with aerenchymatous roots. Young growth minutely hairy; otherwise foliage glabrous. Leaves alternate, lanceolate, up to 10 cm long, 1-2 cm wide, base decurrent to a short petiole. Flowers solitary in leaf axils, sessile or nearly so, usually four-partite, sometimes five-partite. Calyx lobes 3–4 mm. Petals bright yellow or white fading to orange-yellow, 2-4 mm long. Stamens normally 8, 1-2 mm long. Inferior ovary four- to five-celled, style club-shaped. Capsule pubescent, more-or-less cylindrical or swollen towards the apex, up to 30 mm long with many brown oblong seeds about 0.5 mm long, free, in the upper part of the capsule, mostly larger 0.8 mm and embedded in corky endocarp below (Kostermans et al., 1987; Grierson and Long, 1991). L. hyssopifolia was among five Ludwigia species whose pollen morphology was described by Edeoga et al. (1996). They were triporate, and circular or triangular in general outline. Those of L. hyssopifolia were relatively large, 62 micron in diameter.

Distribution

Top of page

L. hyssopifolia is a pantropical weed of wet places at low elevations. It is found in Africa from the vicinity of Dakar (Senegal) to Lake Chad, southern Sudan and south to Zaire; it also occurs on the Cape Verde Islands and Sâo Tomé. The fact that in Africa it is relatively local and confined to the west suggests that it may have been introduced there (but it was found on Sâo Tomé as early as 1822; Raven, 1963).

It occurs in South-East Asia, and in S. Asia from Kerala and Sri Lanka to Assam and Bhutan. It was noted by Chandrasena (1987) as the most widespread and abundant rice weed in Sri Lankan low country rice fields. L. hyssopifolia is found in Upper Myanmar, Laos, Cambodia, Hong Kong, south to northern Australia, the Caroline Islands (Ponape and the Yap group), Guam, Fiji (Viti Levu), Samoa and Christmas Island. It is in some of these Pacific Isalnds that there is serious doubt whether it is native or introduced, conflicting opinions being expressed by different authors (see HEAR, 2012). It also occurs in a number of countries in Central and S. America where it is assumed to be native. 

It is so widespread that it is difficult to say where it may have originated. 

It occurs mainly in the tropical belt up to 20°N and S of the equator, but up to 25-28°N in China and Mexico. Holm et al. (1979) record it in Iraq, at least 30° N but this is not confirmed by other sources. Its naturalization in Spain (39°N) appears anomalous, but may suggest that it has sufficient plasticity to spread well beyond its current native distribution.

 

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

BangladeshWidespreadNative Invasive Moody, 1989; Shaheen et al., 2006
BhutanPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
Brunei DarussalamPresentNativeWaterhouse, 1993
CambodiaPresentNativeMoody, 1989; USDA-ARS, 2012
ChinaPresentNativeHolm et al., 1979; USDA-ARS, 2012
-FujianPresentNativeeFloras, 2012
-GuangdongPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 2012
-GuangxiPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 2012
-HainanPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 2012
-Hong KongPresentRaven, 1963
-YunnanPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 2012
Christmas Island (Indian Ocean)PresentRaven, 1963; HEAR, 2012
IndiaPresentNativeMoody, 1989; USDA-ARS, 2012
-Andaman and Nicobar IslandsPresentNativeSingh and Gangwar, 1987
-AssamPresentRaven, 1963; Barua, 2010
-BiharPresentRaven, 1963
-KeralaPresentRaven, 1963
-Madhya PradeshPresentNativeKhanna and Anand, 2007
-OdishaPresentRaven, 1963
-RajasthanPresentBarua, 2010
-Tamil NaduPresentNativeKandasamy and Palaniappan, 1990
-Uttar PradeshPresentBarua, 2010
-West BengalPresentBarua, 2010
IndonesiaWidespreadNative Invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
-Irian JayaPresentRaven, 1963
-JavaPresentRaven, 1963
-KalimantanPresentHolm et al., 1979
-Nusa TenggaraPresentRaven, 1963
-SulawesiPresentRaven, 1963
-SumatraPresentRaven, 1963
IraqPresentHolm et al., 1979
LaosPresentNative Invasive Moody, 1989; USDA-ARS, 2012
MalaysiaPresentNative Invasive Moody, 1989; USDA-ARS, 2012
-Peninsular MalaysiaPresentRaven, 1963
-SabahPresentRaven, 1963
-SarawakPresentRaven, 1963
MyanmarWidespreadNative Invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
NepalPresentNative Not invasive Holm et al., 1979; USDA-ARS, 2012
PhilippinesWidespreadNative Invasive Moody, 1989; USDA-ARS, 2012
SingaporePresentNativeHEAR, 2012
Sri LankaWidespreadNative Invasive Moody, 1989; USDA-ARS, 2012
TaiwanPresentNativeUSDA-ARS, 2012
ThailandPresentRaven, 1963; Moody, 1989
VietnamWidespreadNative Invasive USDA-ARS, 2012

