Lagarosiphon major (African elodea)
Datasheet Type: Invasive Species
Abstract
This datasheet on Lagarosiphon major covers Impact, Identity, Overview, Associated Diseases, Pests or Pathogens, Distribution, Dispersal, Diagnosis, Biology & Ecology, Environmental Requirements, Natural Enemies, Impacts, Uses, Prevention/Control and Further Information.
Identity
- Preferred Scientific Name
- Lagarosiphon major (Ridley) Moss, 1928
- Preferred Common Name
- African elodea
- Other Scientific Names
- Elodea crispa
- Lagarosiphon muscoides Harvey, 1841
- Lagarosiphon muscoides var. major Ridley, 1886
- International Common Names
- EnglishAfrican curly leaved waterweedAfrican oxygen-weedAfrican waterweedcoarse oxygen weedcurly water thymecurly waterweedfine oxygen weedLagarosiphonoxygen weedoxygen-weedSouth African oxygen weedsubmerged onocotyledon
- Frenchelodée africainegrand lagarosiphon
- Local Common Names
- GermanyGroße WasserpestWassergirlandeWechselbatt-Wasserpest
- South Africababergrasbobbejaantoufynbabergrasgrowwe babergraswaterblommetjie
Pictures
Habit
Lagarosiphon major (African elodea); Habit. Lac du Salagou, Liausson, France. August 2019.
©Purperlibel/via iNaturalist - CC BY-SA 4.0
Habit
Lagarosiphon major (African elodea); Habit. Heretaunga, Upper Hutt, New Zealand. September 2023.
©Joe Dillon/via iNaturalist - CC BY 4.0
Habit
Lagarosiphon major (African elodea); Habit. Cremyll, Cornwall, England. August 2023.
©Matthew Vosper/via iNaturalist - CC BY 4.0
Habit
Lagarosiphon major (African elodea); Habit. Liverpool, England. July 2022.
Public Domain - Released by Stephen James McWilliam/via iNaturalist - CC0 1.0
Flowering habit
Lagarosiphon major (African elodea); Flowering habit. North of Masarwa, Okavango Delta, Botswana. August 2020.
©Robert Taylor/via iNaturalist - CC BY 4.0
Flowering habit
Lagarosiphon major (African elodea); Flowering habit. North of Masarwa, Okavango Delta, Botswana. August 2020.
©Robert Taylor/via iNaturalist - CC BY 4.0
Flowering habit
Lagarosiphon major (African elodea); Flowering habit. Salagou Lake, Clermont-l'Hérault, Hérault, France. June 2016.
©Christian Ferrer/via Wikimedia Commons - CC BY-SA 4.0
Foliage
Lagarosiphon major (African elodea); Foliage. North of Masarwa, Okavango Delta, Botswana. August 2020.
©Robert Taylor/via iNaturalist - CC BY 4.0
Habit
Lagarosiphon major (African elodea); Habit. Consall, Staffordshire, England. August 2023.
©Jarronevsbaru/via iNaturalist - CC BY-SA 4.0
Habit
Lagarosiphon major (African elodea); Habit. Arthon-en-Retz, Chaumes-en-Retz, France. August 2023.
©Clément Maouche/via iNaturalist - CC BY 4.0
Foliage
Lagarosiphon major (African elodea); Foliage. Arthon-en-Retz, Chaumes-en-Retz, France. August 2023.
©Clément Maouche/via iNaturalist - CC BY 4.0
Foliage
Lagarosiphon major (African elodea); Foliage. Kaiapoi, New Zealand. February 2020.
©Joe Potter Butler/via iNaturalist - CC BY 4.0
Foliage
Lagarosiphon major (African elodea); Foliage. Breakwater Country Park, Holyhead, Wales. July 2022.
Public Domain - Released by Stephen James McWilliam/via iNaturalist - CC0 1.0
Foliage
Lagarosiphon major (African elodea); Foliage. Maungaraki, Lower Hutt, New Zealand. March 2023.
©Leon Perrie/via iNaturalist - CC BY 4.0
Foliage
Lagarosiphon major (African elodea); Hand holding foliage. Northburn, Otago, New Zealand. June 2023.
©Cara-Lisa Schloots/via iNaturalist - CC BY 4.0
Foliage
Lagarosiphon major (African elodea); Weeds pulled from lake. Northburn, Otago, New Zealand. June 2023.
