Andropogon virginicus (broomsedge)
Index
- Pictures
- Identity
- Summary of Invasiveness
- Taxonomic Tree
- Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
- Description
- Plant Type
- Distribution
- Distribution Table
- History of Introduction and Spread
- Introductions
- Risk of Introduction
- Habitat
- Habitat List
- Biology and Ecology
- Climate
- Air Temperature
- 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
- Risk and Impact Factors
- Uses
- Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
- Prevention and Control
- Gaps in Knowledge/Research Needs
- References
- Contributors
- Distribution Maps
Don't need the entire report?
Generate a print friendly version containing only the sections you need.
Generate reportIdentity
Top of pagePreferred Scientific Name
- Andropogon virginicus
Preferred Common Name
- broomsedge
Other Scientific Names
- Anatherum virginicum (L.) Spreng.
- Cinna lateralis Walter
- Sorghum virginicum (L.) Kuntze
International Common Names
- English: broom sedge blue-stem; sedge grass; virginia beard grass; whiskeygrass; whisky grass
- Spanish: popotillo pajon
- French: andropogon de virginie; herbe à whisky
Local Common Names
- Bahamas: beard grass
- Japan: Merikenkarukaya
- Korea, Republic of: na-do-sol-sae
- Puerto Rico: matojo de escoba
EPPO code
- ANOVI (Andropogon virginicus)
Summary of Invasiveness
Top of pageA. virginicus is a perennial member of the grass family (Poaceae). It is an abundant species within its large native range extending from most of eastern North America to northern South America (Colombia). It has expanded its range through accidental introductions to the west coast of the USA, Asia, Oceania and Europe. It is weedy within its native range and behaves similarly where introduced. It is an aggressive colonizer of disturbed, low nutrient dry soils. The species is fire tolerant, and minimizes competition via allelopathy. It is a serious weed in Hawaii where it threatens endangered and threatened plant species, and it is listed on the state’s noxious weed list. It alters successional processes, changes fire regimes, causes erosion, and alters hydrology. It is also a threat to agricultural systems where it invades pastures.
Taxonomic Tree
Top of page- Domain: Eukaryota
- Kingdom: Plantae
- Phylum: Spermatophyta
- Subphylum: Angiospermae
- Class: Monocotyledonae
- Order: Cyperales
- Family: Poaceae
- Genus: Andropogon
- Species: Andropogon virginicus
Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
Top of pageAndropogon is a genus of approximately 120 species distributed in temperate and tropical regions. Andropogon virginicus has been placed in Andropogon Section Leptopogon, a group of American species defined by a concave nerveless first glume of the sessile spikelet (Nagahama and Norrmann, 2012). Within Leptopogon, A. virginicus belongs to a group of about 9 closely related taxa with a center of biodiversity in the southeastern USA – the “Andropogon virginicus complex” (Campbell, 1983; Nagahama and Norrmann, 2012).
A. virginicus was described by Linnaeus in 1753 as A. virginicum. Some nineteenth century botanists transferred the species to other genera, including Anatherum and Sorghum (Missouri Botanical Garden, 2016) but the placement in Andropogon has been retained throughout the 1800-1900s.
The infraspecific taxonomy of A. virginicus is complex and in a state of flux (Weakley et al., 2011). Campbell (1983; 1986) conducted an exhaustive study of the A. virginicus complex that resulted in the recognition of three varieties of the species A. virginicus: var. virginicus, var. glaucus, and var. decipiens. Campbell (1983) also divided var. virginicus into several informal variants. The form that is associated with disturbed dry habitats in the USA and also introduced outside of its native range is A. virginicus var. virginicus, formerly called the “Old-field variant” by (Campbell, 1983), defined by characters of raceme sheaths, culm internodes, raceme length, and peduncle length.
Description
Top of pageCaespitose perennial grass, with culms to 0.5-2 m, and culm internodes green. Leaves green (rarely slightly glaucous) glabrous to sparsely pubescent on margins near collar, 11-52 cm long, 1.7-6.5 mm wide, ligule ciliate, 0.2-1.0 mm. Inflorescence units with 2-5 rames, rames 1.9-3.3 cm long; peduncles 3-6 mm long, sheaths 3.3-4.4 mm wide. Sessile spikelets 3.5-3.8 mm; callus hairs 1-3 mm; awns 6-21 mm (Campbell, 2003). Grasses often grow in small clumps.
