RMD-13-04: Consolidated Pest Risk Management Document for pest plants regulated by Canada

This page is part of the Guidance Document Repository (GDR).

Looking for related documents?
Search for related documents in the Guidance Document Repository

Table of Contents

Introduction

Executive Summary

This risk management document (RMD) is part of a three step pest risk analysis process examining the risk to Canada associated with the importation, cultivation and trade of pest plants listed in Table 1: List of plant regulated as pest plants in Canada. The RMD provides a summary of the pest risk assessment for each pest plant, and potential risk mitigation measures. Mitigation measures may be applied to reduce the pest risk to acceptable levels and provide a cost-effective means of preventing the entry of pests into Canada. Although stakeholders were consulted on the individual RMDs in 2010, the general information and considerations for each pest were similar. As such the original RMD information has been combined into one decision document. Invasive plants are those plant species that spread when introduced outside of their natural past or present distribution and cause serious and often irreversible damage to Canada's ecosystems, economy and society.

The pest plants listed in Table 1 could establish in parts of Canada. Following stakeholder consultation in 2010, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) has decided to regulate these pest plants under the Plant Protection Act and the Seeds Act. As such, the plants listed in Table 1 will be regulated as pest under the Plant Protection Act, and placed on the List of Pests Regulated by Canada. The Plant Protection Act gives CFIA the authority to take action and respond to incursions of the pests in Canada. Furthermore, when a seed is a key pathway, the CFIA plans to designate some of these plants as prohibited noxious weed seeds under the Seeds Act's Weed Seeds Order.

Table 1: List of invasive plants to be regulated as pest in Canada
Species Hardiness ZoneTable Note 1
and Distribution
Sector(s)/Habitat Affected Agricultural, Environmental and/or Societal Impacts Potential Human Mediated Pathways of Entry
1. Aegilops cylindrica(jointed goatgrass/Égilope cylindrique) Aegilops cylindrica

Hardiness Zone 2
Canada: ON/B.C. (under official control)
Other: US, Mexico, Asia, Europe

  • Agriculture: cereal crops (primarily winter wheat and also spring wheat) and pasture
  • Environment: disturbed areas such as railways
  • Losses in crop yield and quality in the U.S. estimated at $150 million annually.
  • Field experiments demonstrated a first year infestation of 1 to 5 plants per square metre led to yield losses of 3 to 30% the following year.
  • Presence of spikelets has been shown to lower wheat grade in the U.S. and cause dockage losses in winter wheat.
  • Reduction in planting of winter wheat, a component of reduced-tillage systems.
  • Potential for hybridization with herbicide tolerant wheat varieties if A. cylindrica is allowed to establish.
  • Contaminated farm machinery
  • Spillage of grain from trucks and rail cars
  • Contaminated grain lots (particularly winter wheat), straw and livestock
2. Alopecurus myosuroides (slender foxtail/Vulpin des champs)
Alopecurus myosuroides

Hardiness Zone 6
Canada: absent
Other: US, Africa, Asia, Europe, South America, Australia, New Zealand

  • Agriculture: winter cereal crops and pasture
  • Environment: moist meadows, deciduous forests and disturbed ground
  • Most damaging weed of winter cereals in Europe.
  • Difficult to eradicate from cultivated fields. Populations in England have developed resistance to several grass herbicides.
  • Contaminated grass seed, cereal grains, hay, straw, and manure
3. Centaurea iberica (Iberian starthistle/Centaurée ibérique )
Centaurea iberica

Hardiness Zone 6
Canada: absent
Other: US, Europe, Asia

  • Agriculture: range and pasture, hay
  • Environment: roadsides
  • Social: recreational areas
  • Displaces valuable forage species in pastures and rangelands.
  • Its sharp spines deter grazing animals, restricting access for livestock and reducing the value of hay.
  • Infestations can impede recreational use and restrict access for wildlife.
  • Contaminated clover seed
  • Livestock
  • Raw wool and raw hides
4. Centaurea solstitialis (yellow starthistle/Centaurée du solstice)
Centaurea solstitialis

Hardiness Zone 5
Canada: absent
Other: US, Europe, Asia, South America

  • Agriculture: horses, rangelands, cereals, orchards, vineyards, cultivated crops
  • Environment: roadsides, wastelands
  • Social: recreational areas, private land
  • Toxic in large amounts to horses.
  • Losses due to interference with livestock grazing and forage harvesting procedures.
  • Lower yield and forage quality of rangelands. Livestock avoid grazing in heavily infested areas resulting in slower weight gain and reduced quality of milk, meat, wool and hides.
  • Reduces wildlife habitat and forage, displaces native plants, decreases native plant and animal diversity, alters the water cycle (by using more water to a greater soil depth) and fragments habitat.
  • Can limit access to recreational areas and reduce land value.
  • Contaminated alfalfa seed, cereal grain, hay and nursery stock with soil
  • Movement of vehicles, equipment and livestock
5. Crupina vulgaris (common crupina/Crupine vulgaire )
Crupina vulgaris

Hardiness Zone 4
Canada: absent
Other: US, Europe, Asia, Africa

  • Agriculture: pastures, rangelands, hayfields, livestock
  • Environment: undisturbed roadsides, waste places
  • Could have serious economic impacts on forage and livestock production.
  • Can be highly competitive and dominate sites, displacing other plant species and reducing biodiversity. It also increases the risk of soil erosion.
  • Intentional import by tourists and recreational users
  • Contaminated hay and seed
  • Clothing on travellers
  • Vehicles and equipment
  • Livestock
  • Wool
6. Dioscorea polystachya (Chinese yam/Igname de Chine)
Dioscorea polystachya

Hardiness Zone 5
Canada: absent
Other: US, China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan

  • Environment: forests, scrub, herbaceous plant communities, mountain slopes, granite outcrops, along rivers, creek bottoms, roadsides, drainage canals, waste places, fence rows
  • The large, edible tuber is flavourful and nutritious and is sometimes used in herbal medicine. Processed or dried roots can be imported rather than the plant being grown in Canada.
  • The species is often planted for its ornamental value.
  • Reduces native species richness and abundance and can cause branches of trees and shrubs to break.
  • Manual and mechanical treatment methods are very time and labour-intensive; repeated herbicide treatments are necessary to kill underground tubers.
  • Intentional introduction as an ornamental, medicinal plant or tuber crop
7. Echium plantagineum (Paterson's curse/Vipérine à feuilles de plantain)
Echium plantagineum

Hardiness Zone 5
Canada: SK
Other: US, South Africa, Russia, Uruguay, Argentina, Brazil, New Zealand, Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates.

  • Agriculture: pastures, horses, sheep
  • Environment: soil stability and productivity, threat to native species
  • Pasture degradation, livestock and crop yield losses (e.g. cereals, hay and seed contamination and increased costs of control
  • Ability to dominate pastures in its exotic range, toxicity to livestock and potential control issues due to herbicide resistance.
  • May have a negative impact on the quality of Canadian honey.
  • This species is a host of four plant pests
  • Intentional introduction as an ornamental, industrial crop for commercial production,
  • Fur of domestic animals
  • Indigested seed
  • Contaminated vehicles and equipment
  • Contaminant of hay, soil, gravel or cereal and forage seed
8. Microstegium vimineum (Japanese stiltgrass/Aucun nom commun français répertorié)

Microstegium vimineum

Hardiness Zone 5
Canada: absent
Other: US, India, Nepal, China, Japan

  • Agriculture: crop production areas, landscape plantings and turfgrass
  • Environment: stream banks, moist woodlands, old fields and thickets, utility rights-of-way, roadsides, lawns, wetlands, ditches
  • Once established, can crowd out native herbaceous vegetation in wetlands and forests within 3 to 5 years.
  • Disrupts the quality of nesting habitats for birds
  • Can alter natural soil conditions (e.g. higher pH), creating an inhospitable environment for many native species.
  • Rapid growth leads to the creation of “mats” on the forest floor that negatively affects native woody species regeneration.
  • Contaminant of bird seed, soil, nursery stock, and hay
  • Packing material
  • Fur of animals
  • Human clothes and boots
  • Vehicles
9. Nassella trichotoma (serrated tussock /Stipe à feuilles dentées)

Nassella trichotoma

Hardiness Zone 7
Canada: absent
Other: South America, Australia, New Zealand

  • Agriculture: pasture and range
  • Environment: grasslands and lightly forested terrain
  • The cost to control moderate to heavily infested land in New Zealand was estimated at $98.50 to $107.35 per hectare. Continued treatment must occur for up to 22 years before an economic benefit can be expected.
  • Can out-compete native grasses, threatening the endangered Garry Oak Meadows ecosystem of south-western BC.
  • Heavy infestations of conservation lands decrease their biological diversity and aesthetic value.
  • Reduces carrying capacity of pastures due to its low nutritive value and poor palatability to livestock, but most pastures in Canada are outside of its potential range.
  • Intentional import as an ornamental (seed and plants for planting)
  • Contaminant of seeds of forage grasses, hay and raw wool
  • Live woolly animals
10. Paspalum dilatatum (Dallis grass/Herbe de Dallis)
Paspalum dilatatum

Hardiness Zone 6
Canada: absent
Other: US, South America, southern Europe, tropical and southern Africa, Asia, Australia, New Zealand, Oceania

  • Agriculture: potatoes, vegetables, pastures, orchards, vineyards
  • Environment: heaths, shrubland, riparian habitats, freshwater wetlands, swamps, lawns, roadsides, disturbed and natural clay pans
  • Considered a weed of 14 crops in 28 countries.
  • Weed problem on lawns, golf courses and other turf areas where it is very difficult to control.
  • Smothers low-growing plants and prevents recruitment of native woody species.
  • Contaminant of turf grass seed, bird seed and grain
  • Deliberate introduction as a forage plant
11. Persicaria perfoliata (mile-a-minute weed/Renouée perfoliée)

Persicaria perfoliata

Hardiness Zone 6
Canada: absent
Other: US, Asia (most prominent in Japan, Korea and China), Turkey, Caribbean

  • Agriculture: nurseries, Christmas tree plantations, forage crops
  • Environment: disturbed and riparian areas
  • Social: parks and private land
  • Coined “kudzu of the north”
  • Affects production of trees and shrubs (nurseries) and Christmas tree plantations.
  • Increased costs of control to the transportation industry, parks and recreation and home gardeners.
  • Reduces native plant diversity, invades sensitive riparian areas and impoverishes food and habitat for native wildlife.
  • Reduces the aesthetic value of properties and public areas. Its prickly vines are a nuisance to people and pets.
  • Seed or plants associated with nursery stock
  • Contaminated seed (e.g. Meliosma and Ilex)
  • Contaminated hay or straw
  • Vehicles and equipment
12. Senecio inaequidens (South African ragwort/Séneçon du cap)

Senecio inaequidens

Hardiness Zone 6
Canada: absent
Other: southern Africa, Europe, Taiwan, Mexico, Argentina, Colombia

  • Agriculture: range, pasture, vineyards, livestock, crops
  • Environment: grasslands, stream margins, ruderal habitats, railway lines, roadsides, river ports, flat roofs, flower tubs, logging areas, storm-damaged forests, industrial sites, disused quarries, rocky sites, coastal dunes
  • Capable of modifying landscapes and invading natural habitats such as dunes and cliffs.
  • The plants are toxic to livestock and humans. The pyrrolizidine alkaloids have the potential to contaminate milk and honey products.
  • Control and/or eradication in Europe are considered difficult and costly. Negative economic consequences associated with herbicide resistance have been reported from German railways to be 100,000 Euros per year.
  • Its establishment could threaten Canada's ability to export commodities to the U.S. where it is a federal noxious weed.
  • Contaminant of hay, grain, wool, ornamental plants and containers
  • Association with livestock and people
13. Senecio madagascariensis (Madagascar ragwort/Séneçon de Madagascar)

Madagascar ragwort

Hardiness Zone 8
Canada: absent
Other: southern Africa, Madagascar, Réunion, Mauritius, Argentina, Colombia, Australia, Japan

  • Agriculture: pastures, rangelands, cultivated land
  • Environment: yards, fields, roadsides, disturbed land, coastal plains
  • Strong competitor with desired pasture species, reducing pasture productivity.
  • Toxic to poultry, pigs, cattle and horses.
  • Costs due to herbicide use and toxic effects on cattle were estimated to be $11 million ten years ago in Australia (in non-drought years).
  • Its introduction could threaten Canada's ability to export commodities to the U.S. where it is a federal noxious weed.
  • Negative effects on biodiversity by competing with native vegetation such as grass and low-growing plants.
  • Changes to the vegetation composition of an area could promote soil erosion.
  • Contaminant of seed
  • Association with travellers and their effects
14. Solanum elaeagnifolium (silverleaf nightshade/Morelle jaune)

Solanum elaeagnifolium

Hardiness Zone 5
Canada: absent
Other: US, Mexico, South America, Australia, India, South Africa, Mediterranean basin

  • Agriculture: cereals (wheat, sorghum, corn), soybeans, alfalfa, vegetables, grapes, some fruit trees, cultivated pastures, livestock corrals
  • Environment: disturbed areas, roadsides, railways, riverbanks, canal-sides, construction sites, wastelands
  • Considered one of the “worst weeds of the west.”
  • Presence of the weed decreases yield and reduces quality and sale when found in harvested products.
  • In Morocco, the value of infested fields reportedly decreased by 25%, while in the U.S. entire farms have been abandoned.
  • The average total farm cost for this weed in the wheat belt of Victoria, New South Wales and South Australia was $1,730 (AUD) per year for control and $7,786 (AUD) per year in production losses.
  • May replace native vegetation in overgrazed rangeland.
  • Loss of value of agricultural land infested with the weed.
  • Contaminant of forage and crop seed (corn), hay, straw and grain
  • Livestock and manure
  • Vehicles and agricultural machinery
  • Nursery stock with soil
  • Possible natural dispersal
15. Zygophyllum fabago (Syrian bean-caper/Fabagelle)

Zygophyllum fabago

Hardiness Zone 5
Canada: absent
Other: US, Asia, Europe, Australia

  • Agriculture: rangeland
  • Environment: roadsides, corrals, gravel pits
  • Considered one of the “worst weeds of the west.”
  • Can dominate native vegetation in dry habitats.
  • Forms dense masses that displace beneficial species on rangelands.
  • Control with herbicides is difficult due to its waxy leaf surfaces and extensive root system.
  • Toxic to livestock, so infestations decrease available forage.
  • Intentional import for planting (as plants for planting and seed)
  • Contaminated alfalfa seed
  • Vehicles

Preface

As described by the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC), Pest Risk Analysis (PRA) includes three stages: initiation, pest risk assessment and pest risk management. Initiating the PRA process involves identifying pests and pathways of concern and defining the PRA area. Pest risk assessment provides the scientific basis for the overall management of risk. Pest risk management is the process of identifying and evaluating potential mitigation measures which may be applied to reduce the identified pest risk to acceptable levels and selecting appropriate measures.

This Risk Management Document (RMD) includes a summary of the findings of a pest risk assessment and records the pest risk management process for the identified issue. It is consistent with the principles, terminology and guidelines provided in the IPPC standards for pest risk analysis.

1.0 Purpose

To record the risk management decision regarding the regulation of the following pest plants:

Note: In the context of this document the term listed weeds refers to the plants listed above.

2.0 Scope

This risk management document (RMD) summarizes the Canadian Food Inspection Agency's (CFIA) decision to regulate the listed weeds as pests for Canada.

Information pertaining to current import requirements for specific plants or plant products may be obtained from the CFIA Automated Import Reference System (AIRS).

Additional points for consideration

3.0 Definitions

Definitions for terms used in this document can be found in the Plant Health Glossary of Terms and the IPPC Glossary of Phytosanitary Terms.

4.0 Background

Note: It is well recognized that the risk of invasive species in Canada is a shared risk and therefore a shared responsibility among government jurisdictions and stakeholders. Once an invasive plant is determined to be a pest and is introduced into Canada, the CFIA develops and enforces domestic regulatory measures to mitigate the risks associated with the plant species. The CFIA's approach for domestic regulation is based on the principles of: most up-to-date science during the Pest Risk Assessment, shared responsibility and partnerships with provinces and industry stakeholders, consultation and regular review.

5.0 Pest Risk Assessments Summaries

The CFIA completed a weed risk assessment for each of the species listed in this document. The Table 2: Weed Risk Assessments by Species references the appendices for each risk assessment.

Table 2: Weed Risk Assessments by Species
Scientific Name Common Name Name of the document and reference
Aegilops cylindricajointed goatgrassAppendix: 1A Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Aegilops cylindrical (jointed goat grass)
Alopecurus myosuroidesslender foxtailAppendix: 2A Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Alopecurus myosuroides (slender foxtail)
Centaurea ibericaIberian starthistleAppendix: 3A Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Centaurea iberica (Iberian starthistle)
Centaurea solstitialisyellow starthistleAppendix: 4A Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Centaurea solstitialis (yellow starthistle)
Crupina vulgariscommon crupina Appendix: 5A Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Crupina vulgaris (common crupina)
Dioscorea polystachyaChinese yam Appendix: 6A Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Dioscorea polystachya (Chinese yam)
Echium plantagineumPaterson's curse Appendix: 7A Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Echium plantagineum (Paterson's curse)
Microstegium vimineumJapanese stiltgrass Appendix: 8A Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Microstegium vimineum (Japanese stiltgrass)
Nassella trichotomaserrated tussock Appendix: 9A Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Nassella trichotoma (serrated tussock)
Paspalum dilatatumDallis grass Appendix: 10A Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Paspalum dilatatum (Dallis grass)
Persicaria perfoliatamile-a-minute weedAppendix: 11A Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Persicaria perfoliata (mile-a-minute weed)
Senecio inaequidensSouth African ragwortAppendix: 12A Pest Risk Assessment Summary Senecio inaequidens (South African ragwort )
Senecio madagascariensisMadacascar ragwortAppendix: 13A Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Senecio madagascariensis ( Madacascar ragwort )
Solanum elaeagnifoliumsilverleaf nightshadeAppendix: 14A Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Solanum elaeagnifolium ( silverleaf nightshade )
Zygophyllum fabagoSyrian bean-caperAppendix: 15A Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Zygophyllum fabago ( Syrian bean-caper )

6.0 Risk Management Considerations

6.1 Introduction

The Risk Management Considerations summarizes the rationale in determining the regulatory status of the plant. It outlines the possible phytosanitary import and domestic measures for traded commodities. The commodities may be the plant itself (intentional introduction) or a product contaminated with the plant (unintentional introduction).

6.2 International Responsibilities, Government of Canada Priorities and CFIA Objectives

The CFIA plays an important role in protecting Canada's plant resource base from pests. The objectives of the Plant Protection Program within the CFIA are: (1) to prevent the introduction and spread within Canada of pest plants of quarantine significance, including invasive plants; (2) to detect and control or eradicate designated pest plants in Canada; and (3) to certify plant and plant products for domestic and export trade.

Canada is a contracting party to the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC). Canada is a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the IPPC is formally identified in the WTO Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Agreement as the international standard setting organization for plant health. The IPPC is an international treaty to secure action to prevent the spread and introduction of pests of plants and plant products (including plants as pests), and to promote appropriate measures for their control.

The CFIA is Canada's official National Plant Protection Organization (NPPO) responsible for implementing the provisions of the IPPC and administers the Plant Protection Act, Plant Protection Regulations, Seeds Act and Weed Seeds Order. The Plant Protection Act provides authority to prevent the importation, exportation and spread of pests injurious to plants, provides for control and eradication methods and for the issuance of certificates.

In 1996, as a party to the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), Canada developed its own Canadian Biodiversity Strategy, which recognized the need to conserve biological diversity and promote the sustainable use of biological resources through increased understanding, legislation, incentives and other means. As party to these international and national instruments, Canada has a strong commitment to addressing the deleterious impacts of invasive plants.

Additionally, in September 2004 Canada introduced An Invasive Alien Species Strategy for Canada, aimed to minimize the risk of invasive alien species (IAS) to the environment, economy, and society, and to protect environmental values such as biodiversity and sustainability. The CFIA provides leadership in the implementation of the national IAS strategy as it relates to invasive plants and pest plants.

Table 3: Risk Management Considerations by Species
Scientific Name

Common Name

Name of the document and reference

Aegilops cylindricajointed goatgrassAppendix: 1B Risk Management Considerations for Aegilops cylindrical (jointed goat grass)
Alopecurus myosuroidesslender foxtailAppendix: 2B Risk Management Considerations for Alopecurus myosuroides (slender foxtail)
Centaurea ibericaIberian starthistleAppendix: 3B Risk Management Considerations for Centaurea iberica (Iberian starthistle)
Centaurea solstitialisyellow starthistleAppendix: 4B Risk Management Considerations for Centaurea solstitialis (yellow starthistle)
Crupina vulgariscommon crupina Appendix: 5B Risk Management Considerations for Crupina vulgaris (common crupina)
Dioscorea polystachyaChinese yam Appendix: 6B Risk Management Considerations for Dioscorea polystachya (Chinese yam)
Echium plantagineumPaterson's curse Appendix: 7B Risk Management Considerations for Echium plantagineum (Paterson's curse)
Microstegium vimineumJapanese stiltgrass Appendix: 8B Risk Management Considerations for Microstegium vimineum (Japanese stiltgrass)
Nassella trichotomaserrated tussock Appendix: 9B Risk Management Considerations for Nassella trichotoma (serrated tussock)
Paspalum dilatatumDallis grass Appendix: 10B Risk Management Considerations for Paspalum dilatatum (Dallis grass)
Persicaria perfoliatamile-a-minute weedAppendix: 11B Risk Management Considerations for Persicaria perfoliata (mile-a-minute weed)
Senecio inaequidensSouth African ragwortAppendix: 12B Risk Management Considerations for Senecio inaequidens (South African ragwort )
Senecio madagascariensisMadacascar ragwortAppendix: 13B Risk Management Considerations for Senecio madagascariensis (Madacascar ragwort )
Solanum elaeagnifoliumsilverleaf nightshadeAppendix: 14B Risk Management Considerations for Solanum elaeagnifolium (silverleaf nightshade )
Zygophyllum fabagoSyrian bean-caperAppendix: 15B Risk Management Considerations for Zygophyllum fabago (Syrian bean-caper )

7.0 Pest Risk Management Options

Table 4 Summarises the risk management options considered for each pest plant and Table 5 weighs the advantages and disadvantages for each risk management decision.

Table 4: Considered option for each pest plant

Aegilops cylindrica
Options Add to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada and regulate it under the Plant Protection Act and Regulations Add or continue to regulate as a prohibited weed under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds Act and Regulations. Do not add to the List of Regulated Pests Do not add to the Weed Seeds Order Other alternative specific to this option
Option 1 (recommended)XX
Option 2 XX
Alopecurus myosuroides
Options Add to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada and regulate it under the Plant Protection Act and Regulations Add or continue to regulate as a prohibited weed under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds Act and Regulations. Do not add to the List of Regulated Pests Do not add to the Weed Seeds Order Other alternative specific to this option
Option 1 (recommended)XX
Option 2 XX
Option 3 XX
Centaurea iberica
Options Add to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada and regulate it under the Plant Protection Act and Regulations Add or continue to regulate as a prohibited weed under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds Act and Regulations. Do not add to the List of Regulated Pests Do not add to the Weed Seeds Order Other alternative specific to this option
Option 1 (recommended)XX
Option 2XX
Option 3XX
Centaurea solstitialis
Options Add to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada and regulate it under the Plant Protection Act and Regulations Add or continue to regulate as a prohibited weed under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds Act and Regulations. Do not add to the List of Regulated Pests Do not add to the Weed Seeds Order Other alternative specific to this option
Option 1 (recommended)XX
Option 2XX
Crupina vulgaris
Options Add to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada and regulate it under the Plant Protection Act and Regulations Add or continue to regulate as a prohibited weed under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds Act and Regulations. Do not add to the List of Regulated Pests Do not add to the Weed Seeds Order Other alternative specific to this option
Option 1 (recommended)XX
Option 2XX
Dioscorea polystachya
Options Add to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada and regulate it under the Plant Protection Act and Regulations Add or continue to regulate as a prohibited weed under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds Act and Regulations. Do not add to the List of Regulated Pests Do not add to the Weed Seeds Order Other alternative specific to this option
Option 1 (recommended)XXProhibit the importation of plants and plant parts BOTH for propagation AND for consumption or medicinal use
Option 2XX Prohibit the importation of plants and plant parts for propagation BUT NOT for consumption or medicinal use
Option 3XX
Echium plantagineum
Options Add to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada and regulate it under the Plant Protection Act and Regulations Add or continue to regulate as a prohibited weed under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds Act and Regulations. Do not add to the List of Regulated Pests Do not add to the Weed Seeds Order Other alternative specific to this option
Option 1 (recommended)XX
Option 2XProhibition except for Research Field Trials
Option 3Provisionally Allowed for Industrial Crop Use
Option 4Provisionally Allowed for Industrial Crop Use with Oversight from a Provincial/Territorial Agency and CFIA
Microstegium vimineum
Options Add to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada and regulate it under the Plant Protection Act and Regulations Add or continue to regulate as a prohibited weed under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds Act and Regulations. Do not add to the List of Regulated Pests Do not add to the Weed Seeds Order Other alternative specific to this option
Option 1 (recommended)XX
Option 2XX
Option 3XX
Nassella trichotoma
Options Add to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada and regulate it under the Plant Protection Act and Regulations Add or continue to regulate as a prohibited weed under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds Act and Regulations. Do not add to the List of Regulated Pests Do not add to the Weed Seeds Order Other alternative specific to this option
Option 1 (recommended)XX
Option 2XX
Paspalum dilatatum
Options Add to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada and regulate it under the Plant Protection Act and Regulations Add or continue to regulate as a prohibited weed under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds Act and Regulations. Do not add to the List of Regulated Pests Do not add to the Weed Seeds Order Other alternative specific to this option
Option 1 (recommended)XX
Option 2XX
Option 3XX
Persicaria perfoliata
Options Add to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada and regulate it under the Plant Protection Act and Regulations Add or continue to regulate as a prohibited weed under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds Act and Regulations. Do not add to the List of Regulated Pests Do not add to the Weed Seeds Order Other alternative specific to this option
Option 1 (recommended) XX
Option 2XX
Option 3 (recommended)XX
Option 4XX
Senecio inaequidens
Options Add to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada and regulate it under the Plant Protection Act and Regulations Add or continue to regulate as a prohibited weed under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds Act and Regulations. Do not add to the List of Regulated Pests Do not add to the Weed Seeds Order Other alternative specific to this option
Option 1 (recommended)XX
Option 2XX
Option 3XX
Senecio madagascariensis
Options Add to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada and regulate it under the Plant Protection Act and Regulations Add or continue to regulate as a prohibited weed under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds Act and Regulations. Do not add to the List of Regulated Pests Do not add to the Weed Seeds Order Other alternative specific to this option
Option 1 (recommended)XX
Option 2XX
Option 3XX
Solanum elaeagnifolium
Options Add to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada and regulate it under the Plant Protection Act and Regulations Add or continue to regulate as a prohibited weed under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds Act and Regulations. Do not add to the List of Regulated Pests Do not add to the Weed Seeds Order Other alternative specific to this option
Option 1 (recommended)XX
Option 2XX
Option 3XX
Zygophyllum fabago
Options Add to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada and regulate it under the Plant Protection Act and Regulations Add or continue to regulate as a prohibited weed under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds Act and Regulations. Do not add to the List of Regulated Pests Do not add to the Weed Seeds Order Other alternative specific to this option
Option 1 (recommended)XX
Option 2XX
Option 3XX
Table 5: Advantages and Disadvantages for each Risk Management Decision
Risk Management Decisions Advantages Disadvantages

Add to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada and regulate it under the Plant Protection Act and Regulations

Add or continue to regulate as a prohibited weed under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds Act and Regulations

  • Control over all major pathways of introduction.
  • Protection of respective values at risk.
  • Authority to respond to incursions by applying official control measures.
  • Increased protection of natural ecosystems and rangelands.
  • Potential costs to the owner of the non-compliant good in the exporting country.
  • Potential costs and impacts on trading partners and trading relationships.
  • Resources needed by CFIA for marketplace monitoring, surveillance, inspector training, communication material, sampling.
  • Resources needed by CFIA to enforce the regulation if non-compliance found.
  • If the plants listed in Table 1 are found in Canada, resources will be needed by CFIA to administer and enforce Official Control (eradication or containment measures).
  • Potential costs to businesses and citizens affected by the trade impacts of regulation and official measures to control any infestations, as specified in the Regulations of the Plant Protection Act.

Do not add to the List of Regulated Pests

Do not add to the Weed Seeds Order

  • No additional costs for the CFIA.
  • No additional requirements for exporters to Canada.
  • No additional impact on domestic producers/industry
  • Entry of plants for planting of the plants listed in Table 1 permitted.
  • Mitigation measures not required for commodities contaminated with plants listed in Table 1.
  • Official control measures not applied by the CFIA to introduced or established populations.
  • No increase in protection of natural ecosystems in response to the threat presented by plants listed in Table 1.

Prohibit the importation of plants and plant parts both for propagation and for consumption or medicinal use

Prohibit the importation of plants and plant parts both for propagation but not for consumption or medicinal use

  • Control over all major pathways of introduction.
  • Authority to respond to incursions by applying official control measures.
  • Increased protection of natural ecosystems and rangelands.
  • Control over all major pathways of introduction.
  • Authority to respond to incursions by applying official control measures.
  • Increased protection of natural ecosystems and rangelands.
  • Plants and plant parts for consumption or medicinal use could be imported
  • Potential costs to the owner of the non-compliant good in the exporting country.
  • Potential costs and impacts to trading partners and trading relationships.
  • Resources needed by CFIA for marketplace monitoring, surveillance, inspector training, communication material, sampling.
  • Resources needed by CFIA to enforce the regulation if non-compliance found.
  • If the plants listed in Table 1 are found in Canada, resources will be needed by CFIA to administer and enforce Official Control (eradication or containment measures).
  • Potential costs to businesses and citizens affected by the trade impacts of regulation and official measures to control any infestations, as specified in the Regulations of the Plant Protection Act.

8.0 Risk Management Decision

After stakeholder consultation and review of information and comments, the CFIA has decided to regulate the listed weeds in this RMD under the Plant Protection Act. Under the Plant Protection Regulations, imported things must be free from species on the List of Pests Regulated by Canada.

9.0 References

Appendix 1A: Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Aegilops cylindrica (jointed goat grass)

Identity of Organism

Name: Aegilops cylindrica Host (1802), family Poaceae

Synonyms: Triticum cylindricum (Host) (1869), Cylindropyrum cylindricum (Host) (1982), Aegilops caudata

English Common Names: Jointed goat grass (Darbyshire, 2003), jointed goat grass, (Randall, 2002)

French Common Names: Égilope cylindrique (CFIA 2008)

Taxonomic Note: The taxonomy of the Triticeae tribe is notoriously difficult and unstable (Gould and Shaw, 1983). Due to its similarities with wheat, some authors have in the past renamed jointed goat grass Triticum cylindricum (Host) (Gould and Shaw 1983; Donald and Ogg 1991), although the currently accepted name is Aegilops cylindrica Host (e.g. Tutin et al. 1980; Tsvelev 1984; USDA ARS, 2006). Donald and Ogg (1991) describe the genus Aegilops as distributed worldwide and comprising at least 23 species. Holm et al. (1991) report Aegilops cylindrica as a weed in the United States and Turkey, and other Aegilops species as weeds in Morocco, Portugal, Iran, Jordan and Israel. Donald and Ogg (1991) note that two varieties (or subspecies) of Aegilops cylindrica are recognized by some authors (Aegilops cylindrica var. cylindrica and var. rubiginosa) and Tsvelev (1984) lists three more (var. pauciaristata, var. aristulate and var. prokhanovii), all distinguished based on morphological differences of glumes and spikelets. Most studies fail to describe which varieties are studied, and it is not known whether they differ in their susceptibility to control mechanisms (Donald and Ogg 1991).

Description: Aegilops cylindrica is a winter annual grass that is very similar in appearance to winter wheat (Wicks et al. 2004). Individual plants consist of up to 50 erect flowering stalks (Donald and Ogg 1991). The root system of the plant is shallow and fibrous. Leaves are alternate and 2 to 5 mm wide, and vary from 3 to 15 cm in length (Barkworth 2006). The leaves are glabrous or sparsely hairy (Tutin et al. 1980) and the hairs are evenly spaced along the leaf blade margin (NJGRP 2006). The seed head, or spike, is a narrow cylinder 5-10 cm long with alternately arranged spikelets on opposite sides of the main axis of the spike. Spikelets are 8-10 mm long and contain 2-4 florets each. Glumes on the lower spikelets do not have awns, or have one awn. Glumes of apical spikelets have long awns (3.0 – 9.0 cm). Each spikelet contains on average 2 seeds (Hitchcock 1950; Donald and Ogg 1991; Lyon et al. 1995-2000; Barkworth 2006).

Seeds are reddish-brown caryopses, 6.5-9 mm long, 2 mm wide, and grooved. The lemma and palea adhere to the seed. Aegilops cylindrica plants produce an average of 130 seeds, and up to 3000 seeds under optimal conditions (Donald and Ogg 1991).

At maturity, some selections of Aegilops cylindrica may be distinguished from winter wheat by purple-coloured spikes (Donald and Ogg 1991). Spikes of Aegilops cylindrica are also much narrower and more cylindrical than those of wheat. In the field or in harvested seed lots, disarticulated Aegilops cylindrica spikelets are sometimes mistaken for small pieces of wheat straw (Donald and Ogg 1991).

Organism Status

The first occurrence of Aegilops cylindrica in Canada was likely a small non-persistent population in New Westminster, British Columbia in 1997 (Haber 2006). In 2002, there were four unconfirmed reports of Aegilops cylindrica present in shipments of Canada Western Red Spring wheat destined for Mexico.

In 2006, a small population of this species was discovered in the Regional Municipality of Niagara, Ontario. A small satellite population was discovered approximately 2.5 km away in 2007. In 2009 CFIA took some pre-emptive control measures to limit the further spread of these two populations.

As part of the CFIA import monitoring program, Aegilops cylindrica was found in eight samples of wheat and barley grain imported from the United States in 2008 and destined for British Columbia flour mills.

Regulatory Status

In 2005, the CFIA added Aegilops cylindrica to the Weed Seeds Order under the authority of the Seeds Actand Seeds Regulations, as a Class 1 Prohibited Noxious Weed Seed, prohibiting its movement as seed and as a contaminant in seed.

Provincially, Aegilops cylindrica is listed as a Provincial Noxious Weed in British Columbia, under the British Columbia Weed Control Act. The Province of Saskatchewan completed consultation on the revision of their Noxious Weed Act early in 2009, which includes the addition of Aegilops cylindrica to a prohibited noxious weeds list.

In the United States, Aegilops cylindrica is not included on the USDA's Federal Noxious Weed List, but it is regulated by Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, New Mexico, Oregon, and Washington (USDA, NRCS 2006).

Probability of Entry

The most likely pathway for the introduction of Aegilops cylindrica into Canada is general range expansion of the weed from infested states in the United States that share a border with Canada. General range expansion is a risk because Aegilops cylindrica is present in counties adjacent to the Canadian border in Washington, Idaho, Montana, and New York (Figure 1). Seeds of Aegilops cylindrica float and can be dispersed by runoff water in agricultural fields. However, the spiklets are large and unlikely to be moved great distances by wind. It has been suggested that Aegilops cylindrica seed can be dispersed by birds and mammals, after ingestion; however, it is not clear whether seeds remain viable after passing through the digestive tract in animals other than cattle (WSU Extension 2007).

The occurrence of Aegilops cylindrica in eight separate shipments of wheat and barley from the United States destined to Canada for milling and malting in 2008 provides evidence that the importation of grain for consumption is also a viable pathway for this species. If grains imported for consumption are contaminated with Aegilops cylindrica there is potential for some seeds to enter favourable environments and establish (Table 6). Examples include spillage along railway tracks, or dispersal of viable seeds by livestock that consume contaminated grain.

The listing of Aegilops cylindrica as a Class 1 Prohibited Noxious Weed in the Weed Seeds Order in 2005 provides a sufficient risk mitigation measure for preventing new incursions of this species through the seed pathway. Seed containing prohibited noxious weed seeds may not be sold, offered for sale, or imported into Canada.

Figure 1: Distribution of Aegilops cylindrica (jointed goat grass) in North America

Note: White areas indicate regions where the weed is not present

Figure 1. Description follows.
Description for Figure 1:

This image consists of a map of the United States and Canada demonstrating the distribution of Aegilops cylindrica through the use of the colour green. Approximately 4/5th of U.S. is covered in green with the majority located in the West half.

Source: (USDA, NRCS 2009) Footnote 1.

Table 6: Summary of Pathways for Aegilops cylindrica (jointed goat grass)
Type of Potential Introduction Specific Pathway Description
Natural Means of DispersalWindAegilops cylindrica reproduces only by seed, which have no obvious adaptations for long-range dispersal.
WaterSeeds float and will be dispersed by water runoff in agricultural fields
BirdUnclear if seeds can remain viable after passing through the digestive tracts of birds.
Animal (external or internal)Aegilops cylindrica has no obvious adaptations for this kind of dispersal.
Intentional Introduction PathwaysSeedProhibited under Seeds Actand Seeds Regulations
Plants for planting (excluding seed)None identified.
Field crops not intended for propagationNone identified.
Decorative arrangements and branchesNone identified.
Unintentional Introduction PathwaysField crops not intendedfor propagationAegilops cylindrica could enter Canada as a contaminant in grain from areas where Aegilops cylindrica is established. Aegilops cylindrica is primarily a problem in cereal crops, particularly winter wheat.
SeedAegilops cylindrica is a Class 1 Prohibited Noxious Weed in the Weed Seeds Order, 2005 (Seeds Act) which provides sufficient risk mitigation.
Hay and StrawStraw originating from the U.S. and used for livestock bedding or packing material could contain seedsof Aegilops cylindrica.
ManureNone Identified.
LivestockHigh viability and seedling emergence can be expected from seeds after passage through cattle.
Raw wool and raw hidesAegilops cylindrica has no obvious adaptations for this kind of dispersal.
Motorized vehiclesCustom combine harvesters typically follow the winter wheat harvest northward, even across the Canada/U.S. border and is a potential mechanism of Aegilops cylindrica spred into Canada.

Farm trucks are commonlyused for multiple purposes , including hauling seed, fertilizer and harvested grain, and can lead to contamination and spread.

Nursery stock with soilNone identified.
Used recreational equipment and clothing (excluding motorized vehicles)None identified.

The Seed Science & Technology Section of the CFIA Saskatoon laboratory analyze submitted samples of domestic and imported seed for contaminants, and have no record of Aegilops cylindrica being found in monitored samples of seed.

The level of risk associated with imports of hay and straw into Canada is relatively high when they originate from areas where Aegilops cylindrica is established and when Aegilops cylindrica has gone to seed in hay crop.

Other potential pathways considered to be of lesser importance include the movement of livestock with ingested seed across the border and used farm machinery potentially contaminated with soil which may carry seeds of Aegilops cylindrica.

Probability of Establishment

Aegilops cylindrica could potentially invade crops, pastures, and disturbed areas up to Canada Plant Hardiness Zone 2b, which includes the majority of Canada's agricultural land (Figure 2). Within this range, it is most likely to become a serious weed in winter wheat production areas; these include southern Ontario and in the southern Prairie Provinces where the majority of Canadian winter wheat is sown.

Probability of Spread

While seed production is moderate, Aegilops cylindrica could easily spread through both natural and man-made dispersal mechanisms if introduced into Canada.

Its biological and physical similarities to winter wheat make Aegilops cylindrica difficult to remove from dispersal pathways. Aegilops cylindrica spikelets measure approximately 8 to 10 mm long, and can be difficult to separate from wheat seed, which typically measure 5 to 7 mm. (Donald and Ogg 1991).

Figure 2: Potential range of Aegilops cylindrica (jointed goat grass) in Canada

Note: Shaded area shows hardiness zones 2b and higher, based on the Canadian Plant Hardiness Zones map.

Figure 2. Description follows.
Description for Figure 2:

This image shows the potential range of Aegilops cyclindrica in Canada. In this image of a map of Canada, the lower region of Canada is coloured in various shades of black and grey showing hardiness zone 2b and higher, based on the Canadian Plant Hardiness Zones map.

