Solanum mauritianum (tobacco tree)
- 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
- Notes on Natural Enemies
- Means of Movement and Dispersal
- Plant Trade
- Impact Summary
- Environmental Impact
- Impact: Biodiversity
- 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
- Solanum mauritianum Scop.
Preferred Common Name
- tobacco tree
Other Scientific Names
- Solanum auriculatum Ait.
- Solanum carterianum Rock.
- Solanum erianthum D. Don.
- Solanum tabacifolium Vell.
- Solanum verbascifolium var. auriculatum (Ait.) Kuntze
International Common Names
- English: earleaf nightshade; woolly nightshade
- Spanish: ajicon (Cuba); prendedera (Cuba)
- French: tabac marron
- Portuguese: fona-de-porco (Azores); tabaqueira (Azores)
Local Common Names
- Australia: tree tobacco; wild tobacco
- Brazil: capoeira-branca; couvetinga; cuvitinga; fumeira; fumo-bravo
- Cook Islands: rua 'va 'va
- Cuba: tabaco cimarrón
- New Zealand: flannel weed; keosine plant; tobacco weed
- South Africa: bugtree; bugweed; groot bitterappel; luisboom; nbongobonga
- Tonga: pula
- USA/Hawaii: pua nana honua
- SOLER (Solanum erianthum)
- SOLMR (Solanum mauritianum)
Summary of InvasivenessTop of page The South American tree S. mauritianum has been introduced to Africa, Australasia, India and islands of the Atlantic, Indian and Pacific Oceans. Worldwide, the worst infestations occur in the high rainfall regions of South Africa, where the weed invades natural forests, forestry plantations, riparian zones, urban open space and various disturbed areas. The weed's invasiveness is aggravated by extensive levels of fruiting and secondary distribution of the plant via seed dispersal by frugivorous birds. Negative attributes include displacing native vegetation, hindering commercial forestry activities, harbouring agricultural pests, poisoning livestock and providing health risks for humans. The plant is declared as a noxious weed in several countries. S. mauritianum is considered to be moderately invasive in the Cook Islands, but considerably more so in Australia, New Zealand and Tonga and is a declared weed (Category 1) in South Africa and a Class B noxious weed in New Zealand.
Taxonomic TreeTop of page
- Domain: Eukaryota
- Kingdom: Plantae
- Phylum: Spermatophyta
- Subphylum: Angiospermae
- Class: Dicotyledonae
- Order: Solanales
- Family: Solanaceae
- Genus: Solanum
- Species: Solanum mauritianum
Notes on Taxonomy and NomenclatureTop of page The name Solanum mauritianum Scopoli is universally accepted for this weed which, despite its species name, is not native to Mauritius but to northeastern Argentina, southern Brazil, Uruguay and Paraguay (Roe, 1972). The plant belongs to the subgenus Brevantherum, one of several subgenera of Solanum (D'Arcy, 1972). Synonyms for this plant include Solanum auriculatum Ait., Solanum carterianum Rock., Solanum tabacifolium Vell. and Solanum verbascifolium var. auriculatum (Ait.) Ktze (Lorenzi, 1991; Kissmann and Groth, 1997). The plant is very closely related to other South American species like Solanum erianthum D. Don, Solanum granuloso-leprosum Dun., Solanum riparium Pers. and Solanum verbascifolium L. However, these species may well comprise geographical forms of a widespread and variable species complex (Neser, 1984), particularly since some share the same synonyms (Lorenzi, 1991; Kissmann and Groth, 1997). For example, although S. erianthum (= S. auriculatum, S. tabacifolium, S. mauritianum) and S. granuloso-leprosum (= S. verbascifolium var. auriculatum (Ait.), S. verbascifolium f. granuloso-leprosum (Dun.) Hassl.) are both listed as very similar, but distinct, species, some botanists regard them as synonyms of S. mauritianum, particularly since hybrids between these and S. mauritianum have been reported (Kissmann and Groth, 1997).
