Title: Miconia (Miconia spp)

Scientific Names:

Miconia calvescens DC., Miconia racemosa

Common Names:

miconia

Habitat:

Miconia calvescens: Occurs in tropical montane climate (HEAR 1997). Occurs in coastland, disturbed areas, natural forest, planted forests, riparian zones, scrub/shrublands, urban areas, wetlands (ISSG 2005). Forest, forest edges and grassland (Weber 2003). Mean annual rainfall > 2,000 mm. Elevations at 10 – 1,300 m (Csurhes 1997).

Distribution:

Original source via GBIF

Invasiveness Assessment

ESTABLISHMENT

1. Germination requirements? ‘Germination and seedling growth can occur under light levels as low as 0.02% of full sun’. In a laboratory experiment, some seeds germinated when exposed to light and moisture (Csurhes 1997). Opportunistic germinator.

2. Establishment requirements? ‘Germination and seedling growth can occur under light levels as low as 0.02% of full sun. This attribute facilitates the plant’s persistence in deep shade beneath rainforest canopies’ (Csurhes 1997). Can establish without additional factors.

3. How much disturbance is required? Miconia calvescens ‘persists in a wide range of habitats including primary and secondary rainforest in mesic and wet environments .. in areas of primary rainforest it appears to invade areas that show no obvious signs of disturbance’ (Csurhes 1997). ‘Occurs in coastland, disturbed areas, natural forest, planted forests, riparian zones, scrubs/ shrublands, urban areas, wetlands’ (ISSG 2005). Can establish in relatively intact natural ecosystems.

GROWTH / COMPETITIVE

4. Life form? Tree (Csurhes 1997). Life form –other.

5. Allelopathic properties? None described in Csurhes (1997).

6. Tolerates herb pressure? The most damaging species is the Chinese rose beetle (Adoretus sinicus) which ‘causes up to 50% defoliation but does not cause tree mortality’ (Csurhes 1997). Capable of flowering / seed production under moderate herbivory pressure.

7. Normal growth rate? Medium-sized tree. ‘Under favourable conditions, juvenile specimens can grow up to 1.5 m/year’ (Csurhes 1997). ‘Fast-growing’ (Weber 2003). Moderately rapid growth that will equal competitive species of the same life form.

8. Stress tolerance to frost, drought, w/logg, sal. etc? Native to tropical America and found in other tropical rainforests. Unlikely to be frost tolerant. Thrives in wet forests with annual precipitation between 1800-2000 mm. (ISSG 2005). ‘Can tolerate otherwise poor growing conditions if adequate moisture is available’ Drought intolerant. Can tolerate saline conditions. Tolerant to at least 2 and susceptible to at least 2.

REPRODUCTION

9. Reproductive system? Capable of both self and cross pollination. Does not naturally reproduce vegetatively but can through cuttings (ISSG 2005).

10. Number of propagules produced? ‘A young tree with only two panicles can produce ca. 200,000 seeds in its first fruiting season, whereas an older tree, with over 50 panicles, can produce over 5 million seeds per annum’ (Csurhes 1997).

11. Propagule longevity? ‘Seeds can remain viable for at least four years’ (Csurhes 1997). ‘Longevity of the soils seed bank > 6-8 years’ (ISSG 2005).

12. Reproductive period? In Tahiti Miconia calvescens has ‘naturalized over 65% of the island and has formed dense, monospecific stands over 25% of the island’ (Csurhes 1997). Species forms self-sustaining dense monocultures.

13. Time to reproductive maturity? ‘Reproduce when four to five years old’ (Csurhes 1997).

DISPERSAL

14.Number of mechanisms? ‘Although most fruit falls beneath the parent tree, the seed is small enough to be moved by wind and water’. Bird and rodent dispersed. Can adhere to mud and vehicles (Csurhes 1997).

15.How far do they disperse? ‘Individual birds can carry thousands of seeds at least up to 2 km (ISSG 2005). Very likely that some propagules will disperse greater than 1 km.

Impact Assessment

RECREATION

1. Restrict human access? ‘Capable of reaching 15 m in height, the majority … are 6 to 12 m tall with slender, vertical stems’ (Csurhes 1997). Forms dense monospecific stands (Csurhes 1997). In places where the weed forms dense stands, it would be a high nuisance value to both people and vehicles.

2. Reduce tourism? Very attractive foliage. Can reach up to 15 m height and capable of forming dense, monospecific stands. Can change forest composition (Brooks 2004). Plant could affect some recreational uses.

3. Injurious to people? Not documented as having injurious or toxic properties.

4. Damage to cultural sites? Very attractive foliage. Can reach up to 15 m height and capable of forming dense, monospecific stands (Csurhes 1997). Plant would have a moderate visual effect.

