The Art of Pulling Garlic Mustard

Each spring in Herrontown Woods, from April through May, we take part in the Great Garlic Mustard Pull. That's the effort, replicated in yards and nature preserves throughout the eastern U.S., to pull garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata) out of the ground before it goes to seed. This post explores the logic, toils and unexpected pleasures, as well as the strategies that can make this annual gardening task easier each year.

We pull this nonnative invasive plant, with its aroma of garlic and mustard, because the alternative is too much to bear. Left unchecked, garlic mustard can take over a woodland or garden, altering soil chemistry and smothering native species.

People pulling the flower stems are surprised to learn that other, lower-growing plants coating the ground are also garlic mustard. Two very different forms of the plant are present at the same time. Unlike most herbaceous plants that are either annuals or perennials, garlic mustard is a biennial. That means it grows a rosette the first year, storing energy in its roots--energy that will be used the second year to send up seed-bearing stalks. After the stalk blooms and the blooms turn to seed, the plant dies, leaving copious seed for future generations.

Gardeners are often fooled at first into leaving garlic mustard be. The flowers are modestly attractive, and as they fade and turn into siliques packed with seeds, the plant too fades politely into the background. But wait a month or two, and the flowering stems turn brown, populating the garden with skeletal remains that haunt the summer garden. By the time the gardener notices this blight, the seeds have already dispersed.

Much is made of the plant being edible. Young leaves can be used to make pesto and other dishes. Our friend Kirsten used it to make delicious deviled eggs. But in most situations, the plant's powers of proliferation quickly overwhelm people's appetites.

And so we pull, and pull. That's Herrontown neighbor Philip Smit in the photo. The aim is to get every last one, to ultimately exhaust the soil's supply of seed. Only with zero tolerance will the task get easier year to year. Here is where technique and timing come into play. If you pull hastily, or when the soil is dry, you may get the stem but not the root. This is an incomplete victory. That root will sprout new seedstalks that then too must be pulled. So we "grab low and pull slow", ideally pulling after rain has softened the soil, and return a week or two later to check for any resprouts.

And what to do with the pulled stems, whose seeds could potentially mature? Bagging them is a lot of work and wastes energy to have them hauled away. This year, we've been putting them in trash bins, then rolling them to a pile. In case any of the seeds mature, the pile is located where the seeds won't wash down the hill, and any seedlings will all be in one spot.

I've heard stories of gardeners who pulled year after year, and yet the garlic mustard continued to sprout anew. Where would the seed come from? We speculated that erosion from heavy rains, or the diggings of squirrels, could expose long buried seed. 

But another cause could be these miniature plants I've been finding. We pull the bigger plants and think our work done, but no. A second and even a third pass is needed over the course of weeks, with an eye out for these tiny plants. 

There can be pleasure in the task. These two visitors to the preserve joined in one day. Kids, too, take to the pulling, seeking out the white blooms as if it were an Easter egg hunt.

We're grateful that some students from Princeton University's Outdoor Action--Will Aepli, Quest Starkey, and Zach Duscorsky--worked with Ben Schaffer and me to clear garlic mustard from the Veblen House grounds and the Barden. Inge Regan, Moss Gordon, Ninfa and Andrew have helped with a larger patch in another woodland we're restoring. 

Invasive species can seem an impossible challenge, but if the invasion is caught early, and the garlic mustard is completely removed year after year, even the task of protecting 230 acres of public open space at Herrontown Woods and Autumn Hill Reservation becomes doable, with some satisfaction and even pleasure in the task.

Related Post:

A Garlic Mustard Success Story From Michigan

Training Deer to Eat MORE Japanese Knotweed

This post represents a first for PrincetonNatureNotes.org, in that it is written by someone other than me. Mark Nowotarski lives in Stamford, CT, and contacted me more than a year ago after discovering a 2014 post I had written entitled Training Deer to Eat Invasives. Independently, he had begun foraging the Japanese knotweed growing in his backyard (young shoots are edible) and noticed that deer began browsing it as well. Released from any co-evolved limits on its growth, Japanese knotweed has spread across the US and globally, displacing native species and overwhelming any human efforts to counter it. Unlike people, deer are 24/7 land managers. Their appetites decide what can and cannot grow in our yards and woodlands. Training deer to eat a relatively edible species like Japanese knotweed could conceivably, in some situations, relieve browsing pressure on the native plant species deer tend to prefer. As the deer in Mark's backyard continued to consume young sprouts of Japanese knotweed, he sent me photos and text that I incorporated into a post a year ago.

