White-edged nightshade (Solanum marginatum)

Present distribution

Scientific name:	Solanum marginatum L. f.
Common name(s):	white-edged nightshade

Map showing the present distribution of this weed.

Habitat:

Occurs in “depleted pastures, poor rough country, forest margins, plantations, gullies, roadsides, waste places, scrub” (Webb et al 1988), marginal
areas of conifer and oak forest (Cuevas-Arias et al. 2008), “bush margins, sand dunes, open areas” (Williams, Hayes 2007). Prefers areas of high
rainfall (ARC 2007) but can grow “over a wide altitude and rainfall range” (Williams, Hayes 2007)

Potential distribution

Potential distribution produced from CLIMATE modelling refined by applying suitable landuse and vegetation type overlays with CMA boundaries

Map Overlays Used

Land Use:
Forestry; horticulture perennial; pasture dryland; pasture irrigation

Ecological Vegetation Divisions
Coastal; heathland; grassy/heathy dry forest; lowland forest; foothills forest; forby forest; damp forest; wet forest; high altitude shrubland/woodland; alpine treeless; granitic hillslopes; rocky outcrop shrubland; western plains woodland; basalt grassland; alluvial plains grassland; semi-arid woodland; alluvial plains
woodland; ironbark/box; riverine woodland/forest

Colours indicate possibility of Solanum marginatum infesting these areas.

In the non-coloured areas the plant is unlikely to establish as the climate, soil or landuse is not presently suitable.

