Lantana camara (lantana)
Datasheet Types: Pest, Natural enemy, Invasive species, Host plant
Abstract
This datasheet on Lantana camara covers Identity, Overview, Distribution, Dispersal, Hosts/Species Affected, Diagnosis, Biology & Ecology, Environmental Requirements, Natural Enemies, Impacts, Uses, Prevention/Control, Further Information.
Identity
- Preferred Scientific Name
- Lantana camara L.
- Preferred Common Name
- lantana
- Other Scientific Names
- Camara vulgaris Benth.
- Lantana antidotalis Thonning (1827)
- Lantana camara var. aculeata
- Lantana crocea Jacq.
- Lantana glandulosissima Hayek
- Lantana mexicana Turner
- Lantana mixta Medik.
- Lantana moritziana Otto & A.Dietr.
- Lantana sanguinea Medik.
- Lantana scabrida Ait.
- Lantana spinosa L. ex Le Cointe
- Lantana undulata Raf.
- Lantana urticifolia Mill.
- Lantana x aculeata f. crocea (Jacq.) Voss
- International Common Names
- Englisharch mancommon lantanalarge leaf lantanapink-flowered lantanaprickly lantanared sagered-flowered sageshrub verbenatickberrywhite sagewild sageyellow sage
- Spanishcamarcariaquillocinco cincoscinco negritoscomida de palomacorronchocuasquitofiligranafrutillajaraljarrilamora de caballomoritapalo del diablosanto negritosoterreventurosa
- Frenchcorbeille d’orgalabertlantaniermille fleursvieille fille
- Chinesema ying dan
- Local Common Names
- Brazilcamaracambara de espinho
- Cambodiaach mann
- Cook Islandsranatanatataramoa
- Costa Ricacinco negritosflor de duendetres colores
- El Salvadorbandera española
- Fijikauboica
- French Polynesiatatara moa
- Germanywandelroeschen
- Guineaboulé kognokogno porto
- Haitibonbonierherbe à plombherbe au diableherbe bourrique
- Indiabandsnagaairiphullakiputustantbi
- India/Assamguphul
- Indonesiaboenga pagarchentekembang satikkembang telekoblopuchenganpuyengansaliarasaliyeresliyaratahi agamtai hayamtai kotoktelekantembelektembelekanteterapanwaungwileran
- Japanshichihenge
- Japan/Ryukyu Archipelagoshichi-henge
- Kiribatite kaibuaka
- Lesser Antillesmeasle bushrangoat leafsaugescrubby tree
- Madagascarfankatavinakohofotatramandadriekoradredrekarajejekaramity
- Malaysiabunga asam senyurbunga pagarbunga tahi anjingbunga tahi asubunga tahi ayambunga tahi ayam busoktahi ayam munai
- Mauritiusvieille fille
- Mexicoalantanaalfombrilla hedionda (Michoacán)carrasposaconfiteconfituriaconfiturilla (Sonora-Chihuahua)confiturio (Baja California)flor de San Cayetanolampanamatizadillapasaruinscrubby capsonora roja (Sinaloa)uña de gato (Morelia)
- Micronesia, Federated states ofrandana (Pohnpei)
- Nicaraguacuasquito
- Philippinesbahug-bahugsapinit
- Portugalcambará
- Puerto Ricocariaquillo
- Saint Helenawild currant
- SamoaLantanalatana
- South Africaboesmandruiwecherry-piecommon lantanagewone lantanagomdaggasumbavoelbrandewynwild lantanawilderoosmarynyellow sage
- Spainbanderabanderitaespuela de galán
- Sri Lankaganda-panagarda-panagenda-panakatu-hingururata-guruton-kinna
- Thailandkamkungpaka krawngpha-ka-krong
- TongaTalamoatalatala
- USA/Hawaiilakanalanakanamikinolia hihiumikinolia kuku
- Venezuelacariaquillocariaquito
- Vietnamthom oi
- Zimbabwechiponiwe
- EPPO code
- LANCA (Lantana camara)
Pictures
Flowers
Lantana camara (lantana); flowers.
©CABI/Arne Witt
Flowers
Lantana camara (lantana); flowers.
©CABI/Arne Witt
Habit
Lantana camara (lantana); habit, showing flowers and foliage, as well as the thorny stems.
©CABI/Arne Witt
Invasive habit
Lantana camara (lantana); invasive habit. Ethiopia. July 2014.
©CABI/Arne Witt
Invasive habit
Lantana camara (lantana); invasive habit, on the edge of the Queen Elizabeth National Park, Uganda. January 2005.
©CABI/Arne Witt
Leaf
Lantana camara (lantana); leaf, backlit, showing venation.
©CABI/Arne Witt
Fruits
Lantana camara (lantana); fruits, unopened inflorescence and leaves.
©CABI/Arne Witt
Leaves
Lantana camara (lantana); leaves and unripe fruits. Kula Ace Hardware and Nursery, Maui, Hawaii, USA. September 2007.
©Forest & Kim Starr - CC BY 4.0
Summary of Invasiveness
L. camara is a highly variable ornamental shrub, native of the neotropics. It has been introduced to most of the tropics and subtropics as a hedge plant and has since been reported as extremely weedy and invasive in many countries. It is generally deleterious to biodiversity and has been reported as an agricultural weed resulting in large economic losses in a number of countries. In addition to this, it increases the risk of fire, is poisonous to livestock and is a host for numerous pests and diseases. L. camara is difficult to control. In Australia, India and South Africa aggressive measures to eradicate L. camara over the last two centuries have been largely unsuccessful, and the invasion trajectory has continued upwards despite control measures. This species has been the target of biological control programmes for over a century, with successful control only being reported in a few instances.
Taxonomic Tree
Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
L. camara is a highly variable species which has been widely cultivated for over 300 years. Hundreds of cultivars and hybrids exist (Howard, 1969) and most of them belong to the L. camara complex (Stirton, 1979). Cultivars can be distinguished morphologically (flower size, shape and colour; leaf size, hairiness and colour; stem thorniness; height and branch architecture), physiologically (growth rates, toxicity to livestock) and by their chromosome number and DNA content (Stirton, 1979; Gujral and Vasudevan, 1983; Scott et al., 1997). Two groups are often recognised: one with few or no spines commonly found in the neotropics and one with spines in other parts of the world where the species is troublesome (Howard, 1970; Swarbrick, 1986). In the Pacific Islands the most common variety is the prickly L. camara var. aculeata (Thaman, 1974).
Plant Type
Vine / climber
Perennial
Seed propagated
Shrub
Woody
Description
L. camara is a medium-sized perennial aromatic shrub, 2-5 m tall, with quadrangular stems, sometimes having prickles. The posture may be sub-erect, scrambling, or occasionally clambering (ascending into shrubs or low trees, clinging to points of contact by means of prickles, branches, and leaves). Frequently, multiple stems arise from ground level. The leaves are generally oval or broadly lance-shaped, 2-12 cm in length, and 2-6 cm broad, having a rough surface and a yellow-green to green colour. The flat-topped inflorescence may be yellow, orange, white, pale violet, pink, or red. Flowers are small, multicoloured, in stalked, dense, flat-topped clusters to 4 cm across. Fruit is a round, fleshy, 2 seeded drupe, about 5 mm wide, green turning purple then blue-black (similar in appearance to a blackberry).
Distribution
L. camara is native to Central and South America but its original distribution is unclear due to the introduction of a number of ornamental varieties. The species has also been poorly investigated in its native range, where it is not usually considered to be a serious pest, and the extent of its original native range is unclear. In the West Indies it is found in dry thickets (Adams, 1976). The weed is noted to be present in the Galapagos Islands of Ecuador (Cruz et al., 1986). This species has been widely promoted as an ornamental since the early 1800s and it is widely naturalized throughout the Neotropics. It is present on all continents expect Antartica. It has become very widespread in Australia, India and South Africa, infesting millions of hectares of land (Bhagwat et al., 2012).
Distribution Map
Distribution Table
History of Introduction and Spread
L. camara has been introduced throughout the tropics and subtropics, often used as a hedge plant, and is commonly grown in the temperate zone. Although first cultivated in Europe during the late seventeenth century, reaching Calcutta in 1809 (Burkill, 1935), it was mostly introduced throughout the tropics during the later part of the nineteenth century and a number of cultivars and forms were subsequently disseminated (Howard, 1970). In many tropical regions the thorny forms have invaded huge areas of natural pasture land. In Singapore L. camara became for some time quite abundant but by around 1900 it became less noticeable (Burkill, 1935) and a similar phenomenon has been reported for East Timor (McWilliam, 2000).
Risk of Introduction
The main spread of L. camara into new countries is via the horticultural trade, spreading numerous different varieties of this species. Once introduced into an area the seeds of L. camara are readily dispersed into new areas by birds. L. camara has already spread widely, but there is potential for its range to expand further under future climate change. In Australia it is found in almost all the climatically suitable habitat, but under future climate change it could expand into new areas in Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania (Taylor et al., 2012; Taylor and Kumar, 2013).
Means of Movement and Dispersal
Natural Dispersal
Occasionally abiotic seed dispersal may occur. Flash floods in South Africa, caused by cyclone Demoina in 1983, transported seeds and deposited them on the flood plain of the Ndumu game reserve (Bromilow, 1995). In the Kruger National Park, South Africa, L. camara has primarily spread along rivers (Vardien et al. 2012).
Vector Transmission
The seeds of L. camara are dispersed by native or invasive species of birds. In Hong Kong, L. camara is dispersed by 15 species of native birds (Corlett, 1998), whereas in Hawaii, it is mainly dispersed by exotics such as the Indian myna, Acridotheres tristis (Atkinson and Atkinson, 2000). In the Galapagos Islands it is one of the most dispersed alien plants, being mainly dispersed by two lizard species, and to a minor extent by the birds Myiarchus magnirostris and Mimus melanotis (Heleno et al., 2013). There are also reports of seeds being dispersed by sheep and goats.
Accidental Introduction
Accidental introduction of L. camara via contaminated soil is possible but has not been documented.
Intentional Introduction
As L. camara is such a key ornamental plant, new varieties, some of which have invasive potential, can readily be bought and introduced throughout the tropics.
Vector Transmission
The seeds of L. camara are dispersed by native or invasive species of birds. In Hong Kong, L. camara is dispersed by 15 species of native birds (Corlett, 1998), whereas in Hawaii, it is mainly dispersed by exotics such as the Indian myna, Acridotheres tristis (Atkinson and Atkinson, 2000). In the Galapagos Islands it is one of the most dispersed alien plants, being mainly dispersed by two lizard species, and to a minor extent by the birds Myiarchus magnirostris and Mimus melanotis (Heleno et al., 2013). There are also reports of seeds being dispersed by sheep and goats.
Accidental Introduction
Accidental introduction of L. camara via contaminated soil is possible but has not been documented.
Intentional Introduction
As L. camara is such a key ornamental plant, new varieties, some of which have invasive potential, can readily be bought and introduced throughout the tropics.
Pathway Causes
| Pathway cause | Notes | Long distance | Local | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hedges and windbreaks (pathway cause) | Yes | Yes | ||
| Horticulture (pathway cause) | Yes | Yes | ||
| Ornamental purposes (pathway cause) | Yes | Yes |
Pathway Vectors
| Pathway vector | Notes | Long distance | Local | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Host and vector organisms (pathway vector) | Birds, occasionally sheep and goats | Yes | ||
| Mail (pathway vector) | Yes | |||
| Soil, sand and gravel (pathway vector) | Yes | Yes | ||
| Water (pathway vector) | Flash floods | Yes |
Hosts/Species Affected
L. camara is an agricultural weed that can cause dramatic losses in yields. In Australia, it was reported that L. camara infested 4 million ha of pasture (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 1992). A number of plants affected by L. camara are listed in the "Host Plants/Plants Affected" table below.