Distribution
Top of pageA. virginicus has a broad native range in the Americas. It reaches its northern distributional limit in Ontario, Canada. It is found through the eastern USA from Michigan, New York, and Massachusetts, south to Florida, and west to Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas. To the south it occurs from Mexico to Colombia, apparently absent only from El Salvador and Nicaragua. It also occurs naturally in the Caribbean, the Greater Antilles, Trinidad and Tobago, the Bahamas and as far as Bermuda (Campbell, 1983; Campbell, 2003).
The species has been introduced outside of its natural range to the western USA in California, in Asia, Europe and Oceania. In Europe it has been found at a military base in the department of Gironde in France (Granereau and Verloove, 2010) and also in Landes department (Fried and Mandon-Dalger, 2014), and in the Caucasus region (Zazanashvili, 1999; Akhalkatsi and Kimeridze, 2012). In Asia it is known from Japan (Koyama, 1987) and South Korea (Jong-Cheol et al., 2008). In Oceania it has been introduced to and is reported as invasive in Hawaii (Snow and Lau, 2010), Australia (AVH, 2016), and New Zealand (Gardner et al., 1996).
However, reports from French Polynesia (ISSG, 2016) appear to be in error. French Polynesia has placed the species in its exclusion list, and this may have been misinterpreted. No documentation of the occurrence could be found.
Distribution Table
Top of pageThe distribution in this summary table is based on all the information available. When several references are cited, they may give conflicting information on the status. Further details may be available for individual references in the Distribution Table Details section which can be selected by going to Generate Report.
Last updated: 12 May 2022Continent/Country/Region | Distribution | Last Reported | Origin | First Reported | Invasive | Reference | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Asia |
|||||||
Georgia | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
Japan | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
-Honshu | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
South Korea | Present | Introduced | 2006 | ||||
Europe |
|||||||
France | Present | Introduced | 2006 | Invasive | Gironde | ||
Russia | Present | Introduced | 1885 | ||||
North America |
|||||||
Bahamas | Present | Native | |||||
Belize | Present | Native | |||||
Bermuda | Present | Native | |||||
Canada | Present | Native | |||||
-Ontario | Present | Native | |||||
Costa Rica | Present | Native | |||||
Cuba | Present | Native | |||||
Dominican Republic | Present | Native | |||||
Guatemala | Present | Native | |||||
Haiti | Present | Native | |||||
Honduras | Present | Native | |||||
Jamaica | Present | Native | |||||
Mexico | Present | Native | |||||
Nicaragua | Present | Native | |||||
Panama | Present | Native | |||||
Puerto Rico | Present | Native | |||||
Trinidad and Tobago | Present | Native | |||||
United States | Present | ||||||
-Alabama | Present | Native | |||||
-Arkansas | Present | Native | |||||
-California | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
-Connecticut | Present | Native | |||||
-Delaware | Present | Native | |||||
-District of Columbia | Present | Native | |||||
-Florida | Present | Native | |||||
-Georgia | Present | Native | |||||
-Hawaii | Present | Introduced | 1924 | Invasive | Hawai’i, Kaua‘i, O‘ahu, Moloka‘i, and Maui | ||
-Illinois | Present | Native | |||||
-Indiana | Present | Native | |||||
-Iowa | Present | Native | |||||
-Kansas | Present | Native | |||||
-Kentucky | Present | Native | |||||
-Louisiana | Present | Native | |||||
-Maryland | Present | Native | |||||
-Massachusetts | Present | Native | |||||
-Michigan | Present | Native | |||||
-Mississippi | Present | Native | |||||
-Missouri | Present | Native | |||||
-New Jersey | Present | Native | |||||
-New York | Present | Native | |||||
-North Carolina | Present | Native | |||||
-Ohio | Present | Native | |||||
-Oklahoma | Present | Native | |||||
-Pennsylvania | Present | Native | |||||
-Rhode Island | Present | Native | |||||
-South Carolina | Present | Native | |||||
-Tennessee | Present | Native | |||||
-Texas | Present | Native | |||||
-Virginia | Present | Native | |||||
-West Virginia | Present | Native | |||||
Oceania |
|||||||
Australia | Present | Introduced | 1942 | Invasive | |||
-New South Wales | Present | Introduced | 1942 | Invasive | |||
-Queensland | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
-Victoria | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
French Polynesia | Absent, Unconfirmed presence record(s) | No documentation found to confirm this report. It may have been listed because it is on the French Polynesia exclusion list | |||||
New Zealand | Present | Introduced | 1963 | Invasive | Ulsan | ||
South America |
|||||||
Colombia | Present | Native |
History of Introduction and Spread
Top of pageThe earliest introduced record of the species is from Hawaii in 1924 (Wester, 1992; Wagner et al., 1999). Some dispersal of A. virginicus appears to have occurred because of World War II. It was recorded in Japan in 1940 (Jong-Cheol et al., 2008). It was introduced to Australia in 1942 with packing material around whisky bottles (Gardner et al., 1996). It was found in New Zealand in 1963 (Gardner et al., 1996). More recently it was found in South Korea in 2006 (Jong-Cheol et al., 2008), and in France, also in 2006 (Granereau and Verloove, 2010). Little data was found for the introduction time period in the country of Georgia (Akhalkatsi and Kimeridze, 2012), or California.
