Plant Assessment Form
More Rumex crispus resources
Rumex crispus
Common Names: curly dock
Evaluated on: 4/15/04
List committee review date: 14/05/2004
Re-evaluation date:
Evaluator(s)
Saint Mary's College of California
P.O. Box 4093, Moraga, CA 94575
(925) 631-5384
msarkis@stmarys-ca.edu
List committee members
Carla BossardCynthia Roye
Alison Stanton
Peter Warner
Joe DiTomaso
General Comments
No general comments for this species
Table 2. Criteria, Section, and Overall Scores
|
Overall Score?
Limited
|
Alert Status?
No Alert
|
Documentation?
3.5 out of 5
|
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Score | Documentation | |||
| 1.1 | ?Impact on abiotic ecosystem processes | D. Negligible | Reviewed Scientific Publication | |
| 1.2 | ?Impact on plant community | C. Minor | Reviewed Scientific Publication | |
| 1.3 | ?Impact on higher trophic levels | C. Minor | Reviewed Scientific Publication | |
| 1.4 | ?Impact on genetic integrity | D. None | Anecdotal | |
| 2.1 | ?Role of anthropogenic and natural disturbance in establishment | B. Moderate | Reviewed Scientific Publication | |
| 2.2 | ?Local rate of spread with no management | C. Stable | Reviewed Scientific Publication | |
| 2.3 | ?Recent trend in total area infested within state | C. Stable | Anecdotal | |
| 2.4 |
?Innate reproductive potential (see Worksheet A) |
B. Moderate | Reviewed Scientific Publication | |
| 2.5 | ?Potential for human-caused dispersal | C. Low | Reviewed Scientific Publication | |
| 2.6 | ? Potential for natural long-distance dispersal | B. Occasional | Anecdotal | |
| 2.7 | ?Other regions invaded | C. Already invaded | Reviewed Scientific Publication | |
| 3.1 |
?Ecological amplitude/Range (see Worksheet C) |
A. Widespread | Reviewed Scientific Publication | |
| 3.2 |
?Distribution/Peak frequency (see Worksheet C) |
A. High | Reviewed Scientific Publication | |
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? | D Reviewed Scientific Publication |
|
Identify ecosystem processes impacted: negligible impact found no evidence to support an abiotic ecosystem process change Sources of information: No speceific data site |
|
|
Question 1.2 Impact on plant community composition, structure, and interactions? |
C Reviewed Scientific Publication |
|
Identify type of impact or alteration: Creation of a new structural layer, and also pushes out native species once established Curly Dock has a deep tap root Sources of information: Monaco, T.J., Growth and development of Curly Dock and Broadleaf Dock. Weed Science, Jan 1972. 64-67 |
|
| Question 1.3 Impact on higher trophic levels? | C Reviewed Scientific Publication |
|
Identify type of impact or alteration: Once established, it easily takes over the habitat. But no specifics were mentioned Curly Dock is easily spread Sources of information: Monaco, T.J., Growth and development of Curly Dock and Broadleaf Dock. Weed Science, Jan 1972. 64-67 |
|
| Question 1.4 Impact on genetic integrity? | D Anecdotal |
|
no impact No documentation showing impact on gentic integrity Sources of information: no specific documentation noted |
|
| Section 2: Invasiveness | |
|
Question 2.1 Role of anthropogenic and natural disturbance in establishment? |
C Reviewed Scientific Publication |
|
Describe role of disturbance: Sources of information: Maun, M.A. Biography of Curly Dock. Weeds Today. Feb/March 1977, 14,19 |
|
| Question 2.2 Local rate of spread with no management? | C Reviewed Scientific Publication |
|
Describe rate of spread: Very quick rate of spread without management Large spread due to heavy seed propagulation (40,000 a plant) and seed dormancy Sources of information: Monaco, T.J., Growth and development of Curly Dock and Broadleaf Dock. Weed Science, Jan 1972. 64-67 |
|
| Question 2.3 Recent trend in total area infested within state? | C Anecdotal |
|
Describe trend: No specific data sited, but assuming that it is spread easily Assumed that spread is quick due to the large seed propagulation and seed dormancy Sources of information: no specific sources noted |
|
| Question 2.4 Innate reproductive potential? | B Reviewed Scientific Publication |
|
