365 Urban Species. #166: Multiflora Rose

[urbpan]

Location: Arnold Arboretum, Boston.

Urban species #166: Multiflora rose Rosa multiflora

Early in June, exuberant sprays of small white five-petaled blossoms suddenly appear on prickly shrubs and climbing thorn bushes. A week later, the petals drop away, leaving tangles of green barbed wire entwined in fences and hedges. Seasons later, tiny red rose hips dot the places where the many flowers once were.
Multiflora rose is, like many urban species, a mixed curse and blessing. Its brief bright blossoms are a blessing to city people who appreciate seeing ugly weeds turn into showy wildflowers.

Moreover the roses are a blessing to the many birds that feed upon their fruit. Important among these are the mockingbird, who in large part owes its very presence in the northern states to the winter fruit of this alien rose. Introduced from Asia to provide hardy rootstock for ornamental roses, multiflora has naturalized, with birds providing the service of seed dispersal. The rapid-growing, thorny bushes were also planted in many places to act as living fences. This is where the curse part comes in. Multiflora invades and takes over scrubland, crowding out native species, and making large swaths of countryside unpassable. In the fight against invasive species, multiflora rose has the advantage of being able to fight back. This author, among countless others, has been repeatedly bloodied in the battle to control the dreaded roses.




Location: Olmsted Park, Boston.




Introduced semi-domestic insect pollinates introduced semi-domestic plant.

Next two pictures by cottonmanifesto (that's her, in the top picture, taking these two pictures:)

Comments

[ritaxis.livejournal.com]

I have a friend who lives in Revere and she's been telling me about these roses. I've always had a hard time visualizing them. Now I see their flowers are nearly identical to a named rose (Kathleen?) which is in our garden -- it's not invasive here (It's a little pushy in growth habit but it does not reproduce itself, and in fact is subjugated by the flowering quince and a different rose). I imagine our rose has the multiflora in its parentage, but it's not the same rose -- ours has a longer blooming season, and in fact is remontant. Still, I wonder what makes it invasive in one area and docile in another. Cold winters?

[droserary.livejournal.com]

It really depends on the species. The invasive mile-a-minute weed (Polygonum perfoliatum) requires a substantial period of cold in order for germination, so it has mainly been spreading throughout the Northern US states. Others seem to hate the cold and die back in the harsh Northern winters. Still others (like Ailanthus altissima--the Tree of Heaven) don't seem to care that much about cold winters, water availability, or even high levels of pollution. In other cases, it's not the weather at all, but the ecology of an area. While cordgrass Spartina alterniflora is native to East Coast tidal marshes, it's considered the single most dangerous plant in the West Coast because it's completely destroying the native tidal marsh ecosystems over here.

For a species to be invasive, it first must be introduced. After introduction, it must exhibit the ability to escape cultivation (or accidental introduction) and establish itself. Then it must be able to spread a substantial distance from its source. Generally, any non-native plant that is able to do this does some kind of ecological harm by outcompeting native species. (Consequently, if a species is unable to spread by itself, it's called established or naturalized.)

If you want a really good discussion of invasive species, the following paper is one of the best I've seen:

Duncan, Richard P., Blackburn, Tim M., and Sol, Daniel. (2003). The ecology of bird introductions. Annual Reviews of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 34: 71-98.

[ritaxis.livejournal.com]

Thank you. I've been thinking about that all day, how roses of all sorts do establish themselves in little spots but do not spread. It seems to me that one important clue is that roses hardly go dormant here. Some just don't: they bloom and produce new leaves all year, only slowing down a little. I do believe this is not just choice of variety: I believe I have seen mention of roses grown elsewhere that go dormant in those places and not here.

So I was thinking: what if that's crucial to the roses' spread? Like we have all these species here that don't germinate without fire. Do rose seeds have to be traumatized to germinate?

Multiflora rose

[(Anonymous)]

While "naturalized" has several different meanings, from an ecological standpoint it is most often used to indicate whether a species can survive on its own outside of cultivation. There are plenty of non-native, naturalized plants that spread on their own but are not considered invasive. I know, you probably think I am splitting hairs here. But the difference between invasive and naturalized would be the harm to the ecosystem, which admittedly can be hard to prove.

In addition to the morphological or physiological characteristics of the plant itself, association with humans typically plays a big part in its success as an invader. For example, as Urban Pantheist notes in the profile above, Multiflora rose was extensively planted, in hedgerows and also along highways. There aren't too many other roses you see planted in such profusion (Rosa rugosa but that is another story). Along with the higher-than-average fruit production, due to the large clusters of flowers, that's a pretty big advantage.

