Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T18:14:28.846Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Impact, Biology, and Ecology of Saltcedar (Tamarix spp.) in the Southwestern United States

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Joseph M. Di Tomaso
Joseph M. Di Tomaso*
Affiliation:
University of California, Davis, CA 95616
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Eight species of Tamarix were first brought to North America in the 1800s from southern Europe or the eastern Mediterranean region. Many of the species escaped cultivation and by the 1920s invaded about 4,000 ha of riparian habitat in the southwestern United States. By 1987, it was estimated to have increased to at least 600,000 ha. The success of saltcedar in the southwest can be attributed to several factors related to its growth habit, reproduction, water usage, ability to tolerate highly saline conditions, and redistribution of salt from deep in the soil profile to the soil surface. The flowers produce small, numerous, and tufted seeds that can be carried long distances by wind or water. The seeds, however, have a short period of viability, and must come in contact with suitable moisture within a few weeks of dispersal. Unlike obligate phreatophytes, such as willows and cottonwoods, saltcedar is a facultative phreatophyte and is often able to survive under conditions where groundwater is inaccessible. The high evapotranspiration rates of saltcedar can lower the water table and alter the floristic composition in heavily infested areas. Mature plants are tolerant to a variety of stress conditions, including heat, cold, drought, flooding, and high salinity. Saltcedar is not an obligate halophyte but survives in areas where groundwater concentrations of dissolved solids can average 8,000 ppm or higher. In addition, the leaves of saltcedar excrete salts that are deposited on the soil surface under the plant, inhibiting germination and growth of competing species.

Keywords

Saltcedar, TamarixPhreatophyteinvasive weedriparian ecosystemTamarix aphyllaTamarix chinensisTamarix gallicaTamarix parvifloraTamarix ramossissimaTAAAPTAACHTAAGATAAPATAARA
Type
Symposium
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , June 1998 , pp. 326 - 336
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 by the Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Anderson, B. W. 1996. Salt cedar, revegetation and riparian ecosystems in the southwest. In Lovich, J. E., Randall, J., and Kelly, M., eds. Proc. California Exotic Pest Plant Council Symposium 1995. pp. 32–41.Google Scholar
Anderson, B. W., Higgins, A., and Ohmart, R. D. 1977. Avian Use of Saltcedar Communities in the Lower Colorado River Valley. Fort Collins, CO: USDA, US Rocky Mt. For. Range Exp. Stn. Gen. Tech. Rep. 43:128–136.Google Scholar
Anderson, B. W. and Ohmart, R. D. 1985. Riparian revegetation as a mitigating process in stream and river restoration. In Gore, J. A., ed. The Restoration of Rivers and Streams: Theories and Experience. Boston, MA: Butterworth. pp. 41–80.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. E. 1982. Factors controlling transpiration and photosynthesis in Tamarix chinensis Lour. Ecology 63:48–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ball, J. T., Picone, J. B., and Ross, P. D. 1994. Evapotranspiration by Riparian Vegetation along the Lower Colorado River. Boulder City, NV: Bureau of Reclamation, Lower Colorado Region, Biol. Sci., Cent., Desert Res. Inst., Reno, NV. Final Rep. Rep. 1-CP-30-08910.Google Scholar
Baum, B. R. 1967. Introduced and naturalized tamarisks in the United States and Canada (Tamaricaceae). Baileya 15:19–25.Google Scholar
Baum, B. R. 1978. The Genus Tamarix. Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities. 209 p.Google Scholar
Berry, W. L. 1970. Characteristics of salts secreted by Tamarix aphylla . Amer. J. Bot. 57:1226–1230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackburn, W. H., Knight, R. W., and Schuster, J. L. 1982. Saltcedar influence on sedimentation in the Brazos River. J. Soil Water Conserv. 37:298–301.Google Scholar
Bosabalidis, A. M. 1992. A morphological approach to the question of salt gland lifetime in leaves of Tamarix aphylla L. Israel J. Bot. 41:115–121.Google Scholar
