Pacific Island Ecosystems at Risk (PIER)


Macaranga mappa


RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS: High risk, score: 11


Australian/New Zealand Weed Risk Assessment adapted for Hawai‘i.
Information on Risk Assessments
Original risk assessment

Macaranga mappa (L.) Muell.-Arg. Family - Euphorbiaceae. Common Names(s) - Bingabing. Synonym(s) - Macaranga grandifolia (Blanco) Merrill.

Answer

Score

1.01

Is the species highly domesticated?

y=-3, n=0

n

0

1.02

Has the species become naturalized where grown?

y=1, n=-1

1.03

Does the species have weedy races?

y=-1, n=-1

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

n

0

2.04

Native or naturalized in regions with tropical or subtropical climates

y=1, n=0

y

1

2.05

Does the species have a history of repeated introductions outside its natural range?

y=-2, ?=-1, n=0

n

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

n

0

3.04

Environmental weed y = 2*multiplier (see Append 2)

n=0

y

4

3.05

Congeneric weed y = 1*multiplier (see Append 2)

n=0

4.01

Produces spines, thorns or burrs

y=1, n=0

y

1

4.02

Allelopathic

y=1, n=0

4.03

Parasitic

y=1, n=0

n

0

4.04

Unpalatable to grazing animals

y=1, n=-1

4.05

Toxic to animals

y=1, n=0

4.06

Host for recognized pests and pathogens

y=1, n=0

4.07

Causes allergies or is otherwise toxic to humans

y=1, n=0

4.08

Creates a fire hazard in natural ecosystems

y=1, n=0

n

0

4.09

Is a shade tolerant plant at some stage of its life cycle

y=1, n=0

y

1

4.10

Tolerates a wide range of soil conditions (or limestone conditions if not a volcanic island)

y=1, n=0

y

1

4.11

Climbing or smothering growth habit

y=1, n=0

n

0

4.12

Forms dense thickets

y=1, n=0

y

1

5.01

Aquatic

y=5, n=0

n

0

5.02

Grass

y=1, n=0

n

0

5.03

Nitrogen fixing woody plant

y=1, n=0

n

0

5.04

Geophyte (herbaceous with underground storage organs -- bulbs, corms, or tubers)

y=1, n=0

n

0

6.01

Evidence of substantial reproductive failure in native habitat

y=1, n=0

n

0

6.02

Produces viable seed.

y=1, n=-1

y

1

6.03

Hybridizes naturally

y=1, n=-1

6.04

Self-compatible or apomictic

y=1, n=-1

n

-1

6.05

Requires specialist pollinators

y=-1, n=0

n

0

6.06

Reproduction by vegetative fragmentation

y=1, n=-1

6.07

Minimum generative time (years) 1 year = 1, 2 or 3 years = 0, 4+ years = -1

See left

2

0

7.01

Propagules likely to be dispersed unintentionally (plants growing in heavily trafficked areas)

y=1, n=-1

n

-1

7.02

Propagules dispersed intentionally by people

y=1, n=-1

y

1

7.03

Propagules likely to disperse as a produce contaminant

y=1, n=-1

y

1

7.04

Propagules adapted to wind dispersal

y=1, n=-1

n

-1

7.05

Propagules water dispersed

y=1, n=-1

n

-1

7.06

Propagules bird dispersed

y=1, n=-1

y

1

7.07

Propagules dispersed by other animals (externally)

y=1, n=-1

n

-1

7.08

Propagules survive passage through the gut

y=1, n=-1

y

1

8.01

Prolific seed production (>1000/m2)

y=1, n=-1

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

8.05

Effective natural enemies present locally (e.g. introduced biocontrol agents)

y=-1, n=1

Total score:

11

Supporting data:

Notes

Source

1.01

(1)No evidence

(1)Wagner, W. L., D.R. Herbst and S.H. Sohmer. 1999. Manual of the flowering plants of Hawaii. Revised edition. Bernice P. Bishop Museum special publication. University of Hawai‘i Press/Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu.

1.02

1.03

2.01

(1)Native to the Philippines

(1)Wagner, W. L., D.R. Herbst and S.H. Sohmer. 1999. Manual of the flowering plants of Hawaii. Revised edition. Bernice P. Bishop Museum special publication. University of Hawai‘i Press/Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu.

