Pacific Island Ecosystems at Risk (PIER)
RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS: High risk, score: 10
Information on Risk Assessments
| Funtumia elastica | ||||
| A. | History/ | African rubber tree | ||
| Biogeography | team | |||
| 1 | Domestication/ | 1.01 | Is the species highly domesticated? If answer is 'no' go to 2.01 | N |
| cultivation | 1.02 | Is species naturalised where grown? | ||
| 1.03 | Does the species have weedy races? | |||
| 2 | Climate and | 2.01 | Species suited to Australian climates (0-low; 1-intermediate; 2-high) | 2 |
| Distribution | 2.02 | Quality of climate match data (0-low; 1-intermediate; 2-high) | 2 | |
| 2.03 | Broad climate suitability (environmental versatility) | |||
| 2.04 | Native or naturalised in regions with extended dry periods | |||
| 2.05 | Does the species have a history of repeated introductions outside its natural range? | |||
| 3 | Weed | 3.01 | Naturalised beyond native range | Y |
| Elsewhere | 3.02 | Garden/amenity/disturbance weed | ||
| (interacts with 2.01 | 3.03 | Weed of agriculture/horticulture/forestry | Y | |
| to give a weighted | 3.04 | Environmental weed | Y | |
| score) | 3.05 | Congeneric weed | ||
| B. | Biology/Ecology | |||
| 4 | Undesirable | 4.01 | Produces spines, thorns or burrs | N |
| traits | 4.02 | Allelopathic | ||
| 4.03 | Parasitic | N | ||
| 4.04 | Unpalatable to grazing animals | Y | ||
| 4.05 | Toxic to animals | Y | ||
| 4.06 | Host for recognised pests and pathogens | |||
| 4.07 | Causes allergies or is otherwise toxic to humans | |||
| 4.08 | Creates a fire hazard in natural ecosystems | N | ||
| 4.09 | Is a shade tolerant plant at some stage of its life cycle | Y | ||
| 4.10 | Grows on infertile soils | Y | ||
| 4.11 | Climbing or smothering growth habit | N | ||
| 4.12 | Forms dense thickets | N | ||
| 5 | Plant | 5.01 | Aquatic | N |
| type | 5.02 | Grass | N | |
| 5.03 | Nitrogen fixing woody plant | N | ||
| 5.04 | Geophyte | N | ||
| 6 | Reproduction | 6.01 | Evidence of substantial reproductive failure in native habitat | |
| 6.02 | Produces viable seed | Y | ||
| 6.03 | Hybridises naturally | N | ||
| 6.04 | Self-fertilisation | |||
| 6.05 | Requires specialist pollinators | |||
| 6.06 | Reproduction by vegetative propagation | |||
| 6.07 | Minimum generative time (years) | 10.0 | ||
| 7 | Dispersal | 7.01 | Propagules likely to be dispersed unintentionally | N |
| mechanisms | 7.02 | Propagules dispersed intentionally by people | Y | |
| 7.03 | Propagules likely to disperse as a produce contaminant | N | ||
| 7.04 | Propagules adapted to wind dispersal | Y | ||
| 7.05 | Propagules buoyant | N | ||
| 7.06 | Propagules bird dispersed | N | ||
| 7.07 | Propagules dispersed by other animals (externally) | N | ||
| 7.08 | Propagules dispersed by other animals (internally) | N | ||
| 8 | Persistence | 8.01 | Prolific seed production | Y |
| attributes | 8.02 | Evidence that a persistent propagule bank is formed (>1 yr) | ||
| 8.03 | Well controlled by herbicides | |||
| 8.04 | Tolerates or benefits from mutilation, cultivation or fire | |||
| 8.05 | Effective natural enemies present in Australia | |||
| Outcome: | Reject | |||
| Score: | 10 | |||
| Statistical summary | Biogeography | 10 | ||
| of scoring | Score partition: Undesirable attributes | 4 | ||
| Biology/ecology | -4 | |||
| Biogeography | 4 | |||
| Questions answered: Undesirable attributes | 9 | |||
| Biology/ecology | 16 | |||
| Total | 29 | |||
| Agricultural | 6 | |||
| Sector affected: Environmental | 8 | |||
| A = agricultural, E = environmental, C =combined | ||||
Risk assessment prepared 5 April 2000 by J. Denslow, B. Waterhouse, J. Space, D. Nelson
Need more info? Have questions? Comments? Information to contribute? Contact PIER!
This page new 14 January 2001.