John Randall, The Nature Conservancy

Family: Tamaricaceae (Tamarisk Family)

Synonym(s):

Duration: Perennial

Habit: Tree

Listed by:
Invasive Plant Atlas of the US: 1
Federal Noxious Weed: 0
TDA Noxious Weed: 1
TPWD Prohibited Exotic Species: 0

Description: Salt cedar plants are spreading shrubs or small trees, 5-20 feet tall, with numerous slender branches and small, alternate, scale-like leaves. The pale pink to white flowers are small, perfect and regular, and arranged in spike-like racemes. The distinct petals and sepals occur in fours or fives. The fruit is a capsule.

Salt cedar (Tamarix) taxonomy is currently in a state of confusion. The number of species in the genus has fluctuated widely because members of the genus have few constant differentiating features, and taxonomists have disagreed over which features are most important. Eight species have been listed as introduced into the United States and Canada. These species can be effectively divided into two groups. Tamarix aphylla, an evergreen tree, does not sexually reproduce in this climate, so it is not seriously invasive. Deciduous, shrubby species, including T. pentandra, T. tetranda, T. gallica, T. chinensis, T. ramosissima, and T. parvifolia, as described by various authors, are more serious invasive threats (Rodman 1989). Some authors continue to distinguish many species, while others consider these shrubby plants as one variable species or hybridizing group best designated by the single name T. pentandra.

History: It is believed that nurserymen on the east coast made the first introduction of saltcedar to North America in 1823. Saltcedar appeared on the west coast, where it was apparently brought in from eastern nurseries. It was planted as an ornamental in the western United States, but by the 1870s, it was reported to have escaped cultivation. By the 1920s, saltcedar was becoming a serious problem, spreading rapidly through the watersheds of the southwest .

Biology & Spread: Saltcedar spreads vegetatively, by adventitious roots or submerged stems, and sexually. Each flower can produce thousands of tiny (1/25-inch diameter) seeds that are contained in a small capsule usually adorned with a tuft of hair that aids in wind dispersal. Seeds can also be dispersed by water. Seedlings require extended periods of soil saturation for establishment.

Ecological Threat: Saltcedars are fire-adapted species and have long tap roots that allow them to intercept deep water tables and interfere with natural aquatic systems. Saltcedar disrupts the structure and stability of native plant communities and degrades native wildlife habitat by outcompeting and replacing native plant species, monopolizing limited sources of moisture, and increasing the frequency, intensity and effect of fires and floods. Although it provides some shelter, the foliage and flowers of saltcedar provide little food value for native wildlife species that depend on nutrient-rich native plant resources.

US Habitat: Seedlings establish most frequently in soils that are seasonally saturated at the surface. It appears to grow best in saline soils (up to 15,000 ppm sodium), but saltcedar is adaptable and tolerant of a wide variety of environmental conditions.

Distribution

US Nativity: Introduced to U.S.

Native Origin: NE Africa & W. Asia (Alfred Rehder, Manual of Cultivated Trees and Shrubs: Hardy in North America, The MacMillan Co., New York (1967)); NatureServe Explorer

US States: AZ, CA, NV, PR, TX, UT

Resembles/Alternatives:

Management: Once Tamarisk is well established it is very difficult and expensive to control. Monitoring, prevention, early detection and local eradication are the most effective ways to control it.

Chemical & Mechanical- Sawing followed immediately with applying herbicide to the stump, is effective. Burning and manipulation of water levels to mimic natural flow regimes can favor native species over Tamarisk.

Cultural- Removing tamarisk must be followed with the development of a healthy native plant community that is weed resistant and encourages native wildlife.

Biological- In 2006, the National Park System has worked on releasing the northern Tamarisk beetle (Diorhabda carinulata) on federal lands including Dinosaur National Monument, San Andres National Wildlife Refuge, and White Sands Missile Range. After years of study, the USDA Agricultural Research Service found that the beetles eat only the tamarisk, and starve when no more is available, not eating any plants native to North America.

USE PESTICIDES WISELY: ALWAYS READ THE ENTIRE PESTICIDE LABEL CAREFULLY, FOLLOW ALL MIXING AND APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS AND WEAR ALL RECOMMENDED PERSONAL PROTECTIVE GEAR AND CLOTHING. CONTACT YOUR STATE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOR ANY ADDITIONAL PESTICIDE USE REQUIREMENTS, RESTRICTIONS OR RECOMMENDATIONS. MENTION OF PESTICIDE PRODUCTS ON THIS WEB SITE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE ENDORSEMENT OF ANY MATERIAL.

Listing Source

Texas Department ofAgriculture Noxious Plant List
Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Prohibited Exotic Species
Invaders Program
Federal Noxious Weed
Union of Concerned Scientists
United States Forest Service Southern Research Station

Text References

Baum, B.R. 1978. The genus Tamarix. The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, Jerusalem.

Brotherson, J.D. and V. Winkle. 1986. Habitat relationships of saltcedar (Tamarix ramosissima) in central Utah.

Brotherson, J.D. and D, Field. 1987. Tamarix: Impacts of a successful weed. Rangelands 9: 110-112.

Great Basin Naturalist. 46: 535-541 Carman, J.G. and J.D. Brotherson. 1982. Comparisons of sites infested and not infested with saltcedar and Russian olive. Weed Science 30:360-364.

DeLoach, C.J., M.J. Pitcairn, and D. Woods. 1996. Biological control of saltcedar in Southern California. In: Joe DiTomaso and Carl E. Bell, eds., Proceedings of the Saltcedar Management Workshop, Rancho Mirage, California, pp. 30-31.

Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist. 1961. Vascular Plants of the Pacific Northwest. Volume 3: Saxifragaceae to Ericaceae. University of Washington Press, Seattle.

Howe, W.H. and F.L. Knopf. 1991. On the imminent decline of Rio Grande cottonwoods in central New Mexico. Southwestern Naturalist 36(2):218-224.

Hudson, Laura E. 1999. Climatic and hydrologic effects on the establishment of Tamarix ramosissima in the cold desert of northern Wyoming (Bighorn Lake). M.S. Thesis, University of Montana, Missoula.

Jackson, N.E. 1996. Chemical control of saltcedar (Tamarix ramosissima). In: Joe DiTomaso and Carl E. Bell, eds., Proceedings of the Saltcedar Management Workshop, Rancho Mirage, California, pp. 21-27.

Rodman, J. 1989. Reflections on Tamarisk bashing. Proceedings of the First Annual Meeting of the Society for Ecological Restoration.

Sudbrock, A. 1993. Tamarisk control. I. Fighting Back: An overview of the invasion, and a low-impact way of fighting it. Restoration and Management Notes 11: 31-34.

The Nature Conservancy. Tamarisk: Element Stewardship Abstract. In: Wildland Weeds Management & Research Program, Weeds on the Web.

Data Source

APWG WeedUS Database

Last Updated: 2024-01-23 by ARMO