Introductions
Top of pageIntroduced to | Introduced from | Year | Reason | Introduced by | Established in wild through | References | Notes | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Natural reproduction | Continuous restocking | |||||||
Australia | 1942 | Yes | No | Gardner et al. (1996) | ||||
California | Yes | No | USDA-NRCS (2016) | |||||
France | 2006 | Yes | No | Granereau and Verloove (2010) | ||||
Hawaii | 1924 | Yes | No | Snow and Lau (2010) | ||||
Japan | 1940 | Yes | No | Jong-Cheol et al. (2008) | ||||
Korea, Republic of | 2006 | Yes | No | Jong-Cheol et al. (2008) | ||||
New Zealand | 1963 | Yes | No | Gardner et al. (1996) |
Risk of Introduction
Top of pageRisk assessments of A. virginicus have been conducted for Australia and the Pacific Islands (ISSG, 2016). Both found the species to be a high risk. It has been placed on the exclusion list by French Polynesia because of the threat.
Habitat
Top of pageIn its native range in the Americas A. virginicus occupies a wide range of dry to wet open habitats, particularly following disturbance, including old fields and roadsides (Campbell, 1983; Weakley, 2015). In the USA it is characteristic of a post-disturbance successional stage termed the “broomsedge stage” (Campbell, 1983), colonizing fields 3-5 years post-disturbance and persisting due to allelopathic properties (Rice, 1972).
The preference for dry to wet, disturbed, sunny habitats continues where it is introduced. In Japan the species colonized a burned watershed 2 years post fire, following behaviour in North America (Angara et al., 2000). It is a dominant species of savannah vegetation on the windward sides of Oahu and Hawaii (Sorenson, 1991), and is the one of the three most prevalent grasses in the seasonal submontane zone in Hawaii (Hughes et al., 1991). In Australia it has invaded nutrient poor habitats and altered fire regimes (Cronk et al., 2001; PIER, 2016). In France, the species is an invasive in dry heath, moor, and sphagnum pond, as well as disturbed areas (Fried and Mandon-Dalger, 2014). In the Caucasus region it is reported as invasive in broad-leaved forest (Akhalkatsi and Kimeridze, 2012), an atypical habitat that should be verified.
Habitat List
Top of pageCategory | Sub-Category | Habitat | Presence | Status |
---|---|---|---|---|
Terrestrial | ||||
Terrestrial | Managed | Cultivated / agricultural land | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
Terrestrial | Managed | Cultivated / agricultural land | Present, no further details | Natural |
Terrestrial | Managed | Managed forests, plantations and orchards | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
Terrestrial | Managed | Managed forests, plantations and orchards | Present, no further details | Natural |
Terrestrial | Managed | Managed grasslands (grazing systems) | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
Terrestrial | Managed | Managed grasslands (grazing systems) | Present, no further details | Natural |
Terrestrial | Managed | Industrial / intensive livestock production systems | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
Terrestrial | Managed | Industrial / intensive livestock production systems | Present, no further details | Natural |
Terrestrial | Managed | Disturbed areas | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
Terrestrial | Managed | Disturbed areas | Present, no further details | Natural |
Terrestrial | Managed | Rail / roadsides | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
Terrestrial | Managed | Rail / roadsides | Present, no further details | Natural |
Terrestrial | Managed | Urban / peri-urban areas | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
Terrestrial | Managed | Urban / peri-urban areas | Present, no further details | Natural |
Terrestrial | Natural / Semi-natural | Riverbanks | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
Terrestrial | Natural / Semi-natural | Riverbanks | Present, no further details | Natural |
Terrestrial | Natural / Semi-natural | Wetlands | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
Terrestrial | Natural / Semi-natural | Wetlands | Present, no further details | Natural |
Biology and Ecology
Top of pageGenetics
A. virginicus has a chromosome number of 2n=20 (Campbell, 1983).
Reproductive Biology
Like most grass species, A. virginicus is wind pollinated, although precocious maturation of spikelets precludes wind pollination in some spikelets. The percentage of spikelets that are cleistogamous in A. virginicus is small compared to other closely related species (Campbell, 1982). The capacity for autogamy increases homozygosity, making inbred forms more adaptable to specific environments, increasing success as a colonizer (Campbell, 1983).
