Mugo pine (Pinus mugo)

Present distribution

Scientific name:	Pinus mugo Turra
Common name(s):	mugo pine

Map showing the present distribution of this weed.

Habitat:

“Grows relatively well on well-developed highland soils, dry rocky slopes and scattering's” Found in peatbogs and dry meadows in the highlands (Korshikov and Pirko 2002). “A permanent threat to the open heath vegetation, especially in areas with a relatively high ground water table” (Christensen and Johnsen 2001). Rain from 700 mm up to 2500 mm “with a distinct peak during summer. It is well established that the shade-intolerant pine is not able to recruit or even to maintain viable clonal populations in the understorey of spruce or larch forests” (Dullinger et al. 2005). “Grows mostly in subalpine regions above the timberline (1400-2700 m), but also at lower altitudes in peat bogs and frost hollows (down to 200 m)… Naturalised in heathland and coastal sand dunes” (Jorgensen 2007). “Is frost resistant but drought tender…A useful tree in consolidating snow drifts and preventing avalanches” (Bodkin 1986). “Adapted to fine textured soils: No” (USDA undated).

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; pasture dryland; pasture irrigation

Ecological Vegetation Divisions
Coastal; grassy/heathy dry forest; swampy scrub; freshwater wetland (permanent); treed swampy wetland; lowland forest; forby forest; wet forest; high altitude shrubland/woodland; high altitude wetland; alpine treeless; granitic hillslopes; rocky outcrop shrubland; riverine woodland/forest

Colours indicate possibility of Pinus mugo 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 pinus jeffreyi