I think it is also true that many garden roses are hybrids and produce very few seeds.

Re: Multiflora rose

[(Anonymous)]

Whoops, sorry - not a LiveJournal user so I always forget it posts as Anon...above post was written by Jenn (Invasive Species Weblog)

Re: Multiflora rose

[g-gucci-purse.livejournal.com]

Great stuff!

Re: Multiflora rose

[droserary.livejournal.com]

(gosh, ok, third time's a charm. I really do wish there was an "edit" button on the comments section!)

You point out an interesting difference in terms and wording, there. But I'd have to disagree. All of the research I've done suggests that ecological harm is not a requirement in order for a species to be called invasive. There's a very interesting dichotomous diagram in the paper I noted above.

Something like:

Native species --> Transport (outside native range)?
No --> Not considered. Yes --> Transported species.

Transported species --> Introduction?
No --> Cage, pet or captive species.
Yes (release or escape) --> Introduced species.

Introduced species --> Establishment?
No --> Failed introduction. Yes --> Established or naturalized species.

Naturalized species --> Spread?
No --> Just naturalized/established. Yes --> Invasive species.


While I agree that there may exist some naturalized species that have the capability to spread, I would still tend to call them invasive, regardless of whether or not they significantly harm native (or in some cases, non-native) ecosystems. It's much more difficult to determine ecological harm done than it is to determine whether or not the plant/animal is spreading beyond its initial established range. Then again, I'm a splitter. I like simple demarcations.

I'd like to respond to one thing in particular that you said: There are plenty of non-native, naturalized plants that spread on their own but are not considered invasive.

(Edit note: I do not intend to sound hostile. I'm just in a rush and I may come off as short).
Perhaps there are those (horticulturists?) that may not consider these non-native, naturalized species that spread "invasive," but I do believe ecological studies would consider such species to be invasive. Granted, the ones that cause harm to native ecosystems get the most press, leading us to believe that it may be a requirement for the label. All the literature I've read maintains that invasive species have the capability to and may cause ecological harm, but they don't have to in order to be called invasive. And if you're thinking more along the lines of government agencies declaring what is/is not invasive by placing it on a list, I discovered in my research of one of the worst invaders -- Ailanthus altissima that only a handful of states bothered to list it at all, leading me to wonder exactly what is the fate of our natural landscape if government agencies are turning a blind eye to these glaring problems.

Ah, yes, success as an invader. Again, a great resource and review of the topic can be found in that paper I cited above (dealing with birds, but I got a great deal of information out of it anyway, not being a bird person myself). There are many factors by which invasive species can expect to gain success rate percentage. Association with human environment is one. But even the sun- and disturbed land-loving species have been found deep in forests away from the edge effect. Other factors that can effect introduction and invasion success is number of introduction attempts, proximity in time and space of introduction attemps, size of foundation population, climate/environmental matching (how closely matched is the invasive range to the native range?), and finally species that are native to a range that has a highly variable abiotic environment tend to fare better in non-native ranges because they're ecologically "ready for anything." Establishment is almost always favored in areas where natural enemy population are low, resources are highly available, and the environment can be characterized as "benign."

Well, that's enough from me for now. I've blathered on long enough. Let me know if I've misinterpreted anything you've said. And let's keep the discussion going :-) I look forward to everything you (or anyone else) has to add on this matter.

[browntreesnake.livejournal.com]

I use the Global Invasive Species Programme (http://www.gisp.org)'s definitions:

Alien/exotic species: any species that is not native to a specific ecosystem.

Invasive alien species: an lien species whose introduction does or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human health.

Factors that can make a "good" invader include rapid growth rate great dispersal capabilities, larg reproductive output, and broad environmental tolerance.

[stephanietberry.livejournal.com]

A (multiflora) rose by any other name would still cut you to pieces and take over any forest borderland, meadow, or yard that it could.

Have a lot of problems with this!

[(Anonymous)]

There was one in my mother's back yard that nearly took over the entire yard! It had to be taken out when a neighbor's leaf fire got out of control and the plant was damaged. We had to have it done by a professional; the main tap root was more than a foot in diameter, and the vines had rooted themselves and started new plants. I have the same problem at my house. But it does provide shelter for the birds and rabbits, so I'll wait until fall, when the vines go bare, to remove it. It's collapsing in on itself, and the birds won't nest in it anymore.

[bothwill.livejournal.com]

You have a special way of talking about flowers, it's obvious you're have a really passion for them and understand their beauty more than most people do. As for me, nothing compare with a red rose (http://olericulture.org/red-roses.php), that's the ultimate flower in my vision.