Source: (NRC 2000)

There is also risk of hybridization of Aegilops cylindrica with wheat and other closely related species. Hybridization of Aegilops cylindrica with other species could result in increased weediness. The transfer of herbicide resistance traits from wheat into Aegilops cylindrica has already been documented in the United States (S. Darbyshire, 2006, pers. Comm.)

Potential Economic Consequences

In the United States, losses in winter wheat crop yield and quality due to Aegilops cylindrica are estimated at $150 million annually (Mallory-Smith 2001). Yield reductions are dependent on a variety of factors, notably rainfall, soil moisture and the severity of previous infestations. Field experiments in Washington State for instance, demonstrated that a first year infestation of one to five plants per square metre led to yield loss from 3% to 30 % in the following year (Young et al. 2000). This weed can also cause dockage losses in wheat. In non-herbicide resistant winter wheat varieties, costs of controlling Aegilops cylindrica are mostly indirect due to lack of selective control options. The presence of Aegilops cylindrica in Canadian seed could have negative trade impacts within Canada as well as with Mexico, certain U.S. states, Australia (although it is primarily a wheat-exporting nation), China, and possibly other countries.

Potential Environmental and Social Consequences

Aegilops cylindrica is primarily an agricultural weed, rather than an environmental weed, and its greatest environmental impacts are to sustainable agricultural practices. The presence of Aegilops cylindrica can discourage the cultivation of winter wheat, which is a relatively environmentally friendly crop, as it is an important component in reduced tillage systems and it provides nesting areas for waterfowl (Hamill 2005).

Conclusion

Additional phytosanitary measures may be necessary to prevent Aegilops cylindrica from further introduction into Canada, and to preventits spread. Eradication and subsequent monitoring of the Regional Municipality of Niagara populations should be a high priority, as should surveys in this and other potential high risk areas, particularly where winter wheat is grown, adjacent to railway lines, and along the Canada-United States border. Prevention of further introductions into Canada should be sought through activities such as public education, prevention of entry into Canada of contaminated farm equipment, vehicles, and straw, and possibly grain car inspections. Early control of Aegilops cylindrica, should it be introduced into Canada, would prevent negative economic and environmental consequences for Canada. Therefore, it is recommended that Aegilops cylindrica be considered for inclusion on the List of Pests Regulated by Canada.

Appendix 1B: Risk Management Considerations for Aegilops cylindrica (jointed goat grass)

Existing Programs

In the United States the National Jointed Goatgrass Research Program was established in 1994 to guide research across the United States towards developing management systems based on cultural tactics and population dynamics.

The Government of Alberta, Agriculture and Rural Development, administers the Alberta Certified Weed Free Hay Program. The objective of the program is to provide a premium product that is recognized as marketable and transportable, to prevent the spread of restricted and noxious weeds, and to protect private and public lands from non-native, invasive plant species. Aegilops cylindrica is listed on their "Designated Weed List and Undesirable Plant Species List". Currently, this is the only existing weed free forage program in Canada.

Detection Surveys in Canada

Aegilops cylindrica is not known to occur in Canada outside of local incursions in the Regional Municipality of Niagara in Ontario (CFIA 2007). Field surveys for Aegilops cylindrica have focussed on potential points of introduction such as rail yards, ports, grain elevators, disturbed urban habitats and agricultural areas. Aegilops cylindrica was not found at any of the sites surveyed in Ontario or elsewhere in Canada.

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) have been conducting weed surveys of the Prairie Provinces since the 1970s (Thomas and Leeson 2007). All weed species encountered in these surveys are identified and documented. Aegilops cylindrica is included in this general survey and has not been detected (J. Leeson per. comm. June 2009). An Inventory of Canadian Agricultural Weeds published by Darbyshire in 2002, also reported that Aegilops cylindrica was absent in Canada.

Hybridization with Wheat

The grass tribe Triticeae is known for inter-specific and inter-generic hybridization (S. Darbyshire, 2006, pers. comm). The genus Aegilops is capable of hybridizing with many species of Triticum, including T. aestivum (wheat) and producing fertile offspring, although fertility rates are low. Germination rates of Aegilops cylindrical/ wheat hybrid spikelets in an Okalahoma study ranged between 0.42 and 1.10% (Stone and Peeper 2004).

Hybridization needs to be considered in a determination of risk management as it could reduce the effectiveness of control methods if a herbicide-tolerant trait in wheat has the potential to be transferred to Aegilops cylindrica, potentially reducing the effectiveness of current control options.

The CFIA Plant Biosafety Office has reviewed the safety of herbicide-tolerant Clearfield wheat which is tolerant to the herbicide imidazolinone. The review examined the potential for gene flow of the imidazolinone-tolerant genes to wild relatives, including Aegilops cylindrica. These documents conclude "that there is no increased risk of consequences of gene flow between imidazolinone-tolerant wheat and Aegilops cylindrica, given the non-persistent nature of the introduction in British Columbia" and "the non-agricultural nature of the Ontario site" (CFIA 2007).

Although hybridization is currently unlikely the risks should not be underestimated if population of Aegliops cylindrica are allowed to expand into Canadian agricultural systems.

The large area occupied by both winter wheat and Aegilops cylindrica in the United States could lead to a significant number of hybridization events and, subsequently, the transfer of the herbicide resistance gene (Guadagnuolo et al. 2001). The weediness of Aegilops cylindrica could increase while control options decrease. It is possible that herbicide-tolerant Aegilops cylindrica populations evolved in the United States may be introduced into Canada via the pathways previously discussed.

Host for Pests that attack Winter Wheat

Aegilops cylindrica is considered an over-wintering host for some pests of winter wheat. The species has been shown to act as an alternate host for Russian wheat aphid (Diuraphis noxia Mordvilko) (Hammon et al. 1989). Aegilops cylindrica also acts as an over-wintering host for a number of fungal pathogens, such as those that cause pink mold, foot rot, root browning, damping off, dwarf bunt and karnal bunt (Donald and Ogg 1991).

Wheat Production Areas of Canada at Risk

During 2008-2009, Canada's wheat production was estimated at 27.3 million metric tons, an increase of 36% from 2007 (USDA 2008). Farm cash receipts indicated that the value of all wheat production in Canada was $4.2 and $5.7 million dollars in 2007 and 2008 respectively (Statistics Canada 2009). Wheat production areas at risk from Aegilops cylindrica include Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec and the Atlantic provinces (Figure 2 & Figure 3). The majority of Canadian winter wheat is sown in southern Ontario and in the southern Prairie provinces.

Figure 3: Average wheat yields in Canada 1997-2001

Figure 3. Description follows.
Description for Figure 3:

This image shows the average wheat yields in Canada for the years of 1997 through 2001. The wheat yields can be predominantly found in the Prairie region consisting of lower to mid Manitoba, Saskatewan and Alberta the average wheat yield ranging from greater than 2.00 and less than 3.01 within that region. High wheat yields averaging more than 3.01 can also be found in the Atlantic Provinces as well.

Source: USDA 2004.

Canada is one of the world's largest wheat exporters with more than 95% of Canada's wheat produced in western Canada. According to the 2006 Census of Agriculture, wheat was Canada's largest field crop. Canada produces an average of over 25 million tonnes and exports approximately 19 million tonnes of wheat annually. As production significantly exceeds requirements for domestic consumption, the Canadian wheat industry is export-oriented.

If Aegilops cylindrica becomes established in export-oriented agricultural systems in Canada, exports of Canada's major crops and agricultural commodities could potentially be subject to phytosanitary measures by countries where Aegilops cylindrica is a regulated pest. For example, Aegilops cylindrica appears on the published regulated pest lists of China and Mexico; both countries have imported Canadian wheat in the past (Industry Canada 2009). While Aegilops cylindrica has the greatest impact on the production of winter wheat, phytosanitary measures could be applied by NPPOs of importing country to all wheat shipments; regardless of planting time or variety.

Previous imports

Intentional Introduction Pathways

Unintentional Introduction Pathways

Grains and Field Crops

The total value of grain and field crop commodities Footnote 1 imported into Canada in 2008 was approximately $368 million. Of this amount, 3% of imports consisted of wheat from the United States, where Aegilops cylindrica is present. A small percentage of wheat was imported from other countries where Aegilops cylindrica is present, namely Lebanon, Russia, Turkey, Bosnia, Italy, and Mexico. This represents less than 1% of the remaining imports of wheat in 2008 (Industry Canada 2009).

Seed

Canada imported approximately $1 million worth of wheat seed in 2007/2008, the majority of that from the United States (Canadian Seed Trade Association 2008).

Hay and Straw

The total value of hay and straw imported into Canada was approximately $13 million in 2008; 98% of this value came from states in the United States where Aegilops cylindrica is present (Industry Canada 2009).

Washington State was the greatest exporter of hay and straw to Canada with an average value of approximately $10 million per year in the last 5 years (Industry Canada 2009).

Used Vehicles and Farm Machinery

Used farm machinery moves across the United States-Canada border every year. Information is not available on the volume of imports of used farm machinery.

Recommended Risk Mitigation Measures

Natural Means of Dispersal

Natural range expansion could occur from infested counties in the United States along the U.S.-Canada border (USDA, NRCS 2006). It is recommended that risk mitigation include regular surveys targeting high risk areas along the Canada-United States border where the adjacent United States County is infested.

Education and outreach programs will also work to limit establishment in Canada, through early detection of new incursions.

Intentional and Unintentional Means of Introduction

Regulatory measures under the Plant Protection Act
Regulatory measures under the Seeds Act

Continue to regulate Aegilops cylindrica as a prohibited noxious weed under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds ActFootnote 2. The importation of Aegilops cylindrica seed is prohibited under the Seeds Act and the Seeds Regulations have specific information requirements (CFIA 2009) to verify that seed imported into Canada is free of prohibited noxious weeds and meets the minimum standards for purity and germination for the crop kind in question. A certificate of analysis is required to demonstrate freedom from all prohibited noxious weeds.

Non regulatory measures

Education and outreach programs can assist in preventing and detecting new populations of Aegilops cylindrica. This can include providing information on identifying Aegilops cylindrica in the field, as well as educating people using custom combines and moving used farm machinery to clean all plant debris and soil that could contain seeds or spikelets of Aegilops cylindrica prior to moving the machines.

Trade Implications

Cost effectiveness and feasibility

Appendix 2A: Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Alopecurus myosuroides (slender foxtail)

Identity of Organism

Name: Alopecurus myosuroides Huds (family Poaceae, subfamily Pooideae, tribe Poeae) (USDA -ARS 2009)

Synonyms: Alopecurus agrestis L., Alopecurus coerulescens Steud. & Hochst. ex Steud (nom. nud.), Alopecurus purpurascens, Tozzettia agrestis (L.) Bubani (Tropicos 2008)

English common names: Slender foxtail, black grass, black twitch, large foxtail (USDA -ARS 2009)

French common names: Vulpin des champs (USDA-ARS 2009)

Description: Alopecurus myosuroides is an erect, winter annual, tufted grass with reddish-purple panicles, appearing black at a distance. It flowers in early spring (Hubbard 1968; Aldrich-Markham 1992).

Organism Status

Alopecurus myosuroides has been reported to occur in Canada but did not become established, and no evidence was found that it is cultivated in Canada (CFIA 2008; Scoggan 1979). For more information, see under Probability of Entry. Based on this information, it is considered absent from the pest risk assessment area.

Current Regulatory Status

Alopecurus myosuroides is not currently regulated in Canada. Alopecurus myosuroides is not regulated as a federal noxious weed in the U.S. but is regulated by the state of Washington.

Probability of Entry

Alopecurus myosuroides has been accidentally introduced in contaminated grass seed to fields on research stations in Saanichton, BC (1955) and Brandon, MB (1965), but did not become established (Scoggan 1979). The provincial Conservation Data Centers (CDCs) do not consider the species to be established in these two provinces (CFIA 2008).

Alopecurus myosuroides is propagated only by seed. The main pathway for entry into Canada, based on monitoring of seed lots, is as a contaminant in grass seed lots (Table 1).

Table 1: Summary of Pathways for Alopecurus myosuroides (slender foxtail)
Type of pathway Specific pathways
Natural dispersal

Alopecurus myosuroides is an annual that spreads entirely by seed. Wind is the main natural means of dispersal over short distances.

This is an unlikely pathway for entry into Canada, given the current range.

Intentional introductionNone identified.
Unintentional introduction Pathways

Slender foxtail is an occasional contaminant in lots of grass seed.

This is the most likely pathway for entry into Canada. Based on the CFIA seed laboratory database, Alopecurus myosuroides has been detected in 5 imported grass samples in the past 9 years. As many as 12 seeds were reported from a single sample.

Alopecurus myosuroides could potentially occur as a contaminant in grain lots.

Although the species is a serious weed of winter cereals in Europe, it is very unlikely that Alopecurus myosuroides would occur as a contaminant in processed grains, as it would be readily removed during combining and cleaning. Seeds have not been reported in cereal seed samples in the past 9 years in Canada.

It could also occur in imported hay and straw as contaminant seeds in panicles.

Probability of Establishment

Alopecurus myosuroides is native to northern Africa (n. Algeria, n. Egypt, n. Libya and Tunisia), Asia (Afghanistan, Cyprus, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Turkey, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Ciscaucasia, Dagestan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, n. India and Pakistan), and Europe (United Kingdom, Belgium, Germany, Netherlands, Russian Federation, Ukraine, Albania, Bulgaria, Former Yugoslavia, Greece, Italy, Romania, France, Portugal and Spain) (USDA -ARS 2009).

It is widely naturalized in temperate parts of the world, including North America (U.S. and Mexico), South America (Bolivia, Peru, Argentina), China, Australia and New Zealand (Häfliger and Hildemar 1981). It has been widely introduced in the U.S. (see figure 1) as a weed of cultivation (Barkworth 2006).

In Europe, Alopecurus myosuroides grows in moist meadows, deciduous forests, and cultivated or disturbed ground and is a significant weed species in temperate cereal crops (Barkworth 2006). In the U.S., the species is reported mostly from cultivated fields (Barkworth 2006) but it is now commonly found in wetter sites of pasture, and along roadsides in Oregon and Washington (Lass and Prather 2007).

See Appendix 2C for a breakdown of HS codes and values of each commodity originating from countries where Alopecurus myosuroides is present. No data were available on imports of winter cereal varieties, Appendix 2D for Import data for grass seed and Appendix 2E for Import data for hay and straw.

Figure 1: Range of Alopecurus myosuroides (slender foxtail) in North America

Figure 1. Description follows.
Description for Figure 1:

This is an image of North Arica showing the introduction of Alopecurus myosuroides to the United States. Red is used to demonstrate the regions in which it is found. It is scattered and minimal in nature covering approximately less thamen 3% of country.

Source: Barkworth 2006

Figure 2: Potential range of Alopecurus myosuroides (slender foxtail) in Canada

Figure 2. Description follows.
Description for Figure 2:

This image shows the potential range of Alopecurus myosuroides in Canada and upper America. Red is used to signify the regions in which it could survive according to the Canadian Plant Hardiness Zones map. In this map it would include coastal and extreme southern British Columbia, extreme southwestern Ontario and the coasts of Nova Scotia and Newfoundland. It would also include parts of the Western and Eastern coast of United States as well as areas located near the Great Lakes.

Source: NAPPFAST zones 6-9

Based on the world range, Alopecurus myosuroides is likely to survive to NAPPFAST hardiness zone 6 (see figure 2). This would include coastal and extreme southern British Columbia, extreme southwestern Ontario and the coasts of Nova Scotia and Newfoundland. As a weed of winter cereals, the most likely area to be affected would be southwestern Ontario, where winter cereals are grown. The winter wheat growing areas of the southern prairies appear to be outside the species' current range of climatic tolerance.

Probability of Spread

The main means of spread of Alopecurus myosuroides is by human activities. Seeds can be spread in contaminated crop seed, straw or manure. In cereal fields, the seeds of slender foxtail are blown out of the combine with the chaff. Cultivation equipment can also spread seeds. Seeds could easily move in soil during cultivation and in soil attached to farm equipment (CAB International 2007). Wind is the main natural means of dispersal, but seems to function only over relatively short distances (Colbach and Sache 2001).

There are several changes in cultivation practices that have favoured the spread of Alopecurus myosuroides in cereal fields in Europe (Aldrich-Markham 1992; CAB International 2007). Some that would also favour spread in Canada include:

Potential Economic Consequences

Alopecurus myosuroides is considered one of the most damaging weeds of winter cereals in England (Barkworth 2006) and is also now a major problem in Germany, Belgium and France, as well as parts of Italy, Yugoslavia, and Turkey (Aldrich-Markham 1992). Its spread through Europe has been tied to the expansion of winter wheat and barley acreage, under modern, mechanized cultivation (Aldrich-Markham 1992).

Alopecurus myosuroides occurs in a wide range of crops, but is mainly associated with cereal dominated rotations. It is much commoner in autumn-sown cereal crops, such as winter wheat. It is also found on disturbed land in waste places but does not persist in grassland or pasture (CAB International 2007). It infests other winter crops, including grass seed, rapeseed, and forage legumes (Aldrich-Markham 1992) and is difficult to eradicate from cultivated fields that are repeatedly planted in cereals (Hubbard 1968).

In North America, Alopecurus myosuroides has become a major weed problem in western Oregon and eastern Washington, mostly in cereals, but it has also spread into pastures (Lass and Prather 2007).

Potential Environmental and Social Consequences

Alopecurus myosuroides does not seem to be an environmental weed either in its native or introduced range, being confined to disturbed habitats such as waste places and cultivated fields (Hubbard 1968; Barkworth 2006). There are no obvious potential social consequences to be expected from slender foxtail.

Uncertainty

No uncertainties potentially affecting the outcome of the risk assessment were identified.

Conclusion

Based on the outcome of this pest risk assessment, Alopecurus myosuroides is likely to become weedy or invasive in parts of southern Canada (Figure 2). It is recommended that the pest risk analysis process continue for this plant with the completion of a Risk Management Document.

Technical Issues for Consideration

Alopecurus species. The plants are also readily identifiable by trained personnel.

Appendix 2B: Risk Management Considerations for Alopecurus myosuroides (slender foxtail)

Values at Risk

Alopecurus myosuroides is considered the most serious weed of winter cereals in Europe, reducing crop yield (CAB International 2007). Alopecurus myosuroides will most likely have the greatest impact on crops in Ontario, where winter wheat is produced. In 2008, approximately 650,000 tonnes (or 24 million bushels) of winter wheat were produced in the southwestern Ontario counties of Chatham-Kent, Essex and Lambton where Alopecurus myosuroides could potentially occur. This represents almost a quarter of winter wheat production in Ontario (OMAFRA 2009). Between the year 2000 and 2004, the average value of winter wheat production in Ontario was $250 million per year (OMAFRA 2009). Other crops that could be affected (to a lesser extent) by Alopecurus myosuroides in the respective counties include oats and barley with production values of 5,300 tonnes (85,000bu and 2,400 tonnes (112,000bu respectively in 2008 (OMAFRA 2009).

Potential Mitigation Measures for Natural Means of Dispersal

Wind is the main natural means of dispersal for Alopecurus myosuroides, but only over short distances. Given the current range, wind dispersion is an unlikely pathway for entry into Canada (Allison 2009); thus, no mitigation measures for natural means of dispersal are required at this time.

Potential Mitigation Measures for Intentional Introduction Pathways

No intentional introduction pathways were identified (Allison 2009). Alopecurus myosuroides is not available in Canada as an ornamental plant (CNLA 2009). Although no mitigation measures are currently needed, this pathway will still be regulated under the Plant Protection Act if this species is placed on the List of Pests Regulated by Canada and the Seeds Act if placed on the Weed Seeds Order.

Potential Mitigation Measures for Non-intentional Introduction Pathways

Field Crops Not Intended for Propagation

Previous imports
Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulate Alopecurus myosuroides as a quarantine pest under the Plant Protection Act and add this species to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada (CFIA 2009) in order to:

Regulatory actions under the Plant Protection Act could include one or more of the following:

Trade implications
Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Seed

Previous imports

Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulate Alopecurus myosuroides as a prohibited noxious weed (Class 1) under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds Act Footnote 2.

This species meets the definitions for Class 1 Footnote 3 species under the Weed Seeds Order.

All imported and domestic seed lots must be free of prohibited noxious weed seeds. Imported seed lots would require a certificate of analysis stating Alopecurus myos uroides is absent from the seed lot before it can be imported.

Regulate Alopecurus myosuroides as a quarantine pest under the Plant Protection Act and add this species to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada (CFIA 2009) in order to:

Regulatory actions could include one or more of the following:

Trade implications
Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Hay and Straw

Previous imports

The total value of hay and straw imports was around $13 million in 2008; 98% of this value came from the U.S. (Industry Canada 2009).

Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulate Alopecurus myosuroides under the Plant Protection Act as a quarantine pest by placing it on the List of Pests Regulated by Canada in order to:

Regulatory actions could include one or more of the following:

Trade implications
Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Resources will be needed by CFIA for marketplace monitoring and sampling, inspector training, and communication material development.

Vehicles and Used Farm Machinery

Previous imports
Potential Risk mitigation measures

Enforcement of the Directive 95-26: "Phytosanitary requirements for soil and related matter, alone or in association with plants" (CFIA 2008).

In 2003, the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) assumed responsibility for the initial import inspection services in respect of the Acts and Regulations administered by the CFIA to the extent that they are applicable at Canadian border points. The inspections of goods that may be contaminated with soil are among the responsibilities that were transferred to the CFIA in 2003. The Food, Plant and Animals Programs Section of the CFIA is currently finalizing its Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) concerning the "Inspection of Imported Goods Potentially Contaminated with Soil." This SOP provides the CFIA's Border Services Officers with formal procedures for the inspection and disposition of goods that may be contaminated with soil, including used agricultural machinery and vehicles.

Appendix 2C: Import data for wheat, rye, barley and other unmilled cereals

Import data for wheat, rye, barley and other unmilled cereals originating from countries where Alopecurus myosuroides is present

Value in Canadian Dollars ($)

Table 2: HS 1001 – Wheat 2006-2008
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. – Washington433,2872,317,1011,825,056
Argentina00250,050
Lebanon3,1521,63310,124
Russia04,8906,998
New Zealand4,2507,6256,762
Netherlands001,765
U.S. – Oregon1,508,006422,4961,707
Germany4834,38390
Mexico01,1724
United Kingdom45727,372212
China, Turkey, Jordan, Italy, Ukraine, Bulgaria, Peru, France7211,6951,225
Subtotal:1,950,3562,788,3672,103,993
Table 3: HS 100200 – Rye 2006-2008
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Germany092,050,723
India00203
U.S. – Oregon688294
Subtotal:68912,051,020
Table 4: HS 100300 – Barley 2006-2008
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
China3,12716,93915,429
India3176382,852
Italy, Australia, Germany, New Zealand, Russia, Netherlands, Peru, Ukraine,
U.S. – Oregon
9648141,491
U.S. – Washington4,787021
United Kingdom1,3761439
Subtotal:10,57118,53419,802
Table 5: HS 1008 – Buckwheat, millet, canary seed, other unmilled cereals 2006-2008
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Bolivia717,1651,005,2751,640,901
China277,389307,425503,778
U.S. – Oregon112,846198,547476,661
Peru67,587210,797366,051
Netherlands40,728320,144227,418
India287,150181,626150,134
Egypt106057,357
Russia25,49824,58751,599
Mexico11,16411,39228,825
France64,27931,24223,686
Italy7,11615,7606,877
United Kingdom7815,5025,253
Ukraine19,4334,4612,024
U.S. – Washington1,6193,780482
Turkey, Syria, Spain, Argentina, Bulgaria, Pakistan, Australia, Tunisia1,6492,18970
Germany2,85819,22052
New Zealand2,26800
Subtotal:1,639,6362,341,9473,541,168
Totals
Total 2006 Total 2007 Total 2008
3,600,6315,148,9397,715,983

Quantity in metric tonnes (TNE)

Table 6: HS 1001 – Wheat 2006-2008
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. – Washington2,2008,9165,334
Argentina00320
Lebanon11313
Russia045
New Zealand821212
Netherlands004
U.S. – Oregon9,4632,0091
Germany030
Mexico000
United Kingdom0170
China, Turkey, Jordan, Italy, Ukraine, Bulgaria, Peru, France438
Subtotal:11,76010,9675,697
Table 7: HS 100200 – Rye 2006-2008
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Germany004,015
India001
U.S. – Oregon000
Subtotal:004,016
Table 8: HS 100300 – Barley 2006-2008
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
China38559
India000
Italy, Australia, Germany, New Zealand, Russia, Netherlands, Peru, Ukraine, U.S. – Oregon424
U.S. – Washington3200
United Kingdom700
Subtotal:468763
Table 9: HS 1008 – Buckwheat, millet, canary seed, other unmilled cereals 2006-2008
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Bolivia401,314579,050
630,320
China213,063409,492540,074
U.S. – Oregon108,54143,881347,798
Peru40,095109,596131,443
Netherlands21,248221,320141,553
India226,297271,519145,113
Egypt0020,650
Russia3,9416,0925,961
Mexico1,9131,9164,186
France17,3518,6046,460
Italy2,3294,5953,149
United Kingdom4875584,668
Ukraine4,5692,5692,600
U.S. – Washington367825107
Turkey, Syria, Spain, Argentina, Bulgaria, Pakistan, Australia,
Tunisia
1,6012498
Germany1,07025,53731
New Zealand400
Subtotal:1,044,1901,685,8031,984,121
Totals
Total 2006 Total 2007 Total 2008
1,055,9961,696,8571,993,897

Source: Statistics Canada 2009. Countries with an export value of less than $1,000 per year are grouped together and a summed value for all countries is shown

Appendix 2D: Import data for grass seed

Import data for grass seed originating from countries where Alopecurus myosuroides is present

Value in Canadian Dollars ($)

Table 10: HS 120923 - Fescue seeds 2006-2008
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. - Oregon1,925,4641,898,3652,722,623
U.S. - Washington7,21026,52346,936
Germany80,27289,72667,197
Italy04,28437,816
Netherlands3,42024,29115,640
France010,6133,606
Subtotal:2,016,3662,053,8022,893,818
Table 11: HS 120924 - Kentucky Blue Grass seeds 2006-2008
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. - Oregon4,181,8704,755,4497,836,065
U.S. - Washington3,130,3492,808,0834,252,270
Germany021,1860
Subtotal:7,312,2197,584,71812,088,335
Table 12: HS 120925 - Rye Grass seeds 2006 - 2008
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. -Oregon5,256,2483,814,2466,626,765
U.S. - Washington2,7792,97485,305
Germany355,869339,445222,094
Netherlands79,587106,655144,991
New Zealand34,589109,62463,301
China97,12963,12728,963
Belgium35,887023,113
France015,02015,044
Spain06,1211,827
Argentina017,2421
Italy61,30032,1320
United Kingdom04,1140
Egypt6,12100
Subtotal:5,929,5094,510,7007,211,404
Table 13: HS 120926 - Timothy Grass seeds 2006-2008
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Netherlands14,68900
Germany2,09000
U.S.-Oregon1,37900
Subtotal:18,15800
Totals
Total 2006 Total 2007 Total 2008
15,276,25214,149,22022,193,557

Quantity in Kilograms per Cubic Metre (KGM)

Import data for grass seed originating from countries where Alopecurus myosuroides is present (2006-2008 - Quantity in Kilograms (KGM)).  

Table 14: HS 120923 - Fescue seeds 2006-2008
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. - Oregon975,900921,9111,270,884
U.S. - Washington2,5839,62814,786
Germany38,09140,00036,947
Italy01,80022,665
Netherlands1,72110,6125,606
France05,2091,515
Subtotal:1,018,295989,1601,352,403
Table 15: HS 120924 - Kentucky Blue Grass seeds 2006-2008
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. - Oregon1,468,6141,822,7252,654,033
U.S. - Washington2,010,8771,639,2381,943,822
Germany04,5000
Subtotal:3,479,4913,466,4634,597,855
Table 16: HS 120925 - Rye Grass seeds 2006 - 2008
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. - Oregon3,491,3582,485,8445,227,573
U.S. - Washington1,4601,66557,564
Germany321,092197,97991,268
Netherlands62,31060,56456,649
New Zealand27,35073,87525,000
China59,36033,9306,067
Belgium46,582010,000
France03,9683,431
Spain02,0001,015
Argentina024,9900
Italy21,0007,5000
United Kingdom04,5000
Egypt1,50000
Subtotal:4,032,0122,896,8155,478,567
Table 17: HS 120926 - Timothy Grass seeds 2006-2008
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Netherlands16,27600
Germany77100
U.S.-Oregon65800
Subtotal:17,70500
Totals
Total 2006 Total 2007 Total 2008
8,547,5037,352,43811,428,825

Source: Statistics Canada 2009.

Appendix 2E: Import data for hay and straw

Import data for hay and straw originating from countries where Alopecurus myosuroides is present

Value in Canadian Dollars ($)

Table 18: HS 121300 -Cereal Straw and Husks, unprepared 2006-2008
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. - Washington5,056,544 5,685,0966,397,081
U.S. - Oregon4,8751,75018,492
India284,039258,851302,025
Mexico9,70928,49523,099
China26305,744
Germany3,0792,4533,013
Pakistan1082,0891,131
United Kingdom2,5188,773408
Subtotal:5,361,1355,987,5076,750,993
Table 19: HS 121490 - Swedes, mangolds, fodder roots, hay, clover, sainfoin, forage kale, etc. 2006-2008
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. -Washington3,849,2454,045,9274,115,211
U.S. -Oregon1,086,048630,851330,770
China13,00712,36332,527
India2,93328,29776
Australia019,1320
Germany603,0000
France192,0140
Mexico, U.K., Portugal, Belgium, Peru, Lebanon58384195
Subtotal:4,951,8954,742,4254,478,679
Totals
Total 2006 Total 2007 Total 2008
10,313,03010,729,93211,229,672

Source: Statistics Canada 2009.

Appendix 3A: Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Centaurea iberica (Iberian starthistle)

Identity of the organism

Name: Centaurea iberica Trevir. ex Spreng (family Asteraceae) (USDA-ARS 2009)

Synonyms: Calcitrapa iberica (Trevir. ex Spreng.) Schur, Leucantha iberica (Trevir. ex Spreng.) Á. Löve & D. Löve (Tropicos 2008)

English common names: Iberian star-thistle, Iberian star thistle, pale starthistle, Spanish centaury-thistle, Iberian knapweed, Spanish thistle.

French common name: None found.

Description: Centaurea iberica is a biennial herbaceous plant, but may behave as an annual or short-lived perennial in some environments (Graham and Johnson, 2003). In Oregon, a rosette forms in May and June and the plants bolt and bloom from midsummer to fall. The plants grow from 30 to 200 cm tall. The leaves are divided into narrow linear segments. The rosettes have spines in the centre. The flower heads are white, pink, or pale purple, and 15–20 mm long with straw-colored, spine-tipped bracts. The spines are more than 2.5 cm long. The achenes (cypselae) are white- or brown-streaked, 3–4 mm long, and have a white pappus which is 1–2.5 mm long (FNA Editorial Committee 1993+, ODA 2007).

Organism Status

Centaurea iberica is not reported to be naturalized in Canada, and no evidence was found that it is cultivated in Canada (CFIA 2008). Based on this information, the species is considered to be absent from the PRA area.

Current Regulatory Status

Canada:
Centaurea iberica is not regulated in Canada.
United States:
Centaurea iberica is not regulated as a Federal Noxious Weed in the U.S. but it is regulated in Arizona, California, Nevada and Oregon (USDA-NRCS 2009). No person may move Centaurea iberica or commodities found to contain this species or parts of it into or through these states (ADA 2006; CDFA 2003; State of Nevada 2003; ODA 2006).

Probability of Entry

No information could be found on the probable pathway for entry of Centaurea iberica into North America (Table 8).

Table 8: Summary of Pathways for Centaurea iberica (Iberian star-thistle)
Type of pathway Specific pathways
Natural dispersal
  • Centaurea iberica is a biennial that spreads only by seed.
  • Natural seed dispersal is an unlikely pathway for entry into Canada, given the current range.
Intentional introduction
  • None identified.
Unintentional introduction
  • Centaurea iberica could occur as a contaminant in seed lots. Some Centaurea species are found as seed contaminants in Turkey (Uygur 2001), so seed imported from the native range is one possible source. This is known to be the pathway for other Centaurea species, such as yellow star-thistle (Centaurea solstitialis) (Zouhar 2002). There are no records of Centaurea iberica being found in imported seed lots in Canada in the past 10 years, based on CFIA Seed Laboratory data, but two samples of imported clover seed from the U.S. were contaminated with "starthistle" seeds that were not identified to species.
  • It is possible that livestock being imported from the U.S. could transport the spiny flower heads in their hair or wool (Graham and Johnson 2003).
  • Centaurea iberica could potentially be transported in hay, but, as a biennial plant, it is not reported from cultivated fields so this pathway is unlikely.

Probability of Establishment

In Europe, Centaurea iberica is native in Bulgaria, Greece, former Yugoslavia, Romania and Ukraine (Crimea) (Pankhurst, 1998). It is also native in Asia (Afghanistan, Cyprus, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Turkey, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Russia (Ciscaucasia and Dagestan), southeastern Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, China (Xinjiang), northern India and Pakistan) (USDA-ARS 2009). Centaurea iberica has been introduced in North America in California, Kansas, Oregon, Washington and Wyoming (FNA Editorial Committee, 1993+) (see Figure 1). It spread abundantly in some counties of California during the early 1950's (Graham and Johnson 2003). Centaurea iberica is extremely competitive along roadsides and in range and pastures (ODA 2007).

Figure 1: Range of Centaurea iberica (Iberian star-thistle) in North America

Figure 1. description follows
Description for - Figure 1

This map shows the range of Centaurea iberica in North America indicating its presence through the use of the colour green. The five states covered in green are Washington, Oregon, California, Wyoming and Nebraska.

Figure 2: Source (NAPPFAST zones 6-9)

Figure 2, description follows
Description for - Figure 2

This image shows the potential range of Centaurea iberica in Canada and northern America through the use of a map. Red is used to indicate the regions in which Centaurea iberica could survive according to the Canadian Plant Hardiness Zones map, in this case NAPPFAST Hardiness Zone 6. In Canada, this includes coastal and southernmost BC, extreme southwestern Ontario and small areas on the coasts of the Maritime Provinces, including Newfoundland. In the U.S., it includes parts of the Eastern and Western coast as well as areas located near the Great Lakes.

Source: (USDA-NRCS 2009)

Probability of Spread

Centaurea iberica is a biennial plant that spreads by seed. The achenes have a pappus which suggests that they are dispersed by wind. The spiny involucres could be trapped in hair or clothing and be transported by animals or people.

Potential Economic Consequences

Centaurea iberica is considered a common weed in Lebanon (Holm et al., 1991). In Oregon, Centaurea iberica displaces valuable forage species in pastures and rangelands. The sharp spines deter grazing animals, restricting access for livestock and reducing the value of hay (ODA, 2007).

Potential Environmental and Social Consequences

Centaurea iberica seems to be confined to disturbed areas, including over-grazed rangelands (Uygur, 2001). The sharp spines mean that infestations can impede recreational use and restrict access for wildlife (ODA, 2007).

No other potential social consequences were identified.

Uncertainty

There are a number of areas of uncertainty in this risk assessment. This species is not well-covered in weed books or websites in North America. Basic information on self-compatibility, potential for apomixis, seed productivity and seed bank persistence are lacking. However, better information in these poorly-documented characteristics would not change the outcome from "reject" as the species scored very high in the assessment.

Conclusion

Based on the outcome of this pest risk assessment, Centaurea iberica is likely to establish and become weedy or invasive in some parts of southern and coastal British Columbia, southwestern Ontario and the east coast of Canada if it is introduced to these areas.

Technical Issues for Consideration

The plants of Centaurea iberica are very similar to those of purple star-thistle (Centaurea calcitrapa) as both have purple flower heads. New infestations have been misidentified in the past due to observers being familiar with purple star-thistle but unaware of Centaurea iberica. The plants of Centaurea iberica are more robust on average (FNA Editorial Committee 1993+).

However, the plants are best identified on the basis of the more elongated the flower heads (more rounded in purple star-thistle) and the paler color of the corollas (Graham and Johnson 2003). The achenes can be easily separated by the presence of a pappus and the shinier pericarp in Centaurea iberica (ODA 2007).

In Canada, Centaurea calcitrapa L. (purple star-thistle) has been previously reported from southwestern BC and southern Ontario (Scoggan 1979). As it is not listed in the Illustrated Flora of British Columbia (Douglas et al. 1998), it seems that no persistent populations have become established there.

Appendix 3B: Risk Management Considerations for Centaurea iberica (Iberian starthistle)

Values at Risk

Livestock Industry

Centaurea iberica could establish in pastures and fodder crops, and diminish the quality of forage. It is difficult to evaluate the value of forage because the harvest is usually intended to feed livestock on the farm where it is produced. Feed is the largest single cost of a beef operation, accounting for 60% of expenditures (Potter 2004). The increase in cost of production or a decrease in forage quality could directly impact dairy, cattle and sheep farm incomes.

Almost 250,000 ha of pasture and fodder crops are at risk in Canada. This area, mostly located in Southern Ontario, currently feeds around 261,500 cattle (dairy and beef production) and 36'000 sheep and lambs (see Table 2). In 2007, farm cash receipts were worth $410 million for dairy production and $160 million for the beef industry in Southern Ontario (OMAFRA 2006).

Seed Trade

The presence of Centaurea iberica in forage crops in Canada could affect trade of forage seed with the states of Arizona, California, Nevada and Oregon where Centaurea iberica is prohibited. The value of Canadian forage seed exported to these states fluctuates between $14.9 and $28.5 million/year (see figure 3).

Table 2: Agricultural lands and production of ruminant animals at risk to be impacted by the spread of Centaurea iberica (Iberian star-thistle)
Canadian Provinces Table Note a Hay and fodder crops Table Note b (ha) Natural and tame pastures Table Note b (ha) Cattle and calves Table Note b (nb) Sheep and lambs Table Note b (nb)
Ontario157,00052,000220,00034,000
Nova Scotia4,5004,0007,0002,000
British Columbia4,50042,00034,5000
Total:166,00098,000261,50036,000

Table Notes

Table note 2

Areas located in hardiness zone 6 and higher (Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada 2009).

Return to first table note a referrer

Statistics Canada 2001.

Return to first table note b referrer

Figure 3: Canadian total exports of forage seed to Arizona, California, Nevada and Oregon.

Figure 3. Description follows.
Description for Figure 3

This figure shows the total Canadian exports of forage seed (in $'000) to Arizona, California, Nevada and Oregon for the years of 2004 through 2008. This line graph relies that California, Nevada and Arizona have a forage seed export value of less than 5,000 while Oregon and the overall total increase steadily surpassing 15,000 for the four years with a notable increase in 2007 when it topped 25,000. Seed of clover, alfalfa, fescue, ray-grass (Lolium multiflorum and Lolium perenne) and other forage, except beet and Kentucky grass (Poa pratensis).

Source: Statistics Canada in Industry Canada 2009

Potential Mitigation Measures for Natural Means of Dispersal

Allison (2009) has not identified any risk associated with natural means of dispersal.

Potential Mitigation Measures for Intentional Introduction Pathways

According to Allison (2009), Centaurea iberica is not a cultivated plant. It is not available in Canada as an ornamental (CNLA 2009).

Potential Mitigation Measures for Non-intentional Introduction Pathways

Seed of Clover

Previous imports

For the past ten years, the value of clover seed imported from areas where Centaurea iberica is present fluctuated between $0.8 and $2 million (see Figure 4 and Appendix 3C) (Industry Canada 2009).

Figure 4: Imports of clover seed from countries and areas where Centaurea iberica (Iberian star-thistle) is present.

Figure 4. Description follows.
Description for Figure 4:

This figure shows the imports of clover seeds from countries and areas where Centaurea iberica is present for the years of 2006, 2007 and 2008. This bar graph relies the import values for China (light green), U.S. California (black), U.S. Washington (red and white strips), and U.S. Oregon (turquoise). This graph shows that the predominant import values (over 800,000) comes from U.S. Oregon; moreover, the import values have been rising steadily and the remaining of the actors accounts for less than 10% of the imports for those years.

Source: Statistics Canada in Industry Canada 2009

Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulate Centaurea iberica as a prohibited noxious weed (Class 1) under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds Act Footnote 1.

Regulate Centaurea iberica as a quarantine pest under the Plant Protection Act and add this species to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada (CFIA 2009):

Trade implications
Cost-effectiveness and feasibility

Livestock

Previous imports

Since 2004, around 8000 live animals intended for reproduction have been imported into Canada from areas where Centaurea iberica is present (see Figure 5). This represents around 2% of total imports of live animals for reproduction (CFIA internal data).

