Brassica tournefortii (African mustard)
- Summary of Invasiveness
- Taxonomic Tree
- Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
- Plant Type
- Distribution Table
- History of Introduction and Spread
- Risk of Introduction
- Habitat List
- Hosts/Species Affected
- Host Plants and Other Plants Affected
- Growth Stages
- Biology and Ecology
- Latitude/Altitude Ranges
- Air Temperature
- Rainfall Regime
- Soil Tolerances
- Natural enemies
- Notes on Natural Enemies
- Means of Movement and Dispersal
- Pathway Causes
- Pathway Vectors
- Impact Summary
- Economic Impact
- Environmental Impact
- Threatened Species
- Social Impact
- Risk and Impact Factors
- Uses List
- Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
- Prevention and Control
- Distribution Maps
Don't need the entire report?
Generate a print friendly version containing only the sections you need.Generate report
PicturesTop of page
IdentityTop of page
Preferred Scientific Name
- Brassica tournefortii Gouan
Preferred Common Name
- African mustard
Other Scientific Names
- Brassica amblyorhyncha Coustur. & Gand
- Brassica mesopotamica (Spreng.) Bernh
- Brassica sisymbrioides (Fisch. ex DC.) Grossh
- Brassica stocksii Hook.f. & Thomson
- Brassicella cheiranthus sensu Adamson
- Coincya tournefortii (Gouan) Alcaraz & al.
- Eruca erecta Lag.
- Erucastrum minutiflorum Pau & Font Quer
- Erucastrum tournefortii (Gouan) Link
- Sinapis caspica Willd. ex Ledeb.
International Common Names
- English: Asian mustard; long-fruit turnip; Mediterranean mustard; Mediterranean turnip; pale cabbage; Sahara mustard; tournefort’s birdrape; tournefort’s mustard; wild turnip
- Spanish: mostaza; mostaza del desierto; mostaza del Sahara
- French: chou de tournefort
- Arabic: qarras; shiltam
Local Common Names
- Finland: välimerenkaali
- Italy: cavolo di tournefort
- UK: bresychen welw
Summary of InvasivenessTop of page
B. tournefortii is a widespread species of mustard, commonly known as African mustard or Sahara mustard. Native to Africa, Asia and Europe, it has spread globally and naturalised in North America, Australia and New Zealand. It is a highly invasive annual herb and is recorded as negatively affecting native species in some US states and Australia. Its fast growth rates enable it to monopolize soil moisture and light and mature before native wildflowers. B. tournefortii is often the dominant species in areas of usually diverse flora. CalEPPC (1999) lists the species as ‘regionally most invasive wildland pest plant’. Some factors may increase its invasive capability, for example in the western Sonoran Desert of California, USA, B. tournefortii quickly invaded areas of natural disturbance where soils were young while older geological surfaces were less vulnerable to invasion. Another study in New South Wales, Australia, found that rabbit mounds enhanced the germination of B. tournefortii seeds.
Taxonomic TreeTop of page
- Domain: Eukaryota
- Kingdom: Plantae
- Phylum: Spermatophyta
- Subphylum: Angiospermae
- Class: Dicotyledonae
- Order: Capparidales
- Family: Brassicaceae
- Genus: Brassica
- Species: Brassica tournefortii
Notes on Taxonomy and NomenclatureTop of page
Brassica tournefortii is a widespread and accepted species of the Brassicaceae family, native to Northern Africa, Asia and Southern Europe (USDA-ARS, 2015). Brassica is a large genus with The Plant List (2013) recording 384 plant names, 39 of which are accepted species names (The Plant List, 2013).
It is commonly referred to as African mustard or Sahara mustard. The Plant List (2013) has 16 recorded synonyms, including a number of varieties.
DescriptionTop of page
B. tournefortii is an erect annual herb that has stems that can be from 10 to 100 cm tall, and a well-developed sturdy taproot system. It has a good number of primary stems and a large number of secondary stems that can be as high as 40. The size of the herb can vary considerably depending on soil moisture (Pratap and Gupta, 2009). The lower stems are densely covered with stiff bristles (Graham et al., 2005).
The leaves are green and usually moderately well-developed basal rosette. The lower leaves are large and reduce in size upwards along the stem. During inflorescence only minute bracts are present at the top of the herbs stem (Minnich and Sanders, 2000). The leaves vary from 7-30 cm in length and are pinnately lobed, 8-14 lobes per leaf. The leaves are further toothed with serrate-dentate margins (Pratap and Gupta, 2009).
During inflorescence a typical stem will consist of racemes of 6 to 20 flowers. The racemes become greatly elongated when in fruit. The flowers are a dull yellow in colour and are inconspicuous. Individual flowers are approximately 1.5 cm in width with the petals measuring between 5-7 mm in length. The sepals measure 3 mm in length. The pedicels, when the herb is in flower measure between 4-10 mm, when in fruit the pedicel are elongated to between 10-20 mm in length. The pedicels diverge from the stem at about a 45 degree angle.