This past growing season, Mark expanded his experiments and observations, exploring how a willingness to browse Japanese knotweed could pass from one generation of deer to another. It's still unclear how much of an impact deer browsing could have on the spread of Japanese knotweed, but it's an interesting inquiry. Along the way, we learn about deer family dynamics, the potential grazability of another uber-invasive, porcelainberry, and even the possibility that deer saliva affects the chemistry of plants. Thanks to Mark for sharing his work with us.

Training Deer to Eat MORE Japanese Knotweed

By Mark Nowotarski

In our post last year, “Training Deer to Eat Invasive Plants – Japanese Knotweed”, I shared observations of white tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) browsing a patch of Japanese knotweed (Reynoutria japonica) in my backyard in Stamford CT. The local deer had learned to browse the knotweed continuously from spring to fall resulting in drastically stunted canes. This had allowed numerous native plants to recolonize what had previously been an invasive monoculture. Steve and I speculated that perhaps if we cut the fully mature canes in other nearby patches of knotweed (i.e., coppicing), new shoots would grow and the deer local to those patches might browse the new shoots as well. I’m happy to report that that strategy at least partially worked.

Deer Raising Fawns on Knotweed

Before we talk about manual coppicing, let’s talk about how it’s occurring naturally. This first video, shot in May in my backyard, shows you what deer browsing spring knotweed shoots looks like.

A buck with new antlers approaches several knotweed shoots (Fig. 1). He gives a quick sniff, bites the top portions off, and eats them. The cut stems that are left behind are about 2 feet tall.

This particular buck may well be one of the fawns raised on knotweed in my backyard in the prior summer of 2024. Does and fawns form a family group when the fawns are born in late spring. They normally stay together and browse in the doe’s home range for a full year before dispersing shortly before the doe, if she’s pregnant, gives birth to the next year’s fawns. This is how last year’s fawns learn to eat the new shoots of knotweed that sprout in the early spring. The early spring browsing by last year’s fawns coppices the knotweed so that when it sends out new shoots at a convenient two foot height, the new shoots will be available for the new fawns born in late spring.

This year, our doe was, in fact, pregnant and sometime in June, she gave birth to triplets. Triplets are relatively rare (1 in 10 pregnancies) and indicate that the doe is well fed. By July, the doe and the new set of fawns were out browsing the knotweed previously coppiced by last year’s fawns before they dispersed.

In the foreground of Fig. 2 you can also see several native plants growing up through the coppiced knotweed. On the left is Canadian goldenrod (Solidago canadensis). On the right is Northern lady fern (Athyrium angustum) and sensitive fern (Onoclea sensibilis). The deer would occasionally take a nibble of the natives, but they concentrated primarily on the knotweed. 

This suggests that some of the native species less appealing to deer could begin to coexist with browsed stands of knotweed. I plan on trying this strategy next summer and will keep you posted.

I had set up a motion activated trail-cam to monitor how often, and for how long, the doe and fawns browsed the knotweed over the summer. They returned 4-5 times a week and browsed 5-15 minutes for each visit. This lasted from when I set the camera up in July all the way through late October when the knotweed senesced (i.e., dropped leaves and turned brown). So far this winter, the doe and fawns are still stopping by several times a week. In late October an 8-point buck also stopped by in the middle of the night. After a bit of hide-and-seek with the doe in the knotweed, they mated. We can now hopefully look forward to new fawns this spring.

The cycle of fawns being raised on knotweed and then dispersing in the late spring to new territories may be an important mechanism for the spread of knotweed browsing by deer. The question then becomes, can we spread it even further by coppicing canes ourselves.

Expanding Knotweed Browse with Manual Coppicing

At the same time I was monitoring the deer in my backyard I also set out this past year to explore the knotweed stands in our local parks and land trust sites to see if I could find additional evidence of deer browse. About half of the stands I inspected showed signs of early spring browsing. About half of the spring-browsed sites also showed continued summer browsing. Several of the summer-browsed sites showed a significant expansion of the browsed area versus last year. This was evidenced by areas with tall old canes from last year but only shortened canes this year. The deer hadn’t eaten the knotweed last year and it grew to full height. This year, however, they started in the spring and continued through the summer and fall keeping it short.

To try out the manual coppicing experiment, I selected four sites where there was either no early spring browsing or where there was some spring browsing but no rebrowsing of the new shoots emerging from the coppiced canes. Two of the sites did not show any rebrowsing of the coppiced canes. These sites either had no spring browsing or very scattered spring browsing. The knotweed threw out new shoots which grew to full height despite clear evidence (e.g. footprints) of deer wandering by. Apparently, the deer near those stands had not been sufficiently acclimated to knotweed as a source of food.

In the other two sites, however, the deer did resume browsing the new shoots thrown out by the coppiced canes. These sites had heavy spring browsing and well-worn deer trails right next to the knotweed stands.

The next set of figures shows the history of my coppicing experiment at one of the sites where the deer resumed browsing. 

