Pacific Island Ecosystems at Risk (PIER)
Cochlospermum vitifolium
RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS: Low risk, 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 |
Cochlospermum vitifolium; buttercup tree |
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 |
|
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 |
n |
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 |
n |
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 |
n |
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 |
n |
4.08 |
Creates a fire hazard in natural ecosystems |
y=1, n=0 |
|
4.09 |
Is a shade tolerant plant at some stage of its life cycle |
y=1, n=0 |
n |
4.1 |
Tolerates a wide range of soil conditions (or limestone conditions if not a volcanic island) |
y=1, n=0 |
n |
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 |
|
6.04 |
Self-compatible or apomictic |
y=1, n=-1 |
n |
6.05 |
Requires specialist pollinators |
y=-1, n=0 |
n |
6.06 |
Reproduction by vegetative fragmentation |
y=1, n=-1 |
n |
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 |
y |
7.05 |
Propagules water dispersed |
y=1, n=-1 |
n |
7.06 |
Propagules bird dispersed |
y=1, n=-1 |
n |
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 |
|
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: |
-4 |
Supporting data:
Source |
Notes |
|
1.01 |
no evidence |
|
1.02 |
no evidence |
|
1.03 |
no evidence |
|
2.01 |
USDA, ARS, National Genetic Resources Program. Germplasm Resources Information Network - (GRIN). [Online Database] National Germplasm Resources Laboratory, Beltsville, Maryland. Available: http://www.ars-grin.gov/var/apache/cgi-bin/npgs/html/taxon.pl?11020 (17 April 2002) |
Native range: |
2.02 |
||
2.03 |
(1)USDA, ARS, National Genetic Resources Program. Germplasm Resources Information Network - (GRIN). [Online Database] National Germplasm Resources Laboratory, Beltsville, Maryland. Available: http://www.ars-grin.gov/var/apache/cgi-bin/npgs/html/taxon.pl?11020 (17 April 2002) (2)http://inbio.eas.ualberta.ca/bims/k03/p13/c045/o0253/f01580/g007430/s021845.htm |
(1)Native range: |
2.04 |
USDA, ARS, National Genetic Resources Program. Germplasm Resources Information Network - (GRIN). [Online Database] National Germplasm Resources Laboratory, Beltsville, Maryland. Available: http://www.ars-grin.gov/var/apache/cgi-bin/npgs/html/taxon.pl?11020 (17 April 2002) |
Native range: |
2.05 |
no evidence |
|
3.01 |
no evidence |
|
3.02 |
no evidence |
|
3.03 |
no evidence |
|
3.04 |
no evidence |
|
3.05 |
no evidence |
|
4.01 |
smooth tree |
|
4.02 |
no evidence |
|
4.03 |
no evidence |
|
4.04 |
Susano Hernandez, R. (1981) Forest trees useful as browse
and fodder. |
AB: Information is presented on 17 species found in Mexico, including: parts consumed; cattle species by which it is consumed; percentage utilization; and limitations on use. |
4.05 |
no evidence |
|
4.06 |
no evidence |
|
4.07 |
no evidence |
|
4.08 |
No evidence, but Large, palmate, summer-deciduous leaves, could potentially burn if they accumulate beneath tree |
|
4.09 |
Augspurger, C. K. (1984) Light requirements of neotropical tree seedlings: a comparative study of growth and survival. Journal of Ecology, UK, 1984, Vol.72, No.3, pp.777-795, 38 ref. |
p.779 Table1. C. vitifolium was categorized as very shade intolerant. |
4.1 |
Whistler, W.A. 2000. Tropical Ornamientals. Timber press |
dry, well-drained soils |
4.11 |
Enquist B.J. and J.J. Sullivan [benquist@u.arizona.edu; SullivanJ@landcare.cri.nz] (2001) Vegetative key and descriptions of tree species of the tropical dry forests of upland Sector Santa Rosa, Area de Conservación Guanacaste, Costa Rica. Available at <http://www.acguanacaste.ac.cr/paginas_especie/plantae_online/EnquistSullivanTreeKey.pdf> |