ABIOTIC

5. Impact flow? The hydrological properties of Miconia suggest that there may be a significant change in the water balance, with an increase in runoff and a potential reduction in groundwater recharge….Increased sedimentation will incur surface water quality damages on any infested island’ (Brooks 2004). Plant may have a minor impact on surface or subsurface flow.

6.Impact water quality? ‘The hydrological properties of Miconia suggest that there may be a significant change in the water balance, with an increase in runoff and a potential reduction in groundwater recharge….Increased sedimentation will incur surface water quality damages on any infested island’ (Brooks 2004). Plant may have a noticeable but minor effect on water quality.

7. Increase soil erosion? The tentacular root system is also suspected to favour soil erosion and landslides’ (ISSG 2005).Invaded slopes are prone to landslides as the weak root system does not hold the soil well and the soil lacks a herbaceous ground cover (Weber 2003). In areas of steep slopes and high rainfall, there would be a high probability of large-scale soil movement, but unlikely to occur in Victoria due to ecoclimatic limitations.

8. Reduce biomass? ‘Dense shade produced by the overlapping foliage of M.c. prevents regeneration of local rainforest plants’ (Csurhes 1997). Capable of forming dense mono-specific stands (Csurhes 1997). Biomass may increase.

9. Change fire regime? Forms dense monospecific stands (Csurhes 1997). By preventing regeneration of the understorey, Miconia may have a minor change on the intensity of the fire.

COMMUNITY HABITAT

10(a) Impact on composition of high value EVC? Potential distribution of Miconia spp. excludes Victoria, Australia. No impact on EVCs in Victoria.

10(b) Impact on medium value EVC? Potential distribution of Miconia spp. excludes Victoria. No impact on EVCs in Victoria.

10(c) Impact on low value EVC? Potential distribution of Miconia spp. excludes Victoria. No impact on EVCs in Victoria.

11. Impact on structure? ‘The M. racemosa plants .. were strangling shrubs up to 3 metres tall, entangled with giant bramble along the gully floor and sides for several hundred metres’ (Wilson 2002) Forms dense stands preventing regeneration of understorey. Major effect on all layers.

12. Effect on threatened flora? This species is not documented as posing an additional risk to threatened flora.

FAUNA

13. Effect on threatened fauna? This species is not documented as posing an additional risk to threatened fauna.

14. Effect on non-threatened fauna? ‘Changes in forest composition [due to Miconia] may threaten endangered plant species, bird species, and invertebrate species in particular’ (Brooks 2004. However, due to ecoclimatic limitations, species unlikely to occur in Victoria.

15. Benefits fauna? Plant not documented as providing any additional benefit to fauna.

16. Injurious to fauna? Plant not documented as having toxic effects.

PEST ANIMAL

17. Food source to pests? Plant not documented as providing a food source to pest animals.

18. Provides harbor? Plant not documented as providing harbour for pest species.

AGRICULTURE

19. Impact yield? Not a weed of agriculture (ISSG 2005).

20. Impact quality? Not a weed of cropping (ISSG 2005).

21. Affect land values? Weed not known to affect land value.

22. Change land use? Weed not known to cause a change in priority of land use.

23. Increase harvest costs? Not a weed of cropping (ISSG 2005).

24. Disease host/vector? Not a known host or vector for disease of agriculture.

research alerts 2009+

Feedback?

Do you have additional information about this plant that will improve the quality of the assessment? If so, we would value your contribution.

Assessment ratings originally made by the Victorian Department of Primary Industries.

The entry of this assessment was made possible through the generous support of an anonymous donor.

Attachments:

https___inaturalist-open-data.s3.amazonaws.com_photos_246870474_original.jpeg
Capture.JPG

referenced by (1)

wra1009: Common Name - M (via miconia)

Article: wra8101 (permalink)
Categories: :wra:m, :wra:inv1, :wra:invh, :wra:inv2, :wra:inv3, :wra:invmh, :wra:inv4, :wra:invl, :wra:inv5, :wra:inv6, :wra:inv7, :wra:inv8, :wra:invml, :wra:inv9, :wra:inv10, :wra:inv11, :wra:inv12, :wra:inv13, :wra:inv14, :wra:inv15, :wra:imp1, :wra:impmh, :wra:imp2, :wra:imp3, :wra:impl, :wra:imp4, :wra:impml, :wra:imp5, :wra:imp6, :wra:imp7, :wra:imp8, :wra:imp9, :wra:imp10a, :wra:imp10b, :wra:imp10c, :wra:imp11, :wra:imph, :wra:imp12, :wra:imp13, :wra:imp14, :wra:imp15, :wra:imp16, :wra:imp17, :wra:imp18, :wra:imp19, :wra:imp20, :wra:imp21, :wra:imp22, :wra:imp23, :wra:imp24
Date: 26 January 2023; 5:00:15 pm Australian Eastern Daylight Time

Author Name: David Low
Author ID: adminDavid