|
Wildlife, Animals, and Plants
|
|
Introductory
SPECIES: Carduus nutans | Musk Thistle
ABBREVIATION :
CARNUT
SYNONYMS :
Carduus thoermeri Weinm. [12,13]
SCS PLANT CODE :
CANU4
CANUL
CANUM
CANUN
COMMON NAMES :
musk thistle
nodding thistle
nodding plumeless thistle
TAXONOMY :
This report follows North American literature, using Carduus nutans L.
as the scientific name for the musk thistle complex [1,12,13,15,30].
In North American literature, the scientific name Carduus nutans L. has
been applied to an aggregate of large-flowered plumeless thistles in the
aster (Asteraceae) family. Some treatments have separated the complex
into the following three subspecies [6,13]:
C. n. ssp. nutans
C. n. ssp. macrocephalus (Desf.) Nyman
C. n. ssp. leiophyllus (Petrovic) Stoj. & Stef.
A biosystematic study of the Carduus nutans complex in Canada showed
that a fourth subspecies, C. n. ssp. macrolepis (Peterm.) Kazmi, could
not be morphologically separated from C. n. ssp. leiophyllus [6].
Detailed treatments of Carduus by European systematists [38] suggest a
three-species classification of the large-flowered Carduus in North
America. According to Tutin and others [38], the majority of the
complex in North America is C. thoermeri Weinm. (synonymous with C. n.
ssp. leiophyllus). The other two species are C. nutans L. and C.
macrocephalus Desf.
LIFE FORM :
Forb
FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS :
No special status
OTHER STATUS :
NO-ENTRY
COMPILED BY AND DATE :
Jennifer H. Carey, December 1994
LAST REVISED BY AND DATE :
NO-ENTRY
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION :
Carey, Jennifer H. 1994. Carduus nutans. In: Remainder of Citation
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Carduus nutans | Musk Thistle
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION :
Musk thistle, native to Europe and Asia, was introduced into North
America as early as 1853 [32]. It is now naturalized throughout most of
the United States and southern Canada. It occurs from Nova Scotia west
to British Columbia, south to California, and east to Georgia [5,8,12,13].
ECOSYSTEMS :
Musk thistle probably occurs in most ecosystems.
STATES :
AL AZ AR CA CO CT DE GA ID IL
IN IA KS KY LA MD MA MI MN MS
MO MT NE NV NJ NM NY NC ND OH
OK OR PA RI SC SD TN TX UT VA
WA WV WI WY AB BC MB NB NS ON
PQ SK
ADMINISTRATIVE UNITS :
BIHO BLCA CACH CATO DEWA DETO
FODO GRTE MANA PIPE SHEN WICR
YELL
BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :
1 Northern Pacific Border
2 Cascade Mountains
3 Southern Pacific Border
4 Sierra Mountains
5 Columbia Plateau
6 Upper Basin and Range
7 Lower Basin and Range
8 Northern Rocky Mountains
9 Middle Rocky Mountains
10 Wyoming Basin
11 Southern Rocky Mountains
12 Colorado Plateau
13 Rocky Mountain Piedmont
14 Great Plains
15 Black Hills Uplift
16 Upper Missouri Basin and Broken Lands
KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :
NO-ENTRY
SAF COVER TYPES :
237 Interior ponderosa pine
SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES :
NO-ENTRY
HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES :
Musk thistle primarily occurs on disturbed sites, rangelands, and
pastures, but it probably occurs in almost all habitats except dense
forests, high mountains, deserts, and newly cultivated fields [32]. In
northeastern Kansas, musk thistle occurs in old fields with Japanese
brome (Bromus japonicus) [23]. In Kentucky, musk thistle occurs in
meadow fescue (Festuca pratensis) fields with Carolina horsenettle
(Solanum carolinense) and groundcherry (Physalis spp.) [18]. In
Colorado, musk thistle occurs beneath interior ponderosa pine (Pinus
ponderosa var. scopulorum) [25].
Graminoids and forbs frequently found with musk thistle and spiny
plumeless thistle (Carduus acanthoides) in Canada are listed by
Desrochers and others [5].
VALUE AND USE
SPECIES: Carduus nutans | Musk Thistle
WOOD PRODUCTS VALUE :
NO-ENTRY
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE :
NO-ENTRY
PALATABILITY :
Musk thistle is not palatable to livestock because of its long sharp
spines [17,32].