Host Plants and Other Plants Affected
| Host | Family | Host status | References |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ananas comosus (pineapple) | Bromeliaceae | Main | |
| Camellia sinensis (tea) | Theaceae | Main | |
| Cocos nucifera (coconut) | Arecaceae | Main | |
| Coffea (coffee) | Rubiaceae | Main | |
| Durio zibethinus (durian) | Bombacaceae | Main | |
| Elaeis guineensis (African oil palm) | Arecaceae | Main | |
| Gossypium (cotton) | Malvaceae | Main | |
| Hevea brasiliensis (rubber) | Euphorbiaceae | Main | |
| Mangifera indica (mango) | Anacardiaceae | Unknown | |
| Musa x paradisiaca (plantain) | Musaceae | Main | |
| Oryza sativa (rice) | Poaceae | Main | |
| pastures | Main | ||
| Poaceae (grasses) | Poaceae | Main | |
| Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane) | Poaceae | Main | |
| Santalum album (Indian sandalwood) | Santalaceae | Main | |
| Shorea robusta (sal) | Dipterocarpaceae | Main | |
| Solanum lycopersicum (tomato) | Solanaceae | Unknown | |
| Theobroma cacao (cocoa) | Malvaceae | Unknown | |
| Triticum aestivum (wheat) | Poaceae | Unknown | |
| Zea mays (maize) | Poaceae | Unknown |
Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
Although large stands of weedy varieties of L. camara are easily recognised, it is in fact a variable polyploid complex of interbreeding taxa resulting from hybridisation with species in the other complexes, such as L. urticifolia (Day et al., 2003). In Florida, USA, it may be confused with the endangered endemic native, L. depressa, with which it has extensively hybridised (Langeland and Burks, 2000).
Habitat
L. camara has a wide environmental tolerance and occurs in a variety of habitats. These include wastelands, rainforest edges and beachfronts (ISSG, 2015). It also grows well in disturbed areas such as roads, railways and areas recovering from fire or logging (ISSG, 2015). This species can tolerate some shade but grows best in open unshaded regions. It cannot directly colonise intact forests but instead grows at forest edges and spreads when gaps are created (ISSG, 2015).
Habitat List
| Category | Sub category | Habitat | Presence | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Terrestrial | Terrestrial – Managed | Cultivated / agricultural land | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
| Terrestrial | Terrestrial – Managed | Managed forests, plantations and orchards | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
| Terrestrial | Terrestrial – Managed | Managed grasslands (grazing systems) | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
| Terrestrial | Terrestrial – Managed | Disturbed areas | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
| Terrestrial | Terrestrial – Managed | Rail / roadsides | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
| Terrestrial | Terrestrial ‑ Natural / Semi-natural | Natural forests | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
| Terrestrial | Terrestrial ‑ Natural / Semi-natural | Natural grasslands | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
| Littoral | Coastal dunes | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
Biology and Ecology
Genetics
The known chromosome numbers of L. camara are 2n = 22, 33, 44, 55, but most invasive varieties appear to be tetraploids (Day et al., 2003). Besides variation in chromosome number there is much variation in DNA content, growth rates and toxicity to livestock (Stirton, 1979; Gujral and Vasudevan, 1983; Scott et al., 1997). In the Tamil Nadu region of India there are differences in toxicity of L. camara, with the red flowered variety being more toxic than the pink flowered form (Thirunavukkarasu et al., 2001).
Physiology and Phenology
Flowering and fruiting take place throughout the year with a peak during the first two months of the rainy season.
In the highlands of western Kenya an investigation of leaf decomposition found that after seven days it had decreased to just under a third of the original mass and by the 77th day the leaves had totally decomposed. The percentage of the initial amount of phosphorus and nitrogen remaining in the leaf material after a week was 42 and 54%, respectively. After 21 days 90% of the phosphorus had been released (Kwabiah et al., 2001).
Reproductive Biology
The flowers of L. camara, when yellow, produce nectar and are pollinated by butterflies and thrips. The species is an obligate outcrosser and it is unclear whether apomixis occurs. Fruits mature rapidly and change colour from dark green to black. A number of bird species, and also sheep and goats disperse the seeds, sometimes over long distances, but natural dispersal between oceanic islands has never been demonstrated. Heavy fruit crops are produced yearly, but the thornless forms produce few, if any, seeds. Seeds germinate when sufficient moisture is available, usually at the start of a rainy season. In Australia, Broughton (1999) found that 57-80% of green and ripe fruits tested had one or two viable seeds whereas 12-34% had none, and between 64 and 90% of dried (older) fruits had two nonviable embryos, suggesting that fruit development stage affects germination. She found no difference in viability within sites or between cultivars investigated. Projections of seed survival indicate that L. camara seeds could survive for up to 11 years under natural rainfall conditions in Australia (Vivian-Smith and Panetta, 2009).
The known chromosome numbers of L. camara are 2n = 22, 33, 44, 55, but most invasive varieties appear to be tetraploids (Day et al., 2003). Besides variation in chromosome number there is much variation in DNA content, growth rates and toxicity to livestock (Stirton, 1979; Gujral and Vasudevan, 1983; Scott et al., 1997). In the Tamil Nadu region of India there are differences in toxicity of L. camara, with the red flowered variety being more toxic than the pink flowered form (Thirunavukkarasu et al., 2001).
Physiology and Phenology
Flowering and fruiting take place throughout the year with a peak during the first two months of the rainy season.
In the highlands of western Kenya an investigation of leaf decomposition found that after seven days it had decreased to just under a third of the original mass and by the 77th day the leaves had totally decomposed. The percentage of the initial amount of phosphorus and nitrogen remaining in the leaf material after a week was 42 and 54%, respectively. After 21 days 90% of the phosphorus had been released (Kwabiah et al., 2001).
Reproductive Biology
The flowers of L. camara, when yellow, produce nectar and are pollinated by butterflies and thrips. The species is an obligate outcrosser and it is unclear whether apomixis occurs. Fruits mature rapidly and change colour from dark green to black. A number of bird species, and also sheep and goats disperse the seeds, sometimes over long distances, but natural dispersal between oceanic islands has never been demonstrated. Heavy fruit crops are produced yearly, but the thornless forms produce few, if any, seeds. Seeds germinate when sufficient moisture is available, usually at the start of a rainy season. In Australia, Broughton (1999) found that 57-80% of green and ripe fruits tested had one or two viable seeds whereas 12-34% had none, and between 64 and 90% of dried (older) fruits had two nonviable embryos, suggesting that fruit development stage affects germination. She found no difference in viability within sites or between cultivars investigated. Projections of seed survival indicate that L. camara seeds could survive for up to 11 years under natural rainfall conditions in Australia (Vivian-Smith and Panetta, 2009).
In addition to spread by seed, L. camara is able to produce adventitious shoots, especially shallow lateral roots, following mechanical damage. Hence, it is also able to spread and establish dense thickets by vegetative means. The capacity of the species to spread vegetatively and to inhibit both the growth of other vegetation and seed germination, in conjunction with heavy and regular fruiting, is the main reason why L. camara forms long-lasting permanent thickets. In areas where natural fires occur they stimulate thicker regrowth.
For further information, see Mathur and Mohan Ram (1978), Schemske (1983), Sinha and Sharma (1984) and Thaman (1974).
Environmental Requirements
L. camara can grow between the latitudes 45°N and 45°S and an altitude of up to 1,400 m.
The rapid spread of L. camara throughout the tropics is associated with human-induced disturbances. It forms extensive, dense and impenetrable thickets in forestry plantations, orchards, pasture land, waste land and in natural areas. L. camara thrives in open and disturbed areas as well as in open natural vegetation. Being somewhat shade-tolerant it can become the dominant understorey shrub in open forests, but is absent from closed forests. L. camara grows under a wide range of climatic conditions. In Australia it tolerates a mean annual rainfall from 4000 to less than 1000 mm, and as low as 200 mm per annum elsewhere (Gujral and Vasudevan, 1983). It is found between sea level and nearly 1000 m on Hawaii and higher in East Africa, the upper altitudinal limit being determined by frost, which the plant is susceptible to. In Hong Kong, temperature in the range 3-5°C injured L. camara (Corlett, 1992). It tolerates salt spray. Its distribution is affected by soil type. It has a low tolerance for boggy and saline soils but grows well on poor soils. Studies undertaken by Muvengwi and Ndagurwa (2015) on soil seed bank dynamics and soil nutrient concentrations in the wetlands of New Gada in Zimbabwe, suggest that L. camara-invaded soil had significantly higher levels of calcium, magnesium, sodium and ammonium and lower levels nitrate than non-invaded soils.
For further information, see Mathur and Mohan Ram (1978), Schemske (1983), Sinha and Sharma (1984) and Thaman (1974).
Environmental Requirements
L. camara can grow between the latitudes 45°N and 45°S and an altitude of up to 1,400 m.
The rapid spread of L. camara throughout the tropics is associated with human-induced disturbances. It forms extensive, dense and impenetrable thickets in forestry plantations, orchards, pasture land, waste land and in natural areas. L. camara thrives in open and disturbed areas as well as in open natural vegetation. Being somewhat shade-tolerant it can become the dominant understorey shrub in open forests, but is absent from closed forests. L. camara grows under a wide range of climatic conditions. In Australia it tolerates a mean annual rainfall from 4000 to less than 1000 mm, and as low as 200 mm per annum elsewhere (Gujral and Vasudevan, 1983). It is found between sea level and nearly 1000 m on Hawaii and higher in East Africa, the upper altitudinal limit being determined by frost, which the plant is susceptible to. In Hong Kong, temperature in the range 3-5°C injured L. camara (Corlett, 1992). It tolerates salt spray. Its distribution is affected by soil type. It has a low tolerance for boggy and saline soils but grows well on poor soils. Studies undertaken by Muvengwi and Ndagurwa (2015) on soil seed bank dynamics and soil nutrient concentrations in the wetlands of New Gada in Zimbabwe, suggest that L. camara-invaded soil had significantly higher levels of calcium, magnesium, sodium and ammonium and lower levels nitrate than non-invaded soils.
L. camara has a marked ability to compensate for herbivory as plants survived experimental defoliation for two years (Broughton, 2000).
Associations
L. camara often occurs in pure stands but can be mingled with a variety of species but emergent shrubs and trees in particular.
Associations
L. camara often occurs in pure stands but can be mingled with a variety of species but emergent shrubs and trees in particular.
Air Temperature
| Parameter | Lower limit (°C) | Upper limit (°C) |
|---|---|---|
| Absolute minimum temperature | 0 | |
| Mean annual temperature | 13 |
Rainfall
| Parameter | Lower limit | Upper limit | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry season duration | number of consecutive months with <40 mm rainfall | ||
| Mean annual rainfall | 200 | 4000 | mm; lower/upper limits |
Rainfall Regime
Summer
Bimodal
Soil Tolerances
Soil texture > medium
Soil texture > heavy
Soil reaction > acid
Soil reaction > neutral
Soil drainage > free
Special soil tolerances > infertile
List of Pests
Natural enemy of
Notes on Natural Enemies
The alkaloid-rich leaves of L. camara make it virtually immune to grazing by livestock, although several hundred phytophagous insects have been recorded on it. In the New World, flowers, flower stalks, leaves, shoots and roots are attacked by many insect species and pathogens although their impact on shrub vigour and seed set is poorly understood. The polyphagous pest Phenacoccus parvus severely damages stands of L. camara in Australia and is not, as commonly reported, a pest of potato and aubergine (Solanum melongena), although it has the potential to attack a variety of plant species inclusive of some crops (Marohasy, 1994). In Mexico a stem sap-sucking membracid bug, Aconophora compressa, causes considerable dieback of stems (Swarbrick et al. 1995).
