Tamarix ramosissima L. Family: Tamaricaceae

1
Tamarix ramosissima L.Family Tamaricaceae
Carinna Robertson Department of Natural Resources
and Environmental Science Forest and Rangeland
Management
Sourcesandybottom.com
2
Many names ofTamarix ramosissima L.

• Common names
• tamarisk
• saltcedar
• French tamarisk
• small-flowered tamarisk

• Scientific Names
• Tamarix pentandra
• Tamarix chinensis
• Tamarix gallica
• Tamarix parviflora
• Tamarix tetrandra

3
Plant Characteristics
http//garden.lovetoknow.com/wiki/ImageTam
arisk-3.jpg

• Growth Form
• - Perennial/Dicots
• - Tree - lt 12m
• - Shrub - 1.5-5m
• Root Growth
• - branching lateral root system
• - phreatophytes
• Flowering
• - light to dark pink flowers
• - bloom from April to October w/ one large
  seeding peak, but has continued seeding
  throughout the season
• - 4-5 sepals
• - 3-5 styles
• - stamens located on a fleshy lobed disk
• Fruit
• - 3-5 valve capsule

• Reproduction
• -Resprout
• - Seeds
• - often produced in 1st year
• - small
• - light
• - tuff hair
• - Wind dispersed
• - Deposited via water or animals
• Germination
• - High youth viability
• - approx. 5 weeks
• - Once settling has occurred germination will
  occur within 24hrs.
• - However, germination can occur in water

4
Plant Characteristic Cont.-

• Seedling Establishment and Survival
• Need saturated soil for first few weeks
• High sunlight
• No competing vegetation
• Mortality
• - If soil dries for 1 day then seedling will not
  survive
• - High water flow velocities can cause uprooting
  up to several months after germination

First Stages of Development
http//garden.lovetoknow.com/wiki/ImageTamarisk-3
.jpg
5
Ecological Characteristics

• Soils
• -Tolerant of high saline soils (6mgL? to 15mgL?)
• - Typically sands
• Allelopathy
• - Leaves release high salt concentrations
• - Which deposit below the Tamarix and
• create a hard crust

• Competition
• Favorable Competitive Characteristics
• - High plasticity and adaptability
• - High endurance
• - High drought tolerance
• - High temperature tolerant (xeric regions)
• - High salt tolerance
• - The combined effect of hard crust and being
  able to access a lower water table makes Tamarix
  a more sufficient competitor

http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamarisk
6
Geographic Distribution

• -Native Origin
• -Southern Europe
• -North Africa/South
• Africa
• -Middle East
• -South Asia
• -China
• -Japan
• Habitat Type
• - Moist Spots in
• Desert Regions

7
Non-Native Invaded range
Introduction - First introduced in early 1800s
as ornamentals, windbreaks, shade, erosion
control and stream bank stabilization, and as
source of wood -Naturalized by 1877 - By 1920s
problem was realized - Control efforts started by
1960s Distribution - Tamarix spp. is considered
a noxious weed and has infested 36 states -
1920s 4,000 ha - 2008 400,000-600,000
ha Favorable Habitats - Saline soils in xeric
environments - Variety of stream and
riverbanks
http//plants.usda.gov
8
Ecological, Economical and Social Impacts

• Ecological

• Economical

Social

• Decreases Native Species and Habitat Diversity
• Inhibits Native Phreatophytes
• Forms Monoculture Communities
• Reduces the Water Table the Longer the Invasion
• Creates a Saline Environment

• Reduces Water Supplies
• Reduces Recreation
• Reduces Agricultural Uses
• Increases flooding
• Reduces wildlife diversity
• Reduces Transpiration
• Reduce Soil Quality

• Health and
• Safety
• How we
• perceive and
• appreciate the
• environment
• spend our time