Africa

AngolaPresentNative Not invasive GBIF, 2012
BeninPresentNative Not invasive Holm et al., 1979; GBIF, 2012
Burkina FasoPresentNative Not invasive GBIF, 2012
CameroonPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
Cape VerdePresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
Central African RepublicPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
ChadPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
CongoPresentRaven, 1963
Congo Democratic RepublicPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
EgyptPresentNative Not invasive Holm et al., 1979
GabonPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
GambiaPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
GhanaPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
GuineaPresentRaven, 1963
Guinea-BissauPresentRaven, 1963
LiberiaPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
MaliPresentRaven, 1963
NigeriaPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
Sao Tome and PrincipePresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
SenegalPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
Sierra LeonePresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
SudanRaven, 1963
TogoPresentNative Not invasive GBIF, 2012

North America

MexicoPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012

Central America and Caribbean

Costa RicaPresentNative Not invasive Missouri Botanical Garden, 2012
CubaPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
DominicaPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
GrenadaPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
GuadeloupePresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
HondurasPresentHolm et al., 1979
MartiniquePresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
NicaraguaPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
PanamaPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
Trinidad and TobagoPresentNative Not invasive Maharaj and Brathwaite, 1997

South America

BoliviaPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
BrazilPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
-AcrePresentNative Not invasive GBIF, 2012
-AmapaPresentNative Not invasive GBIF, 2012
-AmazonasPresentNative Not invasive GBIF, 2012
-BahiaPresentNative Not invasive GBIF, 2012
-CearaPresentNative Not invasive GBIF, 2012
-MaranhaoPresentNative Not invasive GBIF, 2012
-ParaPresentNative Not invasive GBIF, 2012
-PiauiPresentNative Not invasive GBIF, 2012
-Rio de JaneiroPresentNative Not invasive GBIF, 2012
-TocantinsPresentNative Not invasive GBIF, 2012
ColombiaPresentNative Not invasive Holm et al., 1979; USDA-ARS, 2012
EcuadorPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
French GuianaPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
GuyanaPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
PeruPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
SurinamePresentNative Not invasive Holm et al., 1979; USDA-ARS, 2012
VenezuelaPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012

Europe

SpainLocalisedIntroduced Invasive Ferrer and Laguna, 2009

Oceania

American SamoaPresent Not invasive HEAR, 2012Tutuila Island
AustraliaPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
-Australian Northern TerritoryPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
-QueenslandPresentNative Not invasive USDA-ARS, 2012
FijiPresent Invasive HEAR, 2012Viti Levu
French PolynesiaPresent Not invasive HEAR, 2012Raiatea (Havai) Island, Tahiti
GuamPresent Not invasive Stone, 1970; GBIF, 2012
Marshall IslandsPresent Not invasive HEAR, 2012Likiep Atoll
Micronesia, Federated states ofPresent Invasive HEAR, 2012Chuuk Islands, Kosrae, Pohnpei, Yap (Waqab) Island,
Northern Mariana IslandsPresent Not invasive HEAR, 2012Rota Island
PalauPresent Not invasive GBIF, 2012Angaur Island, Babeldaob Koror, Malakal, Ngerkabesang
Papua New GuineaPresentRaven, 1963
SamoaPresent Invasive HEAR, 2012Upolu
Solomon IslandsPresent Not invasive HEAR, 2012

History of Introduction and Spread

Top of page

The only certain date for introduction is about 2008 in Spain (Ferrer and Laguna, 2009).