2.02

(1)Native range within tropics

(1)Wagner, W. L., D.R. Herbst and S.H. Sohmer. 1999. Manual of the flowering plants of Hawaii. Revised edition. Bernice P. Bishop Museum special publication. University of Hawai‘i Press/Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu.

2.03

(1)Hardiness: USDA Zone 11: above 4.5 °C (40 °F)

(1)http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/go/59984/ [Accessed 08 Sep 2008]

2.04

(1)Native to the Philippines; in Hawaii naturalized in low elevation mesic to wet areas and disturbed mesic valleys, 0-220 m, on Oahu and Hawaii.

(1)Wagner, W. L., D.R. Herbst and S.H. Sohmer. 1999. Manual of the flowering plants of Hawaii. Revised edition. Bernice P. Bishop Museum special publication. University of Hawai‘i Press/Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu.

2.05

(1)Unusual in cultivation in the continental United States but common in Hawaii.

(1)Llamas, K.A. 2003. Tropical Flowering Plants. A Guide To Identification and Cultivation. Timber Press. Portland, OR.

3.01

(1)Native to the Philippines; in Hawaii naturalized in low elevation mesic to wet areas and disturbed mesic valleys, 0-220 m, on Oahu and Hawaii.

(1)Wagner, W. L., D.R. Herbst and S.H. Sohmer. 1999. Manual of the flowering plants of Hawaii. Revised edition. Bernice P. Bishop Museum special publication. University of Hawai‘i Press/Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu.

3.02

A disturbance adapted plant with negative environmental impacts [see Question 3.04] (1)"The presence of pioneer tree species such as Macaranga mappa…showed that the forest at Furu has been subjected to low-medium level of disturbance." (2)Low-land forest ecosystem degradation resulted from several reasons mentioned above would gives some consequencies to the ecosystem function. Some disturbances which could result in ecosystem degradation, among them are:..Invansion of pionner plants such as makaranga (Macaranga mappa and M. tanarius) to replace the previous native species, such matoa (Pometia spp.), merbau (Intsia spp.), and species from Dipterocarpaceae familiy.

(1)Pattiselanna, F. 2003. Some fruits bats (Chiroptera, Pteropodidae) of the Mamberamo River Basin, West Papua, Indonesia. Asia Life Sciences 12(1): 45-56. (2)Sihite,J., O. N. Lense, R. Suratri, C. Gustiar and S. Kosamah. 2005. BINTUNI BAY NATURE RESERVE MANAGEMENT PLAN IRIAN JAYA BARAT PROVINCE 2006-2030. The Nature Conservancy (TNC), Southeast Asia Center for Marine Protected Areas (SEACMPA). Sanur-Bali, Indonesia.

