Articles on this page are available in 1 other language: Spanish (1) (learn more)

Overview

Brief Summary

New York State Invasive Species Information

Origin and Introduction:

Lonicera tatarica is native to Central Asia and Southern Russia and is believed to have been introduced into North America for ornamental purposes as early as the 1750s.  Lonicera japonica, – a native of China, Japan and Korea – was introduced for horticultural purposes in 1806 on Long Island; it was widely distributed as a garden plant through the early-1900s when it was finally recognized as a weed.  Lonicera maackii, also native to China, Japan and Korea, was introduced as seeds to arboreta throughout the U.S. in the late-1800s to determine whether the plant would grow in North America. This species of honeysuckle was utilized as a soil stabilization and wildlife planning until the mid-1980s and is still available for sale on-line.  Lonicera morrowii, a native of Japan, was imported to Massachusetts in the 1860s and was later released as an ornamental. All four species have escaped cultivation and are easily spread by birds.

Identification:

Lonicera morrowii,  Lonicera tatarica, and  Lonicera maackii, are perennial shrubs;  Lonicera japonica is a perennial woody vine (although its leaves can remain green throughout mild winters). The shrub forms range from 6 to 15 feet in height, while vines can reach 30 feet in length. The egg-shaped leaves range from 1 to 3 inches in length and are arranged oppositely along stems. Invasive honeysuckles begin flowering from May to June and bear small (less than 1 inch long), very fragrant tubular flowers ranging from creamy white through various shades of pink to crimson. Lonicera morrowii and Lonicera tatarica produce ¼ inch red berries from mid-summer through early-fall; Lonicera maackii’s dark-red berries don’t ripen until late-fall; Lonicera japonica produces dark-purple or black berries in the fall. Stems of all four are hollow.

Impacts:  

All three species can form very dense populations that can outcompete and suppress the growth of native plant species. These dense stands suppress the growth of other native species. Lonicera maackii leafs out very early in spring, giving it a competitive advantage over native plants. Lonicera japonica leaves are semi-evergreen allowing the plant to grow longer into the winter and giving it a competitive advantage over native vegetation. It shades out understory growth preventing the success of native understory plants and tree seedlings. Its vigorous vine growth covers native trees; the weight of the vine growth can bring down weak trees. By decreasing light availability to the understory, these invasive honeysuckles can alter habitats by depleting soil moisture and nutrients. The invasive honeysuckle berries do not contain the amount of fat and nutrients present in native honeysuckle berries; eating large amounts of the less nutritious invasive berries rather than native berries can have negative impacts on migrating.

Prevention and Control:

Because these plants spread rapidly via birds eating seeds, control should be started in late-summer or early-fall before seeds are ready to be dispersed. In early stages of invasion, or in cases where populations are at low levels, hand removal of honeysuckle seedlings or young plants is a viable option when repeated annually. Systemic herbicides can be utilized in cases of heavy infestation. Specific state rules should be followed and the appropriate (low environment impact, legally labeled for control of these plants) herbicides should be used. For invasive honeysuckles growing in open habitats, prescribed burning may be an effective control alternative.

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial Share Alike 3.0 (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0)

© The New York Invasive Species Clearinghouse, Cornell University Cooperative Extension

Supplier: Tracy Barbaro

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

History in the United States

Exotic bush honeysuckles have been introduced for use as ornamentals, for wildlife cover and for soil erosion control.

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial Share Alike 3.0 (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0)

U.S. National Park Service Weeds Gone Wild website

Source: U.S. National Park Service

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

History in the United States

Amur honeysuckle was imported as ornamental into New York in 1898 through the New York Botanical Garden. It has been widely planted for wildlife cover and soil erosion control but long ago escaped from plantings and began reproducing on its own and spreading into natural areas. Other invasive exotic shrub honeysuckles include fragrant (L. fragrantissima), Standish’s (L. standishii), Morrow’s (L. morrowii), Tartarian (L. tatarica), and Bell’s (L. x bella), a hybrid between Tartarian and Morrow’s. These are less common in our area.