The fruit of B. tournefortii is dehiscent silique, typical of fruit of the mustard family, and is about 3.5-6.5 cm long with a diameter of 2-3 mm. The fruit consists of 2 locules. Each locule contains a single row of 7-15 seeds. The fruit ends with an obvious terete beak capsule, 1-2 cm long. The seeds are red and have a globose form with a diameter of 1mm (Minnich and Sanders, 2000).
Plant TypeTop of page Annual
DistributionTop of page
B. tournefortii is a widespread mustard native to Africa, Asia and Europe. The species has become widely spread and naturalised in North America, Australia and New Zealand (USDA-ARS, 2015).
Specifically, B. tournefortii occurs in the Northern African countries of Algeria, Libya, Egypt, Tunisia and Morocco. It is widely spread across the Middle East and Western and Central Asia, including Oman, Saudi Arabia, Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan, Iraq, Syria and Turkey . It is also native to the European countries of Italy, Greece and Spain (USDA-ARS, 2015).
B. tournefortii has become naturalised in South Africa, Australasia (Australia and New Zealand), the UK, Mexico and the southern parts of the USA (USDA-ARS, 2015).
It has recently been recorded as a new alien species in Chile (Tellier et al., 2014).
Distribution TableTop 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/Region||Distribution||Last Reported||Origin||First Reported||Invasive||Reference||Notes|
|China||Present||Present based on regional distribution.|
|-Tibet||Present only in captivity/cultivation||Introduced||Hammer et al., 2013||Cultivated in West Tibet as an oil crop|
|India||Present only in captivity/cultivation||Introduced||Not invasive||Hammer et al., 2013; Biodiversity India, 2015||Cultivated on a small scale in NW India|
|-Delhi||Present||Introduced||Biodiversity India, 2015||Cultivated|
|-Indian Punjab||Present||Introduced||Biodiversity India, 2015||Cultivated|
|-Rajasthan||Present||Introduced||Biodiversity India, 2015||Cultivated|
|-Uttar Pradesh||Present||Introduced||Biodiversity India, 2015||Cultivated|
|Saudi Arabia||Present||Native||USDA-ARS, 2015|
|United Arab Emirates||Present||Native||USDA-ARS, 2015|
|South Africa||Present||Introduced||USDA-ARS, 2015||Located in the Eastern, Northern and Western Cape|
|Mexico||Present||Introduced||USDA-ARS, 2015||Found in Northern Mexico, Baja Norte|
|USA||Present||Introduced||1927||Invasive||Minnich and Sanders, 2000||First recorded in Coachella Valley, California in 1927|
|-New Mexico||Present||Introduced||Invasive||USDA-ARS, 2015|
|Chile||Present||Introduced||2014||Teillier et al., 2014||Los Molles, Valparaiso Region (Pacific coast)|
|Belgium||Present||Introduced||Not invasive||DAISIE, 2015|
|Ireland||Present||Introduced||Not invasive||DAISIE, 2015|
|Sweden||Present||Introduced||Not invasive||DAISIE, 2015|
|UK||Present, few occurrences||Introduced||1908||Not invasive||British and Irish Flora, BIF||Formerly common but has now declined to very rare|
|-England and Wales||Present||Introduced||Not invasive||DAISIE, 2015|
|-Scotland||Present||Introduced||Not invasive||DAISIE, 2015|
|Australia||Present||Introduced||1936||Invasive||Weeds of Australia, 2015|
|-Australian Northern Territory||Present||Introduced||Invasive||Weeds of Australia, 2015||Southern NT|
|-New South Wales||Present||Introduced||Invasive||Weeds of Australia, 2015; Weeds of Australia, 2015|
|-Queensland||Present||Introduced||Invasive||Weeds of Australia, 2015||Southern and central QLD|
|-South Australia||Present||Introduced||Invasive||Weeds of Australia, 2015|
|-Tasmania||Present||Introduced||Invasive||Weeds of Australia, 2015|
|-Victoria||Present||Introduced||Invasive||Weeds of Australia, 2015|
|-Western Australia||Present||Introduced||Invasive||Weeds of Australia, 2015||Coastal and sandy sites of Southern and central WA|
|New Zealand||Present||Introduced||USDA-ARS, 2015|
History of Introduction and SpreadTop of page
In the USA, a sample of B. tournefortii was first collected in 1927 in the Coachella Valley, California. It is believed that the species was accidently introduced with the importation of date palms from the Middle East. This is probable due to the development of the date industry in the Coachella Valley in the early part of the twentieth century (Minnich and Sanders, 2000).
