Pacific Island Ecosystems at Risk (PIER)
RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS: Low risk, score: 6 (low risk based on second screen)
|
Australian/New Zealand Weed Risk Assessment adapted for Hawai‘i. Information on Risk Assessments Original risk assessment |
| Cupressus lusitanica (Common names- Mexican cypress, cedar of Goa, Portugal cedar) Synonyms: Cupressus lindleyi Klotzsch ex Endl., Cupressus coulteri Forbes, Cupressus pendula L'Hérit., Cupressus glauca A. B. Lambert | Answer | Score | |
| 1.01 | Is the species highly domesticated? | n | 0 |
| 1.02 | Has the species become naturalized where grown? | y | |
| 1.03 | Does the species have weedy races? | n | |
| 2.01 | Species suited to tropical or subtropical climate(s) (0-low; 1-intermediate; 2-high) – If island is primarily wet habitat, then substitute “wet tropical” for “tropical or subtropical” | 2 | |
| 2.02 | Quality of climate match data (0-low; 1-intermediate; 2-high) see appendix 2 | ||
| 2.03 | Broad climate suitability (environmental versatility) | y | 1 |
| 2.04 | Native or naturalized in regions with tropical or subtropical climates | y | 1 |
| 2.05 | Does the species have a history of repeated introductions outside its natural range? y=-2 | y | |
| 3.01 | Naturalized beyond native range y = 1*multiplier (see Append 2), n= question 2.05 | y | 2 |
| 3.02 | Garden/amenity/disturbance weed y = 1*multiplier (see Append 2) | n | 0 |
| 3.03 | Agricultural/forestry/horticultural weed y = 2*multiplier (see Append 2) | n | 0 |
| 3.04 | Environmental weed y = 2*multiplier (see Append 2) | n | 0 |
| 3.05 | Congeneric weed y = 1*multiplier (see Append 2) | y | 2 |
| 4.01 | Produces spines, thorns or burrs | n | 0 |
| 4.02 | Allelopathic | y | 1 |
| 4.03 | Parasitic | n | 0 |
| 4.04 | Unpalatable to grazing animals | n | -1 |
| 4.05 | Toxic to animals | n | 0 |
| 4.06 | Host for recognized pests and pathogens | n | 0 |
| 4.07 | Causes allergies or is otherwise toxic to humans | ||
| 4.08 | Creates a fire hazard in natural ecosystems | y | 1 |
| 4.09 | Is a shade tolerant plant at some stage of its life cycle | n | 0 |
| 4.1 | Tolerates a wide range of soil conditions (or limestone conditions if not a volcanic island) | y | 1 |
| 4.11 | Climbing or smothering growth habit | n | 0 |
| 4.12 | Forms dense thickets | n | 0 |
| 5.01 | Aquatic | n | 0 |
| 5.02 | Grass | n | 0 |
| 5.03 | Nitrogen fixing woody plant | n | 0 |
| 5.04 | Geophyte (herbaceous with underground storage organs -- bulbs, corms, or tubers) | n | 0 |
| 6.01 | Evidence of substantial reproductive failure in native habitat | n | 0 |
| 6.02 | Produces viable seed. | y | 1 |
| 6.03 | Hybridizes naturally | ||
| 6.04 | Self-compatible or apomictic | ||
| 6.05 | Requires specialist pollinators | n | 0 |
| 6.06 | Reproduction by vegetative fragmentation | n | -1 |
| 6.07 | Minimum generative time (years) 1 year = 1, 2 or 3 years = 0, 4+ years = -1 | 15 | -1 |
| 7.01 | Propagules likely to be dispersed unintentionally (plants growing in heavily trafficked areas) | n | -1 |
| 7.02 | Propagules dispersed intentionally by people | y | 1 |
| 7.03 | Propagules likely to disperse as a produce contaminant | n | -1 |
| 7.04 | Propagules adapted to wind dispersal | y | 1 |
| 7.05 | Propagules water dispersed | n | -1 |
| 7.06 | Propagules bird dispersed | n | -1 |
| 7.07 | Propagules dispersed by other animals (externally) | n | -1 |
| 7.08 | Propagules survive passage through the gut | n | -1 |
| 8.01 | Prolific seed production (>1000/m2) | y | 1 |
| 8.02 | Evidence that a persistent propagule bank is formed (>1 yr) | y | 1 |
| 8.03 | Well controlled by herbicides | ||
| 8.04 | Tolerates, or benefits from, mutilation, cultivation, or fire | y | 1 |
| 8.05 | Effective natural enemies present locally (e.g. introduced biocontrol agents) | ||
| Total score: | 6 |
Supporting data:
| Notes | Reference | |
| 1.01 | No evidence | |