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Comprehensive Description

Comments

This is the most aggressive honeysuckle shrub in the state of Illinois. Amur Honeysuckle can be distinguished from similar honeysuckle shrubs by its larger size, leaves with elongated tips, and nearly sessile flowers and berries.
Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© John Hilty

Source: Illinois Wildflowers

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Description

This introduced shrub is up to 20' tall, 15' across, and abundantly branched. The bark of older branches is gray with flat scaly ridges and narrow grooves. Young branches and twigs are more brown, smooth-textured, and pubescent. Along the latter, pairs of opposite leaves occur. The leaf blades are 2–3½" long and 1–1½" across; they are lanceolate-ovate to ovate, smooth along the margins, and often their tips are slender and elongated. Upper surfaces of the blades are medium green and hairless, while their lower surfaces are pale green and hairless to slightly pubescent. The slender petioles are about ¼" long, light green, and slightly pubescent.
Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© John Hilty

Source: Illinois Wildflowers

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Distribution

Range and Habitat in Illinois

Amur Honeysuckle is well-established in the northeast, east-central, and southern sections of Illinois (see Distribution Map). This shrub undoubtedly occurs in other areas of the state, and it is becoming more common, particularly around cities. It is native to central and eastern Asia. Habitats include mesic deciduous woodlands, savannas and thickets, woodland edges, power-line clearances in wooded areas, fence rows, edges of yards, and semi-shaded waste areas. This shrub can invade both disturbed areas and high quality natural areas. In wooded and semi-wooded areas, it displaces native shrubs and destroys the understory of herbaceous wildflowers.
Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© John Hilty

Source: Illinois Wildflowers

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

National Distribution

Canada

Origin: Exotic

Regularity: Regularly occurring

Currently: Unknown/Undetermined

Confidence: Confident

United States

Origin: Exotic

Regularity: Regularly occurring

Currently: Unknown/Undetermined

Confidence: Confident

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Global Range: Lonicera maackii is native to northeastern Asia (Luken and Mattimiro, 1991) including China, Manchuria, Korea, and, less commonly, Japan (Batcher and Stiles, 2000).

(In North America, this species has escaped from cultivation in at least 25 states east of the Rocky Mountains (Batcher and Stiles, 2000; Hutchinson et al., 1998; Luken and Thieret, 1996) and is considered a widespread invasive almost everywhere it occurs.)

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Winter honeysuckle was introduced to the U.S. from eastern China in 1845 [36,74,191]. It is distributed in the eastern U.S. from New York, west to Ohio and south to Alabama and Georgia. It is not reported in New Jersey and Delaware, but does occur in Louisiana, Texas, and Utah [36,83,133,161,182]. According to Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation [182] winter honeysuckle occurs in the Piedmont region of that state.

Amur honeysuckle is native to central and northeastern China, Manchuria, the Amur and Ussuri river valleys, Korea, and isolated parts of Japan [98,106]. It was first introduced into the U.S. in 1897/98 [74,106], and by 1931 was available from at least 8 commercial nurseries [106]. For a thorough review of the historical cultivation and dissemination of Amur honeysuckle, from its apparent origins in China to its cultivation in Russia, Europe, and North America, see Luken and Thieret [106].

Amur honeysuckle is distributed in the eastern U.S. from Massachusetts west to North Dakota and south to Texas. However, there are no specific reports of occurrence in Minnesota, South Dakota, or Florida [18,36,43,54,59,83,99,100,122,171,178,186,186]. Amur honeysuckle also occurs in Idaho [135] and southern Ontario [131]. Lorenz and others [95] indicate Amur honeysuckle is climatically adapted to all but the coldest areas in this range, such as northern Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont, the Adirondack area of New York, and southwestern portions of Michigan's Upper Peninsula (see Site Characteristics). According to Sharp and Belcher [150] the Amur honeysuckle cultivar 'Rem-Red' is "climatically adapted" from Massachusetts to South Carolina and west to Missouri. Based on a survey of herbaria in eastern North America, Trisel [168] described distribution of "naturalized" Amur honeysuckle from "New Hampshire south to Augusta, Georgia, west to Greenville, Mississippi and Tulsa, Oklahoma, north to Ames, Iowa, and Madison, Wisconsin." Rolfsmeier and others [137] reported Amur honeysuckle growing outside cultivation in Nebraska and Kansas, but indicate it may not be spreading rapidly in this area. According to Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation [182], Amur honeysuckle occurs in the Mountain and Piedmont regions of that state.

Morrow's honeysuckle is native to Japan [54,161,186], and occurs throughout the Japanese archipelago (Talewaki 1969 as cited in [7]). According to Hidayati and others [74] it was introduced to the U.S. from Japan in 1875. Morrow's honeysuckle is distributed in the eastern U.S. from Maine west to Minnesota and south to Arkansas, Tennessee, and the Carolinas, as well as in Alabama [18,44,68,76,83,108,122,149,171,172,178,186,197]. It also occurs in Colorado and Wyoming [83,135,189,190], and in the Canadian provinces of New Brunswick, Quebec, Ontario, and Saskatchewan [83]. According to Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation [182] Morrow's honeysuckle occurs in the Mountain and Piedmont regions of that state.