Campbell (1983) found that A. virginicus hybridizes with A. longiberbis and A. glomeratus var. pumilus. These hybrids are much less fertile than their parents.
Physiology and Phenology
In the Americas this species flowers in the autumn, from about September to October (Weakley, 2015). In Hawaii flowering is stimulated in the autumn by shortening daylight (Sorenson, 1991). Seeds of A. virginicus have been found to form persistent seed banks (Baskin and Baskin, 1998). It can resprout within 96 hours after a fire (Hughes et al., 1991).
Environmental Requirements
Several studies have focused on the ability of A. virginicus to tolerate extreme soil conditions, including contaminated soils. It has a high tolerance to aluminium, extreme acidity, low nutrients, lead, and zinc, often in abandoned coal or lead/zinc mines (Gibson and Risser, 1982; Ning and Cumming, 2001; Cumming and Ning, 2003; Ezaki et al., 2013). The ability to tolerate aluminium is conferred by mychorrhizal fungi (Ning and Cumming, 2001; Cumming and Ning, 2003).
This species is tolerant of low nutrient conditions. The ability to survive in harsh conditions, such as with high aluminum concentrations, is conferred by mychorrizal fungi (Ning and Cumming, 2001; Cumming and Ning, 2003). It is considered a fire hazard and known to alter the fire regime in areas where it has invaded (PIER, 2016).
Climate
Top of pageClimate | Status | Description | Remark |
---|---|---|---|
Af - Tropical rainforest climate | Preferred | > 60mm precipitation per month | |
Am - Tropical monsoon climate | Preferred | Tropical monsoon climate ( < 60mm precipitation driest month but > (100 - [total annual precipitation(mm}/25])) | |
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 | Preferred | Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, wet all year |
Soil Tolerances
Top of pageSoil drainage
- free
- impeded
Soil reaction
- acid
- alkaline
- neutral
- very acid
Soil texture
- heavy
- light
- medium
Special soil tolerances
- infertile
- shallow
Natural enemies
Top of pageNatural enemy | Type | Life stages | Specificity | References | Biological control in | Biological control on |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Puccinia andropogonis | Pathogen | not specific | ||||
Puccinia ellisiana | Pathogen | not specific | ||||
Sorosporium ellisii | Pathogen | not specific | ||||
Sorosporium everhartii | Pathogen | not specific | ||||
Sphacelotheca occidentalis | Pathogen | not specific | ||||
Sphacelotheca seymouriana | Pathogen | not specific | ||||
Thysanoptera | Herbivore | not specific | ||||
Uromyces andropogonis | Pathogen | not specific | ||||
Ustilago striiformis | Pathogen | not specific |
Notes on Natural Enemies
Top of pageA. virginicus has been found to host several species of rust and smut fungi. These include the rusts Puccinia andropogonis, P. ellisiana, Uromyces andropogonis, Sorosporium ellisii (a head smut), S. everhartii (a seed smut), Sphacelotheca seymouriana and S. occidentalis (head or seed smuts), and Ustilago striiformis (stripe smut) (Gardner and Davis, 1982). Beckham et al. (1971) report nine species of thrips on A. virginicus in northern Georgia. Agindotan et al. (2013) report a new marfavirus, tentatively named Switchgrass mosaic virus (SwMV), on A. virginicus.
Means of Movement and Dispersal
Top of pageNatural Dispersal
Campbell (1983) discussed traits of A. virginicus that make it a success as a weed, compared to other members of the genus, including the presence of long spreading hairs on the spikelets which give it the ability to disperse long distances in wind.
Vector Transmission
A. virginicus spikelets have awns and basal callous hairs which can catch in animal fur. This probably facilitates dispersal on clothing and machinery as well.
Accidental Introduction
Some introductions, such as in Australia and New Zealand, are attributed to the use of the species as a packing material around whiskey bottles (Gardner et al., 1996) shipped from the USA, giving rise to the common name whisky grass. In France one of the two or three introductions is at a military base is attributed to storage of NATO ammunition (Granereau and Verloove, 2010), imported from some location at which A. virginicus grows.
