More info for the terms: cover, fire management, forbs, formation, fresh, invasive species, litter, natural, prescribed fire, rhizome, shrubs
Impacts: Most predictions and descriptions of common tansy's impacts on water resources, vegetation, and wildlife are anecdotal (e.g. [1,40,52,85,89]). Although many suggest that impacts are likely because of common tansy's sometimes aggressive establishment and growth, detailed study and documentation are lacking. However, in one study [18], researchers found that common tansy ecotypes from Canada grew larger and produced more flowers than ecotypes from Norway, suggesting that common tansy may have greater growth and reproductive potential in its nonnative habitats. In another study [13], common tansy dominated other forbs after seeding and successfully invaded plots with established grasses.
General: Reviews and other technical publications often report that dense common tansy populations may negatively impact water flow, native vegetation, and wildlife habitat, although documentation of these impacts is typically lacking. A review reports that dense common tansy patches can restrict water flow along irrigation ditches and streams in Alaska [1]. In a gardening guide, Sperka [85] reports that in Wisconsin she has "seen acres taken over" by common tansy. According to fact sheets and other technical reports, thick common tansy clumps and dense populations may crowd out other forbs, grasses, and shrubs, potentially reducing the forage value of pasture or rangelands, decreasing wildlife habitat, and reducing species diversity [40,52,89]. Western weed scientists estimated that common tansy infestations lead to an average 50% reduction in carrying capacity on public lands [95]. It was not clear whether this estimation was specific to cattle, all livestock, or livestock and wildlife. It is important to note that some report heavy grazing of common tansy by domestic sheep; however, supplemental feed may be necessary. For more information, see Biological control.
Several sources have predicted common tansy's potential to invade certain areas and habitat based on general information on reproduction, establishment, growth, and dispersal potential. Based on common tansy's climatic tolerances, biological traits, and invasiveness in other natural areas, researchers expected Canada's Riding Mountain National Park was at high risk for establishment and proliferation of common tansy, especially if there were persistent disturbances in the park [68]. Based on occurrence and distribution data and an analysis of factors influencing plant invasions, researchers predicted that given a disturbance, common tansy could grow in any forest type in the Cascade, Sierran Steppe, and Northern, Southern, and Middle Rocky Mountain ecoregions in the northwestern. In riparian areas in the same region, disturbances may not be required for common tansy establishment and growth [69].
Studies: Plant size and reproductive capacity were greater for common tansy ecotypes in Canada than for ecotypes in Norway. Common tansy seed collected from 3 Norwegian ecotypes and 2 Canadian ecotypes was grown in a greenhouse, and when seedlings were about 4 inches (10 cm) tall, they were planted in June in an experimental field in Hedmark, Norway. By September, Canadian ecotypes were significantly taller and produced significantly more biomass (P<0.05) than Norwegian ecotypes. Proportion of dry matter that was stems, leaves, and flowers was not significantly different between ecotypes, but the dry weight of stems and flowers was generally greater for Canadian than Norwegian ecotypes [18].
During a field experiment conducted in Silwood Park in Ascot, England, within 7 years common tansy dominated 11 of 18 plots where it was seeded with up to 79 other herbaceous species. Common tansy also successfully invaded nearby plots seeded with up to 4 perennial grass species. Researchers suggested that a variety of common tansy growth characteristics made it competitive [13]:
- leaves often remained green through the winter
- shoot growth was rapid by early spring
- common tansy canopies produced dense shade
- "bulky" roots and rhizomes monopolized underground space soon after establishment
Allelopathy: Based on controlled studies conducted on seed collected from fields near Keszthely, Hungary, common tansy may affect germination of associated plant species but may not affect plant growth. Common tansy extracts did not affect germination of winter wheat but reduced soybean, corn, and sunflower germination by 20%, 30%, and 96%, respectively. Common tansy extracts rarely reduced the fresh or dry weight of crop plants and often stimulated crop growth [6].
Control: Preventing establishment and spread of common tansy is likely the most cost-effective control method [11,52]. If control methods are necessary, the potential for the establishment of other invasive species must be considered and their success mitigated [8]. Monitoring in control areas is necessary to eliminate common tansy sprouts or seedlings [41]. A photo of common tansy seedlings and descriptions of seedling characteristics are provided by Royer and Dickinson [83]. As with most biotic invasions, common tansy control is likely most effective when it employs a long-term, ecosystem-wide strategy rather than a tactical approach focused on battling individual invaders [56].
Prevention: Several practices may limit common tansy establishment and spread. These include: maintenance of desired vegetation [11,56,84], limiting grazing to less than 60% defoliation in areas with common tansy, holding livestock for 2 weeks after grazing in infested areas, minimizing disturbances in areas with and without common tansy, and washing mowing or tilling equipment [52,89]. Although common tansy is rarely a problem in crop fields, it is often common along field margins, and rhizome pieces may be spread within and between fields. It is recommended that equipment be cleaned after use in fields with common tansy [40]. Managing to maintain the integrity of native plant communities and limiting those factors that increase an ecosystem's invasibility are likely to be more effective than managing solely to control the invader [33].
