Cookies on Invasive Species Compendium

Like most websites we use cookies. This is to ensure that we give you the best experience possible.

 

Continuing to use www.cabi.org  means you agree to our use of cookies. If you would like to, you can learn more about the cookies we use.

Have you tried our Horizon Scanning Tool (beta) for prioritizing invasive species threats?

We’d value your feedback on the tool. Our survey takes only five minutes to complete.

Datasheet

Phalaris arundinacea (reed canary grass)

Summary

  • Last modified
  • 29 March 2018
  • Datasheet Type(s)
  • Invasive Species
  • Pest
  • Host Plant
  • Preferred Scientific Name
  • Phalaris arundinacea
  • Preferred Common Name
  • reed canary grass
  • Taxonomic Tree
  • Domain: Eukaryota
  •   Kingdom: Plantae
  •     Phylum: Spermatophyta
  •       Subphylum: Angiospermae
  •         Class: Monocotyledonae
  • Summary of Invasiveness
  • P. arundinacea typically invades seasonally wet or continually moist areas and spreads rapidly along ditch systems and land adjacent to watercourses (
  • There are no pictures available for this datasheet

    If you can supply pictures for this datasheet please contact:

    Compendia
    CAB International
    Wallingford
    Oxfordshire
    OX10 8DE
    UK
    compend@cabi.org
  • Distribution map More information

Don't need the entire report?

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

Generate report

Pictures

Top of page
PictureTitleCaptionCopyright

Identity

Top of page

Preferred Scientific Name

  • Phalaris arundinacea L.

Preferred Common Name

  • reed canary grass

Other Scientific Names

  • Baldingera arundinacea (L.) Dumort.
  • Phalaroides arundinacea (L.) Rauschert
  • Typhoides arundinacea (L.) Moench

International Common Names

  • English: gardener's garters; reed canarygrass; reedgrass; ribbon grass
  • Spanish: alpiste arundinaceo; falaris de los banados; hierba cinta
  • French: alpiste roseau; baldingere faux-roseau
  • Portuguese: caniço-malhado

Local Common Names

  • Germany: Rohrglanzgras
  • Italy: fettuccia d'acqua; scagliola d'acqua
  • Japan: kusayoshi
  • Netherlands: rietgras
  • South Africa: langbeenkanariegras; lekolojane; rietgras; rietkanarigras
  • Sweden: roerflen

EPPO code

  • TYPAR (Phalaris arundinacea)

Summary of Invasiveness

Top of page P. arundinacea typically invades seasonally wet or continually moist areas and spreads rapidly along ditch systems and land adjacent to watercourses (Marten and Heath, 1973). Large quantities of highly mobile seed are produced in the first year of life, and a soil seed bank and permanent rhizome bed quickly build up. For these reasons control is not easy once this species is established (Kilbride and Paveglio, 1999).

Taxonomic Tree

Top of page
  • Domain: Eukaryota
  •     Kingdom: Plantae
  •         Phylum: Spermatophyta
  •             Subphylum: Angiospermae
  •                 Class: Monocotyledonae
  •                     Order: Cyperales
  •                         Family: Poaceae
  •                             Genus: Phalaris
  •                                 Species: Phalaris arundinacea

Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature

Top of page The genus Phalaris comprises 15 species and is distributed worldwide with the greatest diversity of species in the Mediterranean area (Anderson, 1961). At least three species, including P. arundinacea, have become undesirable weeds. The scientific and common names of P. arundinacea refer to its reed-like appearance.

Many cultivated varieties have been registered for seed and forage yield in the USA (Rincker and Carlson, 1983; Kalton et al., 1989a, b), others have been developed for erosion control or for their ornamental value (such as the variety or form 'Picta' with variegated leaf blades).

Description

Top of page P. arundinacea is a stout, erect perennial reed growing 0.6-2 m high with far creeping rhizomes. Leaves flat, smooth, acuminate. Blade 10-35 cm long, 6-25 mm wide (approximately 20 times as long as wide), flat, linear. Ligule membranous, truncate, or occasionally acuate, 6-10 mm; sheaths smooth. Culm erect or geniculate, not branching. Panicle lobed lanceolate, 7-40 cm long, 1-4 cm wide, composed of branches up to 5 cm long, spreading only at flowering. Spikelets 3.5-7.5 mm long, subsessile. Glumes lanceolate, acuminate, keeled but not winged. Lemmas broadly lanceolate, acute; L1 and L2 1.2-2.3 mm long, short-hairy, sterile; L3 fertile, 2.9-4.5 mm long, 5-nerved, short-hairy. Caryopses light brown, 2-3 mm long.

It is a highly variable species, varying in height, size and shape of inflorescence, and coloration (Apfelbaum and Sams, 1987). The sturdy, often hollow stems can be up to 13 mm in diameter, with some reddish coloration near the top.

Plant Type

Top of page Grass / sedge
Perennial
Seed propagated
Vegetatively propagated

Distribution

Top of page Although certainly native to Eurasia and probably native to North America (Merigliano and Lesica, 1998), this species currently appears to be undergoing a large expansion in range and density in these regions (Maurer and Zedler, 2002). It is also present as a weed in some temperate countries in the southern hemisphere (Holm et al., 1979; Wells et al., 1986) and also in the tropics (Häfliger and Scholz, 1980).