Potential risk mitigation measures

No mitigation measures needed. The level of risk associated with this pathway is relatively low due to the small number of livestock imported into Canada.

This sampling program helps to ensure that seeds sold in, imported into and exported from Canada meet established standards for quality, including varietal purity and germination, and are labelled so that they are properly represented in the marketplace, and in the case of most agricultural crop varieties, are registered prior to sale in Canada.

Figure 5: Number of live animals intended for reproduction imported from countries where Centaurea iberica (Iberian star-thistle) is present

Figure 5. Description follows.
Description for Figure 5:

This figure displays, through the use of a bar graph, the number of live animals intended for reproduction that were imported from countries where Centaurea iberica is present. The United States's value is indicated using light blue and other countries using black. Cattle, in the U.S., has approximately 500 and is nonexistent in other counties. While goats, sheep and hog have hardly any visible presence in both the U.S. and in other countries on the table. Horses, on the other hand, surpass 5,000 in other countries while surpassing 1,000 in the U.S.

Source: CFIA internal data

Raw Wool and Raw Hides

Previous imports

The total value of raw wool imports was around $3.1 million in 2008; less than 0.1% of that value came from countries and American states where Centaurea iberica is present (Industry Canada 2009).

Potential risk mitigation measures

Appendix 3C: Import data for Centaurea iberica (Iberian star-thistle)

Import data for red clover seeds for sowing originating from countries where Centaurea iberica is present (2006-2008).

Table 10-a: Red Clover HS code 1209.220010
Exporting Country Value ($CAN) 2006 Quantity (kg)
2006
Value ($CAN) 2007 Quantity (kg)
2007
Value ($CAN) 2008 Quantity (kg)
2008
U.S. – Washington316,192226,457217,368126,359443,638242,069
U.S. – Oregon004,2981,814224112
Sub-total:316,192226,457221,666128,173443,862242,181
Table 10-b: Sweet clover code HS 1209.220020
Exporting Country Value ($CAN) 2006 Quantity (kg)
2006
Value ($CAN) 2007 Quantity (kg)
2007
Value ($CAN) 2008 Quantity (kg)
2008
China28,34512,5980052,89223,508
Sub-total:28,34512,5980052,89223,508
Table 10-c: White Clover HS code 1209.220030
Exporting Country Value ($CAN) 2006 Quantity (kg)
2006
Value ($CAN) 2007 Quantity (kg)
2007
Value ($CAN) 2008 Quantity (kg)
2008
U.S. – Oregon396,191106,022651,354204,622468,110135,354
U.S. – California000000
U.S. – Washington18,7413,625008,2612,268
Sub-total:414,932109,647651,354204,622476,371137,622
Table 10-d: Clover seed (other) HS code 1209.220090
Exporting Country Value ($CAN) 2006 Quantity (kg)
2006
Value ($CAN) 2007 Quantity (kg)
2007
Value ($CAN) 2008 Quantity (kg)
2008
U.S – Oregon138,29240,66728,6197,74594,87123,546
U.S. – California6256,46010,34322,9114,990
U.S. – Washington26,0215,0004,4631,58817,0144,538
Sub-total:164,31945,66989,54219,676134,79633,074
Table 10-e: Total
Value ($CAN) 2006 Quantity (kg)
2006
Value ($CAN) 2007 Quantity (kg)
2007
Value ($CAN) 2008 Quantity (kg)
2008
895,443381,773962,562352,4711,055,029412,877

Source: Statistics Canada

Appendix 4A: Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Centaurea solstitialis (yellow star-thistle)

Identity of Organism

Name: Centaurea solstitialis (L.) (Asteraceae) (USDA-ARS, 2009)

Synonyms: Leucantha solstitialis (L.) A. Löve & D. Löve (USDA-NRCS, 2009)

English Common Names: Yellow star-thistle (USDA-NRCS, 2009), Centaurea solstitialis, golden star-thistle, St. Barnaby's thistle, yellow centaury, yellow cockspur (USDA-ARS, 2009)

French Common Names: Centaurée du solstice, chardon-doré, auriole

Description: Centaurea solstitialis is a winter annual, herbaceous plant, rarely a biennial or short-lived perennial. Populations in the United States are variable in their plant characteristics. The stems are stiff and erect, 15-200 cm in height. Centaurea solstitialis produces rosette leaves that lie close to the ground in the first fall. The inflorescences are borne in solitary flowerheads on stem tips, although vigorous plants may produce flowerheads in branch axils. The involucre is about 1.2-1.8 cm long. The involucral bracts have one long central spine 1.0-2.5 cm long and two or more pairs of short lateral spines and are covered with hairs. The achenes (fruits) are of two types, both glabrous and about 2 to 3 mm long. The disc florets produce most of the achenes (75-90%). These disc achenes are shiny and have a short (2-5 mm), stiff pappus. Achenes produced by the outer (ray) florets are duller, darker in color and have no pappus. Centaurea solstitialis has a large taproot that grows to soil depths of 1 m or more, allowing access to deep soil moisture during dry summer and fall months. The dead stalks are persistent and usually remain standing through the winter (Zouhar 2002).

Organism Status

It is known historically from a few locations in Canada, but those populations have not established. No evidence was found that this species is cultivated in Canada (CNLA 2009). Based on this information, it is considered absent from Canada.

Current Regulatory Status

Federally, it is regulated by the CFIA as Class 1 prohibited noxious weed in the Weed Seeds Order under the Seeds Act. Provincially, it is regulated as a "Noxious Weed" in British Columbia, as a "Prohibited Noxious Weed" in Alberta, and as a "Prohibited Weed" in Saskatchewan under their respective Weed Control Acts and Regulations.

It is not regulated as a federal noxious weed in the U.S. but is regulated in the following states: AZ, CA, CO, HI, ID, MO, MT, ND, NM, NV, OR, SD, UT, WA, WV and WY.

Probability of Entry

It is an annual that spreads only by seed. Seeds have been found as contaminants in alfalfa and grain crops, and contaminated seeds are thought to have been the pathway for introduction of the species outside the native range (CAB International 2007).

Table 1: Summary of pathways for Centaurea solstitialis (yellow star-thistle)
Type of pathway Specific pathways
Natural dispersalSeeds can disperse 1.5 m by wind and are dispersed over longer distances by animal activity. (CAB International 2007). The pappus bristles are covered with stiff, microscopic barbs that readily adhere to hair (Zouhar 2002).
Intentional introductionNone identified.
Unintentional introductionLong-distance dispersal of seed is often directly related to human activities and occurs by movement of livestock, vehicles and equipment (Zouhar 2002). This is a likely pathway for entry into Canada. Seeds have been found as contaminants in alfalfa and grain crops, and contaminated seeds are thought to have been the pathway for introduction of the species outside the native range. There have been multiple introductions of Centaurea solstitialis into California, from Europe and Chile, usually as a contaminant in alfalfa seed (CAB International 2007). This would be the most likely pathway for entry into Canada.

Probability of Establishment

It is native to Eurasia, including Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, Tajikistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Algeria, Tunisia, Albania, Bulgaria, France, Greece, Italy, Spain and former Yugoslavia (USDA-ARS 2009). It is now found throughout Europe, in North and South America and Africa. It has spread to Central Asia, but does not persist in cold northerly areas. The earliest specimens in the U.S. were found in California in 1869 (CAB International 2007).

It has been reported from at least 40 U.S. states and four Canadian provinces. However, in eastern North America, infestations are sporadic and localized, and populations have failed to become established, in spite of repeated introductions. In California over 6.9 million hectares are infested, and the species is spreading in Idaho, Oregon and Washington (CAB International 2007).

In spite of historical reports of Centaurea solstitialis from Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario, there are no established populations anywhere in Canada.

Based on the results of the North Carolina State APHIS Plant Pest Forecasting (NAPPFAST) System, it appears that Centaurea solstitialis would survive to global plant hardiness zone 5 (Figure 11). Data from the pacific northwest states indicates that the species is common in warmer micro-climates on south and southwest facing slopes (Shafi et al. 2003; Zouhar 2002), therefore it is likely that it will be these micro-climates that will be vulnerable within zone 5 in Canada.

Figure 1: The potential North American range forCentaurea solstitialis (yellow star-thistle) as predicted by the NAPPFAST system (Red shading corresponds to areas at risk or global plant hardiness zones 5-9)

Figure 1. Description follows.
Description of Figure 1:

This image is a map of Canada and the Central United States with areas colored in red. The read areas are showing the establishment of the Yellow Star-thistle. Thy include the Canadian West Coat and some of the Mid-west States as well as the States south of the Great Lakes and the Canadian and U.S. East coast.

Probability of Spread

Seeds can disperse 1.5 m by wind, and seeds are dispersed over longer distances by animal or human activity. In California, it is thought that human activity accounts for most of the seed dispersal (CAB International 2007). The pappus bristles are covered with stiff, microscopic barbs that readily adhere to clothing and hair. Long-distance dispersal is often directly related to human activities and occurs by movement of livestock, vehicles, equipment, and contaminated hay and crop seed (Zouhar 2002).

Potential Economic Consequences

Centaurea solstitialis is toxic in large amounts to horses. The muscles of the lips, face and tongue become stiff and swollen, giving the horse a fixed expression. Poisoning can result in permanent brain damage, and severely affected animals eventually die of thirst and starvation (CAB International 2007).

Losses result from interference with livestock grazing and forage harvesting procedures, and lower yield and forage quality of rangelands. Livestock and wildlife avoid grazing in heavily infested areas resulting in slower weight gain and reduced quality of meat, milk, wool and hides (CAB International 2007).

Centaurea solstitialis is the most important roadside weed problem in much of central and northern California and causes occasional problems in cereals, orchards, vineyards, cultivated crops and wastelands (CAB International 2007).

Potential Environmental and Social Consequences

Centaurea solstitialis can reduce wildlife habitat and forage, displace native plants, and decrease native plant and animal diversity. Dense infestations threaten natural ecosystems by fragmenting plant and animal habitats (CAB International 2007). Infestations can also limit access to recreational areas, and reduce land value. Several rare and sensitive plant species in Oregon, Nevada and Idaho are thought to be threatened by C.solstitialis. Large populations of Centaurea solstitialis can alter the water cycle in annual grassland and foothill woodland ecosystems in California, by using more water to a greater soil depth than native vegetation (Zouhar 2002).

Uncertainty

There is some doubt about its potential range in Canada. It is very likely that the potential range is less than that shown in Figure 11, based on NAPPFAST zone 5. However, it is also very likely that there are suitable environments for persistent populations in southern British Columbia.

Conclusion

Based on the outcome of the CFIA's pest risk assessment, Centaurea solstitialis is likely to establish and become invasive in parts of Canada, including southern British Columbia if introduced. This plant should be considered for regulation under the Plant Protection Act (note that it is regulated by the CFIA as a prohibited noxious weed seed under the Seeds Act).

Technical Issues for Consideration

Appendix 4B: Risk Management Considerations for Centaurea solstitialis (yellowstar-thistle)

Values at Risk

Rangelands: Rangelands are important ecosystems that provide an abundance and variety of products, such as browse and forage for both wild and domesticated animals and wood fibre. Rangelands also provide drinking water, habitat for wildlife, biodiversity, nutrient cycling and recreational opportunities (Horton 1996). Centaurea solstitialis has the ability to invade rangelands, reducing their native biodiversity, wildlife habitat and forage and affecting the natural water cycle. One of the most common and profitable uses of rangeland is livestock grazing. Table 11 shows the number of cattle and calves, sheep and lambs and horses and ponies in areas of B.C. in hardiness zones five to nine. Of concern is that Centaurea solstitialis is toxic to horses if consumed in large amounts and can interfere with livestock grazing and is recognized as one of the "worst weeds in the West" by the Centre for Invasive Plant Management (CIPM 2009).

Potential Mitigation Measures for Natural Means of Dispersal

Natural dispersal is a possible pathway of entry of Centaurea solstitialis into Canada, particularly into British Columbia. Currently, there are four bordering counties in Washington, one bordering county in Idaho and one bordering county in Montana (adjacent to B.C.) that are infested with the weed (USDA-NRCS 2009). It is listed as a Class B Noxious Weed in the State of Washington (NWCB 2009), a noxious weed in Idaho on the Statewide Containment List (ISDA 2009) and a Category 3 noxious weed in Montana (MDA 2009). In Washington and Idaho, the goal is to prevent the spread of existing populations and the establishment of new populations, but not necessarily eradication. In Montana, a management criterion of Category 3 noxious weeds includes awareness and education, early detection and immediate action to eradicate infestations. Depending on how close existing populations are to the border, these programs could reduce the risk of Centaurea solstitialis naturally dispersing into Canada. It is also regulated as a noxious weed under the B.C. Weed Control Act, which requires all land occupiers to control designated noxious plants if found on their property (BCMAL 2002).

As there are populations of Centaurea solstitialis in U.S. counties adjacent to B.C., it is recommended that an early detection and rapid response (EDRR) program should be employed by the province.

Table 2: Summary of types of livestock in regions of British Columbia where Centaurea solstitialis (yellow star-thistle) could establish.
Type of Animal Number of Animals Percentage of B.C. Total
Cattle and Calves355,87144%
Sheep and Lambs38,61263%
Horses and Ponies53,24649 %

Source: Statistics Canada, 2007

Note: data is based on Census Agricultural Regions and Census Divisions, some of which extend beyond hardiness zone 5.

Potential Mitigation Measures for Intentional Introduction Pathways

No intentional introduction pathways for Centaurea solstitialis were identified. Although no mitigation measures are currently required, this pathway will still be regulated under the Plant Protection Act if this species is placed on the List of Pests Regulated by Canada (CFIA 2009).

Potential Mitigation Measures for Non-intentional Introduction Pathways

Field Crops Not Intended for Propagation

Previous imports

It is unknown which grain commodities could be potentially contaminated with seed of Centaurea solstitialis, but the weed has been noted to affect cereal production.

Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulate Centaurea solstitialis as a quarantine pest under the Plant Protection Act and add this species to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada (CFIA 2009) in order to:

All risk mitigation measures for field crop commodities containing Centaurea solstitialis must be taken with consideration for requirements/measures for pests other than plants (e.g. pathogens and insects).

Trade implications
Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Seed

Two specimens of Centaurea solstitialis were collected in a hay field in Campbellford, Ontario in 1971, prior to the listing of this species on the Weed Seeds Order in 1986.

Previous imports

It is unknown which grain commodities could be potentially contaminated with seed of Centaurea solstitialis, but the weed has been noted to affect cereal production.

Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulatory actions under the Plant Protection Act could include one or more of the following:

Trade implications
Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Hay and Straw

Previous imports
Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulate Centaurea solstitialis under the Plant Protection Act as a quarantine pest by placing it on the List of Pests Regulated by Canada (CFIA 2009) in order to:

Trade implications
Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Livestock

Previous imports
Potential risk mitigation measures
Trade implications

Exporters are already required to undergo inspection of livestock at the border.

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Vehicles and Used Farm Machinery

Previous imports
Potential Risk mitigation measures

Enforcement of the Directive 95-26: "Phytosanitary requirements of soil and related matter and for items contaminated with soil and related matter" (CFIA 2008).

In 2003, CBSA assumed responsibility for the initial import inspection services in respect to the Acts and Regulations administered by the CFIA to the extent that they are applicable at Canadian border points. The inspection of goods that may be contaminated with soil are among the responsibilities that were transferred to the CBSA in 2003. The Food, Plant and Animals Programs Section of the CBSA is currently finalizing its Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) concerning the "Inspection of Imported Goods Potentially Contaminated with Soil." This SOP provides the CBSA's Border Services Officers with formal procedures for the inspection and disposition of goods that may be contaminated with soil, including used agricultural machinery and vehicles.

Nursery Stock with Soil

There are two documented references of Centaurea solstitialis being found in gardens or landscaped areas. The references indicate that the pest plant may be introduced as an ornamental plant or as a root ball of shrubs or trees.

Previous imports
Potential Risk mitigation measures

Regulate Centaurea solstitialis under the Plant Protection Act as a quarantine pest and add it to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada in order to:

Regulatory actions could include one or more of the following:

Trade implications
Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Phytosanitary Certificates are currently issued by exporting countries for nursery stock and exporting countries currently comply with the phytosanitary requirements set out in D-95-26, including the pest-free area.

Appendix 4C: Import Data for Alfalfa seeds

Import data for alfalfa seeds from countries where Centaurea solstitialis (yellow star-thisle) is present (2006-2008).

Value in Canadian Dollars ($)

Table 4C-a: Import Data for Alfalfa seeds for sowing HS 120921
Exporting country/US states 2006 2007 2008
Idaho4,772,72215803442799074
California421,346649464197474
Washington, state26,447404826199382
South Dakota104,01531009357649
Minnesota242,639110720
Tennessee7,3576233019394
Michigan9,36791309438
Montana7,7091058318097
Kentucky01184114976
Oregon50,02310081355
North Carolina23,119101329
Iowa58,78753781851
Maine059
Missouri017342403
North Dakota0017276
Wyoming3,00200
Indiana2,85914870
Wisconsin1,96225049925
Maryland, New York123025
Subtotal:5,731,3663,122,8223,339,677
Table 4C-b: Import Data for Alfalfa seeds for sowing HS 120921
Exporting country/US states 2006 2007 2008
France27252952220
Italy23,9862169769814
Spain036620
Netherlands1251233081
Germany03081242065
Austria0111016046
Subtotal:24,13869,813203,226
Table 4C-c: Import Data for Alfalfa seeds for sowing HS 120921
Exporting country/US states 2006 2007 2008
Argentina5631220
Uruguay2,52400
Subtotal:26,7183,1220
Table 4C-d: Import Data for Alfalfa seeds for sowing HS 120921
Exporting country/US states 2006 2007 2008
Total:5,758,0843,195,7573,542,903

Quantity in kilograms (KGM)

Table 4C-a: Import Data for Alfalfa seeds for sowing HS 120921
Exporting country/US states 2006 2007 2008
Idaho955171327406440995
California11414916679943479
Washington, state54578016545398
South Dakota446009086717010
Minnesota965372609
Tennessee1814124122653
Michigan13179998769
Montana97121585275
Kentucky019991950
Oregon21900198134
North Carolina59363181
Iowa114305967115
Maine011
Missouri0272465
North Dakota003969
Wyoming59000
Indiana5797030
Wisconsin2723674114
Maryland, New York261
Subtotal:1,260,725693,889570,518
Table 4C-b: Import Data for Alfalfa seeds for sowing HS 120921
Exporting country/ US states 2006 2007 2008
France191806335
Italy6013342121212
Spain06000
Netherlands1023200
Germany034513975
Austria021491000
Subtotal:6,0429,80335,722
Table 4C-c: Import Data for Alfalfa seeds for sowing HS 120921
Exporting country/ US states 2006 2007 2008
Argentina115130
Uruguay32500
Subtotal:3365130
Table 4C-d: Import Data for Alfalfa seeds for sowing HS 120921
Exporting country/US states 2006 2007 2008
Total:1 267 103704 205606 240

Source: Statistics Canada 2009

Appendix 4D: Import Data for Hay and Straw

Import data for hay and straw from countries where Centaurea solstitialis (yellow star-thisle) is present (2006-2008)

Value in Canadian Dollars ($)

Table 4D_1: Cereal straw and husks, unprepared HS 121300
Exporting country/US states 2006 2007 2008
Washington, state5,056,5445,685,0966,397,081
North Carolina272,458316,202212,617
North Dakota856,800326,304180,360
Illinois40,714114,980111,185
Oregon4,8751,75018,492
New York8,98410,26016,288
Michigan2,65630,169458
All other statesTable Note 131,37433,17850,069
Mexico Germany Ghana9,70928,49523,099
United Kingdom5,79611,2264,855
Subtotal:6,289,9106,557,6607,014,504
Table 4D_2: Swedes, mangolds, fodder roots, hay, clover, sainfoin, forage kale, etc HS 121490
Exporting country/US states 2006 2007 2008
Washington, state3,849,2454,045,9274,115,211
Wisconsin107,918238,895386,684
Oregon1,086,048630,851330,770
Ohio250,851262,863303,452
Pennsylvania22,69920,272101,167
New Jersey44,16237,89148,900
Nebraska29,89224,79248591
Kansas013,41046,197
Colorado32,13326,65228,890
Kentucky6193015,743
Iowa41248313,852
California12740235119755
Arizona1343451317643429
New York249651808228
Idaho63175509953
All other states Table Note 2277041767721449
Chile04135432946
Albania04135432946
Germany, France, Colombia3592100303888
Subtotal:5,633,6425,583,3095,511,205

Source: Industry Canada 2009

Appendix 5A: Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Crupina vulgaris (common crupina)

Identity of Organism

Name: Crupina vulgaris Cass. (Asterales: Asteraceae)

Synonyms: Centaurea crupina L., Serratula crupina

English common names: Common crupina, crupina, bearded-creeper, starry scabious (Darbyshire, 2003; CABI, 2006)

French common names: Crupine, crupine vulgaire (Darbyshire 2003)

Description: Crupina vulgaris Cass. (Asterales: Asteraceae) is a facultative winter annual weed that is native to the Mediterranean region and has been recently (1968) introduced in the United States in Washington, Idaho, Oregon, California and Massachusetts. It is a serious weed of pastures, grasslands, rangelands, hayfields, and undisturbed roadsides and waste places.

Crupina vulgaris grows a slender taproot from one to several metres deep. The main flowering stem can range in height from 0.3-1.2 m. The top of the main flowering stem branches into 1-15 branches. In addition to short flowering branches at the top of the main flowering stem, additional flowering branches are produced in upper leaf axils.

Three to 130 capitula (flower heads) are produced per plant. Each capitulum bears 3-8 sterile flowers and 1-8 fertile flowers, with a normal combination of three sterile and two fertile flowers. Rose or purple petals partially protrude from the scaly floral bracts of the capitulum.

Seeds are cypselae with a dense pappus of blackish-brown bristles at the apex. Cypselae are a type of achene, a one-celled, one-seeded dry, hard fruits that do not open when ripe. The shape of the achene is roughly cylindrical, tapering at the base, and measuring 3-5 X 1.5-3 mm. The surface of the achene is black or silvery beige and covered with fine hairs.

Organism Status

Current native distribution of Crupina vulgaris is centred around the Mediterranean, ranging from southern Europe (Iberian Peninsula, France, Italy, Greece), across Turkey, and extending as far east as Xinjiang Province of China in Asia. In Africa, it is also considered native to Morocco, Libya and Algeria.

Crupina vulgaris is not present in Canada, but is invasive in several U.S. states (California, Oregon, Washington, and Idaho (USDA, NRCS 2009)).

The first successful introduction of Crupina vulgaris in the U.S. was discovered in Idaho in 1968. Later discoveries were from Sonoma County, California, in 1976 (declared eradicated in 1982), Chelan County, Washington, in 1983, Umatilla County, Oregon, in 1987, Sonoma County, California, in 1989 (a re-discovery), Modoc County, California, in 1990, and Wallowa County, Oregon and locations in Nez Perce County and the Snake River Canyon, Idaho, in 1995. It is estimated that Crupina vulgaris has invaded over 26,000 ha in Idaho, Oregon, California and Washington. The major populations of Crupina vulgaris remain widely separated and discrete, despite local expansion and dispersal to new satellites.

Two reports of Crupina vulgaris in Canada appear to be erroneous. Zamora et al. (1989) state that common crupina was found in British Columbia (no further details given). Garnatje et al. (2002) indicate, however, that this report appears to be in error, based on a personal communication reference with R. Cranston (a weed specialist previously with the B.C. Ministry of Agriculture and Food). Secondly, Thill et al. (1999) state that an infestation of common crupina was found near Pincher Creek, British Columbia, Canada, and eradicated between 1980 and 1986 (Pincher Creek is actually located in the province of Alberta). The personal communication reference for this statement, however, has indicated that he has no knowledge of an occurrence of common crupina in Canada (R. Cranston, previously of B.C. Ministry of Agriculture and Food, pers. comm. with K. Castro, Apr. 4, 2006). Furthermore, there are no records for common crupina in the municipal district of Pincher Creek (K. Cooley, Agricultural Fieldman, M.D. of Pincher Creek, pers. comm. with K. Castro, Apr. 4, 2006). Without further evidence to the contrary, common crupina is considered absent from Canada.

Current Regulatory Status

Crupina vulgaris is not currently regulated under the Plant Protection Act. Under the Seeds Act, Weed Seeds Order, 2005, it is listed as a Class 1 Prohibited Noxious Weed. All seed sold or offered for sale in Canada, as well as imported into Canada for the purpose of planting must be free of prohibited noxious weed seeds as set out in the Weed Seeds Order. At the provincial level, Crupina vulgaris is regulated in British Columbia.

In the United States, Crupina vulgaris is on the USDA's Regulated Pest List (USDA, APHIS 2009) and the Federal Noxious Weed List. It is also considered a noxious weed or plant pest in 15 states: Alabama, California, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, Vermont and Washington (USDA, NRCS 2009).

Probability of Entry

Table 1: Summary of Pathways for Crupina vulgaris (common curpina)
Type of pathway Specific pathways
Natural dispersalCrupina vulgaris achenes can be dispersed by one or more natural means. (Achenes are small, one-seeded dry fruits. In the case of Crupina vulgaris, they resemble a seed.) Wind dispersal of the large, heavy achenes is limited to approximately 2 m or less. Achenes may be transported up to 15 m by rodents, which collect them in food caches, and 100 m or more by cattle and deer, on hooves and hair. Seeds have also survived passage through the digestive tracts of most animals except sheep. Water is a potential dispersal mechanism, although riparian zones are not a major habitat of Crupina vulgaris.
Intentional introductionAchenes may be transported by recreationists or tourists as a curiosity because they are similar in appearance to a fly fishing lure.
Unintentional introductionCanada imports live sheep, sheep wool, live cattle, hay and other forage products from the four states in which Crupina vulgaris is present. These imports represent potential unintentional pathways for this species into Canada. Crupina vulgaris could also be accidentally introduced in association with contaminated fabric, screens, farm machinery, trucks, rail cars, ballast soil, and/or sheep dogs moving across the border from the United States into Canada. Recreationists or tourists may unintentionally transport seeds of Crupina vulgaris on clothing and equipment.

Probability of Establishment

If introduced, Crupina vulgaris would most likely become established in parts of Canada. Based on current distribution, Crupina vulgaris could establish in five plant hardiness zones in Canada (zones 4-8) (Figure 1). This species may be able to establish in harsher climatic zones, an area of uncertainty that could be addressed through scientific research.

Figure 1: USDA Plant Hardiness Zones 4-11

Figure 1. Description follows.
Description of Figure 1:

This image is a map of Nord America showing the hardiness zones from 1 to 11 in different colors.

Probability of Spread

Crupina vulgaris reproduces by seed only. Relative to many other weedy species, Crupina vulgaris has a low seed output. Seed output ranges from 3-27 per plant in dry grasslands to as many as 850 per plant under favourable conditions (Roché 1996, cited in Roché and Thill 2001). Despite relatively low seed output, the large, heavy seeds have a relatively high success rate (Roché and Thill 2001). Dispersal potential is also greatly amplified by human-mediated dispersal pathways (Ising 1937; Sorrie and Sommers 1999). In the United States, Crupina vulgaris has proven to be invasive, and is a serious weed of grasslands, hayfields, pastures and rangelands (CABI 2006). The ability of Crupina vulgaris to establish in dry, sparsely vegetated areas and to compete with more desirable species are additional factors favouring the spread of this species.

Potential Economic Consequences

There is a high potential for serious economic consequences if Crupina vulgaris were to be introduced into Canada. Depending on the level of infestation and the potential range of the species, Crupina vulgaris could have serious negative economic impacts on at least two major industries in Canada: forage and livestock production (AAFC 2007). The marketing of seed commodities could also be affected, although it is considered unlikely that Crupina vulgaris would be found in cleaned seed lots.

Potential Environmental and Social Consequences

Crupina vulgaris contributes to the degradation of native and managed plant communities. It can be highly competitive and dominate sites, displacing other plant species and reducing biodiversity in the ecosystem. It also increases the risk of soil erosion (CABI 2006). Crupina vulgaris is not considered to have sociological impacts on aesthetics, recreation or property values (CABI 2005).

Uncertainty

There are three main areas of uncertainty for this risk assessment. One is the climatic amplitude for Crupina vulgaris. Further refinement of the range of temperatures over which Crupina vulgaris can survive would allow a more precise definition of the potential range of Crupina vulgaris in Canada. Its preference for warmer, more Mediterranean-type climates may limit its potential for invasiveness in Canada. Similarly, rainfall regime tolerances should be clarified, i.e., whether or not high rainfall (greater than 950 mm) is a limiting factor for Crupina vulgaris. Secondly, there is little information on economic impacts of Crupina vulgaris elsewhere where introduced. While it is known to impact livestock and forage production, the monetary value of potential economic impacts of Crupina vulgaris in Canada would be difficult to determine. Lastly, if introduced, Crupina vulgaris could potentially have negative impacts on species at risk in Canada, but it is unknown at this time if, how, or to what degree these impacts might manifest themselves.

Conclusion

It is considered likely that, without specific measures, Crupina vulgaris will be introduced into Canada via one or more of several pathways that have been identified for this species. British Columbia appears to be at the greatest risk, due to the combined factors of imported sheep, cattle and hay from states in which Crupina vulgaris occurs, as well as the availability of suitable habitats. However, it is possible that pathways for Crupina vulgaris could lead to its introduction in other parts of Canada as well.

If Crupina vulgaris became established in Canada, it would have negative economic impacts, especially to the hay and livestock industries. However, its limited natural dispersal ability and relatively low seed production suggest that, if detected early, eradication could be successful.

It is recommended that Crupina vulgaris be added to the List of Regulated Pests by Canadato prevent what would otherwise be a likely introduction of a damaging invasive plant species. This species should be regulated because 1) it is not yet present in Canada, 2) if detected early, there is a relatively good chance of eradication, 3) its potential economic impact is high, 4) no economic benefits of this species have been identified, and 5) it is known to have negative impacts on biodiversity in the areas it invades. Regulation of this species under the Plant Protection Act would also complement its regulation as a prohibited noxious weed under the Seeds Act.

Technical Issues for Consideration

More scientific research is needed to determine if this species is able to establish in harsher climatic zones and if it will have deleterious effects on endangered species and species at risk.

Appendix 5B: Risk Management Considerations for Crupina vulgaris (common crupina)

Values at Risk

No values at risk were identified.

Potential Mitigation Measures for Natural Means of Dispersal

The natural dispersal of the achenes would remain fairly local as the seeds fall close to the parent plant and dispersal by wildlife occurs only over short distances. These methods of dispersal are difficult to control. No specific mitigation measures are proposed for natural means of dispersal of Crupina vulgaris.

Potential Mitigation Measures for Intentional Introduction Pathways

Transport of plant parts by tourists and recreational users

A potential intentional pathway for the introduction of Crupina vulgaris is due to the appearance of the achenes. They are tapered and slightly iridescent, and with their stiff bristles at the wide end, somewhat resemble dry flies used for fishing.

Previous imports

It is not possible to assess the quantity of achenes that enter Canada for fly fishing, but it is most likely small.

Risk mitigation measures

Increase public awareness of the regulation and the risk posed by this plant and distribute awareness material at border crossings to the public. This is not considered effective by itself if the risk is high, but is a viable action if the level of risk is low.

Trade implications

As most imports of this type are non-commercial, there would be no trade implications.

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

A public awareness campaign is the most feasible option, whereas inspection would be very disruptive, difficult to implement, and expensive.

Potential Mitigation Measures for Non-intentional Introduction Pathways

Hay and Straw

Previous imports
Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulate Crupina vulgaris under the Plant Protection Act as a quarantine pest by adding it to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada. This will:

Additional requirements may include:

Trade implications
Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Regulation under the Plant Protection Act is already in place for other pests regulated by Canada. Minor costs will be incurred for training of inspectors for weed identification. Costs may be incurred during the negotiation of requirements with the U.S. or other affected trading partners.

Seed

Previous imports

Between 2004 and 2008, an average of $42 million worth of seed was imported into Canada from the four US states where Crupina vulgaris occurs.

Risk mitigation measures

Crupina vulgaris seeds are not likely to contaminate seed as it does not tolerate cultivation and would not be prevalent in crop fields, although it can become established along field edges. However, it also matures earlier than crop plants and the achenes are easily removed by screening due to its bristly pappus. Seeds suspected of being contaminated with Crupina vulgaris could be re-cleaned to remove the contaminant seeds.

Crupina vulgaris is listed as a Class 1 prohibited noxious weed in the Weed Seeds Order Footnote 2, and therefore, due to current regulations and requirements under the Seeds Act, imported seed is unlikely to be a pathway.

Other options include regulating Crupina vulgaris as a quarantine pest under the Plant Protection Act. Adding this species to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada (CFIA, 2009) would:

Regulatory actions under the Plant Protection Act could include one or more of the following:

Trade implications

NPPOs of exporting countries and seed certification agencies currently devote resources towards inspection of seed lots and issuance of Phytosanitary Certificates. Laboratories in foreign countries will need to be able to identify seeds of Crupina vulgaris within a seed sample. Exporters need to ensure freedom of Crupina vulgaris in seed lots, otherwise CFIA can refuse import.

Field Crops Not Intended for Propagation

Included in this section are cereal grains, oilseeds, pulses, forage, and new crops not covered under the Seed section above.

Previous imports

Between 2004 and 2008, an average of $1.7 million worth of field crops not intended for propagation were imported into Canada from the four U.S. states where Crupina vulgaris occurs.

Risk mitigation measures

Crupina vulgaris seeds are not likely to be a contaminant as they do not tolerate cultivation and would not be prevalent in crop fields, although Crupina vulgaris can become established along field edges. However, it also matures earlier than crop plants and the achenes are easily removed by screening due to its bristly pappus. Grain suspected of being contaminated with Crupina vulgaris could be re-cleaned to remove the contaminant seeds.

Livestock

Previous imports
Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulate Crupina vulgaris under the Plant Protection Act as a quarantine pest by placing it on the List of Pests Regulated by Canada. This would:

Trade implications
Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Raw Wool and Raw Skin

Previous imports
Potential risk mitigation measures

No measure is required:

Vehicles and Used Farm Machinery

Previous imports
Potential Risk mitigation measures

Enforcement of the Directive 95-26: "Phytosanitary requirements for soil and related matter, and for items contaminated with soil and related matter" (CFIA 2010).

In 2003, the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) assumed responsibility for the initial import inspection services in respect to the Acts and Regulations administered by the CFIA to the extent that they are applicable at Canadian border points. The inspection of goods that may be contaminated with soil are among the responsibilities that were transferred to the CBSA in 2003. The Food, Plant and Animals Programs Section of the CBSA is currently finalizing its Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) concerning the "Inspection of Imported Goods Potentially Contaminated with Soil." This SOP provides the CBSA's Border Services Officers with formal procedures for the inspection and disposition of goods that may be contaminated with soil, including used agricultural machinery and vehicles.

Trade implications
Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

As vehicles and used farm machinery are already required to be free from soil, this would address one of the likely sources of Crupina vulgaris contamination, resulting in no additional costs. However, ensuring that used vehicles and farm machinery are free from Crupina vulgaris achenes not in association with soil would require additional resources and training as well as renegotiating the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between CFIA and CBSA.

Used Recreational Equipment and Clothing

Previous imports

It is not possible to assess the quantity of used recreational equipment and clothing that enters Canada, but it is most likely significant.

Risk mitigation measures

Increase public awareness of the regulation and the risk posed by this plant and distribute awareness material at border crossings to the public. This is not considered effective by itself if the risk is high, but is a viable action if the level of risk is low.

Trade implications

As most imports of this type are non-commercial, there would be no trade implications.

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

A public awareness campaign is the most feasible option, whereas inspection would be very disruptive, difficult to implement, and expensive.

Appendix 5C: Import Data for Field Crops

Import data for field crops not intended for propagation originating from U.S. states where Crupina vulgaris is present (2006-2008).

Value in Canadian Dollars ($)

HS Code - Product: 1001 - Wheat & Meslin
Exporting U.S. State 2006 2007 2008
Washington433,2872,317,1011,825,056
Oregon1,508,006422,4961,707
Idaho0279,9280
California4,9748,7015,260
Subtotal:1,946,2673,028,2261,832,023
HS Code - Product: 1002 - Rye
Exporting U.S. State 2006 2007 2008
Oregon688294
Subtotal:688294
HS Code - Product: 1003 - Barley
Exporting U.S. State 2006 2007 2008
Idaho119,901152147
California4,6005,0434,512
Oregon05449
Washington4,787021
Subtotal:129,2885,2005,129
HS Code - Product: 1004 - Oats
Exporting U.S. State 2006 2007 2008
Washington05689
California552067
Idaho2298
Oregon15,80527,90111,700
Subtotal:16,35927,93512,464
HS Code - Product: 1007 - Grain Sorghum
Exporting U.S. State 2006 2007 2008
California1,247251374
Oregon02890
Subtotal:1,247540374
HS Code - Product: 1008 - Buckwheat, Millet and Canary Seed; Other Cereals
Exporting U.S. State 2006 2007 2008
California360,752593,3331,263,130
Oregon112,846198,547476,661
Washington1,6193,780482
Idaho2,98444,04722,951
Subtotal:478,201839,7071,763,224
HS Code - Product: 1201 - Soybeans
Exporting U.S. State 2006 2007 2008
Washington41,9151802,043
Idaho004,481
Oregon7,9944,44126,005
California64,49236,753165,357
Subtotal:114,40141,374197,886
HS Code - Product: 1205 - Rape or Colza Seeds
Exporting U.S. State 2006 2007 2008
Idaho2,278,4296,622,76322,504,709
Washington447,9412,152,6924,950,358
Oregon893,3162,272,0411,233,939
California257,817155,49849,527
Subtotal:3,877,50311,202,99428,738,533
HS Code - Product: 1207 - Oil Seeds and Oleaginous Fruit
Exporting U.S. State 2006 2007 2008
California489,204523,238565,491
Oregon285,632652,761349,070
Washington95,604201,037167,368
Idaho30,6688,062147,337
Subtotal:901,1081,385,0981,229,266
HS Code - Product: All Products
Exporting U.S. State 2006 2007 2008
Total:7,464,44216,531,15633,778,993

Quantity in metric tonnes (TNE)

HS Code - Product: 1001 - Wheat & Meslin
Exporting U.S. State 2006 2007 2008
Washington2,2008,9165,334
Oregon9,4632,0091
Idaho01,2250
California81710
Subtotal:11,67112,1675,345
HS Code - Product: 1002 - Rye
Exporting U.S. State 2006 2007 2008
Oregon000
Subtotal:000
HS Code - Product: 1003 - Barley
Exporting U.S. State 2006 2007 2008
Idaho53120
California181111
Oregon002
Washington3200
Subtotal:5811313
HS Code - Product: 1004 - Oats
Exporting U.S. State 2006 2007 2008
Washington001
California100
Idaho000
Oregon1208481
Subtotal:1218482
HS Code - Product: 1007 - Grain Sorghum
Exporting U.S. State 2006 2007 2008
California410
Oregon010
Subtotal:420
HS Code - Product: 1008 - Buckwheat, Millet and Canary Seed; Other Cereals
Exporting U.S. State 2006 2007 2008
California100,535172,970241,323
Oregon108,54143,881347,798
Washington367825107
Idaho1,70115,5646,994
Subtotal:211,144233,240596,222
HS Code - Product: 1201 - Soybeans
Exporting U.S. State 2006 2007 2008
Washington1401
Idaho005
Oregon18323
California2114130
Subtotal:5317159
HS Code - Product: 1205 - Rape or Colza Seeds
Exporting U.S. State 2006 2007 2008
Idaho2,9686,5975,003
Washington6922,0684,654
Oregon6707,9633,640
California107495187
Subtotal:4,43717,12313,484
HS Code - Product: 1207 - Oil Seeds and Oleaginous Fruits
Exporting U.S. State 2006 2007 2008
California1,0631,246616
Oregon130524226
Washington442745332
Idaho325234
Subtotal:1,6672,5201,408
HS Code - Product: All Products
Exporting U.S. State 2006 2007 2008
Total:229,678265,166616,713

Source: Industry Canada 2009

Appendix 5D: Import Data for Hay and Straw

Import data for hay and straw originating from U.S. states where Crupina vulgaris is present (2006-2008).