3.03

3.04

(1)Resource competition with alien plant species is one of the greatest threats in Hawaiian forests today, especially in lowland wet forests. To test the effects of alien species on rainfall interception, soil moisture, light availability and plant productivity, we established four 100 m2 removal plots and paired controls in a fenced exclosure in a 30 meters elevation lowland wet forest on the island of Hawai‘i. Biomass removed ranged from 325-928 kg dry weight per plot and was dominated by bingabing (Macaranga mappa) and melastoma (Melastoma candidum). Light availability increased by more than 50% when the non-native species were removed. Increased light levels may directly correlate with native species success, but to date we are seeing large amounts of alien seedlings in the removal plots and little regeneration by native species. Our data show that during dry periods, soil water availability is more than 50% greater in the removal plots, despite the fact that rainwater inputs into the plots are identical. In addition, litterfall inputs in the control plots are double the removal plots. These results suggest that alien species are having large effects on native species through water and light competition and are potentially influencing nutrient availability through their litterfall. Removal of alien species over large areas may not be feasible but our results suggest that resource competition between native and invasive plants should be addressed in the restoration and management of Hawai‘i’s lowland wet forests. (2)Lowland Tropical Rain Forest Extends up to 2,500 feet in windward areas. Disappearing due to clearing and non-native species invasion. Home to Kopiko’ula, Macaranga mappa, Asian Melastoma, and many other species (3)Eight potentially invasive species were noted near park lands, and were classified as encroaching upon Kahuku. Black wattle (Acacia mearnsii), autograph tree (Clusia rosea), loquat (Eriobotrya japonica), Chinese banyan (Ficus microcarpa), kahili flower, gunpowder tree, bingabing (Macaranga mappa), and Victorian box (Pittosporum undulatum) were cultivated or naturalized near Kahuku’s boundaries. Due to the highly invasive nature of these species, there is a possibility that individuals may remain undetected within the park or that these species will establish in Kahuku in the near future. (4)Abstract: The Hawaiian Islands contain a variety of climatic regions, elevations and substrates, which are home to a large number of endemic flora and fauna. Unfortunately, these rare ecosystems and endemic species are facing a bleak future of endangerment and extinction, such as the Hawaiian lowland wet forest. Non-native and invasive plant and animal populations are currently out-competing and over-crowding native lowland species. This study evaluated: (i) the effect of alien plants on lowland canopy structure and light availability and (ii) the resource efficiency of several dominant native and alien trees. Removal plots determined that alien species are altering under story light availability by creating a dense (1-10m) sub-canopy that is limiting forest light heterogeneity, and decreasing light transmittance by 51%. Light response curves conducted on Psychotria hawaiiensis (an endemic species) and two alien species (Macaranga mappa and Melastoma candidum) show that Psychotria has lower photosynthesis rates, but similar light compensation and saturation points, thus having shade-tolerant capabilities similar to M. mappa and M. candidum. However, the two alien species demonstrated higher specific leaf areas and lower leaf construction costs. This study indicates that P. hawaiiensis may be the most prominent endemic sub-canopy species because of its competitive photosynthetic characteristics. Yet, P. hawaiiensis constitutes only a small percentage of the total sub-canopy likely because M. mappa and M. candidum have faster growth and regeneration periods. These results suggest that alien plant species are drastically affecting forest under story light availability because of their leaf allocation patterns and high growth rates.

(1)Ostertag, R., S. Cordell, J. Michaud, C. Murray and C. Thurkins. 2005. REMOVING THE ALIENS: EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS FROM A LOWLAND WET FOREST ON HAWAI‘I ISLAND [abstract]. Pp. 80 in Anonymous. THE 2005 HAWAI‘I CONSERVATION CONFERENCE Hawai‘i’s Restoration Efforts July 28-29, 2005. Hawai‘i Convention Center, Honolulu, Hawai‘i. http://www.hawaiiconservation.org/_library/documents/hcc2005_programbook.pdf (2)Anonymous. 2007. NORTH KOHALA COMMUNITY PROFILE DRAFT FOR STEERING COMMITTEE REVIEW (3)Benitez, D.M., T. Belfield, R. Loh, L. Pratt and A. D. Christie. 2008. Inventory of Vascular Plants of the Kahuku Addition, Hawaii Volcanoes National Park. Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit Terchnical Report 157: 1-115. (4)Wong, C.P.,

3.05

M. tanarius naturalized and possibly an environmental weed, but documentation of impacts is lacking (1)Parasol leaf tree (Macaranga tanarius): This relative of bingabing is another invasive pest that has already escaped into the wild on West Maui and may prove to be a pest in the rest of Maui County. It can be distinguished from bingabing by its smaller leaves (60-100 cm or 24-40 in) and pale green to yellowish green calyx (tough outer petals that protect the bud before it opens). (2)Listed as an Environmental Weed (3)Macaranga tanarius (L.) Mull. Arg. New island record Previously recorded as naturalized on Kaua‘i and O‘ahu (Wagner et al., 1990: 624), the following specimen documents the occurrence of this species on Maui. Additionally, Bob Hobdy (pers. comm.) had collected this taxon several years ago from the same locality. These specimens were not seen at BISH.

(1)http://pbin.nbii.gov/reportapest/maui/pestlist/macmap.htm [Accessed 10 Sep 2008] (2)http://www.hear.org/gcw/species/macaranga_tanarius/ [Accessed 10 Sep 2008] (3)Oppenheimer, H. L., J. S. Meidell and R.T. Bartlett. 1999. New plant records for Maui and Moloka‘i. In: Evenhuis, Neal L. and Eldredge, Lucius G., eds. Records of the Hawaii Biological Survey for 1998. Part 2: Notes. Bishop Museum Occasional Papers. 59:7-11.

4.01

(1)Capsules 2-3 celled, 8-10 mm long, glabrous, each valve armed with 2 spine-like processes.

