Scotch heath (Erica cinerea)

Present distribution

Scientific name:	Erica cinerea L.
Common name(s):	Scotch heath, bell heather

This weed is not known to be naturalised in Victoria

Habitat:

Grows on hillsides, cliffs, dry slopes, sea cliffs (Underhill 1971), heaths, rocky ground, woods, dry moorland (Tutin et al 1972), frequently disturbed sites (Vera 1997) and tussock grassland (Webb et al 1988). Dominant in its native range in oceanic heathlands (Soons, Bullock 2008), dry heathlands (Bullock, Moy 2004). Soils; acidic (Underhill 1971), waterlogged, slight salt tolerance (Pessarakli 1999), seasonally dry (Hodkinson et al 1999; Turner, Conran 2004), frost resistant (Bannister, Polwart 2001).

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:
Broadacre cropping; forestry; pasture dryland

Ecological Vegetation Divisions
Coastal; heathland; grassy/heathy dry forest; treed swampy wetland; lowland forest; foothills forest; forby forest; high altitude shrubland/woodland; granitic hillslopes; rocky outcrop shrubland; western plains woodland; basalt grassland; alluvial plains grassland; semi-arid woodland; alluvial plains woodland

Colours indicate possibility of Erica cinerea 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 erica cinerea

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

Impact

QUESTION	COMMENTS	RATING	CONFIDENCE
Social
1. Restrict human access?	Max height of 0.8 m (Soons, Bullock 2008), max diameter 2-2.5 m (Bullock, Moy 2004) – may have a low nuisance value and impede individual access	ml	h
2. Reduce tourism?	“The violet-purple flowers of E. cinerea create an obvious contrast between the flower and its background” (Turner, Conran 2004) – effects to aesthetics	ml	h
3. Injurious to people?	Not stated in the literature (Underhill 1971), therefore it is unlikely to be injurious	l	mh
4. Damage to cultural sites?	Max height of 0.8 m (Soons, Bullock 2008) – little or negligible affect on water flow	l	mh
Abiotic
5. Impact flow?	Grows on “hillsides and cliffs and similar dry slopes” (Underhill 1971) and is dominant in dry heathlands of western Europe (Bullock, Moy 2004) – terrestrial, therefore not likely to affect water flow	l	h
6. Impact water quality?	Grows on “hillsides and cliffs and similar dry slopes” (Underhill 1971) and is dominant in dry heathlands of western Europe (Bullock, Moy 2004) – terrestrial, therefore not likely to impact on water quality	l	h
7. Increase soil erosion?	Has allelopathic properties, especially affecting grasses (Rice 1984) and also grows on “hillsides and cliffs and similar dry slopes” (Underhill 1971) – may cause patches of bare soil – however to what extent this is unknown	m	l
8. Reduce biomass?	The allelopathic properties, especially affecting grasses (Rice 1984) may result in a slight decrease in biomass	mh	mh
9. Change fire regime?	“Primary coloniser of heathland after burning” (Bannister 1994), grows in frequently disturbed sites (Vera 1997), produces “slowly decaying litter” (Debussche et al 1980) – greatly changes frequency and/or intensity of fire risk	h	h
Community Habitat
10. Impact on composition (a) high value EVC	EVC = Valley Grassy Forest (V); CMA = Goulburn Broken; Bioregion = Central Victorian Uplands; VH CLIMATE potential Mat-forming (Webb et al 1988) and has allelopathic properties affecting grasses (Rice 1984) – monoculture within a specific layer; displaces all spp. within a strata/layer	h	h
(b) medium value EVC	EVC = Grassy Dry Forest (D); CMA = North East; Bioregion = Northern Inland Slopes; VH CLIMATE potential Mat-forming (Webb et al 1988) and has allelopathic properties affecting grasses (Rice 1984– monoculture within a specific layer; displaces all spp. within a strata/layer	h	h
(c) low value EVC	EVC = Granitic Hills Woodland (LC); CMA = West Gippsland; Bioregion = Wilsons Promontory; VH CLIMATE potential Mat-forming (Webb et al 1988) and has allelopathic properties affecting grasses (Rice 1984– monoculture within a specific layer; displaces all spp. within a strata/layer	h	h
11. Impact on structure?	Mat-forming (Webb et al 1988) and has allelopathic properties affecting grasses (Rice 1984), it may have a major effect on <60% of the floral strata	mh	mh
12. Effect on threatened flora?	Although it is mat-forming (Webb et al 1988) and has allelopathic properties that mainly affect grasses (Rice 1984) the effect on threatened flora has not yet been determined	mh	l
Fauna
13. Effect on threatened fauna?	Although it is mat-forming (Webb et al 1988) and has allelopathic properties that mainly affect grasses (Rice 1984) therefore changing habitats, the effect on threatened fauna has not yet been determined	mh	l
14. Effect on non-threatened fauna?	Mat-forming (Webb et al 1988) and has allelopathic properties affecting grasses (Rice 1984) – is likely cause reduction in habitat for fauna spp., leading to reduction in numbers of individuals	mh	mh
15. Benefits fauna?	“large proportions of bare ground or short turf (and thus the presence of E. cinerea) may aid high densities of ants (Ravenscroft 1990) – may provide an important alternative food source and/or harbor desirable species	ml	h
16. Injurious to fauna?	No effect mentioned in the literature (Underhill 1971)	l	mh
Pest Animal
17. Food source to pests?	Rabbits sometimes feed on young Erica spp. plants (Underhill 1971) and “the only observed visitor to E. cinerea were honey bees” (Turner, Conran 2004) – supplies food to serious pests, but at low levels	mh	mh
18. Provides harbor?	Rabbits sometimes feed on young Erica spp. plants and burrow underneath (Underhill 1971) – capacity to provide harbor and permanent warrens for foxes and rabbits throughout the year	h	mh
Agriculture
19. Impact yield?	Has been known to cause serious growth problems in crop plants, “particularly with various grass species” (Rice 1984), however to what extent is not known	m	l
20. Impact quality?	As it is not listed as an agricultural weed (Randall 2007) it is not known to affect quality of yield	l	m
21. Affect land value?	As it is not listed as an agricultural weed (Randall 2007) it is not likely to affect land value	l	m
22. Change land use?	Has been known to cause serious growth problems in crop plants, “particularly with various grass species” (Rice 1984) – cause change from crops to other land use – downgrading of the priority land use	mh	mh
23. Increase harvest costs?	As it is not listed as an agricultural weed (Randall 2007) it is not likely to increase harvest costs	l	m
24. Disease host/vector?	As it is not listed as an agricultural weed (Randall 2007) it is not a host or vector for a disease of agriculture	l	m

