Research directed by C. Daehler (UH Botany) with funding from the Kaulunani Urban Forestry Program and US Forest Service
Information on
Risk Assessments
Original risk assessment
Pacific Island Ecosystems at Risk (PIER)
Andira inermis
RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS: Low risk, score: -3
|
Australian/New Zealand Weed Risk Assessment adapted for Hawai‘i. Research directed by C. Daehler (UH Botany) with funding from the Kaulunani Urban Forestry Program and US Forest Service Information on
Risk Assessments |
|
Andira inermis (syn. A. jamaicensis, Geoffroea inermis, G. jamaicensis var. inermis) ; cabbagebark tree, cabbage tree, worm bark |
Answer |
||
|
1.01 |
Is the species highly domesticated? |
y=-3, n=0 |
n |
|
1.02 |
Has the species become naturalized where grown? |
y=-1, n=-1 |
n |
|
1.03 |
Does the species have weedy races? |
y=-1, n=-1 |
n |
|
2.01 |
Species suited to tropical or subtropical climate(s) (0-low; 1-intermediate; 2-high) – If island is primarily wet habitat, then substitute “wet tropical” for “tropical or subtropical” |
See Append 2 |
2 |
|
2.02 |
Quality of climate match data (0-low; 1-intermediate; 2-high) see appendix 2 |
2 |
|
|
2.03 |
Broad climate suitability (environmental versatility) |
y=1, n=0 |
n |
|
2.04 |
Native or naturalized in regions with tropical or subtropical climates |
y=1, n=0 |
y |
|
2.05 |
Does the species have a history of repeated introductions outside its natural range? y=-2 |
?=-1, n=0 |
y |
|
3.01 |
Naturalized beyond native range y = 1*multiplier (see Append 2), n= question 2.05 |
n |
|
|
3.02 |
Garden/amenity/disturbance weed y = 1*multiplier (see Append 2) |
n=0 |
n |
|
3.03 |
Agricultural/forestry/horticultural weed y = 2*multiplier (see Append 2) |
n=0 |
n |
|
3.04 |
Environmental weed y = 2*multiplier (see Append 2) |
n=0 |
n |
|
3.05 |
Congeneric weed y = 1*multiplier (see Append 2) |
n=0 |
y |
|
4.01 |
Produces spines, thorns or burrs |
y=1, n=0 |
n |
|
4.02 |
Allelopathic |
y=1, n=0 |
n |
|
4.03 |
Parasitic |
y=1, n=0 |
n |
|
4.04 |
Unpalatable to grazing animals |
y=1, n=-1 |
n |
|
4.05 |
Toxic to animals |
y=1, n=0 |
y |
|
4.06 |
Host for recognized pests and pathogens |
y=1, n=0 |
n |
|
4.07 |
Causes allergies or is otherwise toxic to humans |
y=1, n=0 |
y |
|
4.08 |
Creates a fire hazard in natural ecosystems |
y=1, n=0 |
n |
|
4.09 |
Is a shade tolerant plant at some stage of its life cycle |
y=1, n=0 |
y |
|
4.1 |
Tolerates a wide range of soil conditions (or limestone conditions if not a volcanic island) |
y=1, n=0 |
y |
|
4.11 |
Climbing or smothering growth habit |
y=1, n=0 |
n |
|
4.12 |
Forms dense thickets |
y=1, n=0 |
n |
|
5.01 |
Aquatic |
y=5, n=0 |
n |
|
5.02 |
Grass |
y=1, n=0 |
n |
|
5.03 |
Nitrogen fixing woody plant |
y=1, n=0 |
y |
|
5.04 |
Geophyte (herbaceous with underground storage organs -- bulbs, corms, or tubers) |
y=1, n=0 |
n |
|
6.01 |
Evidence of substantial reproductive failure in native habitat |
y=1, n=0 |
n |
|
6.02 |
Produces viable seed. |
y=1, n=-1 |
y |
|
6.03 |
Hybridizes naturally |
y=1, n=-1 |
|
|
6.04 |
Self-compatible or apomictic |
y=1, n=-1 |
n |
|
6.05 |
Requires specialist pollinators |
y=-1, n=0 |
n |
|
6.06 |
Reproduction by vegetative fragmentation |
y=1, n=-1 |
n |
|
6.07 |
Minimum generative time (years) 1 year = 1, 2 or 3 years = 0, 4+ years = -1 |
See left |
4 |
|
7.01 |
Propagules likely to be dispersed unintentionally (plants growing in heavily trafficked areas) |
y=1, n=-1 |
n |
|
7.02 |
Propagules dispersed intentionally by people |
