Trapa natans (waterchestnut)
Index
- Pictures
- Identity
- Summary of Invasiveness
- Taxonomic Tree
- Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
- Description
- Plant Type
- Distribution
- Distribution Table
- Introductions
- Risk of Introduction
- Habitat
- Habitat List
- Hosts/Species Affected
- Host Plants and Other Plants Affected
- Growth Stages
- Biology and Ecology
- Climate
- Latitude/Altitude Ranges
- 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
- Social Impact
- Risk and Impact Factors
- Uses
- Uses List
- Detection and Inspection
- Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
- Prevention and Control
- References
- Links to Websites
- 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
- Trapa natans L. (1753)
Preferred Common Name
- waterchestnut
Other Scientific Names
- Trapa natans var. quadrispinosa Makino (1820)
- Trapa quadrispinosa Roxb. (1820)
International Common Names
- English: watercaltrop
- Spanish: castagna de agua
- French: noix aquatique
Local Common Names
- Germany: Wassernuss
- Italy: castana d'acqua; tribolo acquatico
- Netherlands: waternoot
- Sweden: vattennoet
EPPO code
- TRPNA (Trapa natans)
Summary of Invasiveness
Top of pageT. natans is a productive, annual, floating-leaved plant which has been cultivated globally for the nutritious nut it produces (Hummel and Kiviat, 2004). It is an extremely important food crop in China and India and is protected in Europe (Hummel and Kiviat, 2004), but in its introduced range, it grows in thick stands that displace native vegetation and affect water quality. Thick beds of water chestnut can cause significant declines in dissolved oxygen that negatively affect sensitive fauna (Hummel and Findlay, 2006). The nearly impenetrable mats are of virtually no use to wildlife and interfere with boating, fishing and swimming, while the large, spiny nuts can cause injuries to swimmers (ISSG, 2005). T. natans sets abundant seed, making it difficult to eradicate once it is introduced (Les and Mehrhoff, 1999).
Taxonomic Tree
Top of page- Domain: Eukaryota
- Kingdom: Plantae
- Phylum: Spermatophyta
- Subphylum: Angiospermae
- Class: Dicotyledonae
- Order: Myrtales
- Family: Trapaceae
- Genus: Trapa
- Species: Trapa natans
Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
Top of pageThe genus Trapa L. has been reported as having extremely confusing morphology worldwide; it has previously been classified as one polymorphic group or as one genus having up to around 20 different species (Takano and Kadono, 2005). The genus Trapa is presently placed in the monogeneric family Trapaceae (Missouri Botanical Garden, 2010), otherwise sometimes in the family Lythraceae (USDA-ARS, 2008), though it has also been placed in Hydrocaryaceae (Hummel and Kiviat, 2004) or in the family Onagraceae (Hsuan Keng, 1978). Most botanists recognize two species in the Trapa genus: T. bicornis and T. natans. T. natans is an important food crop; many regional varieties are grown in different parts of the world. Official accounts recognize two: T. natans var. natans L. and var. bispinosa (ITIS, 2007). In general, European lines are early flowering, but have lower yield, Asian lines have higher rosette densities and small fruits, while the Chinese and Indian lines have higher yields due to their large fruits (Lalith et al., 2007; Pshennikova, 2007).
Description
Top of pageT. natans is an herbaceous, floating-leaf aquatic species that often grows in water around 60 cm deep (PFAF, 2000). The floating leaves are arranged in a rosette, with leathery upper leaves up to 5 cm wide and broadly rhomboid, triangular, deltoid or broadly ovate (Hummel and Kiviat, 2004). The leaves are sharply serrate, with conspicuous venation and short, stiff hairs. The species also produces submersed leaves that are strikingly morphologically different (Bitonti et al., 1996). The submersed leaves are alternate, finely divided, and can grow up to 15 cm long (Mehrhoff et al., 2003). The petioles of the floating leaves have a spongy floating section that allows for the flotation of the leaf rosette, and each stem may produce several rosettes (Hummel and Kiviat, 2004). The plant also has white flowers with four 8 mm-long petals and four green sepals. The fruit is a single-seeded horned nut-like structure, sometimes referred to as a "turbinate drupe" that develops underwater and is approximately 3 cm wide (Mehrhoff et al., 2003). Single flowers are produced in axils of floating leaves (Hummel and Kiviat, 2004). The stem of the plant is flexible, from 1 to 5 m long, nodes of the stem have slender linear roots, while the plant is anchored in the sediment by the lower roots that emerged from the propagating seed hull (Hummel and Kiviat, 2004).