| 1.02 | (1)"Due to the fact that C. lusitanica has a wide geographical and altitudinal range, it has been introduced all over the world, and it is difficult to determine where it became naturalized and where it was planted. As an example of its adaptability, the species was introduced in Portugal in the 17th century and today grows extremely well in the north and central regions of the country." (2)"Hnatiuk (1990) listed the plant as being naturalised in Queensland and Carr et al., (1992) recorded the plant as having established localised populations in riparian vegetation in Victoria." | (1)Reproduced from the Forestry Compendium. © CAB International, Wallingford, UK, 2005. (2)http://www.hear.org/Pier/species/cupressus_lusitanica.htm |
| 1.03 | "This species includes a recognized variety, C. lusitanica var. benthami (sometimes classified as a subspecies or even as a different species), found naturally in the Paxuca mountains in Mexico, as well as several cultivars with distinct branching patterns and leaf colours. Most of those cultivars were considered in the past as botanical varieties." [No evidenc of the sub species or varieties being weedy]. | Reproduced from the Forestry Compendium. © CAB International, Wallingford, UK, 2005. |
| 2.01 | (1)"It appears that C. lusitanica was originally distributed in the mountains of El Salvador, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras and Mexico. However, according to some, it is doubtful whether this species is native to El Salvador, Nicaragua and Costa Rica, considering it as native between the parallels 15° and 28º N and 89° to 108º W, including only Mexico, Guatemala and Honduras. " (2)"Native range: "Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Costa Rica at altitudes from 1200 to 3000 m. It is doubtful whether this species is native to El Salvador, Nicaragua and Costa Rica" | (1)Reproduced from the Forestry Compendium. © CAB International, Wallingford, UK, 2005. (2)http://www.hear.org/Pier/species/cupressus_lusitanica.htm |
| 2.02 | "Due to the fact that C. lusitanica has a wide geographical and altitudinal range, it has been introduced all over the world, and it is difficult to determine where it became naturalized and where it was planted. As an example of its adaptability, the species was introduced in Portugal in the 17th century and today grows extremely well in the north and central regions of the country. ... The range of C. lusitanica has been widely extended by cultivation, and it is planted in Portugal, England, California, East Africa, New Zealand, Australia and Brazil mainly for wood production, erosion control and as an ornamental. It has been introduced worldwide as an ornamental tree." | Reproduced from the Forestry Compendium. © CAB International, Wallingford, UK, 2005. |
| 2.03 |
"Due to the fact that C. lusitanica has a wide geographical and altitudinal
range, it has been introduced all over the world, and it is difficult to
determine where it became naturalized and where it was planted. As an
example of its adaptability, the species was introduced in Portugal in the
17th century and today grows extremely well in the north and central regions
of the country." "Vegetation Types - coniferous forests - mixed forests - mountain forests - savanna woodlands " "Altitude range: 0 - 3000 m" |
Reproduced from the Forestry Compendium. © CAB International, Wallingford, UK, 2005. |
| 2.04 | (1)"It appears that C. lusitanica was originally distributed in the mountains of El Salvador, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras and Mexico. However, according to some, it is doubtful whether this species is native to El Salvador, Nicaragua and Costa Rica, considering it as native between the parallels 15° and 28º N and 89° to 108º W, including only Mexico, Guatemala and Honduras. " (2)"Native range: "Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Costa Rica at altitudes from 1200 to 3000 m. It is doubtful whether this species is native to El Salvador, Nicaragua and Costa Rica" | (1)Reproduced from the Forestry Compendium. © CAB International, Wallingford, UK, 2005. (2)http://www.hear.org/Pier/species/cupressus_lusitanica.htm |