There is little information regarding the introduction of B. tournefortii to other countries. In Australia the earliest recorded sample of the species by AVH (2015) is dated 23 March 1936.
IntroductionsTop of page
|Introduced to||Introduced from||Year||Reason||Introduced by||Established in wild through||References||Notes|
|Natural reproduction||Continuous restocking|
|Australia||1936||Hitchhiker (pathway cause)||Yes||No||AVH (2015)|
|California||1927||Hitchhiker (pathway cause)||Yes||No||Minnich and Sanders (2000)||Accidently introduced with the importation of date palms from the Middle East|
Risk of IntroductionTop of page
B. tournefortii is a highly invasive species thus its spread and further introduction is of high concern. Curtis and Bradley (2015) modelled the current and future climatic suitability for establishment of B. tournefortii in the southwestern USA, concluding that the species presence and abundance may increase by 29% and 28% respectively.
Following spatial analysis and climatic modelling of B. tournefortii,Li et al. (2015) found that that the climate in the invaded range generally predicts the native distribution.
HabitatTop of page
B. tournefortii is commonly found in disturbed sites along roadsides, abandoned fields and waste grounds. Its native habitat is typically areas of wind blown, sandy arid, or semi-arid environments (Minnich and Sanders, 2000). It also inhabits sandy coastlines typically along the Mediterranean coastline (Thanos et al., 1991). During years of high rainfall it also has been found to inhabit areas of silty and rocky soils (Cal-IPC, 2015).
Berry et al. (2014) found that in the western Sonoran Desert of California, USA, B. tournefortii quickly invaded areas of natural disturbance where soils were young while older geological surfaces were less vulnerable to invasion. Another study in central-western New South Wales, Australia, found that rabbit mounds enhanced the germination of B. tournefortii seeds. The mounds were characterised as disturbed and degraded soil surfaces, suggesting that an increased abundance of B. tournefortii in the area can be attributed to the soil disturbance caused by rabbits (Eldridge and Simpson, 2002).
Habitat ListTop of page
|Terrestrial – Managed||Cultivated / agricultural land||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Cultivated / agricultural land||Present, no further details||Productive/non-natural|
|Disturbed areas||Principal habitat||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Rail / roadsides||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Terrestrial ‑ Natural / Semi-natural||Natural grasslands||Secondary/tolerated habitat||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Scrub / shrublands||Secondary/tolerated habitat||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Deserts||Principal habitat||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Arid regions||Principal habitat||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Arid regions||Principal habitat||Natural|
|Coastal areas||Secondary/tolerated habitat||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Coastal areas||Secondary/tolerated habitat||Natural|
|Coastal dunes||Secondary/tolerated habitat||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Coastal dunes||Secondary/tolerated habitat||Natural|
Hosts/Species AffectedTop of page
Australian Oilseeds Federation (2015) reported that B. tournefortii can contaminate canola oil crops, reducing yield through competition, and compromising oil quality.
Host Plants and Other Plants AffectedTop of page
|Brassica napus var. napus (rape)||Brassicaceae||Main|
Growth StagesTop of page Post-harvest, Vegetative growing stage
Biology and EcologyTop of page
The chromosome count for B. tournefortii was reported to be 2n=20 (Jepson Flora Project, 2014).
B. tournefortii has been hybridized with cultivated Brassica napus (rapeseed) to establish cytoplasmic male sterility B. napus (Liu et al., 1996). Phoma Lingam (black leg disease of Brassica crops) resistance has been shown to be transferred from B. tournefortii to the hybrid plants (Liu et al., 1995). In addition, due to B. tournefortii’s drought resistant genes it has been identified as a possible donor for hybridization with cultivated brassicas (Pratap and Gupta, 2009).
B. tournefortii is an autogamous species with virtually one hundred percent fruit set. A well-developed plant will produce between 750 and 9000 seeds (Minnich and Sanders, 2000). Seeds may remain viable for up to three years (USDA, 2015). It has been reported that the seeds of B. tournefortii can also remain viable after extended submergence (Bangle et al., 2008).
In the Mediterranean region it is reported that seed germination is optimal between 15-25°C (Thanos et al., 1991), compared with 16-35°C in southwest USA (Bangle et al., 2008). Germination is light sensitive, and can be inhibited when exposed to light (Thanos et al., 1991). Malusa et al. (2003) found that seeds lying on the surface did not germinate due to photo-inhibition.
The gel like coating on the seeds waterproofs them and makes them sticky when wet. This enables the seed to survive and remain dormant for a number of months (Holman and Gardener, 2006).