9
Benefits of Tamarisk to the Surrounding Habitat

• stabilizes stream and river banks
• constitutes half the diet of beavers
• provides habitat for the southwestern willow
  flycatcher (Empidonax trailii extimus) and the
  white-winged dove
• aesthetically attractive
• honey bees favor the flowers
• woodrats (Neotoma spp.) and the desert cottontail
  (Sylvilagus audubonii) forage adult Tamarix

http//www.discovermoab.com
10
Control Methods and Strategies
Biological Control Method
-Leaf Beetle Diorhabda elongata - Used to
defoliate Tamarix spp. - Successful, but how
will beetles effect other aspects?
-restructure or eliminate tamarisk patches
- vary regionally - effect native species
http//www.fsu.edu
James Tracy - USDA-ARS, Temple Texas, Bob Richard
- USDA-APHIS-PPQ, Dan Bean-CDA Palisade
Insectary, and Tim Carlson - Tamarisk Coalition.
James Tracy - USDA-ARS, Temple Texas, Bob Richard
- USDA-APHIS-PPQ, Dan Bean-CDA Palisade
Insectary, and Tim Carlson - Tamarisk Coalition.
11
Control Methods and Strategies Contd

• Mechanical Methods
• Many unsuccessful because Tamarix spp. ability to
  resprout
• Root plowing to 35-60 cm can be effective, but
  destroy other vegetation

• Fire Successful
• Ideal time for best rates
• Kills tamarisk during hot summers and drought
• Need to re-apply for 3-4 years to fully kill
• Often need to combine methods
• A lot of implementation factors involved

Grazing -Cattle will sometimes eat young
tamarisk shrubs -Goats may eat the regrowth of
tamarisk -However, grazing is not a primary
control method - Animals prefer higher valued
forage
http//www.fsu.edu
12
Control Methods and Strategies Contd

• Herbicide
• New Mexico
• - Sprayed Arsenal (imazapyr )provided 90-99
  control at a cost of 85/acre
• - Mix of Arsenal Round-up (glyphosphate)
  provided 90-99 control at a cost
• of 60/acre
• - Tebuthiuron is also approved for foliar
  treatments
• California
• - Garlon 4 (triclopyr) and Round-up
  (glyphosphate)

13
Conclusions

• Removal and restoration of Tamarix spp. infested
  areas should be of primary concern
• Funds and support needs to be in place to proceed
• Consideration should be taken to acknowledge the
  side-effects of each control method
• Ultimately, I think biological control methods
  are more favorable, but the side-effect must be
  known and understood

14
Works Cited

• -Hughes Lee E. 1993. The Devils Own-Tamarisk.
  Rangelands 15(4)151-155.
• -McDaniel Kirk C. and J.P. Taylor.2003.Saltcedar
  recovery after herbicide-burn mechanical clearing
  practices. J. Range Management 56439-445.
• -Daoyuan Zhang,Y. Linke and P. Borong. 2002.
  Biological and ecological characteristics of
  Tamarix L. and its effect on the ecological
  environment. Science in China (45).
• -Whitcraft Christine R., D.M. Talley, J.A.
  Crooks, J. Boland, and J. Gaskin. 2007. Invasion
  of tamarisk (Tamarix spp.) in a southern
  California salt marsh. Biol. Invasions 9875-879.
• -Cosse Allard A., R.J. Bartelt, B,W. Zilkowski,
  D.W. Bean, and E.R. Andress. 2006. Behaviorally
  Active Green Leaf Volaties for Monitoring the
  Leaf Beetle, Diorhabda elongata, a Biocontrol
  Agent of Saltcedar, Tamarix spp.. J. Chem. Ecol.
  322695-2708.
• -Tomaso Joseph M. 1998. Impact, Biology, and
  Ecology of Saltcedar (Tamarix spp.) in the
  Southwestern United States. Weed Technology.
  12326-336.
• Taylor John P. and K.C. McDaniel. 1998.
  Restoration of Saltcedar (Tamarix sp.)- Infested
  Floodplains on the Bosque del Apache National
  Wildlife Refuge. Weed Technology 12 345-352.
• Kimball Bruce A. and K.R. Perry. 2008.
  Manipulating Beaver (Castor canadensis) Feeding
  Responses to Invasive Tamarisk (Tamarix spp.)
• Duncan K.W. and K.C. McDaniel. 1998. Saltcedar
  (Tamarix spp.) Management with Imazapyr. Weed
  Technology 12 337-344.
• Sharfroth Patrick B. et al. 2005. Control of
  Tamarix in the Western United States
  Implications for Water Salvage, Wildlife Use, and
  Riparian Restoration. Environ. Manage. 35
  231-246.
• USDA, NRCS. 2008. The PLANTS Database
  (http//plants.usda.gov, 20 November 2008).
  National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, LA
  70874-4490 USA.
• In class notes, Bob Nowak.

15
Questions?
http//oregonstate.edu