| 2.05 | "Due to the fact that C. lusitanica has a wide geographical and altitudinal range, it has been introduced all over the world, and it is difficult to determine where it became naturalized and where it was planted. As an example of its adaptability, the species was introduced in Portugal in the 17th century and today grows extremely well in the north and central regions of the country. ... The range of C. lusitanica has been widely extended by cultivation, and it is planted in Portugal, England, California, East Africa, New Zealand, Australia and Brazil mainly for wood production, erosion control and as an ornamental. It has been introduced worldwide as an ornamental tree." | Reproduced from the Forestry Compendium. © CAB International, Wallingford, UK, 2005. |
| 3.01 | (1)"Due to the fact that C. lusitanica has a wide geographical and altitudinal range, it has been introduced all over the world, and it is difficult to determine where it became naturalized and where it was planted. As an example of its adaptability, the species was introduced in Portugal in the 17th century and today grows extremely well in the north and central regions of the country." (2)"Hnatiuk (1990) listed the plant as being naturalised in Queensland and Carr et al., (1992) recorded the plant as having established localised populations in riparian vegetation in Victoria." | (1)Reproduced from the Forestry Compendium. © CAB International, Wallingford, UK, 2005. (2)http://www.hear.org/Pier/species/cupressus_lusitanica.htm |
| 3.02 | No evidence | |
| 3.03 | No evidence | |
| 3.04 | No evidence | |
| 3.05 | "Cupressus macrocarpa is native to Monterey area in California. It invades coastal priairie, desert scrub and riparian areas elsewhere in the State. |
http://www.cal-ipc.org/ip/inventory/pdf/Inventory2006.pdf#search=%22%22Cupressus %22%20invasive%7Cinvasion%7Cinvading%7Cinvader%22 |
| 4.01 | No evidence of such structures. | Reproduced from the Forestry Compendium. © CAB International, Wallingford, UK, 2005. |
| 4.02 | "Abstract: The potential allelopathic effect of Cupressus lusitanica, Eucalyptus globulus, E. camaldulensis and E. saligna on seed germination, radicle and seedling growth was investigated with four crops: Cicer arietinum (chickpea), Zea mays (maize), Pisum salivum (pea) and Eragrostis tef (teff). Aqueous leaf extracts of all the tree species significantly reduced both germination and radicle growth of the majority of the crops mostly starting from concentrations of 1% or 2.5%. The shoot and root dry weight increase of the crops was significantly reduced after 10 weeks treatment with leaf extracts. Among the four crops, chickpea and teff were most susceptible with respect to germination, and teff with respect to growth. From the overall data the leaf extracts of the four tree species can be arranged according to increasing allelopathic potential: C. lusitanica, E. globulus, saligna and E. camaldulensis. It is suggested that the planting of E. camaldulensis and E. saligna in integrated land use systems should be minimized, whereas the use of C. lusitanica and E. globulus seems less environmentally damaging in this respect." (2)Abstract: Allelopathic substances were found in vegetative and reproductive structures of cypress (C. lusitanica Mill.); aqueous extracts inhibited seed germination in 3 weed species: Lepidium costaricensis, Bidens pilosa and Rumex crispus. The amount of the inhibitor produced by cypress decreases significantly during the dry season. No soil persistance of the inhibitor was observed. The weed seeds begin to germinate normally after 8-10 days of treatment with aqueous extracts or after being washed with tap water. When seeds were treated with the essential cypress oils, no recovery of germination capacity was observed. The inhibitor did not show any effect on cypress seeds. Cypress should probably not be used for reforestation in areas of steep slopes and heavy rainfall. In these sites the establishment of cypress forest could favor degradation instead of soil improvement. | (1)Lisanework, N.; Michelsen, A. Allelopathy in agroforestry systems: The effects of leaf extracts of Cupressus lusitanica and three Eucalyptus spp. on four Ethiopian crops Agroforestry Systems 21 (1) : 63-74 1993. (2)LINES-M N; FOURNIER-O L A ALLELOPATHIC EFFECT OF CUPRESSUS-LUSITANICA ON THE GERMINATION OF WEED SEEDS Revista de Biologia Tropical 27 (2) : 223-230 1979 |