Physiology and Phenology
B. tournefortii is a rapid growing annual, which germinates in the autumn, flowers and fruits in the winter and senesces in the spring. In California, seed germination occurs as a response to rains as small as 4 cm, the plant then grows vigorously within two or three months. The fast growth enables early establishment. In the Sonoran Desert it has been reported that the abundance of B. tournefortii increases with higher winter rainfall. It has been noted that hot dry spells cause B. tournefortii to prematurely flower and fruit (Minnich and Sanders, 2000).
Minnich and Sanders (2000) state that the plant population size can vary from year to year. In the Sonoran Desert it has been reported that population abundance is higher in winters of high rainfall compared with winters of low rainfall (Minnich and Sanders, 2000).
Sanchez-Flores et al. (2008) report that B. tournefortii shows association with microphyllous desert scrub, grassland, and sarcocaulescent desert scrub through land cover characterization.
B. tournefortii is suited to arid and semi-arid sandy desert conditions; however, it inhabits a wide variety of disturbed environments (USDA, 2015). Minnich and Sanders (2000) found that it is becoming more common in the semi-arid coastal areas of California. They noted that it is particularly common in areas of wind blown sediments.
B. tournefortii favours sandy disturbed soils, and can tolerate soil salinity (ASDM, 2015). It requires very low soil nutrient levels, and is able to grow in extremely poor soils and sand dunes (Dremann, 2005). Plants for a Future (2015) report that B. tournefortii prefers well-drained yet moist soils and that it cannot grow in the shade. It can be found at elevations as high as 1000 m though is abundant below 305 m (Minnich and Sanders, 2000). Malusa et al. (2003) found that B. tournefortii in the Mohawk dunes, Arizona, preferred areas of greatest moisture. In the Coachella Valley, California, B. tournefortii favours years of higher precipitation, biomass abundance drops in years of low precipitation (Barrows et al., 2009).
Following spatial analysis and climatic modelling of B. tournefortii,Li et al. (2015) found that that the climate in the invaded range generally predicts the native distribution. Therefore, suggesting that either there has been little local adaptation to climate occurring since introduction or the biological interaction experienced in the invaded range has not driven the species to occupy climatic conditions much different from its native range.
ClimateTop of page
|BS - Steppe climate||Preferred||> 430mm and < 860mm annual precipitation|
|BW - Desert climate||Preferred||< 430mm annual precipitation|
|Cf - Warm temperate climate, wet all year||Tolerated||Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, wet all year|
|Cs - Warm temperate climate with dry summer||Tolerated||Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, dry summers|
|Cw - Warm temperate climate with dry winter||Tolerated||Warm temperate climate with dry winter (Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, dry winters)|
|Ds - Continental climate with dry summer||Tolerated||Continental climate with dry summer (Warm average temp. > 10°C, coldest month < 0°C, dry summers)|
Latitude/Altitude RangesTop of page
|Latitude North (°N)||Latitude South (°S)||Altitude Lower (m)||Altitude Upper (m)|
Air TemperatureTop of page
|Parameter||Lower limit||Upper limit|
|Mean annual temperature (ºC)||18||30|
|Mean maximum temperature of hottest month (ºC)||22||38|
|Mean minimum temperature of coldest month (ºC)||5||20|
RainfallTop of page
|Parameter||Lower limit||Upper limit||Description|
|Mean annual rainfall||400||860||mm; lower/upper limits|
Rainfall RegimeTop of page Bimodal
Soil TolerancesTop of page
- very alkaline
Special soil tolerances
Natural enemiesTop of page
|Natural enemy||Type||Life stages||Specificity||References||Biological control in||Biological control on|
Notes on Natural EnemiesTop of page
There is little information on natural enemies of B. tournefortii. Suazo et al. (2012) concluded that harvester ants in the Mojave Desert, Arizona, might act as seed predators. Harvester ants carried B. tournefortii seeds to their nests and as plant density was lower near the ant’s nest it was concluded that the ants were seed predators rather than seed dispersers (Suazo et al., 2012).
Means of Movement and DispersalTop of page
B. tournefortii spreads exclusively via seed dispersal. The main methods of dispersal include both natural transmission and vector dispersal (USDA, 2015).
B. tournefortii seeds have been reported to be dispersed by both wind and water (USDA, 2015). Evidence shows that seeds can be dispersed by the tumbleweed effect. When the plant dies and dries out it can easily break off and tumble in the wind across the landscape spreading the dried seeds to new locations (USDA, 2015).
It has also been observed that B. tournefortii seeds can remain viable when submerged for long periods, thus can float across bodies of water (Bangle et al., 2008). Powell (2005) found seeds that had been underwater in Lake Mead, Arizona, for 11 weeks remained viable and germinated.
