Invasiveness Assessment - Grey sallow (Salix cinerea) in Victoria (Nox)

Back | Table | Feedback

Plant invasiveness is determined by evaluating a plant’s biological and ecological characteristics against criteria that encompass establishment requirements, growth rate and competitive ability, methods of reproduction, and dispersal mechanisms.

Each characteristic, or criterion, is assessed against a list of intensity ratings. Depending upon information found, a rating of Low, Medium Low, Medium High or High is assigned to that criterion. Where no data is available to answer a criterion, a rating of medium (M) is applied. A description of the invasiveness criteria and intensity ratings used in this process can be viewed here.

The following table provides information on the invasiveness of Grey sallow.

A more detailed description of the methodology of the Victorian Weed Risk Assessment (WRA) method can be viewed below:

Victorian Weed Risk Assessment (WRA) method (PDF - 630 KB)
Victorian Weed Risk Assessment (WRA) method (DOC - 1 MB)
To view the information PDF requires the use of a PDF reader. This can be installed for free from the Adobe website (external link).

Common Name: Grey sallow
Scientific name: Salix cinerea

Question	Comments	Rating	Confidence
Establishment
Germination requirements?	S. cinerea spreads by seed to riparian as well as other moist to wet habitats, and this is of special concern.” (Cremer, 1999). This species does not need uncommon natural events for germination.	MH	MH
Establishment requirements?	S. cinerea “can invade undisturbed herbaceous wetlands…[and establish] even under dense wet sclerophyll forest” (Cremer, 1999).	H	MH
How much disturbance is required?	S. cinerea is “invasive in both disturbed and undisturbed situations” (Carr, 1996) “Can invade undisturbed herbaceous wetlands…even under dense wet sclerophyll forest [and] has invaded steeply sloping, mature pine forest, not just along water courses” (Cremer, 1999).	H	MH
Growth/Competitive
Life form?	Semi-aquatic- All willows are described as growing on the banks of water courses or in moist locations and S. cinerea can also establish on drier soil (Cremer, 1999). S. cinerea grows in swamps, riverbanks, wet areas behind coastal dunes (Webb, Sykes & Garnock-Jones, 1988). “Occurs along streams or near seasonal to permanent swamps and bogs, from sea-level to above the treeline, invasive in both disturbed and undisturbed situations” (Carr, 1996). Invades riparian vegetation, and seasonal and permanent freshwater wetland, alpine and subalpine vegetation (Carr et al, 1992). “Can invade undisturbed herbaceous wetlands…even under dense wet sclerophyll forest…Has invaded steeply sloping, mature pine forest, not just along water courses [and can] establish in undisturbed herbaceous communities above the tree line in National Parks” (Cremer, 1999). “In the Australian Alps…following disturbance by cattle in alpine and subalpine bogs” (Ladson et al, 1997).	H	MH
Allelopathic properties?	Of the naturalised willows in Australia, allelopathic compounds have been demonstrated in S. rubra (Bokarev, Kefeli & Kapeljusnikova, 1966), S. babylonica (Koul et al, 1991), S. fragilis (Davison, 1965), S. viminalis (Bowen & Hoad, 1968), S. alba (Banzhaf et al, 1983) and S. purpurea (Gilliver, 1947). For other willow species, their “dense shade and mat-forming willow roots suppress and kill indigenous understorey” (Purtle et al, 2001b), suggesting that there might be an allelopathic basis for this lack of understorey beneath willow infestations, however no specific reference to S. cinerea.	ML	L
Tolerates herb pressure?	Some Salix species provide good fodder for both ruminants and horses…particularly in Australia (Newsholme, 1992). However, many species tolerate this grazing and/or are able to resprout from stump, e.g. S. cinerea (Cremer, 1999).	MH	MH
Normal growth rate?	“Salix are fast growing trees or shrubs, rarely prostrate” (Spencer, 1997). Where growth rates are described, tree and shrub forms of Salix are recorded as vigorous or fast growing, e.g. S. alba (Spencer, 1997), S. glaucophylloides (Newsholme, 1992), S. nigra (Cremer, 1995), S. purpurea (Webb, Sykes & Garnock-Jones, 1988) and S. x rubens (Meikle).	H	MH