| 4.03 | No evidence | |
| 4.04 | "Cypress are considered undesirable forage for livestock, although young plants are occasionally browsed." | http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/tree/cupmac/all.html |
| 4.05 | No evidence | |
| 4.06 |
List of pest species associated with C. lusitanica: Armillaria mellea (armillaria root rot) fungus Diaporthe eres (apple leaf, branch and fruit fungus) fungus Heterobasidion annosum sensu stricto fungus Lepteutypa cupressi (stem canker: Cupressus spp.) fungus Poria vincta fungus Seiridium fungus Seiridium cardinale (cypress canker) fungus Seiridium unicorne fungus Sphaeropsis sapinea (Sphaeropsis blight) fungus Acromyrmex insect Atta (leaf-cutter ant) insect Cinara cupressi sensu lato (Cypress aphid) insect Glena bisulca insect Megastigmus wachtli (cypress seed chalcid) insect Melanolophia commotaria insect Oxydia trychiata insect Parocneria orienta insect Phloeosinus baumanni insect Phloeosinus serratus insect Phloeosinus sp. insect Phloeosinus tacubayae insect Phoracantha recurva (eucalyptus longhorned borer) insect Polydrusus chrysomela insect Xiphinema diversum nematode [No evidence that the above are economic pests]. |
Reproduced from the Forestry Compendium. © CAB International, Wallingford, UK, 2005. |
| 4.07 | (1)"Occupational contact dermatitis in a 47 year old male employee of a file manufacturing facility was described. The patient had been employed in the file manufacturing company for 25 years and worked in the quality control of files which had been immersed in a mixture of petrol, pitch, colophony, and antirust oil. He had been troubled for 5 years with scaly, itchy vesicular erythematous lesions on the hands which he associated with his factory work. His symptoms also appeared when he worked as a gardener, pruning cedar hedges. The patient showed no signs of personal or family history of atopy. Patch testing was positive for colophony, oil mix, pitch, Cupressus-lusitanica Miller bark, pine mix, spruce mix, cedar juniper mix, and abietic-acid. The authors attribute the patient's sensitization to his exposure of over 20 years to the cutting oils which contain colophony. " [Probably yes - but no other clinical evidence.] (2)"Abstract: Background: Cupressaceae (cypress) pollens can cause pollinosis in winter. However, the lack of specific commercial extracts combined with the early pollination period of cypress trees make a precise diagnosis difficult. The need for a reliable and effective cypress extract for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes is increasingly felt. Methods: Mixed or single Cupressus arizonica, lusitanica and sempervirens pollen extracts precipitated with ammonium sulfate (PPT) were compared by direct RAST, RAST inhibition and SDS-PAGE techniques. The major allergen of C. arizonica (Cup a 1), purified by anion exchange chromatography, was checked by immunoblotting experiments before chemical modification, in parallel with a C. arizonica extract, with potassium cyanate (KCNO) to obtain a monomeric allergoid. The allergoid extract was characterized for its biological, chemico-physical and immunological features by RAST inhibition, SDS-PAGE and ELISA assays. Results: Direct RAST, RAST inhibition, and SDS-PAGE data indicated that the PPT C. arizonica pollen extract showed the most allergenic potential, and it can be considered representative of the Cupressus spp. Immunoblotting data confirmed Cup a 1 as a major allergen. RAST inhibition and ELISA showed that modified PPT C. arizonica extract had less IgE reactivity than the native, non-modified extract, while preserving the immunogenic capacity typical for an allergoid. Finally, the