Plant Assessment Form

Brachypodium sylvaticum

Common Names: slender false-brome; false-brome

Evaluated on: 12/29/04

List committee review date: 16/03/2005

Re-evaluation date:

Evaluator(s)

Elizabeth Brusati, project manager
California Invasive Plant Council
1442A Walnut St. #462, Berkeley, CA 94709
510-843-3902
edbrusati@cal-ipc.org

List commitee members

Carla Bossard
Joe DiTomaso
Cynthia Roye
Jake Sigg
Peter Warner
Matt Brooks

General Comments

No general comments for this species

Table 2. Criteria, Section, and Overall Scores

Overall Score? Moderate
Alert Status? Alert
Documentation? 2.5 out of 5
Score Documentation
1.1 ?Impact on abiotic ecosystem processes U Anecdotal
Impact?
Four-part score UABD Total Score
B
1.2 ?Impact on plant community A. Severe Reviewed Scientific Publication
1.3 ?Impact on higher trophic levels B. Moderate Other Published Material
1.4 ?Impact on genetic integrity D. None Reviewed Scientific Publication
2.1 ?Role of anthropogenic and natural disturbance in establishment A. Severe Reviewed Scientific Publication
Invasiveness?
Total Points
16 Total Score B
2.2 ?Local rate of spread with no management B. Increases less rapidly Observational
2.3 ?Recent trend in total area infested within state C. Stable Observational
2.4 ?Innate reproductive potential
(see Worksheet A)
B. Moderate Observational
2.5 ?Potential for human-caused dispersal A. High Observational
2.6 ? Potential for natural long-distance dispersal B. Occasional Observational
2.7 ?Other regions invaded A. Invades 3 or more ecological types Other Published Material
3.1 ?Ecological amplitude/Range
(see Worksheet C)
D. Narrow Observational
Distribution?
Total Score D
3.2 ?Distribution/Peak frequency
(see Worksheet C)
D. Very low Observational

Table 3. Documentation

Scores are explained in the "Criteria for Categorizing Invasive Non-Native Plants that Threaten Wildlands".

Section 1: Impact
Question 1.1 Impact on abiotic ecosystem processes? U Anecdotal
Identify ecosystem processes impacted:

Long-term impacts unknown. May sequester soil moisture, making it unavailable to tree seedlings. May change fire behavior because it increases fine fuel loads.


Sources of information:

Tu, M. 2002. Weed alert! Brachypodium sylvaticum (Huds.) P. Beauv. The Nature Conservancy, Invasive Species Initiative. http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu/alert/alrtbrac.html. Accessed 12/28/04


Question 1.2 Impact on plant community composition,
structure, and interactions?
A Reviewed Scientific Publication
Identify type of impact or alteration:

Forms monospecific stands in forest understory that outcompete and completely exclude native forbs and grasses. May inhibit establishment of tree seedlings (1). In Finland, grows as large, almost pure stands and is a strong competitor in shady, deciduous forests (2). Forms dense cover at Thornewood Open Space Preserve in CA (3). In Oregon, it has been observed to displace native understory plants, suppress forest regeneration, degrade wildlife habitat, and increase fire risk.


Sources of information:

1. Tu 2002.
2. Haeggstrom, C.-A. and R. Skyten (1996). "Flowering and individual survival of a population of the grass Brachypodium sylvaticum in Nato, Aland Islands, SW Finland." Annales Botanici Fennici 33(1): 1-10.
3. E-mail from Jim Johnson, Streamkeeper, San Francisquito Watershed Council. 2/17/05
4. Chornesky, E.A. et al. 2005. Science priorities for reducing the threat of invasive species to sustainable forestry. BioScience 55(4):335-348.