(1)Wagner, W. L., D.R. Herbst and S.H. Sohmer. 1999. Manual of the flowering plants of Hawaii. Revised edition. Bernice P. Bishop Museum special publication. University of Hawai‘i Press/Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu.

4.02

Unknown for Macaranga mappa, but related species M. tanarius documented to be allelopathic (1)The genus Macaranga is one of the largest genera of the Euphorbiaceae, with approximately 300 species.1 Previously reported components from the species of this genus include diterpenoids, triterpenoids, steroids,2,3 and hydrolyzable tannins4 from M. tanarius, a prenyl stilbene, vedelianin,5 and a geranyl flavonol6 from M. vedeliana, antibacterial prenylated flavanones7 from M. pleiostemona, chromenoflavones8 from M. indica, and cytotoxic geranyl stilbenes9 from M. schweinfurthii. M. tanarius is a common tropical tree distributed from southern Asia to northern Australia.10 The allelopathic potential of the fallen leaves of M. tanarius was indicated from field observations and bioassays, prompting us to study its chemical components. A methanol extract of the fallen leaves was suspended in H2O and then partitioned with ethyl acetate. The ethyl acetate solubles were fractionated to yield two new prenylflavanones, tanariflavanones A (1) and B (2), and the known (-)-nymphaeol-C (3).11 This paper describes the structural elucidation of 1 and 2 and their inhibitory effect on radicle growth of germinating lettuce seeds.

(1)Tseng, M., C. Chou, Y. Chen, and Y-H Kuo, 2001. Allelopathic prenylflavanones from the fallen leaves of Macaranga tanarius. Journal of Natural Products 64 (6): 827-828.

4.03

(1)No evidence

(1)Wagner, W. L., D.R. Herbst and S.H. Sohmer. 1999. Manual of the flowering plants of Hawaii. Revised edition. Bernice P. Bishop Museum special publication. University of Hawai‘i Press/Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu.

4.04

Unknown [no information on palatability to mammalian herbivores] (1)Plants also provide housing and food items for natural enemies of herbivores, known as “biotic” defense mechanisms, as a means to maintain their presence. For example, trees from the genus Macaranga have adapted their thin stem walls to create ideal housing for an ant species (genus Crematogaster), which, in turn, protects the plant from herbivores.

(1)Heil, M., B. Fiala, K. E. Linsenmair, G. Zotz and P. Menke. 1997. Food body production in Macaranga triloba (Euphorbiaceae): A plant investment in anti-herbivore defense via symbiotic ant partners. Journal of Ecology 85(6): 847–861.

4.05

Possibly contains chemicals that would be toxic if ingested, but no further information was found (1)Danger: Parts of plant are poisonous if ingested (2)Abstract: A new prenylated stilbene, mappain (1), was isolated from leaves of Macaranga mappa by bioassay-guided fractionation. The structure was established by application of spectroscopic methods. Mappain is cytotoxic but it appears to be a poor substrate for P-glycoprotein-mediated transport because it is equally potent and effective against the drug-sensitive SK-OV-3 and drug-resistant SKVLB-1 ovarian cancer cell lines, exhibiting an IC50 value of 1.3 M in both cases.

(1)http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/go/59984/ [Accessed 08 Sep 2008] (2)van der Kaaden, J.E., T. K. Hemscheidt and S. L. Mooberry. 2001. Mappain, a New Cytotoxic Prenylated Stilbene from Macaranga mappa. J. Nat. Prod., 64 (1): 103 -105.

4.06

Unknown [no information found on pests or pathogens]

 

4.07

Possibly contains chemicals that would be toxic if ingested, but no further information was found (1)Danger: Parts of plant are poisonous if ingested (2)Abstract: A new prenylated stilbene, mappain (1), was isolated from leaves of Macaranga mappa by bioassay-guided fractionation. The structure was established by application of spectroscopic methods. Mappain is cytotoxic but it appears to be a poor substrate for P-glycoprotein-mediated transport because it is equally potent and effective against the drug-sensitive SK-OV-3 and drug-resistant SKVLB-1 ovarian cancer cell lines, exhibiting an IC50 value of 1.3 M in both cases.

(1)http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/go/59984/ [Accessed 08 Sep 2008] (2)van der Kaaden, J.E., T. K. Hemscheidt and S. L. Mooberry. 2001. Mappain, a New Cytotoxic Prenylated Stilbene from Macaranga mappa. J. Nat. Prod., 64 (1): 103 -105.

