Invasiveness Assessment - Greater bindweed (Calystegia silvatica) in Victoria

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 Greater bindweed.

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: Greater bindweed
Scientific name: Calystegia silvatica

Question	Comments	Rating	Confidence
Establishment
Germination requirements?	Insufficient information to determine germination requirements for this plant. Score medium.	M	MH
Establishment requirements?	Found on waste ground, on roadsides (Brummitt 2002). ‘Weed of waste places and forest margins’ (TWS 2002). ‘Hedgerows, gardens, ungrazed pastures and waste places (Roy et al 1998). Would suggest that plant requires more specific requirements to establish but insufficient information to determine establish requirements. Score medium.	M	H
How much disturbance is required?	Found on waste ground, on roadsides (Brummitt 2002). ‘Weed of waste places and forest margins (TWS 2002). ‘Hedgerows, gardens, ungrazed pastures and waste places (Roy et al 1998). Establishes in highly disturbed natural ecosystems.	ML	H
Growth/Competitive
Life form?	Herb. ‘Robust, sprawling, climbing, hairless perennial’ (Roy et al 1998). Life form – climber.	ML	H
Allelopathic properties?	None described.	L	H
Tolerates herb pressure?	Insufficient information to determine tolerance to herbivory pressure. Score medium.	M	MH
Normal growth rate?	‘An aggressive climbing weed’ (TWS 2002). Insufficient information to determine growth rate of plant in comparison to species of the same life form. Score medium.	M	MH
Stress tolerance to frost, drought, w/logg, sal. etc?	Has been found in the Tamar area, Tasmania along a walking trail and margins of the River Tamar (TWS 2002). Would suggest that the plant is frost tolerant. Not enough information to determine other stress tolerances. Score medium.	M	MH
Reproduction
Reproductive system	Rhizomatous. Seed dispersal is less significant than vegetative spread (Brummitt 2002). ‘All plants in this complex are self-sterile and single populations normally do not set seed at all’ (Brummitt 2002). Vegetative reproduction.	MH	H
Number of propagules produced?	‘Spread vigorously by rhizomes’ (Brummitt 2002). Insufficient documentation to determine number of propagules per flowering event. Score medium.	M	H
Propagule longevity?	Plant vegetatively reproduces (Brummitt 2002).	L	H
Reproductive period?	Perennial plant. ‘ .. in great abundance on waste ground over a distance of perhaps 100 m, swamping other vegetation and climbing to a height of 3 m (Brummitt 2002). Possible that the plant forms self-sustaining dense monocultures where it occurs but not enough evidence to determine reproductive period. Score medium.	M	H
Time to reproductive maturity?	Not enough evidence to determine plant’s time to reach reproductive maturity. Score medium.	M	MH
Dispersal
Number of mechanisms?	‘.. there is no obvious dispersal mechanism and the seeds tend to merely fall to earth beneath the parent plant’ (Brummitt 2002). Propagules mainly spread by gravity.	L	H
How far do they disperse?	‘.. there is no obvious dispersal mechanism and the seeds tend to merely fall to earth beneath the parent plant’ (Brummitt 2002). Very unlikely to disperse greater than 200 m, most will be less than 20 m.	L	H

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