Value in Canadian Dollars ($)

HS Code - Product: 121490 - Alfalfa, Swedes, Mangolds, Fodder roots, Hay, Clover, Sainfoin and similar forage products
Exporting U.S. State 2006 2007 2008
California12,74023,5119,755
Idaho6,31755,09953
Oregon1,086,048630,851330,770
Washington3,849,2454,045,9274,122,801
Subtotal:4,954,3504,755,3884,463,379
All U.S. States:5,630,0505,532,2035,481,961
HS Code - Product: 121300 – Cereal straw and husks, unprepared
Exporting U.S. State 2006 2007 2008
California2,472501597
Idaho000
Oregon4,8751,75018,492
Washington5,056,5445,685,0966,397,081
Subtotal:5,063,8915,687,3476,416,170
All U.S. States:6,629,6056,938,3117,498,629
HS Code - Product: Total Hay and Straw
Exporting U.S. State 2006 2007 2008
CA, ID, OR, WA$10,018,241$10,442,735$10,879,549
All U.S. States $12,259,655 $12,470,514$12,980,590
All Other Countries $2,317,592 $2,186,384 $2,250,154
% From U.S.84%85%85%

Source: Industry Canada 2009

Appendix 6A: Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Dioscorea polystachya (Chinese yam)

Identity of Organism

Name: Dioscorea polystachya Turcz. (Family Dioscoreaceae) (USDA-ARS, 2009)

Synonyms: Dioscorea batatas Decne., Dioscorea cayenensis Lam. var. pseudobatatas Hauman, Dioscorea decaisneana Carrière, Dioscorea doryphora Hance, Dioscorea opposita auct., Dioscorea oppositifolia auct., Dioscorea potaninii Prain & Burkill, Dioscorea rosthornii Diels, Dioscorea swinhoei Rolfe, Dioscorea trinervia Roxb. ex Prain & Burkill (Global Invasive Species Database, 2009; USDA-ARS, 2009)

English common names: Chinese yam, Chinese-potato, cinnamon-vine (USDA-ARS, 2009)

French common name: Igname de Chine (CAB International, 2007; USDA-ARS, 2009)

Description: The plants are vines growing from spindle-shaped tubers which are on long stalks and are deeply buried. The twining stems are up to 5 m in length. Small bulbils (less than 2 cm in diameter) are produced in the leaf axils. The lower leaves are alternate, becoming opposite higher up the stem and are 3–9 cm long × 3–11 cm wide. The petioles are as long as the blade. The blade is 7(–9)-veined, glabrous and 3-lobed. Inflorescences are borne in the leaf axils. The flowers are small, yellowish and have a cinnamon fragrance. Staminate and pistillate flowers are on separate plants. The fruit is an ovate capsule. The seeds are winged. Only one pistillate specimen has been documented from North America and it is assumed that the plants propagate vegetatively by means of the bulbils (FNA Editorial Committee, 1993+; Gleason and Cronquist, 1963).

Dioscorea polystachya is native to eastern Asia, where it is cultivated for its edible tubers. In North America, it is planted as a garden ornamental and has become naturalized throughout much of the eastern United States (FNA Editorial Committee, 1993+).

Organism Status

Dioscorea polystachya has been imported for sale in Canada on a very limited scale. The UBC Botanical Garden offered it for sale (as Dioscorea batatas) in their catalogue in 2006. There are no records of plants outside of cultivation. Based on this information, for the PRA area, this species is considered to be possibly present only in cultivation.

Current Regulatory Status

Dioscorea polystachya is not regulated in Canada. It is not regulated as a federal noxious weed in the U.S., nor is it regulated in any of the states (USDA-NRCS, 2009).

It is currently listed in the Southeast Exotic Pest Plant Council's Invasive Exotic Pest Plant List for Tennessee as a Rank 1-Severe Threat species, indicating that it is an exotic species that possesses characteristics of an invasive species and could spread easily into native plant communities and displace native vegetation (Tu, 2002).

Probability of Entry

Dioscorea polystachya is native to eastern Asia, where it is cultivated for its edible tubers. In North America, it is planted as a garden ornamental and has become naturalized throughout much of the eastern United States (FNA Editorial Committee, 1993+).

Table 1: Summary of pathways for Dioscorea polystachya (Chinese yam)
Type of pathways Specific pathways
Natural dispersalNaturalspread is by seeds and aerial bulbils, but sexual reproduction by means ofseeds has not been detected in North America. The aerial bulbils can bespread by rodents who feed on them. Thispathway allows only local movement and is not likely to be a conduit forentry into Canada.
Intentional introduction Plantshave been intentionally introduced into the U.S. as an ornamental ormedicinal plant. In eastern Asia it has been widely planted as a starchy foodtuber crop. This isthe most likely pathway for entry into Canada.
Unintentional introduction As withany weed, introduction is possible via soil imported with nursery stock frominfested areas of the U.S. The riskfrom this pathway is likely to be minor, however. Asreproduction does not appear to occur through seed in North America,contaminated seed imported from the U.S. is not a potential pathway. Seed imported from other countries wheresexual reproduction does occur could be contaminated, however. The risk from this pathway is likely to beminor, though, as the plant is not known to be a weed of crops and so wouldprobably not be harvested along with seeds for planting.

Probability of Establishment

Dioscorea polystachya is native to China (Anhui, Fujian, eastern Gansu, northern Guangdong, Guangxi, Guizhou, Hebei, Henan, Hubei, Hunan, Jiangsu, Jiangxi, Jilin, Liaoning, southern Shaanxi, Shandong, Sichuan, northern Yunnan and Zhejiang), Japan (Hokkaido, Honshu, Kyushu, Shikoku), Korea and Taiwan (USDA-ARS, 2009). The species is widely cultivated for food in temperate eastern Asia (Bailey and Bailey, 1976).

The species is introduced and cultivated as an ornamental, food and medicinal plant and is naturalized in temperate regions, including the U.S. (USDA-ARS, 2009). It is described as root hardy to USDA Plant Hardiness Zone 5 (Bailey and Bailey, 1976).

In its native range, Dioscorea polystachya grows in forests, scrub, herbaceous plant communities, on mountain slopes, along rivers and roadsides (Wu and Raven, 2000).

Dioscorea polystachya has not become established outside cultivation in Canada (CFIA, 2008; Scoggan, 1979).

Dioscorea polystachya has a wide range of environmental adaptability and few pests and predators in North America. It has a high degree of asexual reproductive vigour, and is difficult to manage once firmly established (Tu, 2002).

Figure 1: Range of Dioscorea polystachya (Chinese yam) in North America

Figure 1. Description follows.
Description for Figure 1:

This map shows the range of Dioscorea polystachya in North America indicating its presence through the use of the colour green. The eastern half of the United States is almost completely covered in green along with a fifth of the lower western half.

Source : USDA-NRCS, 2009.

Figure 2: Potential range of Dioscorea polystachya (Chinese yam) in Canada

Potential range of Dioscorea polystachya (Chinese yam) in Canada
Description for Figure 2:

This image shows the potential range of Dioscorea polystachya in Canada and northern America through the use of a map. Red is used to indicate the regions in which Centaurea iberica could survive according to the Canadian Plant Hardiness Zones map, in this case NAPPFAST Hardiness Zones 5-9. In Canada, Dioscorea polystachya is likely to become weedy or invasive in parts of Canada, including southern and coastal British Columbia, southern Ontario, southern Quebec and parts of the Maritime Provinces. Most of the red can be found in the U.S., this includes the greater parts of the eastern and western coasts as well as areas located near the Great Lakes extending downwards beyond the image.

Source : USDA-NRCS, 2009.

Probability of Spread

Dioscorea polystachya is found in thickets, ravines, stream banks, creek bottoms, limesinks, granite outcrops, alluvial woods, roadsides, drainage canals, waste places and fence rows in its introduced range in the southeastern U.S. (FNA Editorial Committee, 1993+).

Initial infestations are generally associated with human disturbances, such as old home sites and along roadways. From these areas, the species can easily spread into nearby riparian areas and undisturbed habitats. In 1970, the species had not yet been documented as escaping from cultivation in the U.S., but by 1986 it had become naturalized (Tu, 2002).

As Dioscorea polystachya can grow in both disturbed and natural sites, habitats will not be a limiting factor for spread in Canada.

Potential Economic Consequences

Both the tuber and bulbils are edible, although the bulbils are not generally used as food. The edible tuber, which can measure up to 1 m long and weigh up to 2 kg or more, is flavourful and nutritious. The tubers are sometimes used in herbal medicine. The species is frequently planted for its ornamental value (Tu, 2002).

In forested areas, branches can be broken off of trees by the weight of the vines (ISSG, 2009).

Manual and mechanical methods of plant removal can effectively control small isolated patches of Dioscorea polystachya. However, these methods are extremely time and labour-intensive, as the large, deeply-buried tuber makes removal very difficult. Herbicide application appears to be the most effective means for controlling large infestations. Repeated treatments are usually necessary to completely kill large underground tubers (ISSG, 2009), which increases the cost.

Potential Environmental and Social Consequence

Dioscorea polystachya is a fast-growing vine that has the ability to rapidly invade undisturbed habitats, such as riparian forests. It spreads prolifically by asexual reproduction via bulbils. In the U.S., it reduces native species richness and abundance by outcompeting and eliminating native plant species. It thickly blankets adjacent vegetation, and excludes light from understory vegetation. It can break branches of large trees and shrubs. It is able to completely cover the ground so that the growth of native herbaceous ground cover is prevented (ISSG, 2009).

Uncertainty

Although it is listed on one nursery website there is no definite information to confirm that Dioscorea polystachya is being grown in gardens in Canada or if it is present. An online search found no other nurseries or seed suppliers that offer the species for sale in Canada.

Conclusion

Based on the outcome of this pest risk assessment, Dioscorea polystachya is likely to become weedy or invasive in parts of Canada, including southern and coastal British Columbia, southern Ontario, southern Quebec and parts of the Maritime Provinces. This plant should be considered for regulation under Canada's Plant Protection Act. Regulation under the Seeds Act may also be warranted, although seed is not currently considered to be a likely pathway for this species.

Technical Issues for Consideration

The very large number of species in Dioscorea complicates identification. There is one native species of this genus in southern Ontario, Dioscorea villosa L. This species is distinguishable from Dioscorea polystachya, with care and training.

Appendix 6B: Risk Management Considerations for Dioscorea polystachya (Chinese yam)

History of invasiveness

In the 25 or so years that Dioscorea polystachya has been present in the U.S., it has spread across many of the eastern states. In that short period of time, it has been identified as a species of concern by various state invasive plant councils:

As described in Crooks and Soulé, 1999, some invasive plant populations have historically shown a "lag" period after first establishing, during which the population remains relatively small and has a low impact. Following the lag, the population then explodes, its range and impacts rapidly increasing. In brief, "past performance of an exotic is a poor predictor of potential population growth, range expansion and ecological impact" (Crooks and Soulé, 1999).

The CFIA is concerned that this may be the case with Dioscorea polystachya and that the early reports of invasiveness described above may be signs that the plant could become a much more significant threat in the future, both in the U.S. and in Canada.

Potential Mitigation Measures for Natural Means of Dispersal

Though populations are present in U.S. states that adjoin the U.S.-Canada border (see Figure 1), Dioscorea polystachya has only been recorded, within those states, in counties that are not immediately adjacent to the U.S.-Canada border (USDA-NRCS, 2009). Natural dispersal is therefore not expected to be an important factor in the spread of Dioscorea polystachya to Canada. If populations continue to spread in the U.S., however, dispersal of floating bulbils via waterways may become a concern and therefore the species can easily spread into nearby riparian areas. This means of spread would be extremely difficult to control.

Potential Mitigation Measures for Intentional Introduction Pathways

Plants for Planting Excluding Seed

Previous imports

Based on the information available in the CFIA's Import Permit System, Import Retrieval System, and information compiled at the CFIA's Import Service Centres, Dioscorea polystachya may have been recently imported into Canada. Three Permits to Import were issued by the CFIA over the last five years for cuttings of plants from the genus Dioscorea, but the precise species were not indicated. No plants from the genus Dioscorea are listed as available in Canadian nurseries (CNLA, 2009).

Potential risk mitigation measures

Non-regulatory measures

Regulatory measures

Allow sale of Dioscorea polystachya with special conditions such as not to be grown close to natural areas and mandatory control of adventives. Allowing sale with special conditions is not considered effective because once grown in private gardens, CFIA does not have adequate resources to monitor.
Regulate Dioscorea polystachya under the Plant Protection Act as a quarantine pest:

Trade Implications

As described above under Previous imports, Dioscorea polystchya has only rarely been imported into Canada. Prohibiting the species should therefore not significantly impact Canadian importers and vendors. In addition, other ornamental species could potentially be substituted. If the intent is cultivation for consumption or for medicinal purposes, roots (processed or dried) could be imported rather than grown in Canada (see Section below. Plant parts for consumption or for medicinal use, for more information).

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

It may be useful for CFIA inspectors to check imported Dioscorea plants to ensure that Dioscorea polystachya is not being imported under an incorrect name or synonym. This is particularly the case with Dioscorea polystachya because it has been widely sold in the U.S. as Dioscorea polystachya. This would require training inspectors and providing them with identification material. As described above under Previous imports, however, Dioscorea plants are only rarely imported; the impact on CFIA resources should therefore be minimal.

Seed

Previous imports

There is no record in the information available in the CFIA's Import Permit System, Import Retrieval System, and data compiled at the CFIA's Import Service Centres that Dioscorea polystachya seed has ever been imported to Canada. Seed of other Dioscorea species is known to have been imported at least three times in recent years.

Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulate Dioscorea polystachya as a prohibited noxious weed (Class 1) under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds Act Footnote 2.

Regulate as a quarantine pest under the Plant Protection Act. Add this species to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada (CFIA 2009):

Sufficient information about the use of Dioscorea polystachya as a potential crop does not exist. If the proponent, located in Canada, needs to collect more information about the plant (e.g. to generate data for a determination of environmental safety), then confined research field trials under Part V of the Seeds Regulations could be authorized by the Plant Biosafety Office.

Trade Implications

As described above under Previous imports, Dioscorea polystachya seed has only rarely been imported to Canada. Prohibiting the species should therefore not significantly impact Canadian importers and vendors. In addition, other ornamental species could potentially be substituted. If the intent is cultivation for consumption or for medicinal purposes, roots (processed or dried) could be imported rather than grown in Canada (see Section below. Plant parts for consumption or for medicinal use).

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

The CFIA Seed Program is already in place to prevent the entry of prohibited noxious weeds. As well, as described in Section Appendix 6A, Probability of Entry, Dioscorea polystachya is not known to be a weed of crops. Negligible effort would therefore be required to identify the seeds or take action on non-compliant shipments because it would be unlikely to find Dioscorea polystachya seeds as a contaminant in sampled seed or grain lots.

It may be useful for the CFIA to occasionally sample imported Dioscorea seeds to ensure that Dioscorea polystachya seeds are not imported under an incorrect name or synonym. As described above under Previous imports, however, Dioscorea seeds are only rarely imported; the impact on CFIA resources should therefore be minimal.

Plant parts for consumption or for medicinal use

Background

Importers are required to specify the intended end-use (e.g., consumption, planting) of imported products when requesting a Permit to Import, and a Permit to Import issued for plant parts imported for consumption specifies that the plant parts cannot be used for propagation. However, once the plant parts are distributed, the CFIA has no control over how they are used. Dioscorea polystachya tubers imported for consumption could therefore conceivably be planted for cultivation as an ornamental, or to grow tubers for consumption or medicinal use.

Previous imports

Based on the information available in the CFIA's Import Permit System, Import Retrieval System, and information compiled at the CFIA's Import Service Centres, Dioscorea polystachya tubers for consumption or medicinal use may have been recently imported into Canada. Only one Permit to Import was issued by the CFIA over the last five years for tubers for consumption from the genus Dioscorea, but the precise species was not specified. No shipments of Dioscorea polystachya tubers are known to have been imported, though approximately a dozen shipments of tubers of other Dioscorea species have been imported in recent years.

Potential risk mitigation measures

Non-regulatory measures

Encourage voluntary cessation of the sale of Dioscorea polystachya. This would not be effective by itself, but could support other measures.

Regulatory measures

Regulate Dioscorea polystachya under the Plant Protection Act as a quarantine pest and, as a supporting measure, prohibit importation of tubers for consumption.

Trade Implications

As described above under Previous imports, Dioscorea polystachya plant parts for consumption or medicinal use have only rarely been imported to Canada. Prohibiting the species should therefore not significantly impact Canadian importers and vendors.

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

It may be useful for CFIA inspectors to occasionally check imported Dioscorea tubers to ensure that Dioscorea polystachya is not being imported under an incorrect name or synonym. This would require training inspectors and providing them with identification material. As described above under Previous imports, however, Dioscorea tubers are only rarely imported; the impact on CFIA resources should therefore be minimal.

Potential Mitigation Measures for Non-intentional Introduction Pathways

Note that, as described in Section Appendix 6A, in the section called Probability of Entry, unintentional introduction pathways (through contaminated soil, seed, grain, etc.) are considered only minor pathways, posing a minimal risk to Canada. These pathways will therefore not be detailed here.

Appendix 7A: Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Echium plantagineum (Paterson's curse)

CFIA Pest Risk Assessment

English Common Names: Paterson's curse, purple viper's bugloss, salvation Jane, blue weed, Lady Campbell weed, purple bugloss, purple echium, riverina bluebell, dwarf blue bedder.

French Common Names: Vipérine à feuilles de plantain, vipérine faux plantain

Common Names: Echium plantagineum L. (LAMIALES: Boraginaceae), known as Echium plantagineum, is an annual or biennial broadleaved weed. It has been widely introduced around the world as a garden plant and pasture species. More recently, interest in this species has increased due to a unique fatty acid composition that includes both gamma linolenic acid and stearidonic acid. The seed oil has potential for use in health food, cosmetic and pharmaceutical industries. Some of the major issues surrounding Echium plantagineum include its ability to dominate pastures in its exotic range, toxicity to livestock, and potential control issues due to herbicide resistance.

Description: Echium plantagineum L. (LAMIALES: Boraginaceae), known as Echium plantagineum, is an annual or biennial broad-leaved weed with purple flowers.

Distribution: Echium plantagineum has a broad, circum-Mediterranean native distribution. It is particularly successful in invading other countries with Mediterranean-type climates, and has become invasive in Australia, South Africa, Chile, Uruguay, Argentina, and Brazil. In Australia, it has invaded an estimated 33 million hectares. There have also been a number of introductions of Echium plantagineum to the United States, and it is currently invasive in California.

There are records of at least three prior occurrences of Echium plantagineum in Canada: Brandon, Manitoba; Vineland, Ontario; and near St. John's, Newfoundland. It does not appear to have persisted at any of these locations. More recently, Echium plantagineum has been grown for several years in field trials near Saskatoon, Saskatchewan.

Likelihood of introduction: Echium plantagineum has been imported into Canada and there is further interest in importing this species for commercial production.

Establishment potential: Echium plantagineum favours warm temperate climates. Information on the native geographic distribution of this species suggests that it could potentially establish in four plant hardiness zones in Canada (USDA Plant Hardiness Zones 5-8). Although less likely to thrive there, this species may be able to establish in harsher climatic zones as well. Field trials in North America indicate that Echium plantagineum can flower and set seed up to Zone 2 or 3.

Spread potential: Echium plantagineum has both a high reproductive potential and high dispersal potential. This species produces seed over much of the growing season, which can result in large seed banks of as many as 30,000 seeds/m2 under favourable conditions. Seeds germinate under a wide range of temperatures and can remain viable for 10 years in the soil. There are numerous pathways through which Echium plantagineum may disperse, including attachment to animal wool or fur, as ingested seed, and via contaminated vehicles, equipment, hay, grain, soil, or gravel. It has also been known as a cereal and forage seed contaminant. Evidence from its exotic range also indicates a high potential for spread of Echium plantagineum.

Potential economic impact: Echium plantagineum has already caused major economic impacts in other countries where introduced. In Australia, lost pasture productivity, control costs and wool contamination due to Echium plantagineum are estimated to cost sheep and cattle producers $250 million AUD annually. At least six potential negative economic impacts have been identified for Echium plantagineum: pasture degradation, livestock and crop yield losses, hay and seed contamination, and increased costs of control.

Potential environmental impact: Echium plantagineum has the potential to have serious impacts on the environment. The most significant of these are considered to be the potential negative impacts on animal and human health due to the plant's toxic alkaloids and the potential consequences of herbicide resistance in this species. In addition, it appears that Echium plantagineum has the potential to affect ecosystem processes (erosion processes, fertility) and community composition.

Recommendations: Specific phytosanitary measures are strongly recommended. Therefore, it is recommended that Echium plantagineum be added to an official list of species that are not allowed to be imported into Canada. Furthermore, it is recommended that Echium plantagineum be considered for inclusion on Canada's Regulated Pest List and on the Weed Seeds Order as Class 1 Prohibited Noxious.

CFIA Pest Risk Assessment Update

Additional information relating to the CFIA pest risk assessment was gathered in April 2008 as a result of questions arising from a 30-day consultation on the initial version of this RMD. The summary from this document (Castro 2008) is incorporated below.

Other Pest Risk Assessments

A pest risk assessment for Echium plantagineum by the Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA 2004) indicated that this species received the highest possible rating ("A") according to the ODA Noxious Weed Rating System. ODA also assessed Echium plantagineum using the USDA-Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) Weed Risk Assessment Guidelines. The cumulative risk score was 35 out of a possible 37 points, indicating potential for rapid dispersal and growth rates as well as negative economic impacts to certain agricultural industries

Appendix 7B: Risk Management Considerations for Echium plantagineum (Paterson's curse)

Potential Hardiness of Echium plantagineum in Canada

Echium plantagineum should be able to establish and thrive in USDA Plant Hardiness Zones 5-8 in Canada, putting at risk pasture, livestock, crops, hay and honey production in the following areas: Vancouver Island, the Queen Charlotte Islands, the west coast of BC, a large area in south-central British Columbia, the southernmost parts of Ontario, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, a small area of southern New Brunswick, and eastern Newfoundland. Echium plantagineum may also be able to establish in colder regions up to USDA Plant Hardiness Zones 2 or 3, but is less likely to flourish in them. Figure 1 shows the USDA hardiness zones 3a and higher.

In Canada, Echium plantagineum has been historically collected from sites in southern Manitoba, southern Ontario, and Newfoundland (Scoggan, 1978). It has not persisted indefinitely at any of these sites. Lack of persistence would seem to provide support for low invasive risk of Echium plantagineum in Canada. However, examination of the label data on the specimens provides evidence to the contrary.

A specimen collected in 1931 from Murray's Pond, Newfoundland (NFLD) (near St. John's) is located at the Harvard University Herbarium (GH). It was submitted with a note stating "planted 12 years ago", "have at last got it nearly all dug out" and "garden weed (pest)". These statements indicate that Echium plantagineum can persist as a weed from year to year in that area of Newfoundland, which is located in approximately USDA Plant Hardiness zone 6b. CLIMEX software was used to determine other locations in Canada with similar climates to St. John's, NFLD (Figure 2). Areas with similar climates include parts of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, and to a lesser extent, southern Ontario, and coastal British Columbia.

Figure 1: USDA Plant Hardiness Zones 3a and higher

Figure 1. Description follows.
Description for Figure 1:

This image shows locations in North America with a similar climate as St. John's, Newfoundland. This is done through the implementation of a Composite Match Index with four blue circles, each circle getting bigger than the last, symbolizing the ranges of 0.7, 0.8, 0.9, and 1 respectively.

The specimen collected in 1953 from Brandon, Manitoba (MB) is located at the Agriculture and Agri-food Canada Herbarium (DAO). The label on this specimen states "Roadside. Dry soil. Occasional volunteer plants [plants]." Brandon has a much harsher climate than St. John's, NFLD, but evidently Echium plantagineum is capable of producing volunteers there as well. Brandon is in USDA Hardiness zone 3a and has a climate similar to much of the Prairie provinces.

There are two specimens of Echium plantagineum in the University of Guelph herbarium (OAC). One was collected in 1940 from Vineland, ON, where it was collected in habitat described as "Waste ground, near garden." The second is a white form of the species, cultivated at the Ontario Agricultural College in Guelph, (Ontario) ON and collected in 1935. The former suggests that the Echium plantagineum is capable of becoming a garden escape. Vineland, ON is in approximately USDA Hardiness zone 5b.

Figure 2: Locations in North America with similar climates to St. John's, NFLD

Figure 2. Description follows.
Description for Figure 2:

This map contains scattered blue dots across the Maritime Provinces as well as throughout southern Ontario and into the United States deceasing in size as it proceeds downwards. Moreover, occasional spots can be found across the western coast.

Composite Match Index is the product of six component indices (total rainfall, rainfall pattern, humidity, soil moisture, and maximum and minimum temperature) (Sutherst et al., 2006). The value ranges from 0 to 1, with 1 representing a perfect climate match. Map generated using Climex software.

With the exception of the first specimen from Murray's Pond, NFLD, it is not known why Echium plantagineum did not persist in Brandon, MB or Vineland, ON. Lack of persistence may have been due to eradication efforts (physical, mechanical or chemical), as was the case in NFLD, rather than climatic factors. The label data suggests that the species can re-seed and potentially spread at both locations. A seed bank decay rate study by Sheppard and Smyth (2002) showed that Echium plantagineum seed longevity was closely linked with field conditions, but may last tens of years.

Several stakeholders indicated that Echium plantagineum is unlikely to become invasive in New Brunswick because New Brunswick differs significantly from this species' circum-Mediterranean distribution. As shown in Figure 2, there are many locations throughout the Atlantic Maritimes that have similar climates to St. John's, NFLD where this species was a known pest. It is also important to note that the scope of this risk management document for Echium plantagineum includes all of Canada, not just New Brunswick where trials have been proposed. Therefore, the invasive risk of Echium plantagineum must be considered for the entire country.

The CFIA weed risk assessment on Echium plantagineum determined that there is potential for this species to establish in USDA Plant Hardiness Zones 5-8 in Canada based on its native geographic distribution, which includes northern Africa, parts of eastern Asia and much of Europe, including central and southern Russia (Gibbs, 1972). Its center of origin is Mediterranean, but its native range clearly extends beyond this region. There are also records of Echium plantagineum in Norway and Sweden (GBIF, 2008). Evidence of volunteering in Manitoba suggests that this species may be capable of establishing in even colder hardiness zones. It should also be noted that Echium plantagineum has shown high levels of genetic diversity and phenotypic plasticity (Wood and Degabriele, 1985). Seed collected from harsher climatic regions of its native or introduced range may have a better chance of success in Canadian climates than those collected in warmer regions.

It should be noted that even if Echium plantagineum does not survive as an autumn germinated plant, and complete its lifecycle as a winter annual, there is a risk that the species may overwinter as seed, germinate in spring, and complete its lifecycle as an annual plant. Experience with this plant indicates that it reproduces quickly, and can begin flowering within two weeks of emergence in spring (B. Myers-Shenai, 21 Apr. 2008, pers. comm.).

In summary, the potential for adaptation of Echium plantagineum to the Canadian environment appears to be high due to several factors. The species has wide climatic amplitude and an extensive native range. It is capable of establishing new populations where introduced and, notably, it is capable of invading disturbed sites. Seed production is high. It behaves as an annual, winter annual or biennial, conferring greater adaptation potential than perennial species. Genetic variation is also high, and it is capable of a great deal of phenotypic plasticity in response to localized environmental factors. Collectively, these factors suggest a highly adaptable weed potentially capable of establishing throughout most of Canada's agriculturally productive lands.

Areas of Commercial Cultivation

Several stakeholders have indicated that Echium plantagineum is cultivated in the United Kingdom (UK) and New Zealand with few or no issues of invasiveness. IENICA (2000, 2002) report that Echium plantagineum has only been grown in pilot studies in the UK and that details about European production are unknown. Production in the UK was limited to 20 ha in 1997 and 190 ha in 1998. It appears that production in the UK in the past ten years has been small-scale. Experience with the plant in the UK indicates that it grows rapidly and is able to out compete weeds in early stages, and it tolerates infertile soils.

The United Kingdom is considered part of the native range of Echium plantagineum (Clapham et al., 1962; CABI , 2006). Species in their native ranges are generally kept in check by factors such as native community composition and natural predators. In the absence of these factors, some species become invasive where introduced. For this reason, lack of invasiveness in the United Kingdom is not compelling evidence to support the suggestion that Echium plantagineum would not have the potential to become invasive in Canada. Many of Canada's invasive plant species have been introduced from Europe and are not invasive in their native range.

However, it should also be noted that Echium plantagineum has been described as weedy even in its native range. It is considered a 'principal' weed in Tunisia (Holm et al., 1979). Echium plantagineum is also considered an arable weed of Europe (Hanf, 1983). It is introduced occasionally into central Europe from its main native range as a seed contaminant (Hanf, 1983). Clapham et al. (1962) indicate that Echium plantagineum can also occur as a garden-escape in some parts of the British Isles.

Echium plantagineum has also been cultivated in New Zealand but has not caused problems to the same degree as in Australia. However, it is still considered a weed in New Zealand and is described as a "Common weed of road-side and waste places in the north of NI" (Roy et al., 1998). Its habitat is old habitations, road-sides and waste places. Roy et al. (1998) also indicates that grazed pastures in New Zealand are "probably too competitive for it to invade." It is also sold in garden centers in New Zealand.

Field Trial Information

There is little information on the behaviour of Echium plantagineum in cultivation in North America to date. Trials have been conducted in North Dakota, Maine and Saskatchewan. Echium plantagineum has been grown in trials in at least four locations (Carrington, Langdon, Minot, and Prosper) in North Dakota since 2002 (Berti et al., 2007). Seed sources for the trials were from the United Kingdom and wild populations in Chile, collected between 35°S and 40°S. Trials were sown in late May and flowered 31 to 49 days later, with the exception of the Chilean lines, which flowered between 52 and 80 days after sowing or not at all (2 lines). The results state the following: "The harvest index for Echium plantagineum is extremely low indicating little domestication and plant breeding improvement. High lodging of the crop after full bloom contributes to seed shattering, white mold [Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Lib.) De Bary] infection, and poor seed appearance." In addition, the following statements are made: "Echium invasiveness risk is low in North Dakota. No volunteer plants were observed from shattered seed the following season."

There is no indication in this article about the methodology used to determine low invasive risk and the absence of volunteers. The climate in North Dakota is similar to that of southern Manitoba where Echium plantagineum has indeed produced occasional volunteers. Attempts have been made to contact the author of this paper to inquire further about the trials and the method for evaluating invasive risk but no response has been given to date.

A trial on Echium plantagineum was also conducted on 8 acres in Aroostook County, Maine in 2007. The recommendation was given to destroy the trial prior to seed set (Sexton, 2007). The recommendation was based on several factors, including concern regarding infestations in Oregon and California, the species' prolonged seed longevity and prolific seed production, and the potential to harm grain and hay markets (Sexton, 2007). The final decision was to destroy most of the trial, but allow 3 acres to set seed and be harvested. It will not be replanted in the future, and measures will be taken to ensure that this species does not establish and spread from this site (A. Gibbs, ME Dept of Agriculture, 28 Apr. 2008, pers. comm.). Due to the short-term nature of this trial, there is insufficient evidence to indicate that Echium plantagineum has low invasive risk in Maine.

Echium plantagineum trials have also been grown near Saskatoon, Saskatachewan for several years. Information on these trials cannot be included because of a request for confidentiality from the owners of the data.

Economic Impacts in Countries other than Australia

In addition to Australia, where Echium plantagineum has caused significant economic impacts, this specieshas become invasive in South Africa, Chile, Uruguay, Argentina, Brazil, and the US (Oregon and California). There are few reports of economic impacts from this species in these other countries. However, reports that quantify economic impacts of invasive plant species are few in general. Echium plantagineum has been reported to cause harm to livestock in Brazil (Mendez et al., 1985; Santos et al., 2008). In the US, Echium plantagineum has also shown the capability to dominate in cattle pastures. In South Africa, Echium plantagineum is described as a roadside weed (Retief and Van Wyk, 1998).

The Australian experience did not occur under managed conditions, however it has been demonstrated that Echium plantagineum can become invasive as a result of a very limited introduction sometimes consisting of a few plants. Although best management practices can mitigate the risk, they cannot reduce it to an acceptable level. The potential for this species to escape into the wild or into other agricultural crops and pastureland will increase substantially if this species is allowed to be grown commercially throughout Canada.

Agricultural Values at Risk

Echium plantagineum has the potential to cause negative economic impacts including pasture degradation, livestock and crop yield losses, hay and seed contamination, and increased costs of control. Although in the past Echium plantagineum was considered a valuable honey plant, concerns have been raised about the levels of pyrrolizidine alkaloids that carry over into the honey. Due to the presence of toxic alkaloids in Echium plantagineum, Echium plantagineum honey must be blended with non-Echium plantagineum honeys. The Canadian Honey Council has issued a warning regarding the use of honey from Echium plantagineum based on information from Food Standards Australia New Zealand (Canadian Honey Council 2005). Canadian honey producers in proximity to Echium plantagineum crops may therefore be negatively affected. The Canadian Honey Council has expressed concern over the potential requirement for blending honey should Echium plantagineum be present in the Canadian environment, as blending would add significant costs to honey production (H. Clay, Canadian Honey Council, 22 Apr. 2008, pers. comm.).

Although a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis is not within the scope of this document, a rough assessment of the agricultural values that are at risk within the potential range of Echium plantagineum in Canada is shown in tables 1-3. Table 1 shows the number of beekeepers and value of honey production. Provinces within USDA Plant Hardiness Zones 5-8, its primary potential range, are indicated with an asterisk. In 2004 the value of Canadian honey production was $121 million. Recent correspondence with the Canadian Honey Council indicates that the beekeeping industry of Canada includes 8,000 apiculturists, 600,000 colonies of honey bees and has a current value of two million dollars in honey production and one billion dollars in the pollination of agricultural crops. Canadian pure honey is renowned world-wide for its quality and flavour. Approximately seventy-eight percent of Canadian honey production is concentrated in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba.

Table 1: Honey Production in 2004
Province No. of beekeepers Value $,000
Nova ScotiaTable Note 13751,100
New BrunswickTable Note 1225 355
Prince Edward IslandTable Note 130 150
Quebec2055,600
OntarioTable Note 12,650 14,005
Manitoba58016,905
Saskatchewan1,05521,000
Alberta69550,455
British ColumbiaTable Note 12,11011,535
Total: Canada7,925121,105

Source: Honey Council Canada.

Table Notes

Table Note 1

Within primary potential range.

Return to table note 1 referrer

Table 2: Pasture Production in 2006
Province Hectares of Tame (Seeded) Pasture Hectares of Natural Pasture
NewfoundlandTable Note 22,348 10,288
Nova ScotiaTable Note 223,381 31,708
New BrunswickTable Note 217,013 24,995
Prince Edward IslandTable Note 210,847 12,315
Quebec147,387 158,602
OntarioTable Note 2303,400 959,935
Manitoba498,2951,548,197
Saskatchewan1,962,2225,175,789
Alberta2,483,7026,529,863
British ColumbiaTable Note 2245,7931,499,563
Total: Canada5,694,388 15,951,255

Source: Statistics Canada.

Table Notes

Table Note 2

Within primary potential range.

Return to table note 2 referrer

Tables 1 and 2 indicate the areas in forage production which is the foundation of Canada's beef and dairy industries. The beef and dairy industries have traditionally been the second and third ranking primary agriculture sectors in Canada after the grain sector.

According to the 2001 Census of Agriculture, throughout Canada, over 27 million hectares were devoted for livestock grazing and forage production (Agriculture and Agri-food Canada 2007). Of this, about 15.4 million hectares were native pasture, 4.8 million hectares were tame or seeded pasture, and nearly 7 million hectares were cultivated tame hay, including 5 million hectares located in Western Canada. In total, it is estimated that approximately 40% of Canada's total farm area is allocated for grazing and growing forage crops. Harvested area for tame hay was 6.7 million hectares in 2005.

Table 3: Tame Hay Production in 2005
Province Tonnes ('000)
NewfoundlandTable Note 318
Nova ScotiaTable Note 3339
New BrunswickTable Note 3354
Prince Edward IslandTable Note 3258
Quebec3,435
OntarioTable Note 34,563
Manitoba3,193
Saskatchewan4,477
Alberta8,437
British ColumbiaTable Note 31,556
Total: Canada26,630

Source: Agriculture and Agri-food Canada 2007.

Table Notes

Table Note 3

Within primary potential range.

Return to table note 3 referrer

Herbicide Resistance

In Australia, Echium plantagineum has developed resistance to a group of herbicides known as acetolactate synthase (ALS) inhibitors. This group of herbicides includes the sulfonylurea family of herbicides, to which this population of Echium plantagineum is highly resistant, and the imidazolinone family of herbicides, to which it exhibits low-level resistance (Preston 2006). Herbicide resistance in Echium plantagineum can lead to increased costs of control and reduced choices for herbicide use over the long term. In Australia, it is considered likely that ALS resistance will persist over the affected areas for many years even if ALS inhibitors are not used, due to the long lived seed bank (Preston 2006).

It should be noted, however that many cases of ALS herbicide resistance over several species are well documented as established in Canada. These are most prevalent in central and western Canada which historically uses multiple products in this herbicide group. Increased cost of control would not result if more cost-effective herbicide groups, such as phenoxy herbicides were used for Echium plantagineum. With any responsible management program, rotation of herbicide groups are highly suggested regardless of the crop. Canadian growers recognize this and practice this in their farming operations. Australia has experienced herbicide resistance to most groups of herbicides including the first case of glyphosate resistance in the world due in part to poor management practices.

Socio-economic Impacts

Negative Impacts:

Although impacts would take many years to accumulate, costs to Canadians relating to Echium plantagineum after several decades could eventually compare to those currently experienced in Australia. The plant has spread over millions of acres in New South Wales, Western Australia and Victoria provinces. In Australia, lost pasture productivity, control costs and wool contamination due to Echium plantagineum are estimated to cost sheep and cattle producers $250 million AUD annually which is the current equivalent of $220 million CAN annually.

It has been suggested that farmers will greatly benefit from increased revenue associated from growing Echium plantagineum as opposed to cereal crops, especially in New Brunswick. Since New Brunswick is a net importer of feed grains, the reduction of New Brunswick-based grain supplies because of potato farmers switching from cereal rotation to rotation with Echium plantagineum may actually have significant impacts on the New Brunswick livestock industry. The rising costs of feed grains are seriously compromising the Canadian livestock sector.

Canadian honey is world renowned as being exceptional in quality; however the introduction and spread of Echium plantagineum in Canada could potentially affect this reputation and impose a requirement for blending at additional cost to the apiculturist. The total value of Canadian honey in 2004 (the most recent year available from Statistics Canada) was $121.1 million. Recent correspondence with the Canadian Honey Council indicates that the beekeeping industry of Canada includes 8,000 apiculturists, 600,000 colonies of honey bees and has a current value of two million dollars in honey production and one billion dollars in the pollination of agricultural crops.

Potential environmental and social impacts include toxicity to animals and humans, increased or changed herbicide usage in association with herbicide resistance, decreased soil fertility and increased soil erosion, and changes in community composition in natural ecosystems. Pyrrolizidine alkaloids and cytochrome C allergens are two known potentially toxic constituents that are found in Echium plantagineum. Pyrrolizidine alkaloids are harmful to human health, when consumed in products such as milk or milk products, honey or cereals. Liver poisoning by pyrrolizidine alkaloids in humans is gradual and cumulative, and there is no known therapy (Klemow et al., 2002). Furthermore, pyrrolizidine alkaloids "inhibit mitosis, cause chromosomal abnormalities, and are mutagenic, teratogenic and carcinogenic (Culvenor 1985). Ingestion of pyrrolizidine alkaloids may result in cancerous lesions on the lung and liver (Huxtable 1980)" (Klemow et al., 2002). Pyrrolizidine alkaloids in herbal teas have caused poisoning of human infants (Huxtable, 1980, cited in Klemow et al., 2002). Cases of poisoning have been noted in rats (in studies), horses, pigs, cattle, and sheep. Monogastric animals such as horses and pigs are much more susceptible than ruminants, and can be lethally poisoned within a single season of grazing (Peterson 1985). Deaths in sheep may occur over the longer term, and are usually associated with chronic copper poisoning (Peterson 1985). Another invasive plant species in Canada also contains alkaloids (Senecio jacobaea, Tansy Ragwort), however this is not a sufficient justification to overlook the significance of introducing yet one more into the Canadian environment.