©Cara-Lisa Schloots/via iNaturalist - CC BY 4.0
Diseases Table
Summary of Invasiveness
Lagarosiphon major is an aquatic, submerged plant that can grow in dense mats up to 2-3 m thick and cause many negative environmental and economic impacts. Some of these impacts include displacing native plant species, decreasing water quality, reducing biodiversity, blocking hydroelectric intakes, impeding recreational activities and diminishing aesthetic value. L. major is very difficult to control, and its ability to form new plants vegetatively facilitates its spread to new locations. The trade and potential escape of L. major through the aquarium and water garden industry plays a large role in its spread to new locations, as does the transportation of this plant on recreational equipment moving between water bodies. L. major is declared a noxious weed in New Zealand, the United States, and is on the Alert List for Environmental Weeds in Australia. Since 2016, L. major has been listed as a Species of Union Concern, prohibiting trade, propagation and cultivation of the plant within the European Union. L. major is already well established in New Zealand and parts of Europe. Other species of the family Hydrocharitaceae also have the potential to become invasive, and Elodea canadensis, Egeria densa and Hydrilla verticillata, have been recorded as problematic outside of their native range.
Taxonomic Tree
Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
The genus Lagarosiphon (family Hydrocharitaceae) is generally accepted as containing approximately 15-18 species, which occur primarily in Africa, Madagascar and India ( UFL-CAIP, 2001 ; GBIF, 2007 ). The genus name comes from the Greek lagaros meaning ‘narrow, thin’ and siphon meaning ‘tube’, probably referring to the long thin tubes that allow the female flowers to reach the water’s surface ( UFL-CAIP, 2001 ). Lagarosiphon major was first named Lagarosiphon muscoides Harvey in 1841, was revised to L. muscoides var. major by Ridley in 1886, and further revised to its current accepted scientific name, L. major (Ridl.) Moss in 1928. L. major is synonymous with ' Elodea crispa', a name that is often used by those using the plant in aquaria ( Mason, 1960 ). The English common name ‘oxygen weed’ refers to the species ability to ‘oxygenate’ the water, however, the dense mats of vegetation that are characteristic of this species when introduced outside of its native range actually decrease the oxygen levels by limiting water circulation and increasing decomposition.
Plant Type
Perennial
Seed / spore propagated
Vegetatively propagated
Aquatic
Herbaceous
Description
Lagarosiphon major is a dioecious, perennial submerged aquatic plant with adventitious roots and rhizomes that attach the plant to the substrate. The brittle, sparsely branched stem can grow up to 6 m long, is 3-5 mm in diameter and curves like a ‘J’ towards the base. The dark green leaves are alternately spiralled around the stem, though often crowded towards the stem tip. The leaves are minutely toothed, 5-20 mm long, 2-3 mm wide and generally have tapered tips that curve down towards the stem, though in low alkalinity waters the leaves can appear straight ( Australia Natural Heritage Trust, 2003 ). The female flower is very small, with three transparently white/pink petals that are attached to a filament-like stalk above the water’s surface. Only the female plant is known outside of its native range. The fruit is a beaked capsule, containing approximately nine seeds, each seed being approximately 3 mm long ( UFL-CAIP, 2001 ).
Species Vectored
Distribution
Lagarosiphon major is native to Southern and South Tropical Africa, and has been found in the regions of Zambia, Zimbabwe, Botswana, Lesotho and South Africa ( USDA-ARS, 1997 ). In these regions, L. major is naturally found in high mountain freshwater streams and ponds ( Cronk and Fuller, 1995 ). However, there is some disagreement on the status of L. major in Southern Africa; some report it as a nuisance weed species ( CAPM-CEH, 2004 ; Caffrey and Acevedo, 2007 ), while there are other reports of L. major as a restricted species in those regions ( Cronk and Fuller, 1995 ). L. major has been introduced to several other parts of the world, though only the female plant is known outside of its native range. Thus, all reproduction of L. major in its adventive range is done vegetatively, while seed production and male flowers are restricted to its native range of Africa. L. major was introduced to New Zealand in the 1950s and has naturalized in many freshwater lakes in the country. L. major was first recorded in Britain in 1944 and was first reported in Germany and Ireland in 1966. Successful localized eradication from ponds and small lakes has been achieved in Ireland ( Caffrey et al., 2010 ). In southern Australia, L. major has been found and eradicated from a few small dams, and it is currently not known to be naturalized ( Australia Natural Heritage Trust, 2003 ).
Distribution Map
Distribution Table
History of Introduction and Spread
Lagarosiphon major was first reported as being naturalized in New Zealand in 1950, and by 1957 the population had grown to nuisance levels in Lake Rotorua. It is believed that L. major was intentionally introduced to Lake Rotorua with the intention of improving the oxygen levels ( Cronk and Fuller, 1995 ), although the dense mats of vegetation that occurred actually decreased the lake oxygen levels. L. major spread to Lake Taupo around 1966 and was probably introduced to the lake by recreational boat traffic ( Cronk and Fuller, 1995 ). L. major continues to spread to many other freshwater lakes in New Zealand and is a major concern in the region.