Häfliger and Scholz (1980) describe the distribution as: northern, south-eastern, south-central and western USA, Central America, southern, eastern and northern Africa, Iberian Peninsula, central, northern and south-eastern Europe, former USSR, Middle East, Indian sub-continent, south-east Asian sub-continent and Pacific Islands.

In North America, the species is common throughout most of Alaska (USA) and Canada as well as all but the south-east part of the USA (Hitchcock et al., 1969).

Distribution Table

Top of page

The distribution in this summary table is based on all the information available. When several references are cited, they may give conflicting information on the status. Further details may be available for individual references in the Distribution Table Details section which can be selected by going to Generate Report.

Continent/Country/RegionDistributionLast ReportedOriginFirst ReportedInvasiveReferenceNotes

Asia

AfghanistanPresentHolm et al., 1979
ArmeniaPresentNative, 2003
AzerbaijanPresentNative, 2003
ChinaPresentNative, 2003; Holm et al., 1979
-HunanPresentYang, 1988
Georgia (Republic of)PresentNative, 2003
IndiaPresentHolm et al., 1979
-BiharPresentNoltie, 2000
-SikkimPresentNoltie, 2000
-West BengalPresentNoltie, 2000
IndonesiaPresentHolm et al., 1979
IranPresentNative, 2003
IraqPresentNative, 2003
JapanPresentNative, 2003; Holm et al., 1979
KazakhstanPresentNative, 2003
Korea, Republic ofPresentNative, 2003; Holm et al., 1979
KyrgyzstanPresentNative, 2003
MongoliaPresentNative, 2003
Sri LankaPresentHolm et al., 1979
TaiwanPresentNative, 2003
TajikistanPresentNative, 2003
TurkeyPresentNative, 2003; Holm et al., 1979
TurkmenistanPresentNative, 2003
UzbekistanPresentNative, 2003

Africa

AlgeriaPresentNative, 2003
EgyptPresentNative, 2003
EthiopiaPresentIntroducedFroman and Persson, 1974
KenyaPresentIntroducedFroman and Persson, 1974
LesothoPresentWells et al., 1986
MauritiusPresentHolm et al., 1979
South AfricaPresentWells et al., 1986
TanzaniaPresentIntroducedFroman and Persson, 1974
TunisiaPresentNative, 2003
UgandaPresentIntroducedFroman and Persson, 1974

North America

CanadaPresentHolm et al., 1979
-AlbertaPresentNative, 2003
-British ColumbiaPresentNative, 2003
-ManitobaPresentNative, 2003
-New BrunswickPresentNative, 2003
-Newfoundland and LabradorPresentNative, 2003
-Northwest TerritoriesPresentNative, 2003
-Nova ScotiaPresentNative, 2003
-OntarioPresentNative, 2003
-Prince Edward IslandPresentNative, 2003
-QuebecPresentNative, 2003
-SaskatchewanPresentNative, 2003
-Yukon TerritoryPresentNative, 2003
MexicoPresent
USAPresentNativeHolm et al., 1979
-AlaskaPresentNative, 2003; Hitchcock et al., 1969
-ArizonaPresentNative, 2003
-CaliforniaPresentNative, 2003
-ConnecticutPresentNative, 2003
-DelawarePresentNative, 2003
-IdahoPresentNative, 2003
-IllinoisPresentNative, 2003
-IndianaPresentNative, 2003
-IowaPresentNative, 2003
-KansasPresentNative, 2003
-KentuckyPresentNative, 2003
-MainePresentNative, 2003
-MarylandPresentNative, 2003
-MassachusettsPresentNative, 2003
-MichiganPresentNative, 2003
-MinnesotaPresent, 2003
-MissouriPresentNative, 2003
-MontanaPresentNative, 2003
-NebraskaPresentNative, 2003
-NevadaPresentNative, 2003
-New HampshirePresentNative, 2003
-New JerseyPresentNative, 2003
-New MexicoPresentNative, 2003
-New YorkPresentNative, 2003
-North CarolinaPresentNative, 2003
-North DakotaPresentNative, 2003
-OhioPresentNative, 2003
-OregonPresentNative, 2003
-PennsylvaniaPresentNative, 2003
-Rhode IslandPresentNative, 2003
-South DakotaPresentNative, 2003
-TennesseePresentNative, 2003
-UtahPresentNative, 2003
-VermontPresentNative, 2003
-VirginiaPresentNative, 2003
-WashingtonPresentNative, 2003
-West VirginiaPresentNative, 2003
-WisconsinPresentNative, 2003

Central America and Caribbean

Puerto RicoPresentHolm et al., 1979

South America

ArgentinaPresentHolm et al., 1979
ChilePresent
ColombiaPresentHolm et al., 1979
Falkland IslandsPresentUlibarri, 1981
VenezuelaPresent