Fig. 3 is a photo taken in April. It shows what an early spring browsed knotweed shoot looks like. It also shows a new shoot emerging from the cane a few weeks after the initial browse.

Unlike my backyard, however, these new shoots were not rebrowsed. By July they had grown to full height. This, along with the well worn deer trail right next to the knotweed stand, made it an ideal location for the coppicing experiment.

The next photo (Fig. 4) shows a section of the knotweed stand where I cut a 6 foot wide by 12 foot long section of the full grown knotweed canes to about 2 feet off of the ground. 

I cut the canes at a bias so that when I inspected them later on, I could tell whether a cut cane was my doing (angle cut) or a deer browse (horizontal cut). Cuttings were placed where they could not resprout or be washed downstream.

A few weeks later I went back to inspect and, much to my delight, the deer were browsing the new shoots emerging from the manually coppiced canes (Fig. 5). 

Where I had cut the canes, the ends were frayed and the canes turned black down to the next joint. Where the deer browsed the canes, however, the ends appeared to be sealed off and even flared out as if from accumulated water pressure coming up through the knotweed. The canes below the deer browse remained green. It makes me wonder if there is something in the deer saliva that causes a deer browse wound to heal quickly. Perhaps knotweed has evolved this way from browsing by sika deer (Cervus nippon) in their home range in Japan.

Once I confirmed rebrowsing of the new knotweed shoots at this particular site, I set up another trail cam to see what sort of deer were coming by. I half expected another family of a doe teaching fawns to eat knotweed.

 

Imagine my surprise when this magnificent 14-point buck showed up (Fig. 6). It wasn’t a family group. It was a bachelor group with up to four bucks coming through at various times.

This buck and several others came by 4-5 times a week to browse not only the knotweed, but the invasive porcelain berry (Ampelopsis glandulosa) growing over the area in the foreground and hanging off of the uncoppiced knotweed canes in the background. In fact, I suspect that the porcelain berry is the primary reason the deer were there. The knotweed was just an additional food source.

The bucks suddenly disappeared in mid-September after they shed their velvet, no doubt to pursue does during the rutting season. I have not seen them since except for one poor fellow with a missing antler. Given how well-worn the deer trail is, however, I expect to see at least some of them again in the early spring.

Deer in a given area learning to eat Japanese knotweed appears to be a multi-year process. It starts with initial occasional browsing of early spring shoots. The spring shoots are then browsed more intensely in the ensuing years. Eventually the deer start browsing the new shoots growing from the spring browsed canes. If the knotweed is in a doe’s home range, then she starts to raise her young on knotweed and then the process spreads as the fawns raised on knotweed go on to establish their own home ranges.

If you try your own coppicing experiments, please let us know how they work out. I’ve joined a project on iNaturalist called “North American Knotweed Ecology Project” where we can share our observations. iNaturalist is a great tool for finding knotweed stands in your area. If you look carefully in the knotweed photos, particularly those taken in April and May, you can often see a deer-browsed shoot here and there. Sites with browsed shoots would be a likely candidates for coppicing experiments.

In the future I hope to learn more about the general phenomenon of deer adjusting their diets to consume invasive plants; how this affects browsing pressure on native plants; and what impact it might have on the deer themselves. The deer won’t solve all of the problems with invasives, but they may very well be an important part of the solutions.

- Mark Nowotarski

Editor's note: A related initiative is the effort to train cattle to eat invasive species. A woman named Kathy Voth appears to be a leader of this approach. 

Playing the Healer of Nature

One of PrincetonNatureNotes' sister blogs is FOHWard.org, specific to our work and play at Herrontown Woods, the fabled preserve that our nonprofit Friends of Herrontown Woods takes care of. Posts range from the celebratory to the comic, as in when we intervened to scuttle an attempted "theft" of a portapotty. 

For those who imagine cutting invasive species to be dull work, a recent post on that blog, Stewardship and Discovery at Herrontown Woods, might be of particular interest. It captures how elements of beauty, effort, strategy,  serendipity, and discovery can come together to make a stewardship session a rich and satisfying experience. 

Cutting nonnative invasive shrubs, we are essentially deer with loppers. Deer move through the forest looking for something edible to browse. They generally leave the nonnative shrubs uneaten, and so to prevent those nonnative, inedible shrubs from taking over, we move through the forest with our loppers with an eye for "browsing" the nonnatives, to balance out the deer's persistently lopsided appetites. Unlike deer, we aren't in the woods 24/7, and so to have a lasting effect it's necessary to treat the cut stem so it won't grow back. By releasing native plants from competitive pressure, over time we make the forest more edible for deer and other wildlife, essentially expanding the acreage of functional habitat in Princeton. 