Another important measure in preventing common tansy establishment and spread should include making seed and plants unavailable for purchase. As of 1990, common tansy seed was available for purchase from US plant nurseries [55].
Weed prevention and control can be incorporated into many types of management plans, including those for logging and site preparation, grazing allotments, recreation management, research projects, road building and maintenance, and fire management [93]. See the Guide to noxious weed prevention practices [93] for specific guidelines in preventing the spread of weed seeds and propagules under different management conditions.
Fire: For information on the use of prescribed fire to control this species, see Fire Management Considerations and Integrated management.
Physical or mechanical control: Hand-pulling small common tansy populations and mowing larger populations prior to flower and seed development are potentially useful control methods; however, both may be more effective when paired with seeding of desired species, maintenance of associated established vegetation, and/or other control methods [11,40,52]. Because common tansy regenerates from rhizome fragments, cultivation may increase population size [102].
Persistent hand-pulling may be effective in controlling small populations if most or all rhizomes are removed. Seeding areas disturbed by hand-pulling with desired species may decrease the potential for reestablishment [40]. Common tansy can cause dermatitis [30], so precautions should be taken when hand-pulling.
Several sources indicate that common tansy populations may be controlled through mowing. Lackschewitz [49] reported that in Montana common tansy became "less common" with the implementation of right-of-way mowing. Mowing operations should be timed to prevent common tansy flowering or seed set, and mowing heights should be set at a height that limits damage to native and other desirable species [40,52]. Mowing common tansy populations after seed set may increase seed and population spread [40]. In northern Switzerland, common tansy cover was 70% in mowed wildflower strips and 59% in strips left fallow. Mowing occurred in late winter [47] and likely increased the dispersal distance of the previous season's fallen and still attached seed.
Reproductive potential of common tansy was decreased by single high-intensity defoliation and muliple low-intensity defoliation events in roadside and riparian habitats near George Lake, Alberta. Flower head production was significantly lower for plants with 100% of leaves removed than for control plants (P<0.05). Effects of 50% leaf removal, however, were not significant. Defoliation when flower buds were fully formed did not disrupt flower formation. The researcher suggested that mowing may be most effective before flower bud development but may need to be repeated when 50% or more of flowers have bloomed to prevent late flower head development [101].
Biological control: There have been no insect, disease, or fungal biocontrols released for common tansy [101], but potential biocontrol insects have been identified and are being studied [40]. Domestic sheep and goats, however, may be useful biolgical control agents [19]. Cattle typically avoid common tansy; by grazing associated grasses and other vegetation, they may increase the area available for common tansy establishment and/or spread via rhizome growth [52].
Domestic sheep grazing in dense common tansy patches can release grasses by allowing light through the canopies. In Montana, a researcher used sheep to graze common tansy and suggested that "if we can increase the number of sheep in that community then we will never have to worry about tansy again" [19]. Common tansy biomass and spread were reduced by sheep grazing on 2 ranches in Lemhi County, Idaho. In enclosures with dense common tansy populations, repeated sheep grazing was monitored. Enclosures were grazed first in the spring and again when immature flower heads were forming. Common tansy biomass decreased after the first few grazing visits, and the researchers noted that spread of common tansy into adjacent pastures also decreased. When plants were maintained in a vegetative state by sheep, cattle also fed on common tansy plants. During this study, sheep were supplied lots of water to flush the highly fibrous common tansy plant material through their digestive systems. Since common tansy provides only 4% crude protein, the researcher noted that dietary supplements may also be necessary [59].
In a sheep-grazed pasture in Alberta, the shoot number for established common tansy plants steadily and significantly decreased. These decreases did not occur on the cattle-grazed pasture. In the sheep pasture, however, common tansy seedling densities were high. The researcher suggested that decreased litter and increased bare ground on sheep-grazed pasture facilitated the establishment of common tansy seedlings [101].
Chemical control: While several sources provide information on herbicides that may be useful in controlling common tansy [20,52], herbicide use may be restricted along ditch banks or in other riparian habitats and may not be the best option in areas where associated desirable species may be harmed [19].
If herbicide use is considered the best option or is used in conjunction with other control methods, applications should be timed to maximize herbicide effectiveness. Studies in Alberta tracked patterns in the allocation of carbohydrates to roots and rhizomes and suggested that in ungrazed habitats, herbicide applications before flower heads bloom should be most effective [101].
Herbicides may be effective in gaining initial control of a new invasion or a severe infestation, but rarely do they provide complete or long-term weed management [10]. See the Weed Control Methods Handbook [90] for considerations on the use of herbicides in natural areas and detailed information on specific chemicals.
Integrated management: Utilizing multiple control strategies may provide the most successful and long-term control of common tansy. Jacobs [40] suggests that integrated management options should be determined by invasion stage. For small populations or at the early stage of invasion, he suggests herbicide applications, then cultural practices to encourage growth of native plants. For large-scale infestations or large populations, prioritized treatments are recommended. The first priority should be treatment and control of satellite populations to decrease spread rates. Next, parent populations should be treated with a combination of fire, mowing, grazing and/or herbicides. Populations should be monitored to evaluate treatment effectiveness, locate regenerating populations, and plan future treatments [40]. The use of fire with other control methods is discussed more in Fire Management Considerations.