Lagarosiphon major was first recorded in a chalk pit in Britain in 1944 and has since spread to several other locations throughout Europe. L. major was first recorded both in Germany and Ireland in 1966, Belgium in 1993, and Netherlands in 2003 with its European introductions being intentional horticultural and ornamental releases ( NOBANIS, 2005 ; BioChange, 2007 ).
There are currently no naturalized populations of L. major in Australia, but there have been small invasions near Melbourne in Victoria, and Newcastle in New South Wales that were eradicated in the 1970s. These introductions were believed to have been plants that had originated in aquariums or ponds. In addition, there is a record of a cultivated specimen near Queensland in 1990 ( Australia Natural Heritage Trust, 2003 ).
Introductions
| Introduced to | Introduced from | Year | Reason | Introduced by | Established in wild through natural reproduction | Established in wild through continuous restocking | References | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UK | Africa | 1944 | Yes | No | CAPM-CEH (2004) | |||
| New Zealand | Africa | 1950 | Ornamental purposes (pathway cause) | Yes | No | NZPCN (2005) | ||
| Germany | Africa | 1966 | Horticulture (pathway cause) | No | No | NOBANIS (2005) | ||
| Ireland | Southern Africa | 1966 | Ornamental purposes (pathway cause) | Yes | No | BioChange (2007) |
Risk of Introduction
Lagarosiphon major is a popular aquarium and water garden plant, and the ability to order this plant over the internet and through mail order gives it the ability to travel to all parts of the world ( Australia Natural Heritage Trust, 2003 ). It has escaped confinement and has been intentionally introduced on several occasions outside of its native range. In the locales to which it has been introduced, it has often become the dominant plant species, outcompeting both native and previously established exotic species, in addition to displacing other species which depend on the ecosystem. L. major has the potential to colonize large areas within a growing season by means of vegetative propagation and is listed as a noxious weed in many parts of the world.
Means of Movement and Dispersal
Natural Dispersal (Non-Biotic)
Hydrochory, the dispersal of disseminules by water currents, seems to be the main dispersal mode of vegetative fragments within a water body ( ISSG, 2006 ). Mid-stem and apical vegetative fragments as small as 1 cm in length have the potential to form a new plant ( Coughlan et al., 2022 ).
Vector Transmission (Biotic)
There are no direct observations that this plant might be carried between sites by birds or other animals, but biotic vectors could facilitate plant dispersal over short distances given the tolerance of L. major to desiccation even at high temperatures and low humidity regimes for up to 4 h of exposure ( Coughlan et al., 2018 ).
Accidental Introduction
Lagarosiphon major can likely be spread accidentally to new locations by the movement of boats, trailers, nets, sea planes, and other recreational equipment between water bodies ( McGregor and Gourlay, 2002 ; Australia Natural Heritage Trust, 2003 ). It is also possible for L. major to be a ‘hitchhiker’ plant or through mislabelling when other species ordered through water garden catalogues. L. major can be accidentally introduced by flooding of ornamental ponds into surrounding natural waterways. L. major has also been introduced through hobbyists emptying unwanted aquarium species directly into surrounding waterways.
Intentional Introduction
Lagarosiphon major has been intentionally planted as an ‘oxygenator’ or ornamental in different water bodies throughout its current distribution. The trade of this plant as an ornamental through the internet and mail order has greatly increased its availability and ease of spread into new environments ( Australia Natural Heritage Trust, 2003 ).
Pathway Causes
| Pathway cause | Notes | Long distance | Local | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aquaculture | Yes | |||
| Escape from confinement or garden escape | Yes | |||
| Flooding and other natural disasters | Yes | |||
| Hitchhiker | Yes | |||
| Horticulture | Yes | Yes | ||
| Intentional release | Yes | Yes | ||
| Interconnected waterways | Yes | |||
| Internet sales | Yes | |||
| Ornamental purposes | Yes | Yes | ||
| Pet trade | Yes | Yes |
Pathway Vectors
| Pathway vector | Notes | Long distance | Local | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aircraft | seaplanes, float planes | Yes | ||
| Floating vegetation and debris | Yes | |||
| Land vehicles | Vegetation moving between water bodies on vehicles, moving boats, trailers, recreational equipment | Yes | Yes | |
| Mail order | Yes | |||
| Pets and aquarium species | Yes | |||
| Ship structures above the water line | Vegetation moving between water bodies on boats, trailers, recreational equipment, etc | Yes | ||
| Water | Yes |
Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
Several other species in the family Hydrocharitaceae look very similar to L. major, including Egeria densa, Elodea canadensis and Hydrilla verticillata . However, unlike the leaves of the other species, which grow in groups or whorls circularly around the stem, the leaves of L. major are distinguishably alternately spiralled ( Australia Natural Heritage Trust, 2003 ). The presence of recurved leaves and a downward curving stem towards the apex also help to distinguish L. major from these similar species ( Scher, 2007 ). L. major is often also mislabelled as ' Elodea crispa ', usually by those dealing with the plant in the aquarium trade.