Introductions

Top of page
Introduced toIntroduced fromYearReasonIntroduced byEstablished in wild throughReferencesNotes
Natural reproductionContinuous restocking
Spain   Horticulture (pathway cause) Yes Ferrer and Laguna (2009) With planting medium – coconut fibre

Risk of Introduction

Top of page

As a weed in rice there is a significant risk of introduction as a contaminant of rice seed. In the case of introduction to Spain, Ferrer et al. (2009) hypopthesise that this species could have been introduced in contaminated coconut fibre used as a substrate for plant culture.

Habitat

Top of page

L. hyssopifolia is a plant of wet places in the tropical zone, usually in standing water, rice paddies, and the edges of streams and swamps, but it also occurs along wet roadsides and in moist grassland. It has been recorded as a major rice weed on both clay-loam and clay soils (e.g. in South Andaman by Singh and Gangwar, 1987). It may be abundant in natural wetlands, as in peat-lands in Selangor, Malaysia (Baki et al. 1997), and in wetlands in Venezuela (Gordon and Valk, 2003).

Habitat List

Top of page
CategorySub-CategoryHabitatPresenceStatus
Terrestrial
Terrestrial – ManagedCultivated / agricultural land Principal habitat Harmful (pest or invasive)
Terrestrial ‑ Natural / Semi-naturalWetlands Principal habitat
Freshwater

Hosts/Species Affected

Top of page

Rice is by far the most important crop to be affected but other cereals (maize and sorghum) are apparently infested to some degree in Nigeria (Weber et al., 1995) and young cocoa plantations in Brazil (Mori et al., 1980). Holm et al. (1997) note that it occurs in maize in India, rubber and sugarcane in Thailand, sorghum and pineapple in Malaysia and taro in Samoa.

Growth Stages

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

Biology and Ecology

Top of page

Genetics

Chromosome number 2n = 18 (Raven and Tai, 1979.). 

Reproductive Biology

In L. hyssopifolia which possesses both non-endocarp and endocarp seeds, non-endocarp seeds are first dispersed at ripening of fruit while endocarp seeds remain on the parent plant for several weeks and months before they are eventually dispersed into water (Oziegbe et al., 2010). Total seed production can be 75,000 seeds per plant (Pancho, 1964), and Begum et al. (2008) record L. hyssopifolia being the third most abundant in the seed bank of rice fields in Malaysia. It was also one of the most abundant in the seed-bank in a Venezuelan wetland (Gordon and Valk, 2003).

Germination can occur between 10 and 40°C, with optimum temperatures being 15 to 35°C (Sauerborn et al., 1988). 

Seeds of L. hyssopifolia require light for germination, and burial in soil, even to 1 cm depth, greatly reduces germination (Pons, 1985; Chauhan and Johnson, 2009). The same authors confirm germination is also reduced under flooding to just 2 cm depth, though Sahid and Hossain (1995) obtained some germination down to a water depth of 4 cm. When delayed to 21 days after sowing, however, flooding to a depth of 10 cm did not significantly suppress growth (Chauhan and Johnson, 2009). 

In a study in Nigeria, germination of fresh seed on filter paper was high, but slow. Seeds placed on the surface of different soil types was very low < 10%) on loamy and clay soils and moderate (37%) on sandy soil. After 6 months storage germination was high and rapid on all surfaces. It is unclear how the soils influenced germination even when the seeds were placed on the surface, but the results suggest there is some degree of dormancy in freshly shed seeds (Oziegbe et al., 2010). 