p.35 Cochlospermum vitifolium (Willd.) Spreng. "Poroporo";
COCHLOSPERMACEAE. |
4.12 |
no evidence |
|
5.01 |
terrestrial tree |
|
5.02 |
tree |
|
5.03 |
no evidence |
|
5.04 |
tree |
|
6.01 |
no evidence |
|
6.02 |
(1)Martin, F.W. (1991)The Living Fence: Its Role on The Small Farm.ECHO, 17391 Durrance Rd., North Ft. Myers FL 33917, USA. available at <http://www.echonet.org/tropicalag/technotes/LivingFe.pdf> (2)Little and Wadsworth. Common Trees of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. USDA, Washinton DC |
(1)table1. Propagation by seed and stake (2)Double-flowered form is sterile |
6.03 |
no evidence |
|
6.04 |
Roubik, D. W.; Ackerman, J. D.; Copenhaver, C.; Smith, B. H. (1982) Stratum, tree, and flower selection by tropical bees: implications for the reproductive biology of outcrossing Cochlospermum vitifolium in Panama. Ecology, 1982, Vol.63, No.3, pp.712-720 |
p.713 "C. vitifolium is not capable of self-fertilization and must be outcrossed to produced fruit." |
6.05 |
Roubik, D. W.; Ackerman, J. D.; Copenhaver, C.; Smith, B. H. (1982) Stratum, tree, and flower selection by tropical bees: implications for the reproductive biology of outcrossing Cochlospermum vitifolium in Panama. Ecology, 1982, Vol.63, No.3, pp.712-720 |
AB: "Observations of this tree species at several sites in Panama showed that Centris species were its most important pollinators, although Xylocopa, Trigona, Eulaema and Euglossa species were also frequent visitors. " |
6.06 |
no evidence |
|
6.07 |
R. Criley, UH Department of Horticulture, personal communication |
|
7.01 |
no evidence |
|
7.02 |
cultivated as an oramental |
|
7.03 |
no evidence |
|
7.04 |
Enquist B.J. and J.J. Sullivan [benquist@u.arizona.edu; SullivanJ@landcare.cri.nz] (2001) Vegetative key and descriptions of tree species of the tropical dry forests of upland Sector Santa Rosa, Area de Conservación Guanacaste, Costa Rica. Available at <http://www.acguanacaste.ac.cr/paginas_especie/plantae_online/EnquistSullivanTreeKey.pdf> |
P.35 "Dehiscent 6 cm long ovoid fruit pods contain many small (3 mm) semi-circular seeds within a mass of wind-dispersed white cotton-like fluff. " |
7.05 |
no evidence |
|
7.06 |
no evidence |
|
7.07 |
no evidence |
|
7.08 |
Fábio Olmos (1997)Tapirs: Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources. Available at <http://www.tapirback.com/tapirgal/iucn-ssc/tsg/action97/ap97-05.htm> |
Table 1.1 Fruits known to be eaten by wild tapirs, and the
fate of seeds. |
8.01 |
(1) Rockwood, L. L. (1973) The effect of defoliation on seed
production of six Costa Rican tree species. Ecology, 1973, Vol.54, No.6,
pp.1363-1369, 28 ref. |
(1) p.1365, Table 1. C. vitifolium trees are about 8m height, 20 yr old. control had 38 fruits (1020gram)/10 trees (2) P.35 "Dehiscent 6 cm long ovoid fruit pods contain many small (3 mm) semi-circular seeds within a mass of wind-dispersed white cotton-like fluff. " [3.8 fruit/tree which should occupy more than 1 square meter; then each must have more than 1000 seed to >1000/m2. I think it is unlikely]{The fruit numbers reported in this study done in Costa Rica seem very low. Study was based on one year. Don't know if it is typical} |
8.02 |
no evidence |
|
8.03 |
no evidence |
|
8.04 |
no evidence |
|
8.05 |
no evidence |
Need more info? Have questions? Comments? Information to contribute? Contact PIER!
[ Return to PIER homepage ] [Risk assessment page]
This page updated 30 September 2005