Europe

AlbaniaPresentNative, 2003
AustriaPresentNative, 2003
BelarusPresentNative, 2003
BelgiumPresentNative, 2003; Holm et al., 1979
BulgariaPresentNative, 2003
CroatiaPresentHulina et al., 1990
Czechoslovakia (former)PresentNative, 2003; Holm et al., 1979; Prach, 1992
DenmarkPresentNative, 2003
EstoniaPresentNative, 2003
FinlandPresentNative, 2003; Holm et al., 1979
FrancePresentNative, 2003
GermanyPresentNativeHoflich et al., 1990; , 2003
GreecePresentNative, 2003
HungaryPresentNative, 2003; Holm et al., 1979
ItalyPresentNative, 2003; Holm et al., 1979; Baldini, 1993
LatviaPresentNative, 2003
LithuaniaPresentNative, 2003
MoldovaPresentNative, 2003
NetherlandsPresentVermeer, 1986
NorwayPresentNative, 2003; Odland, 1997
PolandPresentNative, 2003; Holm et al., 1979; Szelag, 1997; Czyz et al., 1999; Grynia et al., 1999
PortugalPresentNative, 2003; Holm et al., 1979; Costa, 1981
RomaniaPresentNative, 2003; Hanganu et al., 1994
Russian FederationPresentNative, 2003; Chernyaeva, 1977; Zakharchenko and Masalkin, 1977
-Eastern SiberiaPresentNative, 2003
-Russia (Europe)PresentNative, 2003
-Western SiberiaPresentNative, 2003
SpainPresentNative, 2003
SwedenPresentNative, 2003; Holm et al., 1979
SwitzerlandPresentNative, 2003
UKPresentNative, 2003; Daniels, 1978; Holm et al., 1979
UkrainePresentNative, 2003
Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro)PresentNative, 2003

Oceania

AustraliaPresentHolm et al., 1979
New ZealandPresentHolm et al., 1979

History of Introduction and Spread

Top of page P. arundinacea is now a circumarboreal species (Larson, 1993). However, there is some debate as to whether it is native to North America (Harrison et al., 1996b). It is likely that populations of P. arundinacea in the USA consist of a mixture of agronomic cultivars (introduced from Europe) and native varieties (Merigliano and Lesica, 1998). Distinguishing native strains in the USA is therefore very difficult (White et al., 1993). Baldini (1993) has looked at ploidy levels for this purpose.

Habitat

Top of page P. arundinacea is a wetland plant, typically occurring in soils that are saturated, or nearly so, for most of the growing season, but where standing water does not persist for extended periods (Stace, 1997). However, established stands can tolerate extended periods of inundation (Ivanov et al., 1981). Ideal conditions typically occur in roadside ditches, river dykes and levées, shallow marshes, and meadows (Weinmann et al., 1984). It is also found in waste places, perennial crops and aquatic biotopes (Häfliger and Scholz, 1980). It can be found in some upland sites, for example in Washington State, USA (Harrison et al., 1996b). It is intolerant of shade and is replaced by Salix species, Cornus stolonifera, Prunus virginiana, Carex and Juncus species in Washington State (Harrison et al., 1996b). P. arundinacea is used as an indicator species in Daniels' (1978) classification of British mires.

Habitat List

Top of page
CategoryHabitatPresenceStatus
Terrestrial-managed
Disturbed areas Present, no further details
Rail / roadsides Present, no further details
Urban / peri-urban areas Present, no further details
Terrestrial-natural/semi-natural
Riverbanks Present, no further details
Wetlands Present, no further details Harmful (pest or invasive)

Hosts/Species Affected

Top of page P. arundinacea has negative impacts on wetland plant species and plant communities in the USA. Where the species invades short perennial grasses such as Agrostis alba or Festuca rubra (species typically planted along irrigation ditches), it inhibits their growth within 3-5 months, eventually eliminating them (Apfelbaum and Sams, 1987).

Host Plants and Other Plants Affected

Top of page
Plant nameFamilyContext
Festuca rubra (red fescue)PoaceaeUnknown
Typha latifolia (broadleaf cattail)TyphaceaeUnknown

Biology and Ecology

Top of page Genetics

The chromosome number is 2n = 28 (Stace, 1997).

Sachs and Coulman (1983) and Ostrem (1988) found wide genetic variation in seed yield and other agronomic characters: broad-sense heritabilities were between 0.20 and 0.84. Alkaloid concentration also shows wide genetic variation, with heritabilities for total alkaloid concentration ranging from 0.19 to 0.70 for a range of populations (Ostrem, 1987). Hovin et al. (1978) reported genetic variation in the concentration of eight minerals in P. arundinacea.

Gifford et al. (2002) predicted genetic bottle-necking in populations of this species in the USA due to its recent, rapid range-expansion. However, no such phenomenon has been detected.

Physiology and Phenology

Germination at a temperature of 24-27°C is significantly stimulated by moist chilling in light, red light given during the first 3 days of imbibition, three 2-h periods at 12°C given during the second day of imbibition, ethylene, increased oxygen tension, and soaking in aerated water for 4 days. Dry storage at 20-30°C had no effect on the germinability of the seeds. No significant quantities of germination inhibitors have been found either in water or methanol extracts of seed dispersal units (Landgraff and Junttila, 1979). Berg (1982) reports that germination rates in some strains of this species are too low (due to dormancy) for them to have any agricultural use.

Flowering in P. arundinacea requires exposure to short day-length conditions for primary floral induction and long day-length conditions (13-15 h) for secondary induction (Heide, 1994). The species flowers in June and July in the Pacific Northwest, USA (Hitchcock et al., 1969; Weinmann et al., 1984).