Physiology and Phenology 

L. hyssopifolia is a C3 plant (Chauhan and Johnson, 2010). 

Longevity 

Longevity in the soil was at least 3½ years in the Philippines (Juliano, 1940). 

Environmental Requirements

L. hyssopifolia requires warm, moist to wet conditions and is largely restricted to the moist tropics, though it may thrive in wetlands in less wet climates. The lack of spread much outside the tropics suggests a minimum temperature requirement but this is not well documented. It is presumed to be sensitive to frost.

Climate

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

Notes on Natural Enemies

Top of page

Huang et al. (2006) record infection of L. hyssopifolia by Alternanthera yellow vein virus and a distinct begomovirus, for which the name Ludwigia yellow vein virus (LuYVV) is proposed.

Means of Movement and Dispersal

Top of page

Natural Dispersal (Non-Biotic) 

L. hyssopifolia has no specialized dispersal mechanism, but seeds may float for long enough to be dispersed by flowing water. 

Accidental Introduction

The only apparent record of accidental introduction is via contaminated coconut fibre introduced into Spain as a substrate for the growth of plants (Ferrer and Laguna, 2009). 

Intentional Introduction

The flowers of L. hyssopifolia are relatively small, and it seems unlikely that this species is of any significant interest as an ornamental. Hence deliberate introduction via the horticultural trade seems unlikely.

Impact Summary

Top of page
CategoryImpact
Economic/livelihood Negative
Environment (generally) Negative

Economic Impact

Top of page

L. hyssopifolia is primarily a weed of rice, across a wide range of cultural types. In South and South-East Asia (Moody, 1989), it is present in: lowland rice (Bangladesh, Cambodia, Laos ); transplanted rice (India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam); dry-seeded rice (Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand); tidal swamp rice (Indonesia); wet-seeded rice (Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, Sri Lanka); upland rice (Philippines); and direct-seeded rice (Sri Lanka). It has been recorded as a major rice weed on both clay-loam and clay soils (e.g. in South Andaman by Singh and Gangwar, 1987). Waterhouse (1993) records L. hyssopifolia as an important weed of rice in Myanmar, Malaysia and Thailand which also affects cotton, tobacco and vegetables. Other crops are affected locally, as noted under the Crops and Other Plants Affected table.

Environmental Impact

Top of page

L. hyssopifolia has been tested for possible value for removal of heavy metals from contaminated soil but has been found relatively ineffective for the removal of arsenic (Shaheen et al., 2006) and boron (Shaheen et al., 2007) in Bangladesh and for removal of lead in Thailand (Yaowakhan et al., 2005).

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
  • Fast growing
  • Has high reproductive potential
  • Has propagules that can remain viable for more than one year
Impact outcomes
  • Host damage
  • Negatively impacts agriculture
  • Negatively impacts livelihoods
Impact mechanisms
  • Competition - monopolizing resources
  • Competition - shading
  • Rapid growth
Likelihood of entry/control
  • Difficult to identify/detect as a commodity contaminant

Uses

Top of page

Banibrata Das et al. (2007) report moderate anti-tumour and antibacterial activities in extracts of L. hyssopifolia and in an alkaloid piperine from the plant. A methanol extract showed significant anti-diarrhoeal properties (Mohammad Shaphiullah et al., 2003), but it is not known if there is any economic use from this.

Detection and Inspection

Top of page The dimorphic seeds of this species are very unusual and (if pods are complete) make identification straightforward.

Similarities to Other Species/Conditions

Top of page

There has been nomenclatural confusion between L. hysspopifolia (= Jussiaea linifolia Vahl) and Ludwigia linifolia Poir. but the two species are thoroughly distinct - in plant size (L. linifolia rarely exceeds 1 m high), habit (L. linifolia has stolons), corolla (L. linifolia petals longer, 4-6 mm), and length of capsule (much longer, up to 100 mm in L. linifolia). L. hyssopifolia is distinguished from other common species in the genus by its dimorphic seeds. The Bayer code LUDLI has been applied to L. hyssopifolia (Bayer, 2012) but this is misleading as this source wrongly equates L. hyssopifolia with L. linifolia.