Some would say that humans are an invasive species, so who are we to presume we can make a positive difference. But if we can be considered invasive, we are also equipped to play the role of stewards, to see the consequences of our invasiveness and act to heal the altered earth. As we move deer-like through the forest, our appetite is not an extractive search for food but for restoring balance. To abdicate on that role would be to deny what it means to be human.

I don't know if deer can appreciate beauty or serendipity as they browse, but we can. In Herrontown Woods in autumn, each leaf reveals its inner color. Each boulder is a work of nature's art, mottled with varied shapes of lichen and moss, like the mottled skin of whales navigating the oceans. To steward a preserve is, of course, a considerable task and responsibility, but in another way, working with nature is a great privilege, allowing us to realize our highest role, as stewards, appreciators, and healers of nature's creations.

The Mystery Tree Found in Autumn Hill Reservation

Not everyone gets to discover and report on a new invasive species in one's adopted home town. Though there were a couple kinds of invasive plants that I caught early enough to hopefully keep from spreading through town--thorny mile-a-minute and more recently the dreaded common buckthorn--this particular discovery is different, in that people have yet to agree on what it is. How strange it can feel, in a time when the internet can instantly tell you everything about everything, to find a plant to which no one can with certainty give a name.

I first encountered a single specimen of the mystery tree while conducting a plant inventory in Roger's Refuge in 2007. Only in the past few years have I found it proliferating in Herrontown Woods and Autumn Hill Reservation. 

Some call it a shrub, though when it grows to 30 feet, maybe it's time we start calling it a tree. There's agreement that it is in the genus Pourthiaea--a name that people will struggle to spell and pronounce (my attempt at a pronunciation is "pore-THEE-uh"). In a discussion on iNaturalist, the citizen science site for reporting and identifying species, some try to call it asian photinia (Pourthiaea villosa)--a nonnative shrub that likely escaped from Princeton-based nurseries long ago.

They are surely wrong, as the leaf shape and fall color of asian photinia are clearly distinct. This bright golden yellow is increasingly prettifying and clogging Princeton's greenspaces, from the Institute Woods in the west to Autumn Hill in the east, creating dense, exclusionary stands as it spreads beyond Princeton to proliferate across New Jersey. 

John L. Clark, a Princeton-based botanist frequently posting on instagram from the forests of Equador, has done a great deal of research into our mystery tree. Since the Pourthiaea genus originated in China, John tracked down a couple Chinese botanists to seek their insights. 

One, D.Y. Hong, responded that he was too old to take on the challenge of identifying the tree.

Another, Bin-Bin Liu, was also apparently unable to assist. John laments that botanists now trained in phylogenomics can identify gene sequences but not the actual physical plants themselves. 

There have been various species names thrown at the mystery tree--lurida, lucida, arguta--but none clearly stick thus far. Through Mike Van Clef, I learned of Jean Epiphan, a northern NJ plant expert at Rutgers, who had arrived at the species name "parvifolia", and even came up with a common name, "littleleaf photinia." Originally introduced in 1908 at the Arnold Arboretum," it's popping up in Morris County and, according to Jean, matches our mystery tree in Princeton. She has not seen it being sold in nurseries, and speculates that it is spreading from specimens in old estates. She sent a couple links (here and here) with descriptions, and a mention of it in Dirr's encyclopedic Manual of Landscape Plants.

Some sticking points, though, are that the link she sent to a photo has now gone dead, and the description is of a shrub less than ten feet high. A photo sent by Pat Coleman from Bowman's Hill Wildflower Preserve also matched our mystery tree in Princeton, but no word as yet whether they've come up with a name.

One thing to call the mystery tree is pretty, as are many invasive shrubs, both when they bloom and in the fall. This fall in particular, Autumn Hill Reservation was a jubilant jumble of colorful invasive shrubs, led by the bright red of winged euonymus, joined by the rich colorations of Linden viburnum and the golden yellows of the asian photinia Even the lowly privet got into the color game with an appealing dark bronze. 

When surrounded by such a dazzling visual display, it takes work to remind oneself that something important is being lost as these introduced species gain dominance in the understory. Their success and dominance is enabled in part through being rejected by deer, which prefer a diet of native plants. Thus, our eyes are well fed while the wildlife find themselves living in an increasingly inedible forest. 

As we lose many of the native trees dominating the canopy--chestnut, elm, ash, and now the beloved beech--the extra light reaching the understory drives the extravagant growth of nonnative shrubs. Surrounded by such a thorough invasion of nonnative growth, it is extraordinarily intimidating to contemplate the work involved to shift the balance back to the spicebush, blackhaw viburnums, blueberries, hollies, sumacs, and other natives currently getting smothered beneath the rising tide.