Most sources indicate Tatarian honeysuckle is native to eastern Europe and adjacent Asia [18,54,59,92,149,157,186,191], although according to Strausbaugh and Core [161] it was introduced from western Asia. In the U.S., Tatarian honeysuckle is reported from Maine south to Virginia and west to Washington, Oregon and California, but not in Missouri or Nevada [13,18,20,35,38,45,59,68,69,83,83,92,93,108,122,135,149,157,161,178,186,190,191,198]. It is also reported in Georgia [111], Alaska [83] and in Canada from Nova Scotia west to Alberta [83,121]. Lorenz and others [95] indicate Tatarian honeysuckle is climatically adapted throughout the northeastern U.S., from Maine south to Virginia and west to Kentucky, Ohio, and Michigan (see Site Characteristics). According to Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation [182], Tatarian honeysuckle occurs in the Mountain and Piedmont regions of that state.

European fly honeysuckle was introduced from Eurasia [18,54,149,186]. European fly honeysuckle is distributed in the eastern U.S. from Maine west to Wisconsin, and south to Virginia, but it is not reported in West Virginia or Kentucky [18,83,122,149,178]. It is also reported in Oregon, and in the Canadian provinces of New Brunswick, Quebec, and Ontario [83].

Since it appears the native ranges of Morrow's honeysuckle and Tatarian honeysuckle do not overlap, Bell's honeysuckle probably only occurs outside cultivation in North America [68]. According to a review by Barnes [7], initial reports of Bell's honeysuckle in North America date to around the late 1800s to early 1900s, while its parent species, Tatarian honeysuckle and Morrow's honeysuckle, were introduced sometime in the mid-1700s and mid-1800s, respectively. Determining the distribution of Bell's honeysuckle is especially problematic, since it is a hybrid of 2 nonnative parent species and is often difficult to identify [8] (see Taxonomy). A distribution map provided by Barnes and Cottam [8] shows the U.S. distribution of Bell's honeysuckle from Maine west to northeastern Montana, most of the Dakotas, eastern Nebraska and northeastern Kansas, and south to North Carolina, Tennessee, and northern Missouri. There are also records of its occurrence in Colorado east of the continental divide [190], in South Carolina and Wyoming [83,135], and in Washington [135]. In Canada, Barnes and Cottam [8] indicate that Bell's honeysuckle occurs in far southern Quebec and adjacent eastern Ontario, and while less common, is also established in southwestern Manitoba, southern Saskatchewan, and southeastern Alberta. There is also a record of its occurrence in New Brunswick [83]. According to Barnes [7], Bell's honeysuckle is most widespread in New England and around the southern Great Lakes.

USDA Plants database provides state distribution maps of bush honeysuckles, although additional information may have led to more extensive descriptions of distribution in this review.

The following biogeographic classification systems demonstrate where bush honeysuckles could potentially be found based on floras and other literature, herbarium samples, and confirmed observations. Precise distribution information is unavailable. Therefore, these lists are speculative and may be imprecise.