NUTRITIONAL VALUE :
NO-ENTRY
COVER VALUE :
NO-ENTRY
VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES :
NO-ENTRY
OTHER USES AND VALUES :
Musk thistle provides a source of nectar for high quality honey [29].
MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Musk thistle is listed as a noxious weed in 16 states (mostly western
and midwestern) and 5 Canadian provinces [5,7]. It can be a severe
problem in alfalfa (Medicago sativa) fields, pastures, and rangeland
[7]. Musk thistle does not tolerate cultivation so it is not usually a
problem on annual cropland [5,24]. Control depends on preventing seed
production [26].
Musk thistle is effectively controlled with herbicide applied during the
rosette stage. Herbicide application techniques are described [2,5,17,22,29].
Two weevil species have been introduced from Europe to control musk
thistle. Thistlehead weevil (Rhinocyllus conicus), introduced into 23
states (including Montana in 1969), is well established and has reduced
musk thistle density in the United States [24,36]. The larvae bore into
and feed on the flowerheads. The larvae not only damage developing seed
but also reduce viability of remaining seed [24,32]. A flowerhead with
nine or more larvae has less than 2 percent viability of remaining seed
[32].
The rosette-feeding weevil (Trichosirocalus horridus) inhabits roots and
stems. It is only effective against small, nonvigorous musk thistle
rosettes [24]. It was introduced into Montana in 1978 and, by 1991, was
only established at a few sites [36].
The two introduced weevils combined with sulfonylureas herbicides may
control musk thistle [2]. Application of 2,4-D while primary blooms
were in the late bud or early bloom stage reduced musk thistle but did
not reduce survival or reproduction of either weevil [37].
Tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea) competes effectively with musk thistle
and is recommended for planting on roadsides and other disturbed sites.
Few musk thistle seeds planted in 1-year-old tall fescue germinated, and
those that did germinate did not reach reproductive stage. When tall
fescue and musk thistle were planted simultaneously, musk thistle grew
and reproduced, but seed production was not optimum. Musk thistle
control was greatest when the two introduced weevil species were present
in addition to the tall fescue [19].
Mowing may be an effective control method if it occurs during full
bloom. Musk thistle harvested at full-bloom stage had only 26 good
quality seeds per plant. Plants harvested 2 and 4 days after full bloom
produced 72 and 774 good quality seeds per plant, respectively [26].
At springs, seeps, and marshy valley bottoms in eastern New Mexico, musk
thistle is invading populations of Mescalero thistle (Cirsium vinaceum),
which is federally listed as threatened [34].
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Carduus nutans | Musk Thistle
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
Musk thistle is a biennial or winter annual forb that generally grows
1.6 to 6.6 feet (0.5-2.0 m) tall. Large flowerheads (up to 3 inches [7
cm] in diameter) on terminal branches are usually nodding. Leaves and
stems are spiny [5]. Musk thistle has multiple branches, and a single
large plant may have 100 or more flowerheads [21,24]. The seeds are
0.14 to 0.18 inch (0.35-0.45 cm) long, and the attached pappus is not
feathery. Musk thistle has a long, fleshy taproot [5].
RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :
Hemicryptophyte
Therophyte
REGENERATION PROCESSES :
Musk thistle regenerates solely by seed and is a prolific seed producer
[5,24]. In northeastern Kansas, four large plants averaged 17,750 seeds
per plant [23]. Terminal flowerheads produce the most seeds and average
1,000 seeds per flowerhead; secondary flowerheads average 840 seeds per
flowerhead [26,32]. An estimated one- to two-thirds of the seeds are
well developed and have a high germination potential [24,26].
Seeds are dispersed by wind, small mammals and birds, and water. Many
intact flowerheads fall to the ground below the parent plant, but some
seeds are dispersed by wind [32]. Smith and Kok [19] studied the
effects of wind speed on musk thistle seed dispersal distance and
pattern. Seeds traveled a maximum distance of 328 feet (100 m) with
wind speeds up to 12.5 miles per hour (5.62 m/s) in field trials. A
computer model based on field trials indicates that less than 1 percent
of musk thistle seeds are blown more than 328 feet (100 m), and more
than 80 percent of seeds are deposited in an area less than 131 feet (40
m) from the release point, even at wind speeds of 12.5 miles per hour
(5.6 m/s) [33].