The following fungi have been found attacking the leaves of L. camara: Dendryphiella aspera, Micropustulomyces mucilaginosus, Mycovellosiella lantanae var. lantanae, Septoria sp., Ceratobasidium lantanae, Prospodium tuberculatum and Puccinia lantanae. For further information on fungal natural enemies of L. camara, see Barreto et al. (1995), Breeÿen et al. (2000), Thomas and Ellison (2000), Trujillo and Norman (1995).
Natural enemies
Impact Summary
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Animal/plant collections | None |
| Animal/plant products | None |
| Biodiversity (generally) | Negative |
| Crop production | Positive |
| Environment (generally) | Negative |
| Fisheries / aquaculture | None |
| Forestry production | Negative |
| Human health | Negative |
| Livestock production | Negative |
| Native fauna | Negative |
| Native flora | Negative |
| Rare/protected species | None |
| Tourism | Negative |
| Trade/international relations | None |
| Transport/travel | Negative |
Impact: Economic
In Central America L. camara is common in pastures, waste areas and roadsides; it is also a weed in a number of crops (Schemske, 1983), although infestations are unlikely to be composed of native biotypes, but rather re-introduced cultivars that have become invasive (Stirton, 1977).
In many countries L. camara encroaches on agricultural land, reduces the carrying capacity of pastures and is a weed in many agricultural crops. In Australia, L. camara has infested about 4 million ha of pasture (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 1992). In the early 1980s this resulted in economic losses of A$7.7 m (Swarbrick et al., 1995). In Fiji it is a major weed of coconut plantations, pastures, neglected arable land and waste places (Mune and Parham, 1967). Holm et al. (1977) reported that in some areas of India the invasion of cultivated lands by this weed led to the shifting of several villages. In forestry it tends to over-run young plantations, prevent access to older ones and increase fire hazards. In Indian sandalwood forests the shrub competes with sandalwood trees and also favours the spread of the sandal spike disease. In Kenya, L. camara is poisonous to livestock and also a habitat for tsetse flies (IPPC-Secretariat, 2005).
In many countries L. camara encroaches on agricultural land, reduces the carrying capacity of pastures and is a weed in many agricultural crops. In Australia, L. camara has infested about 4 million ha of pasture (Parsons and Cuthbertson, 1992). In the early 1980s this resulted in economic losses of A$7.7 m (Swarbrick et al., 1995). In Fiji it is a major weed of coconut plantations, pastures, neglected arable land and waste places (Mune and Parham, 1967). Holm et al. (1977) reported that in some areas of India the invasion of cultivated lands by this weed led to the shifting of several villages. In forestry it tends to over-run young plantations, prevent access to older ones and increase fire hazards. In Indian sandalwood forests the shrub competes with sandalwood trees and also favours the spread of the sandal spike disease. In Kenya, L. camara is poisonous to livestock and also a habitat for tsetse flies (IPPC-Secretariat, 2005).
Impact: Environmental
Impact on Habitat
In natural and semi-natural vegetation L. camara is a major conservation problem. It may smother vegetation and increase fire intensity (due to an increase in dry biomass), thus displacing native scrub communities (Heckel, 1911). Its extensive seed production favours rat populations.
In contrast to the widely held view that L. camara is detrimental, Timorese farmers have considered the plant as highly beneficial as it enhanced soil fertility and soil conditioning. This resulted in a reduction in fallow periods under L. camara from 15 to 5-6 years. Another benefit was the supply of firewood (McWilliam, 2000). The idea that L. camara enhances soil fertility has yet to be demonstrated and Binggeli (2001) has postulated that the Pitcairners' selection of sites with thriving L. camara stands for home gardens reflects the species predilection for fertile sites rather than its ability to increase fertility. There are many unsubstantiated statements suggesting that L. camara slows erosion (Ashmole and Ashmole 2000), but it is likely that this may be the case when the plant becomes established on bare ground but not when it displaces native vegetation. It can grow through the pestiferous grass Imperata cylindrica and suppress it in South-East Asia and thus may have some potential in forest restoration (Burkill, 1935).
Impact on Biodiversity
L. camara can readily hybridise with other Lantana species; for example, in Florida it hybridizes with the endangered endemic L. depressa (Langeland and Burks, 2000). The impact on native vegetation is mainly viewed as negative, i.e. reducing species diversity, threatening endemics (Cruz et al., 1986) and leading species to extinction. In Australia, L. camara causes allelopathic suppression of two indigenous tree species (Gentle and Duggin, 1997). It is also generally considered to hinder the regeneration of native tree species (e.g. Islam et al., 2001; Gooden et al., 2009) but there are some occasional references to regeneration of some tree species under its canopy (e.g. Burkill, 1935). Turner and Downey (2010) used L. camara as a case study for their methodology to identify the native biodiversity threatened by an invasive plant. They identified 275 and native plants and 24 native animals requiring protection from L. camara invasions in Australia. The spread of L. camara on the Galapagos Islands is seen as a threat to bird breeding populations (Cruz et al., 1986).
The impact of L. camara on biodiversity is mostly negative but a few instances of a positive impact have been reported. It is often said that it provides habitat for some birds and thus provides refuge for wildlife (Mullen et al., 1993). More specifically, in Kenya thickets of L. camara have been reported to harbour a threatened bird species, Hinde's Babbler, Turdoides hinduei. It provides shelter to the bird that is not now readily available in a human-dominated countryside (Njoroge and Bennun, 2000). The plant plays a minor role in the feeding ecology of some species of conservation interest such as the lion-tailed macaque, Macaca silenus, which feeds extensively on the fruits in southern India (Umapathy and Kumar, 2000).
As it is such a variable species, including variability in stature, specific varieties or forms can be expected to have different impacts on native biodiversity, as well as cropping systems and other human activities; however, no information is available regarding these potential differences.
For more information see Holm et al. (1977), Morton (1994), Schemske (1983), Sharma et al. (1988), Sinha and Sharma (1984) and Thaman (1974).
The impact of L. camara on biodiversity is mostly negative but a few instances of a positive impact have been reported. It is often said that it provides habitat for some birds and thus provides refuge for wildlife (Mullen et al., 1993). More specifically, in Kenya thickets of L. camara have been reported to harbour a threatened bird species, Hinde's Babbler, Turdoides hinduei. It provides shelter to the bird that is not now readily available in a human-dominated countryside (Njoroge and Bennun, 2000). The plant plays a minor role in the feeding ecology of some species of conservation interest such as the lion-tailed macaque, Macaca silenus, which feeds extensively on the fruits in southern India (Umapathy and Kumar, 2000).
As it is such a variable species, including variability in stature, specific varieties or forms can be expected to have different impacts on native biodiversity, as well as cropping systems and other human activities; however, no information is available regarding these potential differences.
For more information see Holm et al. (1977), Morton (1994), Schemske (1983), Sharma et al. (1988), Sinha and Sharma (1984) and Thaman (1974).
Threatened Species
| Threatened species | Where threatened | Mechanisms | References | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cyanea recta (Kealia cyanea) | Hawaii | Competition - monopolizing resources | ||
| Cyrtandra limahuliensis (Limahuli cyrtandra) | Hawaii | Competition - monopolizing resources | ||
| Delissea subcordata (oha) | Hawaii | Allelopathic | ||
| Drosophila aglaia | Hawaii | Altered food web | ||
| Drosophila hemipeza | Hawaii | Altered food web Ecosystem change / habitat alteration | ||
| Drosophila heteroneura | Hawaii | Ecosystem change / habitat alteration | ||
| Drosophila montgomeryi | Hawaii | Ecosystem change / habitat alteration | ||
| Drosophila musaphilia | Hawaii | Ecosystem change / habitat alteration | ||
| Drosophila substenoptera | Hawaii | Ecosystem change / habitat alteration | ||
| Isodendrion longifolium (longleaf isodendrion) | Hawaii | Competition - monopolizing resources | ||
| Myrsine linearifolia (narrowleaf colicwood) | Hawaii | Competition (unspecified) | ||
| Nothocestrum peltatum (Oahu aiea) | Hawaii | Competition - smothering | ||
| Nototrichium humile (kaala rockwort) | Hawaii | Competition - monopolizing resources | ||
| Panicum fauriei (Carter's panicgrass) | Hawaii | Competition (unspecified) | ||
| Partula langfordi (Langford's tree snail) | Northern Mariana Islands | Ecosystem change / habitat alteration | ||
| Peucedanum sandwicense (makou) | Hawaii | Competition - smothering | ||
| Phyllostegia glabra var. lanaiensis (ulihi phyllostegia) | Hawaii | Competition - monopolizing resources | ||
| Phyllostegia knudsenii (Waimea phyllostegia) | Hawaii | Competition (unspecified) | ||
| Phyllostegia renovans (red-leaf phyllostegia) | Hawaii | Competition - monopolizing resources | ||
| Phyllostegia waimeae (Kauai phyllostegia) | Hawaii | Competition - monopolizing resources | ||
| Pittosporum napaliense (royal cheesewood) | Hawaii | Competition - monopolizing resources | ||
| Plantago hawaiensis (Hawai'i plantain) | Hawaii | Allelopathic Competition - monopolizing resources Competition - smothering | ||
| Plantago princeps | Hawaii | Competition - monopolizing resources | ||
| Platydesma rostrata | Hawaii | Competition - monopolizing resources | ||
| Poa mannii (Mann's bluegrass) | Hawaii | Competition - monopolizing resources | ||
| Poa siphonoglossa (Kauai bluegrass) | Hawaii | Competition - monopolizing resources | ||
| Pritchardia munroi (Kamalo pritchardia) | Hawaii | Competition - smothering | ||
| Pritchardia napaliensis | Hawaii | Competition - smothering | ||
| Pritchardia viscosa (stickybud pritchardia) | Hawaii | Competition - smothering | ||
| Psychotria grandiflora (large-flowered balsamo) | Hawaii | Competition - smothering | ||
| Psychotria hobdyi (Hobdy's wild-coffee) | Hawaii | Competition - smothering | ||
| Pteralyxia kauaiensis (Kauai pteralyxia) | Hawaii | Competition - smothering | ||
| Remya kauaiensis (Kauai remya) | Hawaii | Competition (unspecified) | ||
| Remya mauiensis (Maui remya) | Hawaii | Competition (unspecified) | ||
| Remya montgomeryi (Kalalau Valley remya) | Hawaii | Competition (unspecified) | ||
| Santalum freycinetianum var. lanaiense | Hawaii | Competition (unspecified) | ||
| Scaevola coriacea (dwarf naupaka) | Hawaii | Competition (unspecified) | ||
| Scaevola coriacea (dwarf naupaka) | Hawaii | Competition (unspecified) | ||
| Schiedea apokremnos (Kauai schiedea) | Hawaii | Competition (unspecified) | ||
| Schiedea hookeri (sprawling schiedea) | Hawaii | Competition - monopolizing resources Ecosystem change / habitat alteration | ||
| Schiedea kauaiensis (Kauai schiedea) | Hawaii | Competition - monopolizing resources | ||
| Schiedea lydgatei (Kamalo Gulch schiedea) | Hawaii | Competition - monopolizing resources | ||
| Schiedea membranacea | Hawaii | Competition - monopolizing resources | ||
| Schiedea sarmentosa | Hawaii | Competition - monopolizing resources | ||
| Schiedea spergulina var. leiopoda | Hawaii | Competition - monopolizing resources | ||
| Schiedea spergulina var. spergulina | Hawaii | Competition - smothering | ||
| Schiedea spergulina var. spergulina | Hawaii | Competition - smothering | ||
| Schiedea stellarioides | Hawaii | Competition - monopolizing resources Ecosystem change / habitat alteration | ||
| Sesbania tomentosa | Hawaii | Competition - monopolizing resources | ||
| Silene alexandri | Hawaii | Competition - monopolizing resources | ||
| Silene hawaiiensis (Hawaii catchfly) | Hawaii | Competition - shading | ||
| Silene lanceolata (Kauai catchfly) | Hawaii | Competition - monopolizing resources | ||
| Solanum sandwicense | Hawaii | Competition - monopolizing resources | ||
| Spermolepis hawaiiensis (Hawaii scaleseed) | Hawaii | Competition - monopolizing resources | ||
| Stenogyne kanehoana (Oahu stenogyne) | Hawaii | Competition - smothering | ||
| Tetramolopium capillare (pamakani) | Hawaii | Competition - smothering | ||
| Tetramolopium filiforme (ridgetop tetramolopium) | Hawaii | Competition - smothering | ||
| Tetramolopium remyi (Awalua Ridge tetramolopium) | Hawaii | Competition - smothering | ||
| Tetramolopium rockii (dune tetramolopium) | Hawaii | Competition - shading | ||
| Urera kaalae | Hawaii | Ecosystem change / habitat alteration Pest and disease transmission | ||
| Viola lanaiensis (Hawaii violet) | Hawaii | Competition (unspecified) Ecosystem change / habitat alteration | ||
| Wilkesia hobdyi (dwarf iliau) | Hawaii | Competition (unspecified) | ||
| Zanthoxylum dipetalum var. tomentosum | Hawaii | Competition - monopolizing resources Competition - smothering Ecosystem change / habitat alteration |
Impact: Social
Stands of L. camara and of the prickly variety in particular, hinder human's access to invaded habitats. In Tanzania and Uganda, L. camara can be considered a serious health hazard, as its thickets provide breeding grounds for tsetse flies, vectors of trypanosomiasis (Leak, 1999). L. camara thickets are potential breeding places for rats, wild pigs, insect pests and plant diseases. When ingested by cattle and sheep it may cause photosensitive reactions, diarrhoea, jaundice, hepatitis and poisoning. Children have been known to die after eating unripe berries and stems have been used as for toothbrushes (Burkill, 1935; Morton, 1994; Swarbrick et al., 1995).