y=1, n=-1 |
y |
|
7.03 |
Propagules likely to disperse as a produce contaminant |
y=1, n=-1 |
n |
|
7.04 |
Propagules adapted to wind dispersal |
y=1, n=-1 |
n |
|
7.05 |
Propagules water dispersed |
y=1, n=-1 |
n |
|
7.06 |
Propagules bird dispersed |
y=1, n=-1 |
n |
|
7.07 |
Propagules dispersed by other animals (externally) |
y=1, n=-1 |
y |
|
7.08 |
Propagules survive passage through the gut |
y=1, n=-1 |
n |
|
8.01 |
Prolific seed production (>1000/m2) |
y=1, n=-1 |
n |
|
8.02 |
Evidence that a persistent propagule bank is formed (>1 yr) |
y=1, n=-1 |
n |
|
8.03 |
Well controlled by herbicides |
y=-1, n=1 |
|
|
8.04 |
Tolerates, or benefits from, mutilation, cultivation, or fire |
y=1, n=-1 |
|
|
8.05 |
Effective natural enemies present locally (e.g. introduced biocontrol agents) |
y=-1, n=1 |
|
|
Total score: |
-3 |
||
Supporting data:
|
Source |
Notes |
|
|
1.01 |
no evidence |
|
|
1.02 |
no evidence |
|
|
1.03 |
http://www.ildis.org/LegumeWeb/6.00/taxa/1079.shtml |
"Three subspecies: inermis, grandiflora, rooseveltii" but no evidence of being weedy |
|
2.01 |
USDA, ARS, National Genetic Resources Program. Germplasm Resources Information Network - (GRIN). [Online Database] National Germplasm Resources Laboratory, Beltsville, Maryland. Available: http://www.ars-grin.gov/var/apache/cgi-bin/npgs/html/taxon.pl?3115 (26 June 2002) |
Distributional range: |
|
2.02 |
||
|
2.03 |
(1) Pennington, R. T.; Lewis, G.; Marsh, M. (2000) Andira
inermis subsp. inermis , Leguminosae-Papilionoideae. Curtis's Botanical
Magazine, 2000, Vol.17, No.4, pp.188-194, 9 ref. |
(1) p.193 "In different regions, A inermis subsp. inermis
ocuppies different habitats. In Africa it grows in wooded savanna and
rainforest. In Central America and the Caribbean coasts of northern South
America it is a species of seasonally dry tropical forest. Elsewhere in the
Neotropics it occurs in rainforest and gallery forest, including inundateted
areas and even in mangrove." |
|
2.04 |
USDA, ARS, National Genetic Resources Program. Germplasm Resources Information Network - (GRIN). [Online Database] National Germplasm Resources Laboratory, Beltsville, Maryland. Available: http://www.ars-grin.gov/var/apache/cgi-bin/npgs/html/taxon.pl?3115 (26 June 2002) |
Distributional range: |
|
2.05 |
(1)http://www.rngr.net/Reforestation/Publications/TTSM/Folder.2003-07-11.4726/Andira%20inermis.pdf (2)http://www.winrock.org/forestry/factpub/factsh/AINERMIS.htm |
(1)The species was introduced and cultivated in West Africa (2)commonly grown as an ornamental |
|
3.01 |
no evidence |
|
|
3.02 |
no evidence |
|
|
3.03 |
no evidence |
|
|
3.04 |
no evidence |
|
|
3.05 |
Bacon, P., P.J. Terry, N. Waltham, & P.Castro S. (1997) An Electronic Atlas of World Weed and Invasive Plants. Version 1.0, 1997. A database based on the original work "A Geographical Atlas of World Weeds" by Holm et al 1979. |
A. humilis was listed as a principl weed in Brazil |
|
4.01 |
Pennington, R. T.; Lewis, G.; Marsh, M. (2000) Andira inermis subsp. inermis , Leguminosae-Papilionoideae. Curtis's Botanical Magazine, 2000, Vol.17, No.4, pp.188-194, 9 ref. |
no description of these traits |
|
4.02 |
no evidence |
|
|
4.03 |
no evidence |
|
|
4.04 |
http://www.winrock.org/forestry/factpub/factsh/AINERMIS.htm |
'Forage. Preliminary studies by scientists at the University of El Salvador showed that the foliage is edible and palatable for ruminants. Research is now being done with rabbits.' |
|
4.05 |