B. tournefortii seeds are known to be carried and dispersed by animals. When seeds become wet a sticky gel forms. This enables the seed to adhere to passing animals and be carried long distances (Minnich and Sanders, 2000). Furthermore, USDA (2015) reports that rodents cache and move the seeds far from their original source. Powell (2005) observed in Lake Mead National Recreation Area, Arizona, that rodents carried seeds into the open desert to their burrows, some distance from the original B. tournefortii infestation. San (2010) reported that as well as rodents, ants are a potential seed disperser in the Lake Mead area.
B. tournefortii was first recorded in the USA in 1927 in the Coachella Valley, California. It is believed to have been accidently introduced when date palms were imported from the Middle East in the early part of the twentieth century (Minnich and Sanders, 2000). B. tournefortii is now abundant across parts of California and Arizona (USDA, 2015). The movement and seed dispersion has occurred along roadsides when seeds adhere to vehicles and road maintenance equipment (Minnich and Sanders, 2000). Consequently seeds have been dispersed over long distances.
Pathway CausesTop of page
|Digestion and excretion||Rapidly invades disturbed areas.||Yes||Berry et al., 2014|
|Hitchhiker||Wet seeds form a sticky gel like coating so can adhere to passing animals or vehicles||Yes||Yes||Minnich and Sanders, 2000|
|Self-propelled||When plants die, dry and breakoff they tumble in the wind spreading seeds||Yes||USDA-ARS, 2015|
Pathway VectorsTop of page
|Clothing, footwear and possessions||Seeds||Yes||Minnich and Sanders, 2000|
|Floating vegetation and debris||Seeds||Yes||Bangle et al., 2008|
|Land vehicles||Seeds, plant fragments||Yes||USDA-ARS, 2015|
|Livestock||Seeds||Yes||Yes||Minnich and Sanders, 2000|
|Machinery and equipment||Seeds||Yes||Minnich and Sanders, 2000|
|Water||Seeds||Yes||Bangle et al., 2008|
|Wind||Seeds, plant fragments||Yes||USDA-ARS, 2015|
Impact SummaryTop of page
|Economic/livelihood||Positive and negative|
Economic ImpactTop of page
The Australian Oilseeds Federation (2015) reported that B. tournefortii can reduce canola yield through competition. In addition the similar seed size can result in crop contamination and impact the oil quality.
Environmental ImpactTop of page
Impact on Habitat
B. tournefortii biomass increases the fuel load for wildfires (Minnich and Sanders, 2000), creating a fire hazard in an ecosystem previously unaffected by fire and where native species are not adapted to survive fire (Barrows, 2010).
Impact on Biodiversity
In southwestern USA a rapid invasion of B. tournefortii has been observed to be having negative consequences for native wildflowers. B. tournefortii is fast growing and its early phenology makes it a highly invasive species that results in the suppression of native wildflowers, shifting the composition of desert flora (Minnich and Sanders, 2000; Barrow et al. 2009). Holt and Barrows (2014) observed that in areas of dense B. tournefortii growth, native annuals grew taller in order to compete for light under the canopy of B. tournefortii. Consequently the native plants produced fewer flowers and seeds due to the plants energy being focused on height growth. This resulted in a 90% reduction in the reproductive success of the native flora and subsequently leading to a depleted seed bank of the native wildflowers.
Its suppression of natives results in B. tournefortii being the dominant species in areas of usually diverse flora. In 2005 it was approximated that three quarters of wildflower areas in California and Arizona were invaded by B. tournefortii (ASDM, 2015). B. tournefortii has a similar affect on native herbaceous plants in Australia (Weeds of Australia, 2015).
There is little information regarding the impact of B. tournefortii on fauna. It has been reported that the high oxalic acid content of B. tournefortii may be toxic to the desert tortoise (Gopherus spp.) and other desert herbivores (Holman and Gardener, 2006). Barrows et al. (2009) have noted the Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizard (Uma spp.) had a negative response to the abundance of B. tournefortii.
Threatened SpeciesTop of page
|Threatened Species||Conservation Status||Where Threatened||Mechanism||References||Notes|
|Kinosternon sonoriense longifemorale (Sonoyta mud turtle)||USA ESA species proposed for listing USA ESA species proposed for listing||Arizona||Ecosystem change / habitat alteration||US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2014|
Social ImpactTop of page
B. tournefortii leaves and young shoots are edible and its seeds can be used to obtain oil (PFAF, 2015). In India and Tibet, B. tournefortii is cultivated on a small scale as an oil crop (Hammer et al., 2013).