DescriptionTop of page The morphology of S. mauritianum has been described by several authors (Symon, 1981; Hinze, 1985; Lorenzi, 1991; Kissmann and Groth, 1997; Henderson, 2001). The plant is a shrub or small tree 2-4 m (up to 12 m) tall, branched above to form a rounded canopy. It is spineless and all parts (except older stems) are densely pubescent with sessile to long-stalked stellate hairs (trichomes), which are loose and floccose on young growth. The leaves are simple, alternate and elliptic and are more densely trichomate (and hence paler) on the lower surfaces. Leaves are up to 300 mm long and 120 mm wide on young vigorous growth, but are usually around 180 mm long and 70 mm wide on mature stems. The leaf margin is entire, the apex acuminate and the base cuneate and often oblique. The petioles are 30-90 mm long, each with 1-2 smaller auriculate leaves in the axils. These auriculate leaves are sessile, rounded, and sometimes absent from weak or distal shoots. When crushed, leaves produce an odour similar to that of diesel fuel. The flowers are perfect, actinomorphic and numerous in branched corymbs. The peduncles are up to 150 mm long to the first fork, with the pedicels 2-3 mm long. The calyx tube is short (2-3 mm long), while the lobes are narrowly triangular and 2-3 mm long. The corolla has a lilac blue to purple colour, with a pale star-shaped area at its base, and is stellate, 15-25 mm in diameter. There are five stamens inserted low on the corolla tube, with the filaments around 1 mm long and the oblong anthers 2-3.5 mm long and opening by terminal pores. The ovary is densely pubescent, with the style pubescent in the lower part and 5-7 mm long, and the stigma green and terminal. The green berries ripen to a dull yellow fruit which are succulent, globose, 10-15 mm in diameter and pubescent at least in early stages. The fruit are borne in compact terminal clusters. The seeds are numerous, flattened, 1.5-2 mm long, with the testa minutely reticulate and are self-compatible.
Plant TypeTop of page Broadleaved
DistributionTop of page The native range of S. mauritianum is considered to be north eastern Argentina, southern Brazil, Uruguay and Paraguay, although the plant has now also been introduced to Africa, Australasia, India and islands of the Atlantic, Indian and Pacific Oceans (Roe, 1972).
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||Planted||Reference||Notes|
|India||Restricted distribution||Introduced||Invasive||Roe, 1972|
|Japan||Present||Introduced||Ohnishi and Katsuyama, 2011|
|Cameroon||Present||Introduced||Invasive||Missouri Botanical Garden, 2003|
|Comoros||Present||Introduced||Invasive||Missouri Botanical Garden, 2003|
|Kenya||Present||Introduced||Invasive||Copeland and Wharton, 2006|
|Madagascar||Widespread||Introduced||Invasive||Roe, 1972; Jaeger and Hepper, 1986|
|Mauritius||Widespread||Introduced||Invasive||Roe, 1972; Jaeger and Hepper, 1986|
|South Africa||Widespread||Introduced||1862||Invasive||Jaeger and Hepper, 1986; Henderson, 2001|
|Uganda||Present||Introduced||Invasive||Missouri Botanical Garden, 2003|
|USA||Present||Present based on regional distribution.|
Central America and Caribbean
|Cuba||Present||Introduced||Invasive||Oviedo Prieto et al., 2012|
|Argentina||Restricted distribution||Native||Not invasive||Natural||Roe, 1972|
|-Bahia||Restricted distribution||Native||Invasive||Lorenzi, 1991|
|-Espirito Santo||Widespread||Native||Invasive||Lorenzi, 1991|
|-Mato Grosso do Sul||Restricted distribution||Native||Invasive||Lorenzi, 1991|
|-Minas Gerais||Widespread||Native||Invasive||Lorenzi, 1991|
|-Rio de Janeiro||Widespread||Native||Invasive||Lorenzi, 1991|
|-Rio Grande do Sul||Widespread||Native||Invasive||Lorenzi, 1991|
|-Santa Catarina||Widespread||Native||Invasive||Lorenzi, 1991|
|-Sao Paulo||Widespread||Native||Invasive||Lorenzi, 1991|
|Ecuador||Present||Missouri Botanical Garden, 2003|
|Paraguay||Widespread||Native||Not invasive||Roe, 1972|
|Peru||Present||Missouri Botanical Garden, 2003|
|Uruguay||Widespread||Native||Not invasive||Natural||Roe, 1972|
|Portugal||Present||Present based on regional distribution.|
|-Azores||Present||Introduced||Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh, 2003|
|Australia||Present||Present based on regional distribution.|
|-Queensland||Restricted distribution||Introduced||Invasive||Van Dyck, 1979; Symon, 1981|
|Cook Islands||Present||Introduced||Invasive||Space & Flynn, 2003|
|Micronesia, Federated states of||Present||Introduced||Invasive||Space et al., 2000|
|New Caledonia||Present||Introduced||Invasive||Swarbrick, 1997|
|New Zealand||Widespread||Introduced||1883||Invasive||McGregor, 1999; Withers et al., 2002|
|Papua New Guinea||Widespread||Introduced||Invasive||Chadhokar, 1978|
|Solomon Islands||Present||Introduced||Invasive||Swarbrick, 1997|
|Tonga||Introduced, established||Introduced||Invasive||ISSG, IUCN SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group; Space and Flynn, 2001|
History of Introduction and SpreadTop of page S. mauritianum was possibly introduced to Africa, Madagascar, Mauritius and India via the Portuguese trade routes in the early 16th century (Roe, 1972, 1979). In South Africa, the plant was first noted in KwaZulu-Natal Province around 1862 (Wright, 1904) and had become more widespread by 1881, culminating in its proclamation as a noxious weed in 1937 (Olckers and Zimmermann, 1991). The plant has since spread to most parts of South Africa, where it is particularly problematic in the eastern, higher rainfall regions of the country (Henderson, 2001). In New Zealand, S. mauritianum was first recorded in 1883 (Allan, 1940) but is now widely established in the northern areas of the North Island, with a restricted coastal distribution in the northern parts of the South Island (McGregor, 1999). The plant may have been promoted as an ornamental in New Zealand and in other parts of the world and its spread has also been influenced by native birds.