Stress tolerance to frost, drought, w/logg, sal. etc?	FIRE: “If a tree is completely girdled by fire at ground level it may die without coppicing… however young trees tend to sprout from the buried portion of their stem” (Cremer, 1999), indicating some fire tolerance in tree and shrub willows in general. FROST: All tree and shrub species (except S. humboldtiana) in this study are recorded as tolerating USDA hardiness zones of between 1 and 6 (average minimum temperatures between –46^oC and –17^oC) (Bailey & Bailey, 1976, Griffiths, 1992). S. humboldtiana is susceptible to frost (Newsholme, 1992). DROUGHT: All willows are described as growing on the banks or in the riverbeds of water courses or in moist locations (Carr, 1996; Carr et. al, 1992; Cody, 1996; Davis, 1982; Howard, 1988; Ladson, et al, 1997; Maloney et al, 1999; Munz, 1963; Voss, 1972; Webb, Sykes & Garnock-Jones, 1988) suggesting a low drought tolerance; and only few species (S. cinerea and S. exigua) can also establish on drier soil (but are not necessarily drought tolerant), with S. purpurea alone tolerating extremely dry, sandy soils (Newsholme, 1992). WATERLOGGING: Those species able to grow in riverbeds must have high tolerance of waterlogging (S. exigua, Cody, 1996; S. fragilis, Maloney et al, 1999; S. alba, S. x rubens, and S. viminalis; Webb, Sykes & Garnock-Jones, 1988) and also S. cinerea (Cremer, 1999). SALINITY: S. alba is “the most tolerant of all willows to brackish water” (Zallar). S. cinerea “tolerates salt-laden air” (Newsholme, 1992), S. fragilis, S. matsudana & S. seringeana tolerate high levels of salinity (Crouch & Honeyman, 1986). S. nigra has moderately high tolerance of salt (Swift, 1997) and S. purpurea shows “considerable tolerance for salt water” (Newsholme, 1992). S. alba are highly tolerant of waterlogging, salinity and frost, have some tolerance of fire, but not of drought.	MH	MH
Reproduction
Reproductive system	S. cinerea reproduction is largely by seed (Carr, 1996). “Probably does not sucker and rarely breaks off live branches. Layering is rare until the trees are old and fall over” (Cremer, 1999). Capable of reproducing both vegetatively and by seed.	H	MH
Number of propagules produced?	“A large crown would produce over 500,000 seeds (Cremer, 1999). Seeds numerous, very small, each with a tuft of long hairs (Tutin, 1993).	H	MH
Propagule longevity?	“Willow seed is very short-lived” with longer-lived species recorded at surviving 8-10 weeks (Cremer, 1999).	L	MH
Reproductive period?	Following reproductive maturity “flowering tends to be ample and to occur every year” (Cremer, 1999). S. cinerea “stands are mostly monoculture excluding 97% of sunlight and most other species” (Cremer, 1999). The oldest stem S. exigua in this study was 31 years (Ottenbreit & Staniforth, 1992). An old S. fragilis tree was observed to 130 years (Meikle, 1984).	H	MH
Time to reproductive maturity?	“Flowering and the production of viable seed may begin two to three years after germination, provided the plant is at least 1 m tall if it is a shrub willow, or 2 m tall if it is a tree willow…In some taxa (e.g. S. alba) flowering tends to begin at larger sizes” (Cremer, 1999), which is probably still within 5 years. For plants that have reproduced vegetatively, this may be reduced, as in S. nigra, observed flowering on cuttings produced from < 1 year old growth (Crouch & Honeyman, 1986).	ML	MH
Dispersal
Number of mechanisms?	Vegetative propagules and seed spread by water. “Seed is easily carried by wind” (Cremer, 1999).	H	MH
How far do they disperse?	“Seed is easily carried by wind for more than 1 km and some travels for up to 50 km or even 100 km (Cremer, 1999) for species that commonly reproduce by seed: S. cinerea, S. nigra, S. purpurea, S. aegyptica, S. glaucophylloides, & S. viminalis (ARMCANZ, 2001).	H	MH

S. cinerea, S. fragilis, S. x rubens & S. nigra are identified by Ladson et al as outstandingly invasive because of their biology and ecology, specifically their reproductive ability.

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