Habitat
Lagarosiphon major prefers lakes, reservoirs and slow moving rivers with silty or sandy bottoms. L. major is also known to occur in wetlands, water courses, riparian zones ( ISSG, 2006 ), canals and drainage ditches ( CAPM-CEH, 2004 ). It prefers the cool waters of the temperate zone and grows best under high light intensity. L. major can grow to depths of 6.6 m ( Coffey and Wah, 1988 ), but may grow to only 1 m in murky water ( Australia Natural Heritage Trust, 2003 ). L. major grows best in areas sheltered from wind, waves and current.
Habitat List
| Category | Sub-Category | Habitat | Presence | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Terrestrial | Terrestrial - Natural / Semi-natural | Wetlands | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
| Freshwater | Secondary/tolerated habitat | Harmful (pest or invasive) | ||
| Freshwater | Lakes | Principal habitat | Harmful (pest or invasive) | |
| Freshwater | Reservoirs | Secondary/tolerated habitat | Harmful (pest or invasive) | |
| Freshwater | Rivers / streams | Principal habitat | Harmful (pest or invasive) | |
| Freshwater | Ponds | Principal habitat | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
Biology and Ecology
Genetics
Lagarosiphon major has a chromosome number of 2n=22 ( Uchiyama, 1989 ) or 2n=24 ( Kiehn et al., 2000 ). L. major has two complete sets of chromosomes in each cell, and its nuclear DNA expressed on a diploid basis is equal to 3.6, 6.5 pg/2C ( BioChange, 2007 ).
Reproductive Biology
Lagarosiphon major is a dioecious plant , which refers to a species in which the male and female reproductive organs occur on different individuals. L. major has the ability to reproduce by both vegetative and sexual means, though only vegetative reproduction has been observed outside of its native range.
Physiology and Phenology
In the Northern hemisphere, L. major often becomes dormant in the winter and emerges in the spring from rhizomes and shoots. L. major is capable of producing two types of flowers; the male flowers break free from the plant and float along the water’s surface, while the female flowers remain attached to the plant by long, filament-like stalks. All populations of L. major outside of its native range have consisted of plants with only female flowers, and male flowers, fruits and seeds have not been recorded outside of Africa. Female flowers appear from summer to early autumn, and the overall growth of L. major decreases as day length and light intensity decreases ( Australia Natural Heritage Trust, 2003 ).
Environmental Requirements
Lagarosiphon major can live in a range of nutrient levels, however, in lakes with accelerated eutrophication and severely decreased water clarity, L. major abundance declines. L. major prefers high light intensity 250-600 µmol m -2 s -1 ( Schwarz and Howard-Williams, 1993 ), but it appears L. major is tolerant of low light intensities ≤140 µmol m -2 s -1 ( Crane et al., 2022 ). L. major is able to withstand a relatively high pH, and its own photosynthetic activity has been recorded as raising pH levels to 10-10.4 in the surrounding water ( CAPM-CEH, 2004 ). In conjunction with pH, L. major can survive in high alkalinity conditions as well. The optimum temperature of L. major is 20-23°C, with a maximum temperature of approximately 25°C. L. major is thought to be absent below temperatures of 10°C ( Australia Natural Heritage Trust, 2003 ).
Climate
| Climate type | Status | Description | Remarks |
|---|---|---|---|
| B - Dry (arid and semi-arid) | Tolerated | < 860mm precipitation annually | |
| C - Temperate/Mesothermal climate | Preferred | Average temp. of coldest month > 0°C and < 18°C, mean warmest month > 10°C | |
| Cf - Warm temperate climate, wet all year | Tolerated | Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, wet all year | |
| Cs - Warm temperate climate with dry summer | Tolerated | Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, dry summers | |
| Cw - Warm temperate climate with dry winter | Preferred | Warm temperate climate with dry winter (Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, dry winters) |
Latitude/Altitude Ranges
| Latitude North (°N) | Latitude South (°S) | Altitude lower (m) | Altitude upper (m) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 60 | 45 | 0 | 0 |
Soil Tolerances
Soil reaction > Neutral (pH 6.1-7.4)
Soil reaction > Alkaline (pH 7.4-9.4)
Soil reaction > Very alkaline (pH > 9.4)
Notes on Natural Enemies
McGregor and Gourlay (2002) report the nematode Aphelenchoides fragariae attacking the apical tips of L. major . Hydrellia lagarosiphon has also been reported to feed on L. major within the plants native range ( Martin et al., 2013 ).