Risk of IntroductionTop of page The risk of further spread to countries where the weed is not currently naturalized does not appear to be high, because the plant is not normally spread via natural (non-biotic) means, agricultural practices nor accidental introduction. The greatest risks are probably posed by deliberate introductions for ornamental or commercial purposes. In South Africa, S. mauritianum is a declared weed (Category 1) stipulated under the Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act, while in New Zealand it is listed as a Class B noxious weed.
HabitatTop of page S. mauritianum is adapted to a wide range of habitats, but is particularly prevalent in high-rainfall areas. In South Africa, the weed is mostly abundant in summer rainfall areas, but is also present in regions typified by winter and bimodal (spring and autumn) rainfall (Wells et al., 1986; Henderson, 2001). In South Africa, the plant occurs in a range of climatic conditions, from Mediterranean to coastal subtropical to high altitude temperate climates. Although the plant seems able to survive in most soil types, it thrives in soils that have high water retention. The weed is shade-tolerant to a certain degree and is particularly invasive in natural forests (particularly along the margins), forestry plantations, riparian zones and watercourses, savannas, roadsides, urban open space and any other disturbed areas (e.g. along the course of electricity pylons etc.) (Henderson, 2001). In Hawaii, the weed is naturalized on slopes and ridges in disturbed wet forest.
Habitat ListTop of page
|Terrestrial – Managed||Cultivated / agricultural land||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Managed forests, plantations and orchards||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Disturbed areas||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Rail / roadsides||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Urban / peri-urban areas||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Terrestrial ‑ Natural / Semi-natural||Natural forests||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Natural grasslands||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Riverbanks||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Wetlands||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
|Coastal areas||Present, no further details||Harmful (pest or invasive)|
Hosts/Species AffectedTop of page S. mauritianum does not normally invade agricultural land. However, in South Africa, the plant is a major problem in commercial forestry plantations where it competes with seedlings of Pinus species and inhibits their growth (Hinze, 1985). In South Africa, the plant is mostly regarded as an environmental weed which displaces native vegetation. Natural forests are particularly susceptible to invasion, largely because fruit-eating birds, which are the main dispersers of the seeds of forest plants, have altered their diet to the fruit of S. mauritianum because of its greater abundance and predictability as a food source. Indeed, certain native forestry plants (e.g. Ocotea bullata) have become endangered because their normal dispersal agents (e.g. Rameron pigeons) no longer disperse their seeds (Oatley, 1984; Pooley, 1993; Scott-Shaw, 1999).
Host Plants and Other Plants AffectedTop of page
Growth StagesTop of page Post-harvest, Seedling stage, Vegetative growing stage
Biology and EcologyTop of page Genetics
The chromosome number is n=12 (2n=24) (Symon, 1981). Hybridization with closely related species like S. erianthum and S. granuloso-leprosum has been suspected in South America, although the latter species may turn out to be synonyms of S. mauritianum, as regarded by some botanists (Kissmann and Groth, 1997).
Physiology and Phenology
In both its native and introduced habitats, the plant produces flowers and fruit throughout the year. Seeds appear to require a 3-month period of after-ripening under dry conditions before they will germinate, but seed viability is high, with 98% reported in South Africa (Hinze, 1985). Germination requirements are highly variable, but S. mauritianum seeds require the presence of both light and alternating temperatures for optimum germination (Campbell and Staden, 1983; Campbell, 1990; Campbell et al., 1992; Campbell and Staden, 1994). The seeds do not appear to have an extended period of dormancy, preventing the formation of long-lived soil seed banks (Hinze, 1985). Germination of seeds stored in soil is stimulated by fire. The various factors influencing germination ensures that seedling emergence is sporadic and occurs over a prolonged period (Campbell, 1990). Seedlings that become established in summer are able to flower and fruit by autumn. The plant has a high growth rate and seedlings are able to grow to a height of several metres within 2-3 years. Established plants that are felled will regrow rapidly and can produce flowers within 12 months (Denny, 1999). It is a short lived tree and mature plants begin to die after 15 years.
