Hanging sedge (Carex pendula)

Present distribution

Scientific name:	Carex pendula Huds.
Common name(s):	Hanging sedge

Map showing the present distribution of this weed.

Habitat:
Has established “on grassy banks, in and about a mixed plantation” (Moore & Edgar, 1970); in grass along stream margin, on a roadside in the shade of planted trees, backswamp on river terrace, opening in deciduous exotic woodland, floodplain backswamp in revegetation site (MWLR, 2006); and in its native range it inhabits: shady streambank in forest (Townsend & Guest, 1980); “forests or other shady places, near streams, springs or in ditches (Davis, 1985); woods and scrubland (Jermy & Tutin, 1968); moist or wet forests (Brändel & Schutz, 2005).

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:
Forest private plantation; forest public plantation; horticulture.

Broad vegetation types
Lowland forest; swamp scrub; sedge rich woodland; moist foothills forest; montane moist forest; grassland; plains grassy woodland; valley grassy forest; herb-rich woodland; montane grassy woodland; riverine grassy woodland; riparian forest.

Colours indicate possibility of Carex pendula infesting these areas.

In the non-coloured areas the plant is unlikely to establish as the climate, soil or landuse is not presently suitable.

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

Impact

QUESTION	COMMENTS	RATING	CONFIDENCE
Social
1. Restrict human access?	Able to form massed dense clumps along waterways (JOI, 2006) and can grow 50-180cm high (Darke, 1992). May cause difficulties accessing waterways.	MH	MH
2. Reduce tourism?	Able to form massed dense clumps along waterways (JOI, 2006) and can grow 50-180cm high (Darke, 1992). Likely to have a visual effect and may inhibit some aquatic recreational activities.	ML	MH
3. Injurious to people?	Leaves are apically scabrid on the nerves and margin (Townsend & Guest, 1985). May cause minor cuts or abrasions.	ML	MH
4. Damage to cultural sites?	Can grow 50-180cm high (Darke, 1992), but root system is unable to form runners (Brändel & Schutz, 2005) so unlikely to have a structural effect. May have a moderate visual effect.	ML	MH
Abiotic
5. Impact flow?	Able to form massed dense clumps along waterways (JOI, 2006) but root system is unable to form runners (Brändel & Schutz, 2005) so unlikely to impact on waterways.	L	MH
6. Impact water quality?	Able to form massed dense clumps along waterways (JOI, 2006) but root system is unable to form runners (Brändel & Schutz, 2005) so unlikely to impact on waterways.	L	MH
7. Increase soil erosion?	Important components of vegetation that stabilises stream edges (Corriol, 2005). Likely to reduce erosion.	L	MH
8. Reduce biomass?	Able to invade in grass along stream margin, on a roadside in the shade of planted trees, backswamp on river terrace, opening in deciduous exotic woodland, floodplain backswamp in revegetation site (MWLR, 2006). Appears to replace ground layer species, but not vegetation from taller layers. Likely to replace biomass.	ML	MH
9. Change fire regime?	No information found.	M	L
Community Habitat
10. Impact on composition (a) high value EVC	EVC=Herb-rich woodland (V); CMA=Glenelg-Hopkins; Bioreg=Victorian Volcanic Plain; CLIMATE potential=VH. Able to invade in grass along stream margin, on a roadside in the shade of planted trees, backswamp on river terrace, opening in deciduous exotic woodland, floodplain backswamp in revegetation site (MWLR, 2006). Able to form massed dense clumps along waterways (JOI, 2006). Appears able to replace ground layer species in discrete clumps, but not vegetation from taller layers. Minor displacement of some dominant or indicator spp. within any one strata/layer.	ML	MH
(b) medium value EVC	EVC=Lowland Forest (D); CMA=Corangamite; Bioreg=Otway Plain; CLIMATE potential=VH. Able to invade in grass along stream margin, on a roadside in the shade of planted trees, backswamp on river terrace, opening in deciduous exotic woodland, floodplain backswamp in revegetation site (MWLR, 2006). Able to form massed dense clumps along waterways (JOI, 2006). Appears able to replace ground layer species in discrete clumps, but not vegetation from taller layers. Minor displacement of some dominant or indicator spp. within any one strata/layer.	ML	MH