Distribution
Top of pageThe genus Trapa is cultivated worldwide for the harvest of its large, nutritious nut. It currently occupies a wide yet discontinuous native range across Europe, Asia, and Africa, and has been introduced to North America and Australia. It was more widespread in Tertiary times than it is currently (Ithaka Harbors Inc, 2008). The variety T. natans var. natans, with its four-spined nutis widely distributed in Eurasia, Africa and the northeastern United States, whereas T. natans var. bispinosa (also known as T. bicornis, T. bicornuta, or T. japonica) a two-spined variety, grows in China, Japan, India and Southeast Asia (Hummel and Kiviat, 2004). It is preferentially associated with low-energy, high-nutrient systems (USDA-NRCS, 2008).
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: 10 Feb 2022Continent/Country/Region | Distribution | Last Reported | Origin | First Reported | Invasive | Reference | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Africa |
|||||||
Algeria | Present | Native | |||||
Angola | Present | Native | |||||
Botswana | Present | Native | |||||
Burkina Faso | Present | Introduced | Invasive | Original citation: ISSG (IUCN SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group) (2013) | |||
Guinea-Bissau | Present | Native | Present in Cacheu | ||||
Malawi | Present | Native | |||||
Mozambique | Present | Native | |||||
Namibia | Present | Native | |||||
Niger | Present | ||||||
Nigeria | Present | ||||||
South Africa | Present | Native | Present in Natal | ||||
Tanzania | Present | Native | |||||
Tunisia | Present | Native | |||||
Uganda | Present | Native | |||||
Zambia | Present | Native | |||||
Zimbabwe | Present | Native | |||||
Asia |
|||||||
Bangladesh | Present | Native | |||||
China | Present | ||||||
-Fujian | Present | Native | |||||
-Guangdong | Present | Native | |||||
-Guizhou | Present | Native | |||||
-Hainan | Present | Native | |||||
-Hubei | Present | Native | |||||
-Hunan | Present | Native | |||||
-Sichuan | Present | Native | |||||
-Tibet | Present | Native | |||||
-Xinjiang | Present | Native | |||||
-Yunnan | Present | Native | |||||
Georgia | Present | Native | |||||
India | Present | Native | Invasive | Northwest India | |||
Indonesia | Present | Native | |||||
Japan | Present | Native | Invasive | ||||
Laos | Present | ||||||
Pakistan | Present | Native | |||||
Philippines | Present | Native | |||||
Taiwan | Present | Introduced | 1907 | ||||
Thailand | Present | ||||||
Turkey | Present | Native | Present in Northwest Turkey | ||||
Vietnam | Present | Native | |||||
Europe |
|||||||
Albania | Present | Native | |||||
Austria | Present | Native | |||||
Belarus | Present | Native | |||||
Belgium | Present | Introduced | First reported: <1800 | ||||
Bosnia and Herzegovina | Present | Native | |||||
Bulgaria | Present | Native | |||||
Czechia | Present | Native | |||||
Denmark | Present | ||||||
Finland | Present | ||||||
France | Present | Native | |||||
Germany | Present | Native | |||||
Greece | Present | Native | |||||
Hungary | Present | Native | |||||
Italy | Present | ||||||
Latvia | Present | Native | |||||
Netherlands | Present | ||||||
Poland | Present | ||||||
Romania | Present | Native | |||||
Russia | Present | Native | |||||
Sweden | Present | ||||||
Switzerland | Present | Native | |||||
Ukraine | Present | Native | |||||
North America |
|||||||
Canada | Present | Present based on regional distribution. | |||||
-Quebec | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
United States | Present | ||||||
-Connecticut | Present | Introduced | 1999 | Invasive | |||
-Delaware | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
-Maryland | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
-Massachusetts | Present | ||||||
-New Jersey | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
-New York | Present | ||||||
-Pennsylvania | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
-Vermont | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
-Virginia | Absent, Eradicated | ||||||
Oceania |
|||||||
Australia | Present | Introduced |
Introductions
Top of pageIntroduced to | Introduced from | Year | Reason | Introduced by | Established in wild through | References | Notes | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Natural reproduction | Continuous restocking | |||||||
Connecticut | 1999 | No | No | |||||
Massachusetts | Europe | 1879 | Aquaculture (pathway cause); Botanical gardens and zoos (pathway cause) | No | No | Les and Mehrhoff (1999) | ||
New York | 1884 | Aquaculture (pathway cause); Botanical gardens and zoos (pathway cause) | No | No | ||||
Vermont | 1940s | Hitchhiker (pathway cause) | No | No | Les and Mehrhoff (1999) |
Risk of Introduction
Top of pageT. natans has largely been spread as a result of intentional plantings. There have been many reports of escape from cultivation, and the species was originally introduced as an ornamental (Les and Mehrhoff, 1999). T. natans remains well-established in the North Eastern United States to this day (Hummel and Kiviat, 2004). The plant annually produces nuts that sink to the sediment and germinate. The rough spines of the fruit make it generally unpalatable to wildlife, reducing the likelihood of the species being spread this way. Instead, seeds disperse passively, being carried by water currents as they drop to the sediment surface (Boylen et al., 2006). The spines of the fruit also allow it to spread over longer distances as a hitchhiker, when it clings to boats and gear (Hummel and Kiviat, 2004).