Natural enemies
| Natural enemy | Type | Life stages | Specificity | References | Biological control in | Biological control on |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aphelenchoides fragariae (strawberry crimp nematode) | Herbivore |
Impact Summary
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Cultural/amenity | Negative |
| Economic/livelihood | Negative |
| Environment (generally) | Negative |
Impact: Economic
Lagarosiphon major has blocked intakes of hydroelectric systems and has the potential to limit flow in irrigations channels. In addition, the loss of recreational and aesthetic value associated with L. major can also cause a decline in lakefront property values, as well as possible declines in tourism-related revenue for the community. Management and control of L. major can also be costly.
Impact: Environmental
Impact on Habitats
Lagarosiphon major alters the chemical composition of the water body by creating stressful conditions of high pH and low carbon dioxide ( James et al., 1999 ). The photosynthesis of L. major has been recorded as raising surrounding pH to levels over 10, and has the ability to raise levels to 10.4, (the limit of bicarbonate uptake) in small water bodies ( CAPM-CEH, 2004 ). These high pH levels inhibit other native species from effectively photosynthesizing, giving L. major a competitive advantage. L. major can also be an excellent competitor for light and has been known to out-compete native aquatic vegetation and associated invertebrate populations ( ISSG, 2006 ). Despite this species’ common name of oxygen weed, the dense mats of vegetation that are characteristic of this species when introduced outside of its native range actually decrease the oxygen levels by limiting water circulation and increased decomposition of dead plants. Dense mats of L. major also have the ability to change water hydrology and quality, negatively affecting the ecosystem in which it occurs.
Impact on Biodiversity
Lagarosiphon major reduces biodiversity by competing with and displacing native vegetation and is capable of changing the fauna and flora of an ecosystem. L. major has out-competed native species wherever it has colonized, due in part to its ability to out-compete submerged vegetation for light and photosynthesize in the inhospitable, stress-inducing water conditions that it creates. In particular, L. major has out competed Myriophyllum spp., Potamogeton spp., ( Rattray et al., 1994 ) and Elodea spp. ( James et al., 1999 ). Decomposing mats of L. major also have the ability to cause fish kills by creating low oxygen levels in the water.
Impact: Social
Lagarosiphon major can form dense mats that impede recreational activities such as boating, fishing, swimming, water skiing, canoeing and kayaking. In addition, unsightly mats of vegetation decrease aesthetic values. These declines in recreational and aesthetic values can decrease tourism, which can be a major source of income within the community.
Risk and Impact Factors
Invasiveness
Proved invasive outside its native range
Highly mobile locally
Fast growing
Has high reproductive potential
Has propagules that can remain viable for more than one year
Reproduces asexually
Impact outcomes
Damaged ecosystem services
Ecosystem change/ habitat alteration
Modification of hydrology
Modification of natural benthic communities
Modification of nutrient regime
Monoculture formation
Negatively impacts cultural/traditional practices
Negatively impacts livelihoods
Negatively impacts aquaculture/fisheries
Negatively impacts tourism
Reduced amenity values
Reduced native biodiversity
Threat to/ loss of native species
Transportation disruption
Impact mechanisms
Allelopathic
Competition - monopolizing resources
Competition - shading
Filtration
Interaction with other invasive species
Rapid growth
Likelihood of entry/control
Highly likely to be transported internationally deliberately
Difficult to identify/detect as a commodity contaminant
Difficult to identify/detect in the field
Difficult/costly to control
Uses
Economic Value
Ornamental plants of L. major, often sold under the name 'Elodea crispa', are sold for aquariums and ponds, though the specific economic value of this particular species in the ornamental plant trade is unknown. L. major was also once sold as capable of 'water purification', though the continuance of this practice is unknown ( NBGI, 2007 ).
The utilization of L. major as fodder for stock food was explored as a possible usage of harvested biomass, though the high levels of arsenic accumulated by the plants proved unsuitable ( ISSG, 2006 ).
Social Benefit
Lagarosiphon major is enjoyed by many aquarium hobbyists due to the minimal maintenance required and ease of growth.
Environmental Services
In severely disturbed ecosystems where exotics are the only plants capable of surviving, removal of plants such as L. major can further degrade the habitat. L. major can provide some habitat for aquatic fauna, its leaf surface supports periphyton, and plant stands can increase sedimentation, which could be beneficial in some areas ( McGregor and Gourlay, 2002 ).