Pathway Causes
Top of pageCause | Notes | Long Distance | Local | References |
---|---|---|---|---|
Animal production | Yes | |||
Crop production | Yes | |||
Disturbance | Yes | |||
Flooding and other natural disasters | Yes | |||
Forage | Yes | |||
Forestry | Yes | |||
Habitat restoration and improvement | Yes | |||
Hitchhiker | Yes | Yes | ||
Military movements | Yes |
Pathway Vectors
Top of pageVector | Notes | Long Distance | Local | References |
---|---|---|---|---|
Containers and packaging - wood | Packing materials | Yes | Yes | |
Land vehicles | Yes | Yes | ||
Water | Yes | |||
Wind | Yes |
Impact Summary
Top of pageCategory | Impact |
---|---|
Economic/livelihood | Negative |
Environment (generally) | Negative |
Economic Impact
Top of pageIn the USA, A. virginicus is an undesirable invader of pastures because it is poor forage. The species has invaded millions of acres of pastures in the southeastern USA (Butler et al., 2002). It can be grazed during spring and early summer, but forage value is low the rest of the year (Leithead et al., 1971). It is also an indicator of deteriorating range habitat (Leithead et al., 1971).
Environmental Impact
Top of pageImpact on Habitats
Little specific data has been published on impacts of A. virginicus in its introduced range. The main threat of the species is following disturbance, after which it invades and interrupts succession by native species. The species’ allelopathic properties serve to suppress competition with other species (Rice, 1972; Stone, 1985). The species is also fire-tolerant, and in dry periods serves as a fuel source. Invasion of the species into habitats that do not have a natural burn regime can alter successional patterns (Stone, 1985). The species also causes erosion in Hawaii (Stone, 1985).
Impact on Biodiversity
In Hawaii, A. virginicus is a threat to native plant species, including rare species. In dry habitats it competes with the endangered shrub Tetramolopium remyi, and the endangered tree Santalum freycinetianum var. lanaiense [S. haleakalae var. lanaiense] (US Fish and Wildlife Service, 1994). On Oahu it threatens the endangered subshrub Schiedea nuttallii (US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2009). It is a major threat to the small herb Portulaca sclerocarpa on the island of Hawaii and an islet off of Lanai (US Fish and Wildlife Service, 1996). A. virginicus is also sympatric with Pritchardia napaliensis and Schiedea apokremnos in Hawaii and is a potential threat to those species.
Threatened Species
Top of pageThreatened Species | Conservation Status | Where Threatened | Mechanism | References | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Portulaca sclerocarpa | EN (IUCN red list: Endangered); USA ESA listing as endangered species | Hawaii | Competition - strangling | US Fish and Wildlife Service (1996) | |
Santalum haleakalae var. lanaiense (Lanai sandalwood) | NatureServe; USA ESA listing as endangered species | Hawaii | US Fish and Wildlife Service (1994) | ||
Schiedea nuttallii | CR (IUCN red list: Critically endangered); USA ESA listing as endangered species | Hawaii | US Fish and Wildlife Service (2009) | ||
Tetramolopium remyi (Awalua Ridge tetramolopium) | USA ESA listing as endangered species | Hawaii | Competition - strangling | US Fish and Wildlife Service (1994) | |
Phyllostegia glabra var. lanaiensis (ulihi phyllostegia) | USA ESA listing as endangered species | Hawaii | Competition - monopolizing resources | US Fish and Wildlife Service (1994) | |
Phyllostegia renovans (red-leaf phyllostegia) | NatureServe; USA ESA listing as endangered species | Hawaii | Allelopathic; Competition - monopolizing resources | US Fish and Wildlife Service (2010b) | |
Plantago hawaiensis (Hawai'i plantain) | NatureServe; USA ESA listing as endangered species | Hawaii | Ecosystem change / habitat alteration | US Fish and Wildlife Service (1996) | |
Platydesma rostrata | CR (IUCN red list: Critically endangered); USA ESA listing as endangered species | Hawaii | Allelopathic; Competition - monopolizing resources | US Fish and Wildlife Service (2010b) | |
Pritchardia napaliensis | CR (IUCN red list: Critically endangered); USA ESA listing as endangered species | Hawaii | Competition - strangling | US Fish and Wildlife Service (2010a) | |
Psychotria grandiflora (large-flowered balsamo) | EN (IUCN red list: Endangered); USA ESA listing as endangered species | Hawaii | Competition - strangling | US Fish and Wildlife Service (2010b) | |
Schiedea apokremnos (Kauai schiedea) | CR (IUCN red list: Critically endangered); USA ESA listing as endangered species | Hawaii | Competition | US Fish and Wildlife Service (2010c) | |