Habitat
Top of pageT. natans is found world-wide in full sun and low-energy, nutrient-rich fresh waters (Hummel and Kiviat, 2004). It is commonly found in waters with alkalinity ranging from 12 to 128 mg/L of calcium carbonate (O’Neill, 2006), and dislikes calcium-rich waters (PFAF, 2000). Mixed reports exist on the depths of water typically inhabited by T. natans. Some sources report the plant can grow in water up to 5 m deep (Pemberton, 2002), others report that T. natans can be found in depths ranging from 0.3 to 3.6 m (Hummel and Kiviat, 2004), whereas others report a maximum depth of 0.6 m (PFAF, 2000). Hummel and Kiviat (2004) report that the species is found most abundantly in water around 2 m deep and in soft substrate. It also prefers slightly acidic water (PFAF, 2000), although germination can occur in water with pH ranging from 4.2 to 8.3 (Hummel and Kiviat, 2004). The species is disturbance-tolerant; it has been shown that sewage inputs create favourable conditions of increased alkalinity for the plant, and that increased nitrogen is correlated with increased petiole and fruit biomass. T. natans does not tolerate salinity; its seeds will not germinate when NaCl concentrations exceed 0.1% (Hummel and Kiviat, 2004).
Habitat List
Top of pageCategory | Sub-Category | Habitat | Presence | Status |
---|---|---|---|---|
Terrestrial | ||||
Freshwater | ||||
Freshwater | Irrigation channels | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) | |
Freshwater | Irrigation channels | Present, no further details | Productive/non-natural | |
Freshwater | Lakes | Principal habitat | Harmful (pest or invasive) | |
Freshwater | Lakes | Principal habitat | Productive/non-natural | |
Freshwater | Reservoirs | Principal habitat | Harmful (pest or invasive) | |
Freshwater | Reservoirs | Principal habitat | Productive/non-natural | |
Freshwater | Rivers / streams | Principal habitat | Harmful (pest or invasive) | |
Freshwater | Rivers / streams | Principal habitat | Productive/non-natural | |
Freshwater | Ponds | Principal habitat | Harmful (pest or invasive) | |
Freshwater | Ponds | Principal habitat | Productive/non-natural |
Hosts/Species Affected
Top of pageWhere conditions are favourable, T. natans can cover almost 100% of the water surface and shade up to 95% of sunlight (Hummel and Kiviat, 2004). Thus, the effects of the species on native vegetation in its adventive range are significant. Water chestnut is considered an invasive, destructive species, and has been implicated in the loss of many other plant and animal species. In the Hudson River, for instance, the plant has replaced water celery (Vallisneria americana ), clasping pondweed (Potamogeton perfoliatus .) nonindigenous Eurasian watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum .). However, the shelter created by the rosettes is beneficial for duckweeds (Lemna minor , Spirodela polyrhiza. and Wolffia spp.) and filamentous algae. Other emergent species that grow above the waterline, including cattail (Typha angustifolia ), pickerelweed (Pontederia cordata), and spatterdock (Nuphar advena ) are unaffected by the presence of T. natans (Hummel and Kiviat, 2004).