S. mauritianum propagates primarily via seeds which are dispersed by frugivorous birds, bats and monkeys. Pollination is primarily via insects and plants are able to flower when 1-2 years old, with some 20-80 berries borne on each inflorescence, each berry containing about 150 seeds (Hinze, 1985). The plant produces flowers and bears fruit at regular intervals throughout the year, enabling a single plant to produce excessive numbers of seeds. Plant populations are not typified by long-lived soil seed banks and most seeds in the seed bank are damaged by insects and pathogens (Denny, 1999). However, the excessive numbers of seeds produced annually ensure that there are sufficient seedlings to augment plant populations and promote the weed's spread. The plant also propagates vegetatively when mechanically damaged by cutting or uprooting and pieces of root remaining in the soil will regrow (Hinze, 1985).
Observations in South Africa suggest that S. mauritianum is adapted to a wide range of habitats, climates and environmental conditions (Wells et al., 1986). The plant does not normally persist in arid conditions, but thrives in moist habitats and in high-rainfall areas. In South Africa, the plant tolerates all seasonal rainfall patterns (Wells et al., 1986), with summer rainfall areas the worst affected. Conditions suitable for the plant include coastal and low-altitude subtropical climates, but also high-altitude warm temperate and Mediterranean climates. The plant seems to tolerate most soil types, but thrives in those with high water retention. The plant is also able to tolerate low temperatures and occurs in areas that are subject to light frost. The weed is both frost-tolerant and shade-tolerant to a certain degree. Disturbances in both transformed habitats (e.g. fence lines, forestry plantations) and natural vegetation appear to trigger invasion.
In South Africa, the fruit of S. mauritianum provide winter food for the Mediterranean fruit fly (Ceratitis capitata) and Natal fruit fly (Ceratitis rosa), which are pests of several species of deciduous and tropical fruit throughout the country. It is also likely that the plant acts as a host for several diseases of cultivated Solanaceae (e.g. Tobacco mosaic virus).
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|
|Absolute minimum temperature (ºC)||-5|
|Mean annual temperature (ºC)||15||22|
|Mean maximum temperature of hottest month (ºC)||25||32|
|Mean minimum temperature of coldest month (ºC)||5||12|
RainfallTop of page
|Parameter||Lower limit||Upper limit||Description|
|Dry season duration||2||4||number of consecutive months with <40 mm rainfall|
|Mean annual rainfall||500||1500||mm; lower/upper limits|
Rainfall RegimeTop of page Bimodal
Soil TolerancesTop of page
Special soil tolerances
Notes on Natural EnemiesTop of page The natural enemies of S. mauritianum in its native South American countries have been documented following surveys for potential biological control agents by South African entomologists (Neser et al., 1990; Olckers, 1999; Olckers et al., 2002). More than 80 phytophagous species were collected on S. mauritianum and closely related plants, but very few of these were candidates for biocontrol (Neser et al., 1990). The impact of natural enemies in South America is exemplified by the relatively low levels of fruiting that are caused by flower-feeding insects. These and other leaf-feeding and stem-boring species inflict considerable damage to native S. mauritianum populations. The most promising candidates for biocontrol were reviewed by Olckers (1999). Although 15 insect species were imported into quarantine in South Africa for observations and screening, only one has been released while another has been proposed for release. Refer to the section on Biological Control for more information.
Means of Movement and DispersalTop of page Natural Dispersal (non-biotic)
The weed does not normally spread via non-biotic means, although the seeds of plants growing along watercourses and riparian zones could be spread by water.
Vector Transmission (biotic)
Fruit are produced in abundance throughout the year and are thus a predictable food source for fruit-eating birds and mammals. The weed propagates primarily by seeds which, in South Africa, are dispersed by frugivorous birds, bats and monkeys that consume the ripe fruit and facilitate long-distance spreading of the weed (Hinze, 1985). Birds have also been reported to consume the fruit in Australia (Van Dyck, 1979) and New Zealand (McGregor, 1999). Also, birds could indirectly disseminate seed over long distances as birds could potentially deposit seed onto agricultural produce intended for transportation to new areas. In situations where pastures and rangelands may be invaded, livestock does not normally consume the fruits and is thus unlikely to disseminate ingested seeds.
