Present distribution
| This weed is not known to be naturalised in Victoria | ||||
Habitat: Native to Southern Europe and Northern Africa. Reported in shrubland and woodland, as well as invading abandoned pastures. |
Map Overlays Used Land Use: Forest private plantation; forest public plantation; pasture dryland Broad vegetation types Coastal scrubs and grassland; coastal grassy woodland; heathy woodland; lowland forest; heath; box ironbark forest; inland slopes and plains; sedge rich woodland; dry foothills forest; montane dry woodland; sub-alpine woodland; grassland; plains grassy woodland; herb-rich woodland; sub-alpine grassy woodland; montane grassy woodland; rainshadow woodland; mallee; mallee heath; boinka-raak; mallee woodland; wimmera / mallee woodland Colours indicate possibility of Cistus ladanifer infesting these areas. In the non-coloured areas the plant is unlikely to establish as the climate, soil or landuse is not presently suitable. |
|
QUESTION | COMMENTS | RATING | CONFIDENCE |
Social | |||
1. Restrict human access? | It is a plant that can form a dense scrub, and the excaudate has been linked with cases of dermatitis, therefore has nuisance factor (Garcia-Gonzalez etal 2001). | mh | m |
2. Reduce tourism? | There is no evidence of this, cistus species are planted as ornamentals. | ml | m |
3. Injurious to people? | Has been linked with dermatitis (Garcia-Gonzalez etal 2001). | ml | mh |
4. Damage to cultural sites? | Cistus species have become naturalised at the Clunes cemetery and there are reported attempts of control probably for asthenic reasons (Clarke 2005). | ml | m |
Abiotic | |||
5. Impact flow? | A terrestrial species | l | m |
6. Impact water quality? | A terrestrial species | l | m |
7. Increase soil erosion? | Its requirement of fire for regeneration would leave the soil exposed and also its allopathic traits reduce the herbaceous diversity that reduces competition but also vegetation covering the soil (Tarrega, Luis-Calabig & Valbuena 2001). | ml | m |
8. Reduce biomass? | A competitive species replaces other shrubby plants however allelopathy reduces herbaceous diversity (Tarrega, Luis-Calabig & Valbuena 2001). | mh | mh |
9. Change fire regime? | Cistus require fire for persistence, needing to be burnt roughly between every 5 and 15 years, also it produces an exudate and is semi deciduous having pre drought leaf fall so may increase fire intensity (Clemente, Rego & Correia 2005). | mh | mh |
Community Habitat | |||
10. Impact on composition (a) high value EVC | EVC= Plains Savannah (E); CMA= Wimmera; Bioreg= Lowan Mallee; VH CLIMATE potential. Can become dominant leading to lower floral diversity especially in the herb layer. Major displacement of dominant sp. within a layer/creation of shrub layer. | h | mh |
(b) medium value EVC | EVC= Semi-arid Woodland (D); CMA= Wimmera; Bioreg= Lowan Mallee; VH CLIMATE potential. Can become dominant leading to lower floral diversity especially in the herb layer. Major displacement of dominant sp. within a layer. | mh | mh |
(c) low value EVC | EVC= Heathy Woodland (LC); CMA= Wimmera; Bioreg= Lowan Mallee; VH CLIMATE potential. Can become dominant leading to lower floral diversity especially in the herb layer. Major displacement of dominant sp. within a layer. | mh | mh |
11. Impact on structure? | Competitive in shrub layer, allopathy reduces diversity of the herbaceous layer and may prevent the regeneration of the tree layer (Tarrega, Luis-Calabig & Valbuena 2001). | mh | mh |
12. Effect on threatened flora? | No specific data but would be a successful competitor, and does have allelopathic properties. | mh | m |
Fauna | |||
13. Effect on threatened fauna? | No specific data but flavinoid content of exudate causes it to be inedible during the hotter times of the year. | mh | m |
14. Effect on non-threatened fauna? | May out-compete more valuable food sources. | ml | m |
15. Benefits fauna? | Is edible during certain times of the year (Paton, Azocar & Tovar 1998). | mh | m |
16. Injurious to fauna? | Quantities of toxin vary through the year (Paton, Azocar & Tovar 1998), however when extracts of the excaudate where administered to rats it caused a series of ailments (Vicente Ruiz etal 1996). | mh | mh |
Pest Animal | |||
17. Food source to pests? | In its native range it is eaten by deer, goats and rabbits but not as a major component of the diet (Bugalho, Milne & Racey 2001, Martins, Milne & Rego 2002, Paton, Azocar & Tovar 1998 and Sosa etal 2004). | mh | h |
18. Provides harbor? | No specific data but no more than any other shrub species. | m | m |
Agriculture | |||
19. Impact yield? | Described as a pioneer of arid environments would be able to invade grass land and with allelopathy impact yield of pasture and crop plants (Dias, Costa & Dias 2005). Flavinoid content also makes it an unsuitable browse species (Tarrega, Luis-Calabig & Valbuena 2001). | ml | m |