4.08

(1)No evidence [unlikely, as grows in fairly wet forests]

(1)Wagner, W. L., D.R. Herbst and S.H. Sohmer. 1999. Manual of the flowering plants of Hawaii. Revised edition. Bernice P. Bishop Museum special publication. University of Hawai‘i Press/Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu.

4.09

(1)It grows well in the shade of other trees and shrubs… (2)Light response curves conducted on Psychotria hawaiiensis (an endemic species) and two alien species (Macaranga mappa and Melastoma candidum) show that Psychotria has lower photosynthesis rates, but similar light compensation and saturation points, thus having shade-tolerant capabilities similar to M. mappa and M. candidum. However, the two alien species demonstrated higher specific leaf areas and lower leaf construction costs.

(1)Staples, G.W. and D.R. Herbst. 2005. A Tropical Garden Flora. Plants Cultivated in the Hawaiian Islands and Other Tropical Places. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. (2)Wong, C.P., S. Cordell and R. Ostertag. 2008. Hawaiian Lowland Wet Forests: Impacts of Invasive Plants on Light Availability. The Journal of Young Investigators 19(3). http://www.jyi.org/research/re.php?id=1080

4.10

(1)Average, well-drained soil

(1)Llamas, K.A. 2003. Tropical Flowering Plants. A Guide To Identification and Cultivation. Timber Press. Portland, OR.

4.11

(1)Trees 5-10 m tall.

(1)Wagner, W. L., D.R. Herbst and S.H. Sohmer. 1999. Manual of the flowering plants of Hawaii. Revised edition. Bernice P. Bishop Museum special publication. University of Hawai‘i Press/Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu.

4.12

(1)The highest dominance was typically attained by Falcataria moluccana (albizia; e.g., 98% at site 32) and Casuarina equisetifolia (ironwood; e.g., 95% at site 19), although several other species attained more than 50% dominance, including Psidium cattleianum (strawberry guava), Cecropia obtusifolia (trumpet tree), Macaranga mappa (bingabing),... (2)Meanwhile, in the secondary lowland rainforest (ex-dryland cultivation), it is dominated by pioneer species like makaranga (Macaranga mappa and Macaranga tanarius) and wild pepper (Piper sp.). (3)M. mappa now forms large dense stands in this area and is naturalized in low elevation moist to mesic areas of lowlands, 0-220 m (722 ft), on O'ahu and Hawai'i

(1)Mascaro J., K. K. Becklund, R. F. Hughes and S. A. Schnitzer. 2008. Limited native plant regeneration in novel, exotic-dominated forests on Hawai’i. Forest Ecology and Management 256(4): 593–606. (2)Sihite,J., O. N. Lense, R. Suratri, C. Gustiar andS. Kosamah. 2005. BINTUNI BAY NATURE RESERVE MANAGEMENT PLAN IRIAN JAYA BARAT PROVINCE 2006-2030. The Nature Conservancy (TNC), Southeast Asia Center for Marine Protected Areas (SEA CMPA). Sanur-Bali, Indonesia. (3)Starr, F., K. Starr and L. L. Loope. 2003. Macaranga mappa Bingabing Euphorbiaceae. http://www.hear.org/starr/hiplants/reports/pdf/macaranga_mappa.pdf [Accessed 08 Sep 2008]

5.01

Terrestrial

5.02

Euphorbiaceae

 

5.03

Euphorbiaceae

 

5.04

(1)Trees 5-10 m tall.

(1)Wagner, W. L., D.R. Herbst and S.H. Sohmer. 1999. Manual of the flowering plants of Hawaii. Revised edition. Bernice P. Bishop Museum special publication. University of Hawai‘i Press/Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu.

6.01

(1)No evidence

(1)Wagner, W. L., D.R. Herbst and S.H. Sohmer. 1999. Manual of the flowering plants of Hawaii. Revised edition. Bernice P. Bishop Museum special publication. University of Hawai‘i Press/Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu.

6.02

(1)Capsules 2-3-celled

(1)Wagner, W. L., D.R. Herbst and S.H. Sohmer. 1999. Manual of the flowering plants of Hawaii. Revised edition. Bernice P. Bishop Museum special publication. University of Hawai‘i Press/Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu.

