Pacific Island Ecosystems at Risk (PIER)
RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS: Evaluate, score: 4
|
Australian/New Zealand Weed Risk Assessment adapted for Hawai‘i. Research directed by C. Daehler (UH Botany) with funding from the Kaulunani Urban Forestry Program and US Forest Service Information on
Risk Assessments |
Ficus benjamina; weeping fig |
Answer |
||
1.01 |
Is the species highly domesticated? |
y=-3, n=0 |
n |
1.02 |
Has the species become naturalized where grown? |
y=-1, n=-1 |
n |
1.03 |
Does the species have weedy races? |
y=-1, n=-1 |
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” |
See Append 2 |
2 |
2.02 |
Quality of climate match data (0-low; 1-intermediate; 2-high) see appendix 2 |
2 |
|
2.03 |
Broad climate suitability (environmental versatility) |
y=1, n=0 |
y |
2.04 |
Native or naturalized in regions with tropical or subtropical climates |
y=1, n=0 |
y |
2.05 |
Does the species have a history of repeated introductions outside its natural range? y=-2 |
?=-1, n=0 |
y |
3.01 |
Naturalized beyond native range y = 1*multiplier (see Append 2), n= question 2.05 |
n |
|
3.02 |
Garden/amenity/disturbance weed y = 1*multiplier (see Append 2) |
n=0 |
n |
3.03 |
Agricultural/forestry/horticultural weed y = 2*multiplier (see Append 2) |
n=0 |
n |
3.04 |
Environmental weed y = 2*multiplier (see Append 2) |
n=0 |
n |
3.05 |
Congeneric weed y = 1*multiplier (see Append 2) |
n=0 |
y |
4.01 |
Produces spines, thorns or burrs |
y=1, n=0 |
n |
4.02 |
Allelopathic |
y=1, n=0 |
n |
4.03 |
Parasitic |
y=1, n=0 |
n |
4.04 |
Unpalatable to grazing animals |
y=1, n=-1 |
|
4.05 |
Toxic to animals |
y=1, n=0 |
n |
4.06 |
Host for recognized pests and pathogens |
y=1, n=0 |
n |
4.07 |
Causes allergies or is otherwise toxic to humans |
y=1, n=0 |
y |
4.08 |
Creates a fire hazard in natural ecosystems |
y=1, n=0 |
n |
4.09 |
Is a shade tolerant plant at some stage of its life cycle |
y=1, n=0 |
y |
4.1 |
Tolerates a wide range of soil conditions (or limestone conditions if not a volcanic island) |
y=1, n=0 |
y |
4.11 |
Climbing or smothering growth habit |
y=1, n=0 |
n |
4.12 |
Forms dense thickets |
y=1, n=0 |
n |
5.01 |
Aquatic |
y=5, n=0 |
n |
5.02 |
Grass |
y=1, n=0 |
n |
5.03 |
Nitrogen fixing woody plant |
y=1, n=0 |
n |
5.04 |
Geophyte (herbaceous with underground storage organs -- bulbs, corms, or tubers) |
y=1, n=0 |
n |
6.01 |
Evidence of substantial reproductive failure in native habitat |
y=1, n=0 |
n |
6.02 |
Produces viable seed. |
y=1, n=-1 |
y |
6.03 |
Hybridizes naturally |
y=1, n=-1 |
n |
6.04 |
Self-compatible or apomictic |
y=1, n=-1 |
|
6.05 |
Requires specialist pollinators |
y=-1, n=0 |
y |
6.06 |
Reproduction by vegetative fragmentation |
y=1, n=-1 |
y |
6.07 |
Minimum generative time (years) 1 year = 1, 2 or 3 years = 0, 4+ years = -1 |
See left |
4 |
7.01 |
Propagules likely to be dispersed unintentionally (plants growing in heavily trafficked areas) |
y=1, n=-1 |
n |
7.02 |
Propagules dispersed intentionally by people |
y=1, n=-1 |
y |
7.03 |
Propagules likely to disperse as a produce contaminant |
y=1, n=-1 |
n |
7.04 |
Propagules adapted to wind dispersal |
y=1, n=-1 |
n |
7.05 |
Propagules water dispersed |
y=1, n=-1 |
n |
7.06 |
Propagules bird dispersed |
y=1, n=-1 |
y |
7.07 |
Propagules dispersed by other animals (externally) |
y=1, n=-1 |
n |
7.08 |
Propagules survive passage through the gut |
y=1, n=-1 |
y |
8.01 |
Prolific seed production (>1000/m2) |
y=1, n=-1 |
y |
8.02 |
Evidence that a persistent propagule bank is formed (>1 yr) |
y=1, n=-1 |
|
8.03 |
Well controlled by herbicides |
y=-1, n=1 |
|
8.04 |
Tolerates, or benefits from, mutilation, cultivation, or fire |
y=1, n=-1 |
y |
8.05 |
Effective natural enemies present locally (e.g. introduced biocontrol agents) |
y=-1, n=1 |
|
Total score: |
4 |
Supporting data:
Source |
Notes |
|
1.01 |
no evidence |
|
1.02 |
http://www.fnps.org/dade/pubs/PlantsToAvoid.html |
Miami Dade county occurs on Pine Rocklands, Hammocks |
1.03 |
no evidence |
|
2.01 |
CAB International, 2000. Forestry Compendium Global Module. Wallingford, UK: CAB International. |
Natural latitude range: Aproximate limits north to south:
30N to 30S |
2.02 |
||
2.03 |
CAB International, 2000. Forestry Compendium Global Module. Wallingford, UK: CAB International. |
Climate descriptors |
2.04 |
CAB International, 2000. Forestry Compendium Global Module. Wallingford, UK: CAB International. |
Natural latitude range:
Aproximate limits north to south: 30N to 30S |