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

Impact

QUESTION	COMMENTS	RATING	CONFIDENCE
Social
1. Restrict human access?	“A small tree or low multi-stemmed shrub from 2 m to at least 15 m tall, depending of variety. Usually bushy with numerous, spreading, erect branches” (Ledgard and Ecroyd 1988). “Pinus mugo Turra has an obligatory prostrate growth form. Maximum canopy heights of 5 m have been reported (Dullinger 2003). “With its base lying on the ground and ascending shoots emerging as far as 10 meters from the root it is able to withstand downsliding snow and stones” (Jorgensen 2007). Could need significant works to provide reasonable access, tracks closed or impassable.	H	MH
2. Reduce tourism?	“A small tree or low multi-stemmed shrub from 2 m to at least 15 m tall, depending of variety. Usually bushy with numerous, spreading, erect branches” (Ledgard and Ecroyd 1988). “Pinus mugo Turra has an obligatory prostrate growth form. Maximum canopy heights of 5 m have been reported (Dullinger 2003). “With its base lying on the ground and ascending shoots emerging as far as 10 meters from the root it is able to withstand downsliding snow and stones” (Jorgensen 2007). Due to the size of the plant, some recreational uses may be affected.	MH	MH
3. Injurious to people?	“No human health effects are reported” (Jorgensen 2007) “Mucro very small and not armed” (Webb et al. 1988). “Toxicity: None” (USDA, no date). “Source of a cosmetic and medicinal oil” (Ledgard and Ecroyd 1988). No effect, no prickles, no injuries.	L	M
4. Damage to cultural sites?	“With its base lying on the ground and ascending shoots emerging as far as 10 meters from the root it is able to withstand downsliding snow and stones” (Jorgensen 2007). Could cause major structural damage to site, and/or obliteration of cultural features.	H	M
Abiotic
5. Impact flow?	“Grows relatively well on well-developed highland soils, dry rocky slopes and scattering's” Found in dry meadows (Korshikov and Pirko 2002). “A permanent threat to the open heath vegetation, especially in areas with a relatively high ground water table” (Christensen and Johnsen 2001). “Grows mostly in subalpine regions above the timberline… Also at lower altitudes in peat bogs and frost hollows … Naturalised in heathland and coastal sand dunes” (Jorgensen 2007). Not known to be aquatic, negligible affect on water flow.	L	MH
6. Impact water quality?	“Grows relatively well on well-developed highland soils, dry rocky slopes and scattering's” Found in dry meadows (Korshikov and Pirko 2002). “A permanent threat to the open heath vegetation, especially in areas with a relatively high ground water table” (Christensen and Johnsen 2001). “Grows mostly in subalpine regions above the timberline… Also at lower altitudes in peat bogs and frost hollows … Naturalised in heathland and coastal sand dunes” (Jorgensen 2007). Not known to be aquatic, negligible affect on water flow.	L	MH
7. Increase soil erosion?	“Within their natural range the mountain pines protect alpine soils from erosion” (Ledgard and Ecroyd 1988). “Can be used with success in New Zealand for the revegetation of eroded mountain slopes” (Benecke and Gobl 1974). “This is a useful tree in consolidating snow drifts and preventing avalanches” (Bodkin 1986). Decreases the probability of soil erosion.	L	MH
8. Reduce biomass?	This species is a permanent threat to the open heath vegetation, especially in areas with a relatively high ground water table. If the open heath vegetation is to be maintained, the expansion of Pinus mugo and removal of new growth at regular intervals must be monitored” (Christensen and Johnsen 2001). “Dominated by extensive mono-dominant stands of the obligatory shrubby pine species Pinus mugo Turra” (Dullinger et al. 2005). “A small tree or low multi-stemmed shrub from 2 m to at least 15 m tall, depending of variety. Usually bushy with numerous, spreading, erect branches” (Ledgard and Ecroyd 1988). Pinus mugo could have the potential to change an open heathland into a dense pine thicket and therefore biomass may increase.	L	ML
9. Change fire regime?	This species is a permanent threat to the open heath vegetation, especially in areas with a relatively high ground water table. If the open heath vegetation is to be maintained, the expansion of Pinus mugo and removal of new growth at regular intervals must be monitored” (Christensen and Johnsen 2001). “Dominated by extensive mono-dominant stands of the obligatory shrubby pine species Pinus mugo Turra” (Dullinger et al. 2005). “A small tree or low multi-stemmed shrub from 2 m to at least 15 m tall, depending of variety. Usually bushy with numerous, spreading, erect branches” (Ledgard and Ecroyd 1988). Pinus mugo could have the potential to change an open heathland into a dense pine thicket and therefore may cause moderate change to both frequency and intensity of fire risk.	MH	ML
Community Habitat
10. Impact on composition (a) high value EVC	EVC = Plains Grassy Woodland (E); CMA =North East; Bioregion =Central Victorian Uplands; VH CLIMATE potential. “Dominated by extensive mono-dominant stands of the obligatory shrubby pine species Pinus mugo Turra” (Dullinger et al. 2005). “Within its natural range it is most frequent in treeline ecotones, where it establishes mono-dominant, dense, and extensive shrublands” (Dullinger 2003). “Able to cover the ground to a degree that excludes most other vegetation (except shade tolerant mosses) within a span of a few decades” (Jorgensen 2007). Monoculture within a specific layer; displaces all species within a strata/layer.	H	MH
(b) medium value EVC	EVC = Riverine Grassy Woodland/Sedgy Riverine (D); CMA =North East; Bioregion =Victorian Riverina; VH CLIMATE potential. “Dominated by extensive mono-dominant stands of the obligatory shrubby pine species Pinus mugo Turra” (Dullinger et al. 2005). “Within its natural range it is most frequent in treeline ecotones, where it establishes mono-dominant, dense, and extensive shrublands” (Dullinger 2003). “Able to cover the ground to a degree that excludes most other vegetation (except shade tolerant mosses) within a span of a few decades” (Jorgensen 2007). Monoculture within a specific layer; displaces all species within a strata/layer.	H	MH
(c) low value EVC	EVC = Heathy Woodland (LC); CMA =Wimmera; Bioregion =Wimmera; VH CLIMATE potential. “Dominated by extensive mono-dominant stands of the obligatory shrubby pine species Pinus mugo Turra” (Dullinger et al. 2005). “Within its natural range it is most frequent in treeline ecotones, where it establishes mono-dominant, dense, and extensive shrublands” (Dullinger 2003). “Able to cover the ground to a degree that excludes most other vegetation (except shade tolerant mosses) within a span of a few decades” (Jorgensen 2007). “Self-sown thickets… In the pine thickets, a needle litter layer accumulates, eventually forming a more or less thick humus layer… This species is a permanent threat to the open heath vegetation, especially in areas with a relatively high ground water table. If the open heath vegetation is to be maintained, the expansion of Pinus mugo and removal of new growth at regular intervals must be monitored” (Christensen and Johnsen 2001). Monoculture within a specific layer; displaces all species within a strata/layer.	H	MH
11. Impact on structure?	“Dominated by extensive mono-dominant stands of the obligatory shrubby pine species Pinus mugo Turra” (Dullinger et al. 2005). “Within its natural range it is most frequent in treeline ecotones, where it establishes mono-dominant, dense, and extensive shrublands” (Dullinger 2003). “Able to cover the ground to a degree that excludes most other vegetation (except shade tolerant mosses) within a span of a few decades” (Jorgensen 2007). “Self-sown thickets… In the pine thickets, a needle litter layer accumulates, eventually forming a more or less thick humus layer… This species is a permanent threat to the open heath vegetation, especially in areas with a relatively high ground water table. If the open heath vegetation is to be maintained, the expansion of Pinus mugo and removal of new growth at regular intervals must be monitored” (Christensen and Johnsen 2001). Major effects on all layers. Forms monoculture; no other strata/layers present.	H	MH
12. Effect on threatened flora?	“A large number of valuable habitats described in the listings of the European NATURA 200 network, are reduced in quality, or even locally eradicated, in areas up to several tens of hectares” (Jorgensen 2007). May impact upon threatened species, but impact upon VROT unknown.	MH	L
Fauna
13. Effect on threatened fauna?	No information found.	MH	L
14. Effect on non-threatened fauna?	“A large number of valuable habitats described in the listings of the European NATURA 200 network, are reduced in quality, or even locally eradicated, in areas up to several tens of hectares” (Jorgensen 2007). “Able to cover the ground to a degree that excludes most other vegetation (except shade tolerant mosses) within a span of a few decades” (Jorgensen 2007). “Within its natural range it is most frequent in treeline ecotones, where it establishes mono-dominant, dense, and extensive shrublands” (Dullinger 2003). Habitat changed dramatically, leading to the possible extinction (extirpation) of non-threatened fauna.	H	ML
15. Benefits fauna?	“Protection against herbivores is most probably due to the reduced visibility of juvenile trees within dense shrub layers and it is there-fore not surprising that this effect does not depend on species identity” (Dullinger et al. 2005). “With its base lying on the ground and ascending shoots emerging as far as 10 meters from the root it is able to withstand downsliding snow and stones” (Jorgensen 2007). As this plant is known to provide cover for seedlings, it may provide cover for small animals as well and given it has such a broad prostrate growth it may have a capacity to provide some assistance in shelter.	MH	ML
16. Injurious to fauna?	“No human health effects are reported” (Jorgensen 2007“Mucro very small and not armed” (Webb et al. 1988). “Toxicity: None” (USDA undated). Unlikely to be injurious to fauna. No effect.	L	ML
Pest Animal
17. Food source to pests?	“With increasing browsing intensity…Pinus mugo will be co-dominant” (Kienast et al. 1999). “Vertebrate herbivores did not kill any trees during the observation period, although these browsers significantly affected tree growth on wind exposed sites where snow cover was generally low in winter” (Senn 1999). “Seeds of P. mugo are primarily wind dispersed and secondary redistribution of seeds by birds and small mammals has been observed” (Dullinger 2004). Possibly will provide food for one or more minor pest spp.	ML	ML
18. Provides harbour?	“Protection against herbivores is most probably due to the reduced visibility of juvenile trees within dense shrub layers and it is there-fore not surprising that this effect does not depend on species identity” (Dullinger et al. 2005). “With its base lying on the ground and ascending shoots emerging as far as 10 meters from the root it is able to withstand downsliding snow and stones” (Jorgensen 2007). As this plant is known to provide cover for seedlings, it may provide cover for small animals as well and given it has such a broad prostrate growth it may have a capacity to provide harbour and permanent warrens for foxes and rabbits throughout the year.	H	ML
Agriculture
19. Impact yield?	“Gremmeniella abietina (Lagerb.) Morelet was found to be abundant in afforestations, causing extensive losses among young trees of various pine species… The survival rate of the two Pinus species decreased rapidly with increasing duration of snow cover in spring” (Senn 1999). May cause a major impact on quantity of produce (e.g. 5-20%).	MH	M
20. Impact quality?	No information found.	M	L
21. Affect land value?	“Pinus mugo will probably colonise the vigorous high-growing grasslands of many abandoned pastures at quite low rates” (Dullinger 2003). “In the mountains of Europe this small tree grows slowly to 12 ft (3.5 m)” (Burnie et al. 1997). Even if this species was to invade a property, it could take some time to establish up to the point of being a problem requiring attention. Little or no affect of land value.	L	ML
22. Change land use?	“Pinus mugo will probably colonise the vigorous high-growing grasslands of many abandoned pastures at quite low rates” (Dullinger 2003). “In the mountains of Europe this small tree grows slowly to 12 ft (3.5 m)” (Burnie et al. 1997). Unlikely to be a cause for change of land use as control of any infestations should keep them manageable. Little or no change.	L	ML
23. Increase harvest costs?	“If the open heath vegetation is to be maintained, the expansion of Pinus mugo and removal of new growth at regular intervals must be monitored” (Christensen and Johnsen 2001). “Pinus mugo will probably colonise the vigorous high-growing grasslands of many abandoned pastures at quite low rates” (Dullinger 2003). May be a minor increase in cost of harvesting as slightly more labour may be required to control invasions.	M	M
24. Disease host/vector?	“Gremmeniella abietina (Lagerb.) Morelet was found to be abundant in afforestations, causing extensive losses among young trees of various pine species… The survival rate of the two Pinus species decreased rapidly with increasing duration of snow cover in spring” (Senn 1999). Host to major and severe disease or pest of important agricultural produce.	H	M

Invasive

QUESTION	COMMENTS	RATING	CONFIDENCE
Establishment
1. Germination requirements?	“The seeds were allowed to germinate at 25ºC for a period of 21 days” (Kormutak et al. 2009). Rain from 700 mm up to 2500 mm “with a distinct peak during summer” (Dullinger et al. 2005). Likely to only require natural seasonal disturbances such as seasonal rainfall, spring/summer temperatures for germination.	MH	MH
2. Establishment requirements?	“Seedling establishment seems to be inhibited by low light availability and deep layers” (Dullinger 2003). “It is well established that the shade-intolerant pine is not able to recruit or even to maintain viable clonal populations in the understorey of spruce or larch forests” (Dullinger et al. 2005). “Prefers light to medium, well-drained, acid soils in an open, sunny position, and is frost resistant but drought tender” (Bodkin 1986). Requires more specific requirements to establish (e.g. open space or bare ground with access to light and direct rainfall).	ML	H
3. How much disturbance is required?	“This species is a permanent threat to the open heath vegetation, especially in areas with a relatively high ground water table. If the open heath vegetation is to be maintained, the expansion of Pinus mugo and removal of new growth at regular intervals must be monitored” (Christensen and Johnsen 2001). Could establish in healthy and undisturbed natural ecosystems (e.g. mallee, alpine, heathland).	H	H
Growth/Competitive
4. Life form?	“The tree line…composed of shrubby Pinus mugo” (Dullinger et al. 2005). Other.	L	H
5. Allelopathic properties?	“The essential oils of…Pinus mugo did not inhibit the fungal growth even at the highest concentration” (Tampieri 2005). “Pines may serve as ‘nurse plants’ for spruce and larch, improving local site conditions by accumulating humus and conveying shelter against frost, strong winds and browsing herbivores” (Dullinger et al. 2005). “Known allelopath: No” (USDA undated). None.	L	M
6. Tolerates herb pressure?	“With increasing browsing intensity…Pinus mugo will be co-dominant” (Kienast et al. 1999). “Vertebrate herbivores did not kill any trees during the observation period, although these browsers significantly affected tree growth on wind exposed sites where snow cover was generally low in winter” (Senn 1999). Consumed and recovers slowly. Reproduction strongly inhibited by herbivory, but still capable of vegetative propagule (by rhizomes or tubers); weed may still persist.	ML	MH
7. Normal growth rate?	“In the mountains of Europe this small tree grows slowly to 12 ft (3.5 m)” (Burnie et al. 1997). Slow growth; will be exceeded by many other species.	L	M
8. Stress tolerance to frost, drought, w/logg, sal. etc?	Can be found in peatbogs (Korshikov and Pirko 2002). “A permanent threat to the open heath vegetation, especially in areas with a relatively high ground water table” (Christensen and Johnsen 2001). Rain from 700 mm up to 2500 mm “with a distinct peak during summer” (Dullinger et al. 2005). Browsers significantly affected tree growth on wind exposed sites where snow cover was generally low in winter (Senn 1999). “This species does not tolerate extreme heat or dry conditions” (Burnie et al. 1997). “Grows mostly in subalpine regions above the timberline (1400-2700 m), but also at lower altitudes in peat bogs and frost hollows (down to 200 m)” (Jorgensen 2007). “A useful tree in consolidating snow drifts and preventing avalanches” (Bodkin 1986). “Fire resistant: yes” (USDA undated). “Seedlings and saplings can be destroyed with cool burns, but larger plants usually require hot fires” (Muyt 2001). “Commonly naturalised in heathland and coastal sand dunes” (Jorgensen 2007). Highly resistant to frost as it grows in snow areas and possibly tolerant of waterlogging as it grows in peatbogs. May have some resistance to salinity as it grows on the coast and to fire. Possibly intolerant of drought.	MH	MH
Reproduction
9. Reproductive system	“Natural propagation is not only germiniparous, but also vegetative by implanting prostrate sprouts” (Korshikov and Pirko 2002). Both vegetative and sexual reproduction.	H	H
10. Number of propagules produced?	“Each cone produces between 50 and 70 mature seeds, and the number of cones counts in tens or hundreds according to the size of the individual. (Jorgensen 2007). Average number of seeds per cone for P. mugo 34.6± 17.9 =52.5 (as the upper limit) (Kormutak et al. 2009). 50 seed per cone x 100 cones per tree= 5000.	H	M
11. Propagule longevity?	No information found.	M	L
12. Reproductive period?	The age of the studied trees was approximately 120 years (Korshikov and Pirko 2002). “Flowering and seed production takes place from the age of 3-5 years. (Jorgensen 2007). 120 years old – 3 years until flowering= 117 years of ability to produce seed or vegetative sprouts. Mature plant produces viable propagules for 10 years or more.	H	M
13. Time to reproductive maturity?	“Flowering and seed production takes place from the age of 3-5 years. (Jorgensen 2007). 2-5 years to reach sexual maturity.	ML	ML
Dispersal
14. Number of mechanisms?	“All Pines reproduce by seed. Seed is primarily dispersed by wind with some dispersal by Yellow-tailed Black Cockatoos” (Muyt 2001). “Seeds of P. mugo are primarily wind dispersed and secondary redistribution of seeds by birds and small mammals has been observed” (Dullinger 2004). Bird dispersed seeds.	H	H
15. How far do they disperse?	“All Pines reproduce by seed. Seed is primarily dispersed by wind with some dispersal by Yellow-tailed Black Cockatoos” (Muyt 2001). “Strong winds may carry a seed a few hundred metres away from the mother plant” (Jorgensen 2007). Very likely that at least one propagule will disperse greater than one kilometre.	H	M

References

Benecke U. and Gobl F. (1974) The Influence of Different Mycorrhizae on Growth, Nutrition and Gas-exchange of Pinus mugo Seedlings. Plant and Soil. 40, 21-32.

Bodkin F. (1986) Encyclopaedia Botanica: The Essential Reference Guide to Native and Exotic Plants in Australia. Angus & Robertson.

Christensen, S.N. and Johnsen I. (2001) The Lichen-rich Coastal Heath Vegetation on the Isle of Anholt, Denmark- Conservation and Management. Journal of Coastal Conservation. 7:13-22.

Dullinger S, Dirnbock T, Kock R, Hochbichler E, English T, Sauberer N. and Grabherr G. (2005) Interactions Among Tree-line Conifers: Differential Effects of Pine on Spruce and Larch. Journal of Ecology. 93, 948-957.

Dullinger S, Dirnbock T. and Grabherr G Jorgensen H. (2007) Invasive Alien Species Fact Sheet: Pinus mugo. Available at http://www.nobanis.org/Search.asp (verified 2007).

Kienast F, Fritschi J, Bissegger M. and Abderhalden W. (1999) Modelling Successional Patterns of High-elevation Forests Under Changing Herbivore Pressure- Responses at the Landscape Level. Forest Ecology and Management. 120, 35-46.

Kormutak A, Manka P, Vookova B, Salaj T, Camek V, Bolecek P. and Gomory D. (2009) Seed Quality in Hybrid Swarm Populations of Pinus mugo Turra and P. sylvestris. Plant Syst Evol. 277:245-250.

Korshikov I.I. and Pirko Y.V. (2002) Genetic Variation and Differentiation of Peat-Bog and Dry-Meadow Populations of the Dwarf Mountain Pine Pinus mugo Turra in the Highlands of the Ukrainian Carpathians. Russian Journal of Genetics. 38(9), 1235-1241.

Muyt A. (2001) Bush Invaders of South-East Australia: A guide to the Identification and Control of Environmental Weeds Found in South-East Australia. R.G. and F.J. Richardson, Meredith.

Senn J. (1999) Tree Mortality Caused by Gremmeniella abietina in a Subalpine Afforestation in the Central Alps and its Relationship with Duration of Snow Cover. Eur. J. For. Path. 29, 65-74.

Tampieri M.P, Galuppi R, Macchioni F, Carelle M.S, Falcioni L, Cioni P.L. and Morelli I. (2005) The Inhibition of Candida albicans by Selected Essential Oils and Their Major Components. Mycopathologia. 159: 339-345.

Webb CJ, Sykes WR and Garnock-Jones PJ. (1988) Flora of New Zealand. Volume 4. Botany Division, Department of Scientific & Industrial Research, New Zealand.

Global present distribution data references

Australian National Herbarium (ANH) (2008) Australia’s Virtual Herbarium, Australian National Herbarium, Centre for Plant Diversity and Research, Available at http://www.anbg.gov.au/avh/ (verified 10/02/2009).

Department of the Environment and Heritage (Commonwealth of Australia). (1993 – On-going) Australian Plant Name Index (APNI) http://www.cpbr.gov.au/apni/index.html (verified 15/06/2009).

Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) (2008) Global biodiversity information facility, Available at http://www.gbif.org/ (verified 10/07/2009).

Integrated Taxonomic Information System. (2008) Available at http://www.itis.gov/ (verified 15/06/2009).

Missouri Botanical Gardens (MBG) (2008) w³TROPICOS, Missouri Botanical Gardens Database, Available at http://mobot.mobot.org/W3T/Search/vast.html (verified 15/06/2009).

United States Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Research Service, National Genetic Resources Program. Germplasm Resources Information Network - (GRIN) [Online Database]. Taxonomy Query. (2008) Available at http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/taxgenform.pl (verified 26/03/2009).

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