Uses List
General > Botanical garden/zoo
General > Pet/aquarium trade
Animal feed, fodder, forage > Fodder/animal feed
Detection and Inspection
Infestations are often first reported at boat launches, and these areas should be monitored frequently in order to eradicate or control new invasions at an early stage ( Australia Natural Heritage Trust, 2003 ). All recreational equipment should be inspected before leaving any water body, and any visible plants, animals, or sediment should be removed. In addition, rinsing gear with hot water or steam may help in removing non-visible organisms.
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.
Prevention
As with all weed management, prevention is better and more cost-effective than control ( Caffrey et al., 2010 ; Winton et al., 2013 ; Hussner, 2019 ). To eliminate deliberate or accidental introduction, many countries have banned the importation and sale of L. major . Since 2016, for example, the European Union has prohibited the trade, transportation, propagation or breeding of a variety of invasive plant and animal species, including L. major ( EU, 2014 ).
Rapid response
Early detection and eradication are essential in the prevention of future invasions and spread of L. major . Smaller, localized populations can be more easily controlled than those which have the opportunity to spread and become well-established ( Australia Natural Heritage Trust, 2003 ). Early detection of new infestations is usually achieved through intensive surveying or by using novel tools like eDNA, along with citizen science-based detection of non-natives ( Hussner, 2019 ).
Public awareness
Several publications have been produced in areas with L. major populations regarding the impacts of invasive species such as L. major, and the steps that lake recreationists need to take in order to prevent introducing and spreading aquatic invasives. Public awareness and community responses can support early detection and proactive management of L. major ( Hussner, 2019 ).
Eradication
In southern Australia, L. major has been found and eradicated from a few small dams ( Australia Natural Heritage Trust, 2003 ). Successful eradication has also been achieved in small lakes and ponds in Ireland through use of benthic barriers ( Caffrey et al., 2010 ).
Control
Cultural control and sanitary measures
Several regions where aquatic invasives have established now require that recreationists drain all water and clean off all gear (boats, trailers, fishing equipment, etc.) used on water bodies in order to minimize the chance of spreading aquatic invasive species, such as L. major, to other areas.
Physical/mechanical control
Attempts to control L. major has had limited efficacy due to its ability to propagate vegetatively through fragments and underwater roots and rhizomes. Attempts to mechanically harvest only serve as means of creating and introducing more plant fragments, and potentially aiding in dispersal to new locations. There has been some success with mechanical harvesting that is conducted at or near root level ( Caffrey and Acevedo, 2007 ). Suction dredging has also been effectively employed in combination with follow-up hand harvesting, to completely remove submerged plant species from sites in New Zealand lakes ( Winton et al., 2013 ). Weed mats as benthic barriers have been successfully used in small, localized areas ( ENVBOP, 2003 ; Caffrey et al., 2010 ; Hussner, 2021), but are difficult to maintain. Alter water depth and flow speeds in channels, thereby rendering them uninhabitable may assist with L. major control, though there are limited practical situations where these control methods can be applied ( CAPM-CEH, 2004 ).
Movement control
Several countries have banned the importation or sale of exotic plants, such as L. major, in attempts to minimize the chance of introduction to non-native regions. Inspection protocols of imports could eliminate mislabelling ( Hussner, 2019 ), while rigorous biosecurity protocols ( Coughlan et al., 2020 ) can help reduce accidental ‘stowaway’ introductions.
Biological control
McGregor and Gourlay (2002) report that the nematode Aphelenchoides fragariae has been recorded attacking the apical tips of L. major, resulting in shoot dwarfing. But this species has yet been studied for its potential as a biological control agent. Hydrellia lagarosiphon has also been reported to feed on L. major within the plants native range, as have a several other herbivorous insects ( Martin et al., 2013 ), such as Nymphula nitens ( McGregor and Gourlay, 2002 ). Grass carp have been suggested as a potential biological control method, though studies have shown that L. major is not one of their preferred food sources, and their introduction would negatively impact the remaining native submerged vegetation ( CAPM-CEH, 2004 ).
Chemical control
Lagarosiphon major has been found to be susceptible to herbicides containing endothall, diquat, terbutryn or dichlobenil ( CAPM-CEH, 2004 ; Winton and Clayton, 2016 ). The preferred method of control is an early spring (March or early April in the Northern hemisphere) application of dichlobenil. Terbutryn (Clarosan) should only be used when L. major is the overwhelmingly dominant species, because this herbicide will kill most species of submerged aquatic plants and has the ability to cause fish kills due to a sudden decline in photosynthesis ( CAPM-CEH, 2004 ). Diquat has also been moderately successful against L. major, though its effectiveness differs greatly among scenarios, and it is not effective in turbid waters ( UFL-CAIP, 2001 ; Winton and Clayton, 2016 ). Native plants may also experience declines due to herbicide applications, resulting also in negative impacts on other taxa such as invertebrates and fish species ( Hussner, 2019 ).