Viola lanaiensis (Hawaii violet) | USA ESA listing as endangered species | Hawaii | Competition (unspecified); Ecosystem change / habitat alteration | US Fish and Wildlife Service (1994) |
Risk and Impact Factors
Top of page- Invasive in its native range
- Proved invasive outside its native range
- Has a broad native range
- Abundant in its native range
- Highly adaptable to different environments
- Is a habitat generalist
- Tolerates, or benefits from, cultivation, browsing pressure, mutilation, fire etc
- Pioneering in disturbed areas
- Highly mobile locally
- Benefits from human association (i.e. it is a human commensal)
- Fast growing
- Has high reproductive potential
- Has propagules that can remain viable for more than one year
- Altered trophic level
- Damaged ecosystem services
- Ecosystem change/ habitat alteration
- Increases vulnerability to invasions
- Modification of fire regime
- Modification of successional patterns
- Monoculture formation
- Negatively impacts agriculture
- Reduced native biodiversity
- Threat to/ loss of endangered species
- Threat to/ loss of native species
- Allelopathic
- Competition - monopolizing resources
- Competition - shading
- Competition - strangling
- Competition (unspecified)
- Highly likely to be transported internationally accidentally
- Difficult to identify/detect as a commodity contaminant
- Difficult to identify/detect in the field
- Difficult/costly to control
Uses
Top of pageEconomic Value
This species has a low economic value. It has low value as a forage species in North America and is undesirable when it invades pastures (Butler et al., 2002).
Social Benefit
A. virginicus derives its common name broomsedge because of the traditional use in the USA of using it to make brooms. This tradition is seldom seen today.
It is used occasionally as an ornamental in gardens.
Environmental Services
Most literature reports a generally low value of this species to wildlife. Davison and Van Dersal (1941) found that the species is rarely used as food by native bird species, but in times of stress/harsh conditions can prevent starvation when no other food is available. It is an important nesting habitat for quail in some regions (Harshbarger and Simpson, 1970).
Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
Top of pageA. virginicus is very similar to other species of Andropogon, especially those in Section Leptopogon. The ability to identify members of the complex requires carefully collected mature specimens, and careful examination of inflorescence and spikelet morphology (Campbell, 1983; Campbell, 1986). In areas where introduced it could be most easily confused with the closely related A. glomeratus which, like A. virginicus, is naturalized in Hawaii and Japan, and the two are sympatric in their native ranges in North America and the Caribbean. A. glomeratus was misidentified as A. virginicus at Midway Atoll (Snow and Lau, 2010). A. glomeratus is in overall aspect a more robust species with a broader, bushier inflorescence. Positive identification requires examination of spikelets. In A. glomeratus the keel of the first glume is usually scabrous below the middle. Its leaves are usually more than 44 cm long. In contrast, in A. virginicus keels of the first glume are scabrous only above the middle, and leaves are usually less than 31 cm long (Weakley, 2015). A. virginicus could also be confused with other members of the grass family in Section Andropogoneae. For example, Jong-Cheol et al. (2008) note that in Korea it can be confused with Themeda triandrus, as well as an annual congener A. brevifolius.
Prevention and Control
Top of pageDue to the variable regulations around (de)registration of pesticides, your national list of registered pesticides or relevant authority should be consulted to determine which products are legally allowed for use in your country when considering chemical control. Pesticides should always be used in a lawful manner, consistent with the product's label.
Control of A. virginicus should focus on a combination of habitat management to prevent invasion, and chemical control if invasions do occur. As the species is an aggressive invader of disturbed soils, steps should be taken to minimize disturbances near A. virginicus colonies. This may include steps such as the control of wild boar populations because of associated soil disturbances. Where the species invades pastures, a combination of grazing and herbicide application may be effective, or these can be used in conjunction with prescribed burning.
Physical/Mechanical Control
Peters and Lowance (1974) found that control could be achieved in pastures by drilling in tall fescue, with the supplementation of nitrogen, phosphate and potassium. Coupled with mowing in winter and grazing of new growth of spring by cattle, A. virginicus was nearly eliminated after five years.