Pollen from plants in the genus Echium plantagineum has also been associated with respiratory allergies (cytochrome C allergens) (UK Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes 2007). The hairiness of Echium plantagineum has caused dermatitis, inflammation and itching to both humans and animals (Castro 2007).

Positive Impacts:

Crop diversification is widely promoted by federal and provincial agricultural agencies throughout Canada, and the addition of Echium plantagineum as a potentially profitable market-niche crop in Canada would further that goal. The development of Echium plantagineum as a potato rotational crop in New Brunswick has, in particular, received a great deal of attention. While the cereal grains (barley, oats, wheat) have traditionally played a large role as rotation crops for potatoes in New Brunswick, the contribution of those crops to farm economics is marginal. Grain is priced largely in global markets, and New Brunswick/Atlantic Canada, with relatively cool summers and a small land base, does not support a vibrant grains industry. New Brunswick and Atlantic Canada are net importers of feed grain for livestock.

There is a need for new players to provide market access to enable the New Brunswick agri-food and agri-products sector to participate in the new bioeconomy with its emerging opportunities in natural health products, functional foods and industrial bioproducts. These markets are not easily negotiated by agricultural producers, or even cooperatives, which do not have market clout and easy access to global markets outside of commodity regimes. For this reason, the Strategic Innovation Group (SIG) of the New Brunswick Potato Cluster was formed in 2004. The SIG is chaired by the Minister of the New Brunswick Department of Agriculture and Aquaculture and consists of stakeholders from industry, government, university, R & D, consumer groups and additional external advisors.

While large by New Brunswick's standards, the 22,000 or so hectares that the New Brunswick potato industry has to offer for rotation, falls in to a category better described as "niche" on the scale of global crops. The relatively exacting requirements for potato production place the growers in a favourable situation for understanding the more exacting requirements of niche cropping and strict accountability in crop management. Cooler climates, such as found in Atlantic Canada, typically result in the production of seed oils that are more enriched in the polyunsaturated fatty acids of interest. New Brunswick's summers have warm (not hot) days and cool nights, a characteristic deemed vital for the accumulation of the desirable oil constituents in Echium plantagineum.

In addition to the role that that Echium plantagineum promises to offer in diversifying New Brunswick's potato industry, there are several other benefits including:

It has been suggested that farmers will greatly benefit from increased revenue associated from growing Echium plantagineum as opposed to cereal crops, especially in New Brunswick. It is important to note, however that since cereal grain prices are rising in North America, the difference in revenue may not be significant.

Currently there are no concrete proposals to extract the seed oils in Canada. The construction of a processing plant would cost approximately $25 million and the plant would potentially employ up to 25 people. If a refinery was not constructed in Canada, however, the product would probably be exported and Canadian economic benefits would be restricted to crop production.

The cultivation of Echium plantagineum would provide a reliable source of essential fatty acids if a refinery was developed in Canada. The seed oil of Echium plantagineum contains a unique oil profile that is rich in essential fatty acids. Essential fatty acids are not produced by the body, but must be obtained through the diet or by supplementation. Of particular interest are the gamma linolenic (GLA) and stearidonic fatty acids present in the seed oil. Echium plantagineum seed oil contains 10-11% GLA; other sources include borage oil (22-25%), black current oil (about 15%), evening primrose oil (8-10%), and biotechnology-derived safflower oils (35-65%) and canola oils (36-40%) (Patterson 2006). GLA is considered to have many beneficial effects, and has been found effective as a treatment for eczema, hyperactivity disorders, certain cancers, high blood pressure, and swelling.

Stearidonic (SDA) acid is uncommon in plants. Seed oil produced from Echium plantagineum, however, can contain 9 to 16% stearidonic acid according to Berti et al. (2007). Guil-Guerrero et al. (2007) reports 30% saponifiable oil with 13% SDA for Echium plantagineum. Other sources of stearidonic acid include hemp seed (2-3%) (Callaway et al. 1996) and black current seed (2%) (Clough 1993), as well as other Echium species. Guil-Guerrero et al. (2003) report 28.7% saponifiable oil with 13.3% SDA for Echium vulgare, a very similar plant which is also weedy and non-native, but is already present in every province in Canada. Guil-Guerrero et al. (2007) list numerous other plants with similar or even higher levels of SDA in the Boraginaceae and Primulaceae families. Stearidonic acid is also valuable as a health supplement and for its moisturizing and anti-inflammatory action. Echium plantagineum has food use approval in the USA and is awaiting full approval in the EU.

The recent approval of refined echium oil by the FDA in the US has created an increased market opportunity. The approval of echium oil in the UK is still pending.

Potential Trade Impacts

Echium plantagineum is considered a noxious weed in all states and territories of Australia, with the exception of Queensland (Parsons and Cuthbertson 1992). It is regulated as a Category 1 weed in South Africa. In the US, it is considered a quarantine weed for the state of Oregon (USDA, NRCS 2007). If Echium plantagineum was allowed to be cultivated as a crop in Canada and became established, exports of Canada's major crops and other agricultural commodities would potentially be subject to quarantine measures by these or other countries.

Prohibition of Echium plantagineum from Canada would have minimal trade implications. A Phytosanitary Certificate is currently required for all grain imports from off-continent and for all imports of barley, wheat, triticale and rye from the continental US therefore the proposed measure will not require any additional documentation for these crops. Persons responsible for issuing a Phytosanitary Certificate for imports of grain into Canada would need to be confident that the shipment was free from Echium plantagineum as is the case now for three other invasive plant genera: Cuscuta, Orobanche and Striga. A table of major cereal grain imports into Canada for the past few years from countries and states known to support populations of Echium plantagineum has been included (Table 4). The countries which are known to support populations of Echium plantagineum are listed in the pest risk assessment (Castro 2007).

Table 4: Source and Value ($ Canadian) of Some Major Cereal Imports into Canada in 2007 from countries and states with Echium plantagineum
Barley Oats Rye Wheat Sorghum Corn
US-North Dakota8,454,224294,00631,627528,61420,76264,776,228
US-Maine1,435,7531,772,40826,934//1024
US-Oregon527,90182422,496289236
US-California5,043//8,70125193,583
United Kingdom14324/27,372/12
Chile///15,583/13,179,209
New Zealand45411/7,598/84
Russia31615,282/4,890/2,108
Italy356//285//
Turkey///196/44,558
Argentina/////442,435
France///45/660,738
Australia1//1/1
Ukraine//////
Spain/////22,156
Brazil/////33,725
Portugal//////

Source: Trade Data Online (2008)

Note: Items highlighted in bold indicate higher level of risk based on quantity and cereal type. Figures are for 2007 only and may not be indicative of future trends.

The distribution of Echium plantagineum in the US is limited. It is known from two counties in Oregon and is under official control. Field trials were conducted in North Dakota, however they were limited. A 3 acre field trial occurred last year in Maine, but has been discontinued. A Phytosanitary Certificate is currently not required for soybean, corn and oats from Maine, however the risk of contamination of Echium plantagineum in corn and soybean is considered relatively low due to the large seed size of the commodity and harvesting height. California has the most significant infestation of Echium plantagineum in North America. However, in terms of cereal crops, Canada imports mainly corn from California.

Echium plantagineum is also grown and marketed in some parts of the world as a garden species because of its attractive flowers; however, the plant is rarely if ever sold in Canada. It has been identified as a component of three imported flower mixtures since 2007 (CFIA 2010, internal data). The average value of flower seeds, including seed mixtures, imported to Canada in the past five years is about $17,000 every year (Statistics Canada, 2010). Echium plantagineum can be avoided or replaced in flower mixtures by similar flower species without trade impacts.

Existing Domestic, Provincial or other Programs

Echium plantagineum has only recently been considered for use as a new, alternative crop in Canada. The species is not known to occur in Canada outside of cultivation. As a result, there are no existing Canadian programs related to its management.

Appendix 8A: Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Microstegium vimineum (Japanese stiltgrass)

Identity of Organism

Name: Microstegium vimineum

Synonyms: Andropogon vimineum, Eulalia viminea, Eulalia viminea, (USDA-NRCS 2008). Microstegium imberbe, Microstegium willdenovianum, Pollinia imberbis, Pollinia viminea, Pollinia willdenoviana (Tu 2000).

English common names: Japanese stiltgrass, Japanese grass, Nepalese browntop, Nepalgrass (USDA-NRCS 2008).

French common names: None found

Description: Microstegium vimineum is an annual grass with a sprawling habit. It germinates in spring and grows slowly through the summer months, ultimately reaching heights of 0.6-1 m with the reclining stems growing up to 1 metre long. Slender stalks of tiny flowers are produced in August through to September or early October. In late fall they fade to pale greenish-yellow or turns purple in colour (Swearing 2004, Mehrhoff et al. 2003).

Microstegium vimineum grass has become a significant problem in forests in many eastern and Midwestern states. It spreads rapidly due to high seed production and rooting at nodes along the stem and is able to out-compete native vegetation. It often establishes in locations where moist soils are scoured such as along streambanks, floodplains, ditches and trails. Typical habitats include river corridors, forested wetlands, moist woodlands, old fields and thickets, utility rights-of-way, roadsides and lawns (Tu 2000).

Organism Status

Microstegium vimineum is not reported to occur in Canada (CFIA 2008), and no evidence was found that it is cultivated as an ornamental in Canada (CNLA 2009). Based on this information, Microstegium vimineum is considered absent from the PRA area.

Current Regulatory Status

Microtegium vimineum is not currently regulated in Canada. It is not regulated federally in the United States but is regulated in the following states: Alabama, Connecticut, and Massachusetts (USDA-NRCS 2008). It is not known to be regulated in other countries.

Probability of Entry

Microstegium vimineumis native to India, Nepal, China, and Japan and was introduced to North America in 1919 in Tennessee. By 1960 had it had spread (probably in hay and soil) to Ohio and Pennsylvania, and all Atlantic coastal states from Florida to New Jersey (see figure 1) (Howard 2005).

The most likely pathway for entry however is attached to the fur of animals or on human clothes or in mud on tires or hiking boots. Mehrhoff (2000) postulates that some populations along popular hiking trails in the US were likely introduced by way of fruits that adhered to people's clothing, shoes, hiking equipment or dogs.

Table 1: Summary of Pathways for Microstegium vimineum (Japanese stiltgrass)
Type of pathway Specific Pathways
Natural dispersal

Microstegium vimineum has high seed production which is its natural means of dispersal. It is also able to root at the nodes, which helps it to spread locally. Seeds are able to be dispersed in surface runoff and floodwaters, rivers and ditches are primary corridors for population expansion (Howard 2005)

Natural spread is an unlikely pathway into Canada due to the distances between established populations and the Canadian border.

Intentional Introduction Microstegium vimineum has not been documented as being intentionally planted as an ornamental, for erosion control or for forage (Howard 2005; EPPO 2008). No intentional pathways were identified.
Unintentional Introduction

According to an EPPO alert, Japanese stiltgrass can be introduced involuntarily as a contaminant of bird feed, soil, nursery stock and hay. No North American references were found which list birdseed as a pathway for spread. CFIA Seed Lab data show no reports of the species in marketplace monitoring samples of imported seed since 2000.

It was widely used as a packing material for porcelain from China which was likely its pathway of introduction into the U.S. (Tu 2000). It is not clear whether this pathway still exists

It also attaches readily to the fur of animals, human clothes and boots, and in mud on vehicle tires. It can be spread by hikers (Mehrhoff2000).
Unintentional introduction is the most likely pathway for entry into Canada

Probability of Establishment

Microstegium vimineum is hardy to NAPPFAST zone 6 and also appears to be establishing populations in zone 5 in the United States. This gives it a potential range in Canada of parts of Atlantic Canada, southern Ontario and coastal and southern BC (see figure 2). In the New England States, Microstegium vimineum has invaded floodplain forests, early and late successional forests, abandoned fields, roadsides and other habitats (Mehrhoff et al. 2003. Microstegium vimineum also does well in many disturbed areas. These habitats are abundant within the endangered areas within the PRA area.

Figure 1: North American range of Microstegium vimineum (Japanese stiltgrass)

Figure 1. Description follows
Description of Figure 1:

This image is contains a map of eastern North America distinguishing the range of Microstegium vimineum (Japanese stiltgrass) through the use of colours designated to a specific method. Red dots signify a UTC specimen; green dots equate to other herbaria; blue dots represents manual data; dark blue denotes UTC counties; magenta indicates other herbaria counties; light pink represents contributors; light green, the most predominant colour on the map, signifies state flora/atlas; dark green represents regional fora/atlas; light blue stands for reliable reports; turquoise indicates other publication on Microstegium vimineum while grey shows unverified reports; dark green signifies a database; and mustard yellow denotes specimen by MEB while dark purple represents herbarium database. While small light green pieces are predominant, they are heavily condensed in the following states and their surrounding areas: Virginia, New Jersey, Washington DC; parts of Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee and West Virginia.  Moreover, they also have the presences of other colours, such as magenta, light blue, dark green and dark purple, though none of them pervasive.

Source: Barkworth 2006

Figure 2: Potential range of Microstegium vimineum (Japanese stiltgrass)

Figure 2. Description follows
Description of Figure 2:

This image shows the potential range of Microstegium vimineum in Canada and northern America through the use of a map. Red is used to indicate the regions in which Microstegium vimineum could survive according to the Canadian Plant Hardiness Zones map, in this case NAPPFAST Hardiness Zones 5 and 6. In Canada, the potential range of Microstegium vimineum includes parts of Atlantic Canada, southern Ontario and coastal and southern BC. Most of the red can be found in the U.S., this includes the greater parts of the east and west coasts extending inwards reaching most of the central states as well as areas located near the Great Lakes extending downwards beyond the image

Source: Barkworth 2006

Probability of Spread

Although often associated with forested and wetland areas, Microstegium vimineum spreads rapidly into disturbed areas (Weber 2003). Its seeds can be spread by hikers (Mehrhoff et al. 2003), and are dispersed by surface runoff, floodwaters, on human and animal feet, and are carried in contaminated hay, soil or potted plants (Swearingen 2004). Ditches and rivers are primary corridors for population expansion (Howard 2005). It is unpalatable to grazing animals but they have been reported to spread the seeds (Swearingen 2004). By avoiding it and grazing other, more palatable, species wildlife may be indirectly contributing to its spread (Howard 2005). In suitable habitats it quickly spreads by rooting from its prostrate culms, forming dense, monospecific stands (Barkworth 2006).

Potential Economic Consequences

Microstegium vimineum has not been documented as being intentionally planted as an ornamental, for erosion control, or for forage (Tu 2000). It is mainly reported as a weed of natural areas, wetlands and forest understories. There have, however, been reports of it encroaching into crop production areas, landscape plantings, and turfgrass (Judge et al. 2008).
In 2008, a value of $24 million of field crops possibly intended for birdfeed in Canada was imported from areas where Microstegium vimineum is present as well as a value of $746,000 of hay and straw.

Potential Environmental and Social Consequences

Microstegium vimineum can form dense monotypic stands that replace natural communities and can dominate entire habitats, including forest understories and wetland areas. It can tolerate low light conditions allowing it to threaten forest vegetation as well as edge habitats. Once established, it is able to crowd out native herbaceous vegetation in wetlands and forests within three to five years (EPPO 2008).

Populations of Microstegium vimineum disrupt the quality of nesting habitats for birds (e.g. quails). However, it creates an excellent habitat for rats, such as cotton rats, a predator of birds. Microstegium vimineum also may be responsible for altering natural soil conditions, creating an inhospitable environment for many native species. Kourtev et al. (1998) reported that in areas that have been invaded by Microstegium vimineum, both litter and organic soil horizons were thinner than in uninvaded areas, and the pH of such soils was significantly higher (Tu 2000).

Following canopy disturbance Microstegium vimineum responds with a sudden increase in biomass allowing it to rapidly invade forests and impede regeneration of native woody species. Rapid increases in growth of Microstegium vimineum lead to the development of "mats'' on the forest floor that negatively affect native woody species regeneration in multiple ways: directly, through competition for sunlight, nutrients, and water and indirectly, by reducing the likelihood of successful seed to soil contact for germination (Oswalt et al. 2007).

Uncertainty

The climatic tolerance of Microstegium vimineum is uncertain. It is becoming increasingly widespread in the Eastern U.S. in NAPPFAST zone 6, however, there also appear to be populations in zone 5. Its native range is mainly zone 6 but there are some areas of zone 5 included in its distribution. For the purposes of this risk assessment it was assumed that it would be able to establish in at least parts of zone 5.

Conclusion

Based on the outcome of this pest risk assessment, Microstegium vimineum is likely to establish and become invasive in parts of Canada including southern and coastal BC, southern Ontario and parts of Atlantic Canada if it is introduced to these areas. This plant should be considered for regulation under the Plant Protection Act. It should be noted that one of the potential pathways into Canada is as a "hitch-hiker" on human clothing, muddy vehicles or pet fur, which may be difficult to regulate.

Technical Issues for Consideration

Appendix 8B: Risk Management Considerations for Microstegium vimineum (Japanese stiltgrass)

Values at Risk

Microstegium vimineum prefers wetlands and forested areas. It is difficult to assign a value to the biodiversity of our Canadian landscape

Potential Mitigation Measures for Natural Means of Dispersal

No potential mitigation measures for natural means of dispersal are highlighted herein for Microstegium vimineum. Microstegium vimineum has disturbed many areas of the New England States and is approaching the Canadian border. Regulating the dispersal by surface water runoff and the migration of wild animals is nearly impossible to control.

Potential Mitigation Measures for Intentional Introduction Pathways

No intentional pathways were identified

Potential Mitigation Measures for Non-intentional Introduction Pathways

Field Crops Not Intended for Propagation

Previous imports
Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulate Microstegium vimineum as a quarantine pest under the Plant Protection Act. Add this species to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada (CFIA 2009) in order to:

Regulatory actions under the Plant Protection Act could include one or more of the following:

Trade implications
Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Hay and Straw

Previous imports
Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulate Microstegium vimineum under the Plant Protection Act as a quarantine pest by placing it on the List of Pests Regulated by Canada. This will:

Trade implications

Exporting countries will need to devote resources towards inspection of hay and straw commodities and issuance of phytosanitary certificates. Inspectors in exporting countries need to be able to identify seeds of Microstegium vimineum that could be associated with hay and straw. Exporters need to ensure freedom of Microstegium vimineum in hay and straw, otherwise CFIA can refuse import.

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

This measure will facilitate trade of hay and straw with the State of Alabama, Connecticut and Massachusetts, where Microstegium vimineum is regulated. This measure is already in place for other pests regulated by Canada. Minor costs will be incurred for training of inspectors

Vehicles and Used Farm Machinery

Previous imports
Potential Risk mitigation measures

Enforcement of Directive 95-26: "Phytosanitary requirements for soil and related matter, alone or in association with plants" (CFIA 2008).

In 2003, the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) assumed responsibility for the initial import inspection services in respect to the Acts and Regulations administered by the CFIA to the extent that they are applicable at Canadian border points. The inspection of goods that may be contaminated with soil are among the responsibilities that were transferred to the CBSA in 2003. The Food, Plant and Animals Programs Product of the CBSA is currently finalizing its Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) concerning the "Inspection of Imported Goods Potentially Contaminated with Soil." This SOP provides the CBSA's Border Services Officers with formal procedures for the inspection and disposition of goods that may be contaminated with soil, including used agricultural machinery and vehicles.

Nursery Stock with soil

Previous imports

The total value of imports of nursery stock was $173 million in 2008 (Industry Canada 2009) with approximately 80% of that value originating from the United States (Industry Canada, 2009; based on data using HS 0602 – Other Live Plants (incl. Roots), Cuttings and Slips; Mushroom Spawn). Approximately 40% of the imports from the United States originate from states where Microstegium vimineum is present (e.g., Florida, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, New York, Ohio)

Potential Risk mitigation measures
Trade implications
Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Nursery Stock from infested areas where Microstegium vimineum is present may be imported under the condition that the plants are bare root. Alternatively, using soil free growing media may be a condition of entry imposed on these imports. This mitigation measure should be feasible and minor costs will be incurred.

Used Recreational Equipment and Clothing

Previous imports
Risk mitigation measures

Increase public awareness of the regulation and the risk posed by this plant and distribute awareness material at border crossings to the public

Trade implications

There are no trade implications anticipated.

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Appendix 8C: Import Data for field crops used as birdfeed

Import data for field crops not intended for propagation originating from countries where Microstegium vimineum is present (2006-2008).

Value in Canadian Dollars ($)

Product 1: HS 1007 – Grain sorghum
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
US-Pennsylvania 001,527
US-Maryland 0200
India 6,04117,38622,618
China, P. Rep. 03951,271
Subtotal:6,04117,80125,416
Product 2: HS 1008 - Buckwheat, millet, canary seed, other cereals
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
US-New York 142,096 38,700 66,060
US-New Jersey21,74430,56659,891
US-Georgia19,68000
US-Tennessee 16,363 1,199 21,046
US-Pennsylvania 0 7,041 29,210
US-Maryland 2,322 2,569 9,884
US-Massachusetts 1,188 4,213 7,262
US-Connecticut 0 5,346 1,663
US-Kentucky 348 1,823 0
US-North Carolina 4,743 229 0
US-Virginia40400
US-Indiana18800
China, P. Rep.277,389307,425503,778
India287,150181,626150,134
Japan5,3801,1588,798
Subtotal:778,995581,895857,726
Product 3: HS 1206 - Sunflower seeds (whether or not broken)
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
US-Tennessee184,372229,795334,187
US-Georgia114,66662,7240
US-Indiana124,175133,945190,411
US-New York13,09315,98755,456
US-Maryland224209326
US-New Jersey1,11670,8767,013
US-West Virginia0074
US-North Carolina07113,325
US-Pennsylvania1,925183943
US-Kentucky032872
US-Connecticut602,0420
US-Massachusetts05050
US-Virginia000
China, P. Rep.1,520,6681,431,9381,889,796
Japan52,63952,06364,184
India045,464119,947
Subtotal:2,012,9382,046,1302,675,734
Product 4: HS 1207 – Includes: Oilseeds and oleaginous fruits, nes, (whether or not broken)
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
US-New York662,960671,273552,490
US-Maryland252,972214,538396,836
US-Tennessee6094,530612,252
US-New Jersey140,24265,932114,648
US-Georgia45,16675,07168
US-North Carolina100,67260,71026,164
US-Virginia33,5749,2419,863
US-Indiana629,42912,653
US-Kentucky5,67219,2924,163
US-Pennsylvania113,3187,123
US-Connecticut14,94000
US-Massachusetts1,8832,5490
US-West Virginia08342
India7,933,5648,574,28514,632,712
China P. Rep.2,727,8863,808,9284,020,699
Japan62,372110,871155,928
Subtotal:11,981,97013,749,97520,545,941
Totals of section 1 to 4
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Total:14,779,94416,395,80124,104,817

Quantity in metric tonnes (TNE)

Product 1: HS 1007 – Grain sorghum
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
US-Pennsylvania 005
US-Maryland 000
India 225771
China, P. Rep. 015
Subtotal:225881
Product 2: HS 1008 - Buckwheat, millet, canary seed, other cereals
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
US-New York 14,635 489 7,855
US-New Jersey5,35912,05334,715
US-Georgia90,68200
US-Tennessee 65,191 4,534 90,872
US-Pennsylvania 0 14,632 55,086
US-Maryland 441 572 3,158
US-Massachusetts 1,947 2,582 4,672
US-Connecticut 0 4,848 1,167
US-Kentucky 454 1,814 0
US-North Carolina 4,170 113 0
US-Virginia11400
US-Indiana3700
China, P. Rep.213,063409,492540,074
India226,297271,519145,113
Japan1,062822,486
Subtotal:623,452722,730885,198
Product 3: HS 1206 - Sunflower seeds (whether or not broken)
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
US-Tennessee527 512472
US-Georgia368 1400
US-Indiana24 2730
US-New York13 925
US-Maryland0 00
US-New Jersey1 433
US-West Virginia0 00
US-North Carolina0 010
US-Pennsylvania1 01
US-Kentucky0 00
US-Connecticut0 10
US-Massachusetts0 10
US-Virginia0 00
China, P. Rep.1,335933928
Japan806
India03755
Subtotal:2,277 1,7031,530
Product 4: HS 1207 – Includes:oilseeds and oleaginous fruits, nes, (whether or not broken)
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
US-New York2,2501,9201,307
US-Maryland1017391
US-Tennessee03271,627
US-New Jersey1033551
US-Georgia1021640
US-North Carolina47324963
US-Virginia1453722
US-Indiana024
US-Kentucky221
US-Pennsylvania063
US-Connecticut500
US-Massachusetts010
US-West Virginia000
India7,0946,5387,282
China P. Rep.1,1791,5781,255
Japan133636
Subtotal:11,46710,96811,742
Totals of Products 1 to 4
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Total:637,218735,459898,551

Source: Statistics Canada 2009.

Note: Countries with an export value of less than $1,000 per year are grouped together and a summed value for all countries is shown.

Appendix 8D: Import Data for Hay and Straw

Import data for hay and straw originating from countries where Microstegium vimineum is present (2006-2008).

Import Data for Hay and Straw, Value in Canadian Dollars ($)

Product 1: HS 121300 – Cereal Straw and husks, unprepared
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
US-North Carolina 272,458 316,202 212,617
US-New York 8,98410,26016,288
US-Maryland 3,1517,5968,908
US-Massachusetts 00483
US-New Jersey 1,917266106
US-Virginia 006
US-Georgia 060,0000
US-Pennsulvania 530 3,141 0
US-Connecticut 571 249 0
US-Indiana 5,682 0 0
India284,039258,851302,025
China26305,744
Sub-Total:577,595656,565546,177
Product 2: HS 121490 – Swedes, mangolds, fodder roots, hay, clover, sainfoin, forage kale, etc, pellets
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
US- Pennsylvania22,69920,272101,167
US-New Jersey44,16237,89148,900
US-Kentucky6193015,743
US-New York24,9651,808228
US-Maryland277190220
US-Virginia672020
US-Indiana1,546 8 1
US-Massachusetts-- 10 --
US-Georgia-- 10 --
China P. Rep.13,00712,36332,527
Japan4,2231,0511,076
India2,93328,29776
Sub-Total:114,498101,950199,958
Totals of sections 1 and 2
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Total:692,093758,515746,135

Source: Statistics Canada 2009.

Note: Countries with an export value of less than $1,000 per year are grouped together and a summed value for all countries is shown.

Appendix 9A: Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Nassella trichotoma (serrated tussock)

Identity of Organism

Name: Nassella trichotoma (family Poaceae, subfamily Pooideae, tribe Stipeae) (USDA-NRCS 2009).

Synonyms: Stipa trichotoma (1829), Urachne trichotoma (1834), Agrostis trichotoma (1841), Urachne macrathera (1853), Piptochaetium trichotomum (1879), Piptatherum macrantherum (1894), Stipa macrathera (1901), nom. illeg., non Stipa macrathera (1896), Oryzopsis trichotoma (1910).

English common names: Serrated tussock, serrated tussock grass, nassella tussock, Yass tussock, Yass River tussock, tumbleweed.

French common names: Stipe à feuilles dentées

Description: Microstegium vimineum is an annual grass with a sprawling habit. It germinates in spring and grows slowly through the summer months, ultimately reaching heights of 0.6-1 m with the reclining stems growing up to 1 metre long. Slender stalks of tiny flowers are produced in August through to September or early October. In late fall they fade to pale greenish-yellow or turns purple in colour (Swearing 2004, Mehrhoff et al. 2003).

Nassella trichotoma is a tall (at least 60 cm), tussock-forming, perennial grass of the tribe Stipeae (family Poaceae), native to the pampas of South America and introduced into dry, warm-temperate regions in other parts of the world, primarily in the southern hemisphere. In Australia and New Zealand it is a serious, invasive weed in pasture lands and is considered one of their most serious weed problems. In pasture, it reduces the carrying capacity due to its low nutritive value and poor palatability to livestock.

Organism Status

Nassella trichotoma is not reported to occur in Canada, and no evidence was found that it iscultivated here (CFIA 2008, Scoggan 1979). Based on this information, it is considered to be absent from the PRA area.

Nassella trichotomahas not yet become established in North America:

Current Regulatory Status

Canada: Listed as Class 1 "Prohibited Noxious Weed", under the Weed Seeds Order (Seeds Act). All imported and domestic seed must be free of prohibited noxious weed seeds.

United States: Listed in the USDA-APHIS Footnote 1 Federal Noxious Weed List under the Noxious Weed Regulation (Federal Noxious Weed Act). No person may move a federal noxious weed into or through the United States, or interstate, unless this person obtains a permit for such movement (Noxious Weed Regulation).

European Plant Protection Organization (EPPO): Nassella trichotoma is not regulated in Europe, however, it was added to the EPPO Alert List because it presents a risk to the EPPO region. The objective of the EPPO Alert List is to provide early warning and eventually to propose candidates which may be subjected to a PRA (EPPO 2009).

Probability of Entry

The main pathway through which Nassella trichotoma is likely to be introduced into Canada is in seed lots of forage grasses for planting. However, the species does not seem to be a common weed in seed production fields in either its native range or where introduced and it has only rarely been intercepted in imported lots. Nassella trichotoma has been listed as a prohibited noxious weed seed on the Weed Seeds Order: this should greatly reduce the likelihood of it entering Canada as a seed contaminant. A second pathway is available through the sale of plants and seeds for planting in home gardens. See table 1, Summary of Pathways for Nassella trichotoma (serrated tussock).

Table 1: Summary of Pathways for Nassella trichotoma
Type of pathway Specific Pathways
Natural dispersalSeed: the wind distributes seeds over long distances.
Intentional Introduction
  • Seed of ornamental grass
  • Ornamental plants for planting
Unintentional Introduction
  • Contaminant of seed lots of forage grasses
  • Contaminant of hay and straw
  • Contaminant in raw wool
  • Spread by livestocka.

Probability of Establishment

The potential range of Nassella trichotoma in Canada would be very limited. Its range in South America and Australia suggests that it would be confined to Canadian Plant Hardiness Zone 8, possibly extending into zone 7. Even if zone 7 is included, the potential range would be limited to coastal British Columbia where there is a limited amount of suitable habitat (Figure 1).

Climate modeling, based on Nassella trichotoma's current worldwide range, limits the potential distribution even further to extreme Southwestern BC

Figure 1: Potential range of Nassella trichotoma (serrated tussock) in Canada

Figure 1. Description follows.
Description of Figure 1

This map shows the potential range of Nassella trichotoma (serrated tussock) in Canada, more specifically in British Columbia. Red is used to indicate the regions in which Nassella trichotoma could survive according to the Canadian Plant Hardiness Zones map, in this case NAPPFAST Hardiness Zone 8 and possibly zone 7. In Canada, the potential range of Nassella trichotoma is very limited to only coastal British Columbia. This image is narrowed to include the lower coastal regions of BC as well as Washington and Oregon which all have a scattered presence of red.

NAPPFAST zones 7-9

Probability of Spread

Natural spread potential is high. Nassella trichotoma spreads by seed, which may be produced in large quantities. The large panicles break off and blow in the wind, like tumbleweeds, distributing seeds over long distances in open habitats. Under suitable conditions, the plant can spread very rapidly. The seeds can persist for many years in the soil. Since Nassella trichotoma does not usually grow in cultivated fields, this reduces the likelihood of the seeds being moved around on machinery.

Potential Economic Consequences

Potential economic impact is not significant. The primary economic impact of Nassella trichotoma is a reduction in carrying capacity of range and pasture. As most of the ranching areas in Canada are outside of the potential range, the impact would be limited. In badly-infested areas in Australia land can become unusable for pasture, greatly reducing land values. A similar level of impact is unlikely to occur in Canada.

Potential Environmental and Social Consequences

Potential environmental impact is high. Nassella trichotoma has demonstrated an ability to out-compete native and introduced grasses on grazed lands where it has been introduced in Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. It has the potential to become established in native grasslands and lightly forested terrain, including the Garry oak meadows of Southwestern BC. While this area is very limited (see Figure 2), these meadows represent a critically endangered ecosystem within Canada, which provides habitat for about 54 species of vascular plants and three butterfly taxa that are listed as endangered or threatened in Canada.

There are no reports of toxicity to livestock or humans, but domestic animals have died from heavy feeding on Nassella trichotoma due to the indigestible material forming large balls in the stomach. Heavy infestations of conservation lands with Nassella trichotoma decrease their biological diversity, as well as their aesthetic value.

Figure 2: Distribution of Garry Oak Ecosystems in British Columbia

Figure 2. Description follows.
Description of Figure 2:

This map shows the distribution of Garry oak ecosystems in British Columbia through the use of the colour red. It is present, predominantly, on the coastal region of Southern Vancouver Island surrounding the Victoria and Nanaimo regions extending slightly upwards. The distribution of the Garry Oak ecosystem can be found on mainland BC as well which is signified by the two red circles in the vicinity of Hope. There is a black and white arrow on the mainland of the province pointing upwards to identify the direction of north.

Source: GOERT 2009

Uncertainty

This assessment is based on the current understanding of the species' range and climatic tolerances. There are no records of the plant becoming established beyond the equivalent of a Canadian hardiness zone 8. Any evidence to show that it could survive in zone 6 or beyond would dramatically affect this assessment. Establishment potential and economic impact, in particular, would have to be re-assessed. If it was determined that the species was not a threat to endangered species in the Garry oak meadows of Vancouver Island, the environmental impact could be down-graded.

Conclusion

The overall risk associated with Nassella trichotoma is moderate. This indicates that specific phytosanitary measures are necessary. In 2005, the species was listed as a prohibited noxious weed seed. This should greatly reduce the likelihood of Nassella trichotoma being introduced into Canada. The importation and sale of plants for the public should also be regulated. The combination of these two measures would provide adequate phytosanitary protection to Canada against this species. It is recommended that Nassella trichotoma be considered for inclusion on the List of Pests Regulated by Canada.

Technical Issues for Consideration

None

Appendix 9B: Risk Management Considerations for Nassella trichotoma (serrated tussock)

Values at Risk

Seed Industry

In 2007, 162,200 tons of Canadian seed were exported to the U.S., for an approximate value of $197.6 million. If Nassella trichotoma becomes established in Canada, it could complicate seed trade between the U.S. and Canada (Statistics Canada in Agriculture Canada 2008). On several occasions forage grass seed lots of South American origin have been found to be contaminated with seeds of this weed. This has caused problems for the Canadian seed trade when seed lots containing serrated tussock seeds were re-exported to the U.S. It was largely to address these trade concerns that the species was added to the Weed Seed Order as a prohibited noxious weed seed in July 2005.

The potential range of Nassella trichotoma in Canada is limited to the West Coast of British Columbia, where there is almost no forage seed production (Statistics Canada 2007). Its direct impact on seed trade is thus relatively low and is limited to re-exportation to the U.S (Table 2).

Garry Oak Ecosystem

The Garry oak ecosystem is rare and irreplaceable because of its historical and ecological significance. This landscape contributes both to the sense of place and regional identity of the inhabitants of Vancouver Island.

The British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks has two Ecological Reserves that primarily focus on Garry oak ecosystems. The Garry Oak Meadow Preservation Society, the British Columbia Conservation Data Centre and the Canadian Forest Service have initiated programs to promote the preservation of Garry oak ecosystems in Canada.

Table 2: Value in Canadian dollars of Canadian re-exports of forage seeds to U.S. destinations
Forage crops 2004 2005 2006 2007
Alfalfa8,63569,81869,6918,699
Clover9,28616,35828,45841,981
Fescue 0000
Rye grass47,92637,04600
Timothy grass0000
Other forage plants10,497180,97488,191253,822
Total:78,348306,201188,346306,509

Source: Statistics Canada in Industry Canada 2009.

Cost of control

If Nassella trichotoma becomes established in natural ecosystems, including the Garry oak ecosystem of BC, it could be arduous and costly to eradicate.

The most effective control method in New Zealand, chipping combined with herbicide application, is expensive both in labour costs and cost of chemicals. Control costs vary with the degree of infestation and land use (arable versus non-arable) (Vere and Campbell 1984). Costs for control on moderately to heavily-infested land were estimated at $98.50 to $107.35Footnote 1 per hectare (Vere and Campbell 1984). The same authors explain that continued treatment of heavily-infested land must be continued for up to 22 years before an economic benefit can be expected.

Glyphosate seems to be the only pesticide that is currently registered in Canada that has been successful in controlling Nassella trichotoma. Glyphosate, a non-selective herbicide, kills a broad spectrum of plants. Its use would affect native species within the treated area, including endangered species (Allison 2006).

Potential Mitigation Measures for Natural Means of Dispersal

No measures are required. Nassella trichotoma is not present along the Canadian border. It is not likely to enter Canada by natural means.

Potential Mitigation Measures for Intentional Introduction Pathways

Plants for Planting excluding Seed

Previous imports

The CFIA considers Nassella trichotoma as not cultivated in Canada.

Potential risk mitigation measures

Non-regulatory measures

Regulatory measures

Trade implications
Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Seed of Nassella trichotoma

Previous imports

Unknown. No figures are available specifically for Nassella trichotoma.

Potential risk mitigation measures
Trade implications

The loss of market is expected to be very low (see Section V, c. Trade Implications).

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

The CFIA Seed Program is already in place to prevent the entry of prohibited noxious weeds. Verification of compliance is carried out through the Seed Marketplace Monitoring ProgramFootnote 7.

Potential Mitigation Measures for Non-intentional Introduction Pathways

Seed of Forage Grasses

Previous imports
Potential risk mitigation measures
  1. Maintain the regulation of Nassella trichotoma as a prohibited noxious weed (Class 1) under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds Act.
    • This species meets the definitions for Class 1 species under the Weed Seeds Order.
    • All imported and domestic seed lots must be free of prohibited noxious weed seeds. Imported seed lots would require a certificate of analysis stating Nassella trichotoma is absent from the seed lot before it can be imported.
  2. Regulate Nassella trichotoma as a quarantine pest under the Plant Protection Act and add this species to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada (CFIA 2009).
    • This could prevent the importation, movement, and cultivation of this species in Canada.
    • Exporters could be required to obtain a phytosanitary certificate stating freedom from Nassella trichotomaFootnote 9.
    • Phytosanitary agreements could be negotiated to certify imports from pest free areas and/or recognize noxious weed certification in countries or states of origin.
Figure 3: Imports of forage seed into Canada from countries where Nassella trichotoma (serrated tussock) is present

Figure 3. Description follows.
Description of Figure 3

This figure depicts the imports of forage seed into Canada from countries where serrated tussock is present from 1999 to 2008. These include Chile, Uruguay Argentina, New Zealand, Australia, Italy, Brazil and South Africa. In 1999, Canada received the most imports from Argentina (approximately $2,400,00 CAN worth) and in 2008 Canada received the most imports from Chile (approximately $1,250,000 CAN worth).

Trade implications
Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Hay and Straw

Previous imports
Potential risk mitigation measures

No measures required. The level of risk associated with imports of hay and straw into Canada is relatively low because (1) they originate primarily from areas where Nassella trichotoma is not present, and (2) Nassella trichotoma rarely occurs in cultivated crops,such as cultivated grassland.

Live Animals

Previous imports

Between 1999 and 2008, no significant numbers of live sheep or goats for reproduction have been imported into Canada from countries where Nassella trichotoma is present (CFIA internal data).

Potential risk mitigation measures

No measures are required.

Raw Wool

Previous imports

The total value of raw wool imports was around $3.1 million in 2008; 70% of this value came from Australia, New Zealand and Argentina, where Nassella trichotoma is present (Industry Canada 2009).

Potential risk mitigation measures

No measures are required.