Host Plants and Other Plants Affected
Top of pagePlant name | Family | Context | References |
---|---|---|---|
Myriophyllum spicatum (spiked watermilfoil) | Haloragidaceae | Wild host | |
Potamogeton perfoliatus | Potamogetonaceae | Wild host | |
Vallisneria americana (Vallisneria) | Hydrocharitaceae | Wild host |
Growth Stages
Top of pageBiology and Ecology
Top of pageThe taxonomy of the genus Trapa is confusing, it has been varyingly considered as part of one polymorphic group, or as a genus with approximately 20 species. Enzyme electrophoresis indicates, for example, three distinct lineages in the Japanese Trapa. The analysis indicates that two varieties of Trapa have different chromosome numbers (2n = 96 and 2n = 48). However, the authors recognize that despite the distinct genetic differences, the species T. natans and T. bispinosa may be a polymorphism of the same single species (Takano and Kadono, 2005). A different study identified genotypic variation as an important factor affecting organogenesis in more than 18 different T. natans genotypes drawn from all over the world (Aminul Hoque et al., 2007). However, the current tendency is to consider the family Trapaceae as a single monogeneric group containing two species that exhibit high genetic and morphological variation. Missouri Botanical Garden (2010) refers to a study showing chromosome numbers of 44, 46, 48, 90 and 96-97).
Physiology and Phenology
In spring (May in the Northeastern USA), stems bearing leaf rosettes elongate toward the surface of the water. The rosettes flourish and remain green until autumn. The plant begins to flower in early summer, and can continue to flower through to autumn (June to September in its North American range). The fruits mature mid-summer through autumn, after which they sink to the sediment when the plant begins to senesce. The plant quickly decomposes, but the seeds can stay dormant for up to 10 years. The nut overwinters in the sediment, but when water temperature rises to 12 ºC, the terminal pore begins to rot, and around 1 month later, the seed germinates (Hummel and Kiviat, 2004).
Climate
Top of pageClimate | Status | Description | Remark |
---|---|---|---|
A - Tropical/Megathermal climate | Tolerated | Average temp. of coolest month > 18°C, > 1500mm precipitation annually | |
Am - Tropical monsoon climate | Tolerated | Tropical monsoon climate ( < 60mm precipitation driest month but > (100 - [total annual precipitation(mm}/25])) | |
Aw - Tropical wet and dry savanna climate | Tolerated | < 60mm precipitation driest month (in winter) and < (100 - [total annual precipitation{mm}/25]) | |
B - Dry (arid and semi-arid) | Tolerated | < 860mm precipitation annually | |
C - Temperate/Mesothermal climate | Preferred | Average temp. of coldest month > 0°C and < 18°C, mean warmest month > 10°C | |
Cf - Warm temperate climate, wet all year | Preferred | Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, wet all year | |
Cs - Warm temperate climate with dry summer | Preferred | Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, dry summers | |
Cw - Warm temperate climate with dry winter | Preferred | Warm temperate climate with dry winter (Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, dry winters) | |
D - Continental/Microthermal climate | Tolerated | Continental/Microthermal climate (Average temp. of coldest month < 0°C, mean warmest month > 10°C) | |
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 Ranges
Top of pageLatitude North (°N) | Latitude South (°S) | Altitude Lower (m) | Altitude Upper (m) |
---|---|---|---|
56 | 34 |
Soil Tolerances
Top of pageSoil drainage
- seasonally waterlogged
Soil reaction
- acid
- alkaline
- neutral
Soil texture
- heavy
- light
- medium
Natural enemies
Top of pageNatural enemy | Type | Life stages | Specificity | References | Biological control in | Biological control on |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Aix sponsa | Herbivore | |||||
Anser fabalis | Herbivore | |||||
Athelia rolfsii | Pathogen | Plants|Whole plant | not specific | |||
Bagous | Herbivore | |||||
Bagous rufimanus | Herbivore | Fruits|pods; Plants|Stems | not specific | |||
Bagous tersus | Herbivore | Plants|Leaves | ||||
Bagous trapae | Herbivore | Plants|Stems | ||||
Bagous vicinus | Herbivore | |||||
Bipolaris tetramera | Pathogen | Plants|Leaves | ||||
