Plume poppy (Bocconia frutescens)

Assessment ID: 31
Jurisdiction: New South Wales
Methodology: New South Wales Weed Risk Management System
Land use: 1. CONSERVATION AND NATURAL ENVIRONMENTS
Management area: whole of Hunter region

Notes: 

Status: PUBLISHED
Last updated: 19/9/2023 6:37:38 pm AEST

Questions answered: 41 / 48

Weed Risk: 151.56 (High)
   Invasiveness (raw/adjusted): 9.00 / 6.003
   Impacts (raw/adjusted): 8.00 / 4.208
   Potential distribution (raw/adjusted): 6.00 / 6.000

Management: 1.89 (Very high)
   Control costs (raw/adjusted): 6.00 / 4.998
   Persistence (raw/adjusted): 5.00 / 4.545
   Current distribution (raw/adjusted): 0.10 / 0.083

Result: Destroy infestations

Uncertainty: 1% (Submit assessment)

Invasiveness

Q1. What is the ability of the weed to establish amongst existing plants?
Answer: Medium

Comments: Current affected area has been disturbed by fire in 2019. Proliferation has occurred since this event. (MidCoast Staff). Known as a disturbance weed internationally (Invasive Species Compendium).

Q2. What is the weed’s tolerance to average weed management practices in the land use?
Answer: Very High

Comments: Plant has not been targeted in landscape and land use type. Generally used herbicide is not known to be terminally effective (MidCoast Staff).

Q3. What is the reproductive ability of the weed in the land use?

(a) Time to seeding
Answer: >1-3 yrs

Comments: Time to seeding is thought to be strongly influences by prevailing conditions and altered soil chemistry. Noted in Invasive Species Compendium to have varying time to seeding. Nil suckering occurrences observed or noted in Invasive Species Compendium (MidCoast Staff)

(b) Annual seed production
Answer: High

Comments: Time to seeding is thought to be strongly influences by prevailing conditions and altered soil chemistry. Noted in Invasive Species Compendium to have varying time to seeding. Nil suckering occurrences observed or noted in Invasive Species Compendium (MidCoast Staff)

(c) Vegetative reproduction
Answer: None

Comments: Time to seeding is thought to be strongly influences by prevailing conditions and altered soil chemistry. Noted in Invasive Species Compendium to have varying time to seeding. Nil suckering occurrences observed or noted in Invasive Species Compendium (MidCoast Staff)

Q4. How likely is long-distance dispersal (>100m) by natural means?

(a) Flying animals
Answer: Common

Comments: Birds and other fruit and seed eating animals recorded to eat and spread the fruit. Water noted as means of dispersal. Wind noted as unlikely. (Invasive Species Compendium). Ref: Benitez DM, Saulibio D, 2007. Bocconia frutescens distribution on the island of Hawaii. Technical Report 144. Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit, 19 pp.

(b) Other wild animals
Answer: Occasional

Comments: Birds and other fruit and seed eating animals recorded to eat and spread the fruit. Water noted as means of dispersal. Wind noted as unlikely. (Invasive Species Compendium). Ref: Benitez DM, Saulibio D, 2007. Bocconia frutescens distribution on the island of Hawaii. Technical Report 144. Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit, 19 pp.

(c) Water
Answer: Occasional

Comments: Birds and other fruit and seed eating animals recorded to eat and spread the fruit. Water noted as means of dispersal. Wind noted as unlikely. (Invasive Species Compendium). Ref: Benitez DM, Saulibio D, 2007. Bocconia frutescens distribution on the island of Hawaii. Technical Report 144. Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit, 19 pp.

(d) Wind
Answer: Unlikely

Comments: Birds and other fruit and seed eating animals recorded to eat and spread the fruit. Water noted as means of dispersal. Wind noted as unlikely. (Invasive Species Compendium). Ref: Benitez DM, Saulibio D, 2007. Bocconia frutescens distribution on the island of Hawaii. Technical Report 144. Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit, 19 pp.

Q5. How likely is long-distance dispersal (>100 m) by human means?

(a) Deliberate spread by people
Answer: Occasional

Comments: a) Known distribution is currently limited to Rainbow Flat community area (MidCoast LCA). b) little community trade , vehicle movement unlikely c) area not agricultural production area d) livestock not common, domestic animals not commonly wide roaming

(b) Accidentally by people and vehicles
Answer: Unlikely

Comments: a) Known distribution is currently limited to Rainbow Flat community area (MidCoast LCA). b) little community trade , vehicle movement unlikely c) area not agricultural production area d) livestock not common, domestic animals not commonly wide roaming

(c) Contaminated produce
Answer: Unlikely

Comments: a) Known distribution is currently limited to Rainbow Flat community area (MidCoast LCA). b) little community trade , vehicle movement unlikely c) area not agricultural production area d) livestock not common, domestic animals not commonly wide roaming

(d) Domestic/farm animals
Answer: Unlikely

Comments: a) Known distribution is currently limited to Rainbow Flat community area (MidCoast LCA). b) little community trade , vehicle movement unlikely c) area not agricultural production area d) livestock not common, domestic animals not commonly wide roaming

Impacts

Q1. Does the weed reduce the establishment of desired plants?
Answer: 10 - 50% reduction

Comments: Currently rated at < 10% as not causing major impact, but has still reduced expected native vegetation recovery. It may have potential to create shade barrier for the medium to long term. (MidCoast Staff).