Appendix 9C: Import Data forage seeds for sowing a originating

Import data for forage seeds for sowing a originating from countries where Nassella trichotoma is present (2006-2008)

Value in Canadian Dollars ($)

Product 1: Alfalfa HS code 1209.21.00
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Australia199,963136,582358,370
Italy19,96916,96369,519
Argentina 71.8723,1220
Uruguay1,0491,4750
Subtotal:292,853158,142427,889
Product 2: Clover HS code 1209.22.00
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Chile 405,808521,3451,287,309
Uruguay00307,293
New Zealand 285,837507,900215,955
Argentina043,769175,996
Italy0560
Australia254,698404,7980
Subtotal:946,3431,4778681,986,553
Product 3: Fescue HS code 1209.23.00
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Italy1,843042,100
Subtotal:1,843042,100
Product 4: Other forage HS code 1209.29.00
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Argentina36,015175,826196,704
Uruguay223,4731,081 875172,939
New Zealand 18302,605
Italy1,83901,432
Chile 961171,134
Australia1,46310
Subtotal:263,9341,257,719374,814
Totals of Products 1 to 4
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Total:1,504 9732,893 7292,831,356

Quantity in metric tonnes (TNE)

Product 1: Alfalfa HS code 1209.21.00
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Australia58,40548,41660,025
Italy4,9903,01921,428
Argentina20,2865130
Uruguay1501750
Subtotal:83,83152,12381,453
Product 2: Clover HS code 1209.22.00
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Chile 152,528191,132488,676
Uruguay0087,500
New Zealand 61,951157,84062,952
Argentina017,90054,600
Italy0230
Australia60,474116,8310
Subtotal:274,953484,526693,728
Product 3: Fescue HS code 1209.23.00
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Italy1,550024,465
Subtotal:1,550024,465
Product 4: Other forage HS code 1209.29.00
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Argentina8,05739,58560,348
Uruguay60,000219,76845,000
New Zealand 330615
Italy3730125
Chile 4,4968103
Australia27200
Subtotal:73,231259,361106,191
Totals of Products 1 to 4
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Total433,565796,010905,837

Appendix 10A: Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Paspalum dilatatum (Dallis grass)

Identity of Organism

Name: Paspalum dilatatum (family Poaceae, subfamily Panicoideae, tribe Paniceae) (USDA-ARS 2009)

Synonyms: Digitaria dilatata, Panicum platense, Paspalum eriophorum, Paspalum lanatum, Paspalum ovatum, Paspalum pedunculare, Paspalum platense, Paspalum selloi, Paspalum velutinum (Tropicos 2009)

Common names: Dallis grass, Dallisgrass, water grass, paspalum, CAB International 2007; Hitchcock and Chase 1950; USDA-ARS 2009)

French common names: Herbe de Dallis (CAB International 2007; Hitchcock and Chase, 1950; USDA-ARS 2009)

Description: Dallis grass is a perennial, cespitose, C4 grass. The plants have rhizomes, but they are so short (less than 1 cm) that the stems form tufts. The stems are 50-175 cm tall, and erect. The leaf blades are up to 35 cm long, 2-16.5 mm wide, flat, mostly glabrous, with a few long hairs near the base on the upper surface. The panicles are terminal, with 2-7 racemose, divergent branches. The spikelets are 2.3-4 mm long and 1.7-2.5 mm wide. They are paired, and appressed to the branch axes. The lower glumes are absent; the upper glumes and lower lemmas are 5-7-veined, with pilose margins. The caryopses are 2-2.3 mm and white to brown (Barkworth 2006).

Dallis grass is considered a weed of 14 crops in 28 countries (Holm et al. 1977).

Organism Status

Dallis grass is not reported to occur in Canada (CFIA 2008), and no evidence was found that it is cultivated in Canada (CNLA 2009). Based on this information, it is considered absent from the PRA area.

Current Regulatory Status

Canada:
Paspalum dilatatum was not regulated in Canada.
United States:
It is not regulated as a federal or state noxious weed.
Other countries:
In 28 countries it is listed as a serious or principal weed

Probability of Entry

Dallis grass was deliberately introduced into the USA as a forage grass species in the mid-1800's (Hitchcock and Chase 1950). Deliberate introduction seems to have been the main pathway for long distance spread around the world.

In parts of the southern USA, dallis grass is a perennial weed problem on lawns, golf courses and other turf areas. Control in turf is very difficult (Breeden and Brosnan 2009). This suggests that seeds have been introduced as contaminants in grass seed in that region at least. This is probably the most likely pathway for introduction into Canada, as much of the lawn and turf grass seed sold in Canada is imported from the USA (Table 1). The species has also reportedly been used as a turf grass (Barkworth 2006).

Table 1: Summary of Pathways for Paspalum dilatatum (Dallis grass)
Type of pathway Specific Pathways
Natural dispersal

Paspalum dilatatum is dispersed by means of seed.

It is unlikely that natural dispersal will allow the species to enter Canada, as established populations are in the southern states.

Intentional Introduction

Deliberate introduction as a forage plant seems to have been the main pathway for long distance spread around the world.

This is not a likely pathway for entry of Paspalum dilatatum into Canada, since it is grown intentionally only in warmer climates.

Unintentional Introduction

Seeds could be carried as contaminants in seed lots, especially turf grasses. However, no seeds of any Paspalum species have been reported from samples analyzed at the CFIA Seed Laboratory in the past nine years. This could change if more turf grass seed was imported from infested regions.

Seeds could be carried as contaminants in grain lots. Paspalum dilatatum is a weed of rice, so it could be introduced into Canada as a contaminant in rice grain lots.

This is a likely pathway for entry, but is unlikely to introduce seeds into suitable habitats.

Seeds could be carried as contaminants in commodities. Paspalum dilatatum is a weed of tropical fruit crops, including pineapples. Imported pineapples have been reported to be contaminated with weed seeds such as itchgrass, so it could be possible for Paspalum dilatatum to enter by this pathway.

This is a likely pathway for entry, but less likely to introduce seeds into suitable habitats.

Figure 1: Range of Paspalum dilatatum (Dallis grass) in North America

Figure 1. Description follows.
Description of Figure 1:

This image is a map of North America distinguishing the range of Paspalum dilatatum (Dallis grass) through the use of colours designated to a specific method. Red dots signify a UTC specimen; green dots equate to other herbaria; blue dots represents manual data; dark blue denotes UTC counties; magenta indicates other herbaria counties; light pink , the most predominant colour on the map, represents contributors; light green signifies state flora/atlas; dark green represents regional fora/atlas; light blue stands for reliable reports; turquoise indicates other publication on Paspalum dilatatum while grey shows unverified reports; dark green signifies a database; and mustard yellow denotes specimen by MEB, while dark purple represents herbarium database. Large amounts of light pink are condensed in southeast states from West Virginia extending down to Texas. Light green and other colours such as yellow and red are present in the coastal states of Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina. Magenta, blue and purple as well as turquoise are apparent along the west coastal states in California and parts of Arizona as well as in New Mexico although more spread out in nature than the eastern representation.

Source: Barkworth 2006

Figure 2: Potential range of Paspalum dilatatum in Canada

Figure 2. Description follows.
Description of Figure 2:

This image shows the potential range of Paspalum dilatatum in Canada and northern America through the use of a map. Red is used to indicate the regions in which Paspalum dilatatum could survive according to the Canadian Plant Hardiness Zones map, in this case NAPPFAST Hardiness Zones 6-9. In Canada, the potential range of Paspalum dilatatum is limited to coastal and southwestern BC, and, possibly, southern Ontario and parts of the Maritime Provinces if it is introduced to these areas. Most of the red can be found in the U.S., this includes the greater parts of the east and west coasts as well as areas located near the Great Lakes extending downwards beyond the image.

NAPPFAST zones 6-9

Probability of Establishment

Paspalum dilatatum is thought to be native to Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay, Uruguay and Argentina (USDA-ARS 2009). The exact native range is now obscure because of the species' pantropic distribution (Weber 2003). It is now well established across the southern U.S., including Hawaii, as a weed in waste places (Barkworth 2006). Paspalum dilatatum is also naturalized in s. Europe, tropical and s. Africa, Asia, Australia, New Zealand, Macaronesia, the Mascarenes, Melanesia, and Polynesia (USDA-ARS 2009).

Based on its current range in the U.S., Paspalum dilatatum will survive to NAPPFAST zone 6. This would suggest a potential range in Canada that includes coastal and southern British Colombia, extreme southwestern Ontario and coastal parts of Nova Scotia and Newfoundland (see figure 2).

In its native range, Paspalum dilatatum is found in sandy or muddy soil near the seashore or in saline soil and swamps. In its introduced range it invades heaths, shrubland, riparian habitats and freshwater wetlands (Weber 2003). In Western Australia it is a serious weed in disturbed and natural clay pans, as well as swamps, lawns, roadsides and pastures (Hussey et al. 2007).

There would be no shortage of suitable habitats in the limited potential Canadian range.

Probability of Spread

Locally, Paspalum dilatatum plant fragments can be moved around by farm equipment, but seed is the main mode of spread. Large quantities of seed are produced, often by apomixis (Holm et al. 1977). Seeds are spread by attaching to animals and people (Holding and Bowcher 2007).

Potential Economic Consequences

Paspalum dilatatum is listed as a serious or principal weed in Australia, Philippines, Brazil, Columbia, the former Soviet Union and Taiwan (Holm et al. 1991). It can be a problem when it encroaches on irrigation ditches (Holm et al. 1977). It is particularly a weed problem in bananas, papayas, pineapples and rice in the Philippines, sugarcane, bananas, orchards and vineyards in Australia, in bananas, pineapples, papayas and sugarcane in Hawaii, tea and citrus in the former Soviet Union, rice in Brazil and India and potatoes, vegetables and pasture in New Zealand. In the United States it is a pasture weed (Holm et al. 1977). In Tennessee, Paspalum dilatatum is now a weed problem throughout the state on lawns, golf courses and other turf areas where it is very difficult to control (Breeden and Brosnan 2009). It is listed as a serious turf weed on websites in a number of other southeastern states and researchers are looking for cost-effective control measures (Henry and Yelverton 2005).

Potential Environmental and Social Consequences

The dense growth habit smothers other low-growing plants and prevents recruitment of native woody species in Western Australia (Hussey et al. 2007).

Uncertainty

It is quite uncertain that Paspalum dilatatum will actually survive to NAPPFAST zone 6. It is certainly widespread in zone 7 in the United States, but if it could only survive to zone 7, its potential range in Canada would be limited to coastal and southwestern British Colombia.

Conclusion

Based on the outcome of this pest risk assessment, Paspalum dilatatum is likely to establish and become invasive in parts of Canada including southern and coastal British Colombia, and, possibly, southern Ontario and parts of the Maritime Provinces if it is introduced to these areas. This plant should be considered for regulation under Plant Protection Act and Seeds Act. It is recommended that the pest risk analysis process continue for this plant with the completion of a Risk Management Document.

Technical Issues for Consideration

There are 320 species of Paspalum in the warm regions of the world (Watson and Dallwitz 1992 onwards), so there will always be identification issues. However, dallis grass is identifiable by trained personnel.

Appendix 10B: Risk Management Considerations for Paspalum dilatatum (Dallis grass)

Potential Mitigation Measures for Natural Means of Dispersal

According to Allison (2009) it is unlikely that natural dispersal will allow the species to enter Canada, as established populations are in the southern states.

Potential Mitigation Measures for Intentional Introduction Pathways

Plants for Planting excluding Seed

Paspalum dilatatum is not reported to occur in Canada, and no evidence was found that it is cultivated in Canada. Paspalum dilatatum, as an ornamental plant, is not available in Canada (CNLA 2009).

Previous imports

The CFIA requires a Permit to Import, with the scientific and common names, for all plants and propagative material from origins other than the continental U.S. (CFIA 1997; CFIA 2009). Some plants from the continental U.S. also require a Permit to Import as listed in CFIA (2009). The CFIA has not issued a Permit to Import for Paspalum dilatatum plants in the past three years (CFIA internal data).

Potential risk mitigation measures

Non-regulatory measures

Currently, no specific non-regulatory measures are required.

Regulatory measures

Regulate Paspalum dilatatum as a quarantine pest under the Plant Protection Act and add this species to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada.

Trade Implications

As Paspalum dilatatum is mainly used for pasture and soil retention in tropical and subtropical regions and is not cultivated in or imported into Canada as plants or seed, the regulation of Paspalum dilatatum is not expected to have a significant impact on trade.

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

CFIA plant health programs are already in place to prevent the entry of prohibited plant materials. Measures under the Plant Protection Act are already in place for other pests regulated by Canada (CFIA 2009).

Seed

Previous imports

Seed of new crop species, such as field crops, can be imported without a Permit to Import or a Phytosanitary Certificate. There is no regulatory policy or application process in place to adequately control these imports.

Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulate Paspalum dilatatum as a Class 1 prohibited noxious weed under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds Act Footnote 2.

Regulate as a quarantine pest under the Plant Protection Act. Add this species to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada(CFIA 2009) in order to:

Regulatory actions under the Plant Protection Act could include the following:

Require importers of plant material from the non-continental U.S. to apply for a Permit to Import with scientific name specified.

Sufficient information about the use of Paspalum dilatatum as a potential crop does not exist. If the proponent, located in Canada, needs to collect more information about the plant (e.g. to generate data for a determination of environmental safety), then confined research trials under Part V of the Seeds Regulations could be authorized by the Plant Biosafety Office.

Trade Implications

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

The CFIA Seed Program is already in place to prevent the entry of prohibited noxious weeds.

Field Crops Not Intended for Propagation

Previous imports

Based on the information available in the CFIA's Import Permit System, two import permits have been issued, in 2003 and 2007, for various dried plant specimens from the genus Paspalum. Import permits were issued under section 43 and were for research purposes only.

Risk mitigation measures

Regulate Paspalum dilatatum as a quarantine pest under the Plant Protection Act and add this species to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada in order to:

Regulatory requirements under the Plant Protection Act could include one or more of the following:

Trade implications

As there is no identified usage of Paspalum dilatatum as as non-propagative product (food, ornamental, decorative) there will be no impact on trade.

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

CFIA plant health programs are already in place to prevent the entry of prohibited plant materials. Measures under the Plant Protection Act are already in place for other pests regulated by Canada (CFIA 2009).

Potential Mitigation Measures for Non-intentional Introduction Pathways

Field Crops Not Intended for Propagation

Previous imports

Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulate Paspalum dilatatum as a quarantine pest under the Plant Protection Act and add this species to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada (CFIA 2009) in order to:

Regulatory actions under the Plant Protection Act could include one or more of the following:

Trade implications

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Seed

Previous imports

In 2008 the total value of seeds of forage plants imported from the U.S. was $6.68 million. Sixty-three percent of those imports ($4.23 million) came from states where Paspalum dilatatum is present (Industry Canada 2009). See appendix 10C. The probability of the weed seeds contaminating seed lots is unknown. The seed has not been reported as a contaminant in the marketplace of imported seed lots coming into Canada. There is risk associated with Paspalum dilatatum because it is commonly used as a forage crop, for pasture in cultivated subtropical areas, and it is also a serious weed in turf and golf courses in the southern states.

Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulate Paspalum dilatatum as a prohibited noxious weed (Class 1) under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds Act Footnote 10.

Regulate Paspalum dilatatum as a quarantine pest under the Plant Protection Act and add this species to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada (CFIA 2009) in order to:

Regulatory actions under the Plant Protection Act could include one or more of the following:

Trade implications

Exporting countries currently devote resources towards inspection of seed lots and issuance of Phytosanitary Certificates when required. Laboratories in foreign countries will need to be able to identify seeds of Paspalum dilatatum within a seed sample. Exporters need to ensure freedom of Paspalum dilatatum in seed lots, otherwise CFIA can refuse import.

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Hay and Straw

Previous imports
Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulate Paspalum dilatatum under the Plant Protection Act as a quarantine pest by placing it on the List of Pests Regulated by Canada in order to:

Regulatory actions under the Plant Protection Act could include:

Trade implications

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

This measure is already in place for other pests regulated by Canada. Minor costs will be incurred for identification training for inspectors.

Appendix 10C: Import Data forage seeds for sowing

Table 10C: Canadian imports of forage seeds for sowing (except beet seeds) (HS 120929) from U.S. states where Paspalum dilatatum is present (2004 to 2008)
Year States where Paspalum dilatatum is present ($) Total US ($) % of importation from states where Paspalum dilatatum is present
20044,079,0935,520,52073,9%
20053,990,0105,453,03873,2%
20063,590,9875,514,53365,1%
20073,358,0935,340,24162,9%
20084,233,8606,678,00263,4%

Source: Statistics Canada 2009

Appendix 11A: Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Persicaria perfoliata (mile-a-minute weed)

Identity of Organism

Name: Persicaria perfoliata (mile-a-minute weed)

Synonym(s): Ampelygonum perfoliatum, Chylocalyx perfoliatus, Echinocaulon perfoliatum, Fagopyrum perfoliatum, Polygonum perfoliatum, Tracaulon perfoliatum, Truellum perfoliatum (Park 1986).

Engligh common names: Mile-a-minute weed, devil's-tail tearthumb, giant climbing tearthumb, mile-a-minute weed, mile-a-minute-vine, minuteweed, tearthumb, Asiatic tearthumb (Hinds and Freeman 1993; USDA-ARS 2008; USDA-NRCS 2008).

French common names: None.

Mile-a-minute weed was formerly included in the large genus Polygonum, as P. perfoliatum. However, more recently most botanists in North America have agreed that this plant should be placed in the genus Persicaria (Hinds and Freeman 2005).

Persicaria perfoliata is a rapidly growing herbaceous annual vine of the buckwheat family (Polygonaceae). It is a distinctive plant with triangular leaves, backward-curved barbs on the stems and lower leaf blades, and metallic blue, berry-like fruits. Also characteristic of this plant are cup-shaped leafy structures called ocreae encircling the nodes (Okay et al. 1997).

Persicaria perfoliata is native to temperate and tropical Asia. In the United States, it is introduced and invasive in disturbed sites, hedges, and riparian sites of 13 states, including New York (Hinds and Freeman 1993). This aggressive plant forms tangled mats that smother native herbs, shrubs, and understory trees (Weber 2003).

Organism Status

Persicaria perfoliata is not reported to occur in Canada (CFIA 2008). Based on this information, for the PRA area, P. perfoliata is considered absent with no pest records.

Current Regulatory Status

Prior to this RMD decision, Persicaria perfoliata was not regulated in Canada. It is not currently regulated at the federal level in the United States, Mexico, Peru, Brazil, or China. It is currently regulated at the state level in Alabama, Connecticut, Massachusetts, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania and South Carolina (USDA-NRCS 2009).

Probability of Entry

The main pathways of entry into Canada are unintentional, human-mediated dispersal and natural dispersal (Table 1). Based on previous experience from the United States, the most likely human-mediated pathway is the unintentional movement of seed or plants associated with nursery stock. Additional potential human-mediated pathways include contaminated vehicles, equipment, hay, mulch, soil, shoes, clothing, baggage and ornamental seed. Intentional introduction is also possible but the plant has low ornamental value. Due to the presence of P. perfoliata in nearby states, such as New York and Pennsylvania, natural range expansion is another potential pathway of introduction for this species.

Probability of Establishment

It is native to cool temperate regions of eastern Asia, where it is widely distributed (Johnson Jr. 1996; Steward 1930). It is most prominent in Japan, Korea and parts of China (Johnson Jr. 1996). It extends as far south as the Philippines and as far west as India, where it is generally found in cooler or mountainous regions (Johnson Jr. 1996).

In addition to its native range, it was introduced and established in the United States. The current distribution of P. perfoliata in North America is illustrated in Figure 1 and Figure 2. It has also been detected in Turkey (Güner 1984) and the Caribbean (Weber 2003) but its status (casual, naturalized, or invasive) is unknown. It was introduced into New Zealand, but has since been eradicated (EPPO 2008). In Canada, P. perfoliata was collected once along a roadside near Pitt Meadows, British Columbia in 1954, but did not persist (Douglas et al. 1990; Hinds and Freeman 1993).

It is considered to be hardy to United States Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Plant Hardiness Zone 6. Within Canada plant hardiness zones 6 to 8 are located along the coast of British Columbia and Vancouver Island, in extreme southern Ontario, and areas in the Maritime Provinces (Figure 3). Suitable habitats for P. perfoliata include a variety of disturbed areas and riparian areas. It prefers sunny, moist sites but can tolerate shady and dry sites as well. Within areas of climatic tolerance, availability of suitable habitats would not be a limiting factor for the establishment of P. perfoliata in Canada.

Table 1: Summary of pathways for Persicaria perfoliata Mile-a-minute weed
Type of Introduction Specific Pathways
Natural Means of Dispersal

Natural dispersal is reported to occur by water, birds, mammals and ants (Okay et al. 1997).

Of these natural means of dispersal, birds are probably the most significant long-distant disperser, followed by water, since the fruits can remain buoyant for at least a week (Okay et al. 1997).

Rate of spread in the U.S. has been approximately 500 km in several directions over 55 years (EPPO 2008), or approximately 9 km per year.

Persicaria perfoliata is present in several states adjacent to Canada, including Ohio, Pennsylvania and New York.

If the current trend continues, and includes northward expansion, the range of Persicaria perfoliata could expand into Canada within several decades.

The probability of entry of Persicaria perfoliata into Canada by natural means of dispersal appears to be high.

Intentional Introduction Intentional introduction is possible but the plant has low ornamental value.
Unintentional Introduction

Unintentional introduction pathways for Persicaria perfoliata include contaminated vehicles, equipment, hay, mulch, soil, shoes, clothing and baggage, seed (mainly ornamental) or grain contamination, and movement of seed or plants associated with nursery stock.

The probability of entry of Persicaria perfoliata into Canada association with contaminated seed and/or nursery stock, which were the means of introduction of this species into the U.S. by unintentional means appears to be high, especially in

Figure 1: Current range of Persicaria perfoliata (mile-a-minute weed) in North America

Note: States shaded green have at least one occurrence point.

Figure 1 description follows
Description for Figure 1:

This map shows the range of Persicaria perfoliata in North America indicating its presence through the use of the colour green. The states that have at least one occurrence point are shaded green they are: Oregon, New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia, Virginia, Maryland, New Jersey, and Delaware.

Source: USDA-NRCS 2009.

Figure 2: County-level distribution of Persicaria perfoliata (mile-a-minute weed) in the eastern United States

Figure 2 description follows
Description for Figure 2:

This map shows the northeastern region of North America demonstrating a county-level distribution Persicaria perfoliata (mile-a-minute weed). Yellow circles are used to distinguish the regions in which distribution is prevalent which is predominantly situated in the Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland and Delaware regions. A scattered and minimal presence can be seen in New York and Massachusetts as well as Virginia and West Virginia.

Source: adapted from Hough-Goldstein et al. 2008.

Figure 3: USDA Plant Hardiness Zone 6

Note: Mile-a-minute weed is considered to be hardy to USDA Plant Hardiness Zone 6. Within Canada, it may establish in shaded areas along the coast of British Columbia and Vancouver Island, in southern Ontario, and areas in the Maritime Provinces.

Figure 3. description follows.
Description for Figure 3:

This is a map of North America showing the Plant Hardiness Zones 1 to 11 in different colours.

Probability of Spread

Persicaria perfoliata reproduces by seed. Individual plants can produce 50 to 100 seeds each. Vegetative growth is remarkably rapid, and can reach 15 cm per day. In addition to a variety of human-mediated means of dispersal, P. perfoliata is dispersed naturally by water, birds, ants, other small animals and deer. In the United States, it has spread rapidly over the past seven decades, and is now present in eleven states. The possibility of it spreading coast to coast has been raised. While some speculate that it could assume a perennial growth habit in Florida, other authors suggest the requirement of a cold stratification treatment for germination might limit the southward spread of this species. Overall, it has a moderate reproductive potential and a moderate to high seed mobility.

Potential Economic Consequences

Persicaria perfoliata is known to cause direct negative economic consequences on industries involved in the production of trees and shrubs, such as orchards, nurseries, Christmas tree plantations and regeneration sites. Plants germinate early and can quickly form a dense, prickly carpet of vegetation over seedlings and shrubs, causing defoliation, mechanical damage, and mortality. Potential indirect economic impacts include increased costs of control to a variety of sectors (e.g. transportation industry, parks and recreation, home gardeners), seed or grain contamination, decreased hay quality, and losses to the hunting and tourism industries.

Potential Environmental and Social Consequences

Persicaria perfoliata can cause reduced plant diversity by out competing and killing native understory plants including wildflowers, grasses, shrubs and saplings. Although P. perfoliata is often found in disturbed areas, it has the potential to cause species reductions in sensitive riparian areas as well. Furthermore, it may degrade food and habitat for wildlife, restrict wildlife movement, and reduce the aesthetic value of properties and public areas. The prickly vines, which can form dense thickets, are a nuisance to people, pets and wildlife.

Uncertainty

Areas of uncertainty that were identified in the risk assessment related to the potential for P. perfoliata to establish and spread in colder climates than it has previously, and the scarcity of quantitative information on the economic impacts of this species.

Conclusion of Weed Risk Assessment

Persicaria perfoliata is an aggressive invasive plant that can cause significant economic and environmental harm. Potential mitigation measures should be considered for this plant, recognizing that over time spread by natural means from the northeastern United States into Canada might occur.

Appendix 11B: Risk Management Considerations for Persicaria perfoliata (mile-a-minute weed)

Pest Management

Persicaria perfoliata can be effectively controlled with herbicides either preemergence or postemergence (McCormick and Hartwig 1995). Hand-pulling, cultivation, and herbicides can control P. perfoliata on small scales; however, these methods are not feasible for large infestations or infestations in environmentally sensitive areas (Mountain 1989; Hough-Goldstein and Lake 2008; Price et al. 2003). Mechanical control is ineffective (Lehtonen 1994). The seed remains viable in the in the soil for six years, so managing P. perfoliata successfully depends on yearly treatments (Hough-Goldstein et al. 2008). A classical biological control program for P. perfoliata began in the U.S. in 1996 (Hough-Goldstein et al. 2008) using the weevil Rhinoncomimus latipes, a natural enemy introduced from China which is specific to the vine; with releases beginning in 2004 (Hough-Goldstein and Lake 2008; Hough-Goldstein 2008; Colpetzer et al. 2004).

Pest Risk Assessments from Other Countries

A pest risk assessment has been conducted by USDA-APHIS (Lehtonen 1994). The overall pest risk potential rating in the USDA-APHIS assessment was "high", which was based on "high" ratings for spread probability and environmental impact potential, and a "medium" rating for economic consequences of establishment. It was determined that the species no longer met the definition of noxious weed as required for listing under the U.S. Federal Noxious Weed Act. Recommendations included investigation of biological control for the species and cooperation in integrated management with other government agencies willing to share costs of control.

A Report of a Pest Risk Analysis on Polygonum perfoliatum is available from EPPO (EPPO 2007). The overall conclusion of pest risk assessment portion of the analysis was that the risk is unacceptable and management measures should be considered; it also reported that the plant is capable of causing significant damage to freshwater ecosystems and to commercial forest areas and forest regeneration. The report identified plants for planting with growing media, soil as a commodity, and imports of Meliosma seeds as the main introduction pathways.

New York State (U.S.) completed a non-native plant invasiveness ranking form for P. perfoliata concluding an invasiveness rank of "very high".

Existing Domestic, Provincial or other Programs

There are no existing Canadian programs related to the management or control of P. perfoliata . A Mile-A-Minute Control Management Plan has been developed by the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture where the plant is a State Noxious Weed; it is a joint control program between the USDA-APHIS PPQ and the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture (Bravo 2008). Persicaria perfoliata is considered widely distributed in the U.S. so does not meet the definition of a noxious weed as required for listing under the Federal Noxious Weed Act; eradication is no longer feasible (Lehtonen 1994). At the U.S. State level, it is listed as a Class A noxious weed in North Carolina, a prohibited noxious weed in Ohio, and a noxious weed in Pennsylvania and Alabama (Kumar and Ditommaso 2005).

Persicaria perfoliata can unintentionally contaminate hay (Castro 2008). Weed free forage programs can help prevent the spread of invasive plants. The Government of Alberta, Agriculture and Rural Development, administers the Alberta Certified Weed Free Hay Program. The objectives of the program are to provide a premium product that is recognized as marketable and transportable, to prevent the spread of restricted and noxious weeds, and to protect private and public lands from non-native, invasive plant species. Persicaria perfoliata is not currently designated as an undesirable plant on this list.

Canadian Christmas Tree Industry

Persicaria perfoliata is known to have deleterious economic consequences on the production of Christmas trees (Castro 2008). It grows rapidly and may out-compete Christmas tree seedlings. In 2007, Canada exported 2.5 million Christmas trees worth $29.8 million (Table 1). Areas in the Maritime Provinces that export Christmas trees, and that have suitable climate conditions for P. perfoliata (see Appendix 11A, Figure 3), are at risk if P. perfoliata establishes in Canada.

Potential Mitigation Measures for Natural Dispersal Pathways

Natural range expansion is a potential pathway of introduction. Persicaria perfoliata produces numerous fruits and has a high rate of seed set that contributes to natural dispersal (Oliver 1996). Once established, it can spread into surrounding habitats and watersheds by birds, animals and water (Lehtonen 1994). Birds and rodents disperse seeds as dorivers and streams, especially after flooding events (Mountain 1989; Gerlach Okay et. al 2007). Birds are also recognized as long-distance dispersal agents and ant species transport seed short distances (Kumar and Ditommaso 2005; Gerlach Okay et. al 2007). Seeds can pass through avian digestive tracts and remain viable (Okay 1997 in Kumar and Ditommaso 2005). Persicaria perfoliata seed dispersal and germination can also be facilitated by white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) (Hough-Goldstein et al. 2008). Once established in a new location, new populations can establish as P. perfoliata can reproduce without cross-pollination (Kumar and Ditommaso 2005).

Risk management of natural dispersal events is difficult. However, regulation will require surveys that would detect any new incursions established through natural dispersal pathways. Education and outreach programs, as well as pest identification training for inspectors, would also support the early detection and rapid response to new pest incursions that may result from natural dispersal events.

Table 2: Summary of Christmas trees exported by Canadian provinc and year

Value $ million
Province 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Nova Scotia9.49.09.611.011.19.910.810.910.68.5
New Brunswick5.24.65.76.36.45.75.34.84.84.8
Québec19.620.622.625.725.521.919.418.118.715.7
Other provinces2.00.80.70.80.90.60.71.00.80.8
Canada36.235.038.643.843.938.036.234.834.929.8

Source: AAFC 2008

Recommended Mitigation Measures for Intentional and Unintentional Introduction Pathways

Recommended risk mitigation measures

Regulatory measures under the Plant Protection Act

It is recommended that Canadaregulate P. perfloliata as a quarantine pest under the Plant Protection Act (1990, c.22)Footnote 1, and add this species to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada (CFIA 2009). This would prevent the intentional importation, movement, or cultivation of this species in Canada. The CFIA would not approve Permit to Import applications for P. perfoliata.

The CFIA would need to rescind any Permits to Import issued for Persicaria perfoliata. Any plants of Persicaria perfoliata established either outside of cultivation or in cultivation would need to be placed under official control.

To support regulation, a general requirement would be that importers would be required to provide full scientific names on all applications for Permits to Import as there are many species in the Persicaria genus.

Regulatory exemptions for the import of live or dried Persicaria perfoliata plant parts for special purposes such as research, food or medicine would be considered on a case by case basis by the CFIA.

Regulatory measures under the Seeds Act

It is recommended that Canada regulate P. perfoliata as a Class 1 Prohibited Noxious weed under the Weeds Seeds Order (SOR/2005-220) of the Seeds Act (R.S., 1985, c. S-8) Footnote 2. This species meets the definition for Class 1Footnote 3 species under the Weeds Seeds Order. All imported and domestic seed lots must be free of prohibited noxious weed seeds. Imported seed lots would require a certificate of analysis stating P.. perfoliata is absent from the seed lot before it can be imported.

The Weed Seeds Orderis a Ministerial Order made under the Seeds Act. The Weed Seeds Order allows the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food to regulate the seeds of the species of plants set out in the schedule that are deemed to be weed seeds for the purpose of establishing grades under the Seeds Act.

Non-regulatory measures

Education and awareness programs that foster awareness and support regulation of P. perfoliata are recommended. These would support regulatory measures, as well as prevention and early detection activities. Industry could also implement voluntary measures to end the sale and distribution of known invasive plants through mail order catalogs or internet sales.

Trade Implications
Plant Protection Act

The regulation of P. perfoliata under the Plant Protection Act will have trade impacts as commodities will need to be certified as free from the pest and subjected to new plant import requirements for import to Canada. International trade as a plant for planting is limited as it is not known to have any economic value in Canada and most countries recognize P. perfoliata as an invasive plant (Oliver 1996).

Seeds Act

The regulation of P. perfoliata under the Seeds Act will impact trade as exporting countries will need to devote resources towards inspection of seed lots and issuance of foreign Phytosanitary Certificates under the Plant Protection Act. Laboratories in exporting countries will need to be able to identify seeds of P. perfoliata within a seed sample. Exporters would need to ensure freedom of P. perfoliata in seed lots, otherwise the CFIA will refuse entry.

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Additional resources would be required so that the CFIA could "trace-back" all existing permits issued for Persicariaspp. to determine if the species, P. perfoliata, has been intentionally imported. If it has been imported, an official control program would be required.

Resources would be required to expand the CFIA survey efforts. Minor costs may be incurred for pest identification training for inspectors and survey staff.

Resources would be required for an education and awareness program to foster awareness of P. perfoliata as an invasive plant and potential quarantine pest, targeting the general public, gardeners and the horticultural industry.

The CFIA currently requires import declarations and certificates of analysis for seed imported into CanadaFootnote 4. Additional resources required to regulate P. perfoliata via the seed pathway would be minimal.

Resources will be required to expand CFIA seed sampling efforts and minor costs would be incurred for seed identification training for inspectors. Seeds consist of spherical, shiny-black achenes, covered by a white or pink perianth, which becomes blue and fleshy when mature. They form blueberry-like "fruits", each 5 mm in diameter, arranged in clusters (Wu et al. 2002). Inspectors will need to be able to detect the seeds in any imported commodities.

The horticultural industry would need to be trained to recognize the seed and plants of P. perfoliata, as part of a preventive approach. The CFIA Seed Program is already in place to prevent the entry of prohibited noxious weeds. The CFIA monitors compliance with the Canadian standards through the Marketplace Monitoring ProgramFootnote 5.

Exporting countries will need to devote resources towards inspection of hay and straw commodities and for the issuance of Phytosanitary Certificates. Inspectors in foreign countries need to be able to identify seeds and plants of P. perfoliata that could attach themselves to hay and straw or that might become tangled up in the hay or straw with viable seeds attached. Exporting countries would need to ensure freedom of P. perfoliata in hay and straw, otherwise the CFIA will refuse entry.

Inspection staff at Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) would need to be trained on how to identify P. perfoliata seed on vehicles or other equipment entering Canada. Inspections should focus on any vehicles or equipment entering Canada from infested north eastern U.S. States (see see Appendix 11A, Figure 2).

Implicated Pathways

Intentional Introduction Pathways
Plants for Planting
Plants for planting is recognized as a potential pathway of entry for P. perfoliata into Canada, however, the plant has low ornamental value (Castro 2008). Persicariaspp.have been imported intentionally into Canada. Between 2006 and 2009, the CFIA issued 25 Permits to Import for Persicariaspp., and another 11 Permits to Import permits between 2004 and 2005. However, it is not known if P. perfoliata has specifically been imported into Canada as species level data was not specified on the import permits. Permits to import Persicaria spp. have been issued to importers in Quebec (imports from the Netherlands, France, Japan, and United Kingdom), Ontario (imports from the Netherlands, United Kingdom, United States), Manitoba (imports from the Netherlands), Alberta (imports from the Netherlands) and British Columbia (imports from the Netherlands).
Seed
It is unlikely that importers would import pure lots of P. perfoliata seed. However, persons wishing to intentionally import the species may choose the seed pathway. Persicaria perfoliata could also enter Canada undetected in packets of ornamental seed, such as in wildflower mixes (Castro 2008).
Unintentional Introduction Pathways
Movement of seed or plants associated with nursery stock
A potential unintentional pathway is the importation of nursery stock or plants contaminated with seeds or plant material of P. perfoliata . The plant is well adapted for dispersal from nursery to nursery or nursery to planting-bed (Hill et al. 1981). Seeds are likely to survive along the nursery stock pathway (Castro 2008). Persicaria perfoliata seed or plants associated with nursery stock rooted in soil is a potential pathway only from the U.S. (Castro 2008). Introduction into Canada through contaminated seed commodities is a possibility (Castro 2008). Persicaria perfoliata has been reported to be unintentionally introduced by seed associated with Meliosma seed imported into the U.S. from China, and in Ilex seeds from Japan (Lehtonen 1994) as well as being reported as a contaminant from rhododendron nursery stock imported from eastern Asia (Hill et al. 1981). Seeds can remain viable for up to seven years and withstand a fairly wide range of temperatures (Castro 2008).
It is not known if nursery stock contaminated by seed or plants of P. perfoliata has been imported into Canada. The Seed Science and Technology Section of the CFIA Saskatoon laboratory maintains a record of contaminants found in domestic and imported seed. Persicaria perfoliata has not previously been detected as a seed contaminant.
Persicaria perfoliata seed may contaminate imported nursery stock present either in the soil or adhering to plants (e.g., Persicaria perfoliata can wrap around the nursery stock and fruits are known to remain on the plants long after the plant senesces) (Kumar and Di Tommaso 2005). The import of plants with soil and related matter is prohibited with the exception of shipments from the continental United States which require a Phytosanitary Certificate (see CFIA Policy Directive D-02-02 Plant protection import requirements for rooted, or unrooted plants, plant parts, and plants in vitrofor planting). Shipments of plants rooted in soil or related matter, or without soil, would be required to be free of P. perfoliata.
Hay and Straw
Hay is a potential pathway for the introduction of P. perfoliata , although there is little information about it in the literature (Castro 2008). The forage industry is economically significant in Canada (Table 2a & 2b). It is not known if P. perfoliata has been unintentionally imported into Canada as a contaminant in hay or straw (i.e., forage crops).

Summary of forage imports and exports into and out of Canada between 2003 and 2007

Table 2a: Imports
Year Quantity
('000) Tonnes
Value
('000 Cdn$)
20070.2535,710
20060.2685,723
20050.4027,814
20040.4578,349
20031.1689,836
Table 2b: Exports
Year Quantity
('000) Tonnes
Value
('000 Cdn$)
2007746198,381
2006677172,826
2005616162,790
2004679171,515
2003450136,272

Source: Statistics Canada 2008

Vehicles and Equipment - Persicaria perfoliata may unintentionally be introduced into Canada as a contaminant on railroad cars, vehicles, and similar equipment (e.g. mowing equipment) entering Canada from infested areas. For example, P. perfoliata may have been introduced into Virginia (U.S.) as a contaminant of railroad cars or in mud on gas well drilling equipment (Lehtonen 1994). It can also be dispersed by logging equipment (McCormick and Hartwig 1995) and roadside mowers (Oliver 1996).

In 2003, CBSA assumed responsibility for the initial import inspection services in respect of the Acts and Regulations administered by the CFIA to the extent that they are applicable at Canadian border points. The inspections of goods that may be contaminated with soil are among the responsibilities that were transferred to the CBSA in 2003. The Food, Plant and Animals Programs Section of the CBSA is currently finalizing its Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) concerning the "Inspection of Imported Goods Potentially Contaminated with Soil." This SOP provides the CBSA's Border Services Officers with formal procedures for the inspection and disposition of goods that may be contaminated with soil, including used agricultural machinery and vehicles.

Regulatory measures would include enforcement of CFIA's Policy Directive 95-26 (CFIA 2008) that specifies the phytosanitary requirements for the import and domestic movement of soil and related matter. It includes requirements for soil and related matter individually or in association with plants, plant material, and other things such as vehicles, equipment, seed, hay, and containers. This directive also specifies the standards by which the Canadian Food Inspection Agency or the Canada Border Services Agency may inspect, certify or release these articles. If added to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada (CFIA 2009), things such as vehicles, equipment, and containers may be refused entry into Canada if contaminated with Persicaria perfoliata.

Appendix 12A: Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Senecio inaequidens (South African ragwort)

Identity of Organism

Name: Senecio inaequidens (Asteraceae) (USDA-ARS 2009)

Synonyms: Senecio burchellii (CAB International 2007)

English common names: South African ragwort, narrow-leaved ragwort (CAB International 2007), fireweed, variable groundsel (Mondragón Pichardo and Vibrans 2005)

French common names: Séneçon du Cap (CAB International 2007)

Taxonomic note: There has been considerable taxonomic confusion regarding Senecio inaequidens, which is owed to morphological variation within the species and superficial similarity between two groups of species (Senecio madagascariensis complex and Senecio lautus complex) (CAB International 2007). Traditionally, a distinction has been made between Senecio inaequidens and Senecio madagascariensis, although recent research suggests that they are conspecific and differ in ploidy level only (CAB International 2007; Lafuma et al. 2003). It was found that a tetraploid form was introduced in Europe, and a diploid form in Australia, Argentina, Mexico and possibly the U.S. (Hawaii), although both forms originated in South Africa (Lafuma et al. 2003). The tetraploid form is referred to as Senecio inaequidens, and the diploid form may actually be what has been referred to as Senecio madagascariensis.