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.

Cultural Control and Sanitary Measures 

Chauhan and Johnson (2010) and Chauhan et al. (2011) show that competition between rice and L. hyssopifolia is mainly between the shoot systems, for light, and conclude that effects of the weed can be reduced by dense planting of leafy varieties of the crop. 

Biological Control

Little work appears to have been done specifically on biological control of L. hyssopifolia, although it is possible that some of the biocontrol agents which have been investigated for L. adscendens and L. octovalvis may also be effective against this species. 

Chemical Control

Weed species of Ludwigia (primarily L. adscendens, L. hyssopifolia and L. octovalvis) that occur in rice are reported to be susceptible to the following herbicides (results reported as usually at least as good as standard twice-repeated hand-weeded controls). 

Standard treatments include MCPA and 2,4-D as post-emergence treatments (Raju and Reddy, 1986). Others are quinclorac + bensulfuron or molinate + 2,4-D. More recently, pretilachlor (often in combination with other active ingredients; see, for example, Llorente and Evangelista, 1990) has emerged as an effective herbicide for use against Ludwigia spp. Good results have been observed with a range of these and other products and mixes, in varying situations as summarized below. 

Post-emergence application of piperophos + propanil was reported to be very effective in direct-seeded and transplanted lowland rice in Nigeria, with oxadiazon + propanil, and fluorodifen [now superseded] + propanil also reasonable. Pre-emergence treatments were less effective because of crop phytotoxicity or poor weed control efficacy (using pretilachlor + dimethametryn, or oxadiazon) (Imeokparia et al. 1992; Imeokparia, 1994).

In Malaysia, L. hyssopifolia in direct-sown rice was susceptible to post-sowing treatment with cinosulfuron; about as good as pretilachlor + fenclorim applied pre-emergence (Azmi and Supaad, 1992). Pre-emergence thiobencarb plus one hand-weeding was slightly better than butachlor plus one hand weeding in dry and wet-sown rice in Tamil Nadu, India: in these trials, post-emergence treatments were not effective in either crop - using thiobencarb + 2,4-D, butachlor + 2,4-D, fluchloralin + 2,4-D, pendimethalin + 2,4-D or piperophos + 2,4-D (Kandasamy and Palaniappan, 1990).

The main current herbicide recommendations include butachlor, pretilachlor and bispyrbac pre-emergence, and 2,4-D, bentazon post-emergence (D. Johnson, personal communication February, 2012).

References

Top of page

Azmi M; Supaad MA, 1992. Evaluation of new herbicides for weed control 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. 6:292-296

Baki BB; Feeny WNY; Kwon WY, 1997. Weed flora of arable peat in Selangor, Malaysia - Quantitative and spatial pattern analyses. Korean Journal of Weed Science, 17(4):382-389.

Banibrata Das; Juthika Kundu; Bachar SC; Uddin MA; Kundu JK, 2007. Antitumor and antibacterial activity of ethylacetate extract of Ludwigia hyssopifolia Linn and its active principle piperine. Pakistan Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 20(2):128-131. http://www.pakmedinet.com/PJPS

Barua IC, 2010. The genus Ludwigia (Onagraceae) in India. Rheedea, 20(1):59-70.

Bayer AG, 2012. Bayer codes for pests. Bayer codes for pests. Bayer AG. http://www.cipm.info/names/getbayer.cfm

Begum M; Juraimi AS; Azmi M; Omar SRS; Rajan A, 2008. Soil seedbank of the Muda rice granary in north-west Peninsular Malaysia invaded by the weed Fimbristylis miliacea (L.) Vahl. Plant Protection Quarterly, 23(4):157-161. http://www.weedinfo.com.au

Chandrasena JPNR, 1987. Ludwigia species: most prevalent broad-leafed weeds in wet zone ricefieldsof Sri Lanka. International Rice Research Newsletter, 12(6):32.