Botryotinia fuckeliana | Pathogen | Plants|Whole plant | not specific | |||
Castor canadensis | Herbivore | Fruits|pods; Plants|Leaves | ||||
Cercospora | Pathogen | Plants|Leaves | not specific | |||
Chironomus | Herbivore | Plants|Leaves | ||||
Galerucella birmanica | Herbivore | Plants|Leaves | ||||
Galerucella nymphaeae | Herbivore | Plants|Leaves | not specific | |||
Galerucella singhara | Herbivore | Plants|Leaves | ||||
Lymnaea auricularia | Herbivore | Plants|Leaves | not specific | |||
Macrosteles purpurata | Herbivore | Plants|Leaves | not specific | |||
Nanophyes | Herbivore | Plants|Leaves | ||||
Nanophyes japonica | Herbivore | Plants|Leaves | ||||
Nanophyes rufipes | Herbivore | |||||
Nymphula | Herbivore | Plants|Leaves | ||||
Nymphula crisonalis | Herbivore | Plants|Leaves | ||||
Nymphula gangeticalis | Herbivore | Plants|Leaves | ||||
Nymphula interruptalis | Herbivore | Plants|Inflorescence; Plants|Leaves | not specific | |||
Nymphula responsalis | Herbivore | Plants|Inflorescence; Plants|Leaves | not specific | |||
Odocoileus virginianus | Herbivore | Plants|Leaves | ||||
Ondatra zibethicus | Herbivore | |||||
Parapoynx vittalis | Herbivore | Plants|Leaves | not specific | |||
Rattus norvegicus | Herbivore | |||||
Rhopalosiphum nymphaeae | Herbivore | Plants|Leaves | not specific | |||
Sciurus carolinensis | Herbivore | Fruits|pods; Plants|Leaves | ||||
Sclerotium hydrophilum | Pathogen | Plants|Leaves | ||||
Spodoptera litura | Herbivore | Plants|Leaves | not specific | |||
Tamias striatus | Herbivore | |||||
Tamiasciurus hudsonicus | Herbivore |
Notes on Natural Enemies
Top of pageMany natural enemies in the native range of T. natans have been documented by Pemberton (1999). The plant is native to the Old World, and many enemies (insects, fungi, viruses) are found throughout its native range. Of the currently explored enemies, he reports that the most common and damaging species in Asia is the weevil Galerucella birmanica which causes complete defoliation of entire populations and is also somewhat host-specific (oligophagous). Hummel and Kiviat (2004) report observations on natural enemies in the plant’s alien range. T. natans is productive and is occasionally a nuisance in its native range, therefore, natural enemies are extremely important to keep populations in check. A major reason behind why the plant is so problematic in its introduced range is precisely because of release from predation (O’Neill, 2006).
Means of Movement and Dispersal
Top of page
Pathway Causes
Top of pageCause | Notes | Long Distance | Local | References |
---|---|---|---|---|
Aquaculture | Yes | Yes | O'Neill (2006) | |
Botanical gardens and zoos | Yes | Yes | O'Neill (2006) | |
Escape from confinement or garden escape | Yes | O'Neill (2006) | ||
Hitchhiker | Yes | Yes | Les and Mehrhoff (1999) | |
Horticulture | Yes | Yes | Hummel and Kiviat (2004) | |
Intentional release | Yes | Yes | Les and Mehrhoff (1999) | |
Interbasin transfers | Yes | GBIF (2008) | ||
Interconnected waterways | Yes | |||
Internet sales | Yes | Yes | ||
Ornamental purposes | Yes | Yes | Hummel and Kiviat (2004) |
Pathway Vectors
Top of pageVector | Notes | Long Distance | Local | References |
---|---|---|---|---|
Aquaculture stock | Yes | Yes | Hummel and Kiviat (2004) | |
Floating vegetation and debris | Yes | GBIF (2008) | ||
Machinery and equipment | Yes | Yes | Hummel and Kiviat (2004) | |
Ship structures above the water line | Yes | Yes | Hummel and Kiviat (2004) | |
Water | Yes | GBIF (2008) |
Impact Summary
Top of pageCategory | Impact |
---|---|
Cultural/amenity | Positive and negative |
Economic/livelihood | Positive and negative |
Environment (generally) | Positive and negative |
Human health | Positive and negative |
Economic Impact
Top of pageT. natans is an economic asset in its native range as it is an important food crop and a staple in many areas. However, in its introduced range, the plant is a significant nuisance. The economic cost of T. natans in the northeastern United States is not well documented (Pemberton, 2002), but we do know that from 1982 to 2001, $4.3 million dollars were spent on the control of T. natans in the Lake Champlain basin alone (Naylor, 2003). The largest control program, which takes place in Vermont, USA, was estimated to cost $500,000 in the year 2000 (Pemberton, 2002).