Question 1.3 Impact on higher trophic levels? B Other Published Material
Identify type of impact or alteration:

Reduction of habitat for butterflies because it outcompetes plants that are their food sources. Unknown if unpalatable but deer are reported to graze on it. Reported to degrade wildlife habitat. Tu, M. 2002. Weed alert! Brachypodium sylvaticum (Huds.) P. Beauv. The Nature Conservancy, Invasive Species Initiative. http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu/alert/alrtbrac.html. Accessed 12/28/04


Sources of information:

1. Chornesky, E.A. et al. 2005. Science priorities for reducing the threat of invasive species to sustainable forestry. BioScience 55(4):335-348.text here


Question 1.4 Impact on genetic integrity? D Reviewed Scientific Publication

none no native Brachypodium species


Sources of information:

Hickman, J. C. (ed.) 1993. The Jepson Manual, Higher Plants of California. University of California Press. Berkeley, CA enter text here


Section 2: Invasiveness
Question 2.1 Role of anthropogenic and natural disturbance
in establishment?
B Observational
Describe role of disturbance:

When invading, may first disperse along roadsides (1). In Finland, increased in closed canopy forest without any disturbance (2). Does not do well if grazed or cut (2). In California, spreading in undisturbed redwood and mixed evergreen forest as well as along roadsides and trails (3).


Sources of information:

1. Kaye, T. 2003. Invasive plant alert. False-brome (Brachypodium sylvaticum). False-brome working group. www.appliedeco.org/FBWG.htm. Accessed 12/28/04
3. E-mail from Jim Johnson, Streamkeeper, San Francisquito Watershed Council. 2/17/05


Question 2.2 Local rate of spread with no management? B Observational
Describe rate of spread:

In an experimental plot in California, 15 plants in a 100 sq.ft. area increased to 150 sq. ft. in one year, forming dense cover. The following year, seedlings were present in an area of 500 sq. ft..


Sources of information:

E-mail from Jim Johnson, Streamkeeper, San Francisquito Watershed Council


Question 2.3 Recent trend in total area infested within state? C Observational
Describe trend:

Discovered in Santa Cruz mountains in 2004 (1). Removed at Thornewood Open Space Preserve, San Mateo County (2). Spread documented only from area surrounding Schilling Lake at Thornewood OSP (3). Scoring as C because only reported in one area in California.


Sources of information:

1. Tu M., Randall J.M. 2003. 2003 Cal-IPC Red Alert! Proceedings, California Invasive Plant Council Symposium. Pgs. 116-120.
2. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District. 2004. District responds to eliminate non-native weed slender false-brome. Open Space News. Winter 2004-05: 2.
3. E-mail from Jim Johnson, Streamkeeper, San Francisquito Watershed Council 2/17/05


Question 2.4 Innate reproductive potential? B Observational
Describe key reproductive characteristics:

Perennial bunchgrass. Not rhizomatous. Reproduces rapidly from seed and can resprout from small stem or root fragments when cut. Seed bank probably does not survive longer than one year, but this is not confirmed (1). Tufts can survive several years, but do not flower each year (2). Seeds sprouted one year after plants were removed in 2004. J. Johnson at Thornewood Open Space Preserve is monitoring regeneration of seedlings in eradicated plots (3). Seedbank appears to last one year, with very few seeds surviving to the second year (preliminary data). Has two rounds of seedling germination, in fall and spring (4). Self-compatible and long-lived. Can produce many seeds, but exact number not known (5).


Sources of information:

1. Tu 2002.
2. Haeggstrom and Skyten 1996
3. E-mail from Jim Johnson, Streamkeeper, San Francisquito Watershed Council 2/17/05
4. E-mail from Julie Kemp, University of Oregon 4/21/05
5. E-mail from Alisa Ramakrishnan, Portland State University. 4/22/05


Question 2.5 Potential for human-caused dispersal? A Observational
Identify dispersal mechanisms:

Spreads mostly by roads, road maintenance, and moving logging or road equipment from invaded areas (1). In California, spreading along roads (2). .