Bosabalidis, A. M. and Thomson, W. W. 1984. Light microscopical studies on salt gland development in Tamarix aphylla L. Ann. Bot. 54:169–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bosabalidis, A. M. and Thomson, W. W. 1985. Ultrastructural development and secretion in the salt glands of Tamarix aphylla L. J. Ultrastructure Res. 92:55–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brotherson, J. D., Carman, J. G., and Szyska, L. A. 1984. Stem-diameter age relationships of Tamarix ramosissima in central Utah. J. Range Manage. 37:362–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brotherson, J. D. and Field, D. 1987. Tamarix: impacts of a successful weed. Rangelands 9:110–112.Google Scholar
Brotherson, J. D. and Winkel, V. 1986. Habitat relationships of saltcedar (Tamarix ramosissima) in central Utah. Great Basin Nat. 46:535–541.Google Scholar
Bureau of Reclamation. 1992. Vegetation Management Study, Lower Colorado River. Boulder City, NV: Lower Colorado Region Phase 1 Rep. 103 p.Google Scholar
Busch, D. E. 1995. Effects of fire on southwestern riparian plant community structure. Southwest. Nat. 40:259–267.Google Scholar
Busch, D. E., Ingraham, N. L., and Smith, S. D. 1992. Water uptake in woody riparian phreatophytes of the southwestern United States: a stable isotope study. Ecol. Appl. 2:450–459.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Busch, D. E. and Smith, S. D. 1992. Fire in a Riparian Shrub Community: Postburn Water Relations in the Tamarix-Salix Association along the Lower Colorado River. Ogden, UT: USDA, For. Serv. Intermt. Res. Stn. Gen. Tech. Rep. 289. pp. 52–59.Google Scholar
Busch, D. E. and Smith, S. D. 1993. Effects of fire on water and salinity relations of riparian woody taxa. Oecologia 94:186–194.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Busch, D. E. and Smith, S. D. 1995. Mechanisms associated with decline of woody species in riparian ecosystems of the southwestern U.S. Ecol. Monogr. 65:347–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, N. and Thomson, W. W. 1975. Chloride localization in the leaf of Tamarix . Protoplasm 83:1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, N., Thomson, W. W., and Platt, K. 1974. The apoplastic pathway of transport to salt glands. J. Exp. Bot. 25:61–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carman, J. G. and Brotherson, J. D. 1982. Comparisons of sites infested and not infested with saltcedar (Tamarix pentandra) and Russian olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia). Weed Sci. 30:360–364.Google Scholar
Carothers, S. W., Aitchison, S. E., Karpiscak, M. M., Ruffner, G. A., and Sharber, J. J. 1976. An ecological survey of the riparian zone of the Colorado River between Lee's Ferry and Grand Wash Cliffs, Arizona. U.S. National Park Service, Colorado River Res. Serv. Tech. Rep. 10. 251 p.Google Scholar
Cohan, D. R., Anderson, B. W., and Ohmart, R. D. 1978. Avian population responses to saltcedar along the lower Colorado River. In Johnson, R. R. and McCormick, J. F., eds. Strategies for Protection and Management of Floodplain Wetlands and Other Riparian Ecosystems. Washington, DC: U.S. Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-12. pp. 371–381.Google Scholar
Crins, W. J. 1989. The Tamaricaceae in the southwestern United States. J. Arnold Arboretum 70:403–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davenport, D. C., Martin, P. E., and Hagan, R. M. 1982a. Evapotranspiration from riparian vegetation: water relations and irrecoverable losses for saltcedar. J. Soil Water Conserv. 37:233–236.Google Scholar
Davenport, D. C., Martin, P. E., and Hagan, R. M. 1982b. Evapotranspiration from riparian vegetation: conserving water by reducing saltcedar transpiration. J. Soil Water Conserv. 37:237–239.Google Scholar
deGouvenain, R. C. 1996. Origin, history and current range of salt cedar in the U.S. In Proc. Saltcedar Management Workshop. Rancho Mirage, CA. California Exotic Pest Plant Council. pp. 1–3.Google Scholar
DeLoach, C. J. 1989. Prospects for biological control of saltcedar (Tamarix spp.) in riparian habitats of the southwestern United States. In Delfosse, E. S., ed. Proc. VII International Symposium of the Biological Control of Weeds, 1988, Rome, Italy. 1st Sper. Patol. Veg. (MAF). pp. 307–314.Google Scholar
DeLoach, C. J., Pitcairn, M. J., and Woods, D. 1996. Biological control of saltcedar in southern California. In Proc. Saltcedar Management Workshop. Rancho Mirage, CA. California Exotic Pest Plants Council. pp. 30–31.Google Scholar
DiTomaso, J. M. 1996. Identification, biology and ecology of saltcedar. In Proc. Saltcedar Management Workshop. Rancho Mirage, CA. pp. 4–8.Google Scholar