Environmental Impact
Top of page
Social Impact
Top of pageThis plant can cause substantial nuisance to recreational users by impeding navigation and tangling fishing line. This species has little nutritional benefit for fish or waterfowl, and can have detrimental effect on native game species that utilize the area. Additionally, the sharp spines present on the nuts can result in puncture wounds to swimmers (O’Neill, 2006). The plant may have played a role in the drowning deaths of a woman and two children in 2001 on the Hudson River (Hummel and Kiviat, 2004). Some people eat the chestnuts raw and ingest the giant intestinal fluke Fasciolopsis buski that is known to cause fasciolopsiasis, and the beds are known to be good breeding grounds for mosquitoes (Hummel and Kiviat, 2004). However, there is evidence that the T. natans nuts have been consumed by humans as early as 8000 BC. Currently the nut is valued worldwide for both its nutritional value as well as its medicinal properties.
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
- Tolerates, or benefits from, cultivation, browsing pressure, mutilation, fire etc
- 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
- Reproduces asexually
- Has high genetic variability
- Altered trophic level
- Conflict
- Damaged ecosystem services
- Ecosystem change/ habitat alteration
- Increases vulnerability to invasions
- Modification of natural benthic communities
- Modification of nutrient regime
- Monoculture formation
- Negatively impacts cultural/traditional practices
- Negatively impacts livelihoods
- Negatively impacts aquaculture/fisheries
- Negatively impacts tourism
- Reduced amenity values
- Reduced native biodiversity
- Threat to/ loss of endangered species
- Threat to/ loss of native species
- Transportation disruption
- Competition - monopolizing resources
- Competition - shading
- Competition - smothering
- Competition (unspecified)
- Rapid growth
- Highly likely to be transported internationally deliberately
- Difficult/costly to control
Uses
Top of pageT. natans has long been consumed by humans across the globe (Hummel and Kiviat, 2004). The nuts have a high moisture content and are valued for quenching thirst as well as being used as a source of flour that forms the base for many different food products (Hummel and Kiviat, 2004). Nuts are composed of 15% protein, 7.5% fat, 52% starch, 3% sugar and 22.5% water (Hummel and Kiviat, 2004). Singhara nut plants (related subspecies) are highly productive and are capable of high yields (typically 260-370 g/m2 and up to 550 g/m2) (Hummel and Kiviat, 2004). As well as being an important food source, the nut has also been recommended for use as paper pulp, fertilizer, fish food, compost and biofuel (Hummel and Kiviat, 2004).
Environmental Services
Uses List
Top of pageAnimal feed, fodder, forage
- Fishmeal
Environmental
- Landscape improvement
- Revegetation
- Wildlife habitat
Fuels
- Biofuels
General
- Botanical garden/zoo
- Ritual uses
- Sociocultural value
Human food and beverage
- Flour/starch
- Nuts
- Sugar
Materials
- Chemicals
- Essential oils
- Fertilizer
- Fibre
Medicinal, pharmaceutical
- Source of medicine/pharmaceutical
- Traditional/folklore
Detection and Inspection
Top of pageThe distinct floating rosette makes this aquatic species easier than most to detect soon after invasion.
Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
Top of pageT. natans is unlikely to be readily confused with native plants in its adventive range. The distinctive floating rosette of leathery green leaves and the production of large horned nuts means it is highly morphologically distinct from other floating-leaf species. The two most commonly recognized varieties are distinguished based on the number of spines. The Eurasian/European varieties always have four spines, whereas the Asian varieties (Trapa natans var. bispinosa) have two spines.
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.
PreventionSince T. natans remains valued for its nutritional and cultural uses, and since it is still a plant of botanical interest, educational programs must be directed to educate the public about the dangers this plant poses outside of its native range. Teaching users how to clean equipment in a way that decreases the chance of transmission is one way to lessen the impact of human-mediated transport. Several of the United States have legislated the regulation of the purchase, transportation, and introduction of this species.
Rapid responseIt is much easier and more effective to attempt to control this plant early in its introduction timeline. Small populations are effectively controlled by hand pulling, preferably prior to the production of the propagating nuts. If the infestation is allowed to persist, it will probably grow quickly. It has been reported that this species is capable of increasing its biomass by ten times in a single year (Groth et al., 1996). Large infestations must be controlled by mechanical harvesters or herbicides and can be quite costly (O’Neill, 2006).