Germination studies have shown that musk thistle has a short, innate
dormancy period [21,23,27,29]. In one study, germination was less than
2 percent immediately after maturity but increased to 50 percent 8 weeks
after maturity. Ninety percent of 1-year-old seeds germinated within 2
weeks of being placed in a suitable seedbed [21]. Musk thistle seeds
remain dormant for up to 10 years [24]. Seeds buried in the top 0.8
inch (2 cm) of soil remain viable for 2 to 3 years while those buried
deeper than 0.8 inch (2 cm) remain viable longer [29]. Germination is
strongly enhanced by light. Optimal temperature for germination is
between 59 and 68 degrees Fahrenheit (15-20 deg C) in light and 68 and
86 degrees Fahrenheit (20-30 deg C) in dark [27].
Musk thistle establishment is best on bare soil. The optimal seedbed
microhabitat is near the soil surface but protected from evaporation.
Small, shallow cracks are ideal. A light covering of litter after seeds
have fallen reduces evaporation and improves establishment [14].
Populations increase following moist years and decrease during drought [5].
Musk thistle rosettes bolt only after exposure to low temperatures
during winter [28].
SITE CHARACTERISTICS :
Musk thistle grows where winters are cool and there is adequate
precipitation in either the spring or fall [29]. It occurs in areas
with as little as 10 inches (25 cm) of annual precipitation [24]. In
dry climates such as New Mexico, musk thistle does well near springs and
seeps and in marshy valley bottoms [34]. In cold northern climates,
musk thistle rosettes survive winter only in protected sites such as
gullies that accumulate an insulating layer of snow. Musk thistle
grows from sea level to about 8,000 feet (2,400 m) elevation [24].
Musk thistle grows best on moist, alluvial soils. It occurs over a wide
range of conditions from acidic to saline [24]. Musk thistle
distribution is restricted by extremely acidic soils and extremes in
soil water content [5].
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS :
Musk thistle is intolerant of dense shade [32].
Musk thistle rapidly colonizes disturbed sites [23]. It can form dense
stands with as many as 60,000 plants per acre (150,000/ha). Stands are
self-perpetuating because the bare soil beneath mature plants is an
ideal seedbed [5].
A site in central Utah was chained in 1982 to remove true pinyon (Pinus
edulis) and Utah juniper (Juniperus osteosperma). The area was seeded
with perennial grasses and forbs but musk thistle also established.
Musk thistle density increased from 78 per acre (190/ha) in 1983 to
2,700 per acre (6,680/ha) in 1985 [4].
SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT :
Musk thistle exhibits three life cycles (spring biennial, autumn
biennial, or winter annual) depending in part on time of seed
germination. The winter annual life cycle is less common than the
biennial cycles [23]. Germination occurs over a period of several
months in both spring and fall [14]. A spring biennial germinates in
spring, forms a large rosette in summer, overwinters, and grows and
flowers the following spring and summer. An autumn biennial germinates
in fall but does not grow into a large rosette until the following
spring and summer, and then flowers in its second growing season. A
winter annual germinates in late summer or early fall, early enough that
a large rosette forms before winter dormancy. It flowers the following
growing season [23].
Musk thistle flowers over a long period, from as early as late May until
killed by frost or dessication [1,12,17,30]. Terminal flowerheads bloom
and set seed first. In Kentucky, flowering begins in mid-May and
continues until mid-August [21]. In Michigan, musk thistle flowers from
mid-June to mid-August [9]. It flowers in May and June in the central
Midwest, and seeds mature late June to early July [23]. Seeds can
germinate several weeks after maturity if light and moisture are
adequate [23].
FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Carduus nutans | Musk Thistle
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS :
Musk thistle populations are probably resistant to fire because of their
ability to colonize disturbed sites. Musk thistle probably regenerates
after fire from seeds buried in soil or from off-site seed sources.
POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY :
Ground residual colonizer (on-site, initial community)
Initial-offsite colonizer (off-site, initial community)
FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Carduus nutans | Musk Thistle
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT :
Fire probably kills musk thistle. Seed buried in the soil probably
survives most fires.
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT :
NO-ENTRY
PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE :
Musk thistle colonizes recently burned prairie sites where grasses are
not vigorous [16]. Plant competition and dry conditions may limit musk
thistle establishment after fire on some sites.
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE :
NO-ENTRY
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
The role of fire in musk thistle control has not been fully explored
[24]. Popay and Medd [29] suggest there is little merit in using fire
to control musk thistle because combustion would readily occur only on
mature plants that have already dispersed seed.