Native shrubs and trees don't exactly lack color. Here's a dogwood that was mixed in and easily confused with the mystery invasive. Note the way the leaves are paired rather than arising one at a time along the stem. 

All the invasive shrubs currently dominating were at one time, long ago, in a similar state, just starting to pop up here and there. Clearly there was no one back then able to see the future and take early action. In our era, the consequences of inaction are readily apparent. What is special about this moment in the history of Autumn Hill Reservation is that the mystery tree is still early enough in its invasion, and easy enough to spot in fall, that it can be stopped.  

Update:

Where found thus far:

• Rogers Refuge, Herrontown Woods, and Autumn Hill in Princeton
• Possible sighting in the Institute Woods in Princeton
• Bowman's Hill Wildflower Preserve
• Jockey Hollow and the NJ Brigade Area in Morris County
• Tourne Park, in Boonton

Update: A big thank you to "anonymous" in the comment section, who provided a species name and links to herbarium photos:

"Thanks for alerting us to this newly naturalized species. One of the best resources for documentation of plants on a global scale is GBIF. Reviewing the gallery of specimens online, the name leaves to appear to bear a resemblance to Photinia parviflora. https://www.gbif.org/occurrence/gallery?taxon_key=5363981"

Each photo at the link bears the name C.K. Schneid. Look at the wikipedia page for Camillo Karl Schneider and you'll find that he was a German botanist who traveled to China in 1913 to collect plants and seeds. His next stop was the Arnold Arboretum in Boston, where the species is said to have been introduced five years earlier by Wilson in 1908.

Each photo shows that the now accepted species name is not parvifolia but instead parviflora. 

Applied name Photinia parvifolia (Pritz.) C.K.Schneid.
Accepted name Pourthiaea parviflora (Cardot) Iketani & H.Ohashi

That puts into question the common name "little leaf photinia", since "parviflora" means little flower. 

So, we're not really there yet. 

Stiltgrass Reaches Michigan

During four weeks of touring with our latin/jazz group Lunar Octet in California and Michigan this summer, this "jazz naturalist" kept encountering different variations on the problem of invasive species. In the Bay area of California, highly combustible introduced grasses dominate hillsides, threatening homes. A side trip to Cleveland took me close to where beech leaf disease was first identified 12 years ago. 

And then, housesitting for my friend Sam in Ann Arbor--our home base for various Michigan gigs--I was astonished to find Japanese stiltgrass growing in his garden. Now, the only thing that would be astonishing about stiltgrass in a New Jersey garden would be its absence. Stiltgrass has become nearly ubiquitous in Princeton--coating roadsides, establishing broad monocultural meadows in our woodlands, smothering our gardens with its stilt-like growth. An annual that spreads rapidly for lack of any wildlife that find it palatable, it dies back in the fall, leaving a frozen ocean of brown in the forest, and billions of seeds to sprout the next spring. 

Stiltgrass is Not Yet Everywhere

That ubiquity makes it hard to believe that there are still many parts of the U.S. where stiltgrass has yet to spread. Until recently, though, Michigan was one of them. For a New Jersey gardener, traveling to Ann Arbor used to be like stepping thirty years back in time to a stiltgrass-free landscape. 

My fantasy, upon discovering this uber-invasive in Sam's yard, was that I had through uncanny serendipity happened upon the first colony of the plant in the area, and at a time of year when it could be pulled before it went to seed. What finer gift could a housesitter give to a homeowner and his neighbors than to nip an invasion of stiltgrass in the bud? This jazz cat was going to put a botanical bully back in the bag. 

The Horse, the Cat, the Barn and the Bag

But no. The stiltgrass--which I'm guessing first arrived as a hitch-hiker in topsoil or a nursery plant, or perhaps in the soil of a well-intended gift plant dug from some well-meaning friend's garden--had already spread far down the hillside towards the Huron River. 

Turned out Sam already knew about stiltgrass. Ann Arborites are a plant-savvy bunch. Their city already had a Natural Lands Manager, Dave Borneman, long before I moved away in 1995. Princeton hired its first Open Space Manager in 2021. Most towns and cities don't even have one.

I contacted Dave, who now has his own habitat restoration business doing prescribed burns, to ask about the status of stiltgrass in Ann Arbor. He didn't say the cat was out of the bag, but he did say the horse had left the barn. "Sadly, the horse has left the barn on this species locally. We’re seeing it pop up fairly widely now in eastern Scio and western/northern AA."

The first occurrence of stiltgrass was in fact reported seven years ago, on Sept 1, 2017, in an announcement by the state Dept. of Natural Resources. A collaboration between the DNR and a nonprofit called The Stewardship Network sought to identify and knock out the initial population, said to have been limited to one property, but to no avail. 