Dressen, D. R. and Wangen, L. E. 1981. Elemental composition of saltcedar (Tamarix chinensis) impacted by effluents from a coal-fired power plant. J. Environ. Qual. 10:410–416.Google Scholar
Egan, T. B., Chavez, R. A., and West, B. R. 1993. Afton Canyon saltcedar removal first year status report. In Smith, L. and Stephenson, J., eds. Proc. Symposium of Vegetation Management, Hot Desert Rangeland Ecosys., Phoenix, AZ. p. 18.Google Scholar
Ellis, L. M. 1995. Bird use of saltcedar and cottonwood vegetation in the Middle Rio Grande Valley of New Mexico, U.S.A. J. Arid Environ. 30:339–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engel-Wilson, R. W. and Ohmart, R. D. 1978. Floral and attendant faunal changes on the lower Rio Grande between Fort Quitman and Presidio, Texas. In Proc. National Symposium Strategies for Protection and Management of Floodplain Wetlands and Other Riparian Ecosystems. pp. 139–147.Google Scholar
Everitt, B. L. 1980. Ecology of saltcedar—a plea for research. Environ. Geol. 3:77–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frasier, G. W. and Johnsen, T. N. Jr. 1991. Saltcedar (tamarisk): classification, distribution, ecology, and control. In James, L. F., Evans, J. O., Ralphs, M. H., and Child, R. D., eds. Noxious Range Weeds. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. pp. 377–386.Google Scholar
Friederici, P. 1995. The alien saltcedar. Am. For. 101:45–47.Google Scholar
Gary, H. L. 1960. Utilization of Five-Stamen Tamarisk by Cattle. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Rocky Mt. For. Range Exp. Stn. Res. Note 51. 4 p.Google Scholar
Gatewood, J. S., Robinson, T. W., Colby, R. B., Hem, J. D., and Halpenny, L. C. 1950. Use of Water by Bottomland Vegetation in Lower Safford Valley, Arizona. U.S. Geol. Survey Water Supply Paper 1103.Google Scholar
Gay, L. W. 1985. Evapotranspiration from saltcedar along the lower Colorado River. First North. Am. In Conf. Proc., Riparian Ecosystems and their Management: Reconciling Conflicting Uses. Tucson, AZ. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Forest Service. pp. 171–174.Google Scholar
Gay, L. W. and Fritschen, L. J. 1979. An energy budget analysis of water use by saltcedar. Water Resour. Res. 15:1589–1592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gay, L. W. and Hartman, R. K. 1982. ET measurements over riparian saltcedar on the Colorado River. Hydrol. Water Resour. Arizona Southwest 12:9–15.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, F. B. and Smart, N. 1982. Age, spacing and growth rate of Tamarix as an indication of lake boundary fluctuations at Sebkhet Kelbia, Tunisia. J. Arid Environ. 5:43–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graf, W. L. 1978. Fluvial adjustments to the spread of tamarisk in the Colorado Plateau region. Bull. Geol. Soc. Am. 89:1491–1501.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Great Western Research, Inc. 1989. Economic analysis of harmful and beneficial aspects of saltcedar. In Final Report. Boulder City, NV: Bureau of Reclamation, Lower Colorado Region. p. 259.Google Scholar
Hagemeyer, J. and Waisel, Y. 1990. Phase-shift and memorization of the circadian rhythm of transpiration of Tamarix aphylla . Experientia 46:876–877.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haigh, S. L. 1996. Saltcedar (Tamarix ramosissima), an uncommon host for desert mistletoe (Phoradendron californicum). Great Basin Nat. 56:186–187.Google Scholar
Horton, J. S. 1964. Notes on the Introduction of Deciduous Tamarix. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. For. Serv. Res. Note R-16. 7 p.Google Scholar
Horton, J. S. 1977. The Development and Perpetuation of the Permanent Tamarisk Type in the Phreatophyte Zone of the Southwest. Fort Collins, CO: USDA, U.S. Rocky Mt. For. Range Exp. Stn. Gen. Tech. Rep. 43.Google Scholar
Horton, J. S. and Campbell, C. J. 1974. Management of Phreatophyte and Riparian Vegetation for Maximum Multiple Use Values. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Forest Service, Res. Pap. RM-117. 23 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howe, W. H. and Knopf, F. L. 1991. On the imminent decline of Rio Grande cottonwoods in central New Mexico. The Southwest. Nat. 36:218–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, L. E. 1993. “The devil's own”—tamarisk. Rangelands 15:151–155.Google Scholar