Biological Control
Options for biocontrol of grasses are generally limited because of the potential threat to many important crop species such as sugarcane, rice and wheat. An assessment of the suitability of biocontrol in Hawaii concluded that the threat to sugarcane would be a major impediment (Gardner and Davis, 1982).
Chemical Control
Herbicides can be effective in the control of A. virginicus, but only when applied on new growth. Use of glyphosate (1% in water) applied to new growth is recommended (Motooka, 2003).
Butler et al. (2002) found that in pastures a combination of herbicide (particularly glyphosate) with burning, followed by “sound forage management practices” was effective. Both MSMA and DSMA herbicides were shown to be effective (Lowance et al., 1975). In agricultural habitats a combination of bromacil, hexazinone, tebuthiuron, bromacil and diuron, and buthidazole have been used as an effective control (Cronk et al., 2001).
Gaps in Knowledge/Research Needs
Top of pageFurther data should be sought on the occurrence A. virginicus in the Caucasus region of Eurasia. Little data could be found on the report of this species there, such as in Georgia (Zazanashvili, 1999; Akhalkatsi and Kimeridze, 2012).
References
Top of pageAcevedo-Rodriguez P, Strong MT, 2016. Flora of the West Indies. Washington D.C, USA: National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution. http://botany.si.edu/antilles/WestIndies/index.htm
Angara EV, Nakagoshi N, Nehira K, 2000. Twenty-one years post-fire succession in a small watershed on Etajima Island, Hiroshima Prefecture, Southwestern Japan. Journal of International Development and Cooperation, 6(1):177-196.
AVH, 2016. Australia's Virtual Herbarium. http://avh.ala.org.au/
Baskin CC, Baskin JM, 1998. Ecology of seed dormancy and germination in grasses. In: Population biology of grasses. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press Cambridge, pp. 30-83, 30-83.
Campbell C, 2003. Andropogon. In: Flora of North America North of Mexico, Volume 25, Magnoliophyta, Commelinidae, Poaceae, Part 2, 25(2). New York, USA: Oxford University Press, 814 pp.
Campbell CS, 1983. Systematics of the Andropogon virginicus complex (Gramineae). J. Arnold Arboretum, 64(2):171-254.
Davison VE, Dersal WRVan, 1941. Broomsedge as a Food for Wildlife. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 5(2):180-181.
EPPO, 2014. PQR database. Paris, France: European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization. http://www.eppo.int/DATABASES/pqr/pqr.htm
Fried Mandon-Dalger GI, 2014. Conference Sure L'Entretien des Espaces Verts, Jardins, Gazons, Forets, Zones Aquatiques et Autres Zones non Agricoles, Toulouse - 15, 16 ET 17 Octobre 2013. Association Francaise de Protection des Plantes.
Gardner DE, Davis CJ, 1982. Technical Report 45: The prospects for biological control of nonnative plants in Hawaiian National Parks, 45. Hawaii, USA: University of Hawaii at Manoa, 55 pp. http://manoa.hawaii.edu/hpicesu/techr/045.pdf
Gardner RO, Champion PD, Lange PJde, 1996. Andropogon virginicus and Stipa tenuissima. Auckland Botanical Society Journal, 51:31-33.
Granereau GG, Verloove FV, 2010. Une poacee invasive nouvelle pour la France: Andropogon virginicus (Andropogoneae, Poaceae). Bull. Soc. Linn. Bordeaux, 145(38):417-421.
Harshbarger TJ, Simpson RC, 1970. Late-summer nesting sites of quail in south Georgia. North Carolina, USA: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, 4 pp.
ISSG, 2015. Global Invasive Species Database (GISD). Invasive Species Specialist Group of the IUCN Species Survival Commission. http://www.issg.org/database/welcome/
ISSG, 2016. IUCN/SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG). http://www.issg.org/
Jong-Cheol Y, Park S-H, Lee J-H, Lee Y-M, 2008. Two new naturalized species from Korea, Andropogon virginicus L. and Euphorbia postrata Aiton. Korean J. Plant Res, 21(6):427-430.
Koyama T, 1987. Grasses of Japan and its neighboring regions: an identification manual. Tokyo, Japan: Kodansha, 570 pp.
Missouri Botanical Garden, 2016. Tropicos database. St. Louis, Missouri, USA: Missouri Botanical Garden. http://www.tropicos.org/
Motooka PS, 2003. Weeds of Hawai'i's pastures and natural areas: an identification and management guide. Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources, University of Hawai'i at Manoa.