The First Sighting in Wisconsin 

Wisconsin's situation sounds more hopeful, with only one known infestation that is allegedly being managed and kept to a limited area. A botanist visiting from Minnesota made the early identification. Somewhat less reassuring is a post by the Invasive Plant Association of Wisconsin (IPAW), that mentions my childhood landscape in the Lake Geneva area specifically as a place where people should be "on high alert" for stiltgrass. That would suggest its been reported there.

Is Stiltgrass Controllable?

It got me thinking about what can a town do about a new invasion? Once the cat has left the barn and the horse is out of the bag, is there anything to be done? Ann Arbor certainly needs no advice from afar. Its Wild Ones chapter has an excellent fact sheet on stiltgrass in Michigan, including a field guide with details to help with distinguishing stiltgrass from some similar-looking native grasses like whitegrass. Other groups like the Legacy Land Conservancy are also engaged, sounding the warning that Michigan gardeners and land stewards now face a challenge like no other.

“Stiltgrass is not like other invasives we have seen in Michigan, which spread relatively slowly and can be contained. Stiltgrass travels via water and deer, as easily as water itself."

But Princeton's experience with uber-invasives like stiltgrass and lesser celandine can be instructive. One can say these rapidly spreading nonnative species are ubiquitous, and yet there are locales--backyards, neighborhoods, upper valleys, hillsides--within the town where one or another invasive has yet to spread. In the preserves I have managed, I have had considerable success with proactive action to keep various areas free of the lesser celandine, garlic mustard, and porcelainberry that plague other areas of Princeton. 

Much can be done to slow the expansion of stiltgrass, by patrolling in late summer, particularly along the edges of trails. Even though stiltgrass has been in Princeton for many decades, it's still possible to walk through portions of preserves and see none, or to find just a few along the trail that can easily be plucked up before they go to seed in September.

One has to keep at it year after year, catch any invasion early, and be strategic in one's timing to maximize result and minimize effort. For larger patches that would be impossible to pull, late season mowing and/or application of very dilute herbicide prevents production of new seed. Doing this thoroughly and year after year ultimately exhausts the seedbank. Scroll down at this link for more information on these approaches. 

Patrolling for stiltgrass in a preserve can even be a good motivation to get out into areas you might not frequent otherwise, and do some botanizing. It's a chance to sharpen the eye, as one distinguishes between stiltgrass and the native whitegrass, and a few other plant species with similar appearance.

The top half of this photo is native perennial whitegrass. The bottom half is the invasive, annual stiltgrass. The latter is easy to pull. The former resists, because of its greater investment in roots.

In this list of lookalikes taken from the internet, the whitegrass and the northern shorthusk have been enjoyable for this plant geek to get to know a little better this year. As is typical of native species, they are fairly common in less historically altered preserves, but don't take over like stiltgrass tends to. 

Smartweeds (Polygonum spp.), with tiny, white to pink flowers on a short spike and a tell-tale dark blotch near the center of each leaf.
Whitegrass (Leersia virginica), which is well-rooted in the soil and has longer, thinner leaves than stiltgrass, with no mid-rib stripe.
Northern shorthusk (Brachyelytrum aristosum), with fine hairs on the top, bottom and edges of its leaves and stems, and leaf veins in a pattern resembling an irregular brick wall.

That's the upside of intervening in a situation where many feel frustration and helplessness. Intervention to stem the advance of hyper-aggressive plant species gets us outdoors, often prompting new discoveries and providing a chance to gain more familiarity with the native diversity we seek to protect.

Holden Arboretum Studies Resistant Beech and Ash Trees

Herein lies a post about the long, patient work that begins when something goes wrong with the world. With the introduction of beech leaf disease into North America, things have gone very wrong. Another noble, native tree species, towering and strong, is proving no match for a microscopic nematode. When this happens--yet another example of collateral damage from international trade--scientists mobilize to seek understanding and possible remedies.

In recent blog posts about beech leaf disease, I've mentioned Holden Arboretum. Holden happens to be located east of Cleveland, close to where the disease was first noticed back in 2012. Visiting family in Cleveland this summer during a band tour, I reached out to Holden staff to see if I could stop by to witness their research on the disease. 

Tucked behind some 3000 acres of gardens and ponds, forests and fields, is a research station where Holden is devoting staff and greenhouses to a collaboration with the U.S. Forest Service and others to test resistance not only beech leaf disease, but also to the introduced insects that have decimated two other native trees--ash and hemlock. 

I learned primarily about their research on beech and ash trees.

AMERICAN BEECH

Where did the nematode that causes beech leaf disease come from? According to Rachel Kappler, Holden's Forest Health Collaborative Coordinator, who generously came in on a Saturday to give me a tour, they have identified the island in Japan from which the nematode came. It was not a species from Asia's mainland. 