Hughes, W. C. 1970. Economic Feasibility of Increasing Pecos Basin Water Supplies through Reduction of Evaporation and Evapotranspiration. Water Resources Research Institute Rep. 9.Google Scholar
Hunter, W. C., Anderson, B. W., and Ohmart, R. D. 1985. Summer avian community composition of Tamarix habitats in three southwestern desert riparian systems. In Conf. Proc., Riparian Ecosystems and their Management: Reconciling Conflicting Uses, Tucson, AZ. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Dept. Agr., Forest Service. pp. 128–134.Google Scholar
Hunter, W. C., Ohmart, R. D., and Anderson, B. W. 1988. Use of exotic saltcedar (Tamarix chinensis) by birds in arid riparian systems. Condor 90:113–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, J., Ball, J. T., and Rose, M. R. 1990. Assessment of the salinity tolerance of eight Sonoran Desert riparian trees and shrubs. In Final Report. Yuma, AR: Bureau of Reclamation, Yuma Project Office. p. 102.Google Scholar
Johnson, S. 1987. Can tamarisk be controlled? Fremontia 15(2): 19–20.Google Scholar
Kerpez, T. A. and Smith, N. S. 1987. Saltcedar Control for Wildlife Habitat Improvement in the Southwestern United States. Washington, DC: USDI. Fish and Wildlife Serv. Resource Publ. 169. 16 p.Google Scholar
Kleinkopf, G. E. and Wallace, A. 1974. Physiological basis for salt tolerance in Tamarix ramosissima . Plant Sci. Lett. 3:157–163.Google Scholar
Lovich, J. E., Egan, T. B., de Gouvenain, R. C. 1994. Tamarisk control on public lands in the desert of Southern California: two case studies. Proc. California Weed Conf. 46:166–177.Google Scholar
Neill, W. M. 1985. Tamarisk. Fremontia 12:22–23.Google Scholar
Robinson, T. W. 1958. Phreatophytes. Washington, DC: U.S. Geol. Survey Water Supply Paper. 1423. 85 p.Google Scholar
Robinson, T. W. 1965. Introduction, Spread, and Aerial Extent of Saltcedar (Tamarix) in the Western States. Washington, DC: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 491-A. 12 p.Google Scholar
Sala, A. and Smith, S. D. 1996. Water use by Tamarix ramosissima and associated phreatophytes in a Mojave Desert floodplain. Ecol. Appl. 6:888–898.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shafroth, P. B., Friedman, J. M., and Ischinger, L. S. 1995. Effects of salinity on establishment of Populus fremontii (cottonwood) and Tamarix ramosissima (saltcedar) in southwestern United States. Great Basin Nat. 55:58–65.Google Scholar
Shrader, T. H. 1977. Selective management of phreatophytes for improved utilization of natural food-plain resources. Water management for irrigation and drainage. Proc. Soc. Civil Eng. 2:16–44.Google Scholar
Sisneros, D. 1991. Herbicide Analysis: Lower Colorado River Saltcedar Vegetation Management Study. Denver, CO: Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Dept. Int. R-91–06. 167 p.Google Scholar
Story, R. and Thomson, W. W. 1994. An x-ray microanalysis study of the salt glands and intracellular calcium crystals of Tamarix . Ann. Bot. 73:307–13.Google Scholar
Swenson, J. E., Hendricks, P., and Farjon, A. 1982. Arrival and occurrence of Tamarix chinensis (tamarisk) along the Yellowstone River in Treasure and Rosebud Counties, Montana. Proc. Mont. Acad. Sci. 41:67–70.Google Scholar
Thomson, W. W., Berry, W. L., and Liu, L. L. 1969. Localization and secretion of salt by the salt glands of Tamarix aphylla . Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 63:310–317.Google Scholar
van Hylckama, T.E.A. 1974. Water Use by Saltcedar as Measured by the Water Budget Method. Washington, DC: USGS Professional Paper 491-E.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warren, D. K. and Turner, R. M. 1975. Saltcedar seed production, seedling establishment, and response to inundation. Arizona Acad. Sci. J. 10:131–144.Google Scholar
Weeks, E. P., Weaver, H. L., Campbell, G. S., and Tanner, B. D. 1987. Water Use by Saltcedar and by Replacement Vegetation in the Pecos River Floodplain between Acme and Artesia, New Mexico. Washington, DC U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Pap., 491-G. 33 p.Google Scholar
Wiesenborn, W. D. 1996. Saltcedar impacts on salinity, water, fire frequency. and Hooding. In Proc. Saltcedar Management Workshop. Rancho Mirage. CA, 1996. California Exotic Pest Plant Council. pp. 9–12.Google Scholar
Williams, M. E. and Anderson, J. E. 1977. Diurnal trends in water status, transpiration, and photosynthesis of saltcedar. Hydrol. Water Resour. Arizona Southwest 12:119–124.Google Scholar