2.05 |
CAB International, 2000. Forestry Compendium Global Module. Wallingford, UK: CAB International. |
List of countries where planted |
3.01 |
Note: listing on http://www.fnps.org/dade/pubs/PlantsToAvoid.html was apparently an error. Does not appear on updated list. Not listed as naturalized in Florida by Long and Lakela A Tropical Flora of Florida. |
|
3.02 |
no vidence |
|
3.03 |
no vidence |
|
3.04 |
http://www.co.miami-dade.fl.us/derm/badplants.htm |
1) Was on Miami Dade county list of "plants to avoid" but was taken off the list in the most updated version (reference cited here). Not on 1999 or 2001 FLEPPC list. |
3.05 |
(1) Weeds in New Zealand (http://www.boprc.govt.nz/www/green/weedindx.htm)
contact: norb@kcbbs.gen.nz |
(1) F. pumila and F. rubiginosa are prohibited from
propagation, sale and distribution in New Zealand. |
4.01 |
smooth tree |
|
4.02 |
no evidence |
|
4.03 |
CAB International, 2000. Forestry Compendium Global Module. Wallingford, UK: CAB International. |
F. benjamina is a large strangling fig with an umbrella-shaped, graceful crown and few or no aerial roots. It is grown for ornamental purposes and is therefore found in many countries outside its natural range; |
4.04 |
||
4.05 |
no evidnce |
|
4.06 |
CAB International, 2000. Forestry Compendium Global Module. Wallingford, UK: CAB International. |
Insect pests: |
4.07 |
(1) Kanerva, L.; Estlander, T.; Petman, L.; Mäkinen-Kiljunen,
S. (2001) Occupational allergic contact urticaria to yucca (Yucca aloifolia
), weeping fig (Ficus benjamina ), and spathe flower (Spathiphyllum wallisii
). Allergy (Copenhagen), 2001, Vol.56, No.10, pp.1008-1011, 27 ref. |
(1) AB: "Occupational contact urticaria (CU) from plants is
often reported, but it is less often attributed to decorative houseplants.
We present an atopic gardener and caretaker of plants who developed CU when
occupationally exposed to weeping fig, spathe flower, and yucca [Finland;
date not given]. Sensitization was evaluated by skin prick tests (SPT) and
analyses for IgE antibodies. SPT were positive to all three plants, and IgE
antibodies were found to weeping fig and spathe flower. SPT were also
performed with several decorative houseplants in more than 600 patients.
Positive SPT was found to weeping fig (12%), African milk tree (Euphorbia
trigona ; 8.3%), yucca (5.8%), Chinese rose (Hibiscus rosa-sinensis ; 4.7%),
massangana (Dracaena fragrans ; 4.6%), bird's nest fern (Asplenium nidus ;
3.2%), and spathe flower (3.2%)." |
4.08 |
no vidence |
|
4.09 |
Choi JongIn; Seon JeangHoon; Paek KeeYoeup; Kim TaeJung (1998) Photosynthesis and stomatal conductance of eight foliage plant species as affected by photosynthetic photon flux density and temperature. Journal of the Korean Society for Horticultural Science, 1998, Vol.39, No.2, pp.197-202, 16 ref. 2) MIN-G-M and LEE-J-S 1992. GROWTH RESPONSES AND ACCLIMATIZATION OF FICUS-BENJAMINA WG-1 TO THE CHANGES OF LIGHT CONDITIONS.Journal-of-the-Korean-Society-for-Horticultural-Science. 33 (1): 48-53. |
AB: "CO2 assimilation, intercellular CO2 concentration, stomatal conductance and transpiration as influenced by photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD) and temperature were determined for 8 foliage plants. Chlorophyll contents of most plants tended to increase with low PPFDs (35-100 micro mol m-2 s-1) and low temperatures compared with high PPFD (300 micro mol m-2 s-1) and high temperatures. Ficus benjamina attained a high CO2 concentration under 300 micro mol m-2 s-1 PPFD." 2)The growth of Ficus benjamina 'WG-1' under low light intensities (60%, 90% shading) was better than higher light intensities (0%, 30% shading) considering the abilities to be acclimatized. |
4.1 |
CAB International, 2000. Forestry Compendium Global Module. Wallingford, UK: CAB International. |
- Soil texture: light; medium; heavy |
4.11 |
CAB International, 2000. Forestry Compendium Global Module. Wallingford, UK: CAB International. |
F. benjamina is a large strangling fig with an umbrella-shaped, graceful crown and few or no aerial roots. It is grown for ornamental purposes and is therefore found in many countries outside its natural range; |
4.12 |
CAB International, 2000. Forestry Compendium Global Module. Wallingford, UK: CAB International. |
F. benjamina is a large strangling fig with an umbrella-shaped, graceful crown and few or no aerial roots. It is grown for ornamental purposes and is therefore found in many countries outside its natural range; |