  • 100. Luken, James O. 1990. Forest and pasture communities respond differently to cutting of exotic Amur honeysuckle. Restoration & Management Notes. 8(2): 122-123. [13757]
  • 106. Luken, James O.; Thieret, John W. 1996. Amur honeysuckle, its fall from grace. Bioscience. 46(1): 18-24. [26048]
  • 108. Maine Department of Conservation, Natural Areas Program. 2004. Maine invasive plant fact sheet: Shrubby honeysuckles. Augusta, ME: Maine Natural Areas Program. 2 p. [51760]
  • 111. McRae, W. Alan. 1980. Unusual bobwhite foods on abandoned piedmont farmlands. Georgia Journal of Science. 38: 49-54. [41041]
  • 121. Moffatt, S. F.; McLachlan, S. M. 2004. Understorey indicators of disturbance for riparian forests along an urban-rural gradient in Manitoba. Ecological Indicators. 4: 1-16. [51154]
  • 122. Mohlenbrock, Robert H.; Ladd, Douglas M.. 1978. Distribution of Illinois vascular plants. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press at Carbondale and Edwardsville. 282 p. [17554]
  • 13. Battaglia, James. 1989. Control of honeysuckle, garlic mustard, black swallowwort and white sweet clover: information requested (New York). Restoration and Management Notes. 7(1): 45. [8058]
  • 131. Pringle, James S. 1973. Lonicera maackii (Caprifoliaceae) adventive in Ontario. The Canadian Field-Naturalist. 87: 54-55. [47289]
  • 133. 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]
  • 135. Rice, Peter M. 2001. INVADERS Database System, [Online]. Missoula, MT: University of Montana, Division of Biological Sciences (Producer). Available: http://invader.dbs.umt.edu/ [2004, March 25]. [38172]
  • 137. Rolfsmeier, Steven B.; Steinauer, Robert F.; Sutherland, David M. 1999. New floristic records for Nebraska--5. Transactions, Nebraska Academy of Sciences. 25: 15-22. [37459]
  • 149. Seymour, Frank Conkling. 1982. The flora of New England. 2d ed. Phytologia Memoirs 5. Plainfield, NJ: Harold N. Moldenke and Alma L. Moldenke. 611 p. [7604]
  • 150. Sharp, W. Curtis; Belcher, Cluster R. 1981. `Rem-Red' Amur honeysuckle--a multipurpose landscape shrub. American Nurseryman. 153(12): 7, 94-96. [47716]
  • 157. Stephens, H. A. 1973. Woody plants of the North Central Plains. Lawrence, KS: The University Press of Kansas. 530 p. [3804]
  • 161. Strausbaugh, P. D.; Core, Earl L. 1977. Flora of West Virginia. 2nd ed. Morgantown, WV: Seneca Books, Inc. 1079 p. [23213]
  • 168. Trisel, Donald E. 1997. The invasive shrub, Lonicera maackii (Rupr.) Herder (Caprifoliaceae): factors contributing to its success and its effect on native species. Oxford, OH: Miami University. 199 p. Dissertation. [48165]
  • 171. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Region. 2001. Regional invasive exotic plant species list. Regional Forester's list and ranking structure: invasive exotic plant species of management concern, [Online]. In: Invasive plants of southern states list. Southeast Exotic Pest Plant Council (Producer). Available: http://www.se-eppc.org/fslist.cfm [2003, August 25]. [44944]
  • 172. U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Resource Conservation Service. 2005. PLANTS database (2004), [Online]. Available: http://plants.usda.gov/. [34262]
  • 178. University of Wisconsin-Madison. 1999. Wisflora - Vascular plant species, [Online]. In: Wisconsin Botanical Information System. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin, State Herbarium (Producer). Available: http://www.botany.wisc.edu/wisflora/ [2005, January 29]. [51106]
  • 18. Braun, E. Lucy. 1961. The woody plants of Ohio. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press. 362 p. [12914]
  • 182. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage. 2003. Invasive alien plant species of Virginia, [Online]. Available: http://www.dcr.state.va.us/dnh/invlist.pdf [2003, August 25]. [44942]
  • 186. Voss, Edward G. 1996. Michigan flora. Part III: Dicots (Pyrolaceae--Compositae). Cranbrook Institute of Science Bulletin 61/University of Michigan Herbarium. Ann Arbor, MI: The Regents of the University of Michigan. 622 p. [30401]
  • 189. Weber, William A. 1987. Colorado flora: western slope. Boulder, CO: Colorado Associated University Press. 530 p. [7706]
  • 190. Weber, William A.; Wittmann, Ronald C. 1996. Colorado flora: eastern slope. 2nd ed. Niwot, CO: University Press of Colorado. 524 p. [27572]
  • 191. Welsh, Stanley L.; Atwood, N. Duane; Goodrich, Sherel; Higgins, Larry C., eds. 1987. A Utah flora. The Great Basin Naturalist Memoir No. 9. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University. 894 p. [2944]
  • 197. Wofford, B. Eugene. 1989. Guide to the vascular plants of the Blue Ridge. Athens, GA: The University of Georgia Press. 384 p. [12908]