Overall, the distinction between Senecio inaequidens and Senecio madagascariensis is still 'controversial' (CAB International 2007). For the purposes of risk assessment, they are considered to be distinct taxa in accordance with the USDA Germplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN) (USDA-ARS 2009), although some of the references consulted treated the two together. It should be noted that this distinction between taxa may disappear in the future, which would require an update to the taxonomy presented in this risk assessment. At this time, since Senecio madagascariensis possesses many of the same invasive qualities as Senecio inaequidens (Lafuma et al. 2003), the plant health risk posed by the two taxa should probably be considered concurrently. Senecio inaequidens and Senecio madagascariensis are both listed on the U.S. Federal Noxious Weed List (USDA-APHIS 2006).

Description: Senecio inaequidens is a broadleaved, herbaceous short-lived perennial shrub that reaches 100 cm in height (CAB International 2007). It has erect stems that often branch from the base, bright green alternate leaves that usually clasp the stem, and yellow flowers composed of 7 to 13 female ray florets and numerous perfect disc florets (CAB International 2007). The seeds are achenes, 2 to 2.5 mm long, with a white pappus, 2 to 3 times as long (EPPO 2006a). The specific epithet inaequidens means unequal teeth, likely referring to variation in the degree of dissection and the width of the lobes of the leaves (CAB International 2007).

Organism Status

It is not reported to occur in Canada (CAB International 2007; CFIA 2008; Scoggan 1979), with the exception of Heger and Böhmer (2006), who refer to Garcia-Serrano et al. (2004). However, there is no statement in the latter reference (Garcia-Serrano et al. 2004) indicating that Senecio inaequidens is present in Canada, so the reference appears to have been used in error (possibly because it was published in the Canadian Journal of Botany). No evidence of its cultivation in Canada was found either (CNLA 2008; Isaacson and Allen 2007). Based on this information, for the PRA area, Senecio inaequidens is considered absent.

Current Regulatory Status

It is not currently regulated in Canada. It is regulated as a federal noxious weed in the US but not regulated in any of the states.Summary of pathways for Senecio inaequidens (South African ragwort). It is not currently regulated by any European country (EPPO 2006), but is on the EPPO List of Invasive Alien Plants and is considered to impose an important threat to plant health, the environment and biodiversity in the EPPO region. Senecio madagascariensis, a very closely related taxon, is listed as a noxious weed in Hawaii (HEAR 2003), Australia (i.e., New South Wales, Western Australia, Queensland and the Australian Capital Territory (Australian Weeds Committee 2008; EPPO 2006)) and in Mexico.

Probability of Entry

Although natural dispersal is an important pathway of introduction in its current range, natural dispersal is unlikely to be means of introduction for into Canada (Table 1). However, there are a number of potential unintentional pathways for introduction of Senecio inaequidens into Canada including wool imports, contaminated hay or grain, and as a generalist contaminant on travelers or on surfaces.

Table 1: Summary of pathways for Senecio inaequidens (South African ragwort)
Type of pathway Specific Pathways
Natural dispersal
  • wind is a pathway for dispersal and can carry the seeds long distances
  • water is considered a possible means of dispersal
The risk of natural dispersal into Canada is low because there are no populations near Canadian borders.
Intentional IntroductionNone identified
Unintentional Introduction
  • as a seed contaminant on wool imports
  • as a seed contaminant in hay, grain, ornamental plants, soil, or on the surface of containers
  • seed contaiminant on clothes and shoes, livestock, building materials, or on tires

These unintentional pathways are low risk.

Probability of Establishment

It native to southern Africa (Lesotho, South Africa, Swaziland, Mozambique, Botswana, and Namibia) and is naturalized elsewhere (CAB International 2007) (Figure 1 ). Its reported range is variable among sources due to the taxonomic confusion mentioned above. It is currently found in many European countries, from Spain to Poland, and including the northern countries of Norway and Sweden (CAB International 2007; Heger and Böhmer 2006). Although it has been reported in Finland, it does not appear to have established there (Heger and Böhmer 2006). It was also recently discovered in Taiwan (Jung et al. 2005). Reports of Senecio inaequidens from Mexico, Argentina (Figure 1), and possibly Colombia, may refer to S. madagascariensis (Lafuma et al. 2003).

Figure 1: Distribution map of Senecio inaequidens (South African ragwort)

Figure 1. Description follows.
Description of Figure 1:

This image shows the distribution map of Senecio inaequidens (South African ragwort). You can see a map of the world under which there is a legend that is subdivided into two sections: national records and subnational records. Under national records there is a yellow square with a filled in red circle inside it symbolizing that records are present. Secondly, there is a yellow square inside which there is a red outline of a circle signifying that it is present only in some areas. Subnational record also has two symbols: a yellow square with a green filled in circle denoting present records on the subnational level and a yellow square with an outline of a green circle inside it signifying that they are only present in some areas. Southern Africa is covered in yellow containing filled in red circles in regions such as: Lesotho, South Africa, Swaziland, Mozambique, Botswana, and Namibia. Moreover, a great many European countries ranging from Spain to Poland extending to Norway and Sweden are covered in yellow while most contain complete red circles, Ireland and the United Kingdom have green full circles. Argentina and Mexico also contain complete red circles.

Source: EPPO 2008

In southern Africa, Senecio inaequidens grows in grasslands at high elevations (1400-2800 m), along the margins of periodically flooded streams, and in ruderal habitats (CAB International 2007). In Europe, this species establishes in a wide variety of habitats and on a wide range of soils, although it prefers warm, dry disturbed sites with well-drained soils (CAB International 2007). Habitats include railway lines, roadsides, the dividing strips of highways, river ports, flat roofs, flower tubs, logging areas, storm-damaged forests, burnt land industrial sites, disused quarries, rocky sites, coastal dunes, crops and pastures from sea level to approximately 600 m (EPPO 2006; Heger and Böhmer 2006).

There is potential for Senecio inaequidens to establish in Canada due to its opportunistic nature and its ability to establish in temperate climates. An EPPO datasheet on Senecio inaequidens describes it as hardy and well adapted to zone 7 (EPPO 2006) (likely referring to USDA Plant Hardiness Zone 7). Based on the results of the NAPPFAST System, it appears capable of establishing in zone 6 as well, based on records from Norway, Sweden (GBIF 2008) and Switzerland (Heger and Böhmer 2006). In Canada, zone 6 and above includes coastal British Columbia and Vancouver Island, a small area in extreme southern Ontario, and some of the coastal areas of Nova Scotia and Newfoundland (Figure 2).

Figure 2: Potential distribution of Senecio inaequidens (South African ragwort) in Canada

Note: As predicted by the NAPPFAST system. The red shading corresponds to areas at risk which represent global plant hardiness zones 6 and above.

Figure 2. Description follows.
Description of Figure 2:

This image shows the potential range of Senecio inaequidens (South African ragwort) in Canada and northern America through the use of a map. Red is used to indicate the regions in which Senecio inaequidens could survive in according to the Canadian Plant Hardiness Zones map, in this case NAPPFAST Hardiness Zones 6. In Canada, the potential range of Senecio inaequidens includes coastal British Columbia and Vancouver Island, a small area in extreme southern Ontario, and some of the coastal areas of Nova Scotia and Newfoundland. Most of the red can be found in the U.S., this includes the greater parts of the east and west coasts as well as areas located near the Great Lakes extending downwards beyond the image.

Probability of Spread

It is a prolific seed producer that is dispersed naturally by wind and unintentionally by humans in association with clothes, shoes, soil movement, road and rail vehicles, building materials, hay, grain, ornamental plants, livestock, and wool (CAB International 2007; EPPO 2006; Heger and Böhmer 2006). In Europe, its initial introduction occurred in association with sheep wool imports and then it spread rapidly along linear anthropogenic structures, especially railway tracks and highways (Heger and Böhmer 2006). It grows vigorously and is readily adaptable to a wide range of environments (EPPO 2006).

Potential Economic Consequences

From various foci of introduction in Europe, Senecio inaequidens began to spread and by the 1970s was considered invasive in many European countries (EPPO 2006). It continues to expand its range today, and tends to form very high infestation levels (EPPO 2006). Senecio inaequidens is known to colonize vineyards and to reduce the value of pastures (EPPO 2006). The plants contain pyrrolizidine alkaloids, which are toxic to livestock and humans (EPPO 2006) and may affect consumer demand for milk and honey (EPPO 2006).

Control or eradication in Europe is considered very difficult and costly (EPPO 2006). Negative economic consequences associated with herbicide resistance of Senecio inaequidens have been reported from German railways (100,000 Euros per year) (Heger and Böhmer 2006; Reinhardt et al. 2003). The EPPO Pest Risk Analysis for this species indicates that economic risks for this species are medium to high (EPPO 2006). [Note that there is a discrepancy between this source and CAB International (2007), which considers economic impacts to be minimal.] The introduction of Senecio inaequidens in the PRA areacould also threaten Canada's ability to export commodities to the United States (where it is a designated federal noxious weed) and potentially elsewhere. The achenes are similar in size to those of Senecio vulgaris L. (common groundsel), a known contaminant of forages and grasses in Canada.

Potential Environmental and Social Consequences

It is known to invade natural habitats (e.g., dunes, cliffs, temporary ponds) and may threaten biodiversity (EPPO 2006). It is considered capable of modifying landscapes and is also an "colonizer of wasteland" (EPPO 2006). The EPPO Pest Risk Analysis for this species indicates that environmental risks for this species are medium to high and social risks are low to medium (EPPO 2006). Note again that there is a discrepancy between this source and CAB International (2007), which considers environmental impacts to be minimal.

Uncertainty

It may only be marginally hardy to NAPPFAST zone 6. It is certainly widespread in zone 7 in Europe, but if it could only survive to zone 7, its potential range in Canada would be limited to coastal and southwestern BC.

Although Senecio inaequidens is considered to have negative impacts on crops and pastures, information on the severity of these impacts, or on what crop species it invades (other than vineyards) is scarce.

Conclusion

The pest risk assessment concluded that Senecio inaequidens would likely become weedy or invasive in parts of Canada, including southern and coastal British Columbia, extreme southern Ontario and parts of the Maritimes, if introduced.

Technical Issues for Consideration

Senecio taxa may be distinguished based on shorter achenes (1.5 mm to 2.0 mm) and hairs confined to the achene grooves in Senecio madagascariensis as compared to longer achenes (2.5 mm) and completely hairy achenes in Senecio inaequidens. These differences should be treated with caution as they are based on limited sampling (CAB International 2007; Radford et al. 2000).

Appendix 12B: Risk Management Considerations for Senecio inaequidens (South African ragwort)

Values at Risk

Canadian Livestock Industry:
Senecio inaequidens contains 4 different pyrrolizidine alkaloids, two of which are known hepatotoxins (Dimande et al. 2007). These chemicals are poisonous to grazing animals, including cattle and sheep, which have resulted in death (Scherber 2007, Dimande et al. 2007). The total export value of cattle, sheep and horse products originating from the Canadian provinces where Senecio inaequidens is likely to invade was approximately $450 million in 2008 (Industry Canada 2009). In addition to directly affecting livestock, pastureland yields could decrease if the weed is introduced into Canada.
Canadian Wine Industry:
This species has the potential to colonize vineyards affecting the Lake Erie North Shore and Pelee Island wine regions of Ontario. In 2007, approximately $5 million worth of grapes Footnote 1 were produced in the counties of Ontario where this species could become established (OMAFRA 2009). The coastal wine-growing region of B.C. could also be affected by Senecio inaequidens affecting $1.6 million.
Biological Diversity:
There is evidence that Senecio inaequidens threatens biological diversity.
Animal Health:
The plant contains pyrrolizidine alkaloids which are toxic to livestock and humans and may affect consumer demand for milk and honey.

Pathways of Introduction

Natural Dispersal

The major pathways for the natural dispersal of Senecio inaequidens are wind, animals, and water. The risk of introduction into Canada from these natural dispersion mechanisms is low as there are no populations present near Canadian borders.

Intentional Introduction

There are no identified intentional introduction pathways for the entry.

Non-intentional Introduction

  1. Field crops not intended for propagation. The level of risk associated with the import of cereal grain into Canada is very low since imports originate primarily from areas where Senecio inaequidens is absent.
  2. Hay and Straw. The level of risk associated with imports of hay and straw into Canada is relatively low since they originate primarily from areas where Senecio inaequidens is absent.
  3. Livestock. The level of risk associated with the importation of livestock is low because of the small number of animals imported into Canada from countries where Senecio inaequidens is present.
  4. Vehicles and Used Farm Machinery. Information is not available on the volume of imports of used farm machinery. The lik lihood of Senecio inaequidens being introdued into Canada from seeds adhering to tires is low.
  5. Nursery Stock with Soil. Not present in United-States so it is not likely to be introduced to Canada through nursery stock with soil.
  6. Travelers and Their Effects. Travelers are not likely to bring Senecio inaequidens back into Canada unintentionally.
  7. Packaging Material. Container surfaces are a potential pathway of introduction for Senecio inaequidens. The achenes are more likely to attach to rough surfaces (e.g.. wood) rather than smooth ones, due to the nature of the seed. This pathway is considered low risk.

Appendix 12C: Assessement of Measures for Senecio inaequidens (South African ragwort)

Field Crops Not Intended for Propagation

Previous imports

Import data for cereal grains originating from countries where Senecio inaequidens (South African ragwort) is present

Value in Canadian Dollars ($)
Product 1: HS 1001 – Wheat
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Argentina00250,050
Netherlands001,765
United Kingdom (U.K.)457 27,372212
Germany483 4,38390
Denmark, Italy, South Africa, France46 330231
Subtotal:98632,085252,348
Product 2: HS 100200 – Rye
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Germany092,050,723
Poland183640
Subtotal:183732,050,723
Product 3: HS 100300 – Barley
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Switzerland001,118
United Kingdom1,3761439
Finland, Netherlands, Sweden, Poland, Germany, Italy7041,095928
Subtotal:2,0801,2382,055
Product 4: HS 100400 – Oats
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Switzerland, Poland, Sweden, South Africa161412332
United Kingdom9,84224149
Subtotal:10,003436481
Product 5: HS 100590 - Maize (excluding sweet corn)
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Argentina2,98296,5192,562
Netherlands, U.K., Poland, Finland, South Africa41912234
Spain022,1560
France46,00000
Subtotal:49,401118,6872,796
Product 6: HS 1008 - Buckwheat, millet, canary seed; other unmilled cereals
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Switzerland18,739289,206291,267
Netherlands40,728320,144227,418
Poland11,37020,13349,375
South Africa0024,311
France64,27931,24223,686
Italy7,11615,7606,877
United Kingdom7815,5025,253
Germany2,85819,22052
Spain, Argentina, Hungary4751,2270
Austria47,22100
Finland3,70600
Subtotal:197,273702,434628,239
Totals of Products 1 to 6
All Exporting Countries 2006 2007 2008
Total:259,761855,2532,936,642
Quantity (metric tonnes, TNE)
Product 1: HS 1001 – Wheat
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Argentina00320
Netherlands004
United Kingdom (U.K.)0170
Germany030
Denmark, Italy, South Africa, France0 00
Subtotal:020324
Product 2: HS 100200 – Rye
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Germany004,015
Poland030
Subtotal:034,015
Product 3: HS 100300 – Barley
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Switzerland001
United Kingdom700
Finland, Netherlands, Sweden, Poland, Germany, Italy103
Subtotal:804
Product 4: HS 100400 – Oats
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Switzerland, Poland, Sweden, South Africa122
United Kingdom2010
Subtotal:2132
Product 5: HS 100590 - Maize (excluding sweet corn)
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Argentina42329119
Netherlands, U.K., Poland, Finland, South Africa20144
Spain01190
France3,87889365
Subtotal:3,922537628
Product 6: HS 1008 - Buckwheat, millet, canary seed; other unmilled cereals
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Switzerland3,78869,33057,456
Netherlands21,248221,320141,553
Poland6,0668,17615,984
South Africa0021,500
France17,3518,6046,460
Italy2,3294,5953,149
United Kingdom4875584,668
Germany1,07025,53731
Spain, Argentina, Hungary364870
Austria63,17000
Finland2200
Subtotal:115,895338,207250,801
Totals of Products 1 to 6
All Exporting Countries 2006 2007 2008
Total:119,846338,770255,774

Note: Countries with an export value of less than $1,000 per year are grouped together and a summed value for all countries is shown.

Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulate Senecio inaequidens as a quarantine pest under the Plant Protection Act and add this species to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada (CFIA 2009) in order to:

Regulatory actions under the Plant Protection Act could include one or more of the following:

Note: End uses impact risk and may therefore impact required risk mitigation measures. Regulatory measures may be waived for those commodities that have been treated or processed such that the risk of introduction of Senecio inaequidens has been reduced to an acceptable level.

All risk mitigation measures for field crop commodities containing Senecio inaequidens must be taken with consideration for requirements/measures for pests other than plants (e.g.. pathogens and insects).

Trade implications

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Hay and Straw

Previous imports

Import data for hay and straw originating from countries where Senecio inaequidens is present

Value in Canadian Dollars ($)

Product 1: HS 121300 - Cereal straw and husks, unprepared
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Germany3,0792,4533,013
United Kingdom2,5188,773408
Subtotal: 5,59711,2263,421
Product 2: HS 121490 – Swedes, mangolds, fodder roots, hay, clover, sainfoin, forage kale
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Germany603,0000
France1920140
Subtotal:795,0140
Totals of both Products
All Exporting Countries 2006 2007 2008
Total: $ 5,676$ 16,240 $ 3,421

Source: Industry Canada 2009

Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulate Senecio inaequidens under the Plant Protection Act as a quarantine pest by placing it on the List of Pests Regulated by Canada in order to:

Regulatory actions under the Plant Protection Act could include one or more of the following:

Trade implications

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Livestock

Previous imports

Potential risk mitigation measures

No mitigation measures are required due to the low number of animals entering Canada that could act as an introduction pathway for Senecio inaequidens.

Previous imports

Potential risk mitigation measures

No measure is required:

Vehicles and Used Farm Machinery

Previous imports

Potential Risk mitigation measures

Enforcement of the Directive 95-26: "Phytosanitary requirements for soil and related matter, alone or in association with plants" (CFIA 2008).

Nursery Stock with Soil

Plants imported from off-continent sources must be free of soil as specified in directive D-02-02: Plant Protection Import Requirements for Rooted, or Unrooted Plants, Plant Parts, and Tissue Cultured Plants for Propagation (CFIA 2006). Soil can be imported with plants from the continental U.S., but since Senecio inaequidens is not present in that country, it is not likely to be introduced to Canada through nursery stock with soil; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.

Travelers and Their Effects

Previous imports

Risk mitigation measures

Increase public awareness of the regulation and the risk posed by Senecio inaequidens and distribute awareness material at border crossings to the public. It is difficult to target travelers for one particular species that could be unintentionally imported. Thus, a general information and awareness campaign about the risks associated with several species may be the best option. While not considered effective by itself if the risk is high, increased public awareness is a viable action if the level of risk is low.

Trade implications

None anticipated.

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Packaging Material

Previous Imports

Risk Mitigation Measures

Trade Implications

No additional trade implications since countries that do not comply with the requirements set out in D-98-08 may have goods refused at the Canadian border.

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Appendix 13A: Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Senecio madagascariensis (Madacascar ragwort)

Identity of Organism

Name: Senecio madagascariensis (Asteraceae) (USDA-ARS 2009)

Synonyms: Senecio incognitus Cabrera (USDA-ARS 2009)

English common names: Fireweed, Madagascar ragwort (USDA-ARS 2009), variable groundsel (Starr et al. 1999)

French common names: Séneçon de Madagascar

Taxonomic note: As noted in PRA 2009-20 sein (Senecio inaequidens DC.), the distinction between Senecio inaequidens (2n=40) and Senecio madagascariensis (2n=20) is controversial (International 2007; Lafuma et al. 2003; López et al. 2008). For the purposes of this risk assessment they are considered to be distinct taxa in accordance with the USDA Germplasm Resources Information Network (USDA-ARS 2009). Detailed investigation of populations from the exotic ranges of these species, together with several other closely related Senecio species from southern Africa is needed to understand the genetics, systematics and morphological variation of Senecio madagascariensis (CAB International 2007).

Description: It is a broadleaved, herbaceous, short-lived, branched perennial with golden yellow flowers (CAB International 2007; Starr et al. 1999). The plant has erect stems that reach 60 cm (CAB International 2007). Its leaves are bright green, alternate, occasionally petiolate and variable, reaching 12 cm long and 2.5 cm wide (CAB International 2007). Plants produce 2 to 200 small daisy-like flowers per plant, which appear at the branch tips (Starr et al. 1999). Seeds are achenes measuring approximately one to three mm long (Starr et al. 1999). Each has a white pappus, with hairs two to three times as long as the achenes (CAB International 2007; Starr et al. 1999).

Organism Status

It is not reported to occur in Canada, and no evidence was found that it has been cultivated in Canada (CAB International 2007; CFIA 2008; CNLA 2008; Isaacson and Allen 2007; Scoggan 1979). Based on this information Senecio madagascariensis is considered to be absent in Canada.

Current Regulatory Status

It is not currently regulated in Canada. It is regulated as a Federal Noxious Weed in the United States (USDA-APHIS 2006) and at the state level in Hawaii (HEAR 2003). It is also listed as a noxious weed in Australia, in New South Wales, Western Australia, Queensland and the Australian Capital Territory (Australian Weeds Committee 2008) and in Japan (Government of Japan 2006).

Probability of Entry

Potential pathways for introduction of Senecio madagascariensis into the PRA area are primarily unintentional pathways (Table 1). There is a moderate risk of this species entering the PRA area on travelers, on their clothing, shoes, or personal effects. Additional, minor pathways include imports of grass or pasture seed for planting and imports of livestock from areas where this plant is present. From the year 2000 to present, Senecio madagascariensis has not been detected in samples analysed by the CFIA Seed Lab.

Table 1: Summary of pathways for Senecio madagascariensis (Madacascar ragwort)
Type of pathway Specific Pathways
Natural dispersal

Wind is considered to be the major factor for dispersal of seeds over large areas and long distances (i.e. seeds are light and spread easy by wind)

The risk of natural dispersal into Canada is low because there are no populations near Canadian borders.

Intentional Introduction None identified
Unintentional Introduction
  • ship ballast
  • as a seed contaminate in hydromulch
  • as a seed contaminate in hay or grain products
  • as a seed contaminate on farm vehicles and equipment
  • as a seed attached to livestock
  • contaminated shoes and clothing of travelers

Contaminated shoes, clothing and personal effects of travellers may be the most likely of these pathways due to the high frequency of human travel between Canada and Hawaii, Australia, Japan, Colombia, Argentina and southern Africa. The remaining pathways are low risk.

Probability of Establishment

Senecio madagascariensis is native to South Africa (Cape Province, Natal, Transvaal), Swaziland (USDA, ARS, 2009), Mozambique and Madagascar (CAB International 2007) (Figure 1). It is introduced in Kenya, Mauritius, U.S. (Hawaii), Argentina (Buenos Aires, Santa Fe, Entre Rios, Corrientes and Mendoza), Colombia, Australia (New South Wales, Queensland, and Victoria) (CAB International 2007) and Japan (Koike et al. 2006).

Figure 1: Distribution map of Senecio madagascariensis (Madacascar ragwort)

Note: a red dot indicates widespread; yellow indicates present but no further details; white indicates present and localized; green indicates present with additional regional information available (CAB International 2007).

Figure 1. Description follows.
Description of Figure 1:

This image is a distribution map of Senecio madagascariensis (Madagascar ragwort) in the world. You can see a map of the world which contains red dots signifying Senecio madagascariensis is widespread, yellow dots indicating that it is present but with no further details, white dots denoting a presence that is localized and green dots signifying that it is present with additional regional information available. South America has two whites dots located in Columbia and Argentina. At the centre of Australia there is a green dot. Asia has a yellow dot in the vicinity of Japan while another yellow dot can be seen in the Hawaiian Islands of North America. Lastly and most pervasively, there are yellow, white and red dots scattered along the lower half of the continent of Africa more specifically in Kenya which has a yellow dot as well as Swaziland and Mauritius which has multiple; Madagascar has a red dot and Mozambique has white one.

Source: CAB International 2007.

In general, this species is opportunistic and able to colonize a wide range of habitats, "from low-elevation arid pastures and coastal plains to higher-elevation, moist pastures, yards, fields and roadsides" (Starr et al. 1999). It often occurs in overgrazed or neglected pastures as well as cultivated or disturbed land (Starr et al. 1999). Although it has been found in both shady and sunny sites, it does not perform well in pastures over 1 m tall (CAB International 2007). Both high and low fertility soils, as well as a range of soil textures, are suitable for its growth. It is tolerant of drought (Plant and Robertson 2007) but does not survive in poorly drained or waterlogged soils (Starr et al. 1999; Watson et al. 1997). Senecio madagascariensis appears to be most successful in humid maritime sub-tropical climates and tends to be restricted to climates with low frost incidence (CAB International 2007; Sindel and Michael 1992). Frost may kill seedlings and reduce plant vigor (Sindel and Michael 1992; Starr et al. 1999).

Based on its current distribution and the results of the North Carolina State APHIS Plant Pest Forecasting (NAPPFAST) System it may adapt to plant hardiness zones 8 and higher. In Canada, zones 8 and above are restricted to coastal British Columbia and Vancouver Island (Figure 2). Within the area at risk, the dominant biogeoclimatic zone is coastal western hemlock, and there are small areas of coastal Douglas-fir as well (BC Ministry of Forests 1999). While unlikely to establish in mature forests, Senecio madagascariensis may be capable of establishing in the warm, humid disturbed areas of these biogeoclimatic zones.

Figure 2: Potential distribution of Potential distribution of Senecio madagascariensis (Madacascar ragwort) in British Columbia, Canada

Figure 2.Description follows.
Description of Figure 2:

This image shows the potential distribution of Senecio madagascariensis (Madagascar ragwort) in Canada, more specifically in British Columbia. Red is used to indicate the regions in which Senecio inaequidens could survive according to the Canadian Plant Hardiness Zones map, in this case NAPPFAST Hardiness Zones 8. In Canada, the potential range of Senecio madagascariensis is very limited to include only coastal British Columbia where it has a scattered presence. This image is narrowed to include parts of the U.S. more specifically Washington and Oregon where the red has more of a prevalent presence and is heavily condensed.

Probability of Spread

It is a highly adaptable species with an ability to grow vigorously and spread rapidly after introduction. Seeds are small and light (Plant and Robertson 2007). Seed production, which is extended over a period of weeks, is prolific (100 to 150 seeds per flower, 25,000 to 30,000 per plant) and germination rates are high (Starr et al. 1999). Light infestations can result in 1,000,000 seeds per hectare (Queensland Government 2007). Seeds are capable of germinating immediately after release, and quickly cover areas recently disturbed by fire or cultivation before more desirable species have a chance to emerge (Plant and Robertson 2007). Once present in an area, the species is easily dispersed by wind and other natural and unintentional human-mediated means (see Probably of Entry). Within Australia, contaminated fodder has been identified as one means of spread of Senecio madagascariensis (Bega Valley Fireweed Association no date).

Potential Economic Consequences

It is a serious pest plant in Australia and Hawaii (Starr et al. 1999). Its introduction to Japan has been fairly recent, but it is spreading rapidly there as well (Koike et al. 2006). In Colombia and Argentina, its distribution is currently considered localized (CAB International 2007). The main economic impact of this species is reduced pasture productivity (CAB International 2007). It is a strong competitor with desired pasture species and also has toxic effects on livestock (CAB International 2007). Consumption of large quantities of Senecio madagascariensis has resulted in acute poisoning and death of livestock due to pyrrolizidine alkaloid toxicosis. Consumption of smaller quantities over longer periods results in sublethal liver poisoning. Poultry, pigs, cattle and horses are all sensitive to pyrrolizidine alkaloids. Sheep and goats are fairly resistant, but continuous exposure should be avoided (CAB International 2007). In Australia, over a decade ago, costs due to herbicide use and toxic effects on cattle were estimated to be $11 million (currency not stated) in non-drought years (DRDC 1996, cited in Starr et al. 1999).

The establishment of Senecio madagascariensis into Canada would threaten Canada's ability to export commodities to the United States where it is a designated Federal Noxious Weed, as well as Australia and Japan.

Potential Environmental and Social Consequences

It can have a negative effect on biodiversity by competing with native vegetation such as grass and other low-growing plants (CAB International 2007; Sindel et al. 1998). Changes to the vegetative composition of an area due to this species may also promote soil erosion (CAB International 2007).

Uncertainty

No significant areas of uncertainty identified.

Conclusion

Senecio madagascariensis could become invasive in parts of Canada (coastal British Columbia and Vancouver Island) if it were introduced.

Technical Issues for Consideration

Senecio taxa may be distinguished based on shorter achenes (1.5 mm to 2.0 mm) and hairs confined to the achene grooves in Senecio madagascariensis as compared to longer achenes (2.5 mm) and completely hairy achenes in Senecio inaequidens. These differences should be treated with caution as they are based on limited sampling (CAB International 2007; Radford et al. 2000).

Appendix 13B: Risk Management Considerations for Senecio madagascariensis (Madacascar ragwort)

Values at Risk

Canadian Livestock Industry
Senecio madagascariensis contains pyrrolizidine alkaloids that are toxic to livestock (i.e., cattle, sheep, goats, and horses) and causes irreversible liver damage. Total pasture land in BC was approximately 3.4 million acres in 1996 (Statistics Canada 1996), however the majority of farms producing cattle in BC are outside of the potential distribution range (i.e., coastal British Columbia and Vancouver Island) of the weed.
Animal Health
It contains pyrrolizidine alkaloids that are toxic to livestock (i.e., cattle, sheep, goats, and horses) and causes irreversible liver damage.
Biological Diversity
It can have a negative effect on biodiversity by competing with native vegetation such as grass and other low-growing plants.

Pathways of Introduction

Natural Dispersal

The risk of introduction into Canada by natural dispersal is low as there are no known populations near the Canadian border.

Intentional Introduction

No intentional introduction pathways were identified.

Non-intentional Introduction
  1. Field crops not intended for propagation: The level of risk associated with the import of cereal grain into Canada is very low since imports originate primarily from areas where Senecio madagascariensis is absent.
  2. Hay and Straw: The level of risk associated with imports of grass and forage seed into Canada is low since they originate primarily from areas where Senecio madagascariensis is absent.
  3. Travellers and Their Effects: A considerable number of people cross the Canadian border every year. Approximately 5.4 million Canadians traveled abroad in the 4th quarter of 2008 alone (Statistics Canada 2009). There is a high frequency of travel between Canada and areas where Senecio madagascariensis is present (Hawaii, Australia, Japan, Colombia, Argentina and southern Africa). This pathway is considered the most likely pathway of introduction of Senecio madagascariensis into Canada, but the level of risk is unknown.

Appendix 13C: Assessement of Measures for Senecio madagascariensis (Madacascar ragwort)

Field Crops Not Intended for Propagation

Previous imports

Import data for cereal grains originating from places where Senecio madagascariensis is present.
Table 2a: ($)Value in Canadian Dollars
Product Exporting Country Table Note ** 2006 2007 2008
HS 1001 - WheatArgentina00250,050
HS 1001 - WheatU.S. - Hawaii001,151
HS 100590 - Maize (excluding sweet corn)Colombia8,5205,1073,036
HS 100590 - Maize (excluding sweet corn)Argentina2,98296,5192,562
HS 1008 - Buckwheat, millet, canary seed; other unmilled cereals Table Note *Colombia8,18113,87538,927
Total:19,683115,501295,726
Table 2a: Quantity in metric tonnes (TNE)
Product Exporting Country Table Note ** 2006 2007 2008
HS 1001 - WheatArgentina00320
HS 1001 - WheatU.S. - Hawaii004
HS 100590 - Maize (excluding sweet corn)Colombia391312
HS 100590 - Maize (excluding sweet corn)Argentina42329119
HS 1008 - Buckwheat, millet, canary seed; other unmilled cereals Table Note *Colombia2,1915,88315,354
Total:2,2726,22515,809

Source: Statistics Canada 2009

Table Notes

Table note star 1

Quantity listed as N/A

Return to first table note * referrer

Table note star 2

Countries with an import value of less than $1,000 are not included.

Return to first table note ** referrer

Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulate Senecio madagascariensis as a quarantine pest under the Plant Protection Act and add this species to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada (CFIA 2009) in order to:

Regulatory actions under the Plant Protection Act could include one or more of the following:

Note: End uses impact risk and may therefore impact required risk mitigation measures. Regulatory measures may be waived for those commodities that have been treated or processed such that the risk of introduction of Senecio madagascariensis has been reduced to an acceptable level.

Trade implications

Feasibility

Resources will be needed by CFIA for marketplace monitoring and sampling, inspector training, and communication material development.

Seeds

Previous imports

Imports of forage and grass seed for sowing from countries where Senecio madagascariensis is present.

Table 3a-3d: Value in Canadian Dollars ($)

Table 3a: Value in Canadian Dollars ($)
Product Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
HS 120921 - AlfalfaAustralia208,607234,443198,929
HS 120921 - AlfalfaArgentina563,1220
Subtotal: 208,663237,565198,929
Table 3b: Value in Canadian Dollars ($)
Product Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
HS 120922 – CloverAustralia119,673364,3650
HS 120922 – CloverArgentina43,76991,082146,970
Subtotal: 163,442455,447146,970
Table 3c: Value in Canadian Dollars ($)
Product Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
HS 120923 – FescueJapan002,505
HS 120925 - Rye grassArgentina017,2420
HS 120929 - Seed of forage plants Argentina28,760445,141142,798
HS 120929 - Seed of forage plants Japan09702,475
Subtotal: 28,760446,111145,273
Table 3d: Value in Canadian Dollars ($)
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Total: 400,8651,156,365493,677

Table 3a-3d: Quantity in Kilograms (KGM)

Table 3a: Quantity in Kilograms (KGM)
Product Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
HS 120921 - Alfalfa Australia69,57141,71831,372
HS 120921 - Alfalfa Argentina115130
Subtotal: 69,58242,23131,372
Table 3b: Quantity in Kilograms (KGM)
Product Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
HS 120922 – CloverAustralia31,500105,3310
HS 120922 – CloverArgentina17,90033,30041,300
Subtotal: 49,400138,63141,300
Table 3c: Quantity in Kilograms (KGM)
Product Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
HS 120923 – FescueJapan001,474
HS 120925 -Rye grassArgentina024,9900
HS 120929 - Seed of forage plants Argentina6,10098,03632,204
HS 120929 - Seed of forage plantsJapan0154903
Subtotal: 6,10098,19033,107
Table 3d: Quantity in Kilograms (KGM)
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Total: 125,082304,042107,253

Source: Statistics Canada 2009

Potential risk mitigation measures

Trade implications

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Travellers and Their Effects

Previous imports

Risk mitigation measures

Increase public awareness of the regulation and the risk posed by Senecio madagascariensis and distribute awareness material at border crossings to the public. It is difficult to target travelers for one particular species that could be unintentionally imported. Thus, a general information and awareness campaign about the risks associated with several species may be the best option. While not considered effective by itself if the risk is high, increased public awareness is a viable action if the level of risk is low.

Trade implications

None anticipated.

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Appendix 14A: Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Solanum elaeagnifolium (silverleaf nightshade)

Identity of Organism

Name: Solanum elaeagnifolium (Solanaceae; USDA-ARS, 2009)

Synonyms: None listed (e.g. CAB International, 2007; USDA-ARS, 2009; USDA-NRCS, 2009).

English common names: Bitter apple, bitterleaf nightshade, bull nettle, prairie-berry, silverleaf bitter-apple, silverleaf nightshade, silverleaf-nettle, tomato weed, white horse-nettle (EPPO, 2007; USDA-ARS, 2009).

French common names: Morelle jaune (EPPO, 2007)

Description: Solanum elaeagnifolium is an erect, deep-rooted, shrub-like, perennial herb. Plants are multi-stemmed and highly branched; reaching a height of up to 80 cm. Leaves are alternate, stalked, and lance-shaped with wavy or scalloped edges. Stems and leaves are densely covered with short, fine, star-shaped hairs that give the plant a silvery-white appearance. Stems and main veins of leaves also have numerous slender, yellow to red prickles. Flowers are star-shaped and bright blue to purple/violet or occasionally white, with 5 fused petals and 5 prominent yellow anthers. Flowers give rise to clusters of smooth, globular berries that change in colour as they mature from green with stripes to mottled yellow and orange or brownish when ripe. Each berry contains 60-120 seeds that are flat, light, and closely resemble those of tomatoes (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001; CAB International, 2007; EPPO, 2007; Mekki, 2007).

Solanum elaeagnifolium is a weed of crops, pastures, and disturbed areas in its native and introduced ranges worldwide. All parts of the plant, but particularly berries, are poisonous to livestock. Historically, the berries and seeds were used by aboriginal peoples in the south-western U.S. in the preparation of food and clothing (Boyd et al., 1984). More recently, the fruit has been identified as a rich source of steroidal alkaloids (e.g. solasodine), used in the synthesis of contraceptive and corticosteroid drugs. These have been commercially extracted in India and Argentina (Maiti and Mathew, 1967; Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001; CAB International, 2007).

Organism Status

Solanum elaeagnifolium is not reported to occur in the Canadian flora (Scoggan, 1979; Kartesz, 1999; CFIA, 2008), and no evidence was found that it is cultivated in Canada. Based on this information, Solanum elaeagnifolium is considered absent with no pest records in the PRA area.

Current Regulatory Status

Solanum elaeagnifolium is not currently regulated as a pest in Canada, either federally or provincially (although Solanum spp. are regulated in Manitoba). It is not a Federal Noxious Weed in the U.S., but it is regulated as a noxious weed and/or noxious weed seed in 19 U.S. states (Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, New Mexico, Nevada, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, Texas, and Washington) (Rice, 1997-2008; USDA-ARS, 2009; USDA-NRCS, 2009). Worldwide, it is a quarantine pest in Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine, and is controlled under noxious weed legislation in Australia and South Africa (EPPO, 2007). In Europe, it is included on the European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization (EPPO) list of species recommended for regulation as quarantine pests by member countries (EPPO, 2009).

Probability of Entry

The most likely pathway of entry of Solanum elaeagnifolium into the PRA area is unintentional introduction as a contaminant in commodities or conveyances. It has been distributed around the world in contaminated fodder and crop seed, and may also be spread by livestock and manure, agricultural machinery, vehicles, bulldozers and other earth-moving equipment (Boyd et al., 1984; Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001; CAB International, 2007; EPPO, 2007; Mekki, 2007). Soil, sand, and ornamental plants can also be contaminated by fragments of roots or seeds (EPPO, 2007).

Table 1 : Summary of Pathways for Solanum elaeagnifolium (silverleaf nightshade)
Type of pathways Specific pathways
Natural dispersal

Natural spread of Solanum elaeagnifolium occurs by seed and vegetatively from cut root sections. Seeds are fleshy berries adapted to dispersal by birds and animals. Studies have shown seed to be viable after passing through the digestive tracts of animals (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001). The fruit can also float, and be dispersed along rivers and streams (Boyd and Murray, 1982; EPPO, 2007) and dried berries can be dispersed by strong winds in the winter (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001).

This is a possible pathway of entry into Canada, as there are populations in the U.S. approaching the Canadian border (e.g. Washington). Natural spread by vegetative fragments would be local, but spread of seeds by birds, animals, wind, or water could cover greater distances.

Intentional introduction

Solanum elaeagnifolium is not generally cultivated as an ornamental (Bailey and Bailey, 1976; Isaacson and Allen, 2007). Solanum elaeagnifolium has some limited use as fodder in South Africa (CAB International, 2007), and the steroidal alkaloid solasodine has been commercially extracted in India and Argentina (EPPO, 2007). However, it is unclear to what extent (if any) the plant is cultivated in this regard.

This pathway is considered unlikely at this time.

Unintentional introduction

Solanum elaeagnifolium is a weed of crops and pastures, and has been distributed around the world in contaminated fodder and crop seed (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001). It may also be spread by livestock and manure, agricultural machinery, vehicles, bulldozers and other earth-moving equipment, as well as in soil, sand, and ornamental plant material (EPPO, 2007; Boyd et al., 1984).

This is considered the most likely pathway of entry into Canada.