Chandrasena JPNR, 1988. Floristic composition and abundance of rice-field weeds in four low-country Wet Zone districts of Sri Lanka. Tropical Pest Management, 34(3):278-287

Chauhan BS; Johnson DE, 2009. Ludwigia hyssopifolia emergence and growth as affected by light, burial depth and water management. Crop Protection, 28(10):887-890. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/02612194

Chauhan BS; Johnson DE, 2010. Relative importance of shoot and root competition in dry-seeded rice growing with junglerice (Echinochloa colona) and ludwigia (Ludwigia hyssopifolia). Weed Science, 58(3):295-299. http://www.wssajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1614/WS-D-09-00068.1

Chauhan BS; Pame ARP; Johnson DE, 2011. Compensatory growth of Ludwigia (Ludwigia hyssopifolia) in response to interference of direct-seeded rice. Weed Science, 59(2):177-181. http://wssajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1614/WS-D-10-00134.1

Edeoga HO; Ogbebor NO; Amayo AO, 1996. Pollen morphology of some Nigerian species of Aneilema R. Br. and Ludwigia L. New Botanist, 23(1/4):223-231.

eFloras, 2012. Flora of China. Flora of China. eFloras. http://www.efloras.org/flora_page.aspx?flora_id=2

Ferrer PP; Laguna E, 2009. [English title not available]. (Sobre Ludwigia hyssopifolia (G. Don) Exell (Onagraceae) como integrante de la flora subespontánea valenciana.) Acta Botanica Malacitana, 34:228-230.

Ferrer PP; Laguna E; Collado-Rosique F; Vizcaíno-Matarredona A, 2009. About Murdannia spirata (L.) Brückn. (Commelinaceae), a new non-native species in the European flora. (Sobre Murdannia spirata (L.) Bruckn. (Commelinaceae), nueva especie alóctona en la flora Europea.) Anales de Biología, 31:117-120.

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

Gordon E; Valk AGvan der, 2003. Secondary seed dispersal in Montrichardia arborescens (L.) Schott dominated wetlands in Laguna Grande, Venezuela. Plant Ecology, 168(2):177-190.

Grierson AJC; Long DG, 1991. Flora of Bhutan including a record of plants from Sikkim and Darjeeling, vol. 2, part 1. Edinburgh, UK: Royal Botanic Garden and Royal Government of Bhutan, 311-313.

HEAR, 2012. Pacific Islands Ecosystems at Risk (PIER). Pacific Islands Ecosystems at Risk (PIER). HEAR. http://www.hear.org/pier/

Holm LG; Doll J; Holm E; Pancho JV; Herberger JP, 1997. World Weeds: Natural Histories and Distribution. New York, USA: John Wiley & Sons Inc.

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

Huang JF; Jiang T; Zhou XP, 2006. Molecular characterization of begomoviruses infecting Ludwigia hyssopifolia. Journal of Plant Pathology, 88(1):83-88. http://www.agr.unipi.it/sipav/jpp/index.html

Imeokparia PO, 1994. Weed control in flooded rice with various herbicide combinations in the southern Guinea savanna zone of Nigeria. International Journal of Pest Management, 40(1):31-39

Imeokparia PO; Lagoke STO; Olunuga BA, 1992. Evaluation of postemergence herbicides for broad-spectrum weed control in three cultivars of flooded rice in Nigeria. Crop Protection, 11(2):165-173

JULIANO JB, 1940. Viability of some Philippine weed seeds. Philippine Journal of Agriculture, 29:313-26.

Kandasamy OS; Palaniappan SP, 1990. Weed control in dry and wet seeded irrigated rice. International Rice Research Newsletter, 15(3):33

Khanna KK; Anand Kumar, 2007. Some additional plants for Pachmarhi Biosphere Reserve (Madhya Pradesh). Indian Journal of Forestry, 30(2):215-220.