(c) low value EVC	EVC=Montane Wet Forest (LC); CMA=West Gippsland; Bioreg=Victorian Alps; CLIMATE potential=VH. Able to invade in grass along stream margin, on a roadside in the shade of planted trees, backswamp on river terrace, opening in deciduous exotic woodland, floodplain backswamp in revegetation site (MWLR, 2006). Able to form massed dense clumps along waterways (JOI, 2006). Appears able to replace ground layer species in discrete clumps, but not vegetation from taller layers. Minor displacement of some dominant or indicator spp. within any one strata/layer.	ML	MH
11. Impact on structure?	Able to invade in grass along stream margin, on a roadside in the shade of planted trees, backswamp on river terrace, opening in deciduous exotic woodland, floodplain backswamp in revegetation site (MWLR, 2006). Able to form massed dense clumps along waterways (JOI, 2006). Appears able to replace ground layer species in discrete clumps, but not vegetation from taller layers. Minor effect on the grasses and herbs in the groundcover layer.	ML	MH
12. Effect on threatened flora?	C. pendula has been observed invading vegetation alongside waterways in massed dense clumps (JOI, 2006). It may reduce populations of threatened flora species, but no evidence was found for this.	MH	L
Fauna
13. Effect on threatened fauna?	Able to invade in grass along stream margin, on a roadside in the shade of planted trees, backswamp on river terrace, opening in deciduous exotic woodland, floodplain backswamp in revegetation site (MWLR, 2006). Able to form massed dense clumps along waterways (JOI, 2006). Appears able to replace ground layer species in discrete clumps, but not vegetation from taller layers. May cause minor reduction in food available to animals.	ML	MH
14. Effect on non-threatened fauna?	Able to invade in grass along stream margin, on a roadside in the shade of planted trees, backswamp on river terrace, opening in deciduous exotic woodland, floodplain backswamp in revegetation site (MWLR, 2006). Able to form massed dense clumps along waterways (JOI, 2006). Appears able to replace ground layer species in discrete clumps, but not vegetation from taller layers. May cause minor reduction in food available to animals.	ML	MH
15. Benefits fauna?	Able to form massed dense clumps along waterways (JOI, 2006) and can grow 50-180cm high (Darke, 1992). May provide some cover for small mammals. Flower spikes have high nutritional value (Summers, 2005) which may provide some food when fruiting.	MH	MH
16. Injurious to fauna?	Although the leaves are apically scabrid on the nerves and margin (Townsend& Guest, 1985), this abrasiveness is unlikely to harm animals, as they are protected by fur. Flower spikes have high nutritional value “but were used only in extreme circumstances” (Summers, 2005), so plants are unlikely to be poisonous.	L	MH
Pest Animal
17. Food source to pests?	Flower spikes have high nutritional value “but were used only in extreme circumstances” (Summers, 2005) which may provide some food when fruiting. Minimal.	L	MH
18. Provides harbour?	Able to form massed dense clumps along waterways (JOI, 2006) and can grow 50-180cm high (Darke, 1992). May harbour minor pest species, such as rodents.	ML	MH
Agriculture
19. Impact yield?	Naturalised in agricultural ecosystems, and “may be a minor problem but not considered important enough to warrant control at any location” (Groves et al, 2003). Unlikely to have a noticeable affect on yield.	L	MH
20. Impact quality?	Naturalised in agricultural ecosystems, and “may be a minor problem but not considered important enough to warrant control at any location” (Groves et al, 2003). Unlikely to have any affect on quality.	L	MH
21. Affect land value?	Naturalised in agricultural ecosystems, and “may be a minor problem but not considered important enough to warrant control at any location” (Groves et al, 2003). Unlikely to affect land value.	L	MH
22. Change land use?	Naturalised in agricultural ecosystems, and “may be a minor problem but not considered important enough to warrant control at any location” (Groves et al, 2003).Unlikely to change land use.	L	MH
23. Increase harvest costs?	Naturalised in agricultural ecosystems, and “may be a minor problem but not considered important enough to warrant control at any location” (Groves et al, 2003). Unlikely to increase harvest costs.	L	MH
24. Disease host/vector?	Not recorded as a host for disease in Groves et al, (2003).	L	MH