6.03

Unknown [no information found on hybridization]

 

6.04

(1)Macaranga is a dioecious tree, which means male and female plants are required for seed production. Ripe seeds are very attractive to birds. Fruit are bright red when ripe.

(1)http://toptropicals.com/html/toptropicals/plant_wk/macaranga.htm [Accessed 09 Sep 2008]

6.05

Apparently not, considering ability to produce seed in the Hawaiian Islands (1)Inflorescences are commonly visited by trigonid bees and thrips [pollination for related species of Macaranga]

(1)MOMOSE, K., T. YUMOTO, T. NAGAMITSU, M. KATO, H. NAGAMASU, S. SAKAI, R. D. HARRISON, T. ITIOKA, A. A. HAMID, AND T. INOUE. 1998. Pollination biology in a lowland dipterocarp forest in Sarawak, Malaysia. I. Characteristics of the plant-pollinator community in a lowland dipterocarp forest. American Journal of Botany 85: 1477–1501.

6.06

Possibly, but no information on vegetative reproduction in natural settings found (1)Propagation Methods: By dividing rhizomes, tubers, corms or bulbs (including offsets)

(1)http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/go/59984/ [Accessed 08 Sep 2008]

6.07

(1)Fast growing, Macaranga reaches a mature size within 2-3 years.

(1)http://toptropicals.com/html/toptropicals/plant_wk/macaranga.htm [Accessed 09 Sep 2008]

7.01

(1)No evidence [no means of external attachment]

(1)Wagner, W. L., D.R. Herbst and S.H. Sohmer. 1999. Manual of the flowering plants of Hawaii. Revised edition. Bernice P. Bishop Museum special publication. University of Hawai‘i Press/Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu.

7.02

(1)Ornamental

(1)http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/go/59984/ [Accessed 08 Sep 2008]

7.03

(1)Since the survey, M. mappa has been found in a Kihei nursery, arriving as a contaminant in potted plants shipped to Maui from the island of Hawaii.

(1)Starr, F., K. Starr and L. L. Loope. 2006. ROADSIDE SURVEY AND EXPERT INTERVIEWS FOR SELECTED PLANT SPECIES ON MAUI, HAWAII. http://hear.org/starr/publications/2006_maui_roadside_botanical_survey.pdf [Accessed 08 Sep 2008]

7.04

(1)Birds eat the ripe fruit. (2)The role of fruit-bats in degraded Asian landscapes may be limited, however, because the majority of pioneer trees and shrubs, including the important genus Macaranga, are bird-dispersed.

(1)http://toptropicals.com/catalog/uid/macaranga_grandifolia.htm [Accessed 08 Sep 2008] (2)Corlett, R. T. 2002. Frugivory and seed dispersal in degraded tropical East Asian landscapes. Pp. 451-465 in D.J. Levey, W.R. Silva and M. Galetti (eds). Seed Dispersal and Frugivory: Ecology, Evolution and Conservation. CABI Publishing. New York.

7.05

(1)Birds eat the ripe fruit. (2)The role of fruit-bats in degraded Asian landscapes may be limited, however, because the majority of pioneer trees and shrubs, including the important genus Macaranga, are bird-dispersed.

(1)http://toptropicals.com/catalog/uid/macaranga_grandifolia.htm [Accessed 08 Sep 2008] (2)Corlett, R. T. 2002. Frugivory and seed dispersal in degraded tropical East Asian landscapes. Pp. 451-465 in D.J. Levey, W.R. Silva and M. Galetti (eds). Seed Dispersal and Frugivory: Ecology, Evolution and Conservation. CABI Publishing. New York.

7.06

(1)Birds eat the ripe fruit. (2)The role of fruit-bats in degraded Asian landscapes may be limited, however, because the majority of pioneer trees and shrubs, including the important genus Macaranga, are bird-dispersed.

(1)http://toptropicals.com/catalog/uid/macaranga_grandifolia.htm [Accessed 08 Sep 2008] (2)Corlett, R. T. 2002. Frugivory and seed dispersal in degraded tropical East Asian landscapes. Pp. 451-465 in D.J. Levey, W.R. Silva and M. Galetti (eds). Seed Dispersal and Frugivory: Ecology, Evolution and Conservation. CABI Publishing. New York.