Holden's main endeavor is to seek out beech that show some resistance to the disease, and test that resistance. 

Rachel first grows seedlings that can be used as root stock for these tests. The root stock serves as the bottom half of a graft.

When trees are found that have lingered in the landscape while others succumb, Rachel then grafts cuttings from these "suspiciously healthy" trees onto the prepared rootstock. 

Once the grafts heal,

the trees can be tested for resistance. Measured numbers of nematodes are applied to the buds, documented with colored tags, and the tree's resistance to the nematodes is then observed.

The nematodes are small enough to enter the buds between the overlapping bud scales. The tiny worm-like creatures inhabit the leaves all summer. Then in fall, exiting the leaves through the stomata--the openings on the undersides of the leaves through which the tree breathes--the nematodes transfer to the new buds to overwinter.

Each step in the process of testing resistance takes time and consistent attention. Rachel says some promising means of speeding research are in the works. Promisingly resistant trees can be propagated using only their leaves. The leaves are cut, a particular root hormone applied, then the leaf is stuck in soil medium to grow. This approach could potentially avoid the need to grow root stock, grafting, and the time it takes for grafts to heal.

As for treatments for the disease, she says soil applications of phosphite have mostly been experimented with on smaller trees because it's easier to study at these smaller scales. Similarly, using chemical sprays on the trees' foliage requires just the right timing, and a thorough coating, which makes larger trees very difficult and expensive to spray. They are experimenting with pruning to allow better air circulation and thereby reduce the moisture that the nematodes like.

ASH TREES

Research on resistant ash trees is a little farther along. Rachel showed me a grove of young green ash--protected by a deer fence--that are being tested for resistance to the Emerald Ash Borer (EAB), which spread through Ohio nine years before Beech Leaf Disease. This is the same introduced insect that has decimated Princeton's ash trees.

Rachel explained that the ash can defend themselves from the burrowing insects in three ways. One is a blockage that prevents entry. Another is to react by building a wall around an ash borer that has gotten in under the bark. Another is to somehow deprive the ash borer of nutrition, so that it becomes stunted. 

Sticky boards are used to monitor the presence of Emerald Ash Borers at the site.

When I told her that I had only seen one adult Emerald Ash Borer in my life, despite the hundreds of millions of ash trees killed, she pulled one off of the sticky board.

In this closeup, the Emerald Ash Borer is on the left; a native ash borer, far less destructive, is on the right. Though they are similar in appearance, it's the difference in behavior of the introduced species that has proven lethal.

She said that ash trees become vulnerable to EAB attack fairly early in life, certainly under ten feet high. While some of the ash trees being tested in the grove are dying due to EAB (perhaps these are the controls in the experiment), 

many are doing well, showing some degree of resistance. 

The green ash that have proven resistant to the EAB must not only be able to survive at low EAB levels, but also when the Emerald Ash Borer is present in high numbers. Rigorous testing helps avoid later marketing an ash variety that ultimately could prove vulnerable. 

This scar is evidence of an inner struggle by the ash to fend off the borer. The tree tries to build walls around the EAB larvae. 

Rachel described an autoimmune reaction, observed in black ash up north, in which the tree is too aggressive in blocking off passages, interfering with its own circulation. 

She talked about the physical aspects of doing research on trees and their pathogens. The wooly adelgid that plagues our hemlocks is hard to study, in part because it can be hard to apply the soft insect to test trees without squashing its soft frame, so they use its eggs. Nematodes are much easier to count and apply to branches.

Expanded greenhouses suggest Holden is expanding its efforts to nurture trees resistant to imported insects and disease. 

One bonus from my visit was that Rachel took an interest in our efforts in Princeton to bring back the native butternut (Juglans cinerea), and has put us in touch with someone studying the species.

If, as beech leaf disease takes its toll on beech trees in Princeton, we see some trees that "linger" and remain "suspiciously healthy," we'll want to notify Holden Arboretum, to aid their ongoing search for resistant trees. 

A thunderstorm prevented me from exploring the many gardens at Holden that day, including a treetop walk and tower. And then there's the Cleveland Botanical Garden closer into town, with which Holden recently merged. These are some good botanical destinations in Cleveland, with a mission that extends far beyond the city, and an engaging origin story.

Botanical Threats to Greenway Meadows--Neighbors Raise Concerns

Over the years I've sung the praises of Greenway Meadows, the park in western Princeton with an asphalt trail running down the middle of an expansive meadow. One post describes the beauty of broomsedge and cross country racers "testing inner nature in a natural setting." Another describes the exhilaration of riding a bike through the meadow on the way to an art exhibit opening at the Johnson Education Center.