Risk and Impact Factors
Invasiveness
Proved invasive outside its native range
Highly adaptable to different environments
Tolerates, or benefits from, cultivation, browsing pressure, mutilation, fire etc
Highly mobile locally
Has high reproductive potential
Impact outcomes
Damaged ecosystem services
Ecosystem change/ habitat alteration
Modification of fire regime
Negatively impacts agriculture
Negatively impacts forestry
Negatively impacts human health
Negatively impacts animal health
Reduced native biodiversity
Threat to/ loss of native species
Impact mechanisms
Allelopathic
Competition - monopolizing resources
Competition - shading
Competition - smothering
Competition (unspecified)
Pest and disease transmission
Hybridization
Produces spines, thorns or burrs
Likelihood of entry/control
Highly likely to be transported internationally accidentally
Highly likely to be transported internationally deliberately
Difficult to identify/detect as a commodity contaminant
Difficult/costly to control
Uses
Since the 19th century L. camara has been one of the main tropical and subtropical garden ornamentals. Under temperate climes it has been, and still is, widely used as a glasshouse ornamental and a pot plant. Apart from its ornamental value, L. camara has few redeeming features. In some mountainous areas (e.g. in Tanzania and India) the presence of L. camara was once considered a good ground cover preventing erosion. In parts of East Africa, in locations where it is not weedy, it has effectively been used as a live fence (Howes, 1946). However, in parts of Ethiopia where the idea of establishing a live fence of L. camara to protect crops from domestic animals was taken up by local villagers in the 1990s but this quickly led to the loss of rough grazing land through the rapid spread of this species (Binggeli and Desalegn Desissa, 2002).
A number of minor uses of L. camara include using the seeds as a source of food for lambs, using straw from L. camara mixed with dung for biogas production and using the twigs as fuel. There is some evidence, although conflicting in nature, that extracts from L. camara may have value as biocides (Ahmed and Agnihotri, 1977). In addition, essential oils from the flowers and leaves may have some value to the perfume industry and as beneficial drugs (Ahmad et al., 1962). In parts of its native range, L. camara is used as a source of medicinal cures, for example, in Ecuador the leaves are ingested to treat stomach disorders (Ellison and Evans, 1996). It is viewed in many regions as an important honey plant (Fichtl and Admasu Adi, 1994). Leaf extracts have strong insecticidal and antimicrobial activity, for example, storing potatoes, Solanum tuberosum, with leaves of L. camara almost eliminates damage by the potato tuber moth Phthorimaea operculella (Lal, 1987).
A number of minor uses of L. camara include using the seeds as a source of food for lambs, using straw from L. camara mixed with dung for biogas production and using the twigs as fuel. There is some evidence, although conflicting in nature, that extracts from L. camara may have value as biocides (Ahmed and Agnihotri, 1977). In addition, essential oils from the flowers and leaves may have some value to the perfume industry and as beneficial drugs (Ahmad et al., 1962). In parts of its native range, L. camara is used as a source of medicinal cures, for example, in Ecuador the leaves are ingested to treat stomach disorders (Ellison and Evans, 1996). It is viewed in many regions as an important honey plant (Fichtl and Admasu Adi, 1994). Leaf extracts have strong insecticidal and antimicrobial activity, for example, storing potatoes, Solanum tuberosum, with leaves of L. camara almost eliminates damage by the potato tuber moth Phthorimaea operculella (Lal, 1987).
Uses List
General > Ornamental
Environmental > Boundary, barrier or support
Environmental > Erosion control or dune stabilization
Materials > Pesticide
Materials > Poisonous to mammals
Medicinal, pharmaceutical > Traditional/folklore
Fuels > Biofuels
Fuels > Fuelwood
Human food and beverage > Honey/honey flora
Animal feed, fodder, forage > Fodder/animal feed
Detection and Inspection
L. camara is conspicuous due to its attractive and multicoloured floral displays and is a well-known species throughout the tropics.
Prevention and Control
Due to the variable regulations around (de)registration of pesticides, your national list of registered pesticides or relevant authority should be consulted to determine which products are legally allowed for use in your country when considering chemical control. Pesticides should always be used in a lawful manner, consistent with the product's label.
Cultural Control
Being poisonous to livestock means that the species can not be controlled using large herbivores. In fact, intense grazing by goats and donkeys will favour L. camara infestations by suppressing competition from palatable species (Ashmole and Ashmole, 2000).
Being poisonous to livestock means that the species can not be controlled using large herbivores. In fact, intense grazing by goats and donkeys will favour L. camara infestations by suppressing competition from palatable species (Ashmole and Ashmole, 2000).
Osunkoya et al. (2013) suggest from studies and simulation models in Queensland, Australia that periodic burning could control the weed in forests within 4-10 years if fire frequency is at least every two years. On farms, site-specific control may be achieved by 15 years if the biennial fire frequency is tempered with increased burning intensity.
Mechanical Control
Mechanical control can be effective, particularly where land is cleared, but requires continual follow-up treatment to remove roots and seedlings of L. camara. Slashing and burning stimulate suckering. Both chemical and mechanical control methods are expensive and labour intensive and are only effective in the short term. Cleared areas are rapidly colonised via seeds originating from distant parents or from sprouting roots. Dohn et al. (2013) recommend hand pulling for creating firebreaks or where minimizing damage to native species is paramount.
Chemical Control
The Australian experience in controlling L. camara, reviewed by Swarbrick et al. (1995), indicates that some herbicides are more effective on particular forms of L. camara. The most effective herbicides belong to the phenoxy acid (2,4-D, dichloroprop and MCPA), benzoic acid (dicamba) and pyridine groups. Glyphosate, sulfonylureas (metsulfuron methyl) and imidazolinones (imazapyr) also show good activity. Photosynthetic herbicides (triazine and urea) are not effective. A number of factors affect the effectiveness of the chemical treatment and they include: plant size, time of application, mode of application, and the use of surfactant. Use of herbicide in uncut stands may not be effective in preventing eventual regrowth. Combination of mechanical and chemical control may be the best. The seasonal response of L. camara to applications of fluroxypyr, metsulfuron-methyl, glyphosate and dichlorprop has been reported by Hannan-Jones (1998).
Work carried out in the South African Kruger National Park by Erasmus et al. (1993) showed that chemical control was cheaper and caused less disturbance resulting in higher biodiversity than mechanical control. Chemical control consisted in an application of imazapyr on freshly cut stems and a follow-up operation by spot-spray application of glyphosate. The initial control required 25 man-days per ha and that of the follow-up control 6.8 man-days per ha. Control costs will vary from site to site and will depend on L. camara stem density and cover. Latest South African recommendations are provided by Vermeulen et al. (1996).
In India, eradication of L. camara from sub-watersheds in the Markanda catchment, Himachal Pradesh, was effective and economical using glyphosate sprayed on to regenerated growth, cut four months previously (Rana and Singh, 1999).
Mechanical Control
Mechanical control can be effective, particularly where land is cleared, but requires continual follow-up treatment to remove roots and seedlings of L. camara. Slashing and burning stimulate suckering. Both chemical and mechanical control methods are expensive and labour intensive and are only effective in the short term. Cleared areas are rapidly colonised via seeds originating from distant parents or from sprouting roots. Dohn et al. (2013) recommend hand pulling for creating firebreaks or where minimizing damage to native species is paramount.
Chemical Control
The Australian experience in controlling L. camara, reviewed by Swarbrick et al. (1995), indicates that some herbicides are more effective on particular forms of L. camara. The most effective herbicides belong to the phenoxy acid (2,4-D, dichloroprop and MCPA), benzoic acid (dicamba) and pyridine groups. Glyphosate, sulfonylureas (metsulfuron methyl) and imidazolinones (imazapyr) also show good activity. Photosynthetic herbicides (triazine and urea) are not effective. A number of factors affect the effectiveness of the chemical treatment and they include: plant size, time of application, mode of application, and the use of surfactant. Use of herbicide in uncut stands may not be effective in preventing eventual regrowth. Combination of mechanical and chemical control may be the best. The seasonal response of L. camara to applications of fluroxypyr, metsulfuron-methyl, glyphosate and dichlorprop has been reported by Hannan-Jones (1998).
Work carried out in the South African Kruger National Park by Erasmus et al. (1993) showed that chemical control was cheaper and caused less disturbance resulting in higher biodiversity than mechanical control. Chemical control consisted in an application of imazapyr on freshly cut stems and a follow-up operation by spot-spray application of glyphosate. The initial control required 25 man-days per ha and that of the follow-up control 6.8 man-days per ha. Control costs will vary from site to site and will depend on L. camara stem density and cover. Latest South African recommendations are provided by Vermeulen et al. (1996).