Sources of information:

1. E-mail from Cindy McCain, NW Oregon Ecology Group, US Forest Service. 2/15/05
2. E-mail from Jim Johnson, Streamkeeper, San Francisquito Watershed Council.


Question 2.6 Potential for natural long-distance dispersal? B Observational
Identify dispersal mechanisms:

Able to move along game trails without human vectors. In Oregon, is spreading on floodplain of the Willamette Valley and down creeks.


Sources of information:

E-mail from Cindy McCain, NW Oregon Ecology Group, US Forest Service. 2/15/05


Question 2.7 Other regions invaded? A Other Published Material
Identify other regions:

. Oregon is the only other US state where invasive. In OR, invades closed canopy coniferous forests, riparian forests, forest edges, and upland prairies with full sun at elevations ranging from 200-3500 ft.. In Willamette Valley, occurs with native perennial bunch grasses. Invaded 40 years ago and now infests thousands of acres in Willamette Valley.


Sources of information:

Tu 2002.
Kaye, T. 2003.
E-mail from Cindy McCain, NW Oregon Ecology Group, US Forest Service. 2/15/05


Section 3: Distribution
Question 3.1 Ecological amplitude/Range? D Observational

Found in CA 2003. Small distribution so far, in Santa Cruz mountains (1, 2). Open space district removed infestation at Thornewood Preserve. Favored habitat is high shade of redwoods where there are sun breaks. Does not grow in deepest shade of redwoods. Spreading in redwood and mixed evergreen forest (3).


Sources of information:

1. Tu and Randall 2003
2. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District. 2004.
3. E-mail from Jim Johnson, Streamkeeper, San Francisquito Watershed Council


Question 3.2 Distribution/Peak frequency? D Observational
Describe distribution:

New invader, very low frequency of occurrence so far.


Sources of information:

Worksheet A - Innate reproductive potential

Reaches reproductive maturity in 2 years or less Yes
Dense infestations produce >1,000 viable seed per square meter Unknown
Populations of this species produce seeds every year. Yes
Seed production sustained over 3 or more months within a population annually No
Seeds remain viable in soil for three or more years No
Viable seed produced with both self-pollination and cross-pollination Yes
Has quickly spreading vegetative structures (rhizomes, roots, etc.) that may root at nodes No
Fragments easily and fragments can become established elsewhere Unknown
Resprouts readily when cut, grazed, or burned Yes
Total points: 4
Total unknowns: 2
Total score: B?

Related traits:

Worksheet B - Arizona Ecological Types is not included here

Worksheet C - California Ecological Types

(sensu Holland 1986)
Major Ecological Types Minor Ecological Types Code?
Marine Systemsmarine systems
Freshwater and Estuarine lakes, ponds, reservoirs
Aquatic Systemsrivers, streams, canals
estuaries
Dunescoastal
desert
interior
Scrub and Chaparralcoastal bluff scrub
coastal scrub
Sonoran desert scrub
Mojavean desert scrub (incl. Joshua tree woodland)
Great Basin scrub
chenopod scrub
montane dwarf scrub
Upper Sonoran subshrub scrub
chaparral
Grasslands, Vernal Pools, Meadows, and other Herb Communitiescoastal prairie
valley and foothill grassland
Great Basin grassland
vernal pool
meadow and seep
alkali playa
pebble plain
Bog and Marshbog and fen
marsh and swamp
Riparian and Bottomland habitatriparian forest
riparian woodland
riparian scrub (incl.desert washes)
Woodlandcismontane woodland
piñon and juniper woodland
Sonoran thorn woodland
Forestbroadleaved upland forestD, < 5%
North Coast coniferous forest
closed cone coniferous forest
lower montane coniferous forest
upper montane coniferous forest
subalpine coniferous forest
Alpine Habitatsalpine boulder and rock field
alpine dwarf scrub
Amplitude (breadth): D
Distribution (highest score): D

Infested Jepson Regions

Click here for a map of Jepson regions

  • Central West
  • Great Valley
  • Northwest