Kostermans AJGH; Wirjahardja S; Dekker RJ, 1987. The weeds: description, ecology and control. Weeds of rice in Indonesia [edited by Soerjani, M.; Kostermans, A.J.G.H.; Tjitrosoepomo, G.] Jakarta, Indonesia; Balai Pustaka, 24-565

Llorente JL; Evangelista CC, 1990. Efficacy of pretilachlor for weed control in transplanted rice (IR 74). University of Southern Mindanao College of Agriculture Research Journal, 1:9-17.

Maharaj K; Brathwaite RAI, 1997. Effect of herbicide treatments on the main rice (Oryza sativa L.) crop and its subsequent influence on the ratoon crop in Trinidad. Tropical Agriculture, 74(3):216-220.

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

Mohammad Shaphiullah; Bachar SC; Kundu JK; Farida Begum; Uddin MA; Roy SC; Khan MTH, 2003. Antidiarrheal activity of the methanol extract of Ludwigia hyssopifolia Linn. Pakistan Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 16(1):7-11. http://www.pakmedinet.com/PJPS

Moody K, 1989. Weeds reported in Rice in South and Southeast Asia. Manila, Philippines: International Rice Research Institute.

Mori SA; Silva LAM; Lisboa G; Pereira RC; Santos TSdos, 1980. Studies of weedy plants of southern Bahia 1. Productivity and phenology. Boletim Tecnico, Centro de Pesquisas do Cacau, No. 73:18 pp.

Munz PA, 1942. Studies in Onagraceae XII. A revision of the New World species of Jussiaea. Darwiniana, 4(2-3):179-284.

Oziegbe M; Faluyi JO; Oluwaranti A, 2010. Effect of seed age and soil texture on the germination of some Ludwigia species (Onagraceae) in Nigeria. Acta Botanica Croatica, 69(2):249-257. http://hrcak.srce.hr/index.php?show=casopis&id_casopis=83

Pancho J, 1964. Seed size and production capabilities of common weed species in rice fields of Philippines. Philippines Agriculturalist, 48:307-316.

Pons TL, 1985. Factors affecting weed seed germination and seedling growth in lowland rice in Indonesia. Biotrop Bulletin in Tropical Biology, 23:47-57.

Raju RA; Reddy MN, 1986. Protecting the world's rice crops. Agricultural Information Development Bulletin, 8(2):17-18

Raven PH, 1963. The old world species of Ludwigia (including Jussiaea), with a synopsis of the genus (Onagraceae). Reinwardtia, 6(3):327-427.

Raven PH; Tai WL, 1979. Observations of chromosomes in Ludwigia (Onagraceae). Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden, 66:862-879.

Sahid IB; Hossain MS, 1995. The effects of flooding and sowing depth on the survival and growth of five rice-weed species. Plant Protection Quarterly, 10(4):139-142.

Sauerborn J; Koch W; Krage J, 1988. On the influence of light, temperature, depth of burial and water stress on the germination of selected weed species. Zeitschrift für Pflanzenkrankheiten und Pflanzenschutz, Sonderheft, 11:47-53.

Shaheen R; Mitra N; Mahmud R, 2006. Assessment of arsenic accumulation efficiency by selected naturally grown weeds. International Journal of Sustainable Crop Production, 1(1):24-31. http://www.gwf.org.bd/IJSCP/V1_I1_August2006/24-31.pdf

Singh D; Gangwar B, 1987. Ricefield weeds in South Andaman, India. International Rice Research Newsletter, 12(4):47

Smith AC, 1985. Flora Vitiensis nova: a new flora of Fiji. Lawai, Kauai, Hawaii, USA: National Tropical Botanic Gardens, 758 pp.

Stone BC, 1970. The flora of Guam. Micronesia, 6:1-659.

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

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.

Weber G; Elemo K; Lagoke STO, 1995. Weed communities in intensified cereal-based cropping systems of the northern Guinea savanna. Weed Research (Oxford), 35(3):167-178

Yaowakhan P; Kruatrachue M; Pokethitiyook P; Soonthornsarathool V, 2005. Removal of lead using some aquatic macrophytes. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 75(4):723-730. http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=101156

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

29/02/12 Updated by:

Chris Parker, Consultant, UK

 

Distribution Maps

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