Dead leaves persist throughout the winter resting period (in the UK; Clapham et al., 1987).

Hovin et al. (1980) report that the alkaloid concentration in most of the accessions studied was high enough to adversely affect the performance of ruminants.

Reproductive Biology

Reproduction in this species is via seeds, rhizomes and tillers (Wells et al., 1986; Ito et al., 1990). It will also produce roots and shoots from the nodes of freshly cut, well jointed culms (Marten and Heath, 1973; Corley, 1989). Dethioux (1986) has demonstrated that stem cuttings of this species are a viable means of propagation. Gifford et al. (2002) have strong evidence that P. arundinacea reproduces primarily clonally in North America.

Environmental Requirements

P. arundinacea generally favours moist to inundated soils and is even used as an indicator of soil moisture in some areas (Strien and Melman, 1987). It survives under complete anaerobiosis but does not show shoot extension (Barclay and Crawford, 1982) under this condition. It is highly resistant to flooding (up to 50 d inundation; Ivanov et al., 1981), and to regular flooding cycles (Rice et al., 1993).

Some strains are tolerant of high soil aluminium concentrations (Culvenor et al., 1986), but the species appears less tolerant of high salinity (Liu et al., 1992). It regenerates and re-colonizes riparian habitats quickly after severe disturbance (Ohtsuka and Nemoto, 1997); because of this, Morrison and Molofsky (1998) suggest that this species is most likely to become a pest in disturbed or low-density plant communities.

There is evidence to suggest that nutrient enrichment by nitrate-nitrogen from agricultural run-off improves habitat suitability for P. arundinacea and is contributing to increasing colonization and dominance of this species in wetlands in the USA (Green and Galatowitsch, 2002).

Latitude/Altitude Ranges

Top of page
Latitude North (°N)Latitude South (°S)Altitude Lower (m)Altitude Upper (m)
0 0 0 0

Rainfall

Top of page
ParameterLower limitUpper limitDescription
Mean annual rainfall00mm; lower/upper limits

Soil Tolerances

Top of page

Soil drainage

  • impeded
  • seasonally waterlogged

Natural enemies

Top of page
Natural enemyTypeLife stagesSpecificityReferencesBiological control inBiological control on
Septoria bromi var. phalaricola Pathogen Leaves
Sitodiplosis phalaridis Herbivore Inflorescence
Ustilago echinata Pathogen Inflorescence

Notes on Natural Enemies

Top of page For further information on the natural enemies listed see the following: Sitodiplosis mosellana (Abbass, 1986; Sylven et al. 1997); Septoria bromi var. phalaricola (Zeiders, 1979); and Ustilago echinata (Guo, 1991).

Means of Movement and Dispersal

Top of page Natural Dispersal (Non-Biotic)

Seeds are dispersed along ditches and waterways (Apfelbaum and Sams, 1987).

Intentional Introduction

P. arundinacea has been widely introduced into the USA as stock fodder (Larson, 1993).

Plant Trade

Top of page
Plant parts liable to carry the pest in trade/transportPest stagesBorne internallyBorne externallyVisibility of pest or symptoms
Bulbs/Tubers/Corms/Rhizomes stems
Flowers/Inflorescences/Cones/Calyx seeds; stems
Fruits (inc. pods) seeds
Growing medium accompanying plants roots; seeds; stems
Leaves seeds
Roots roots; seeds; stems
Seedlings/Micropropagated plants whole plants
Stems (above ground)/Shoots/Trunks/Branches seeds; stems
True seeds (inc. grain) seeds

Impact Summary

Top of page
CategoryImpact
Animal/plant collections None
Animal/plant products None
Biodiversity (generally) Negative
Crop production None
Environment (generally) Negative
Fisheries / aquaculture None
Forestry production None
Human health None
Livestock production None
Native fauna None
Native flora Negative
Rare/protected species None
Tourism None
Trade/international relations None
Transport/travel None

Impact

Top of page Few data are available on the economic impact of infestations of this species. However, there is considerable evidence that at least some strains have a negative impact upon cattle and sheep when included in feed. P. arundinacea can contain a number of harmful alkaloids including tryptamine-carboline and gramine (Marten, 1973; Marten et al., 1976); selenium can also be present at 0.005 p.p.m. (Susaki et al., 1980).

When in flower, the species produces abundant pollen and chaff, which aggravate hay fever and allergies (Weinmann et al., 1984).

Environmental Impact

Top of page The species is considered a serious weed along irrigation banks and ditches (in Washington State, USA, for example) because infestation can cause siltation (Marten and Heath, 1973).

Impact: Biodiversity

Top of page According to Maurer and Zedler (2002), P. arundinacea is aggressively invading wetlands across North America. The species grows so vigorously that it is able to inhibit and eliminate competing species (Apfelbaum and Sams, 1987). In some locations (such as river islands in western Wisconsin, USA) this species has become the dominant plant in only 15 years (Barnes, 1999). It can replace native vegetation with monospecific stands (Lindig Cisneros and Zedler, 2002).

In one study, only herbs and smaller grasses growing less than 1 m above the maximum water level were outcompeted by P. arundinacea. The species growing above this level remained unaffected (Barnes, 1999). Wetzel and Valk (1998) have shown that P. arundinacea can outcompete and overshadow other typical riparian plant species such as Carex stricta and Typha latifolia. Unlike many other invasive species in North America, P. arundinacea does reduce native plant biodiversity in undisturbed as well as disturbed wetland habitats (Harrison et al., 1996a; Lesica, 1997). Areas that have existed as monocultures of this species for extended periods may have seedbanks that are devoid of native plant species (Apfelbaum and Sams, 1987).

Dense stands of P. arundinacea have lower wildlife value than native vegetation: few species can feed on this plant, and the stems grow too densely to provide suitable cover for mammals and waterfowl (Maia, 1994).

Risk and Impact Factors

Top 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
Impact outcomes
  • Negatively impacts animal health
  • Reduced native biodiversity
Likelihood of entry/control
  • Highly likely to be transported internationally deliberately
  • Difficult/costly to control

Uses

Top of page Some strains of P. arundinacea (i.e., those low in toxic compounds) are used as fodder crops. This species has been an important component of lowland fodder in a number of countries for some time, particularly in Europe, the USA and Russia. It has been the subject of much agricultural research (for example, see Alway, 1931; Hitchcock, 1950; Hitchcock et al., 1969; Tasi and Barcsak, 2001; Struzhkina, 2002).

Trials by Vassileva and Jingov (1988) showed this species to offer effective soil conservation properties on strongly eroded soils.

P. arundinacea has also been the subject of much research into biomass/energy crops (for example, Bullard et al., 2001; Gylling, 2001) and, as such, this crop is considered to have a relatively low environmental impact in northern Europe (Pedersen, 1997).

It is also grown in Europe for its short fibres which are suitable for high-quality paper production (Pedersen, 1997).

It also has ornamental value as a landscaping plant and for dried flowers (Corley, 1989; Urbanski, 1997). The variegated form 'Picta' is popular.

Uses List

Top of page

Animal feed, fodder, forage

  • Fodder/animal feed
  • Forage

Environmental

  • Erosion control or dune stabilization

General

  • Ornamental

Materials

  • Poisonous to mammals

Similarities to Other Species/Conditions

Top of page P. arundinacea is distinguished from most other Phalaris species by being a rhizomatous perennial with glumes un-winged.

Prevention and Control

Top of page Cultural Control

Burning has been effective in areas with an existing component of native plants, either above ground or in the soil seed bank. To be effective, burns should be conducted in the late spring, early to mid-summer, or early to late autumn. Early spring burning stimulates the production of shoots (Apfelbaum, 1993).

Mechanical Control

Heavy equipment alone seems unsuccessful in the removal of this species. Rapid re-growth occurs from rhizomes and seeds that remain in the soil. Clipping back plants at ground level and covering them with opaque black plastic sheets can reduce but not eliminate populations (Apfelbaum and Sams, 1987). However, this method is not always successful because seasonal inundation may displace covering materials (Gillespie and Murn, 1992).

Mowing may be a valuable control method since it removes seed heads before maturity and exposes the ground to light, which promotes the growth of native species. In Wisconsin, USA, twice-yearly mowing in early to mid-June and early October led to increased numbers of native species relative to P. arundinacea-infested plots that were not mown (Gillespie and Murn, 1992).

Chemical Control

Glyphosate, amitrole, dalapon and paraquat have all shown some success. Maximum control depends on the timing of application (Apfelbaum and Sams, 1987). These herbicides provide control for 2 years at the most. After this period, treated areas are recolonized from adjacent stands or from seedbank recruitment (White et al., 1993). In Washington State, USA, glyphosate treatment, followed 2 or 3 weeks later by burning, has also been effective. Because this species is often present in or near watercourses, careful consideration should be given to the environmental and legal consequences of the use of herbicides.

Integrated Control

Kilbride and Paveglio (1999) recommend cutting (discing) followed by herbicide treatment in the following growing season. Without herbicide use, the species quickly re-grows from rhizomes. They recommend that the cutting/herbicide regime continues until the site water level can be altered sufficiently to reduce P. arundinacea growth. The use of fire helps to ensure mortality by killing re-sprouts and germinants which appear after herbicide use (Apfelbaum, 1993).

References

Top of page

Abbass AK, 1986. A new species of grass midge (Dipt., Cecidomyiidae) infesting the inflorescence of Phalaris arundinacea L. in Britain. Entomologist's Monthly Magazine, 122(1460/1463):65-71

Alway FJ, 1931. Early trials and use of reed canary grass as a forage plant. Journal of the American Society of Agronomists, 23:64-66.

Anderson DE, 1961. Taxonomy and distribution of the genus Phalaris. Iowa State Journal of Science 36:1-96.

Apfelbaum SI, 1993. An update on the ecology and management of reed canarygrass. Broadhead, Wisconsin, USA: Applied Ecological Services.

Apfelbaum SI; Sams CE, 1987. Ecology and control of reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea L.). Natural Areas Journal, 7(2):69-74

Baldini RM, 1993. The genus Phalaris L. (Gramineae) in Italy. Webbia, 47(1):1-53.

Barclay AM; Crawford RMM, 1982. Plant growth and survival under strict anaerobiosis. Journal of Experimental Botany, 33(134):541-549.

Barnes WJ, 1999. The rapid growth of a population of reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea L.) and its impact on some riverbottom herbs. Journal of the Torrey Botanical Society, 126(2):133-138; 20 ref.

Berg T, 1982. Seed dormancy in local populations of Phalaris arundinacea L. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, 32(4):405-409.

Bruns VF, 1973. Studies on the control of reed canarygrass along irrigation systems. Publication, Western Region, Agricultural Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, No. ARS-W-3:17 pp.

Bullard MJ; Christian DG; Knight JD; Lainsbury MA; Parker SR; Parker SR; eds, 2001. Biomass and Energy Crops II. University of York, UK, 18-21 December 2001. Aspects of Applied Biology, No. 65:374 pp.

Chernyaeva AM, 1977. Flora of Zelenyi Island (Little Kuril Islands). Botanicheskii Zhurnal, 62(11):1672-1682.

Clapham AR; Tutin TG; Moore DM, 1987. Flora of the British Isles. Third edition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Corley WL, 1989. Propagation of ornamental grasses adapted to Georgia and the US southeast. Combined Proceedings, International Plant Propagators' Society, 39:332-337.

Costa JCA, 1981. Distribution of Phalaris spp. in Portugal. I Congresso Portugues de Fitiatria e de Fitofarmacologia e III Simposio Nacional de Herbologia, 1980., Volume 3:33-46

Culvenor RA; Oram RN; Fazekas de St Groth C, 1986. Variation in tolerance in Phalaris aquatica L. and a related species to aluminium in nutrient solution and soil. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 37(4):383-395

Czyz H; Gos A; Kitczak T; Trzaskos M, 1999. Characteristics of the plant cover of fallowed meadows in the lower Warta river valley. Folia Universitatis Agriculturae Stetinensis, Agricultura, No. 75:55-57.

Daniels RE, 1978. Floristic analyses of British mires and mire communities. Journal of Ecology, 66(3):733-802.

Dethioux M, 1986. Trials on the rooting of grass cuttings on the banks of two Belgian watercourses. Revue de l'Agriculture, 39(6):1361-1366.

Evans MW; Ely JE, 1941. Growth habits of reed canary grass. Journal of the American Society of Agronomists, 33:1017-1027.

Fröman B; Persson S, 1974. An Illustrated Guide to the Grasses of Ethiopia. Assella, Ehiopia: Chilalo Awraja Development Unit.

Gifford ALS; Ferdy JB; Molofsky J, 2002. Genetic composition and morphological variation among populations of the invasive grass, Phalaris arundinacea. Canadian Journal of Botany, 80(7):779-785; 35 ref.

Gillespie J; Murn T, 1992. Mowing controls reed canarygrass, releases native wetland plants (Wisconsin). Restoration and Management Notes, 10:93-94.

Green EK; Galatowitsch SM, 2002. Effects of Phalaris arundinacea and nitrate-N addition on the establishment of wetland plant communities. Journal of Applied Ecology, 39(1):134-144.

Griffith WL; Harrison CM, 1954. Maturity and curing temperature and their influence on the germination of reed canarygrass. Agronomy Journal, 46:163-168.

Grynia M; Grzelak M; Kryszak A, 1999. Production potential of meadows situated along the Orlicki canal. Prace z Zakresu Nauk Rolniczych, 87:9-17.

Guo L, 1991. Three species of Ustilaginales new to China. Mycosystema, 4:95-98

Gylling M, 2001. Energiafgrodeprogrammet: Hovedrapport. Rapport Statens Jordbrugs og Fiskeriokonomiske Institut, No. 131:78 pp.

Hanganu J; Gridin M; Drost HJ; Chifu T; Stefan N; Sarbu I, 1994. Explanation to the vegetation map of the Romanian Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve. Flevobericht Directoraat Generaal Rijkswaterstaat, Ministerie van Verkeer en Waterstaat, No. 356. Lelystad, Netherlands, 68 pp.

Harrison RD; Chatterton NJ; Page RJ; Curto M; Asay KH; Jensen KB; Horton WH, 1996. Effects of nine introduced grasses on ecological biodiversity in the Columbia basin. Rangelands in a sustainable biosphere. Proceedings of the Fifth International Rangeland Congress, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA, 23-28 July, 1995. Volume 1: Contributed presentations., 211-212.

Harrison RD; Chatterton NJ; Page RJ; Curto M; Assay KH; Jensen KB; Horton WH, 1996. Reed canarygrass. Research Report 155. Logan, USA: Utah Agricultural Experiment Station, Utah State University.

Heichel GH; Hovin AW; Henjum KI, 1980. Seedling age and cold treatment effects on the induction of panicle production in reed canarygrass. Crop Science, 20:683-687.

Heide OM, 1994. Control of flowering in Phalaris arundinacea. Norwegian Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 8(3-4):259-276.

Henderson RA, 1990. Controlling reed canarygrass in a degraded oak savannah (Wisconsin). Restoration and Management Notes, 8:123-124.

Henderson RA, 1991. Reed canarygrass poses threat to oak savanna restoration and maintenance (Wisconsin). Restoration & Management Notes, 9(1):32.

Hitchcock AS, 1950. Manual of the grasses of the United States. USDA Miscellaneous Publication 200. Washington, D.C., USA: USDA.

Hitchcock CL; Cronquist A; Owenby M, 1969. Vascular Plants of the Pacific Northwest. Part1: Vascular Cryptograms, Gymnosperms and Monocotyledons. Seattle, USA: University of Washington Press.

Hoflich G; Tauschke M; Schalitz G; Joschko M; Hohn A, 1999. Bodenkultur Biological activity in flood polders of the Oder, 50(2):111-119.

Holm LG; Pancho JK; Herberger JP; Plunkett PL, 1991. A Geographical Atlas of World Weeds. Malabar, Florida: Krieger Publishing Co.

Holm LG; Pancho JV; Herbenger JP; Plucknett DL, 1979. A Geographical Atlas of World Weeds. New York, USA: John Wiley & Sons.

Hovin AW; Solberg Y; Myhr K, 1980. Alkaloids in reed canarygrass grown in Norway and the USA. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, 30(2):211-215.

Hovin AW; Tew TL; Stucker RE, 1978. Genetic variability for mineral elements in reed canarygrass. Crop Science, 18(3):423-427.

Hulina N; Barrett PRF; Greaves MP; Murphy KJ; Pieterse AH; Wade PM; Wallsten M; eds, 1990. Aquatic weeds in open canals in the upper Sava river valley (Croatia - Yugoslavia). Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Aquatic Weeds, Uppsala, Sweden, 13-17 August 1990. Wageningen, Netherlands: European Weed Research Society, 123-129.

Häfliger E; Scholz H, 1981. Grass Weeds 2: Weeds of the subfamilies Chloridoideae, Pooideae, Oryzoideae. Basle, Switzerland: Documenta CIBA GEIGY.

Ito M; Sato E; Goto H; Hattori Y, 1990. Growth morphology of reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea L.) tillers under sward conditions. Journal of Japanese Society of Grassland Science, 36(3):254-262.

Ivanov AI; Lobovikov NN; Lobovikov VF, 1981. Tall-growing grasses under prolonged flooding. Trudy po Prikladnoi Botanike, Genetike i Selektsii, 71(2):11-23.

Kalton RR; Richardson P; Shields J, 1989. Registration of 'Venture' reed canarygrass. Crop Science, 29(5):1327-1328; 1 ref.

Kalton RR; Shields J; Richardson P, 1989. Registration of 'Palaton' reed canarygrass. Crop Science, 29(5):1327; 1 ref.

Kilbride KM; Paveglio FL, 1999. Integrated pest management to control reed canarygrass in seasonal wetlands of southwestern Washington. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 27(2):292-297; 12 ref.

Landgraff A; Junttila O, 1979. Germination and dormancy of reed canary-grass seeds (Phalaris arundinacea). Physiologia Plantarum, 45(1):96-102

Larson GE, 1993. Aquatic and wetland vascular plants of the northern Great Plain. Gen Tech. Rep. RM-238. Fort Collins, Colorado, USA: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experimental Station.

Lefor MW, 1987. Phalaris arundinacea L. (reed canary grass - Gramineae) as a hydrophyte in Essex, Connecticut, USA. Environmental Management, 11(6):771-773

Lesica P, 1997. Spread of Phalaris arundinacea adversely impacts the endangered plant Howellia aquatilis. Great Basin Naturalist, 57(4):366-368; 18 ref.

Lindig Cisneros R; Zedler JB, 2002. Phalaris arundinacea seedling establishment: effects of canopy complexity in fen, mesocosm, and restoration experiments. Canadian Journal of Botany, 80(6):617-624.

Liu CH; Suan JK; Huang WH, 1992. Study on the salt tolerance of grass forage cultivars. Grassland of China, No. 6:12-17, 22.

Maia E, 1994. Noxious weeds: a guide to invasive non-native plants. Seattle, USA: King County Department of Public Works, Surface Water Management Division.

Marten GC, 1973. Alkaloids in reed canarygrass. In: Matches AG, ed. Anti-quality components of forages. Special Publication, Crop Science Society of America, 15-31.

Marten GC; Heath ME, 1973. Reed canarygrass. In: Heath ME, DS Metcalfe, Barneseds RF, eds. Forages: The Science of Grassland Agriculture. Ames, USA: Iowa State University Press.

Marten GL; Jordan RM; Hovin AW, 1976. Biological significance of reed canarygrass alkaloids and association with palatability variation to grazing in sheep and cattle. Agronomy Journal 68:909-914.

Maurer DA; Zedler JB, 2002. Differential invasion of a wetland grass explained by tests of nutrients and light availability on establishment and clonal growth. Oecologia, 131(2):279-288; many ref.

Merigliano MF; Lesica P, 1998. The native status of reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea L.) in the inland northwest, USA. Natural Areas Journal, 18(3):223-230; 41 ref.

Morrison SL; Molofsky J, 1998. Effects of genotypes, soil moisture, and competition on the growth of an invasive grass, Phalaris arundinacea (reed canary grass). Canadian Journal of Botany, 76(11):1939-1946; 29 ref.

Noltie HJ, 2000. Flora of Bhutan including a record of plants from Sikkim and Darjeeling. Volume 3 Part 2. The Grasses of Bhutan. Edinburgh, UK: Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh and Royal Government of Bhutan.