Risk and Impact FactorsTop 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
- Pioneering in disturbed areas
- Highly mobile locally
- Fast growing
- Has high reproductive potential
- Has propagules that can remain viable for more than one year
- Reproduces asexually
- Has high genetic variability
- Ecosystem change/ habitat alteration
- Modification of fire regime
- Monoculture formation
- Negatively impacts agriculture
- Negatively impacts animal health
- Reduced amenity values
- Reduced native biodiversity
- Threat to/ loss of native species
- Competition - monopolizing resources
- Competition - shading
- Competition - smothering
- Highly likely to be transported internationally accidentally
- Difficult to identify/detect as a commodity contaminant
- Difficult/costly to control
UsesTop of page
B. tournefortii is not widely cultivated for use. However, it is used as a small-scale oil crop in north west India and western Tibet (Hammer et al., 2013).
Uses ListTop of page
Human food and beverage
Similarities to Other Species/ConditionsTop of page
B. tournefortii can be confused with other yellow flowering mustards in the field, including Hirschfeldia icana (shortpod mustard), Brassica nigra (black mustard), B. juncea (Indian mustard) and B. napus (rapeseed) (BCC, 2015). B. tournefortii can be distinguished from other yellow flowering mustards by its pale, dull in comparison, small yellow flowers and the stiff white bristles on the herbs lower stems. Also the fruit of B. tournefortii is relatively elongated with a long beak (Di Tomaso and Healy, 2007).
In the USA, the Sahara Mustard and Volutaria Eradication Task Force (2015) have noted a few native desert plants that co-occur and are similar in appearance to B. tournefortii. These include Descurainiapinnata (tansy mustard), Guillenia lasiophylla (California mustard) and Camissonia californica (false mustard). Identification and differentiation is important for the control and eradication of B. tournefortii in these native habitats.
Prevention and ControlTop of page
B. tournefortii can not be effectively controlled in one year. Multiple management methods need to be applied over multiple years in order to effectively control a B. tournefortii invasion. Effectiveness of control increases by using a combination of methods (USDA, 2015).
A study on seed production by Trader et al. (2006) found that seed production of individual plants can be higher in plots with lower densities. Therefore, control measures that reduce density but do not clear the entire area of plants may result in an increase in net seed production from those individuals that have not been removed.
Cultural Control and Sanitary Measures
Early detection and removal is vital to inhibiting the spread of B. tournefortii. Education and public awareness regarding B. tournefortii’s invasiveness, and identification at different life stages, will lead to the public aiding prevention and control by reporting new infestations. In addition land users should be discouraged to use vehicles and machinery, and graze livestock in infested areas in order to mitigate the spread of seeds (USDA, 2015).
Hand weeding is the most common method of control (Holt and Barrows, 2014). However it is only effective where an infestation has been detected in the early stages, it is not a feasible option for large scale infestations of B. tournefortii (Barrows, 2010). The entire plant should be removed, bagged and disposed of off site (USDA, 2015). Abella et al. (2013) showed that physical treatment worked best in the early stages of B. tournefortii growth and seed development.
The use of biological control may not be suitable due to B. tournefortii being closely genetically related to a number of important agricultural crops such as broccoli (Brassica oleracea), canola (Brassica spp.) and cabbage (Brassica oleracea). Finding a bio-control that would not attack the cultivated species may be difficult (Holt and Barrows, 2014).
Chemical control, such as herbicides, are an effective control against B. tournefortii. Unlike physical control it can be effective once the plant has reached the seed developmental stages of its lifecycle (Abella et al., 2013). Herbicide treatment when used in ecosystems such as Mojave Desert or Coachella Valley may cause a negative impact on the surrounding native wildflowers. However, the early phenology of B. tournefortii provides a window for selective control using herbicides without affecting the native annual wildflowers. Early treatment of B. tournefortii would reduce its abundance and allow native wildflowers to germinate and establish (Holt and Barrows, 2014). Chemical control may be best suited when B. tournefortii infests agricultural crops.
Monitoring and Surveillance
Recent studies, e.g. Sankey et al. (2014), have used high spatial resolution to detect presence, cover and biomass of B. tournefortii.