Tropical dry forests are one of the most endangered natural communities in the Hawaiian Islands and have been reduced to approximately 10% of their former cover (Bruegman, 1996). As it is capable of forming dense stands in dry habitats, Smith (1985) listed B. frutescens as one of the 86 worst weeds that have become serious pests of dry forests and other native ecosystems. The most significant infestations of Bocconia on Maui now occur from 485-1225 m in the dry forests of Auwahi and Kanaio, and during the 1992 survey of the now Kanaio Natural Area Reserve, Bocconia was found to comprise the sixth highest percentage cover of alien species along five monitoring transects (Medeiros et al., 1993). However, of the ten most common weeds by cover, it was the only woody species that could

Q2. Does the weed reduce the yield or amount of desired vegetation?
Answer: 10 - 25% reduction

Comments: Desired vegetation is native species regeneration post-fire (disturbance). Bocconia spp. has shown capacity to adapt to its growing conditions and micro environment. Can tolerate high variety of environmental conditions showing clear differences in growth rates and impacts. Currently less than 10% based on current location information and observations, however rated as higher based on the species potential impacts. (MidCoast Staff).
Tropical dry forests are one of the most endangered natural communities in the Hawaiian Islands and have been reduced to approximately 10% of their former cover (Bruegman, 1996). As it is capable of forming dense stands in dry habitats, Smith (1985) listed B. frutescens as one of the 86 worst weeds that have become serious pests of dry forests and other native ecosystems. The most significant infestations of Bocconia on Maui now occur from 485-1225 m in the dry forests of Auwahi and Kanaio, and during the 1992 survey of the now Kanaio Natural Area Reserve,

Q3. Does the weed reduce the quality of products, diversity or services available from the land use?
Answer: Medium

Comments: Current level of infestation observed as low. (MidCoast Staff). However information suggest the plant has a medium impact overseas, where established.
Tropical dry forests are one of the most endangered natural communities in the Hawaiian Islands and have been reduced to approximately 10% of their former cover (Bruegman, 1996). As it is capable of forming dense stands in dry habitats, Smith (1985) listed B. frutescens as one of the 86 worst weeds that have become serious pests of dry forests and other native ecosystems. The most significant infestations of Bocconia on Maui now occur from 485-1225 m in the dry forests of Auwahi and Kanaio, and during the 1992 survey of the now Kanaio Natural Area Reserve, Bocconia was found to comprise the sixth highest percentage cover of alien species along five monitoring transects (Medeiros et al., 1993). However, of the ten most common weeds by cover, it was the only woody species that could achieve the stature and dimensions of a dry forest tree.

Q4. What is the weed’s potential to restrict the physical movement of people, animals, vehicles, machinery and/or water?
Answer: Low

Comments: Currently low based on local situation, (MidCoast Staff) but has been recorded at other locations to form thickets when growing post disturbance (Invasive Species Compendium).

Q5. What is the weed’s potential to negatively affect the health of animals and/or people?
Answer: None

Comments: no known or recorded toxicity

Q6. Does the weed have major positive or negative effects on environmental health?

(a) Food/shelter
Answer: Minor or no effect

Comments: Root system is marginally fibrous with a moderate taproot. Is growing as other species would and as a replacement pioneer species. (MidCoast Staff)

(b) Fire regime
Answer: Do not know

Comments: Root system is marginally fibrous with a moderate taproot. Is growing as other species would and as a replacement pioneer species. (MidCoast Staff)

(c) Altered nutrient levels
Answer: Minor or no effect

Comments: Root system is marginally fibrous with a moderate taproot. Is growing as other species would and as a replacement pioneer species. (MidCoast Staff)

(d) Soil salinity
Answer: Minor or no effect

Comments: Root system is marginally fibrous with a moderate taproot. Is growing as other species would and as a replacement pioneer species. (MidCoast Staff)

(e) Soil stability
Answer: Minor or no effect

Comments: Root system is marginally fibrous with a moderate taproot. Is growing as other species would and as a replacement pioneer species. (MidCoast Staff)

(f) Soil water table
Answer: Minor or no effect

Comments: Root system is marginally fibrous with a moderate taproot. Is growing as other species would and as a replacement pioneer species. (MidCoast Staff)

Potential distribution

Q1. Within the geographic area being considered, what is the percentage area of land use that is suitable for the weed?
Answer: 40-60% of land use

Comments: It tolerates a broad range of environmental conditions along a large elevation gradient within its native range suggesting that it may further encroach upon additional native and non-native habitats within the Hawaiian Islands and could become invasive in similar tropical ecosystems worldwide. (Invasive Species Compendium).
Estimated 40 - 60% of Hunter region based on annual rainfall being typically sub-tropical in nature and excluding Barrington due to elevation and local climate, drier and less favourable conditions of the Upper Hunter LGA. (MidCoast Staff)

Control costs

Q1. How detectable is the weed?