Figueroa, V.; Sutherland, T. M. (1972) "Muerte subita" (Sudden death) in cattle. 5. The role of toxic plant. Revista Cubana de Ciencia Agricola (English edition), 1972, Vol.6, No.1, pp.53-59 |
AB: 5. Pasture from an area where "muerte subita" is common in Cuba (see NAR 40, 1979) was analysed botanically in October 1967 and March, July and August 1968. Herbicide, 2-4D, was applied at 8 litres/ha in January 1968 and a mixture of 2-4D and 2-4-5T in March and June. Of 11 broad-leaved plants thought to be possibly poisonous, tests with sheep given aqueous suspensions of the plants into the rumen showed that 5 were so. The plants were Urechites lutea, Trichilia havanensis, Andira inermis, Cestrum diurnum and Desmanthus virgatus. Clinical signs and pathological lesions often differed from those seen in cattle in "muerte subita".After the first application of herbicide 10 Brahman heifers, and after the second 20 heifers grazed the pastures. The cattle were from a "muerte subita" region. One heifer in the first group and 9 in the second died, all in June, the rainy season. The herbicides did not eliminate the toxic plants though there was some temporary reduction. |
|
4.06 |
Polak, M.; Brown, W. D. (1995) Mating tactics and courtship behavior in Cleogonus rubetra (Fabricius) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). Journal of Insect Behavior, 1995, Vol.8, No.4, pp.453-463, 28 ref. |
AB: Females of the tropical curculionid Cleogonus rubetra oviposit into fruits of the leguminous tree Andira inermis [not known to attack other plants] |
|
4.07 |
(1) Pennington, R. T.; Lewis, G.; Marsh, M. (2000) Andira
inermis subsp. inermis , Leguminosae-Papilionoideae. Curtis's Botanical
Magazine, 2000, Vol.17, No.4, pp.188-194, 9 ref. |
(1) p.188 "Five gram of the extract (from bark) made a
strong man sick, It must be concealed that fatal accidents have occurred
from the imprudent administration of tis bark, chiefly from over-dosing the
medicine." |
|
4.08 |
Pennington, R. T.; Lewis, G.; Marsh, M. (2000) Andira inermis subsp. inermis , Leguminosae-Papilionoideae. Curtis's Botanical Magazine, 2000, Vol.17, No.4, pp.188-194, 9 ref. |
p.193 "In different regions, A inermis subsp. inermis ocuppies different habitats. In Africa it grows in wooded savanna and rainforest. In Central America and the Caribbean coasts of northern South America it is a species of seasonally dry tropical forest. Elsewhere in the Neotropics it occurs in rainforest and gallery forest, including inundateted areas and even in mangrove." [a evergreen tree occasionally grows in dry habitat but more often in flooded environment where fire is unlikely] |
|
4.09 |
Lovelock, C. E.; Kursar, T. A.; Skillman, J. B.; Winter, K. (1998) Photoinhibition in tropical forest understorey species with short- and long-lived leaves. Functional Ecology, 1998, Vol.12, No.4, pp.553-560, 36 ref. |
AB: "Shade-tolerant species with leaf lifetimes of less than 2 years (e.g. Andira inermis )" [lifetimes here = leaf lifespan] |
|
4.1 |
http://www.rngr.net/Reforestation/Publications/TTSM/Folder.2003-07-11.4726/Andira%20inermis.pdf |
It may be found in primary and secondary forests with alluvial, acid-clayed, or sandy soils. |
|
4.11 |
http://www.ildis.org/LegumeWeb/6.00/taxa/1079.shtml |
"Stems: Not climbing" |
|
4.12 |
unlikely, a large tree which don't reproduce vegetatively, and with limited seed production. |
|
|
5.01 |
terrestrial |
|
|
5.02 |
tree; Fabaceae |
|
|
5.03 |