ReferencesTop of page
Abella SR, Suazo AA, Norman CM, Newton AC, 2013. Treatment alternatives and timing affect seeds of African mustard (Brassica tournefortii), an invasive forb in American southwest arid lands. Invasive Plant Science and Management, 6(4):559-567. http://wssajournals.org/loi/ipsm
AOF, 2015. Australian Oilseeds Federation. New South Wales, Australia: Australian Oilseeds Federation. http://www.australianoilseeds.com/
Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum (ASDM), 2015. Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum. Arizona, USA: Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum. http://www.desertmuseum.org/
AVH, 2015. Australia's Virtual Herbarium. Canberra, ACT, Australia: Council of Heads of Australasian Herbaria. http://avh.chah.org.au/
Bangle DN, Walker LR, Powell EA, 2008. Seed germination of the invasive plant brassica tournefortii (Sahara mustard) in the Mojave Desert. Western North American Naturalist, 68(3):334-342. http://www.wnan.byu.edu
Barrows CW, 2010. The Anatomy of an Invasion: Saharan Mustard. California, USA: Mojave Desert Land Trust. http://mojavedesertlandtrust.org/research/Sahara%20Mustard_Barrows.pdf
Barrows CW, Allen EB, Brooks ML, Allen MF, 2009. Effects of an invasive plant on a desert sand dune landscape. Biological Invasions, 11(3):673-686. http://www.springerlink.com/content/j4617233280216j2/?p=960c4d381874424fb9f3692341dc6538&pi=17
BCC, 2015. Brisbane City Council Weed Identification Tool. Queensland, Australia: BCC. http://weeds.brisbane.qld.gov.au/
Berry KH, Gowan TA, Miller DM, Brooks ML, 2014. Models of invasion and establishment for African mustard (Brassica tournefortii). Invasive Plant Science and Management, 7(4):599-616. http://wssajournals.org/loi/ipsm
Biodiversity India, 2015. India Biodiversity Portal. Bangalore, India: Biodiversity India. http://indiabiodiversity.org/
British and Irish Flora (BIF), 2015. Online Atlas of the British and Irish Flora. London, UK: British and Irish Flora (BIF). http://www.brc.ac.uk/plantatlas/
CalEPPC, 1999. The CalEPPC List: Exotic Pest Plants of Greatest Ecological Concern in California. California Exotic Plant Pest Council, USA.
Cal-IPC (California Invasive Plant Council), 2015. California Invasive Plants Council. www.cal-ipc.org. Berkeley, California, USA: California Invasive Plants Council.
Curtis CA, Bradley BA, 2015. Climate change may alter both establishment and high abundance of red brome (Bromus rubens) and African mustard (Brassica tournefortii) in the semiarid Southwest United States. Invasive Plant Science and Management, 8(3):341-352. http://www.bioone.org/loi/ipsm
DAISIE, 2015. Delivering Alien Invasive Species Inventories for Europe. European Invasive Alien Species Gateway. www.europe-aliens.org/default.do
Dremann C, 2005. Desert Exotic Invasive Mustards in the USA. California, USA: Craig and Sue Dremann's Redwood City Seed Company. http://www.ecoseeds.com/mustards.html
Florentine SK, Westbrooke ME, 2005. Invasion of the noxious weed Nicotiana glauca R. Graham after an episodic flooding event in the arid zone of Australia. Journal of Arid Environments, 60(4):531-545. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WH9-4DFK6SM-1&_user=3796239&_handle=V-WA-A-W-AA-MsSAYVW-UUA-U-AAWVUYVCAY-AAWAZZCBAY-WBUDCCUUD-AA-U&_fmt=summary&_coverDate=03%2F01%2F2005&_rdoc=1&_orig=browse&_srch=%23toc%236845%232005%23999399995%23529275!&_cdi=6845&view=c&_acct=C000000593&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=3796239&md5=3cda89c00e55429e172b699eec90d9ee
Graham J, Johnson WS, Powell E, 2005. Identifying and Managing Sahara Mustard Fact Sheet. Nevada, USA: Cooperative Extension, University of Nevada. https://www.unce.unr.edu/publications/search/
Hammer K, Gladis T, Laghetti G, Pignone D, 2013. The wild and the grown - remarks on Brassica. International Journal of AgriScience, 3(6):453-480. http://www.inacj.com/attachments/section/17/Temp%20June%202013-820%20Hammer%20P%20(453-480).pdf
Holman D, Gardener M, 2006. Sahara Mustard No Ordinary Weed. Arizona, USA: University of Arizona. http://cals.arizona.edu/mohave/master_gardeners/lake_havasu/articles/
Holt JS, Barrows CW, 2014. Sahara Mustard, Brassica Tournefortii. California, USA: Center of Invasive Species Research, University of California. http://cisr.ucr.edu/sahara_mustard.html
Jepson Flora Poject, 2014. Jepson eFlora. Berkeley California, USA: Univeristy of California. http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/jepson_flora_project.html
Li YM, Dlugosch KM, Enquist BJ, 2015. Novel spatial analysis methods reveal scale-dependent spread and infer limiting factors of invasion by Sahara mustard. Ecography, 38(3):311-320. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1600-0587
Liu JH, Dixelius C, Eriksson I, Glimelius K, 1995. Brassica napus (+) B. tournefortii, a somatic hybrid containing traits of agronomic importance for rapeseed breeding. Plant Science (Limerick), 109(1):75-86.
Malusa J, Halvorson B, Angell D, 2003. Distribution of Exotic Mustard Brassica tournefortii in the Mohawk Dunes and Mountains, Arizona. Desert Plants, 19(1):33-39.