In India, eradication of L. camara from sub-watersheds in the Markanda catchment, Himachal Pradesh, was effective and economical using glyphosate sprayed on to regenerated growth, cut four months previously (Rana and Singh, 1999).
In Queensland, Dohn et al. (2013) suggest that foliar spraying with a glyphosate-based herbicide is the most efficient treatment for combating large infestations of L. camara. In Florida, Ferrell et al. (2011) report that this species can be effectively controlled by two applications of fluroxypyr, two applications of fluroxypyr+aminopyralid, or a single application of aminocyclopyrachlor.
L. camara is resistant to triclopyr, a widely used herbicide for woody weed control (Goodall and Naude, 1998).
Biological Control
L. camara is resistant to triclopyr, a widely used herbicide for woody weed control (Goodall and Naude, 1998).
Biological Control
Worldwide, well over 200 releases of biocontrol agents have been made (39 different natural enemies have been released in 29 countries), however, in the majority of cases the control agent either failed to become established or became established without achieving control. Despite this limited success, classical biological control is still considered to be the only viable, long-term control option, since it offers a safe, economic and environmentally benign method of suppressing the weed. Most of the releases have been carried out in the Pacific, South Africa and Australia (for historical details see Taylor 1989; Cilliers and Neser, 1991; Denton et al., 1991; Davis et al., 1992; Swarbrick et al., 1995). The most widely established species include Ophiomyia lantanae, Uroplata girardi and Octoma scabripennis. Day et al. (2003) have produced a detailed review of 48 of these control agents.
In Hawaii, Neogalea sunia and Epinotia lantanae contribute to the control of L. camara across the islands. In addition, a combination of Hypena strigata, Octotoma scabripennis, Salbia haemorrhoidalis, Teleonemia scrupulosa and Uroplata girardi provide partial to substantial control in drier areas <1270 mm rainfall), and in wetter areas Plagiohammus spinipennis provides partial control (Julien and Griffiths, 1998).
The release in 1993 of U. girardi on an island of the Russell Island group (Solomon Islands) resulted in the successful control of the 'Hawaiian Pink' form (Swarbrick et al., 1995). U. girardi has proved to be one of the more successful agents and is credited with providing some check on the spread of L. camara in Australia, South Africa and some islands in the Pacific Ocean. In Micronesia seven out of 13 introduced insect species became established and have resulted in acceptable levels of control for current agricultural practices (Denton et al., 1991). As elsewhere the effectiveness of the insect species varied between islands and between varieties of L. camara. Greater success appears to have been achieved in drier areas.
In Uganda, the introduction of T. scrupulosa, which had been widely released after its successful introduction into Hawaii in 1902, was very successful in the area around Serere Research Station in Teso District but it also attacked one of the cultivars of Sesamum indicum grown on the Research Station (Davies and Greathead, 1967). Fortunately, it was unable to breed on that crop and attacks subsided after the L. camara had been controlled. Subsequently other agents for L. camara control were tested on Sesamum and it was found that other Tingidae and the chrysomelid leaf miners would also feed on this crop (Greathead, 1973).
Recent releases of arthropod biocontrol agents in Australia (Queensland and New South Wales) to control L. camara include the treehopper Aconophora compressa (first in 1995), the mirid Falconia intermedia (during 2000-2004), and the leaf miner Ophiomyia camarae (first in 2007). Weather conditions and other factors have resulted in poor establishment or low levels of damage so far (Taylor et al., 2008).
Hersula and Hill (2012) report that populations of F. intermedia released in South Africa to control L. camara had disappeared after initially building up to high densities. It is suggested that some L. camara varieties possess factors enabling them to resist feeding activities after the initial attack. Biological control of L. camara in South Africa is reviewed by Moran et al. (2011), who suggest that it plays a subsidiary role in support of mechanical and chemical control, but that cost benefits justify the continued development of new agents.
Broughton (2000) reviewed biological control programmes of L. camara worldwide and concluded that leaf-, flower- and fruit-feeding species were the most successful feeding groups, and the leaf-mining chrysomelid U. girardi was the most successful control agent. She identified the main factor preventing the establishment of control agents as the number of individuals released and noted that cultivar preferences, parasitism and predation, and climate reduced control. Broughton (2000) concluded that flower- and fruit-feeding species were unlikely to be effective because the seeds of L. camara are only viable for a short period of time and have a low germination, and that defoliating species were likely to be ineffective because of the ability of L. camara to withstand defoliation. Julien and Griffiths (1998) showed that different cultivars display differences in susceptibility to insect herbivores.
A potential pathogen of L. camara (spreading in Hawaii) was identified by Trujillo and Norman (1995) as a leaf-spot fungus, Septoria sp., from Ecuador. Various other pathogens with apparently excellent potential to control a wide range of cultivars have been identified by Barreto et al. (1995) and Thomas and Ellison (2000). In South Africa, permission was granted in 2001 to release the fungus Mycovellosiella lantanae var. lantanae, collected from Florida, USA (Breeÿen et al., 2000, Breeÿen, 2004). In 2001 the rust fungus Prospodium tuberculatum (ex Brazil) was the first pathogen to be released in Australia for biological control of L. camara (Tomley and Riding, 2002; Ellison et al., 2006; Thomas et al., 2006). Drought conditions affected its establishment and spread from the release sites in Queensland and New South Wales and incidence is generally low, although some leaf drop has been observed (Taylor et al., 2008).
In May 2015, the first release of P. lantanae was made on New Zealand’s North Island. The rust had previously been screened by CABI scientists in the UK for its host specificity before being transferred to Landcare’s Plant Pathogen Containment Facility in Auckland. The blister rust is able infect leaves, petioles and stems and can cause systemic infections that lead to stem dieback and defoliation.
In addition, a second rust, P. tuberculatum (the same isolate released in Australia in 2001) was released in New Zealand as part of the same initiative. The leaf rust pathogen causes leaf death and defoliation and as it is subtropical, it is expected to be less dependent on high humidity to compliment P. lantanae in different climatic conditions (Anon, 2015).
Links to Websites
| Name | URL | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| GISD/IASPMR: Invasive Alien Species Pathway Management Resource and DAISIE European Invasive Alien Species Gateway | https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.m93f6 | Data source for updated system data added to species habitat list. |
| Global register of Introduced and Invasive species (GRIIS) | http://griis.org/ | Data source for updated system data added to species habitat list. |
References
Julien MH ed., 1992. Biological Control of Weeds. A World Catalogue of Agents and their Target Weeds, 3rd edition. Wallingford, UK: CAB International.
Adams CD, 1976. Flowering plants of Jamaica. Mona: University of the West Indies.
Ahmad MN, Bhatty MK, Karimullah, 1962. Some essential oil sources from West Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Science, 14:12-15.
Ahmed SR, Agnihotri JP, 1977. Antifungal activity of some plant extracts. Indian Journal of Mycology and Plant Pathology, 7(2):180-181
Anon, 2008. Review of the declaration of Lantana species in New South Wales. Review of the declaration of Lantana species in New South Wales:viii + 62 pp.
Anon, 2015. Pathogens against Lantana: New Zealand releases new agent. Biocontrol News and Information, 36(3):24. http://www.cabi.org/Uploads/bni/news/bni-news-36-3%20(1).pdf
Ashmole P, Ashmole M, 2000. St Helena and Ascension Island: a natural history. Oswestry, UK: A. Nelson.
Atkinson IAE, Atkinson, TJ, 2000. Land vertebrates as invasive species on the islands of the South Pacific Regional Environment Programme. In: Sherley G, ed. Invasive Species in the Pacific: A Technical Review and Draft Regional Strategy. Samoa, South Pacific Regional Environment Programme, 19-84.
Baars JR, Neser S, 1999. Past and present initiatives on the biological control of Lantana camara (Verbenaceae) in South Africa. African Entomology Memoir, 1 21-33
Barreto RW, Evans HC, Ellison CA, 1995. The mycobiota of the weed Lantana camara in Brazil, with particular reference to biological control. Mycological Research, 99(7):769-782
Bhagwat SA, Breman E, Thekaekara T, Thornton TF, Willis KJ, 2012. A battle lost? Report on two centuries of invasion and management of Lantana camara L. in Australia, India and South Africa. PLoS ONE, 7(3):e32407. http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0032407
Binggeli P, 2001. The human dimensions of invasive woody plants. In: McNeilly J, ed. The Great reshuffling - Human Dimensions of Invasive Alien Species. Gland: IUCN, 145-159.
Binggeli P, 2003. Verbenaceae, Lantana camara, fankatavinakoho, fotatra, mandadrieko, rajejeka, radredreka, ramity. In: Goodman SM, Benstead JP, ed. The Natural History of Madagascar. Chicago, USA: University of Chicago Press, 415-417.
Binggeli P, Desalegn Desissa, 2002. Lantana camara - the invasive shrub that threatens to drive people out of their land. Newsletter of the Ethiopian Wildlife and Natural History Society, April-June 2002:4-6.
Breeÿen A den, 2004. Release strategies for the establishment of the leaf spot pathogen, Mycovellosiella lantanae var. lantanae, on Lantana camara in South Africa. In: Proceedings of the XI International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds, Canberra, Australia, 27 April - 2 May, 2003 [ed. by Cullen, J. M.\Briese, D. T.\Kriticos, D. J.\Lonsdale, W. M.\Morin, L.\Scott, J. K.]. Canberra, Australia: CSIRO Entomology, 386-388.
Breeÿen A den, Morris MJ, Serdani M, 2000. Host specificity studies of the pathogen Mycovellosiella lantanae var. lantanae for the biological control of Lantana camara in South Africa. In: Spencer NR ed. Proceedings of the X International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds, Montana State University, Bozeman, Montana, USA, p. 676 (abstract).
Bromilow C, 1995. Problem plants of South Africa. Briza Publications, Arcadia.
Broome R, Sabir K, Carrington S, 2007. Plants of the Eastern Caribbean. Online database. Barbados: University of the West Indies. http://ecflora.cavehill.uwi.edu/index.html
Broughton S, 1999. Impact of the seed-fly, Ophiomyia lantanae (Froggatt) (Diptera: Agromyzidae), on the viability of lantana fruit in south-east Queensland, Australia. Biological Control, 15(2):168-172; 28 ref.
Broughton S, 2000. Review and evaluation of lantana biocontrol programs. Biological Control, 17(3):272-286; 3 pp. of ref.
Burkill IH, 1935. A Dictionary of the Economic Products of the Malay Peninsula, Volumes 1 and 2. London, UK: Governments of the Straits Settlements and Federal Malay States, Crown Agents for the Colonies.
CONABIO, 2009. The National Commission for the Knowledge and Use of Biodiversity. Mexico: Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad. http://www.conabio.gob.mx/
Chevalier A, 1935. Les Iles de Cap Vert - Geographie, biogeographie, agriculture - Flore de l'Archipel. Revue de Botanique Appliquée et d'Agriculture Tropicale, 15(170-1):732-1068.
Cilliers CJ, Neser S, 1991. Biological control of Lantana camara (Verbenaceae) in South Africa. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 37(1-3):57-75
Corlett RT, 1992. The naturalized flora of Hong Kong: a comparison with Singapore. Journal of Biogeography, 15:421-430.
Corlett RT, 1998. Frugivory and seed dispersal by vertebrates in the Oriental (Indomalayan) Region. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 73(4):413-448; 9 pp. of ref.
Cronk QCB, 1989. The past and present vegetation of St Helena. Journal of Biogeography, 16:47-64.
Cruz F, Cruz J, Lawesson JE, 1986. Lantana camara L., a threat to native plants and animals. Noticias de Galapagos, 43:10-11.