7.07

No means of external attachment

 

7.08

(1)Birds eat the ripe fruit. (2)The role of fruit-bats in degraded Asian landscapes may be limited, however, because the majority of pioneer trees and shrubs, including the important genus Macaranga, are bird-dispersed.

(1)http://toptropicals.com/catalog/uid/macaranga_grandifolia.htm [Accessed 08 Sep 2008] (2)Corlett, R. T. 2002. Frugivory and seed dispersal in degraded tropical East Asian landscapes. Pp. 451-465 in D.J. Levey, W.R. Silva and M. Galetti (eds). Seed Dispersal and Frugivory: Ecology, Evolution and Conservation. CABI Publishing. New York.

8.01

Numbers unknown, but M. mappa dominates seed bank biomass (1)ABSTRACT- Many Hawaiian ecosystems have been drastically impacted by human presence mainly through the introduction of non-native species. The impact of introduced species is particularly strong in the lowland wet forest, where little research has been conducted to understand the mechanisms by which introduced species dominate and control the ecosystem. In order to understand the structure of this forest and the ways introduced species may out-compete native species, eight comparison plots, four control and four removal plots, were established in an invaded wet forest. We examined the relationship between seed presence, through quantification of the seed rain and the soil seed bank, and the establishment of native and introduced seedling species. We predicted that the overall amount of seeds will be higher in the control plots than in the removal plots because its structure makes this area a more suitable habitat for birds, a major seed dispersal agent. We also hypothesized that seed rain will be the main contributor of germinants in the control plots, but the seed bank will be the main contributor of germinants in the removal plots. Preliminary observations show that at the removal plots, introduced species dominate the seedling population although no introduced adult specimens are present within the plot. Our results suggest that this introduced dominance is due to the role of the soil seed bank. Non-native species were found to dominate the soil seed bank at both control and removal plots. In terms of overall seed number the seed rain contained both native and non-native species and did not differ between control and removal plots. Metrosideros polymorpha, the dominant native canopy tree in this forest was the most abundant species in the seed rain; however the introduced tree Macaranga mappa was most dominant in terms of seed biomass. The results obtained may help us understand the competitive success of native and introduced species at this site, proving us the tools to develop alternative control methods that could be applied at the different plant life stages.

(1)Vasquez-Radonic, L. and R. Ostertag 2006. Understanding the interrelations of native and introduced species in the Hawaiian lowland wet forest through seed rain and soil seed bank quantification. Poster session presented at: Ecology in an Era of Globalization: Challenges and Opportunities for Environmental Scientists in the Americas. 2006 Jan 8-12; Merida, Mexico.

8.02

Possibly, as M. mappa dominates seed bank biomass (1)ABSTRACT- Many Hawaiian ecosystems have been drastically impacted by human presence mainly through the introduction of non-native species. The impact of introduced species is particularly strong in the lowland wet forest, where little research has been conducted to understand the mechanisms by which introduced species dominate and control the ecosystem. In order to understand the structure of this forest and the ways introduced species may out-compete native species, eight comparison plots, four control and four removal plots, were established in an invaded wet forest. We examined the relationship between seed presence, through quantification of the seed rain and the soil seed bank, and the establishment of native and introduced seedling species. We predicted that the overall amount of seeds will be higher in the control plots than in the removal plot.

(1)Vasquez-Radonic, L. and R. Ostertag 2006. Understanding the interrelations of native and introduced species in the Hawaiian lowland wet forest through seed rain and soil seed bank quantification. Poster session presented at: Ecology in an Era of Globalization: Challenges and Opportunities for Environmental Scientists in the Americas. 2006 Jan 8-12; Merida, Mexico.

8.03

Unknown (1)Control methodology for M. mappa has yet to be refined for Hawai'i. It is uncertain whether cutting at the base would completely control this tree or if application of herbicides are necessary. Further testing is necessary to be sure.

(1)Starr, F., K. Starr and L. L. Loope. 2003. Macaranga mappa Bingabing Euphorbiaceae. http://www.hear.org/starr/hiplants/reports/pdf/macaranga_mappa.pdf [Accessed 08 Sep 2008]

8.04

Unknown

8.05

Unknown


Need more info? Have questions? Comments? Information to contribute? Contact PIER!


[ Return to PIER homepage ] [Risk assessment page]


This page created 13 December 2008