Public awarenessNumerous educational campaigns have been directed at informing the public about the danger of aquatic invasive species in states of the USA in which T. natans is particularly problematic commonly distribute informational materials about its identity as well as instructions on how to report new invasions. Other educational campaigns have been directed toward informing the public about how to clean equipment in order to prevent the movement of invasive species.
EradicationIt has been reported that this species was eradicated from the state of Virginia, USA (ISSG, 2007).
ControlCultural control and sanitary measures
Nuts, though large and not as portable as propagules of other aquatic invasive species can remain dormant for up to 10 years, so it is extremely important to decrease the instances of accidental introduction by addressing humans as vectors. Additionally, since the plant is capable of producing ramets and engaging in vegetative clonal expansion via plant fragments, establishing guidelines on how to properly clean equipment, dispose of water, and identify target plants will probably decrease instances of accidental transportation and release.
Physical/mechanical controlSince the seeds of T. natans can remain dormant for up to 10 years, annual control efforts for at least that long must be undertaken in order for there to be a chance of eradication (O’Neill, 2006). Large beds must be mechanically harvested, but this will provide relief for only one growing season (O’Neill, 2006). Smaller areas of infestation can be addressed with hand pulling, although care must be exercised that all parts of the plant be removed, lest fragments remain to mature and produce fruits (Hummel and Kiviat, 2004). Ultrasound has also been proposed as a possible method of control. After treatment of the stem with ultrasound for 10 seconds, a mortality rate of 97.6% was reported (Wu, 2007).
Movement controlPlants can spread locally as nuts and fragments drift in water currents, but most attention should be given to addressing forms of human-mediated transport. A number of the United States have enacted legislation limiting the introduction, sale, transportation and trafficking of the species in an attempt to limit the rate of accidental or intentional introduction (USDA-NRCS, 2008).
Biological controlMuch attention has been given to discovering methods of biological control. Grass carp Ctenopharyngodon idella has been used to control water chestnut (Hummel and Kiviat, 2004). However, grass carp are non-selective herbivores that will almost certainly harm native species. Much research has been forwarded on the use of herbivorous insects from the plant’s native range (Pemberton, 1999). Of the explored species, the leaf beetle Galerucella birmanica has shown the most promise. Although concerns regarding its specificity were forwarded early on in the research process, it has since been shown that although capable of completing its life cycle using native Brasenia schreberi, G. birmanica exhibits a strong preference in the laboratory and in the field for T. natans, with only occasional “spill-over” of beetles onto B. schreberi (Ding et al., 2006).
Chemical controlSome control of water chestnut has been documented with subsurface applications of triclopyr and 2,4-D amine. However, the maximum control achieved was only 66% (Poovey and Getsinger, 2007). Due to its limited efficacy, if chemical control is used, it should be accompanied by other forms of physical control and removal.
References
Top of pageGBIF, 2008. Global Biodiversity Information Facilities. GBIF. http://data.gbif.org/
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/
Naylor M, 2003. . USA: Maryland Department of Natural Resources
Wu M, 2007. Can ultrasound eradicate water chestnuts? Ecological Restoration, 25(1):64-65
Distribution References
CABI Data Mining, Undated. CAB Abstracts Data Mining.,
CABI, Undated. Compendium record. Wallingford, UK: CABI
CABI, Undated a. CABI Compendium: Status inferred from regional distribution. Wallingford, UK: CABI
CABI, Undated b. CABI Compendium: Status as determined by CABI editor. Wallingford, UK: CABI
GBIF, 2008. Trapa natans. In: Global Biodiversity Information Facilities, GBIF. http://data.gbif.org
Links to Websites
Top of pageWebsite | URL | Comment |
---|---|---|
GISD/IASPMR: Invasive Alien Species Pathway Management Resource and DAISIE European Invasive Alien Species Gateway | https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.m93f6 | Data source for updated system data added to species habitat list. |
Global register of Introduced and Invasive species (GRIIS) | http://griis.org/ | Data source for updated system data added to species habitat list. |
Contributors
Top of page08/04/08 Original text by:
Alison Mikulyuk, Wisconsin Dept of Natural Resources, Science Operations Center, 2801 Progress Rd, Madison, WI 53716, USA
Michelle Nault, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2801 Progress Rd, Madison, WI 53716-3339, USA
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/