  • 198. Woods, Kerry D. 1993. Effects of invasion by Lonicera tatarica L. on herbs and tree seedlings in four New England forests. The American Midland Naturalist. 130(1): 62-74. [21810]
  • 20. Brown, William T.; Krasny, Marianne E.; Schoch, Nina. 2001. Volunteer monitoring of nonindigenous invasive plant species in the Adirondack Park, New York, USA. Natural Areas Journal. 21(2): 189-196. [48347]
  • 35. Dieter, Charles D.; McCabe, Thomas R. 1989. Factors influencing beaver lodge-site selection on a prairie river. The American Midland Naturalist. 122: 408-411. [9273]
  • 36. Diggs, George M., Jr.; Lipscomb, Barney L.; O'Kennon, Robert J. 1999. Illustrated flora of north-central Texas. Sida Botanical Miscellany No. 16. Fort Worth, TX: Botanical Research Institute of Texas. 1626 p. [35698]
  • 38. Dorn, Robert D. 1984. Vascular plants of Montana. Cheyenne, WY: Mountain West Publishing. 276 p. [819]
  • 43. Fewless, Gary. 2004. Lonicera maackii (Rupr.) Maxim.--Amur honeysuckle, [Online]. In: Invasive plants of Wisconsin. Green Bay, WI: University of Wisconsin, Cofrin Center for Biodiversity (Producer). Available: http://www.uwgb.edu/biodiversity/herbarium/invasive_species/lonmaa01.htm [2004, September 1]. [51731]
  • 44. Fewless, Gary. 2004. Lonicera morrowii A. Gray--Asian fly honeysuckle, [Online]. In: Invasive plants of Wisconsin. Green Bay, WI: University of Wisconsin, Cofrin Center for Biodiversity (Producer). Available: http://www.uwgb.edu/biodiversity/herbarium/invasive_species/lonmor01.htm [2004, September 1]. [51709]
  • 45. Fewless, Gary. 2004. Lonicera tatarica L.--Tatarian honeysuckle, [Online]. In: Invasive plants of Wisconsin. Green Bay, WI: University of Wisconsin, Cofrin Center for Biodiversity (Producer). Available: http://www.uwgb.edu/biodiversity/herbarium/invasive_species/lontat01.htm [2004, September 1]. [51729]
  • 54. 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]
  • 59. Great Plains Flora Association. 1986. Flora of the Great Plains. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. 1392 p. [1603]
  • 68. Hauser, Edward J. P. 1966. The natural occurrence of a hybrid honeysuckle (Lonicera X bella) in Ohio and Michigan. The Michigan Botanist. 5: 211-217. [47292]
  • 69. Hegstad, Glen D. 1992. Vegetation analysis of a native hillside prairie within an oak woodland in Sioux County, Iowa. In: Smith, Daryl D.; Jacobs, Carol A., eds. Recapturing a vanishing heritage: Proceedings, 12th North American prairie conference; 1990 August 5-9; Cedar Falls, IA. Cedar Falls, IA: University of Northern Iowa: 89-94. [24721]
  • 7. Barnes, William J. 1972. The autecology of the Lonicera X bella complex. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin. 169 p. Dissertation. [48166]
  • 74. Hidayati, Siti N.; Baskin, Jerry M.; Baskin, Carol C. 2000. Dormancy-breaking and germination requirements of seeds of four Lonicera species (Caprifoliaceae) with underdeveloped spatulate embryos. Seed Science Research. 10: 459-469. [41725]
  • 76. Howard, Lauren F.; Lee, Thomas D. 2002. Upland old-field succession in southeastern New Hampshire. Journal of the Torrey Botanical Society. 129(1): 60-76. [44551]
  • 8. Barnes, William J.; Cottam, Grant. 1974. Some autecological studies of the Lonicera X bella complex. Ecology. 55(1): 40-50. [48173]
  • 83. Kartesz, John T.; Meacham, Christopher A. 1999. Synthesis of the North American flora (Windows Version 1.0), [CD-ROM]. Available: North Carolina Botanical Garden. In cooperation with the Nature Conservancy, Natural Resources Conservation Service, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [2001, January 16]. [36715]
  • 92. Kudish, Michael. 1992. Adirondack upland flora: an ecological perspective. Saranac, NY: The Chauncy Press. 320 p. [19376]
  • 93. Lackschewitz, Klaus. 1991. Vascular plants of west-central Montana--identification guidebook. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-227. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 648 p. [13798]
  • 95. Lorenz, David G.; Sharp, W. Curtis.; Ruffner, Joseph D. 1991. Conservation plants for the Northeast. Program Aid 1154. [Washington, DC]: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 43 p. [47719]
  • 98. Luken, J. O.; Tholemeier, T. C.; Kuddes, L. M.; Kunkel, B. A. 1995. Performance, plasticity, and acclimation of the nonindigenous shrub Lonicera maackii (Caprifoliaceae) in contrasting light environments. Canadian Journal of Botany. 73(12): 1953-1961. [26453]
  • 99. Luken, James O. 1988. Population structure and biomass allocation of the naturalized shrub Lonicera maackii (Rupr.) Maxim. in forest and open habitat. The American Midland Naturalist. 119(2): 258-267. [47293]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Regional Distribution in the Western United States