DAISIE, 2013. Delivering Alien Invasive Species Inventories for Europe. DAISIE (online). www.europe-aliens.org
Davies CJ, Greathead DJ, 1967. Occurrence of Teleonemia scrupulosa on Sesamum indicum Linn. in Uganda. Nature, 213:102-103.
Davis CJ, Yoshioka E, Kageler D, 1992. Biological control of lantana, prickly pear, and Hamakua pamakani in Hawaii: a review and update. In: Stone CP, Smith CW, Tunison JT, eds. Alien plant invasions in native ecosystems of Hawaii: Management and Research. Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: University of Hawaii Press, 411-431.
Day MD, Wiley CJ. Playford J, Zalucki MP, 2003. Lantana: current management status and future prospects. Australia: ACIAR Monograph, 102.
Denton GRW, Muniappan R, Marutani M, 1991. Status and natural enemies of the weed, Lantana camara, in Micronesia. Tropical Pest Management, 37(4):338-344
Dohn J, Berry ZC, Curran TJ, 2013. A pilot project testing the effectiveness of three weed control methods on the removal of Lantana camara in Forty Mile Scrub National Park, Queensland, Australia. Ecological Management & Restoration, 14(1):74-77. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1442-8903
Doren RF, Ferriter A, Hastings H, 2002. Weeds won't wait! Part one: an assessment of invasive exotic plants in Florida. The South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force And Working Group. http:\everglades/fiu.edu/taskforce/www.
Ellison CA, Evans HC, 1996. Amazon-ingly useful fungi - a biological control cornucopia?. Mycologist, 10(1):11-13; 4 ref.
Ellison CA, Pereira JM, Thomas SE, Barreto RW, Evans HC, 2006. Studies on the rust Prospodium tuberculatum, a new classical biological control agent released against the invasive alien weed Lantana camara in Australia. 1. Life-cycle and infection parameters. Australasian Plant Pathology, 35(3):309-319. http://www.publish.csiro.au/nid/39/paper/AP06022.htm
Englberger K, 2009. Invasive weeds of Pohnpei: A guide for identification and public awareness. Conservation Society of Pohnpei, 29 pp.
Erasmus DJ, Maggs KAR, Biggs HC, Zeller DA, Bell RS, 1993. Control of Lantana camara in the Kruger National Park, South Africa, and subsequent vegetation dynamics. Brighton crop protection conference, weeds. Proceedings of an international conference, Brighton, UK, 22-25 November 1993 Farnham, UK; British Crop Protection Council (BCPC), Vol. 1:399-404
Evans HC, 1999. Biological control of weed and insect pests using fungal pathogens, with particular reference to Sri Lanka. Biocontrol News and Information, 20(2):63N-68N.
Ferrell J, Sellers B, Macdonald G, 2011. Herbicidal control of Lantana camara. In: 23rd Asian-Pacific Weed Science Society Conference. Volume 1: weed management in a changing world, Cairns, Queensland, Australia, 26-29 September 2011. Cairns, Australia: Asian-Pacific Weed Science Society, 170-176.
Fichtl R, Admasu Adi, 1994. Honeybee Flora of Ethiopia. Weikersheim: Margraf Verlag.
Flora of China Editorial Committee, 2012. Flora of China Web. Cambridge, USA: Harvard University Herbaria. http://flora.huh.harvard.edu/china/
Florence J, Waldren S, Chepstow-Lusty AJ, 1995. The flora of the Pitcairn Islands: a review. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 56(1/2):79-119
Francis JK, Rivera C, Figureroa J, 1994. Toward a woody plant list for Antigua and Barbuda: past and present. General Technical Report - Southern Forest Experiment Station, USDA Forest Service, SO-102:1-28.
Funk V, Hollowell T, Berry P, Kelloff C, Alexander SN, 2007. Checklist of the plants of the Guiana Shield (Venezuela: Amazonas, Bolivar, Delta Amacuro; Guyana, Surinam, French Guiana). Contributions from the United States National Herbarium, 584 pp.
Gentle CB, Duggin JA, 1997. Allelopathy as a competitive strategy in persistent thickets of Lantana camara L. in three Australian forest communities. Plant Ecology, 132(1):85-95; 56 ref.
Gerlach J, 1993. The conservation of Silhouette Island, Seychelles. 1. Plants. Phelsuma, 1:18-29.
Goodall JM, Naudé DC, 1998. An ecosystem approach for planning sustainable management of environmental weeds in South Africa. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 68(1/2):109-123; 34 ref.
Gooden B, French K, Turner PJ, 2009. Invasion and management of a woody plant, Lantana camara L., alters vegetation diversity within wet sclerophyll forest in southeastern Australia. Forest Ecology and Management, 257(3):960-967. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03781127
Gooding EGB, Loveless AR, Proctor GR, 1965. Flora of Barbados. London, UK: Ministry of Overseas Development.
Govaerts R, 2013. World Checklist of Verbenaceae. Richmond, UK: Royal Botanic Gardens Kew. http://apps.org/wcsp/home.do
Graveson R, 2012. The Plants of Saint Lucia (in the Lesser Antilles of the Caribbean). The Plants of Saint Lucia (in the Lesser Antilles of the Caribbean). http://www.saintlucianplants.com
Greathead DJ, 1973. Progress in the biological control of Lantana camara in East Africa and discussion of problems raised by the unexpected reaction of some of the more promising insects to Sesamum indicum. In: Dunn PH, ed. Miscellaneous Publication, Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control, No. 6:89-92
Gujral GS, Vasudevan P, 1983. Lantana camara L., a problem weed. Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research, 42:281-286.
Hannan-Jones MA, 1998. The seasonal response of Lantana camara to selected herbicides. Weed Research (Oxford), 38(6):413-423; 21 ref.
Heckel E, 1911. Sur l'envahissement des forOts de Nouvelle Calédonie par le Lantana camara L. et les dangers que la plante fait courir à l'économie agricole et sylvicole de l'île. Bulletin de la Société d'Acclimatisation de France, 58:511-514.
Heleno RH, Olesen JM, Nogales M, Vargas P, Traveset A, 2013. Seed dispersal networks in the Galápagos and the consequences of alien plant invasions. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 280(1750):20122112. http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/280/1750/20122112.full
Heshula LUP, Hill MP, 2012. Effect of previous feeding by Falconia intermedia (Hemiptera: Miridae) on subsequent feeding activity on the invasive shrub Lantana camara (Verbenaceae). Biocontrol Science and Technology, 22(6):671-684. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09583157.2012.677806
Holm LG, Pancho JV, Herberger JP, Plucknett DL, 1979. A geographical atlas of world weeds. New York, USA: John Wiley and Sons, 391 pp.
Holm LG, Plucknett DL, Pancho JV, Herberger JP, 1977. The World's Worst Weeds. Distribution and Biology. Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: University Press of Hawaii.
Howard RA, 1969. A checklist of cultivar names in the genus Lantana. Arnoldia, 29(11):73-109.
Howard RA, 1970. Lantana camara - a prize and a peril. American Horticultural Magazine, 49:31-36.
Howes FN, 1946. Fence and barrier plants in warm climates. Kew Bulletin, 2:51-87.
IPPC-Secretariat, 2005. Identification of risks and management of invasive alien species using the IPPC framework. Proceedings of the workshop on invasive alien species and the International Plant Protection Convention, 22-26 September 2003. xii + 301 pp.
ISSG, 2015. Global Invasive Species Database (GISD). Invasive Species Specialist Group of the IUCN Species Survival Commission. http://www.issg.org/database/welcome/
Islam KR, Ahmed MR, Bhuiyan MK, Badruddin A, 2001. Deforestation effects on vegetative regeneration and soil quality in tropical semi-evergreen degraded and protected forests of Bangladesh. Land Degradation and Development, 12:45-56.
Julien MH, Griffiths MW, 1998. Biological control of weeds: a world catalogue of agents and their target weeds. Biological control of weeds: a world catalogue of agents and their target weeds., Ed. 4:x + 223 pp.
Kairo M, Ali B, Cheesman O, Haysom K, Murphy S, 2003. Invasive species threats in the Caribbean region. Report to the Nature Conservancy. Curepe, Trinidad and Tobago: CAB International, 132 pp. http://www.issg.org/database/species/reference_files/Kairo%20et%20al,%202003.pdf
Khan MA, Qureshi RA, Gillani SA, Ghufran MA, Batool A, Sultana KN, 2010. Invasive species of federal capital area Islamabad, Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Botany, 42(3):1529-1534. http://www.pakbs.org/pjbot/PDFs/42(3)/PJB42(3)1529.pdf
Kwabiah AB, Stoskopf NC, Voroney RP, Palm CA, 2001. Nitrogen and phosphorus release from decomposing leaves under sub-humid tropical conditions. Biotropica, 33: 229-240.
Lal L, 1987. Studies on natural repellents against potato tuber moth (Phthorimaea operculella Zeller) in country stores. Potato Research, 30(2):329-334; 8 ref.
Langeland KA, Burks KC, eds, 2000. Identification and biology of non-native plants in Florida's natural areas. Florida, USA: University of Florida.
Leak SGA, 1999. Tsetse biology and ecology, their role in the epidemiology and control of trypanosomosis. Wallingford, UK: CAB International.
Macdonald IAW, Thebaud C, Strahm WA, Strasberg D, 1991. Effects of alien plant invasions on native vegetation remnants on La Reunion (Mascarene Islands, Indian Ocean). Environmental Conservation, 18(1):51-61.
Marohasy J, 1994. The pest status of Phenacoccus parvus Morrison (Homoptera: Pseudococcidae). International Journal of Pest Management, 40:337-340.
Mathur G, Mohan Ram HY, 1978. Significance of petal colour in thrips-pollinated Lantana camara L. Annals of Botany, 42:1473-1476.
McWilliam A, 2000. A plague on your house? Some impacts of Chromolaena odorata on Timorese livelihoods. Human Ecology, 28(3):451-469; 29 ref.
Meyer J-Y, 2000. A preliminary review of the invasive plants in the Pacific Islands (SPREP Member Countries). In: Sherley G, ed. Invasive Species in the Pacific: A Technical Review and Draft Regional Strategy. Samoa: South Pacific Regional Environment Programme, 85-114.
Morton JF, 1994. Lantana, or red sage (Lantana camara L., [Verbenaceae]), notorious weed and popular garden flower; some cases of poisoning in Florida. Economic Botany, 48(3):259-270; 84 ref.
Mullen BF, Macfarlane DC, Evans TR, 1993. Weed identification and management in Vanuatu pastures, Second Edition. Vanuatu Pasture Improvement Project (VPIP) Technical Bulletin, No. 2.
Mune TL, Parham JW, 1967. The declared noxious weeds of Fiji and their control, 3rd edn. Fiji Department of Agriculture Bulletin, 48:1-87.
Munz PA, 1974. A Flora of Southern California. Berkeley, USA: University of California Press.
Muvengwi J, Ndagurwa HGT, 2015. Soil seed bank dynamics and fertility on a seasonal wetland invaded by <i>Lantana camara</i> in a savanna ecosystem. South African Journal of Botany, 100:190-194. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0254629915003233
Nair NC, Henry AN, 1983. Flora of Tamil Nadu Ser. 1. Analysis. Coimbatore, India: Botanical Survey of India (Southern Circle).
National Tropical Botanical Garden, 2007. http://ntbg.org
NatureServe, 2010. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. Arlington, Virginia, USA. http://www.natureserve.org/explorer
Njoroge P, Bennun LA, 2000. Status and conservation of Hinde's Babbler Turdoides hinduei, a threatened species in an agricultural landscape. Ostrich, 71:69-72.