Invasive

QUESTION	COMMENTS	RATING	CONFIDENCE
Establishment
1. Germination requirements?	“Seeds collected from the highest altitude had a higher percentage of germination than those from lower altitudes.” Have a degree of dormancy and require stratification (Vera 1997) – requires natural seasonal disturbances	mh	h
2. Establishment requirements?	Although it is said that “germination occurs in the presence of light” (Turner, Conran 2004). It is also shade tolerant and “thrives on south facing slopes” in the northern hemisphere (Hodkinson et al 1999) – can establish under moderate canopy/litter cover	mh	h
3. How much disturbance is required?	It is a “primary coloniser of heathland after burning” (Bannister 1994) and grows in frequently disturbed sites (Vera 1997) – establishes in highly disturbed natural ecosystems	ml	h
Growth/Competitive
4. Life form?	Dwarf shrub (Vera 1997)	l	h
5. Allelopathic properties?	Has been known to cause serious growth problems in crop plants, “particularly with various grass species” (Rice 1984) – allelopathic properties seriously affecting some plants	mh	mh
6. Tolerates herb pressure?	“Host for a monophagous species of sap-feeding psyllid belonging to the genus Strophingia” (Hodkinson et al 1999). “Some grazing regimes led to a large decrease in its frequency, this species always returned to its initial level after the livestock was removed.” It may also stimulate lateral growth (Gallet, Roze 2001) – consumed but recovers quickly	mh	h
7. Normal growth rate?	Colonising sp. (Bannister 1994) – rapid growth	h	h
8. Stress tolerance to frost, drought, w/logg, sal. etc?	“has a greater capacity [than Calluna vulgaris] to exploit dry habitats” (Hodkinson et al 1999) however Turner and Conran (2004) believe that E. cinerea would be “disadvantaged under the hot dry summer days seen in South Australia” – not highly drought tolerant Frost resistant to -13˚C (Bannister, Polwart 2001), “severe cold-tolerant” (Turner, Conran 2004) – frost resistant Although Underhill (1971) states that E. cinerea “will not stand waterlogged ground,” Pessarakli (1999) states that it is commonly found on dune-slacks in waterlogged soils – tolerant of water logging “recovers more slowly from fire than taller heaths” although seeds do survive fire (Turner, Conran 2004) and is a “primary coloniser of heathland after burning” (Bannister 1994) – fire tolerant “less injured” by Fe sulphate than E. tetralix (Pessarakli 1999) – salt tolerant, but not highly tolerant	h	h
Reproduction
9. Reproductive system	Can regenerate by seedling establishment and vegetative methods (Vera 1997), but may have “limited self-compatibility” or even be “self-sterile” (Turner, Conran 2004)	h	h
10. Number of propagules produced?	Large plants can produce tens of thousands of seeds per year (Soons, Bullock 2008), up to 1.2 million (Bullock, Moy 2004) – above 2000	h	h
11. Propagule longevity?	“seeds can survive for 30 – 40 years in the soil seed bank” (Turner, Conran 2004)	h	h
12. Reproductive period?	Life span of up to at least 19 years (Soons, Bullock 2008) – mature plant produces viable propagules for 10 years or more	h	h
13. Time to reproductive maturity?	Greater than two years to reach reproductive maturity (Clement, Touffet 1990)	ml	h
Dispersal
14. Number of mechanisms?	Wind-dispersed (Soons, Bullock 2008)	h	h
15. How far do they disperse?	“Vast majority of seeds fell within 1 m of the plant, but a small number... can disperse to distances up to 80 m” (Soons, Bullock 2008) – 20 – 200 m	ml	h