SDS-PAGE profile of Cup a 1 allergoid was similar to native Cup a 1 allergen, suggesting the modified C. arizonica extract shows the characteristics of a monomeric allergoid. Conclusions: The PPT C. arizonica pollen extract shows good in vitro diagnostic potential and its chemically modified form offers the features of a monomeric allergoid. It might therefore lend itself to the development of a product to be administered by the sublingual or oromucosal route for immunotherapy of individuals with cypress pollinosis." | (1)Occupational Dermatitis from Colophony Matos J ; Mariano A ; Goncalo S ; Freitas JD ; Oliveira J Contact Dermatitis, Vol. 18, No. 1, pages 53-54, 4 references, 19881988 [NIOSH] (2)Mistrello, G.; Roncarolo, D.; Zanoni, D., et al. Allergenic relevance of Cupressus arizonica pollen extract and biological characterization of the allergoid. International Archives of Allergy and Immunology 129 (4) : 296-304 December 2002 |
| 4.08 | "The major disadvantage of C. lusitanica is its relative susceptibility to fire, because of its natural characteristics and due to the fact that, because of its low-density crown when young, it allows the growth of shrubs that increase the risk of fire." | Reproduced from the Forestry Compendium. © CAB International, Wallingford, UK, 2005. |
| 4.09 | "Because it is a shade intolerant species, it should be managed in even-aged stands." | Reproduced from the Forestry Compendium. © CAB International, Wallingford, UK, 2005. |
| 4.1 | "Soil types: acid soils; limestone soils; sandstone soils; vertisols; volcanic soils. Within its natural geographical range, C. lusitanica grows on mountainous sites, usually between 1800 and 2600 m altitude, on moist soils of volcanic origin. However, it is very tolerant to the geological nature of the substrate and grows well on soils derived from sedimentary rocks, calcareous and sandstone. In Mediterranean regions it also grows on low altitude sites (below 400 m, e.g. in Portugal), especially with oceanic aspect, and occasionally on sites with continental aspect and high air and/or soil humidity." | Reproduced from the Forestry Compendium. © CAB International, Wallingford, UK, 2005. |
| 4.11 | No evidence | |
| 4.12 | No evidence | |
| 5.01 | "C. lusitanica is a medium-sized tree up to 25-30 metres high, with a broadly pyramidal crown." | Reproduced from the Forestry Compendium. © CAB International, Wallingford, UK, 2005. |
| 5.02 | ||
| 5.03 | ||
| 5.04 | ||
| 6.01 | No evidence | |
| 6.02 | "Cone serotiny refers to canopy seed storage in cones that remain alive, though closed, for several years. There are some Cupressus species which have only serotinous cones, or both serotinous and non-serotinous cones on the same tree. Scale separation and seed release occurs immediately after the cone ripens in non-serotinous cones, or else the cones remain closed and alive longer, generally up to 15-20 years. Germination tests were done with serotinous cone seeds from C. arizonica Greene, C. benthamii Endl., C. lusitanica Mill., and C. macrocarpa Hartw. Germination was below 50% for all species. The highest levels of germination were obtained from 2- to 7-year-old cones, depending on the species. Cupressus arizonica showed a regular decline in germination values, from 43.5% for seeds from 3-year-old cones to 7.5% for seeds from 7-year-old cones. Cupressus benthamii had a maximum germination value of seeds from 5-year-old cones. Cupressus macrocarpa had a maximum germination capacity of 20.5% for seeds from 6-year-old cones, and it showed 7.5% germination for 12-year-old seeds. Cupressus lusitanica reached 33.5% germination of seeds from 5-year-old cones. Serotinous cones from Cupressus species, usually not collected because it is assumed that their seeds are not viable, can be utilized in cone harvesting, increasing the yield of the cone-bearing trees." | http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=13424761 |