PIER, 2016. Pacific Island Ecosystems at Risk. Honolulu, USA: HEAR, University of Hawaii. http://www.hear.org/pier/index.html
Shaw RB, Douglas P, Region R, 1996. Big Island plant cluster recovery plan. Oregon, USA: US Fish and Wildlife Service.
Snow N, Lau A, 2010. Notes on grasses (Poaceae) in Hawai'i: 2. Bishop Museum Occasional Papers, 107:46-60.
Stone CP, 1985. Hawai`i's terrestrial ecosystems : preservation and management: proceedings of a symposium held June 5-6, 1984, at Hawai`i Volcanoes National Park. Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit, University of Hawaii.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2009. Schiedea nuttallii 5-Year Review Summary and Evaluation. Oregon, USA: US Fish and Wildlife Service.
USDA-NRCS, 2016. The PLANTS Database. Baton Rouge, USA: National Plant Data Center. http://plants.usda.gov/
Weakley AS, 2015. Flora of the Southern and Mid-Atlantic States. Working draft of 2015. Carolina, USA: Univ. of North Carolina Herbarium (NCU).
Weakley AS, LeBlond RJ, Sorrie BA, Witsell CT, Estes LD, Mathews KG, Ebihara A, Gandhi K, 2011. New combinations, rank changes, and nomenclatural and taxonomic comments in the vascular flora of the southeastern United States. Journal of the Botanical Research Institute of Texas, 5(2):437-455.
Wester L, 1992. Origin and Distribution of Adventive Alien Flowering Plants in Hawai'i, in Alien plant invasions in native ecosystems of Hawai`i: management and research. Hawaii, USA: University of Hawaii Press, 99-154.
Distribution References
Acevedo-Rodriguez P, Strong MT, 2016. Flora of the West Indies., Washington D.C, USA: National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution. http://botany.si.edu/antilles/WestIndies/index.htm
Angara EV, Nakagoshi N, Nehira K, 2000. Twenty-one years post-fire succession in a small watershed on Etajima Island, Hiroshima Prefecture, Southwestern Japan. In: Journal of International Development and Cooperation, 6 (1) 177-196.
AVH, 2016. Australia's Virtual Herbarium., http://avh.ala.org.au/
CABI, Undated. CABI Compendium: Status as determined by CABI editor. Wallingford, UK: CABI
Fried Mandon-Dalger GI, 2014. (Conference Sure L'Entretien des Espaces Verts, Jardins, Gazons, Forets, Zones Aquatiques et Autres Zones non Agricoles, Toulouse - 15, 16 ET 17 Octobre 2013)., Association Francaise de Protection des Plantes.
Gardner RO, Champion PD, Lange PJ de, 1996. (Andropogon virginicus and Stipa tenuissima). In: Auckland Botanical Society Journal, 51 31-33.
Granereau GG, Verloove FV, 2010. (Une poacee invasive nouvelle pour la France: Andropogon virginicus (Andropogoneae, Poaceae)). In: Bull. Soc. Linn. Bordeaux, 145 (38) 417-421.
ISSG, 2016. IUCN/SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG)., http://www.issg.org/
Jong-Cheol Y, Park SH, Lee JH, Lee YM, 2008. Two new naturalized species from Korea, Andropogon virginicus L. and Euphorbia postrata Aiton. In: Korean J. Plant Res, 21 (6) 427-430.
Koyama T, 1987. Grasses of Japan and its neighboring regions: an identification manual., Tokyo, Japan: Kodansha. 570 pp.
Missouri Botanical Garden, 2016. Tropicos database., St. Louis, Missouri, USA: Missouri Botanical Garden. http://www.tropicos.org/
Snow N, Lau A, 2010. Notes on grasses (Poaceae) in Hawai'i: 2. In: Bishop Museum Occasional Papers, 107 46-60.
USDA-NRCS, 2016. The PLANTS Database. Greensboro, North Carolina, USA: National Plant Data Team. https://plants.sc.egov.usda.gov
Wester L, 1992. Origin and Distribution of Adventive Alien Flowering Plants in Hawai'i. In: Alien plant invasions in native ecosystems of Hawai`i: management and research, Hawaii, USA: University of Hawaii Press. 99-154.
Distribution Maps
Top of pageSelect a dataset
Map Legends
-
CABI Summary Records
Map Filters
Unsupported Web Browser:
One or more of the features that are needed to show you the maps functionality are not available in the web browser that you are using.
Please consider upgrading your browser to the latest version or installing a new browser.
More information about modern web browsers can be found at http://browsehappy.com/