Osunkoya OO, Perrett C, Fernando C, 2010. Population viability analysis models for Lantana camara L. (Verbenaceae): a weed of national significance. In: 17th Australasian weeds conference. New frontiers in New Zealand: together we can beat the weeds. Christchurch, New Zealand, 26-30 September, 2010 [ed. by Zydenbos, S. M.]. Hastings, New Zealand: New Zealand Plant Protection Society, 99-102.
Osunkoya OO, Perrett C, Fernando C, Clark C, Raghu S, 2013. Modeling population growth and site specific control of the invasive Lantana camara L. (Verbenaceae) under differing fire regimes. Population Ecology, 55(2):291-303. http://rd.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10144-013-0364-7
PIER, 2013. Pacific Islands Ecosystems at Risk. Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: HEAR, University of Hawaii. http://www.hear.org/pier/index.html
Palmer WA, Pullen KR, 1995. The phytophagous arthropods associated with Lantana camara, L. hirsuta, L. urticifolia, and L. urticoides (Verbenaceae) in North America. Biological Control, 5(1):54-72; 35 ref.
Palmer WA, Willson BW, Pullen KR, 2000. Introduction, rearing, and host range of Aerenicopsis championi Bates (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) for the biological control of Lantana camara L. in Australia. Biological Control, 17(3):227-233; 17 ref.
Parsons WT, Cuthbertson EG, 1992. Noxious Weeds of Australia. Melbourne, Australia: Inkata Press, 692 pp.
Press JR, Short MJ, ed, 1994. Flora of Madeira. London, UK: HMSO.
Rana RS, Singh LN, 1999. Eradication of Lantana camara and wasteland utilization in Kandi region of Himachal Pradesh. Indian Journal of Soil Conservation, 27(2):137-140; 1 ref.
Rawat GP, 1997. Conservation status of forests and wildlife in the Eastern Ghats, India. Environmental Conservation, 24:307-315.
Robertson MP, Caithness N, Villet MH, 2001. A PCA-based modelling technique for predicting environmental suitability for organisms from presence records. Diversity and Distributions, 7(1/2):15-27; 46 ref.
Robinson P, 2001. The Gambia. In: Fishpool LDC, Evans MI, eds. Important bird areas in Africa and associated islands. Newbury, UK: Pisces Publications and Cambridge, BirdLife International, 357-366.
Roby D, Dossar MB, 2000. Strategie nationale et plan d'action pour la conservation de la diversite biologique. Moroni, Comoros: Republique Federale Islamique des Comores. http://www.biodiv.org/doc/world/km/km-nbsap-01-fr.pdf.
Schemske DW, 1983. Lantana camara (Cinco Negritos, Lantana). In: Janzen DH, ed. Costa Rican Natural History. Chicago, USA: University of Chicago Press, 266-268.
Schnell R, 1950. Contribution préliminaire à l'étude botanique de la Basse-Guinée Française. Etudes Guinéennes, 6:31-75.
Scott L, Graham GC, Hannan-Jones M, Yeates DK, 1997. DNA profiling resolves the limited importance of flower colour in defining varieties of Lantana camara. Electrophoresis, 18:1560-1563.
Sharma GP, Raghubanshi AS, 2012. Invasive species: ecology and impact of Lantana camara invasions. In: Invasive alien plants: an ecological appraisal for the Indian subcontinent [ed. by Bhatt, J. R.\Singh, J. S.\Singh, S. P.\Tripathi, R. S.\Kohli, R. K.]. Wallingford, UK: CABI, 19-42. http://www.cabi.org/CABeBooks/default.aspx?site=107&page=45&LoadModule=PDFHier&BookID=630
Sharma OP, Makkar HPS, Dawra RK, 1988. A review of the noxious plant Lantana camara. Toxicon, 26(11):975-987
Sinha S, Sharma A, 1985. Lantana camara L. <dash> a review. Feddes Repertorium, 95(9/10):621-633
Smiet AC, 1992. Forest ecology on Java: human impact and vegetation of montane forest. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 8:129-152.
Sobrino E, Sanz-Elorza M, Dana ED, Gonzßlez-Moreno A, 2002. Invasibility of a coastal strip in NE Spain by alien plants. Journal of Vegetation Science, 13(4):585-594; many ref.
Stirton CH, 1977. Some thoughts on the polyploid complex Lantana camara L. (Verbenaceae). Proceedings of the Second National Weeds Conference of South Africa., 321-340
Stirton CH, 1979. Taxonomic problems associated with invasive alien trees and shrubs in South Africa. In: Proceedings of the 9th Plenary Meeting AETFAT (Association pour l'étude taxonomique de la flore d'Afrique tropicale, Brussells, Belgium), 218-219.
Strahm W, 1989. Plant Red Data Book for Rodrigues. Konigstein, Germany: Koeltz Scientific Books.
Swarbrick JT, 1986. History of the lantanas in Australia and origins of the weedy biotypes. Plant Protection Quarterly, 1(3):115-121
Swarbrick JT, Wison BW, Hannan-Jones MA, 1995. The biology of Australian weeds. 25. Lantana camara L. Plant Protection Quarterly, 10:82-95.
Taylor DBJ, Riding N, Chamberlain A, Clark A, Day MD, 2008. The establishment and spread of the latest biocontrol agents released against Lantana camara in Australia. In: Proceedings of the 16th Australian Weeds Conference, Cairns Convention Centre, North Queensland, Australia, 18-22 May, 2008. Queensland, Australia: Queensland Weed Society, 279. http://www.16awc.com.au
Taylor EE, 1989. A history of biological control of Lantana camara in New South Wales. Plant Protection Quarterly, 4(2):61-65
Taylor S, Kumar L, 2013. Potential distribution of an invasive species under climate change scenarios using CLIMEX and soil drainage: a case study of <i>Lantana camara</i> L. in Queensland, Australia. Journal of Environmental Management, 114:414-422. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03014797
Taylor S, Kumar L, Reid N, 2012. Impacts of climate change and land-use on the potential distribution of an invasive weed: a case study of Lantana camara in Australia. Weed Research (Oxford), 52(5):391-401. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-3180.2012.00930.x/full
Thaman RR, 1974. Lantana camara: its introduction, dispersal and impact on islands of the tropical Pacific Ocean. Micronesica, 10:17-39.
Thirunavukkarasu PS, Prathaban S, Dhanapalan P, 2001. Pathological studies of Lantana camara poisoning in experimental calves. Indian Veterinary Journal, 78:676-678.
Thomas SE, Ellison CA, 2000. A century of classical control of Lantana camara: can pathogens make a significant difference? In: Spencer NR, ed. Proceedings of the X International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds, Montana State University, Bozeman, Montana, USA, 97-104.
Thomas SE, Ellison CA, Tomley AJ, 2006. Studies on the rust Prospodium tuberculatum, a new classical biological control agent released against the invasive alien weed Lantana camara in Australia. 2. Host range. Australasian Plant Pathology, 35(3):321-328. http://www.publish.csiro.au/nid/39/paper/AP06023.htm
Tomley AJ, Riding N, 2002. <i>Prospodium tuberculatum</i>, lantana rust, a new agent released for the biocontrol of the woody shrub <i>Lantana camara</i>. In: 13th Australian Weeds Conference: weeds "threats now and forever?", Sheraton Perth Hotel, Perth, Western Australia, 8-13 September 2002: papers and proceedings [ed. by Jacob, H. S.\Dodd, J.\Moore, J. H.]. Victoria Park, Australia: Plant Protection Society of Western Australia Inc, 389-390.
Trujillo EE, Norman DJ, 1995. Septoria leaf spot of lantana from Ecuador: a potential biological control for bush lantana in forests of Hawaii. Plant Disease, 79(8):819-821
Turner PJ, Downey PO, 2010. Ensuring invasive alien plant management delivers biodiversity conservation: insights from an assessment of Lantana camara in Australia. Plant Protection Quarterly, 25(3):102-110. http://www.weedinfo.com.au
Tutin TG, Heywood VH, Burges NA, Moore DM, Valentine DH, Walters SM, Webb DA, 1972. Flora Europaea. Vol. 3. Diapensiaceae to Myoporaceae. London, Cambridge University Press., UK xxix+370pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 1995. Lana'i Plant Cluster Recovery Plan. In: Lana'i Plant Cluster Recovery Plan.US Fish and Wildlife Service. 138 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 1995. Recovery Plan for the Kauai Plant Cluster. In: Recovery Plan for the Kauai Plant Cluster.US Fish and Wildlife Service. 270 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 1996. Big Island Plant Cluster Recovery Plan. In: Big Island Plant Cluster Recovery Plan.US Fish and Wildlife Service. 202 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 1996. Recovery Plan for the Molokai Plant Cluster. In: Recovery Plan for the Molokai Plant Cluster.US Fish and Wildlife Service. 143 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 1997. Recovery Plan for the Maui Plant Cluster. In: Recovery Plan for the Maui Plant Cluster.US Fish and Wildlife Service. 130 pp. + appendices.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 1998. Kauai II: Addendum to the Recovery Plan for the Kauai Plant Cluster. In: Kauai II: Addendum to the Recovery Plan for the Kauai Plant Cluster.US Fish and Wildlife Service. 84 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 1998. Recovery Plan for Oahu Plants. In: Recovery Plan for Oahu Plants.US Fish and Wildlife Service. 207 pp. + appendices.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2003. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Designation or Nondesignation of Critical Habitat for 95 Plant Species From the Islands of Kauai and Niihau, HI; Final Rule. In: Federal Register, 68(39) US Fish and Wildlife Service. 9116-9164. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/federal_register/fr4053.pdf
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2008. 5-Year Review, Short Form Summary: Species Reviewed: Schiedea kauaiensis (no common name). In: 5-Year Review, Short Form Summary: Species Reviewed: Schiedea kauaiensis (no common name).US Fish and Wildlife Service. 6 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2008. Kulu`i (Nototrichium humile). 5-Year Review. In: Kulu`i (Nototrichium humile). 5-Year Review.US Fish and Wildlife Service. 11 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2008. Phyllostegia waimeae (no common name). 5-Year Review, Short Form. In: Phyllostegia waimeae (no common name). 5-Year Review, Short Form.US Fish and Wildlife Service. 6 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2008. Silene alexandri (no common name). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. In: Silene alexandri (no common name). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation.US Fish and Wildlife Service. 10 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2009. 5-Year Review, Short Form Summary: Species Reviewed: Phyllostegia knudsenii (no common name). In: 5-Year Review, Short Form Summary: Species Reviewed: Phyllostegia knudsenii (no common name).US Fish and Wildlife Service. 6 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2009. 5-Year Review, Short Form Summary: Zanthoxylum dipetalum var. tomentosum (A`e). In: 5-Year Review, Short Form Summary: Zanthoxylum dipetalum var. tomentosum (A`e).US Fish and Wildlife Service. 7 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2009. Remya mauiensis (Maui remya). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. In: Remya mauiensis (Maui remya). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation.US Fish and Wildlife Service. 15 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2009. Solanum sandwicense (Popolo 'aiakeakua). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. In: Solanum sandwicense (Popolo 'aiakeakua). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation.US Fish and Wildlife Service. 13 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2010. 5-Year Review Short Form Summary: Remya montgomeryi (no common name). In: 5-Year Review Short Form Summary: Remya montgomeryi (no common name). US Fish and Wildlife Service. 7 pp. https://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_year_review/doc3343.pdf