More info on this topic.

This species can be found in the following regions of the western United States (according to the Bureau of Land Management classification of Physiographic Regions of the western United States):

BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS [16]:

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
  • 16. 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]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

States or Provinces

(key to state/province abbreviations)
winter honeysuckle:
UNITED STATES
AL GA KY LA NY
NC OH PA SC
TN TX UT VA

Amur honeysuckle:
UNITED STATES
AL AR CT DE GA ID IL
IN IA KS KY LA MD MA
MI MS MO NE NJ NY NC
ND OH OK PA RI SC TN
TX VA WV WI

CANADA
ON

Morrow's honeysuckle:
UNITED STATES
AL AR CO CT DE IL
IN IA KY ME MD MA
MI MN MO NH NJ NY
NC OH PA RI SC TN
VT VA WV WI WY

CANADA
NB ON PQ SK

Tatarian honeysuckle:
UNITED STATES
AK CA CO CT DE GA ID
IL IN IA KS KY ME MD
MA MI MN MT NE NH NJ
NY ND OH OR PA RI SD
UT VT VA WA WV WI WY

CANADA
AB MB NB NS ON PQ SK

European fly honeysuckle:
UNITED STATES
CT DE IL IN ME
MD MA MI MO NH
NJ NY OH OR PA
RI VT VA WI

CANADA
NB ON PQ

Bell's honeysuckle:
UNITED STATES
CO CT DE HI IL IN IA
KS KY ME MD MA MI MN
MO MT NE NH NJ NY NC
ND OH PA RI SC SD TN
VT VA WA WV WI WY

CANADA
AB MB NB ON PQ SK

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Distribution in the United States

Amur, Tartarian, Morrow's, and pretty honeysuckle generally range from the central Great Plains to southern New England and south to Tennessee and North Carolina. The remaining species are sporadically distributed.

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial Share Alike 3.0 (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0)

U.S. National Park Service Weeds Gone Wild website

Source: U.S. National Park Service

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Native Range

Eurasia (Japan, China, Korea, Manchuria, Turkey and southern Russia) 
Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial Share Alike 3.0 (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0)

U.S. National Park Service Weeds Gone Wild website

Source: U.S. National Park Service

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Distribution and Habitat in the United States

Amur honeysuckle is one of the most common and invasive bush honeysuckles found in the mid-Atlantic region. It occurs in most states in the eastern U.S. except for Minnesota, Maine and Florida and has been reported to be invasive in many. It is adaptable to a range of conditions from sun to deep shade and wet to dry. It occurs in disturbed habitats including forest edges, forest interiors, floodplains, old fields, pastures, and roadsides. Disturbance increases the likelihood of invasion. Amur honeysuckle grows especially well on calcareous soils.

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Origin

China, Japan, Korea, and Russian Far East

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Physical Description

Morphology

Description

More info for the terms: shrub, shrubs

The following descriptions of bush honeysuckles provide characteristics that may be relevant to fire ecology, and are not meant for identification. Keys for identification are available (e.g. [18,36,54,59,133,161,186,189,190,191]).

Winter honeysuckle is a deciduous or semievergreen shrub, mainly 3.2 to 10 feet (1-3 m), occasionally to 15 feet (4.6 m) tall [36,37,127,133,191]. The crown is an erect but wide-spreading, irregularly rounded, tangled mass of slender recurved branches [37,127,133]. Leaves are 0.6 to 3.5 inches (1.5-9 cm) long and 0.4 to 1.8 inches (1-4.5 cm) wide [36,37,127,133,191]. Flowers are 0.4 to 0.5 inches (1-1.2 cm) long, borne in pairs on short peduncles [191]. Fruit is a berry, 0.25 to 0.4 inches (6.4-10 mm) in diameter [36,37,127,133], with seeds 0.05 to 0.08 inches (1.3-2  mm) long [133].
Winter honeysuckle. ©Univ. Connecticut Plant Database.

Amur honeysuckle is an upright, spreading, deciduous shrub, 12 to 20 feet (3.7-6.1 m) tall with hollow branches [36,37,54,131]. Leaves are 1.4 to 3.5 inches (3.5-9 cm) long and 0.5 to 1.5 inches (1.3-3.8 cm) wide [37,54,131]. Fruit is a 0.08 to 0.25 inch (2-6.4 mm) diameter berry [36,37].
Amur honeysuckle. © John M. Randall / The Nature Conservancy.

Morrow's honeysuckle is a deciduous shrub, 4.9 to 8 feet (1.5-2.4 m) tall and 6 to 10 feet (1.8-3 m) wide [37,152,161,175], "forming a broad, rounded, dense, tangled mound with foliage and branches to the ground" [37]. Leaves are 1 to 2.5 inches (2.5-6.4 cm) long and 0.5 to 1.25 inches (1.3-3.2 cm) wide [37,161]. The fruit is a 0.25 inch (6 mm) diameter berry [37].
Morrow's honeysuckle. © John M. Randall/The Nature Conservancy.