There are no recorded instances of the weed being spread by agricultural practices, since it does not normally invade croplands, although seed could be spread by attachment to vehicles' tyres.
There are no records of the weed being spread by means of trade or transport, although the potential for this may well exist.
Deliberate introductions of the plant may well have occurred globally for ornamental purposes, since the plant has attractive mauve/purple flowers and the copious amounts of fruit produced attract birds in residential gardens. Seed is still available from a number of commercial mail order companies (e.g. Malkmus, 2003). However, ornamental usage is prohibited in many countries (e.g. South Africa, New Zealand) where the weed is invasive. Although extracts of the plants could be utilized commercially for the synthesis of corticosteroid drugs, there are no records of deliberate introductions for this purpose.
Plant TradeTop of page
|Plant parts liable to carry the pest in trade/transport||Pest stages||Borne internally||Borne externally||Visibility of pest or symptoms|
|True seeds (inc. grain)||seeds|
|Plant parts not known to carry the pest in trade/transport|
|Fruits (inc. pods)|
|Growing medium accompanying plants|
|Stems (above ground)/Shoots/Trunks/Branches|
Impact SummaryTop of page
|Fisheries / aquaculture||None|
ImpactTop of page Although S. mauritianum can, but does not normally, invade agricultural land, pastoral land is invaded which may lead to loss of grazing potential. In South Africa, the plant is a major problem in commercial forestry plantations where it competes with seedlings of pine trees (Pinus species), retarding their growth and that of young trees where deformation of the stems occurs (Hinze, 1985). In older stands, the weed causes problems in silvicultural and harvesting operations where repeated chemical and mechanical control operations increase the costs of plantation management. The weed grows less vigorously under a canopy cover than in open areas and is thus more problematic during the establishment phases of forestry operations (Hinze, 1985). Also, in South Africa, the fruit provide winter food for the Mediterranean fruit fly (Ceratitis capitata) and Natal fruit fly (Ceratitis rosa), which are pests of several species of deciduous and tropical fruit throughout the country. Although the plant is not normally consumed by livestock, there are reports of fatal poisoning of pigs and cattle in Queensland, Australia (Everist, 1974; Van Dyck, 1979).
Environmental ImpactTop of page In South Africa, the plant is a major environmental weed and is classified as a "transformer species" which displaces native vegetation (Wells et al., 1986; Henderson, 2001). Dense stands are able to inhibit the growth of other plant species through overcrowding and shading. Natural forests are particularly susceptible to invasion, largely because fruit-eating birds (notably Rameron pigeons), which are the main dispersers of the seeds of forest plants, have altered their diet to the fruit of S. mauritianum (Oatley, 1984) to the detriment of the former plants. Other habitats that are susceptible to invasion include riparian zones and watercourses, savanna and any other disturbed sites (e.g. forest gaps caused by natural tree mortality).
Impact: BiodiversityTop of page Although the impact of S. mauritianum on native biodiversity has not been quantified, dense stands of the plant clearly exclude native vegetation and their associated organisms, notably host specific herbivorous insects (Olckers and Hulley, 1991). In South Africa, the weed invades natural areas, including several proclaimed nature reserves throughout the country. Also, in South Africa, seed dispersal of several native plants has been adversely affected because the avian dispersive agents have switched their diet to the fruit of S. mauritianum (Oatley, 1984). In particular, Ocotea bullata (stinkwood) has become endangered in natural forests because of inappropriate utilization and the fact that Rameron pigeons no longer disperse their seeds adequately (Pooley, 1993; Scott-Shaw, 1999).
Social ImpactTop of page The plant invades urban areas via frugivorous birds which deposit seeds in residential gardens. In South Africa, alien plant legislation dictates that fines may be imposed if property owners do not remove this plant from their gardens (Henderson, 2001). All parts of the plant are toxic to humans, especially the green berries that are rich in alkaloid chemicals. The fine hairs (trichomes) on the stems and leaves can be an irritant and can cause respiratory problems (Henderson, 2001), especially when they are dislodged during mechanical clearing operations.