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2010. 5-Year Review, Short Form Summary: Species Reviewed: Poa mannii (Mann's bluegrass). In: 5-Year Review, Short Form Summary: Species Reviewed: Poa mannii (Mann's bluegrass).US Fish and Wildlife Service. 10 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2010. 5-Year Review, Short Form Summary: Species Reviewed: Poa siphonoglossa (no common name). In: 5-Year Review, Short Form Summary: Species Reviewed: Poa siphonoglossa (no common name).US Fish and Wildlife Service. 8 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2010. 5-Year Review, Short Form Summary: Species Reviewed: Pritchardia napaliensis (loulu palm). In: 5-Year Review, Short Form Summary: Species Reviewed: Pritchardia napaliensis (loulu palm).US Fish and Wildlife Service. 10 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2010. 5-Year Review, Short Form Summary: Species Reviewed: Pteralyxia kauaiensis (kaulu). In: 5-Year Review, Short Form Summary: Species Reviewed: Pteralyxia kauaiensis (kaulu).US Fish and Wildlife Service. 9 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2010. 5-Year Review, Short Form Summary: Species Reviewed: Remya kauaiensis (no common name). In: 5-Year Review, Short Form Summary: Species Reviewed: Remya kauaiensis (no common name).US Fish and Wildlife Service. 12 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2010. 5-Year Review, Short Form Summary: Species Reviewed: Schiedea membranacea (no common name). In: 5-Year Review, Short Form Summary: Species Reviewed: Schiedea membranacea (no common name).US Fish and Wildlife Service. 9 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2010. 5-Year Review, Short Form Summary: Species Reviewed: Schiedea stellarioides (no common name). In: 5-Year Review, Short Form Summary: Species Reviewed: Schiedea stellarioides (no common name).US Fish and Wildlife Service. 7 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2010. 5-Year Review, Short Form Summary: Wilkesia hobdyi (dwarf iliau). In: 5-Year Review, Short Form Summary: Wilkesia hobdyi (dwarf iliau).US Fish and Wildlife Service. 8 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2010. Determination of Endangered Status for 48 Species on Kauai and designation of Critical Habitat: Final Rule. In: Determination of Endangered Status for 48 Species on Kauai and designation of Critical Habitat: Final Rule.US Fish and Wildlife Service. i + 205 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2010. Plantago princeps (laukahi kuahiwi). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. In: Plantago princeps (laukahi kuahiwi). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation.US Fish and Wildlife Service. 19 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2010. Scaevola coriacea (dwarf naupaka). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. In: Scaevola coriacea (dwarf naupaka). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation.US Fish and Wildlife Service. 19 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2010. Schiedea apokremnos (maolioli). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. In: Schiedea apokremnos (maolioli). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation.US Fish and Wildlife Service. 16 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2010. Schiedea spergulina var. leiopoda (no common name). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. In: Schiedea spergulina var. leiopoda (no common name). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation.US Fish and Wildlife Service. 11 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2010. Sesbania tomentosa (ohai). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. In: Sesbania tomentosa (ohai). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation.US Fish and Wildlife Service. 24 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2010. Silene lanceolata (no common name). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. In: Silene lanceolata (no common name). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation.US Fish and Wildlife Service. 15 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2010. Spermolepis hawaiiensis (no common name). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. In: Spermolepis hawaiiensis (no common name). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation.US Fish and Wildlife Service. 19 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2010. Tetramolopium filiforme (no common name). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. In: Tetramolopium filiforme (no common name). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation.US Fish and Wildlife Service. 11 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2011. 5-Year Review, Short Form Summary: Species Reviewed: Pritchardia munroi (lo'ulu). In: 5-Year Review, Short Form Summary: Species Reviewed: Pritchardia munroi (lo'ulu).US Fish and Wildlife Service. 11 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2011. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing 23 Species on Oahu as Endangered and Designating Critical Habitat for 124 Species. In: Federal Register, 76(148) US Fish and Wildlife Service. 46362-46593. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-08-02/pdf/2011-17162.pdf
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2011. Isodendrion longifolium (aupaka). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. In: Isodendrion longifolium (aupaka). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. US Fish and Wildlife Service. 28 pp. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_year_review/doc3809.pdf
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2011. Panicum fauriei var. carteri (no common name). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. In: Panicum fauriei var. carteri (no common name). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation.US Fish and Wildlife Service. 17 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2011. Santalum freycinetianum var. lanaiense, Lanai sandalwood ('iliahi). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. In: Santalum freycinetianum var. lanaiense, Lanai sandalwood ('iliahi). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation.US Fish and Wildlife Service. 19 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2011. Schiedea hookeri (no common name). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. In: Schiedea hookeri (no common name). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation.US Fish and Wildlife Service. 20 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2011. Schiedea lydgatei (no common name). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. In: Schiedea lydgatei (no common name). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation.US Fish and Wildlife Service. 17 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2011. Schiedea sarmentosa (no common name). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. In: Schiedea sarmentosa (no common name). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation.US Fish and Wildlife Service. 14 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2011. Urera kaalae (opuhe). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. In: Urera kaalae (opuhe). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation.US Fish and Wildlife Service. 19 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2012. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Status for 23 Species on Oahu and Designation of Critical Habitat for 124 Species; Final Rule. In: Federal Register, 77(181) US Fish and Wildlife Service. 57648-57862. https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-09-18/pdf/2012-19561.pdf
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2013. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Endangered Status for 38 Species on Molokai, Lanai, and Maui; Final Rule. In: Federal Register, 78(102) US Fish and Wildlife Service. 32014-32065. https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-05-28/pdf/2013-12105.pdf
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2013. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Review of Native Species That are Candidates for Listing as Endangered or Threatened; Annual Notice of Findings on Resubmitted Petitions; Annual Description of Progress on Listing Actions. In: Federal Register, 78(226) US Fish and Wildlife Service. 70104-70162. https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-11-22/pdf/2013-27391.pdf
US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2015. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Status for 16 Species and Threatened Status for 7 Species in Micronesia. In: Federal Register, 80(190) US Fish and Wildlife Service. 59424-59497. https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-10-01/pdf/2015-24443.pdf
USDA-NRCS, 2013. The PLANTS Database. Baton Rouge, USA: National Plant Data Center. http://plants.usda.gov/
Umapathy G, Kumar A, 2000. Impacts of the habitat fragmentation on time budget and feeding ecology of lion-tailed macaque (Macaca silenus) in rain forest fragments of Anamalai Hills, South India. Primate Report, 58:67-82.
Urban AJ, Simelane DO, Retief E, Heystek F, Williams HE, Madire LG, 2011. The invasive 'Lantana camara L.' hybrid complex (Verbenaceae): a review of research into its identity and biological control in South Africa. African Entomology, 19(2):315-348. http://journals.sabinet.co.za/essa
Vardien W, Richardson DM, Foxcroft LC, Thompson GD, Wilson JRU, Roux JJle, 2012. Invasion dynamics of <i>Lantana camara</i> L. (sensu lato) in South Africa. South African Journal of Botany, 81:81-94. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0254629912000701
Vermeulen JB, Dreyer M, Grobler H, van Zyl K, 1996. A guide to the use of herbicides. 15th edition. National Development of Agriculture. South Africa.
Vivian-Smith G, Panetta FD, 2009. Lantana (Lantana camara) seed bank dynamics: seedling emergence and seed survival. Invasive Plant Science and Management, 2(2):141-150. http://www.wssa.net
Waipara NW, Winks CJ, Paynter Q, Riding N, Day MD, 2009. Prospects for the biological control of Lantana camara (Verbenaceae) in New Zealand. New Zealand Plant Protection [Proceedings of the New Zealand Plant Protection Society's Annual Conference, Otago Museum Conference Centre, Dunedin, New Zealand, 11-13 August 2009.], 62:50-55. http://www.nzpps.org/journal/62/nzpp_620500.pdf
Walker EH, 1976. Flora of Okinawa and the Southern Ryukyu Islands. Washington DC, USA: Smithsonian Institution.
Waterhouse DF, 1993. The Major Arthropod Pests and Weeds of Agriculture in Southeast Asia. ACIAR Monograph No. 21. Canberra, Australia: Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research, 141 pp.
Whitten T, Henderson GS, Mustafa M, 2002. The ecology of Indonesia series. Volume 4. The Ecology of Sulawesi. Hong Kong: Periplus Editions.
Witt, A., Luke, Q., 2017. Guide to the naturalized and invasive plants of Eastern Africa, [ed. by Witt, A., Luke, Q.]. Wallingford, UK: CABI. vi + 601 pp. http://www.cabi.org/cabebooks/ebook/20173158959
Xie Yan, Li Zhenyu, Gregg WP, Li Dianmo, 2001. Invasive species in China - an overview. Biodiversity and Conservation, 10(8):1317-1341.
Zuloaga FO, Morrone O, Belgrano MJ, 2008. Catálogo de las Plantas Vasculares del Cono Sur (Argentina, Sur de Brasil, Chile, Paraguay y Uruguay). Volumen 1: Pteridophyta, Gymnospermae y Monocotyledoneae (Catalogue of the vascular plants of the southern cone (Argentina, southern Brazil, Chile, Paraguay and Uruguay). Volume 1: Pteridophyta, Gymnospermae and Monocotyledoneae) [ed. by Zuloaga FO, Morrone O, Belgrano MJ]. St. Louis, USA: Missouri Botanical Garden Press, 983 pp.
Kurniadie, D., Widayat, D., 2013. Weed mapping in two corn (Zea mays) production center in West Java Province of Indonesia [Conference poster]. In: The role of weed science in supporting food security by 2020. Proceedings of the 24th Asian-Pacific Weed Science Society Conference, Bandung, Indonesia, October 22-25, 2013 [The role of weed science in supporting food security by 2020. Proceedings of the 24th Asian-Pacific Weed Science Society Conference, Bandung, Indonesia, October 22-25, 2013.], [ed. by Bakar, B. H., Kurniadie, D., Tjitrosoedirdjo, S.]. Bandung, Indonesia: Weed Science Society of Indonesia. 559-563.
Macharia, I., Backhouse, D., Wu, S. B., Ateka, E. M., 2016. Weed species in tomato production and their role as alternate hosts of Tomato spotted wilt virus and its vector Frankliniella occidentalis.Annals of Applied Biology, 169(2) 224-235.
Carvalho, V. C. de, Andrade, T. C. G. R. de, Silva, M. C. de C., Santos, R. de S., Pereira, D. L., 2018. Phytosociological survey of weeds in cacao plantation.Amazonian Journal of Plant Research, 2(2) 189-194.
Shah, G. M., Khan, M. A., 2006. Checklist of noxious weeds of district Mansehra, Pakistan.Pakistan Journal of Weed Science Research, 12(3) 213-219. http://wssp.org.pk/
Affandi, Medina, C. dela R., Velasco, L. R. I., Javier, P. A., Depositario, D. P. T., Mansyah, E., Hardiyanto, 2019. Population dynamic of Scirtothrips dorsalis Hood (thysanopetera: Thripidae) on mango and associated weeds under low and intensive agricultural practices.AGRIVITA, Journal of Agricultural Science, 41(3) 575-585.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
Copyright © CABI. CABI is a registered EU trademark. This article is published under a Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)
History
Published online: 7 December 2015
Language
English
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
SCITE_
Citations
Export citation
Select the format you want to export the citations of this publication.
EXPORT CITATIONSExport Citation
View Options
View options
Get Access
Login Options
Check if you access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.