Gaps in Knowledge/Research Needs
Greater consideration of biocontrol is required. Promising candidates for biocontrol of L. major have been identified but with limited development of knowledge needed to underpin in situ use.
Improved understanding of L. major dispersal, environmental tolerances and biotic interactions are needed to better support identification of areas at risk of invasion.
Links to Websites
| Website | URL | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| Centre for Aquatic Plant Management: Center for Ecology & Hydrology | http://www.capm.org.uk | |
| 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 Invasive Species Database | http://www.issg.org/database/species | The GISD aims to increase awareness about invasive alien species and to facilitate effective prevention and management. It is managed by the Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG) of the Species Surviva |
| Global register of Introduced and Invasive species (GRIIS) | http://griis.org/ | Data source for updated system data added to species habitat list. |
| Weed Management Guide - Lagarosiphon major | http://www.weeds.gov.au/publications/guidelines/alert/pubs/l-major.pdf |
.png)
References
Australia Natural Heritage Trust, 2003 . Lagarosiphon - Lagarosiphon major. In: Weed Management Guide . Natural Heritage Trust . http://www.weeds.gov.au/publications/guidelines/alert/pubs/l-major.pdf
BioChange, 2007 . Database of Alien Plants in Ireland . Dublin, Ireland : Trinity College . http://www.biochange.ie/alienplants/index.php
Caffrey, J., Acevedo, S., 2007 . Lagarosiphon major - An aggressive invasive species in Lough Corrib . Ireland : Central Fisheries Board .
Caffrey, J.M., Millane, M., Evers, S., Moran, H., Butler, M., 2010 . A novel approach to aquatic weed control and habitat restoration using biodegradable jute matting.Aquatic Invasions, 5 ( 2 ): 123 - 129 . http://www.aquaticinvasions.net/2010/AI_2010_5_2_Caffrey_etal.pdf
CAPM-CEH, 2004 . Aquatic plant management: Information sheets . Center for Ecology & Hydrology . http://www.capm.org.uk
Coffey, B.T., Wah, C.K., 1988 . Pressure inhibition of anchorage-root production in Lagarosiphon major (Ridl.) Moss: a possible determinant of its depth range.Aquatic Botany, 29 : 289 - 301 .
Coughlan, N.E., Armstrong, F., Baker-Arney, C., Crane, K., Cuthbert, R.N., Jansen, M.A.K., Kregting, L., Vong, G.Y.W., Dick, J.T.A., 2022 . Retention of viability by fragmented invasive Crassula helmsii, Elodea canadensis and Lagarosiphon major.River Research and Applications, 38 ( 8 ): 1356 - 1361 . https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/rra.3952
Coughlan, N.E., Armstrong, F., Cuthbert, R.N., Eagling, L.E., Kregting, L., Dick, J.T.A., MacIsaac, H.J., Crane, K., 2020 . Dead and gone: steam exposure kills layered clumps of invasive Lagarosiphon major.Aquatic Botany, 162 : 103204 . https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0304377020300140
Coughlan, N.E., Cuthbert, R.N., Kelly, T.C., Jansen, M.A.K., 2018 . Parched plants: Survival and viability of invasive aquatic macrophytes following exposure to various desiccation regimes.Aquatic Botany, 150 : 9 - 15 . https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0304377018300433
Crane, K., Cuthbert, R.N., Coughlan, N.E., Kregting, L., Reid, N., Ricciardi, A., MacIsaac, H.J., Dick, J.T.A., 2022 . No time to dye: dye-induced light differences mediate growth rates among invasive macrophytes.Management of Biological Invasions, 13 ( 2 ): 288 - 302 . https://www.reabic.net/journals/mbi/2022/2/MBI_2022_Crane_etal.pdf
Cronk, Q.C.B., Fuller, J.L., 1995 . Plant invaders: the threat to natural ecosystems . London, UK : Chapman & Hall Ltd . xiv + 241 pp .
ENVBOP, 2003 . Pest plant fact sheets . Whakatane, New Zealand : Environment Bay of Plenty . http://www.envbop.govt.nz
EPPO, 2014 . PQR database . Paris, France : European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization . http://www.eppo.int/DATABASES/pqr/pqr.htm
EU, 2014 . European Union Regulation No 1143/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 on the prevention and management of the introduction and spread of invasive alien species .
GBIF, 2007 . International Plant Names Index . Copenhagen, Denmark : Global Biodiversity Information Facility . http://data.gbif.org
Hussner, A., 2019 . Information on measures and related costs in relation to the species included on the Union list - Lagarosiphon major. Technical note prepared by IUCN for the European Commission .