Tatarian honeysuckle is an upright deciduous shrub, 3.3 to 12 feet (1-3 m) tall and 10 feet (3 m) wide [18,37,54,59,93,155,157,161,176,191], often dense with fine branches [157]. Dirr [37] describes the Tatarian honeysuckle crown as "strongly multi-stemmed with the upper branches arching and the overall effect one of a dense, twiggy mass." Twigs are hollow [54], and 0.03 to 0.04 inches (0.8-1 mm) in diameter [157]. Bark has long, flat, thin scales and not much shredding [157], although older stems have shredding bark [59]. Leaves are 0.6 to 2.5 inches (1.5-6.4 cm) long and 0.2 to 1.5 inches (0.5-3.8 cm) wide [37,54,59,157,191]. Flowers are pedunculate and borne in sessile pairs in leaf axils [59,157,191]. Fruits are berries, 0.2 to 0.3 inch (4-8 mm) in diameter, borne singly or in pairs with the bases fused, with 3-6 seeds per fruit [37,59,157,191]. Seeds are about 0.1 inch (2.5-3 mm) long and 0.08 to 0.1 inch (2-2.5 mm) wide [59,157].  
Tatarian honeysuckle. © John M. Randall/The Nature Conservancy.

European fly honeysuckle is a rounded deciduous shrub with spreading arching branches, 3.3 to 10 feet (1-3 m) tall, 10 to 12 feet (3-3.7 m) wide, with hollow twigs [18,37,54,177].
European fly honeysuckle. ©Univ. Connecticut Plant Database.

Bell's honeysuckle is an erect shrub, 4 to 10 feet (1.2-3 m) tall and often at least as wide as it is tall [25,37,133]. It has a round growth habit with spreading, somewhat arching branches [37]. Leaves are 1 to 3 inches (2.5-7.6 cm) long [25]. Fruits are 0.25 to nearly 0.5 inch (6.5-13 mm) diameter round berries [25,37], with 2 to 6 seeds per fruit [37].

Age of Bell's honeysuckle shrubs studied in southern Wisconsin ranged from 12 to 34 years, with a mean of 20.4 years [7].

By excavating numerous Bell's honeysuckle shrubs in Wisconsin, it was determined that most roots occurred at a depth of 0.98 to 5.9 inches (2.5-15 cm), and in many cases extended well beyond crown width [7].

Physiology: Barnes and Cottam [8] found no difference in photosynthetic response of Bell's honeysuckle shrubs originating from wet and dry sites, and subjected to shaded and exposed light conditions. Similarly, they detected no difference in photosynthetic response of shrubs from either site to induced water stress.