More recent visits to Greenway Meadows have focused on the threats to the park posed by invasive species, and the need to act quickly, before the problem gets overwhelming. This past April, it was dramatic to see how lesser celandine is beginning to invade the meadow and the lawn.

Then this summer, Mimi Schwartz, who lives near Greenway Meadows, reached out about the park. She had noticed some attrition among trees along the Poetry Trail, and wondered if competition from the tangle of invasive shrubs growing beneath them might be a cause.

Another neighbor of the park, Jennifer Widner, is focusing on threats to the meadow--threats that surely go unnoticed by the many people who walk or jog down the asphalt trail, see a pleasing green, and look no closer.

Still apparent to all are the many native wildflowers in the field, among them common milkweed and wild bergamot. 

But on a visit to meet Jennifer, I was astonished to see the extent to which Sericea lespedeza (aka Chinese bushclover, Lespedeza cuneata) is beginning to dominate. This is an invasive species that has become a big problem in the southeast U.S. and the plains states, but was comfortingly rare in Princeton when I first moved here in 2003.

There are various species of native bushclover that can sometimes be found mingling with other wildflowers in a field, but Sericea lespedeza doesn't, as they say, "play well with others." It's behavior is more that of a bully.

In understanding the threat posed, it helps to have lived elsewhere in the country where Sericea lespedeza has had a longer track record of aggression. Living in Durham, North Carolina, near where the species was first introduced, in 1896, and is still widely used for erosion control despite many efforts to have it banned from seed mixes, I witnessed its capacity to displace native species. 

For those who say live and let live, and let it be, consider the ecological consequences if the meadow ultimately becomes a monoculture of an introduced plant with indigestible seeds and inedible foliage. Here's one fact sheet's description:

"Sericea contains a high concentration of tannic acid, which causes wild and domestic animals to avoid eating it, unless no other food is available. Animals then forage more intensely on native plants, which depletes the desirables and allows invasives to increase. Tannic acid leaches from sericea into surrounding soil, creating a toxic environment that prevents or slows the growth of other plants, giving it yet one more advantage."

Mimi and Jennifer have had some success engaging public officials on these threats, and the land managers at DR Greenway's headquarters nearby are potential allies. 

The project with the clearest solution is the freeing of trees from the invasive shrubs growing beneath. A greater challenge, requiring intervention and vigilance for years to come, will be stopping uber-invasives like lesser celandine and Sericea lespedeza. 

My experience, though, is that the work can get easier year to year, as steady effort makes the invasives less numerous. Down the road, or down the trail, as the threat recedes, those involved may get to experience that wonderful "walk in the park" feeling, where the botanical bullies have been sent packing, and require only a bit of ongoing vigilance and mild intervention to prevent their return.

For more information on Sericea lespedeza, try these: BlueRidge and Oklahoma State.

Related post:

Monocultures in the Making - 2013

A Followup on Beech and other Threatened Native Trees

Having grown despondent about the devastating toll beech leaf disease will likely take on Princeton's beech trees, I was surprised and somewhat heartened by what I found on the Princeton University campus. 

A friend from childhood was visiting me for the first time, and as I showed him and his wife around campus, I began to feel as if we had somehow been transported back to an era before introduced pathogens and insects had marginalized many of our native trees.

An American white ash towered over us, healthy as can be. American elms, too, grew as if Dutch elm disease had never arrived.

Unlike the ailing beech trees up along the Princeton ridge, the beeches on campus appeared unfazed by beech leaf disease.

I looked for signs that these trees had been injected with chemicals to ward off invasion, but found none. Surely, though, this improbable survival depends heavily on medicinal intervention.

Since I first alerting the community to the presence of beech leaf disease in Princeton in a blog post and letter to the editor, some articles have been written in the local press--one in TapInto Princeton and one in Town Topics. 

Both mention phosphites as the primary treatment available thus far. Applied to the soil, phosphites are a biostimulant that improves the tree's immune system response. I was skeptical that this could make much of a difference, but the University appears to be having good results. Grounds supervisor EJ May said they started seeing signs of beech leaf disease two years ago. Speaking generally about efforts to save native trees, he acknowledged some losses but some success as well.  

Another lead I had checked out was a kind of beech mentioned in a list of special campus trees.  Called a fern-leaved beech (Fagus sylvatica 'Asplenifolia')--a variety of European beech with unusual foliage--the university had gone to great lengths to save this extraordinary specimen during construction of the new chemistry building. The tree's described online as having "no serious insect or disease problems." Was the text written before beech leaf disease was discovered in 2012, or might this variety have some sort of natural immunity? I stopped by to take a look, and could find no visible symptoms. 

There remains, too, an uncertainty as to the origin of the nematode that causes beech leaf disease. It is most similar to a species found in Japan, but differs in some ways.