Risk and Impact FactorsTop of page Invasiveness
- Invasive in its native range
- Proved invasive outside its native range
- Highly adaptable to different environments
- Tolerates, or benefits from, cultivation, browsing pressure, mutilation, fire etc
- Highly mobile locally
- Has high reproductive potential
- Has propagules that can remain viable for more than one year
- Damaged ecosystem services
- Ecosystem change/ habitat alteration
- Negatively impacts agriculture
- Negatively impacts human health
- Negatively impacts animal health
- Negatively impacts tourism
- Reduced amenity values
- Reduced native biodiversity
- Competition - monopolizing resources
- Pest and disease transmission
- Highly likely to be transported internationally deliberately
UsesTop of page With the possible exception of the ripe fruit, S. mauritianum has no fodder value and plants are generally avoided by grazing animals. However, the weed has been suggested as a 'nursery plant' in countries where its invasiveness has been limited (e.g. Australia), since it supposedly can provide a protective environment for native vegetation to germinate and grow underneath (Van Dyck, 1979). However, this should not be advised as it will pertain only to situations that are marginal for the plant - healthy stands of S. mauritianum will normally shade out native plants growing beneath them (as experienced in South Africa). In rare situations, the fruit may be a valuable food source for native bird species, although these tend to facilitate long-distance dispersal and further invasion of the weed. The most use important use for S. mauritianum concerns its potential for the synthesis of corticosteroid drugs, the precursors of which (e.g. solasodine) are extracted from the unripe fruit of the plant. Although this possibility was investigated in South Africa (Campbell, 1990; Campbell and Staden, 1990), commercial production was never initiated and it is uncertain whether this has occurred elsewhere in the world.
Uses ListTop of page
- Poisonous to mammals
- Source of medicine/pharmaceutical
Similarities to Other Species/ConditionsTop of page In its native countries, several congeneric species appear very similar to S. mauritianum. These include Solanum erianthum, S. granuloso-leprosum, S. riparium and S. verbascifolium. Also, in some countries where the plant has been introduced, some congeneric native species have similarities. In Australia, the native S. stelligerum and S. densevestitum (devil's needles) appear similar to S. mauritianum (Symon, 1981). Both native species have purple flowers and furry grey-green leaves, but the leaves are smaller and narrower than those of S. mauritianum. Both plants are also smaller, growing to around 1 m in height. A distinguishing feature of S. stelligerum is the prickles on the stems. In South Africa, the native S. giganteum has been confused with the weed, although it can easily be distinguished by its thorny stems, shiny green leaves with powdery white undersides, and smaller berries which turn red when ripe.
Prevention and ControlTop of page Cultural Control
Cultural control methods, e.g. burning or oversowing with grass species to provide competition, are not normally used against S. mauritianum. Indeed, in forestry situations, the burning of leaf litter is discouraged as the forest floor mulch has an inhibiting effect on seed germination (Hinze, 1985).
Manual control methods, which are largely aimed at the prevention of fruiting, involve the felling of large trees and slashing of smaller plants, ring-barking of trees and hand-pulling of seedlings (Denny, 1999). Seedlings less than 1 m tall can be hand-pulled in soft, moist soil, but roots that break off will coppice. Also, the grubbing out of large plants with mattocks is often unsuccessful as severed roots will initiate regrowth (Hinze, 1985). Felling and slashing by itself is insufficient as the plants will resprout to form multi-stemmed thickets which are more difficult and more expensive to control. As a result, felling and slashing must be accompanied by herbicidal applications. Ring-barking is effective for controlling small infestations, but is labour-intensive (Little, 1980; McGregor, 1999).
Herbicides are currently the most effective means of controlling S. mauritianum, since the plant is easily killed with herbicides. Application methods include: (i) foliar sprays for seedlings and regrowth that follows felling or slashing, (ii) basal-stem treatments to the lower stems and root crowns of trees, (iii) cut-stump applications following felling or slashing and (iv) soil applications (Denny and Goodall, 1992; Denny, 1999). In South Africa, several chemicals are registered for use against S. mauritianum and include glyphosate, sulfosate, triclopyr and fluroxypyr for foliar applications, triclopyr and fluroxypyr for basal-stem treatments, triclopyr and imazapyr for cut-stump applications and tebuthiuron for soil applications (Denny, 1999; Grobler et al., 2000). Soil applications are not recommended when the plants are close to crops or plantations, while cut-stump applications of imazapyr are not advised in plantations of Eucalyptus species. The most popular methods are basal-stem and cut-stump applications. Herbicides are best applied during the weed's growing season (Hinze, 1985).
Biological control has only been attempted in South Africa, where the sap-sucking lace bug Gargaphia decoris (Tingidae), which was released in 1999, is so far the only agent that has been used (Olckers, 1999, 2000). However, this insect has proved ineffective to date, largely because of its failure to establish at many release sites and its inability to sustain high population densities throughout the year. Permission for the release of a second agent, the flower bud-feeding weevil Anthonomus santacruzi (Curculionidae) that prevents fruiting, is currently being sought in South Africa (Olckers, 2003). Besides South Africa, only New Zealand has considered biological control of S. mauritianum (Withers et al., 2002). This plant has proved to be a difficult target for biological control because of closely related cultivated and native plants in the genus Solanum, which have made it difficult to obtain clearance for the release of biological control agents.