In the Konza Prairie Research Natural Area in Kansas, burning favored
seedling establishment of musk thistle in areas where grazing had
reduced the vigor of prairie grasses. However, on sites where grasses
were vigorous, musk thistle was crowded out whether the site was burned
or not. Frequent burning to maintain vigorous prairie plants is
recommended to prevent the invasion of exotic plant species [16].
REFERENCES
SPECIES: Carduus nutans | Musk Thistle
REFERENCES :
1. Bare, Janet E. 1979. Wildflowers and weeds of Kansas. Lawrence, KS: The
Regents Press of Kansas. 509 p. [3801]
2. Beck, K. George. 1991. Biennial thistle control with herbicides. In:
James, Lynn F.; Evans, John O.; Ralphs, Michael H.; Child, R. Dennis,
eds. Noxious range weeds. Westview Special Studies in Agri. Science and
Policy. Boulder, CO: Westview Press: 254-259. [23553]
3. Bernard, Stephen R.; Brown, Kenneth F. 1977. Distribution of mammals,
reptiles, and amphibians by BLM physiographic regions and A.W. Kuchler's
associations for the eleven western states. Tech. Note 301. Denver, CO:
U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 169 p.
[434]
4. Davis, James N.; Harper, Kimball T. 1990. Weedy annuals and
establishment of seeded species on a chained juniper-pinyon woodland in
central Utah. In: McArthur, E. Durant; Romney, Evan M.; Smith, Stanley
D.; Tueller, Paul T., compilers. Proceedings--symposium on cheatgrass
invasion, shrub die-off, and other aspects of shrub biology and
management; 1989 April 5-7; Las Vegas, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-276.
Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain
Research Station: 72-79. [12872]
5. Desrochers, A. M.; Bain, J. F.; Warwick, S. I. 1988. The biology of
Canadian weeds. 89. Carduus nutans L. and Carduus acanthoides L.
Canadian Journal of Plant Science. 68: 1053-1068. [23888]
6. Desrochers, A. M.; Bain, J. F.; Warwick, S. I. 1988. A biosystematic
study of the Carduus nutans complex in Canada. Canadian Journal of
Botany. 66: 1621-1631. [23883]
7. Dewey, Steven A. 1991. Weedy thistles of the western United States. In:
James, Lynn F.; Evans, John O.; Ralphs, Michael H.; Child, R. Dennis,
eds. Noxious range weeds. Westview Special Studies in Agri. Science and
Policy. Boulder, CO: Westview Press: 247-253. [23552]
8. Dunn, P. H. 1976. Distribution of Carduus nutans, C. acanthoides, C.
pycnocephalus, and C. crispus, in the United States. Seed Science.
24(5): 518-524. [23889]
9. Evans, Francis C. 1986. Bee-flower interactions on an old field in
southeastern Michigan. In: Clambey, Gary K.; Pemble, Richard H., eds.
The prairie: past, present and future: Proceedings, 9th North American
prairie conference; 1984 July 29 - August 1; Moorhead, MN. Fargo, ND:
Tri-College University Center for Environmental Studies: 103-109.
[3538]
10. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and
Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
11. Garrison, George A.; Bjugstad, Ardell J.; Duncan, Don A.; [and others].
1977. Vegetation and environmental features of forest and range
ecosystems. Agric. Handb. 475. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service. 68 p. [998]
12. Gleason, Henry A.; Cronquist, Arthur. 1991. Manual of vascular plants of
northeastern United States and adjacent Canada. 2nd ed. New York: New
York Botanical Garden. 910 p. [20329]
13. Great Plains Flora Association. 1986. Flora of the Great Plains.
Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. 1392 p. [1603]
14. Hamrick, J. L.; Lee, Janet M. 1987. Effect of soil surface topography
and litter cover on the germination, survival, and growth of musk
thistle (Carduus nutans). American Journal of Botany. 74(3): 451-457.
[23882]
15. Hickman, James C., ed. 1993. The Jepson manual: Higher plants of
California. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1400 p.
[21992]
16. Hulbert, Lloyd C. 1986. Fire effects on tallgrass prairie. In: Clambey,
Gary K.; Pemble, Richard H., eds. The prairie: past, present and future:
Proceedings, 9th North American prairie conference; 1984 July 29 -
August 1; Moorhead, MN. Fargo, ND: Tri-College University Center for
Environmental Studies: 138-142. [3550]
17. Hull, A. C., Jr.; Evand, John O. 1973. Musk thistle (Carduus nutans): an
undesirable range plant. Journal of Range Management. 26(5): 383-385.