Invasive

QUESTION	COMMENTS	RATING	CONFIDENCE
Establishment
1. Germination requirements?	Sow seed in Autumn, if possible, or in Spring (Toogood, 1999). Fresh seed is dormant for around 2 weeks, but following this, “seeds can…germinate at any time of the year when they are exposed to light and high temperatures” of 9-33^oC (Brändel & Schutz, 2005).	MH	H
2. Establishment requirements?	Regeneration is predicted to occur in open sites (forest gaps) (Brändel & Schutz, 2005). Has established “on grassy banks, in and about a mixed plantation” (Moore & Edgar, 1970).	ML	H
3. How much disturbance is required?	Has escaped cultivation in America, appearing on roadsides and stream banks (Ball & Reznicek, 2003). Limited disturbance data indicates that this species may require highly disturbed (roadside) ecosystems for establishment, however, the stream banks may only be subject to minor disturbance. Rating M was chosen as a mid point between the two scenarios.	M	MH
Growth/Competitive
4. Life form?	Short rhizomes (Davis, 1985). Geophyte.	ML	MH
5. Allelopathic properties?	None found in the depauperate literature.	M	L
6. Tolerates herb pressure?	Browsing by deer appeared to favour this species (Crampton et al, 1998). Edible and nutritious (Summers, 2005). Capable of persisting under moderate herbivory pressure.	MH	M
7. Normal growth rate?	“Slow to establish.” Growth rate less than the other Carex species described (Brockmeyer, 2006).	ML	M
8. Stress tolerance to frost, drought, w/logg, sal. etc?	Cultivated in water gardens (Ball & Reznicek, 2003), requires summer/spring flooding (mesohygrophilic) (Corriol, 2005), found in habitats with a constant water supply (Jermy & Tutin, 1968). Needs protection from prolonged frosts, but able to tolerate hard winters by becoming dormant (Darke, 1992). High tolerance of waterlogging, some frost tolerance, but not drought. Tolerance of at least two and susceptible to at least 1.	ML	MH
Reproduction
9. Reproductive system	Short rhizomes (Davis, 1985), without the capability to form runners (Brändel & Schutz, 2005). Self-sows freely (Christman, 2004). Likely to be able to self-pollinate. Has separate male and female flowers (Davis, 1985) which reduces the chance of self-pollination (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2006). Likely to be able to self- and cross- pollinate.	ML	M
10. Number of propagules produced?	More than 20 000 seeds per plant (Brändel & Schutz, 2005).	H	H
11. Propagule longevity?	Seed described as short-lived by Toogood (1999), however a germination study found that the species has “the capability to form long, persistent seed banks” (Brändel & Schutz, 2005), however this was not quantified.	M	L
12. Reproductive period?	“Presumably long-lived” (Brändel & Schutz, 2005). No further information.	M	L
13. Time to reproductive maturity?	No information found.	M	L
Dispersal
14. Number of mechanisms?	The fruits of plants in the genus Carex “lack characters assisting dispersal, most falling close to the parent plants: longer distance dispersal sometimes occurs when fruit is carried…by run-off water on slopes, or in drains and streams” (Moore & Edgar, 1970). C. pendula does invade stream banks (Ball & Reznicek, 2003), so water is probably also a dispersal agent for this species.	MH	MH
15. How far do they disperse?	The fruits of plants in the genus Carex “lack characters assisting dispersal, most falling close to the parent plants” streams” (Moore & Edgar, 1970). Most propagules will disperse far less than 20m. The ability to invade stream banks (Ball & Reznicek, 2003) may also allow long distance dispersal in water (Moore & Edgar, 1970) but comparatively few propagules would reach a kilometre.	ML	MH

References
Ball, P. W. & Reznicek, A.A. 2003, ‘Carex’. In: Flora of North America Editorial Committee (eds.), 1993+. Flora of North America North of Mexico, Oxford University Press, New York and Oxford. Vol. 23, p. 421, http://flora.huh.harvard.edu/FNA/families.shtml, viewed: 19/12/2006.

Brändel M. & Schutz, W. 2005, ‘Temperature effects on dormancy levels and germination in temperate forest sedges (Carex),’ Plant Ecology, vol. 176, p. 245-261.

Brockmeyer, J. 2006, Carex pendula, Bluestem Nursery, Canada & USA, viewed: 18/12/2006, www.bluestem.ca/carex-pendula.htm

Christman, S. 2004, ‘Carex pendula,’ Floridata.com, Tallahassee, Florida USA, viewed: 19/12/2006, http://www.floridata.com/ref/C/care_pen.cfm

Corriol, G. 2005, ‘Forest habitats – note no. 2: alder woodlands,’ Forest Enterprise, vol. 163, p. 60-63, viewed: Dec, 2006, CAB Abstracts.

Crampton, A.G. Stutter, O. Kirby, K.J & Welch, R.C 1998, ‘Changes in the composition of Monks Wood National Nature Reserve (Cambridgeshire, UK) 1964-1996,’ Arboricultural Journal, vol. 22(3), p. 229-245, viewed: Dec 2006, CAB Abstracts.

Darke, R. 1992, The Royal Horticultural Society Manual of Grasses, Timber Press, Protland, Oregon.