20. Impact quality? | If consumed at certain times of the year can have toxic effects on stock (Paton, Azocar & Tovar 1998). | ml | m |
21. Affect land value? | Persistent seed bank makes it hard to remove, therefore if removal seen as a requirement, costs would be a negative for the land (Ferrandis etal 1999). | m | m |
22. Change land use? | If left to become dominant would limit land capability but can be effectively managed (Paton, Azocar & Tovar 1998 and Tarrega, Luis-Calabig & Valbuena 2001). | ml | m |
23. Increase harvest costs? | As long as fire isn't an ongoing management strategy the cost of managing cistus should eventually reduce to a minimal level. Restriction of stock from infested areas at certain time of the year would increase labour costs. | mh | m |
24. Disease host/vector? | No specific data. | l | m |
QUESTION | COMMENTS | RATING | CONFIDENCE |
Establishment | |||
1. Germination requirements? | Majority of seed produced has an induced dormancy due to a hard shell coat and germinate after fire (Delgado etal 2001), however an estimated 25% of seed produced can germinate the following winter-spring if dispersed (Alias etal 2006 and Malo & Suarez 1996). | mh | h |
2. Establishment requirements? | Majority of successful germination occurs after a fire event leaving little litter canopy cover (Clemente, Rego & Correia 2005 and Quintana etal 2004). | ml | mh |
3. How much disturbance is required? | In natural distribution inhabits woodland dominated by oak species, however is more prolific after fire (Bugalho, Milne & Racey 2001 and Quintana etal 2004). | mh | h |
Growth/Competitive | |||
4. Life form? | Shrub (Paton, Azocar & Tovar 1998). | l | h |
5. Allelopathic properties? | Produces a suite of chemicals, which work better in conjunction with each other than individually, able to inhibit germination of some plants and those species found to be able to germinate growth is retarded (Chaves & Escudero 1997). Found to cause Autotoxicity preventing seedling growth except after fire or if able to be dispersed away from parent population (Alias etal 2006). | h | h |
6. Tolerates herb pressure? | Produces a chemical as part of its exudate which impairs the relaxation of mouth skeletal muscle (Sosa etal 2004). However the presence of this chemical varies in quantity through the year and the species is grazed by species such as deer, goats and rabbits but not a major component of diet (Bugalho, Milne & Racey 2001). | mh | h |
7. Normal growth rate? | Can grow to 3m, seedlings recorded growing 40cm in a year, mature plant growth 19cm/y (Clemente, Rego & Correia 2005). | mh | mh |
8. Stress tolerance to frost, drought, w/logg, sal. etc? | Recognised as an obligate seeder, Fire will kill adult plants but promote seed bank germination and seen to require a fire frequency of 1 in 5-15 years for persistence (Clemente, Rego & Correia 2005 and (Delgado etal 2001)). Able to grow on soils with a high heavy metal content (Murciego etal 2006). Able to grow in arid environments it is semi deciduous dropping leaves before dry times and also produces high quantities of flavinoids as a defence against browsing (Sosa etal 2004). Frost reported to causing mass failure of seedlings however mature plants presumed to have some tolerance (Quintana etal 2004). Tolerance to waterlogging is not reported. | mh | m |
Reproduction | |||
9. Reproductive system | Requires cross-pollination for seed set (Talavera, Gibbs & Herrera 1993). | l | h |
10. Number of propagules produced? | At a population level seed output have been estimated to range between 3000 and 270 000 seeds per plant (Talavera, Gibbs & Herrera 1993). | h | h |
11. Propagule longevity? | Produce two sets of seed, approx 75% of those are dormant with a hard seed coat (Delgado etal 2001). Viable seed were detected as a soil seed bank in grassland some time after the scrub vegetation was cleared (Ferrandis etal 1999), no accurate estimation of seed persistence likely to be 10+ years (Paton, Azocar & Tovar 1998). | mh | m |
12. Reproductive period? | Found to flower in there second year however this is minimal and found not to live much past 15 years (Clemente, Rego & Correia 2005 and Paton, Azocar & Tovar 1998). | h | h |
13. Time to reproductive maturity? | Some plants observed flowing in their second year (Clemente, Rego & Correia 2005). | ml | h |
Dispersal | |||
14. Number of mechanisms? | Deer have been shown to disperse around 8000 seeds per individual per day (Malo & Suarez 1996). Some dispersal by ants also shown (Bastida & Talavera 2002), however majority believed to be dispersed by water and gravity. | mh | h |
15. How far do they disperse? | Deer are highly mobile animals however other than them seeds have no special adaptations for dispersal and the majority of seeds have been found to fall beneath parent canopies (Bastida & Talavera 2002). | m | h |