map showing the potential distribution of solanum marginatum

Red= Very high	Orange = Medium
Yellow = High	Green = Likely

Impact

QUESTION	COMMENTS	RATING	CONFIDENCE
Social
1. Restrict human access?	Grows to 5 m (Webb et al 1988) and “forms dense thickets, which become impenetrable” (Marlborough District Council 2007) – major impediment to access waterways or machinery. Significant works required to provide reasonable access, tracks closed or impassable	H	M
2. Reduce tourism?	“Forms dense thickets, which become impenetrable” (Marlborough District Council 2007) and the “stems and lower leaf surfaces densely covered with a mat of stellate hairs and a scattering of sharp yellow prickles overall” (Parsons, Cuthbertson 2001) – major impact on recreation. Weeds obvious to the average visitors, with visitor response complaints and a major reduction in visitors	H	M
3. Injurious to people?	Toxic and “ people have become ill after tasting the fruit... stems and lower leaf surfaces densely covered with a mat of stellate hairs and a scattering of sharp yellow prickles overall” (Parsons, Cuthbertson 2001) – large spines or burrs and extremely toxic	H	MH
4. Damage to cultural sites?	“Forms dense thickets, which become impenetrable” (Marlborough District Council 2007) – moderate visual effect	ML	M
Abiotic
5. Impact flow?	Terrestrial (Parsons, Cuthbertson 2001) – little or negligible affect on water flow	L	MH
6. Impact water quality?	“White edged nightshade invades the forest floor, inhibiting the establishment of native plant seedlings and leading to higher light levels and succession by more aggressive weeds, especially vines.” (Biosecurity NZ 2008) – noticeable but minor effects in either dissolved oxygen or light levels	ML	M
7. Increase soil erosion?	“Forms dense thickets, which become impenetrable” (Marlborough District Council 2007) – low probability of large scale soil movement	L	M
8. Reduce biomass?	“White edged nightshade invades the forest floor, inhibiting the establishment of native plant seedlings and leading to higher light levels and succession by more aggressive weeds, especially vines.” (Biosecurity NZ 2008) – biomass significantly decreased	H	M
9. Change fire regime?	“White edged nightshade invades the forest floor, inhibiting the establishment of native plant seedlings and leading to higher light levels and succession by more aggressive weeds, especially vines.” (Biosecurity NZ 2008) – greatly changes the frequency and/or intensity of fire risk	H	M
Community Habitat
10. Impact on composition (a) high value EVC	EVC = Valley Grassy Forest (V); CMA = North Central; Bioregion = Central Victorian Uplands; VH CLIMATE potential. “Shades out small native species in places such as sand dunes” (Williams, Hayes 2007), “form dense thickets, which become impenetrable and displace preferred pasture species. It will also displace native species” (Marlborough District Council 2007). “Invades the forest floor, inhibiting the establishment of native plant seedlings and leading to higher light levels and succession by more aggressive weeds, especially vines.” (Biosecurity NZ 2008) Monoculture within a specific layer; displaces all spp. within a strata/layer	H	H
(b) medium value EVC	EVC = Grassy Woodland (D); CMA = East Gippsland; Bioregion = East Gippsland Uplands; VH CLIMATE potential. “Shades out small native species in places such as sand dunes” (Williams, Hayes 2007), “form dense thickets, which become impenetrable and displace preferred pasture species. It will also displace native species” (Marlborough District Council 2007). “Invades the forest floor, inhibiting the establishment of native plant seedlings and leading to higher light levels and succession by more aggressive weeds, especially vines.” (Biosecurity NZ 2008) Monoculture within a specific layer; displaces all spp. within a strata/layer	H	H
(c) low value EVC	EVC = Wet Forest (LC); CMA = Corangamite; Bioregion = Otway Ranges; VH CLIMATE potential. “Shades out small native species in places such as sand dunes” (Williams, Hayes 2007), “form dense thickets, which become impenetrable and displace preferred pasture species. It will also displace native species” (Marlborough District Council 2007). “Invades the forest floor, inhibiting the establishment of native plant seedlings and leading to higher light levels and succession by more aggressive weeds, especially vines.” (Biosecurity NZ 2008) Monoculture within a specific layer; displaces all spp. within a strata/layer	H	H
11. Impact on structure?	“Shades out small native species in places such as sand dunes” (Williams, Hayes 2007), “form dense thickets, which become impenetrable and displace preferred pasture species. It will also displace native species” (Marlborough District Council 2007). “Invades the forest floor, inhibiting the establishment of native plant seedlings and leading to higher light levels and succession by more aggressive weeds, especially vines.” (Biosecurity NZ 2008) – major effects on all layers	H	M
12. Effect on threatened flora?	Although it “invades the forest floor, inhibiting the establishment of native plant seedlings and leading to higher light levels and succession by more aggressive weeds, especially vines (Biosecurity NZ 2008), it is not yet known to affect Bioregional Priority 1A or VROT species	MH	L
Fauna
13. Effect on threatened fauna?	Although it “invades the forest floor, inhibiting the establishment of native plant seedlings and leading to higher light levels and succession by more aggressive weeds, especially vines (Biosecurity NZ 2008) and therefore is likely to change habitat drastically, it is not yet known to affect Bioregional Priority or VROT species	MH	L
14. Effect on non-threatened fauna?	“Invades the forest floor, inhibiting the establishment of native plant seedlings and leading to higher light levels and succession by more aggressive weeds, especially vines (Biosecurity NZ 2008) – habitat changed dramatically, leading to the possible extinction of non-threatened fauna	H	M
15. Benefits fauna?	“form dense thickets, which become impenetrable” (Marlborough District Council 2007),“Fruit not attractive to birds or other animals” and blocks access for animals (ARC 2007) – provides very little support to desirable species	H	M
16. Injurious to fauna?	Toxic and “ people have become ill after tasting the fruit... stems and lower leaf surfaces densely covered with a mat of stellate hairs and a scattering of sharp yellow prickles overall” (Parsons, Cuthbertson 2001). Also “toxic to stock” (GWRC 2007) – toxic	H	M
Pest Animal
17. Food source to pests?	Listed as “not known to be eaten” by goats (Simmonds et al. 2000) and the fruit is “not attractive to birds or other animals” (ARC 2007) – provides minimal food for pest animals	L	MH
18. Provides harbour?	“form dense thickets, which become impenetrable” (Marlborough District Council 2007) and may harbour rabbits (ARC 2007) – capacity to provide harbour and permanent warrens for foxes and rabbits throughout the year	H	M
Agriculture
19. Impact yield?	“Toxic to stock and reduces pasture production” (GWRC 2007). “Form dense thickets, which become impenetrable and displace preferred pasture species” (Marlborough District Council 2007). Also occurs in plantations (Webb et al 1998) – serious impacts of quantity. Un-viable to harvest crop/ stock	H	M
20. Impact quality?	“Toxic to stock and reduces pasture production” (GWRC 2007). “Form dense thickets, which become impenetrable and displace preferred pasture species” (Marlborough District Council 2007). Also occurs in plantations (Webb et al 1998) – major impacts on quality of produce	MH	M
21. Affect land value?	“Toxic to stock and reduces pasture production” (GWRC 2007). “Form dense thickets, which become impenetrable and displace preferred pasture species” (Marlborough District Council 2007). Also occurs in plantations (Webb et al 1998) – decreases land value <10%	M	M
22. Change land use?	“Toxic to stock and reduces pasture production” (GWRC 2007). “Form dense thickets, which become impenetrable and displace preferred pasture species” (Marlborough District Council 2007). Also occurs in plantations (Webb et al 1998) – some change, but no serious alteration of either agricultural return	ML	M
23. Increase harvest costs?	“Toxic to stock and reduces pasture production” (GWRC 2007). “Form dense thickets, which become impenetrable and displace preferred pasture species” (Marlborough District Council 2007). Also occurs in plantations (Webb et al 1998) – however, impacts on harvest costs are unknown	M	L
24. Disease host/vector?	Host plant susceptible to Tomato Spotted Wilt Virus, which “produces a variety of disease symptoms including a range of chlorotic, necrotic, stunting, and enation symptoms in all parts of the plant” and affects lettuce, tomato, and bell pepper (capsicum) (Cho et al 1987). Minor host of potato cist nematode (Globodera pallida) (Sullivan 2009) – host to major and severe disease or pest of important agricultural produce	H	MH