Qian, J. H.; Kwon SoonWo; Parker, M. A. (2003) rRNA and nifD phylogeny of Bradyrhizobium from sites across the Pacific Basin. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 2003, Vol.219, No.2, pp.159-165, 38 ref. |
[associate with Bradyrhizobium sp., a nitrogen fixing symbiont.] |
|
5.04 |
tree |
|
|
6.01 |
Zimmerman, J. K.; Pascarella, J. B.; Aide, T. M. (2000) Barriers to forest regeneration in an abandoned pasture in Puerto Rico. Restoration Ecology, 2000, Vol.8, No.4, pp.350-360, 54 ref. (2)http://www.winrock.org/forestry/factpub/factsh/AINERMIS.htm |
AB: "Nine species dispersed naturally and colonized plots during the study"; "Germination of Andira inermis were not affected." [show substantial colonization] (2)In Puerto Rico, two flowering seasons are observed, one between January and February and the second one, between May and September (Little and Wadsworth 1964). In Barro Colorado Island, Panamá, trees may flower for nine months under suitable moist conditions (Croat 1978). This pattern is also observed in trees growing in urban areas in El Salvador where trees flower between December and July |
|
6.02 |
Zimmerman, J. K.; Pascarella, J. B.; Aide, T. M. (2000) Barriers to forest regeneration in an abandoned pasture in Puerto Rico. Restoration Ecology, 2000, Vol.8, No.4, pp.350-360, 54 ref. |
AB: "Sources of forest regeneration (soil seed bank, seed rain) and barriers to seedling establishment were examined in 1996 in a recently abandoned pasture in eastern Puerto Rico. Few woody species were found in the soil seed bank or in the seed rain. The number of seeds and species in the seed rain and soil seed bank declined with distance from the adjacent secondary forest. Nine species dispersed naturally and colonized plots during the study, with the wind-dispersed tree Tabebuia heterophylla being the predominant colonizer (91% of all seedlings). Barriers to seedling establishment were determined in 1996-97 using a blocked field experiment with eleven woody species representative of a variety of life histories. Each species was planted under the pasture vegetation (control) or in areas where all vegetation was removed (removal). Germination was greater for Prestoea montana, Dacroydes excelsa, Guarea guidonia and T. heterophylla in the control treatment. Psychotria berteriana, P. brachiata, Palicouria cr |
|
6.03 |
no evidence |
|
|
6.04 |
Frankie, G. W.; Opler, P. A.; Bawa, K. S. (1976) Foraging behaviour of solitary bees: implications for outcrossing of a neotropical forest tree species. Journal of Ecology, 1976, Vol.64, No.3, pp.1049-1057 |
AB: "Artificial pollination of Andira inermis in Costa Rica demonstrated that this massively flowering, papilionaceous tree species is self-incompatible." |
|
6.05 |
Frankie, G. W.; Vinson, S. B.; Rizzardi, M. A.; Griswold, T. L.; O'Keefe, S.; Snelling, R. R. (1997) Diversity and abundance of bees visiting a mass flowering tree species in disturbed seasonal dry forest, Costa Rica. Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society, 1997, Vol.70, No.4, pp.281-296, 41 ref. |
AB: "Comparison of systematic samples of bees attracted to a mass flowering tree, Andira inermis , in 1972 and 1996 at Liberia, a site in the seasonal dry forest of Guanacaste Province, Costa Rica, indicated a significant reduction of bee pollinators due to habitat loss over the 24 year period." |
|
6.06 |
no evidence |
|
|
6.07 |
http://www.winrock.org/forestry/factpub/factsh/AINERMIS.htm |
One-year-old plants, 50 cm tall or more, can be transplanted during the rainy season. It grows very slowly even with suitable moist conditions [indicates relatively slow growth, at least 4 years] |