(a) Distinguishing features
Answer: Always distinct

Comments: a) many distinguishing features of leaf, bark, fruit.

(b) Period of year shoot growth visible
Answer: > 8 months

Comments: b) Perennial shrub/tree. visible all year. 

(c) Height at maturity
Answer: > 2 m

Comments:  c) has been recorded at 5-6m.

(d) Pre-reproductive height in relation to other vegetation
Answer: Below canopy

Comments: d) mid-storey tree in its current known distribution range. (Invasive Species Compendium).

Q2. What is the general accessibility of known infestations at the optimum time of treatment?
Answer: Medium

Comments: Infestation is within bush land and sloping geography - generally not easily accessible (MidCoast Staff).

Q3. How expensive is management of the weed in the first year of targeted control?

(a) Chemical costs/ha
Answer: High ($250-$500/ha)

Comments: based on cut /stump or basal bark treatment at 3000 plants /ha. 

(b) Labour costs/ha
Answer: Very high (>$500/ha)

Comments: b) labour cost due to man-hours involved for specific application.

(c) Equipment costs
Answer: Low

Comments: c) standard bush regen tools. (MidCoast Staff). On Hawaii, Benitez and Saulibio (2007) surveyed multiple B. frutescens populations, recording densities ranging from under 10 individuals/ha to a heavily invaded 29ha parcel containing 5224 individuals/ha within a young Eucalyptus plantation, and less than 100 individuals/ha within former cane fields. (Invasive Species Compendium).

Q4. What is the likely level of participation from landholders/volunteers within the land use at risk?
Answer: High

Comments: NPWS actively involved in weed control within the adjacent Koorainghat park area. Community is also actively participating on their own land. (MidCoast Staff).

Persistence

Q1. How effective are targeted management treatments applied to infestations of the weed?
Answer: High

Comments: Preliminary observation indicates success of cut stump techniques. No coppicing observed within 5 months of cut and paint treatment. Overseas treatments indicate targeted treatments are successful. (MidCoast Staff).
Early trials indicate possible effectiveness of Vigilant II on cut stump method, but Glyphosate is not observed to be effective as regrowth has emerged on privately treated plants.

The aerial delivery of a foliar herbicide, such as Garlon 3A, from a long-line ball sprayer attached to a helicopter has also been suggested to help reduce the ubiquitous seed source of B. frutescens. This strategy, similar to the method employed in Miconia calvescens control efforts on the windward side of Maui (Medeiros et al., 1998), would target the larger, fruiting trees and dense stands of plants. Motooka et al. (2003) also reported that good control was achieved with 2,4-D and fair control with triclopyr applied using the basal bark application method. (Invasive Species Compendium)

Q2. What is the minimum time period for reproduction of sexual or vegetative propagules?
Answer: 6-12 months

Comments: Observation in MidCoast area show fruiting to occur within or just beyond 6 months of germination. (MidCoast Staff).

Q3. What is the maximum longevity of sexual or vegetative propagules?
Answer: > 5 years

Comments: B. frutescens is able to persist in the environment, and to exploit and rapidly colonize disturbed sites in part through the long-lived seeds and persistence of the seed bank. (Invasive Species Compendium).
It should also be noted B. frutescens is a pioneer species indicating long life of seed.

Q4. How likely are new propagules to continue to arrive at control sites, or to start new infestations?

(a) Long-distance (>100m) dispersal by natural means
Answer: Rare

Comments: B. frutescens is limited in distribution and not readily available for sale in retail outlets but is traded online. Species under active management within known infestation area. (MidCoast Staff).

(b) Long-distance (>100m) dispersal by human means
Answer: Rare

Comments: B. frutescens is limited in distribution and not readily available for sale in retail outlets but is traded online. Species under active management within known infestation area. (MidCoast Staff).

Current distribution

Q1. What percentage area of the land use in the geographical area is currently infested by the weed?
Answer: <1% of land use

Comments: Know infestation restricted to Rainbow Flat area of MidCoast LGA. (MidCoast Staff).

Q2. What is the number of infestations, and weed distribution within the geographic area being considered?
Answer: Restricted

Comments: Know infestation restricted to Rainbow Flat area of MidCoast LGA. (MidCoast Staff).