Invasive

QUESTION	COMMENTS	RATING	CONFIDENCE
Establishment
1. Germination requirements?	“Seeds germinate in spring and summer, while moisture is available” (Parsons, Cuthbertson 2001) – requires natural seasonal disturbances such as seasonal rainfall, spring/summer temperatures for germination	MH	MH
2. Establishment requirements?	“Depleted pastures, poor rough country, forest margins, plantations, gullies, roadsides, waste places, scrub” (Webb et al 1988) – can establish under moderate canopy/litter cover	MH	MH
3. How much disturbance is required?	Weed of “depleted pastures, poor rough country, forest margins, plantations, gullies, roadsides, waste places, scrub” (Webb et al 1988) and sand dunes (Williams, Hayes 2007) – establishes in relatively intact or only minor disturbed natural ecosystems	MH	MH
Growth/Competitive
4. Life form?	Small shrub 1 to 1.5 m high (Parsons, Cuthbertson 2001) and up to 5 m (Biosecurity NZ 2008)	L	MH
5. Allelopathic properties?	Allelopathic properties unknown	M	L
6. Tolerates herb pressure?	Listed as “not known to be eaten” by goats (Simmonds et al. 2000), however seeds found in sheep dung (Semen 2007) and is a minor host of potato cist nematode (Globodera pallida) (Sullivan 2009). Williams and Hayes (2007) have also found that there is “Minimal recovery from damage and no great resurgence from seed banks” – consumed but non-preferred	MH	MH
7. Normal growth rate?	“Shades out small native species in places such as sand dunes” (Williams, Hayes 2007) and “form dense thickets, which become impenetrable and displace preferred pasture species. It will also displace native species” (Marlborough District Council 2007) – rapid growth rate that will exceed most other species of the same life form	H	M
8. Stress tolerance to frost, drought, w/logg, sal. etc?	Prefers “higher rainfall areas” (ARC 2007). However extent of tolerance to drought, frost, fire, waterlogging and salinity is unknown.	M	L
Reproduction
9. Reproductive system	“self- and cross-pollinated” (Dulberger et al 1981) – sexual (self and cross-pollinated)	ML	H
10. Number of propagules produced?	“Only a small fraction of the flowers set fruit. The mean number of flowers per inflorescence is 14.6, and 1-yr-old plants produce 200-300 inflorescences, but the mean number of berries on five plants examined was only 275, a range of 199-341. The mean number of seeds counted in three medium-sized berries was 1,257.” (Dulberger et al 1981) – above 2000	H	H
11. Propagule longevity?	“No great resurgence from seed banks” (Williams, Hayes 2007) – greater than 25% of seeds survive 5 years	L	M
12. Reproductive period?	Perennial (Parsons, Cuthbertson 2001) – mature plant produces viable propagules for 3-10 years	MH	M
13. Time to reproductive maturity?	“5-mo-old seedlings were transplanted ... blooming started at the beginning of January and continued throughout the year, reaching a peak during April-August” (Dulberger et al 1981) “Seedlings make slow growth in the first season as the root system is established. A few flowers may appear by late summer” (Parsons, Cuthbertson 2001) – reaches maturity and produces viable propagules in under a year	H	H
Dispersal
14. Number of mechanisms?	“Spread occurs mainly as movement of the fruit in water flowing over the soil surface, or when soil contaminated with seeds is moved during garden development or in roadmaking” (Parsons, Cuthbertson 2001) Seeds also found in sheep dung (Semen 2007) and dispersed in water (Williams, Hayes 2007)	H	MH
15. How far do they disperse?	“Spread occurs mainly as movement of the fruit in water flowing over the soil surface, or when soil contaminated with seeds is moved during garden development or in roadmaking” (Parsons, Cuthbertson 2001)	H	MH