Integrated control is currently confined to the use of herbicides in conjunction with mechanical clearing. However, it is believed that biological control has an important role to play, notably in reducing the weed's excessive seed production and recruitment of seedlings and thereby rendering conventional follow-up operations more sustainable. In South Africa, follow-up operations are essential and work needs to be continued for at least 3 years once initiated at a particular site. In particular, operations involve three stages which include (i) killing standing trees to prevent further seed production, (ii) removing seedlings that regenerate from the seed-bank and (iii) encouraging native plants to smother the seedlings (Denny, 1999). It is important that seedlings be controlled annually, preferably at the end of summer.
ReferencesTop of page
Allan HH, 1940. A Handbook of the Naturalized Flora of New Zealand. DSIR Bulletin No. 83. Wellington, New Zealand: Department of Scientific and Industrial Research.
Campbell PL, 1990. Reproductive potential of Solanum mauritianum Scop.- implications for control. PhD Thesis. Department of Botany, University of Natal, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa.
Campbell PL; Staden J van; Stevens C; Whitwell MI, 1992. The effects of locality, season and year of seed collection on the germination of bugweed (Solanum mauritianum Scop.) seeds. South African Journal of Botany, 58:310-316.
Copeland RS; Wharton RA, 2006. Year-round production of pest Ceratitis species (Diptera: Tephritidae) in fruit of the invasive species Solanum mauritianum in Kenya. Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 99(3):530-535. http://docserver.esa.catchword.org/deliver/cw/pdf/esa/freepdfs/00138746/v99n3s9.pdf
D'Arcy WG, 1972. Solanaceae studies II: typification of subdivisions of Solanum. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden, 59:262-278.
Denny RP, 1999. Control of bugweed (Solanum mauritianum). Pamphlet of the Plant Protection Research Institute, Hilton, South Africa.
Everist SL, 1974. Poisonous Plants of Australia. Sydney, Australia: Angus & Robertson.
Grobler H; Vermeulen JB; Van Zyl K, 2000. A Guide to the Use of Herbicides. Edition 17. National Department of Agriculture, South Africa: Formeset.
Henderson L, 2001. Alien Weeds and Invasive Plants. Plant Protection Research Institute Handbook No. 12. Cape Town, South Africa: Paarl Printers.
Hinze WHF, 1985. Solanum mauritianum Scop. Bugweed, luisboom. Plant Invaders, Pamphlet 365/1. Directorate Forest Management, South Africa.
ISSG (IUCN SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group), 2013. Global Invasive Species Database (GISD). IUCN SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group. http://www.issg.org/database/welcome/
Jaeger P-ML; Hepper FN, 1986. A review of the genus Solanum in Africa. In: D'Arcy WG, ed. Solanaceae: Biology and Systematics. New York, USA: Columbia University Press, 41-55.
Lorenzi H, 1991. Plantas Daninhas do Brasil: Terrestres, Aquaticas, Parasitas, Toxicas e Medicinais. Edition 2. Nova Odessa, Brazil: Editora Plantarum.
Malkmus B, 2003. Rareplants. Tropical Plants, Germany. http://www.rareplants.de/plants/seeds/tropical_plants.htm.
McGregor PG, 1999. Prospects for biological control of woolly nightshade, Solanum mauritianum (Solanaceae: Solanoideae). Contract Report LC9900/035. Palmerston North, New Zealand: Landcare Research.
Missouri Botanical Garden, 2003. VAScular Tropicos database. St. Louis, USA: Missouri Botanical Garden. http://mobot.mobot.org/W3T/Search/vast.html.
Neser S, 1984. Report on a visit to Australia, Texas and Canada and countries en route with observations on biological control of weeds. Report of the Plant Protection Research Institute. Pretoria, South Africa: Department of Agriculture and Water Supply.
Neser S; Zimmermann HG; Erb HE; Hoffmann JH, 1990. Progress and prospects for the biological control of two Solanum weeds in South Africa. Proceedings of the VIII International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds Rome, Italy; Instituto Sperimentale per la Patologia Vegetale, Ministero dell'Agricoltura e delle Foreste, 371-381
Oatley TV, 1984. Exploitation of a new niche by the Rameron Pigeon Columba arquatrix in Natal. Proceedings of the Fifth Pan-African Ornithological Congress, 1984. Lilongwe, Malawi, 323-330.