References

Bannister P, Polwart A (2001) The frost resistance of ericoid heath plants in the British Isles in relation to their biogeography. Journal of Biogeography 28, 589-596

Bannister P (1994) Upon this blasted heath, guest editorial. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 18(2), 83-86. Available at http://www.newzealandecology.org/nzje/free_issues/NZJEcol18_2_83.pdf (verified 8 October 2008)

Bullock JM, Moy IL (2004) Plants as seed traps: inter-specific interference with dispersal. Acta Oecologica, 25, 35-41

Clement B, Touffet J (1990) Plant strategies and secondary succession on Brittany heathlands after severe fire. Journal of Vegetation Science 1, 195-202

Debussche M, Escarre J, Lepart J (1980) Changes in Mediterranean shrub communities with Cytisus purgans and Genesta scorpius. Vegetatio 43, 73-82

Gallet S, Roze S (2001) Conservation of heathland by sheep grazing in Brittany (France): Importance of grazing period on dry and mesophilous heathlands. Ecological Engineering 17, 333-344

Hodkinson ID, Bird J, Miles JE, Bale JS, Lennon JJ (1999) Climatic signals in the life histories of insects: the distribution and abundance of heather psyllids (Strophingia spp.) in the UK. Functional Ecology 13, 83-95

Neslon EC, Coker PD (1974) Ecology and status of Erica vagans in County Fermanagh, Ireland. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society, 69, 153-195

Pessarakli M (1999) Handbook of plant and crop stress. CRC Press.

Ravenscroft NOM (1990) The ecology and conservation of the silver-studded blue butterfly Plebejus argus L. on the sandlings of east Anglia, England. Biological Conservation, 53, 21-36

Rice EL (1984) Allelopathy, 2nd Edition. Academic Press, Inc.

Roy B, Popay I, Champion P, James T, Rahman A (2004) An illustrated guide to common weeds of New Zealand, 2nd Edition. New Zealand Plant Protection Society.

Soons MB, Bullock JM (2008) Non-random seed abscission, long-distance wind dispersal and plant migration rates. Journal of Ecology 96, 581-590

Turner D, Conran JG (2004) The reproductive ecology of two naturalised Erica species (Ericaceae) in the Adelaide Hills: the rise and fall of two ‘would-be’ weeds? Transactions of the Royal Society of South Australia, 128(1), 23-31

Tutin TG, Heywood VH, Burges NA, Moore DM, Valentine DH, Walters SM, Webb DA (eds) (1972) Flora Europaea Vol 3. Cambridge University Press.

Underhill TL (1971) Heaths and heathers; Calluna, Daboecia and Erica. David & Charles: Newton Abbot

Valbeuna L, Vera ML (2002) The effects of thermal scarification and seed storage on germination of four heathland species. Plant Ecology, 161, 137-144

Vera ML (1997) Effects of altitude and seed size on germination and seedling survival of heathland plants in north Spain. Plant Ecology 133, 101-106

Webb CJ, Sykes, WR, Garrock-Jones PJ (1988) Flora of New Zealand Vol 4. Botany Division, DSIR. Christchurch, NZ.

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 November 2008).

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

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