References

Auckland Regional Council (ARC) (2007) Biosecurity – pest plants. Available at http://www.arc.govt.nz/albany/index.cfm?63E0F20E-14C2-3D2D-B905-
50098EBBE4B9&plantcode=solmar (verified 8 May 2009).

Biosecurity NZ (2008) National pest plant accord. New Zealand Government. Available at http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/files/pests/plants/nppa/nppa-accord-manual.pdf (verified 8 May 2009).

Cho JJ, Mau RFL, Mitchell WC, Gonsalves D, Yudin LS (1987) Host list of plants susceptible to tomato spotted wilt virus (TSWV). Research Extension Series 078, available at http://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/10125/5893/1/RES-078.pdf (verified 29 April 2009).

Cuevas-Arias CT, Vargas O, Rodríguez A (2008) Solonaceae diversity in the state of Jalisco, Mexico. Revista Mexicana de Bioversidad 79, 67-79.

Marlborough District Council (2007) Regional pest management strategy for Marlborough – 2007. Marlborough, NZ. Available at
http://www.marlborough.govt.nz/content/docs/environmental/RPMS_07_P37-43.pdf (verified 6 May 2009).

Parsons WT, Cuthbertson EG (2001) Noxious weeds of Australia; 2nd Edition. CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne.

Semen R (2007) Dung seed bank of livestock in Weberi, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Addis Ababa University. Available at
http://etd.aau.edu.et/dspace/bitstream/123456789/238/1/Rawda%20Seman.pdf (verified 6 May 2009).

Simmonds H, Holst P, Bourke C (2000) The palatability, and potential toxicity of Australian weeds to goats. Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation, Canberra. Available at https://rirdc.infoservices.com.au/downloads/00-139.pdf (verified 8 May 2009).

Sullivan M (2009) Globodera pallida host range. National Weed Management Laboratory, Fort Collins, CO. Available at http://programs.cphst.org/pcn/files/$File.doc (verified 6 May 2009).

Webb CJ, Sykes WR, Garnock-Jones PJ (1988) Flora of New Zealand, Vol 4. Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, Christchurch.

Williams PA, Hayes L (2007) Emerging weed issues for the West Coast Regional Council and their prospects for biocontrol. Landcare Research New Zealand. Available at http://www.envirolink.govt.nz/reports/documents/80-WCRC10.pdf (verified 6 May 2009).

Global present distribution data references

Australian National Herbarium (ANH) (2009) Australia’s Virtual Herbarium, Australian National Herbarium, Centre for Plant Diversity and Research, Available at
http://www.anbg.gov.au/avh/ (verified 8 May 2009).

Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) (2006) Flora information system [CD-ROM], Biodiversity and Natural Resources Section, Viridans Pty Ltd, Bentleigh.

Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) (2009) Global biodiversity information facility, Available at http://www.gbif.org/ (verified 8 May 2009).

Feedback

Do you have additional information about this plant that will improve the quality of the assessment?
If so, we would value your contribution. Click on the link to go to the feedback form.

Page top