ISSG, 2006 . Global Invasive Species Database (GISD) . Auckland, New Zealand : University of Auckland . http://www.issg.org/database
James, C.S., Eaton, J.W., Hardwick, K., 1999 . Competition between three submerged macrophytes, Elodea canadensis Michx, Elodea nuttallii (Planch.) St John and Lagarosiphon major (Ridl.) Moss. In: Hydrobiologia, 415 [ed. by Caffrey, J.M., Barrett, P.R.F., Ferreira, M.T., Moreira, I.S., Murphy, K.J., Wade, P.M. ]. 35 - 40
Kiehn, M., Vitek, E., Dobe, C., 2000 . Documented Chromosome Number Checklist of Austrian Vascular Plants [ed. by Dobe, C., Vitek, E. ]. Vienna, Austria : Verlag des Naturhistorischen Museums .
Martin, G.D., Coetzee, J.A., Bars, J.A., 2013 . Hydrellia lagarosiphon Deeming (Diptera: Ephydridae), a potential biological control agent for the submerged aquatic weed, Lagarosiphon major (Ridl.) Moss ex Wager (Hydrocharitaceae).African Entomology, 21 ( 1 ): 151 - 160 . http://journals.sabinet.co.za/essa
Mason, R., 1960 . Three waterweeds of the family Hydrocharitaceae in New Zealand.N. Z. J. Sci, 3 ( 3 ): 382 - 95 .
McGregor, P.G., Gourlay, H., 2002 . Assessing the prospects for biological control of lagarosiphon (Lagarosiphon major (Hydrocharitaceae)).DOC Science Internal Series, 57 .
NBGI, 2007 . Ireland's National Plant Conservation Strategy . Dublin, Ireland : National Botanic Gardens of Ireland . http://www.botanicgardens.ie/home.htm
NOBANIS, 2005 . North European and Baltic Network on Invasive Alien Species . http://www.nobanis.org
NZPCN, 2005 . New Zealand Plant Conservation Network . Wellington, New Zealand : New Zealand Plant Conservation Network . http://www.nzpcn.org
PIER, 2007 . Pacific Islands Ecosystems at Risk . Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry . http://www.hear.org/pier/index.html
Rattray, M.R., Howard-Williams, C., Brown, J.M., 1994 . Rates of early growth of propagules of Lagarosiphon major and Myriophyllum triphyllum in lakes of differing trophic status.New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research, 28 ( 3 ): 235 - 241 .
Scher, J., 2007 . Federal Noxious Weed Disseminules of the U.S . http://www.lucidcentral.org/keys/FNW/FNW%20Disseminules%20Key/html/index.htm
Schwarz, A.M., Howard-Williams, C., 1993 . Aquatic weed-bed structure and photosynthesis in two New Zealand lakes.Aquatic Botany, 46 ( 3-4 ): 263 - 281
Thompson, K., Hodgson, J.G., Rich, T.C.G., 1995 . Native and alien invasive plants: more of the same?Ecography, 18 ( 4 ): 390 - 402
Uchiyama, H., 1989 . Karyomorphological studies on some taxa of the Helobiae.Journal of Science of Hiroshima University, Series B, Division 2 (Botany), 22 : 271 - 352 .
UFL-CAIP, 2001 . Non-native invasive aquatic plants in the United States . Gainesville, USA : University of Florida, Center for Aquatic and Invasive Plants . http://plants.ifas.ufl.edu
USDA-ARS, 1997 . Germplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN). Online Database . Beltsville, Maryland, USA : National Germplasm Resources Laboratory . https://npgsweb.ars-grin.gov/gringlobal/taxon/taxonomysearch.aspx
USDA-NRCS, 2006 . The PLANTS Database Version 3.5 . Baton Rouge, USA : National Plant Data Center . http://plants.usda.gov
Winterton, S., Scher, J., 2007 . Aquarium and Pond Plants of the World, Edition 2.0, Lucid v.3.4 . USA : USDA/APHIS/PPQ Center for Plant Health Science and Technology, North Carolina State University, and California Department of Food and Agriculture . http://www.lucidcentral.org/keys/aquariumplants2/
Winton, M. de, Clayton, J.S., 2016 . Ten year management plan for Lagarosiphon major at Lake Dunstan: 2016-2025. In: NIWA Client report No. HAM2016-040 . 41 pp .
Winton, M. de, Jones, H., Edwards, T., Özkundakci, D., Wells, R., McBride, C., Rowe, D., Hamilton, D., Clayton, J., Champion, P., Hofstra, D., 2013 . Review of best management practices for aquatic vegetation control in stormwater ponds, wetlands, and lakes. Prepared by NIWA and the University of Waikato for Auckland Council. In: Auckland Council technical report, TR2013/026 .
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: 23 July 2024
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.