Minnich RA, Sanders AC, 2000. Brassica Tournefortii. In: Invasive Plants of California's Wildlands [ed. by Bossard, C. C. \Randall, J. M. \Hoshovsky, M. C.]. California, USA: University of California Press, 68-72.
NZVH, 2016. New Zealand Virtual Herbarium. Auckland, New Zealand: New Zealand Virtual Herbarium. http://www.virtualherbarium.org.nz/home
Plants for a Future (PFAF), 2015. Plants for a Future. Devon, UK: Plants for a Future. http://www.pfaf.org/user/default
Powell EA, 2005. 2005 Southwest Desert Exotic Mustard Survery: Reports from Lake Mead National Recreation Area. California, USA: Craig and Sue Dremann's Redwood City Seed Company. http://www.ecoseeds.com/lake.mead.html
Pratap A, Gupta SK, 2009. Biology and Ecology of Wild Crucifers. In: Biology and Breeding of Crucifers [ed. by Gupta, S. K.]. Florida, USA: CRC Press, 37-67.
Sahara Mustard and Volutaria Eradication Task Force, 2015. Sahara Mustard and Volutaria Eradication Task Force. Borrego Springs. California, USA: Sahara Mustard and Volutaria Eradication Task Force. http://borregospringschamber.com/mustard/
San A, 2010. Seed removal rates of Sahara mustard (Brassica tournefortii) by rodents and ants under different microsites in Lake Mead National Recreation Area. Mojave Applied Ecology Notes, 3(1):1-3.
Sánchez-Flores E, Rodríguez-Gallegos H, Yool SR, 2008. Plant invasions in dynamic desert landscapes. A field and remote sensing assessment of predictive and change modeling. Journal of Arid Environments, 72(3):189-206. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WH9-4PFDPK1-1&_user=6686535&_coverDate=03%2F31%2F2008&_rdoc=7&_fmt=full&_orig=browse&_srch=doc-info(%23toc%236845%232008%23999279996%23675272%23FLA%23display%23Volume)&_cdi=6845&_sort=d&_docanchor=&_ct=15&_acct=C000066028&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=6686535&md5=7aaf48720074a7330d9ac8523a5bfa4b
Sankey T, Dickson B, Sesnie S, Wang O, Olsson A, Zachmann L, 2014. WorldView-2 high spatial resolution improves desert invasive plant detection. PE&RS, Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing, 80(9):885-893. http://www.asprs.org/a/publications/pers/2014journals/PE&RS_Sept_2014_Flipping/HTML/files/assets/common/downloads/PE&RS%20September%202014.pdf
Suazo AA, San A, Tsutsui RK, Abella SR, 2012. Desert seed consumers as predators and dispersers of a non-native invasive plant. Proceedings of the 97th Ecological Society of America Annual Convention, Portland, Oregon, USA, 5-10th August 2012. http://esa.org/meetings_archive/2012/webprogram/Paper37212.html
Teillier S, Prina A, Lund R, 2014. Brassica tournefortii Gouan (Brassicaceae), new record for the alien flora of Chile. (Brassica tournefortii Gouan (Brassicaceae), nuevo registro para la flora alóctona asilvestrada de Chile.) Gayana Botánica, 71(2):284-286. http://www.gayanabotanica.cl/pdfs/2014/2/14_Teillier_etal.pdf
The Plant List, 2013. The Plant List: a working list of all plant species. Version 1.1. London, UK: Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. http://www.theplantlist.org
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), 2015. Field Guide for Managing Sahara Mustard in the Southwest. US Forest Services. Washington DC, USA: United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), 12 pp. http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprd3828962.pdf
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2014. In: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service species assessment and listing priority assignment form: Kinosternon sonoriense longifemorale. US Fish and Wildlife Service, 24 pp.. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/candidate/assessments/2014/r2/C067_V01.pdf
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/
Virtuella Herbariat, 2016. Virtual Herbarium, Sweden. Oskarshamn, Sweden: Virtuella Herbariat. http://www.herbarium-ume.se/virtuella_herbariet/
Weeds of Australia, 2015. Weeds of Australia, Biosecurity Queensland Edition. http://keyserver.lucidcentral.org/weeds/data/03030800-0b07-490a-8d04-0605030c0f01/media/Html/search.html?zoom_query=
West JS, Balesdent MH, Rouxel T, Narcy JP, Huang YJ, Roux J, Steed JM, Fitt BDL, Schmit J, 2002. Colonization of winter oilseed rape tissues by A/Tox and B/Tox Leptosphaeria maculans (phoma stem canker) in France and England. Plant Pathology, 51(3):311-321; 29 ref.
ContributorsTop of page
27/01/2016 Original text by:
Madeleine Florin, Consultant, UK
Distribution MapsTop of page
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/