[24326]
18. Kalisz, P. J.; Davis, W. H. 1992. Effect of prairie voles on vegetation
and soils in central Kentucky. American Midland Naturalist. 127(2):
392-399. [18193]
19. Kok, Loke T.; McAvoy, Thomas J.; Mays, Warren T. 1986. Impact of tall
fescue grass and Carduus thistle weevils on the growth and development
of musk thistle (Carduus nutans). Weed Science. 34: 966-971. [23890]
20. Kuchler, A. W. 1964. Manual to accompany the map of potential vegetation
of the conterminous United States. Special Publication No. 36. New York:
American Geographical Society. 77 p. [1384]
21. Lacefield, Garry D.; Gray, Elmer. 1970. The life cycle of nodding
thistle (Carduus nutans L.) in Kentucky. In: Proceedings, northcentral
weed control conference: 105-107. [23886]
22. Lacey, John R.; Lacey, Celestine A. 1985. Controlling pasture and range
weeds in Montana. Bulletin 362. Bozeman, MT: Montana State University,
Cooperative Extension Service. 33 p. [1397]
23. Lee, Janet M.; Hamrick, J. L. 1983. Demography of two natural
populations of musk thistle (Carduus nutans). Journal of Ecology. 71:
923-936. [23884]
24. Leininger, Wayne C. 1988. Non-chemical alternatives for managing
selected plant species in the western United States. XCM-118. Fort
Collins, CO: Colorado State University, Cooperative Extension. In
cooperation with: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife
Service. 47 p. [13038]
25. McCambridge, W. F.; Morris, M. J.; Edminster, C. B. 1982. Herbage
production under ponderosa pine killed by the mountain pine beetle in
Colorado. Res. Note RM-416. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment
Station. 3 p. [16929]
26. McCarty, Melvin K. 1982. Musk thistle (Carduus thoermeri) seed
production. Weed Science. 30: 441-445. [23885]
27. Medd, R. W.; Lovett, J. V. 1978. Biological studies of Carduus nutans
(L.) ssp. nutans. I. Germination and light requirement of seedlings.
Weed Research. 18: 363-367. [23891]
28. Medd, R. W.; Lovett, J. V. 1978. Biological studies of Carduus nutans
(L.) ssp. nutans. II. Vernalization and phenological development. Weed
Research. 18: 369-372. [23892]
29. Popay, A. I.; Medd, R. W. 1990. The biology of Australian weeds 21.
Carduus nutans L. spp nutans. Plant Protection Quarterly. 5(1): 3-13.
[23673]
30. Radford, Albert E.; Ahles, Harry E.; Bell, C. Ritchie. 1968. Manual of
the vascular flora of the Carolinas. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of
North Carolina Press. 1183 p. [7606]
31. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant
geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
32. Rees, Norman E. 1991. Biological control of thistles. In: James, Lynn
F.; Evans, John O.; Ralphs, Michael H.; Child, R. Dennis, eds. Noxious
range weeds. Westview Special Studies in Agri. Science and Policy.
Boulder, CO: Westview Press: 264-273. [23554]
33. Smith, Lane M., II; Kok, L. T. 1984. Dispersal of musk thistle (Cardus
nutans) seeds. Weed Science. 32: 120-125. [23887]
34. Spellenberg, Richard. 1993. Species of special concern. In: Dick-Peddie,
William A., ed. New Mexico vegetation: Past, present, and future.
Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico Press: 179-224. [21101]
35. Stickney, Peter F. 1989. Seral origin of species originating in northern
Rocky Mountain forests. Unpublished draft on file at: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Fire
Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT; RWU 4403 files. 7 p. [20090]
36. Story, Jim M. 1992. Biological control of weeds: selective, economical
and safe. Western Wildlands. 18(2): 18-23. [19464]
37. Trumble, J. T.; Kok, L. T. 1980. Integration of a thistle-head weevil
and herbicide for Carduus thistle control. Protection Ecology. 2: 57-64.
[23916]
38. Tutin, T. G.; Haywood, V. H.; Burges, N. A.; [and others]. 1976.
Compositae: 117. Carduus L. Flora Europaea. 4: 220-232. [23881]
39. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1994. Plants
of the U.S.--alphabetical listing. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 954 p. [23104]
40. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Biological Survey. [n.d.]. NP
Flora [Data base]. Davis, CA: U.S. Department of the Interior, National
Biological Survey. [23119]
Index
Related categories for Species: Carduus nutans
| Musk Thistle
|
 |