Davis, PH (ed) 1975, Flora of Turkey, University Press, Edinburgh.

Encyclopedia Britannica 2006, Pollination, Encyclopedia Britannica Inc., Chicago, Illinois, viewed:11/12/2006, www.britannica.com/eb/article-75903/pollination

Groves, R.H. (Convener) Hosking, J.R Batianoff, G.N. Cooke, D.A. Cowie, I.D. Johnson, R.W. Keighery, G.J. Lepschi, B.J Mitchell, A.A Moerkerk, M.

Randall, R.P. Rozefelds, A.C. Walsh, N.G. & Waterhouse, B.M. 2003, Weed Categories for Natural and Agricultural Ecosystem Management, Bureau of

Rural Sciences, Canberra, viewed: 19/12/2006, www.greeningaustralia.org.au/nativevegetation/pages/pdf/Authors%20G/5_Groves_et_al.pdf

Jepson Online Interchange (JOI) 2003, ‘Accession Detail Results,’ The University and Jepson Herbaria, University of California, Berkeley, viewed: 19/12/2006, http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/interchange.html

Kukkonen, I. 1998, ‘Cyperaceae,’ in Rechinger, K.H. (ed.), Flora Iranica, vol. 173, pp. 1-307.

Manaaki Whenua Lancare Research (MWLR) 2006, ‘Carex pendula,’ viewed: 18/12/2006, http://nzflora.landcareresearch.co.nz

Moore, L.B.; Edgar, E. 1970: Flora of New Zealand. Volume II. Indigenous Tracheophyta - Monocotyledons except Graminae. First electronic edition,

Landcare Research, June 2004, viewed: 18/12/2006, http://FloraSeries.LandcareResearch.co.nz

Summers, M. 2005, The Natural History of the Tavistock Canal, Tamar Valley Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, viewed: 19/12/2006, www.tamarvalley.org.uk/pdf/TavCanalNH.pdf

Toogood, a. (ed) 1999 The Royal Horticultural Society Propagating Plants, Dorling-Kindersley, Great Britain.

Townsend, C.C. and Guest, E. (eds) 1980, Flora of Iraq, vol. 4, Ministry of Agriculture and Agrarian Reform, Republic of Iraq.

Global present distribution data references

Australian National Herbarium (ANH) 2006, Australia’s Virtual Herbarium, Australian National Herbarium, Centre for Plant Diversity and Research, viewed 15/12/2006, http://www.anbg.gov.au/avh/

Ball, P. W. & Reznicek, A.A. 2003, ‘Carex’. In: Flora of North America Editorial Committee (eds.), 1993+. Flora of North America North of Mexico, Oxford University Press, New York and Oxford. Vol. 23, p. 421, http://flora.huh.harvard.edu/FNA/families.shtml, viewed: 19/12/2006.

Davis, PH (ed) 1975, Flora of Turkey, University Press, Edinburgh.

Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) 2006, Global biodiversity information facility: Prototype data portal, viewed 15/12/ 2006, http://www.gbif.org/

Hansen, A. & P. Sunding. 1985, Flora of Macaronesia: checklist of vascular plants, ed. 4. Sommerfeltia vol. 17.

Jermy, A.C. & Tutin, T.G. 1968, British Sedges, Botanical Society of the British Isles, London.

Kukkonen, I. 1998, ‘Cyperaceae,’ in Rechinger, K.H. (ed.), Flora Iranica, vol. 173, pp. 1-307.

Manaaki Whenua Lancare Research (MWLR) 2006, ‘Carex pendula,’ viewed: 18/12/2006, http://nzflora.landcareresearch.co.nz

Missouri Botanical Gardens (MBG) 2006, w3TROPICOS, Missouri Botanical Gardens Database, viewed 27/11/2006, http://mobot.mobot.org/W3T/Search/vast.html

Moore, L.B.; Edgar, E. 1970: Flora of New Zealand. Volume II. Indigenous Tracheophyta - Monocotyledons except Graminae. First electronic edition, Landcare Research, June 2004, viewed: 18/12/2006, http://FloraSeries.LandcareResearch.co.nz

National Biodiversity Network, 2004, ‘NBN Gateway – interactive species mapper,’ version 3.1, National Biodiversity network, Nottingham, United Kingdom, viewed: 15/12/2006, www.searchnbn.net/index_homepage/index.jsp

Townsend, C.C. and Guest, E. (eds) 1980, Flora of Iraq, vol. 4, Ministry of Agriculture and Agrarian Reform, Republic of Iraq.

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