|
7.01 |
Pennington, R. T.; Lewis, G.; Marsh, M. (2000) Andira inermis subsp. inermis , Leguminosae-Papilionoideae. Curtis's Botanical Magazine, 2000, Vol.17, No.4, pp.188-194, 9 ref. |
unlikely with such large sized fruit |
|
7.02 |
(1)http://www.rngr.net/Reforestation/Publications/TTSM/Folder.2003-07-11.4726/Andira%20inermis.pdf (2)http://www.winrock.org/forestry/factpub/factsh/AINERMIS.htm |
(1)The species was introduced and cultivated in West Africa (2)Andira inermis (Sw.) Kunth ex DC (Berendsohn 1989) is a nitrogen fixing tree that is commonly grown as an ornamental. |
|
7.03 |
Pennington, R. T.; Lewis, G.; Marsh, M. (2000) Andira inermis subsp. inermis , Leguminosae-Papilionoideae. Curtis's Botanical Magazine, 2000, Vol.17, No.4, pp.188-194, 9 ref. |
unlikely with large sized fruit |
|
7.04 |
Pennington, R. T.; Lewis, G.; Marsh, M. (2000) Andira inermis subsp. inermis , Leguminosae-Papilionoideae. Curtis's Botanical Magazine, 2000, Vol.17, No.4, pp.188-194, 9 ref. |
p.188 the dispersal agent of the majority of A. inermis are bats. |
|
7.05 |
no evidence |
|
|
7.06 |
no evidence |
|
|
7.07 |
(1) Janzen, D. H.; Miller, G. A.; Hackforth-Jones, J.; Pond,
C. M.; Hooper, K.; Janos, D. P. (1976) Two Costa Rican bat-generated seed
shadows of Andira inermis (Leguminosae). Ecology, 1976, Vol.57, No.5,
pp.1068-1075, 28 ref. |
(1) AB: Marked differences were noted in the dispersal of seeds by bats from two mature trees, with greater numbers of seeds dropped beneath the trees used as feeding roosts. Seed mortality from Cleogonus weevils was greatest below the parent trees, intermediate below the feeding roosts and least in fruit dropped between the parent trees and the feeding roosts. The relations between dispersal by bats, attack by weevils and regeneration of the tree are briefly discussed. (2) AB: "It is concluded that the production of a higher number of fruits of intermediate size could be the result of a co-adaptive process with relationship to the phyllostomid bats. [fruit 29.9 - 35 mm dispersed by bats, but the seeds usually not ingested] |
|
7.08 |
no evidence of being ingested |
|
|
8.01 |
Pennington, R. T.; Lewis, G.; Marsh, M. (2000) Andira inermis subsp. inermis , Leguminosae-Papilionoideae. Curtis's Botanical Magazine, 2000, Vol.17, No.4, pp.188-194, 9 ref. |
p.193 "fruit green, drying dark brown to black, smooth or somewhat rough and warty, 3-6 cm long x 2.5-4.3 cm high x 2.4-4.3 cm wide" large fruit |
|
8.02 |
http://www.rngr.net/Reforestation/Publications/TTSM/Folder.2003-07-11.4726/Andira%20inermis.pdf |
Fruits are collected from the ground under the trees. The seeds are separated from the fleshy mesocarp. Tissue separation is done with a sharp knife as soon as the fruit is collected to avoid damage by Curculionids (Cleogonus sp.) and fungi. Surrounded by the woody endocarp, the seeds are soaked in running water for 24 hours and sown in greenhouse beds. The seeds show recalcitrant behavior and cannot be stored. |
|
8.03 |
no evidence |
|
|
8.04 |
http://www.winrock.org/forestry/factpub/factsh/AINERMIS.htm |
In the field, little or no management is done. Occasionally lower branches are pruned to induce faster growth and a straight trunk. In landscaping, top branches are pruned to control height growth.' |
|
8.05 |
no evidence |
Need more info? Have questions? Comments? Information to contribute? Contact PIER!
[ Return to PIER homepage ] [Risk assessment page]
This page updated 30 September 2005