| 6.03 | "Leyland cypress is an inter-generic hybrid betweenyellow cedar, Chamaecyparis nootkatensis, andC. macrocarpa, and several clones have beendeployed widely by vegetative propagation." [No evidence of hybrids of C. lusitanica]. | |
| 6.04 | ||
| 6.05 | A gumnosperm - probably wind pollinated. | |
| 6.06 | No evidence of spread by vegetative means. | |
| 6.07 | "C. lusitanica commences flowering at approximately 15 years old. " | Reproduced from the Forestry Compendium. © CAB International, Wallingford, UK, 2005. |
| 7.01 | Probably not - no evidence that the species is planted in heavily trafficked areas - also no evidence that the propagules have any menas of attachment. | |
| 7.02 | "C. lusitanica is used as an ornamental (namely in living hedges, because of its low sensitivity to pruning) as well as in forestry." Cultivated for its highly durable wood. | Reproduced from the Forestry Compendium. © CAB International, Wallingford, UK, 2005. |
| 7.03 | Probably not - no evidence that the species is planted in heavily trafficked areas - also no evidence that the propagules have any menas of attachment. | |
| 7.04 | (1)Seeds about 75 to a cone, brown, with resin glands, about 4 mm long together with a narrow wing." (2)Wind-blown seed | (1)http://www.conifers.org/cu/cup/lusitanica.htm (2)http://www.hear.org/Pier/species/cupressus_lusitanica.htm |
| 7.05 | No evidence of the species inhabiting water ways. | |
| 7.06 | Probably not - gymnosperm with seeds enclosed in cones. | |
| 7.07 | Probably not - no evidence that the propagules have any means of attachment. | |
| 7.08 | Probably not - no evidence of ingestion by animals. | |
| 8.01 | "Cones globose, cca 12 mm across, bluish-green in the juvenile stage, turning dark brown when they ripen, they open and later fall, composed of 6-8 scales with a central strong, reflexed umbo, erect on the upper scales. Seeds about 75 to a cone, brown, with resin glands, about 4 mm long together with a narrow wing" [Probably yes - Need only about 15 cones per m sq for there to be >1000 seeds/ m sq. Plus the tree has pyramidal shape and not a wide canopy]. | |
| 8.02 | "Cone serotiny refers to canopy seed storage in cones that remain alive, though closed, for several years. There are some Cupressus species which have only serotinous cones, or both serotinous and non-serotinous cones on the same tree. Scale separation and seed release occurs immediately after the cone ripens in non-serotinous cones, or else the cones remain closed and alive longer, generally up to 15-20 years. Germination tests were done with serotinous cone seeds from C. arizonica Greene, C. benthamii Endl., C. lusitanica Mill., and C. macrocarpa Hartw. Germination was below 50% for all species. The highest levels of germination were obtained from 2- to 7-year-old cones, depending on the species. Cupressus arizonica showed a regular decline in germination values, from 43.5% for seeds from 3-year-old cones to 7.5% for seeds from 7-year-old cones. Cupressus benthamii had a maximum germination value of seeds from 5-year-old cones. Cupressus macrocarpa had a maximum germination capacity of 20.5% for seeds from 6-year-old cones, and it showed 7.5% germination for 12-year-old seeds. Cupressus lusitanica reached 33.5% germination of seeds from 5-year-old cones. Serotinous cones from Cupressus species, usually not collected because it is assumed that their seeds are not viable, can be utilized in cone harvesting, increasing the yield of the cone-bearing trees." [Seeds could probably survive within cones fallen on the ground for over a year]. | http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=13424761 |
| 8.03 | No evidence that the species is being controlled for. | |
| 8.04 | "C. lusitanica is very well suited for the establishment of hedges and windbreaks due to its low sensitivity to pruning. " | Reproduced from the Forestry Compendium. © CAB International, Wallingford, UK, 2005. |
| 8.05 | Don’t know. |
Need more info? Have questions? Comments? Information to contribute? Contact PIER!
[ Return to PIER homepage ] [Risk assessment page]
This page created 24 December 2006