Odland A, 1997. Development of vegetation in created wetlands in western Norway. Aquatic Botany, 59(1/2):45-62.

Ohtsuka T; Nemoto M, 1997. Effect of soil eutrophication on weedy riparian communities around agricultural areas. Journal of Weed Science and Technology, 42(2):107-114; 25 ref.

Ostrem L, 1987. Studies on genetic variation in reed canarygrass, Phalaris arundinacea L. I. Alkaloid type and concentration. Hereditas, Sweden, 107(2):235-248.

Ostrem L, 1988. Studies on genetic variation in reed canarygrass, Phalaris arundinacea L. III. Seed yield and seed yield components. Hereditas, Sweden, 108(2):159-168.

Paveglio FL; Kilbride KM, 1996. Integrated management techniques show promise for control for reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) in seasonal wetlands (Washington). Restoration and Management Notes, 14(1):79-80.

Pedersen S, 1997. Reed canary grass on marginal land - industrial applications, economics and environmental impact. Proceedings of the NJF seminar on alternative use of agricultural land, Research Centre Foulum, Denmark, 9-10 June 1997. Rapport Statens Planteavlsforsog, No. 18:102-111.

Prach K, 1992. Vegetation, microtopography and water table in the Luznice River floodplain, South Bohemia, Czechoslovakia. Preslia, 64(4):357-367.

Rice JS; Pinkerton BW, 1993. Reed canarygrass survival under cyclic inundation. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 48(2):132-135.

Rincker CM; Carlson IT, 1983. Performance of four sources of breeder seed of 'Vantage' reed canarygrass. Crop Science, 23(1):127-128.

Sachs APW; Coulman BE, 1983. Variability in reed canarygrass collections from eastern Canada. Crop Science, 23(6):1041-1044.

Stace CA, 1997. New Flora of the British Isles. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Strien AJ van; Melman, 1987. Effects of drainage on the botanical richness of peat grassland. Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science, 35(2):103-111.

Struzhkina TM, 2002. Phalaris arundinacea, a valuable fodder crop for the Kamchatka region, [Russia]. Kormoproizvodstvo, No. 8:11-15.

Susaki H; Ishida N; Kawashima R, 1980. Selenium concentrations in Japanese fodder. Jap. J. Zootech. Sci., 51(11):806-7.

Sylven E; Hellqvist S; Sellerholm G; Tastas-Duque R, 1997. A new gall midge (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae), feeding beneath leaf sheaths of Phalaris arundinacea (Poaceae). Entomologisk Tidskrift, 118(2-3):99-109.

Szelag Z, 1997. Additions to the flora of Nida Basin. Fragmenta Floristica et Geobotanica, Series Polonica, 4:33-37.

Tasi J; Barcsak Z, 2001. Relationship between the phenological phase of grass and the quality of fodder. Novenytermeles, 50(1):31-42.

Ulibarri AE, 1981. Botanical specimens collected in the second scientific survey of the Falkland Islands. Anales de la Sociedad Cientifica, Argentina, 209-210(1-4):57-63.

Urbanski P, 1997. Growth and flowering of ornamental grasses with coloured leaves. Roczniki Akademii Rolniczej w Poznaniu, Ogrodnictwo, No. 25:99-108.

USDA-ARS, 2003. Germplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN). Online Database. Beltsville, Maryland, USA: National Germplasm Resources Laboratory. https://npgsweb.ars-grin.gov/gringlobal/taxon/taxonomysearch.aspx

Vassileva T; Jingov A, 1988. Effectiveness of soil conservation provided by some perennial grasses grown on strongly eroded soils. Pochvoznanie i Agrokhimiya, 23(6):61-67.

Vermeer JG, 1986. The effect of nutrients on shoot biomass and species composition of wetland and hayfield communities. Acta Oecologica, Oecologia Plantarum, 7(1):31-41.

Vose PB, 1962. Delayed germination in reed canarygrass, Phalaris arundinacea L. Annals of Botany, 26:197-206.

Weinmann F; Boule M; Brunner K; Malek J; Yoshino V, 1984. Wetland Plants for the Pacific Northwest. Seattle, USA: US Army Corps of Engineers.

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.

Wetzel PR; Valk AG van der, 1998. Effects of nutrient and soil moisture on competition between Carex stricta, Phalaris arundinacea, and Typha latifolia. Plant Ecology, 138(2):179-190.

White D J; Haber E; Keddy C, 1993. Invasive Plants of Neutral Habitats in Canada. Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Wildlife Service.

Yang BM, 1988. New taxa of the grass family from Hunan. Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis Normalis Hunanensis, 11(3):234-237.

Zakharchenko IV; Masalkin KN, 1977. Mountain meadows of the Western Urals - a promising source of fodder. Korma, No. 3:21-22.

Zeiders KE, 1979. A Septoria disease of reed canarygrass in Pennsylvania. Plant Disease Reporter, 63(9):796-800

Distribution Maps

Top of page
You can pan and zoom the map
Save map
Download KML file Download CSV file
Creative Commons Licence
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Please click OK to ACCEPT or Cancel to REJECT

Creative Commons Licence
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Please click OK to ACCEPT or Cancel to REJECT