5.01 |
CAB International, 2000. Forestry Compendium Global Module. Wallingford, UK: CAB International. |
F. benjamina is a large strangling fig with an umbrella-shaped, graceful crown and few or no aerial roots. It is grown for ornamental purposes and is therefore found in many countries outside its natural range; |
5.02 |
CAB International, 2000. Forestry Compendium Global Module. Wallingford, UK: CAB International. |
F. benjamina is a large strangling fig with an umbrella-shaped, graceful crown and few or no aerial roots. It is grown for ornamental purposes and is therefore found in many countries outside its natural range; |
5.03 |
no evidence |
|
5.04 |
CAB International, 2000. Forestry Compendium Global Module. Wallingford, UK: CAB International. |
F. benjamina is a large strangling fig with an umbrella-shaped, graceful crown and few or no aerial roots. It is grown for ornamental purposes and is therefore found in many countries outside its natural range; |
6.01 |
no evidence |
|
6.02 |
CAB International, 2000. Forestry Compendium Global Module. Wallingford, UK: CAB International. |
- Seed storage recalcitrant |
6.03 |
Pollinated only by species specific fig wasp; unlilkely to hybridize |
|
6.04 |
||
6.05 |
fig wasp |
|
6.06 |
CAB International, 2000. Forestry Compendium Global Module. Wallingford, UK: CAB International. |
Ability to sucker; regenerate rapidly; suited for coppicing |
6.07 |
R. Criley, UH Department of Horticulture, personal communication |
|
7.01 |
no evidence |
|
7.02 |
Vidalie, H. (2000) Foliage pot plants for decorative
purposes. |
AB: "Production data of foliage pot plants in France, Netherlands, Germany, Denmark, Belgium and Luxembourg, the UK, Italy, Spain and Switzerland are presented. The Netherlands are the greatest producers (547 ha of greenhouses) with 64% of plants for export. The most popular plants are Ficus benjamina, Hedera spp., Dracaena spp., Yucca and Schefflera . " |
7.03 |
no evidence |
|
7.04 |
no evidence |
|
7.05 |
no evidence |
|
7.06 |
fleshy fig with red color when mature |
|
7.07 |
Elangovan, V.; Marimuthu, G.; Kunz, T. H. (1999) Temporal patterns of individual and group foraging behaviour in the short-nosed fruit bat, Cynopterus sphinx , in south India. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 1999, Vol.15, No.5, pp.681-687, 13 ref. |
" The foraging behaviour of the short-nosed fruit bat, Cynopterus sphinx , was investigated in 10 species of fruit trees near the Madurai Kamaraj University campus in Tamil Nadu, over 121 nights between May 1996 and January 1998. The tree species were Annona squamosa, Polyalthia longifolia, P. pendula, Achras sapota [Manilkara zapota], Calophyllum inophyllum, Coccinia indica [C. grandis], Terminalia catappa, Ficus religiosa, F. benjamina and F. bengalensis [F. benghalensis] .The bat began to visit fruit-bearing trees about 30 min after sunset. Individual bats often hovered near or landed on fruits or on nearby branches to remove whole or parts of fruits with their mouths. These bats seldom remained in the fruit-bearing trees to feed, but instead carried fruits to feeding roosts, repeating this behaviour several times throughout the night. Analysis of the temporal distribution of feeding behaviour revealed 2 peaks of activity, one in the pre-midnight hours when bats fed mostly on 'steady state' fruits (those p |
7.08 |
bird dispersal |
|
8.01 |
numerous minute seeds in small figs |
|
8.02 |
||
8.03 |
Pacific Island Ecosystems at Risk (PIER) |
Chemical: "Fig trees are particularly sensitive to triclopyr herbicides as a basal or cut-stump treatment. Trees found growing on concrete or rock structures should be treated with herbicide while young to avoid costly structural damage. Use extreme caution when applying herbicide to figs growing as epiphytes to ensure that the poison does not contact the host tree. When exotic figs germinate high in the branches of large trees in natural forest communities, it may be extraordinarily difficult to get close enough to the fig to treat it." (Hammer, 1996) (chemcial is effective but difficult in practice) |
8.04 |
CAB International, 2000. Forestry Compendium Global Module. Wallingford, UK: CAB International. |
Ability to sucker; regenerate rapidly; suited for coppicing |
8.05 |
no information |
Need more info? Have questions? Comments? Information to contribute? Contact PIER!
[ Return to PIER homepage ] [Risk assessment page]
This page updated 4 March 2005