Describe key reproductive characteristics: High reproductive potential Assumed that spread is quick due to the large seed propagulation and seed dormancy Sources of information: Monaco, T.J., Growth and development of Curly Dock and Broadleaf Dock. Weed Science, Jan 1972. 64-67 |
|
| Question 2.5 Potential for human-caused dispersal? | C Reviewed Scientific Publication |
|
Identify dispersal mechanisms: seeds transferable as manure because it is not digested outer seed coat is not digested by cattle, and thus it can be spread through manure Sources of information: Foster, L. The biology and non-chemical control of dock species Rumex obtusifolious and Rumex crispus. Biological Agricultural and Horticulture: an international journal |
|
| Question 2.6 Potential for natural long-distance dispersal? | B Anecdotal |
|
Identify dispersal mechanisms: human dispersal only no mention of direct disperal greater than 1km Sources of information: no source noted |
|
| Question 2.7 Other regions invaded? | C Reviewed Scientific Publication |
|
Identify other regions: Lakes, ponds, rivers, streams, canals, reserviors, grasslands, swamps. These were identified areas of dock infestations Sources of information: Foster, L. The biology and non-chemical control of dock species Rumex obtusifolious and Rumex crispus. Biological Agricultural and Horticulture: an international journal and Maun, M.A. Biography of Curly Dock. Weeds Today. Feb/March 1977, 14,19 |
|
| Section 3: Distribution | |
| Question 3.1 Ecological amplitude/Range? | A Reviewed Scientific Publication |
|
Moderate ecological amplitude Sources of information: Foster, L. The biology and non-chemical control of dock species Rumex obtusifolious and Rumex crispus. Biological Agricultural and Horticulture: an international journal and Maun, M.A. Biography of Curly Dock. Weeds Today. Feb/March 1977, 14,19 |
|
| Question 3.2 Distribution/Peak frequency? | A Reviewed Scientific Publication |
|
Describe distribution: 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 | No |
| Populations of this species produce seeds every year. | Yes |
| Seed production sustained over 3 or more months within a population annually | Unknown |
| Seeds remain viable in soil for three or more years | Yes |
| Viable seed produced with both self-pollination and cross-pollination | Unknown |
| Has quickly spreading vegetative structures (rhizomes, roots, etc.) that may root at nodes | No |
| Fragments easily and fragments can become established elsewhere | No |
| Resprouts readily when cut, grazed, or burned | Yes |
| Total points: | 5 |
| 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 Systems | marine systems | |
| Freshwater and Estuarine | lakes, ponds, reservoirs | |
| Aquatic Systems | rivers, streams, canals | |
| estuaries | ||
| Dunes | coastal | |
| desert | ||
| interior | ||
| Scrub and Chaparral | coastal 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 | A, > 50% | |
| Grasslands, Vernal Pools, Meadows, and other Herb Communities | coastal prairie | D, < 5% |
| valley and foothill grassland | ||
| Great Basin grassland | C, 5% - 20% | |
| vernal pool | B, 20% - 50% | |
| meadow and seep | ||
| alkali playa | ||
| pebble plain | ||
| Bog and Marsh | bog and fen | C, 5% - 20% |
| marsh and swamp | ||
| Riparian and Bottomland habitat | riparian forest | D, < 5% |
| riparian woodland | D, < 5% | |
| riparian scrub (incl.desert washes) | ||
| Woodland | cismontane woodland | |
| piñon and juniper woodland | ||
| Sonoran thorn woodland | ||
| Forest | broadleaved upland forest | |
| North Coast coniferous forest | ||
| closed cone coniferous forest | ||
| lower montane coniferous forest | ||
| upper montane coniferous forest | ||
| subalpine coniferous forest | ||
| Alpine Habitats | alpine boulder and rock field | |
| alpine dwarf scrub | ||
| Amplitude (breadth): | A | |
| Distribution (highest score): | A |
Infested Jepson Regions
Click here for a map of Jepson regions
- CA Floristic Province
- Cascade Range
- Central West
- Great Valley
- Northwest
- Sierra Nevada
- Southwest
- Great Basin Province
- Modoc Plateau
- Sierra Nevada East
- Desert Province
- Mojave Desert
- Sonoran Desert