Olckers T, 1999. Biological control of Solanum mauritianum Scopoli (Solanaceae) in South Africa: a review of candidate agents, progress and future prospects. In: Olckers T, Hill MP, eds. Biological Control of Weeds in South Africa (1990-1998). African Entomology (Memoir No.1), 65-73.
Olckers T, 2000. Biology, host specificity and risk assessment of Gargaphia decoris, the first agent to be released in South Africa for the biological control of the invasive tree Solanum mauritianum. BioControl, 45(3):373-388; 26 ref.
Olckers T, 2003. Assessing the risks associated with the release of a flowerbud weevil, Anthonomus santacruzi, against the invasive tree Solanum mauritianum in South Africa. Biological Control, in press.
Olckers T; Hulley PE, 1991. Impoverished insect herbivore faunas on the exotic bugweed Solanum mauritianum Scop. relative to indigenous Solanum species in Natal/ KwaZulu and the Transkei. Journal of the Entomological Society of Southern Africa, 54:39-50.
Olckers T; Medal JC; Gandolfo DE, 2002. Insect herbivores associated with species of Solanum (Solanaceae) in Northeastern Argentina and Southeastern Paraguay, with reference to biological control of weeds in South Africa and the United States of America. Florida Entomologist, 85(1):254-260; 12 ref.
Olckers T; Zimmermann HG, 1991. Biological control of silverleaf nightshade, Solanum elaeagnifolium, and bugweed, Solanum mauritanum, (Solanaeae) in South Africa. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 37(1-3):137-155
Oviedo Prieto R; Herrera Oliver P; Caluff MG, et al. , 2012. National list of invasive and potentially invasive plants in the Republic of Cuba - 2011. (Lista nacional de especies de plantas invasoras y potencialmente invasoras en la República de Cuba - 2011). Bissea: Boletín sobre Conservación de Plantas del Jardín Botánico Nacional de Cuba, 6(Special Issue 1):22-96.
Pooley E, 1993. The Complete Field Guide to Trees of Natal, Zululand and Transkei. Durban, South Africa: Natal Flora Publications Trust.
Roe KE, 1972. A revision of Solanum sect. Brevantherum (Solanaceae). Brittonia, 24:239-278.
Roe KE, 1979. Dispersal and speciation in Solanum section Brevantherum. In: Hawkes JG, Lester RN, Skelding AD, eds. The Biology and Taxonomy of the Solanaceae. London, UK: Academic Press, 563-567.
Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh, 2003. Flora Europaea, Database of European Plants (ESFEDS). Edinburgh, UK: Royal Botanic Garden. http://rbg-web2.rbge.org.uk/FE/fe.html.
Scott Shaw CR, 1999. Rare and Threatened Plants of KwaZulu-Natal and Neighbouring Regions. Pietermaritzburg, South Africa: KwaZulu-Natal Nature Conservation Service.
Space JC; Flynn T, 2001. Report to the Kingdom of Tonga on invasive plant species of environmental concern. Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: USDA Forest Service.
Space JC; Waterhouse B; Denslow JS; Nelson D; Mazawa TR, 2000. Invasive plant species in Chuuk, Federated States of Micronesia. USDA Forest Service, Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry, Honolulu, Hawai'i, USA.
Swarbrick JT, 1997. Weeds of the Pacific Islands. Technical paper No. 209. Noumea, New Caledonia: South Pacific Commission.
Symon DE, 1981. A revision of the genus Solanum in Australia. J. Adelaide Bot. Gard., 4:1-367.
USDA-NRCS, 2002. The PLANTS Database, Version 3.5. National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, USA. http://plants.usda.gov.
Van Dyck S, 1979. Destruction of wild tobacco trees (Solanum mauritianum Scopoli) by mountain possums (Trichosurus caninus Ogilby). Memoirs of the Queensland Museum, 19:367-371.
Wells MJ; Balsinhas AA; Joffe H; Engelbrecht VM; Harding G; Stirton CH, 1986. A catalogue of problem plants in South Africa. Memoirs of the botanical survey of South Africa No 53. Pretoria, South Africa: Botanical Research Institute.
Withers TM; Olckers T; Fowler SV, 2002. The risk to Solanum spp. in New Zealand from Gargaphia decoris (Hem.: Tingidae), a potential biocontrol agent against woolly nightshade, S. mauritianum. New Zealand Plant Protection Volume 55, 2002. Proceedings of a conference, Centra Hotel, Rotorua, New Zealand, 13-15 August 2002, 90-94; 6 ref.
Wright CH, 1904. Solanaceae. In: Thiselton-Dyer WT, ed. Flora Capensis, Vol. 4. London, UK: Lovell Reeve, 87-121.
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/