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

Victorian Resources Online

Invasiveness Assessment - Branched horsetail (Equisetum ramosissimum) 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 Branched horsetail.

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: Branched horsetail
Scientific name: Equisetum ramosissimum

Question
Comments
Reference
Rating
Establishment
Germination requirements?Reproduces mostly by vegetative means (i.e. Rhizome) at any time in moist environments.
Matus (1999)
Clapham et al (1952)
H
Establishment requirements?Occurs in woods, vineyards, orchards, where shading would occur.
Matus (1999)
CAB Abstracts
MH
How much disturbance is required?Est. amongst irrigated crops, as well as vineyards & citris orchards.
CAB Abstracts
MH
Growth/Competitive
Life form?Semi-aquatic → found growing in wet places (e.g. standing water).
Matus (1999)
CAB Abstracts
H
Allelopathic properties?None described.
L
Tolerates herb pressure?If consumed would recover quickly because rhizome presumably remains intact.
Clapham et al (1952)
MH
Normal growth rate?See E. arvense.
MH
Stress tolerance to frost, drought, w/logg, sal. etc?Tolerance to low temp (0 - 2oC), high aridity (xeric features), waterlogging (semi-aquatic), fire (rhizome), salinity.
Matus (1999)
CAB Abstracts
H
Reproduction
Reproductive systemSexual (spores & vegetative (rhizomes).
Clapham et al (1952)
H
Number of propagules produced?Numerous spores 5-8 sporangia.

- 8 sporangia/strobilus x >300 spores = >2,000 spores.
Clapham et al (1952)
H
Propagule longevity?Assumed to be short-lived like E. arvense & E. palustre. Hence, rhizome being 1o mechanism for reproduction.
Clapham et al (1952)
L
Reproductive period?Rhizomes perennial.
Clapham et al (1952)
H
Time to reproductive maturity?Assumed to be same as E. arvense & E.palustre.
- Once rhizome produces aerial stems (fertile stems first).
Matus (1999)
H
Dispersal
Number of mechanisms?Spores overlaid by 2 spiral bands (‘elators’).
Clapham et al (1952)
H
How far do they disperse?Spores also numerous, so greater chance will disperse further.
Clapham et al (1952)
MH


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