Probability of Establishment

Solanum elaeagnifolium is native to the south-western U.S. and north-eastern Mexico. It is sometimes considered native to Argentina, although the nature of the herbivorous insect fauna suggests this is a secondary distribution (Boyd et al., 1984; CAB International, 2007; EPPO, 2007). It has been introduced elsewhere in North and South America, and is now widespread in the U.S. in all but the Great Lakes and New England regions (Figure 1; Kartesz, 1999; CAB International, 2007; USDA-NRCS, 2009). It is also introduced in other parts of the world including Australia, India, South Africa and around the Mediterranean basin (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001; CAB International, 2007; EPPO, 2007; GBIF, 2008). Most of its range falls in NAPPFAST zones 8-9 and above (www.nappfast.org), but occurrences in the U.S. suggest it can survive in zone 6 and probably 5 (Figure 2).

Figure 1: Current distribution of Solanum elaeagnifolium (silverleaf nightshade) in North America

Figure 1. Description follows.
Description for Figure 1:

This map shows the current distribution of in North America indicating its presence through the use of the colour green. Two thirds of the United States is covered in green predominantly the lower western half, none of the states along the north eastern coast contain green except for Maryland.

Source: USDA-NRCS, 2009.

Solanum elaeagnifolium is adapted to a wide range of habitats but appears mostly in warm-temperate regions in areas of relatively low annual rainfall (250-600 m). It thrives on disturbed land and is not confined to any particular soil type. Infestations are more serious in dryland situations, but irrigated crops are also prone to invasion (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001; CAB International, 2007). In addition to cultivated and agricultural land, it occurs along roadsides, railways, riverbanks, and canal-sides, and in rangeland, livestock corrals, construction sites, and wastelands (CAB International, 2007; EPPO, 2007; Mekki, 2007).

Based on its native distribution and available records, it appears that Solanum elaeagnifolium may find climatic and ecological conditions suitable for establishment and spread in the PRA area, in the parts of British Columbia, southern Ontario and the Maritimes which comprise zones 6-9 and possibly also zone 5.

Figure 2-1: Potential range of Solanum elaeagnifolium (silverleaf nightshade)

NAPPFAST zones 6-9. Description follows.
Description for Figure 2-1:

This image shows the potential range of Solanum elaeagnifolium (silverleaf nightshade) in Canada and northern America through the use of a map. Red is used to indicate the regions in which Solanum elaeagnifolium could survive in according to the Canadian Plant Hardiness Zones map, in this case NAPPFAST Hardiness Zones 6-9. In Canada, this includesSolanum elaeagnifolium is likely to become weedy or invasive in parts of Canada, including southern and coastal British Columbia, southern Ontario, and the Maritimes. Most of the red can be found in the U.S., this includes the parts of the east and west coasts as well as areas located near the Great Lakes extending downwards beyond the image.

NAPPFAST zones 6-9.

Figure 2-2: Potential range of Solanum elaeagnifolium (silverleaf nightshade)

NAPPFAST zones 5-9. Description follows.
Description for Figure 2-2:

This image shows the potential range of Solanum elaeagnifolium in Canada and northern America through the use of a map. Red is used to indicate the regions in which Solanum elaeagnifolium could survive in according to the Canadian Plant Hardiness Zones map, in this case NAPPFAST Hardiness Zones 5-9. In Canada, the potential range of Solanum elaeagnifolium includes parts of Atlantic Canada, southern Ontario and coastal and southern BC. Most of the red can be found in the U.S., this includes the greater parts of the east and west coasts extending inwards reaching most of the central states as well as areas located near the Great Lakes extending downwards beyond the image.

NAPPFAST zones 5-9.

Probability of Spread

Natural spread of Solanum elaeagnifolium occurs both by seed, and vegetatively from cut root sections. Flowers are cross-pollinated by insects, primarily bees (Hardin et al., 1972; EPPO, 2007), and produce clusters of fleshy berries that may be dispersed by birds, animals, wind and water. A single plant generally produces 40-60 fruits per growing season (up to 200), each containing 60-120 seeds (CAB International, 2007; EPPO, 2007). Dense populations are capable of producing 250 million seeds/ha (Boyd and Murray, 1982). Seeds are highly viable and may also last up to 10 years in soil (EPPO, 2007; Mekki, 2007). Plants are also able to regenerate vegetatively as early as ten days after germination (EPPO 2007). Established plants have extensive root systems, and new shoots are produced from the lateral roots each spring from as deep as 50 cm. All parts of the root are capable of forming shoot buds (Parsons and Cuthbertson 2001); root fragments only 1 cm long retain the ability to sprout, and remain viable for up to 15 months (Boyd et al. 1984; Parsons and Cuthbertson 2001; EPPO 2007). Despite this variety of natural dispersal mechanisms, most long-distance spread has been attributed to human activity.

Potential Economic Consequences

Solanum elaeagnifolium is an agricultural weed that competes for moisture and nutrients with a variety of crops in both dryland and irrigated conditions. Several crops are affected worldwide, the most important of which are cereals (wheat, sorghum, maize), alfalfa, and cotton (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001; CAB International, 2007). The most serious crop losses have been recorded in alfalfa (in Australia, South Africa, and U.S.), cotton, sorghum, maize and groundnut (in Morocco, U.S.), wheat (in Australia, U.S.) and cultivated pastures (in Australia, Greece, Morocco, U.S.) (CAB International, 2007). Other crops affected include many vegetables (e.g. potato, asparagus, tomato), grapes, and some fruit trees (e.g. peaches). In addition to yield reductions, presence of the weed in harvested products reduces their quality and sale (CAB International, 2007).

Potential Environmental and Social Consequences

Solanum elaeagnifolium is primarily an agricultural weed that invades croplands, pastures, and disturbed and marginal areas such as roadsides. No reports of environmental impacts or effects on natural areas were found, although it may replace natural vegetation in overgrazed rangeland (EPPO, 2007; Mekki, 2007). Social impacts may result from the loss of value of agricultural land infested with the weed; in Morocco the value of infested fields reportedly decreased by 25%, while in the U.S. entire farms have been abandoned because of the weed (Gmira et al., 1998; EPPO, 2007).

Uncertainty

Further investigation of the distribution of Solanum elaeagnifolium in the U.S. and Europe could help refine the estimated potential range in Canada. No other significant areas of uncertainty were identified.

Conclusion

Based on the outcome of this risk assessment, Solanum elaeagnifolium has the potential to become weedy or invasive in areas in which it can establish. Parts of British Columbia, southern Ontario and the Atlantic provinces are considered to be the areas most at risk. This plant should be considered for regulation according to Canada's Plant Protection Act and Seeds Act.

Technical Issues for Consideration

Various other species of the genus have reportedly been confused with Solanum elaeagnifolium in the field in Australia, South Africa and the U.S. However, it is not generally considered difficult to distinguish or detect as a commodity contaminant (CAB International, 2007).

Appendix 14B: Risk Management Considerations for Solanum elaeagnifolium (silverleaf nightshade)

Values at Risk

Several crops are affected by Solanum elaeagnifolium worldwide, the most important being cereals (wheat, sorghum and maize), alfalfa (lucerne) and cotton. In Australia and the U.S., wheat production losses have been as high as 50%. A 2007 survey of farmers in Australia showed that Solanum elaeagnifolium has spread across the wheat belt of Victoria, New South Wales and South Australia. On average, the total farm cost for the weed was $1,730 (AUD) per year for control and $7,786 (AUD) per year in production losses (Kidston et al. 2006). Sorghum losses have ranged from 4-10% under optimal moisture conditions (CAB International, 2007; Sforza and Jones 2007).

The amount of land in each province in hardiness zones 5-9 that are planted with the species most affected by Solanum elaeagnifolium. The Province of Ontario has the greatest amount of crop area that could be impacted. In 2008, Ontario counties in hardiness zones 5 and 6 produced approximately 12 million bushels of wheat (OMAFRA, 2009) Maize production was approximately 48 million bushels in 2008 in Ontario counties (OMAFRA, 2009). Sorghum production in the respective provinces is considered marginal. A total of 22 hectares of organic sorghum was produced in Canada in 2005, with 15 hectares originating from provinces where Solanum elaeagnifolium could establish (Macey 2006).

Table 2: Pathways for Solanum elaeagnifolium
Type of Commodity
(Pathways)
Introduction Previous Imports Potential Risk Mitigation Measures Trade Implications Cost Effectiveness & Feasibility
Seed Intentional No data available
  • Regulate under the WSO
  • Regulate under the PPA
Market loss for exploring countries would be minimal Seed Program already in place
SeedUnintentional
(as a contaminant)
This species has not previously been recorded in imported and Canadian seeds samples
Level of risk is high since maize and forage plants originate primarily from areas where this species is present
  • Regulate under the WSO
  • Regulate under the PPA
  • Will facilitate seed trade with the 19 states where this species is regulated
  • Potential reduction or loss of some import markets for Canada
  • Seed Program already in place
  • Easily identified by trained analysts
Field crops not intended for propagation Unintentional 300,000 tonnes of wheat, sorghum, maize and soybeans from countires with Solanum eleagnifolium were import in 2008 Regulate under the PPAPotential for reduction or loss of some import markets for Canada if physanitary requimrents can not be met. Resources will be needed for marketplace monitoring
Hay and Straw Unintentional Hay and straw imports were around $13 million in 2008 (harvested frequently and before weeds produce fruit) Regulate under the PPARegulation of this species will safeguard trade of hay and straw with US, Potential reduction of import markets in Canada Resources will be needed for CFIA marketplace monitoring
Vehicles and Used Farm Machinery Unintentional Considerable volume of vehicles cross US and Canadian border
Information not available on imports of used farm machinery
Enforcement of Directive 95-96: Phytosanitary requirements for soil and related matter, alone or in association with plants   
Nursery Stock with soil Unintentional In 2008, 73% of all nursery stock imports came from countries where this species is present Regulate under the PPAPotential reduction in import market for Canada if exporting countries cannot meet requirements Phytosanitary certificate are currently issued by exporting countries for nursery stock.
Manure Unintentional Data is unavailable Bagged, composted manure regulated by Health of Animals Regulations. There are currently no standards for fresh manure. No trade implications If heating process makes weed seeds inviable, the n this would be a cost effective measure.
Livestock Unintentional Risk associated with livestock pathway is relatively low It is not feasible to implement mitigation measures for this pathway at this time.   

Potential Mitigation Measures for Natural Means of Dispersal

Natural dispersal of Solanum elaeagnifolium seeds by birds, animals or water could cover great distances and this represents a possible pathway of entry into Canada. Currently, populations of the plant in Washington are in counties at the southern margins of the state (USDA-NRCS, 2009). Washington State carries out eradication of Class A weeds as required by law (NWCB, 2009). Oregon and Idaho also have programs to eradicate noxious weeds (ODA, 2009; ISDA, 2005). If these programs are effective, the risk of natural dispersal as a pathway into Canada will decrease.

Since Solanum elaeagnifolium is currently at the southern margins of bordering states, an early detection and rapid response (EDRR) program should be employed such as the framework established in British Columbia. The Invasive Plant Council of BC has approved an EDRR framework that describes the process, steps and stakeholders involved in carrying out an EDRR system in the province (IPCBC, 2007). Early detection can be made possible with the use of atlases already available such as E-flora BC (Klinkenberg 2008) that inventory native, non-native and invasive species.

Potential Mitigation Measures for Intentional Introduction Pathways

Although sources indicate Solanum elaeagnifolium is not currently being sold as an ornamental plant in Canada (CNLA, 2009), further research found two Internet sites with seeds of Solanum elaeagnifolium for sale. While these companies indicate that they will ship to Canada, it is unknown how often, if any, seeds have been brought into Canada through this pathway. The potential for intentional introduction of Solanum elaeagnifolium into Canada is low.

Seed

Previous imports

None known. There is no data available specific to imports of Solanum elaeagnifolium.

Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulate Solanum elaeagnifolium as a prohibited noxious weed (Class 1) under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds Act Footnote 1.

Regulate as a quarantine pest under the Plant Protection Act. Add this species to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada (CFIA, 2009) in order to:

Regulatory actions under the Plant Protection Act could include the following:

Sufficient information about the use of Solanum elaeagnifolium as a potential crop does not exist. If the proponent, located in Canada, needs to collect more information about the plant (e.g. to generate data for a determination of environmental safety), then confined research field trials under Part V of the Seeds Regulations could be authorized by the Plant Biosafety Office.

Trade Implications
Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Potential Mitigation Measures for Non-Intentional Introduction Pathways

Field Crops Not Intended for Propagation

Previous imports

The total volume of wheat, sorghum, maize and soybeans Footnote 6 imported in 2008 from countries where Solanum elaeagnifolium is present was approximately 300,000 metric tonnes (Appendix 14C; Statistics Canada, 2009). The majority of these imports (99.5%) came from infested U.S. states (Industry Canada, 2009).

Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulate Solanum elaeagnifolium as a quarantine pest under the Plant Protection Act and add this species to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada in order to:

Regulatory actions under the Plant Protection Act could include one or more of the following:

End uses have an impact on risk and may, therefore, affect required risk mitigation measures. Phytosanitary measures may be waived for those commodities that have been treated or processed such that the risk of introduction of Solanum elaeagnifolium has been reduced to an acceptable level.

All risk mitigation measures for field crop commodities containing Solanum elaeagnifolium must be taken with consideration for requirements/measures for pests other than plants (e.g. pathogens and insects).

Trade implications
Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Seed

Previous imports
Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulate Solanum elaeagnifolium as a prohibited noxious weed (Class 1) under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds Act.

Regulate Solanum elaeagnifolium as a quarantine pest under the Plant Protection Act and add this species to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada in order to:

Regulatory actions under the Plant Protection Act could include one or more of the following:

Trade implications
Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Hay and Straw

Previous imports
Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulate Solanum elaeagnifolium under the Plant Protection Act as a quarantine pest by placing it on the List of Pests Regulated by Canada in order to:

Regulatory actions could include one or more of the following:

Trade implications
Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Resources will be needed by CFIA for marketplace monitoring and sampling, inspector training, and communication material development.

Vehicles and Used Farm Machinery

Previous imports
Potential Risk mitigation measures

Enforcement of the Directive 95-26: "Phytosanitary requirements for soil and related matter, and for items contaminated with soil and related matter" (Canada, 2008).

Nursery Stock with Soil

All parts of the root of Solanum elaeagnifolium are capable of forming shoot buds; root fragments only 1 cm long retain the ability to sprout. In addition, sections of taproot can remain viable for up to 15 months (Boyd et al., 1984; Parsons and Cuthbertson, 2001). Root fragments of Solanum elaeagnifolium can contaminate soil in imported nursery stock and establish if planted in suitable growing conditions.

Previous imports
Potential Risk mitigation measures

Regulate Solanum elaeagnifolium under the Plant Protection Act as a quarantine pest and add it to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada in order to:

Regulatory actions could include one or more of the following:

Trade implications
Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Phytosanitary certificates are currently issued by exporting countries for nursery stock and exporting countries currently comply with the phytosanitary requirements set out in D-95-26, including pest-free areas of production.

Manure

Previous imports

Data is unavailable to determine the total values of manure imports.

Potential risk mitigation measures
Trade implications

No trade implications are expected since regulations are already in place for manure.

Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

If the heating process does make weed seeds inviable, this provides a cost-effective measure for the manure pathway.

Livestock

Previous imports
Potential risk mitigation measures

It is not feasible to implement mitigation measures for this pathway at this time.

Appendix 14C: Import Data for selected cereal grains from countries where Solanum elaeagnifolium is present (2006-2008)

Value in Canadian Dollars ($)

Product - 1: HS 1001 - Wheat
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. - Washington433,2872,317,1011,825,056
U.S. - Illinois312,7201,003,8521,529,417
Argentina00250,050
U.S. - Arkansas00115,175
U.S. - Indiana411,4931,74836,159
Oceania (Pacific)4,2507,6266,762
U.S. - California4,9748,7015,260
U.S. - Nebraska352,21213,967
U.S. - Oregon1,508,006422,4961,707
U.S. - Oklahoma76901,384
U.S. - Hawaii001,151
U.S. - Colorado, Italy, MacedoniaTable Note *7841,191805
U.S. - Missouri038,835467
U.S. - Utah4,6485,44530
Chile1,51315,6358
Mexico01,1724
U.S. - Idaho0279,9280
U.S. - Arizona9,0047,0320
India01,4380
U.S. - Georgia5,49600
U.S. - Kentucky1,61600
Subtotal:3,050,7724,112,2013,777,402
Product - 2: HS 100590 - Maize (not including sweet corn)
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. - Illinois28,838,18049,663,06033,903,759
U.S. - Missouri5,682,60730,593,71012,789,022
U.S. - Indiana2,698,8664,094,6955,844,521
U.S. - Nebraska4,577,3332,320,1414,787,771
U.S. - Kansas2,060,5056,044,4281,695,519
U.S. - Texas665,144729,857941,429
U.S. - Washington97,964709,358930,800
U.S. - Maryland84,119494,884652,269
U.S. - New Mexico195,171137,586181,034
U.S. - Arkansas012127,852
U.S. - Florida5,884,350492108,552
U.S. - California30,34179,72168,819
U.S. - Kentucky77,62856,35464,653
U.S. - Alabama35,05378,33042,210
U.S. - North Carolina17,85725,97840,763
U.S. - Tennessee28,77497,07233,820
Mexico28,28643,50818,050
U.S. - Colorado14,3585,17616,902
India4,9444,14410,536
Oceania (Pacific)14,8095918,899
U.S. - Idaho10,66410,4204,975
Macedonia09,0643,465
Argentina2,98296,5192,562
Puerto Rico06112,125
Croatia74921,325
U.S. - (Mississippi, Arizona, Oregon, Utah),
Chile, Guatemala, Paraguay
1,1511,7902,665
U.S. - Oklahoma30,1971156
Spain022,1560
U.S. - Louisiana018,5300
U.S. - Nevada3,281840
France 46,00000
Subtotal:51,130,63895,338,37462,284,353
Product - 3: HS 100700 - Grain sorghum
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. - Missouri167,283179,995358,776
U.S. - Kansas59,30485,207125,015
U.S. - Colorado9,9773,01725,814
India6,04117,38622,618
U.S. - Nebraska45,37997,3334,888
U.S. - California1,247251374
Egypt01,4440
U.S. - Oregon02890
U.S. - Texas16,919120
Subtotal:306,150384,934537,485
Total of Products 1, 2 and 3
All Exporting Countries 2006 2007 2008
Total:54,487,56099,835,50966,599,240

Quantity in metric tonnes (TNE)

Product - 1: HS 1001 - Wheat
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. - Washington2,2008,9165,334
U.S. - Illinois2,0433,3722,837
Argentina00320
U.S. - Arkansas00162
U.S. - Indiana1,243564
Oceania (Pacific)---
U.S. - California81710
U.S. - Nebraska9,4632,0091
U.S. - Oregon3,10205
U.S. - Oklahoma203
U.S. - Hawaii004
U.S. - Colorado, Italy, MacedoniaTable Note *433
U.S. - Missouri01410
U.S. - Utah29200
Chile6110
Mexico000
U.S. - Idaho01,2250
U.S. - Arizona81270
India020
U.S. - Georgia14100
U.S. - Kentucky600
Subtotal:18,32815,7488,743

Table Notes

Table note star

Countries or states with an export value of less than $1,000 per year are grouped together and a summed value for all countries and states is shown.

Return to first table note * referrer

Product - 2: HS 100590 - Maize (not including sweet corn)
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. - Illinois245,237285,222159,720
U.S. - Missouri43,659214,92371,755
U.S. - Indiana7,29811,62617,115
U.S. - Nebraska41,53215,96922,544
U.S. - Kansas17,58138,1189,124
U.S. - Texas2,5843,0622,867
U.S. - Washington3673,4823,690
U.S. - Maryland8063,5243,000
U.S. - New Mexico299292521
U.S. - Arkansas00493
U.S. - Florida42,7943429
U.S. - California207204244
U.S. - Kentucky1193533
U.S. - Alabama2996835
U.S. - North Carolina152192247
U.S. - Tennessee93501185
Mexico12299105
U.S. - Colorado736258
India111669
Oceania (Pacific)---
U.S. - Idaho1021583
Macedonia01013
Argentina42329119
Puerto Rico1311
Croatia000
U.S. - (Mississippi, Arizona, Oregon, Utah),
Chile, Guatemala, Paraguay
145500146
U.S. - Oklahoma18101
Spain01190
U.S. - Louisiana0890
U.S. - Nevada2000
France 3,87889365
Subtotal:407,602578,695292,892
Product - 3: HS 100700 - Grain sorghum
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. - Missouri6749991,668
U.S. - Kansas269384437
U.S. - Colorado39997
India225771
U.S. - Nebraska30456324
U.S. - California410
Egypt050
U.S. - Oregon010
U.S. - Texas3900
Subtotal:1,3512,0192,297
Total of Tables 1, 2 and 3 - Quantity in metric tonnes (TNE)
All Exporting Countries 2006 2007 2008
Total:427,281596,462303,932

Source: Statistics Canada, 2009

Appendix 14D: Import Data for Maize and Forage seed from countries where Solanum elaeagnifolium is present (2006-2008)

Value in Canadian Dollars ($)

Product - 1: HS 100510 - Maize
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. - Missouri10,862,98616,151,93223,746,229
U.S. - Indiana7,568,81912,419,31217,477,833
U.S. - Illinois2,377,3802,247,7195,116,696
U.S. - Nebraska259,169289,555789,896
U.S. - Washington184,628319,90350,866
U.S. - Idaho698,17191,95315,937
U.S. - Colorado 36,98043,4455,061
U.S. - California81013,862536
Chile3,458,26013,123,8669,495,021
France255,593660,7361,157,153
Argentina104,3904,112,304357,611
India00216,397
Subtotal:25,807,18649,474,58758,429,236
Product - 2: HS 120921 - Alfalfa
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. - Idaho4,772,7221,580,3442,799,074
U.S. - Washington26,447404,826199,382
U.S. - California421,346649,464197,474
U.S. - Tennessee7,35762,33019,394
U.S. - Kentucky011,84114,976
U.S. - Missouri01,7342,403
U.S. - Oregon50,0231,0081,355
U.S. - North Carolina23,119101,329
Italy23,98621,69769,814
France272,52952,220
Subtotal:5,325,0272,735,7833,357,421
Product - 3: HS 120922 - Clover
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. - Oregon1,206,4711,338,669836,195
U.S. - Idaho223,065287,751117,948
U.S. - Alabama1,86268,73672,247
U.S. - Mississippi0040,485
U.S. - Washington44,7628,33425,275
U.S. - California656,46022,911
U.S. - Kentucky11,5301,4307,626
Chile688,426599,4681,229,059
Uruguay0128,656178,637
Argentina43,76991,082146,970
Subtotal:2,219,8912,580,5862,677,353
Product - 4: HS 120923 - Fescue
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. - Oregon1,925,4641,898,3652,722,623
U.S. - Washington7,21026,52346,936
U.S. - Idaho19,66888,38733,445
U.S. - Colorado 055,5034,549
Italy04,28437,816
France010,6133,606
Subtotal:1,952,3422,083,6752,848,975
Product - 5: HS 120924 - Kentucky blue grass
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. - Oregon4,181,8704,755,4497,836,065
U.S. - Washington3,130,3492,808,0834,252,270
U.S. - Idaho1,667,4901,532,5952,049,030
U.S. - Illinois375,617385,992260,592
Subtotal:9,355,3269,482,11914,397,957
Product - 6: HS 120925 - Rye grass
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. - Oregon5,256,2483,814,2466,626,765
U.S. - Washington2,7792,97485,305
U.S. - Idaho54,67431,87677,718
U.S. - Arizona332,24212,125
U.S. - Illinois1,59515,1191,116
U.S. - California11,0920288
U.S. - Colorado 010,4740
France015,02015,044
Argentina017,2420
Uruguay71,05255,1100
Italy61,30032,1320
Subtotal:5,458,7733,996,4356,818,361
Product - 7: HS 120926 - Timothy grass
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. - California33,57900
Subtotal:33,57900
Total for products 1 to 7 - Value in Canadian Dollars ($)
All Exporting Countries 2006 2007 2008
Total:50,152,12470,353,18588,529,303

Quantity in Kilograms (kg)

Product - 1: HS 100510 - Maize
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. - Missouri6,874,00010,986,00012,136,000
U.S. - Indiana2,585,0002,934,0004,025,000
U.S. - Illinois604,000403,000922,000
U.S. - Nebraska137,00064,000166,000
U.S. - Washington54,000100,00036,000
U.S. - Idaho62,000158,0003,000
U.S. - Colorado 14,00056,0001,000
U.S. - California01,0000
Chile1,251,0003,320,0003,664,000
France3,857,00089,000365,000
Argentina38,00087,000117,000
India0052,000
Subtotal:15,476,00018,198,00021,487,000
Product - 2: HS 120921 - Alfalfa
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. - Idaho955,171327,406440,995
U.S. - Washington5,45780,16545,398
U.S. - California114,149166,79943,479
U.S. - Tennessee1,81412,4122,653
U.S. - Kentucky01,9991,950
U.S. - Missouri0272465
U.S. - Oregon21,900198134
U.S. - North Carolina5,9363181
Italy6,0133,42121,212
France191806,335
Subtotal:1,110,459592,855562,802
Product - 3: HS 120922 - Clover
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. - Oregon387,648421964238341
U.S. - Idaho67,9948366346156
U.S. - Alabama5322225620573
U.S. - Mississippi0011036
U.S. - Washington8,62527446806
U.S. - California2103434990
U.S. - Kentucky3,0874531951
Chile256,960239676374500
Uruguay04500042500
Argentina17,9003330041300
Subtotal:742,748859,399788,153
Product - 4: HS 120923 - Fescue
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. - Oregon9759009219111270884
U.S. - Washington2583962814786
U.S. - Idaho72572856312435
U.S. - Colorado 0198941091
Italy0180022665
France052091515
Subtotal:985,740987,0051,323,376
Product - 5: HS 120924 - Kentucky blue grass
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. - Oregon1,468,61418227252654033
U.S. - Washington2,010,87716392381943822
U.S. - Idaho539,623519804671617
U.S. - Illinois81,8386242168600
Subtotal:4,100,9524,044,1885,338,072
Product - 6: HS 120925 - Rye grass
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. - Oregon3,491,35824858445227573
U.S. - Washington1,460166557564
U.S. - Idaho32,9262224837847
U.S. - Arizona115501633
U.S. - Illinois463200981330
U.S. - California14,3990192
U.S. - Colorado 075120
France039683431
Argentina0249900
Uruguay94,085906930
Italy21,00075000
Subtotal:3,655,7022,665,0685,329,570
Product - 7: HS 120926 - Timothy grass
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
U.S. - California12,39100
Subtotal:12,39100
Total for Product 1 to 7 - Quantity in Kilograms
All Exporting Countries 2006 2007 2008
Total:26,083,99227,346,51534,828,973

Source: Statistics Canada, 2009

Note: Only those countries having an import value greater or equal to $10,000 in any year between 2006 and 2008 are included in this table.

Appendix 14E: Import Data for Hay and straw from countries where Solanum elaeagnifolium is present (2006-2008)

Value in Canadian Dollars ($)

Product - 1: HS 121300 - Cereal straw and husks, unprepared
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Washington5,056,5445,685,0966,397,081
India284,039258,851302,025
North Carolina272,458316,202212,617
Arkansas54,81850,870173,146
Illinois40,714114,980111,185
New Mexico9,70928,49523,099
Oregon4,8751,75018,492
Florida1,3485,0689,550
Maryland3,1517,5968,908
Oklahoma03,3472,079
California2,472501597
Georgia060,0000
Arizona1,3658850
Indiana5,68200
Subtotal:5,737,1756,533,6417,258,779
Product - 2: HS 121490 - Swedes, mangolds, fodder roots, hay, clover, sainfoin, forage kage, etc.
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Washington3,849,2454,045,9274,115,211
Oregon1,086,048630,851330,770
Nebraska29,89224,79248,591
Kansas013,41046,197
Chile041,35432,946
Colorado32,13326,65228,890
Kentucky6193015,743
California12,74023,5119,755
Nevada5,12804,135
Arizona134,345131,7643,429
Missouri673,6852,935
Illinois774101,728
India2,93328,29776
Idaho6,31755,09953
Indiana1,54681
Oceania019,1320
France192,0140
Subtotal:5,161,8065,046,5364,640,460
Total of both 1 and 2- Quantity in Kilograms (KGM)
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Total:10,898,98111,580,17711,899,239

Source: Statistics Canada, 2009

Appendix 15A: Pest Risk Assessment Summary for Zygophyllum fabago (Syrian bean-caper)

Identity of Organism

Name: Zygophyllum fabago

Synonyms: None found

English common names: Syrian bean-caper, Syrian beancaper

French common names: Fabagelle

Description: Zygophyllum fabago is a much-branched herbaceous plant with a deep, well-developed tap root. The plants grow almost 1 m tall and wide and are bushy. The succulent leaves are opposite and compound with a single pair of leaflets each 1 to 3 cm in length. The whitish to yellow flowers are borne in the leaf axils. The fruit is a five-valved capsule with a single seed in each valve. The capsules are oblong, and cylindrical and five sided (Davison and Wargo 2001; Robbins et al. 1951).

Zygophyllum fabago has the ability to dominate a site and eliminate the native vegetation. It grows on disturbed sites such as roadsides, corrals, and gravel pits. It can form large dense colonies that exclude native plants and animals. The thick, waxy leaves allow the plants to survive long periods of drought and the extensive root system provides a competitive advantage over native species. It is considered unpalatable to livestock (Davison and Wargo 2001).

The species reproduces by seed and spreading roots. Root fragments can produce new plants. The stems die back to the ground each winter. In very cold areas it can function as an annual, with new plants growing from seed each year (Davison and Wargo 2001).

Organism Status

Zygophyllum fabago is not reported to occur in Canada, and no evidence was found that it is cultivated in Canada (CFIA 2008; CNLA 2009). Based on this information, it is considered absent from the PRA area.

Current Regulatory Status

Zygophyllum fabago is not currently regulated in Canada. It is not regulated as a federal noxious weed in the U.S., but is regulated in the following states: California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon and Washington (USDA-ARS 2009; USDA-NRCS 2009).

Probability of Entry

Zygophyllum fabago is thought to have been imported to the United States in contaminated alfalfa seed. There is a possibility that it may have escaped from gardens as the flower buds are used as a caper substitute in its native range (Davison and Wargo 2001).

Table 1 : Summary of Pathways for Zygophyllum fabago (Syrian bean-caper)
Type of pathway Specific pathways
Natural dispersalZygophyllum fabago spreads primarily by seeds (Davison and Wargo, 2001). No information could be found to document how seeds spread in natural situations. This pathway is unlikely given that there are no known documented occurrences in counties adjacent to the Canadian border. The species is reported as possible in Okanogan County, Washington, however there are no supporting collections (Wooten 2010).
Intentional introduction

Some websites list seeds of this species for sale as a medicinal herb. It is thought that it might have escaped from gardens as the flower buds are used as a caper substitute in the native range (Davison and Wargo 2001).

Intentional introduction for planting is the most likely pathway for entry into Canada. It is available for sale on-line, but it is difficult to know how much interest there is.

Unintentional introduction

The species is "thought to have been imported to the United States at the turn of the century in contaminated alfalfa seed" (Davison and Wargo 2001).

This pathway is unlikely, unless seed is imported from the native range. The species is not a common weed of agricultural fields.

Root fragments can sprout to form new plants (Davison and Wargo 2001). It is possible that they could be transported on equipment.

This is certainly a possibility, but it could be reduced as a pathway by keeping soil from entering the country.

Probability of Establishment

Zygophyllum fabago is native to Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Turkey, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Ciscaucasia, Turkmenistan, Pakistan, Russian Federation, Ukraine and Romania (USDA-ARS 2009). It is introduced in southern Europe (France, Spain, Sardinia) (Pankhurst 1998), North America (western U.S.) (USDA-NRCS 2009), Puerto Rico and Australia (Western Australia and New South Wales) (Randall 2007).

Within the western U.S., there are populations in 6 counties in Washington and 5 counties in Idaho. It has not yet been reported from Oregon and all infestations in California are thought to have been eradicated (Karl et al. 1996). There are reports from a number of other states (see figure 1). However, the record for Pennsylvania is based on an old collection at ballast dumps at Philadelphia harbour which has never been repeated (Ruiz and Carlton 2003). As the species is not included in any of the major northeastern flora, it is very likely that the New York record is also based on ephemeral populations at a port location (Fernald 1950; Gleason 1968; Gleason and Cronquist 1963).

Figure 1: Range of Zygophyllum fabago (Syrian bean-caper) in North America

Figure 1. Description follows.
Description for Figure 1:

This map shows the range of Zygophyllum fabago (Syrian bean-caper) in North America indicating its presence through the use of the colour green. The states covered in green are: New York, Pennsylvania, Texas, Kansas, Colorado, New Mexico, Montana, Idaho, Washington, Nevada and California

Source: USDA-NRCS 2009

The current range in the U.S. suggests that the species would be hardy to NAPPFAST zone 5. However, persistent Zygophyllum fabago populations are restricted to dry regions, including deserts (Davison and Wargo 2001), so the potential range as an invasive weed species is limited to southern B.C. in Canada (see figure 2). It should be noted that the coastal parts of the range on the map are probably too wet to be suitable for this species.

Figure 2: Potential range of Zygophyllum fabago (Syrian bean-caper) in Canada

Figure 2. Description follows.
Description for Figure 2:

This image shows the potential range of Zygophyllum fabago (Syrian bean-caper) in Canada, more specifically in British Columbia. Red is used to indicate the regions in which Zygophyllum fabago at risk according to the Canadian Plant Hardiness Zones map, in this case NAPPFAST Hardiness Zones 5-9. In Canada, the potential range of Zygophyllum fabago is limited to southern British Columbia where it has a scattered presence. This image is narrowed to include parts of the U.S. more specifically Washington, Oregon, and Idaho where the red has more of a prevalent presence and is heavily condensed downwards beyond the image.

NAPPFAST zones 5-9.

Probability of Spread

On a local scale, plants can spread by root fragments, but the usual means of dispersal is by seeds (Davison and Wargo 2001). The seeds of Zygophyllum speciesare mucilaginous (Beier et al. 2003), which might allow them to attach to animals or people for distribution, but this does not seem to be documented.

Potential Economic Consequences

The biggest economic threat from Zygophyllum fabago is to ranchers. The plants can form dense masses that displace beneficial species on rangelands. Control with herbicides is difficult because of the waxy leaf surfaces and because of the extensive root system. The plants are not palatable to livestock (Anonymous 2007), so infestations reduce the amount of useful forage available to browsers. Herbicides have shown some promise in controlling this weed, but repeated applications are necessary because of the thick, waxy leaves (Davison and Wargo 2001). In the dry rangelands invaded by this species, it is unlikely that control with herbicides would be economically feasible.

Potential Environmental and Social Consequences

Zygophyllum fabago has the ability to dominate native vegetation in suitable dry habitats, being described as "almost as invasive as" Peganum harmala (African-rue) and Tribulus terrestris (puncture vine), which are related weed species (Davison and Wargo 2001).

Uncertainty

There is not a great deal of information available on the biology and impacts of this species. So far, its distribution and impacts have been limited. In particular, there is almost no information about seed dispersal.

Conclusion

Based on the outcome of this pest risk assessment, Zygophyllum fabago is likely to establish and become invasive in parts of Canada, including southern B.C., if it is introduced to these areas. This plant should be considered for regulation under the Plant Protection Act and Seeds Act.

Technical Issues for Consideration

There should be no difficulties in detection and identification of seeds or plants of this species. Root pieces might be more difficult to identify.

Appendix 15B: Risk Management Considerations for Zygophyllum fabago (Syrian bean-caper)

Potential Mitigation Measures for Natural Means of Dispersal

As described in Section V, natural dispersal is a possible pathway; however there is a high level of uncertainty regarding this. The species is regulated in Washington and Idaho and populations have been controlled. Therefore, risk mitigation measures will not be suggested.

Potential Mitigation Measures for Intentional Introduction Pathways

Plants for Planting Excluding Seed

Intentional introduction for planting is the most likely pathway for entry of Zygophyllum fabago into Canada, as it can be used as a medicinal herb or as a flavoring.

Previous imports

The CFIA requires a Permit to Import, with the scientific and common names, for all plants and propagative material from origins other than the continental U.S. (CFIA 2008, 2009). Some plants from the continental U.S. also require a Permit to (CFIA 2009).

Based on the information available in the CFIA's Import Permit System, Import Retrieval System, and information compiled at the CFIA's Import Service Centres, Zygophyllum fabago has not been recently imported into Canada.

Potential risk mitigation measures

Non-regulatory measures:

Regulatory measures:

For species intended for large scale cultivation in Canada:

Trade Implications
Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Seed

Previous imports

Websites list seeds of this species for sale as a medicinal herb (CFIA, 2009), but it is difficult to know the level of interest in the plant in Canada.

Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulate Zygophyllum fabago as a prohibited noxious weed (Class 1) under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds ActFootnote 2.

Regulate as a quarantine pest under the Plant Protection Act and add this species to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada (CFIA 2009) in order to:

Regulatory actions under the Plant Protection Act could include the following:

Sufficient information about the use of Zygophyllum fabago as a potential crop does not exist. If the proponent, located in Canada, needs to collect more information about the plant (e.g. to generate data for a determination of environmental safety), then confined research field trials under Part V of the Seeds Regulations could be authorized by the Plant Biosafety Office.

Trade Implications
Cost-effectiveness and Feasibility

Potential Mitigation Measures for Non-intentional Introduction Pathways

Seed

Zygophyllum fabago is "thought to have been imported to the United States at the turn of the century in contaminated alfalfa seed" (Davison and Wargo 2001).

Previous imports
Import data for Alfalfa seed originating from countries where Zygophyllum fabago (Syrian beancaper) is present.

Although a large percentage of imported alfalfa seed originates from areas where Zygophyllum fabago is present, the level of risk associated with this pathway is relatively low since the species is not a common weed of agricultural fields (CFIA 2009). No imports are coming from countries in the weed’s native range, which would be the most likely source of contaminated alfalfa seed.

Table 2a: Value in Canadian Dollars ($)
HS 1209210 Lucerne (Alfalfa) seeds for sowing
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Australia208,607234,443198,929
France272,52952,220
Spain03,6620
U.S. - Idaho4,772,7221,580,3442,799,074
U.S. - California421,346649,464197,474
U.S. - Washington26,447404,826199,382
U.S. - Montana7,70910,58318,097
Total:5,436,8582,885,8513,465,176
Table 2b: Quantity in Kilograms (KGM)
HS 1209210 Lucerne (Alfalfa) seeds for sowing
Exporting Country 2006 2007 2008
Australia69,57141,71831,372
France191806,335
Spain06000
U.S. - Idaho955,171327,406440,995
U.S. - California114,149166,79943,479
U.S. - Washington5,45780,16545,398
U.S. - Montana9712,1585,275
Total:1,145,338619,026572,854

Source: Statistics Canada 2009

Potential risk mitigation measures

Regulate Zygophyllum fabago as a prohibited noxious weed (Class 1) under the Weed Seeds Order of the Seeds Act Footnote 6.

Regulate Zygophyllum fabago as a quarantine pest under the Plant Protection Act. and add this species to the List of Pests Regulated by Canada (CFIA 2009) in order to:

Regulatory actions under the Plant Protection Act could include one or more of the following:

Trade Implications
Cost-effectiveness and feasibility

Vehicles and Used Farm Machinery

Root fragments can sprout to form new plants (Davison and Wargo, 2001). It is possible that root fragments could be transported on equipment. Since Zygophyllum fabago is not a common weed of agricultural fields, this is considered a low-risk pathway.

Previous imports
Potential Risk mitigation measures

Enforcement of the Directive 95-26: "Phytosanitary requirements for soil and related matter, alone or in association with plants" (CFIA, 2008).

In 2003, the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) assumed responsibility for the initial import inspection services in respect to the Acts and Regulations administered by the CFIA to the extent that they are applicable at Canadian border points. The inspection of goods that may be contaminated with soil are among the responsibilities that were transferred to the CBSA in 2003. The Food, Plant and Animals Programs Section of the CBSA has developed Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) concerning the "Inspection of Imported Goods Potentially Contaminated with Soil." This SOP provides the CBSA's Border Services Officers with formal procedures for the inspection and disposition of goods that may be contaminated with soil, including used agricultural machinery and vehicles.

Appendix 16: Consultation

The following stakeholders were consulted:

Significant support for this regulatory decision was received through responses from provincial and federal departments and other stakeholders. Suggested comments and revisions were included in this document where appropriate.

Date modified: