Your gateway to a wide range of natural resources information and associated maps

Victorian Resources Online

Impact Assessment - Giant water lily (Nymphaea mexicana) in Victoria

Back | Table | Feedback

Assessment of plant invasiveness is done by evaluating biological and ecological characteristics such as germination requirements, growth rate, competitive ability, reproduction methods and dispersal mechanisms. Assessment of plant impacts, however, is determined by the extent to which a plant affects a land manager’s environmental, economic and social resources.

The relative importance of these resources varies depending upon the value people place on them and, as such, the assessment process is subjective. For example, a farmer is likely to place a higher emphasis on the impact of a plant on production (economic resource) than its impact on areas of natural vegetation occurring on the farm. Conversely, a Landcare or Friends group would value environmental or social resources more than economic resources.

Recognising that the value of resources vary between different land tenures, plant impact assessments allow a prioritisation of resources by land managers. Assessments can apply at a local, regional or state level, and the relative values of each resource identified may differ at each level.

The impact assessment method used in the Victorian Pest Plant Prioritisation Process uses three broad resource categories: social, environmental and agricultural, each with a number of related attributes. For example, social resources include such attributes as how the plant affects human access for recreation, or if it creates a health risk due to toxicity or by producing allergens.

Each resource attribute, or criterion, is assessed relative to a list of intensity ratings. Depending upon information found in relation to each criterion, a rating of Low, Medium Low, Medium High or High is assigned. Descriptions of the impact criteria and intensity ratings used in this process can be viewed here.

The following table provides information on the impact of Giant water lily (yellow water lily).

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: Giant water lily (yellow water lily)
Scientific name: Nymphaea mexicana

Question
Comments
Rating
Confidence
Recreation
1. Restrict human access?Reported to decrease the recreational value of infected areas (Capperino & Schneider 1985). This may imply the restriction of boating.
MH
M
2. Reduce tourism?In areas where it has become over populated recreational values have been reduced (Capperino & Schneider 1985). Unknown to what extent.
MH
MH
3. Injurious to people?There is no reported evidence for this.
L
M
4. Damage to cultural sites?Ornamental species may alter the aesthetics.
ML
L
Abiotic
5. Impact flow?Only reported in slow moving water, however it is attached and semi-emergent in high density patches as the competition drives the leaves to be elevated above the water surface (Saity & Jacobs 1981). Abel to form dense infestations that impact on recreational activities therefore can have a major impact on both surface and subsurface flow (Capperino & Schneider 1985).
H
MH
6. Impact water quality?There is no evidence for this species, however in dense infestations the shading by this species could reduce water temperatures and the reduction in water flow could alter dissolved oxygen especially at night when the plant respires.
M
L
7. Increase soil erosion?Reported in areas of low to no flow and can further reduce water movement (Saity & Jacobs 1981). Therefore has a low probability of associated large scale soil movement.
L
M
8. Reduce biomass?Clogs water ways that were open (Bailey 1900; Capperino & Schneider 1985). This would be a increase in biomass.
L
MH
9. Change fire regime?Aquatic species, therefore not affected by fire.
L
H
Community Habitat
10. Impact on composition
(a) high value EVC
EVC= Billabong Wetland (E); CMA= Goulburn Broken; Bioreg= Murray Fans; VH CLIMATE potential.
Has been noted to displace other submerged aquatics (Johnstone 1982).
MH
MH
(b) medium value EVC
Aquatic species. All Victorian water bodies considered to comprise high value EVCs only (Weiss pers. com).
L
M
(c) low value EVC
Aquatic species. All Victorian water bodies considered to comprise high value EVCs only (Weiss pers. com).
L
M
11. Impact on structure?Has been noted to displace other submerged aquatics (Johnstone 1982). Therefore having a major impact on all species within the water column.
MH
MH
12. Effect on threatened flora?Unknown.
MH
L
Fauna
13. Effect on threatened fauna?Unknown.
MH
L
14. Effect on non-threatened fauna?Unknown.
M
L
15. Benefits fauna?Flowers visited by insects, used by duck species in its native range (Capperino & Schneider 1985; Alexander 1987). Unknown in Australia.
M
M
16. Injurious to fauna?None reported.
L
M
Pest Animal
17. Food source to pests?May be eaten by duck species.
ML
L
18. Provides harbor?The cover produced by aquatic macrophytes is ideal habitat for the immature stages of mosquito species (Orr & Resh 1992).
ML
MH
Agriculture
19. Impact yield?Not viewed as an agricultural weed.
L
M
20. Impact quality?Not viewed as an agricultural weed.
L
M
21. Affect land value?Not viewed as an agricultural weed.
L
M
22. Change land use?Not viewed as an agricultural weed.
L
M
23. Increase harvest costs?Increases evaporation, therefore increases water costs (Capperino & Schneider 1985).
M
MH
24. Disease host/vector?There is no reported evidence for this.
L
M

This table can also be viewed as a PDF document (printer friendly).

Impact Assessment Record - Giant water lily (PDF - 63KB)
Impact Assessment Record - Giant water lily (DOC - 53KB)
To view the information PDF requires the use of a PDF reader. This can be installed for free from the Adobe website (external link).

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