  • 127. Oregon State University. 2004. Lonicera fragrantissima--winter honeysuckle, [Online]. In: Landscape plants: Images, identification, and information. Volume 2. Corvallis, OR: Department of Horticulture (Producer). Available: http://oregonstate.edu/dept/ldplants/lofr.htm [2004, August 26]. [51754]
  • 131. Pringle, James S. 1973. Lonicera maackii (Caprifoliaceae) adventive in Ontario. The Canadian Field-Naturalist. 87: 54-55. [47289]
  • 133. 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]
  • 152. Smith, Tim E., ed. 2004. Vegetation management guideline: bush honeysuckles: Morrow's and Amur honeysuckle [Lonicera morrowii Gray and L. maackii (Rupr.) Maxim.], [Online]. In: Missouri vegetation management manual. Jefferson City, MO: Missouri Department of Conservation (Producer). Available: http://www.conservation.state.mo.us/nathis/exotic/vegman/six.htm [2004, August 30]. [51529]
  • 155. Soper, James H.; Heimburger, Margaret L. 1982. Shrubs of Ontario. Life Sciences Miscellaneous Publications. Toronto, ON: Royal Ontario Museum. 495 p. [12907]
  • 157. Stephens, H. A. 1973. Woody plants of the North Central Plains. Lawrence, KS: The University Press of Kansas. 530 p. [3804]
  • 161. Strausbaugh, P. D.; Core, Earl L. 1977. Flora of West Virginia. 2nd ed. Morgantown, WV: Seneca Books, Inc. 1079 p. [23213]
  • 175. University of Connecticut. 2004. Lonicera morrowii--Morrow honeysuckle, [Online]. In: University of Connecticut plant database of trees, shrubs, and vines. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut (Producer). Available: http://www.hort.uconn.edu/plants/l/lonmor/lonmor3.html [2004, August 28]. [51747]
  • 176. University of Connecticut. 2004. Lonicera tatarica--Tatarian honeysuckle, [Online]. In: University of Connecticut plant database of trees, shrubs, and vines. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut (Producer). Available: http://www.hort.uconn.edu/plants/l/lontat/lontat3.html [2004, August 28]. [51749]
  • 177. University of Connecticut. 2004. Lonicera xylosteum, [Online]. In: University of Connecticut plant database of trees, shrubs, and vines. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut (Producer). Available: http://www.hort.uconn.edu/plants/l/lonxyl/lonxyl3.html [2004, August 30]. [51744]
  • 18. Braun, E. Lucy. 1961. The woody plants of Ohio. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press. 362 p. [12914]
  • 186. Voss, Edward G. 1996. Michigan flora. Part III: Dicots (Pyrolaceae--Compositae). Cranbrook Institute of Science Bulletin 61/University of Michigan Herbarium. Ann Arbor, MI: The Regents of the University of Michigan. 622 p. [30401]
  • 189. Weber, William A. 1987. Colorado flora: western slope. Boulder, CO: Colorado Associated University Press. 530 p. [7706]
  • 190. Weber, William A.; Wittmann, Ronald C. 1996. Colorado flora: eastern slope. 2nd ed. Niwot, CO: University Press of Colorado. 524 p. [27572]
  • 191. Welsh, Stanley L.; Atwood, N. Duane; Goodrich, Sherel; Higgins, Larry C., eds. 1987. A Utah flora. The Great Basin Naturalist Memoir No. 9. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University. 894 p. [2944]
  • 25. Chapman, William K.; Bessette, Alan E. 1990. Trees and shrubs of the Adirondacks. Utica, NY: North Country Books, Inc. 131 p. [12766]
  • 36. Diggs, George M., Jr.; Lipscomb, Barney L.; O'Kennon, Robert J. 1999. Illustrated flora of north-central Texas. Sida Botanical Miscellany No. 16. Fort Worth, TX: Botanical Research Institute of Texas. 1626 p. [35698]
  • 37. Dirr, Michael A. 1998. Manual of woody landscape plants: their identification, ornamental characteristics, culture, propagation and uses. 5th ed. Champagne, IL: Stipes Publishing Company. 1187 p. [48168]
  • 54. 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]
  • 59. Great Plains Flora Association. 1986. Flora of the Great Plains. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. 1392 p. [1603]
  • 7. Barnes, William J. 1972. The autecology of the Lonicera X bella complex. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin. 169 p. Dissertation. [48166]
  • 8. Barnes, William J.; Cottam, Grant. 1974. Some autecological studies of the Lonicera X bella complex. Ecology. 55(1): 40-50. [48173]
  • 93. Lackschewitz, Klaus. 1991. Vascular plants of west-central Montana--identification guidebook. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-227. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 648 p. [13798]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Description

Exotic bush honeysuckles are upright, generally deciduous shrubs that range from 6 to 15 feet in height. The 1-2 ½ inch, egg-shaped leaves are opposite along the stem and short-stalked. Older stems are often hollow. Pairs of fragrant, tubular flowers less than an inch long are borne along the stem in the leaf axils. Flower color varies from creamy white to pink or crimson in some varieties of Tartarian honeysuckle. Flowering generally occurs from early to late spring, but varies for each species and cultivar. The fruits are red to orange, many-seeded berries. Native bush honeysuckles may be confused with these exotic species and cultivars, so proper identification is necessary. Unlike the exotics, most of our native bush honeysuckles have solid stems.

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial Share Alike 3.0 (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0)

U.S. National Park Service Weeds Gone Wild website

Source: U.S. National Park Service

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Description and Biology

  • Plant: upright, deciduous shrub up to 15-20 ft. high; pith of mature stems is hollow and white or tan (in contrast to solid white pith of native shrub honeysuckle species).
  • Leaves: opposite, ovate with a tapered tip, lightly pubescent, and up to 3½ in. long.
  • Flowers, fruits and seeds: flowers paired, tubular, white to pinkish, fading to yellow, less than 1 in. long, borne from leaf axils, five petals, upper 4 fused; fruits are red to orange-red berries produced in late summer and persist through the winter.
  • Spreads: by fruits which are abundant and highly attractive to birds that consume them and defecate the seeds in new locations. Vegetative sprouting aids in the local spread and persistence. 
  • Look-alikes: other exotic bush honeysuckles including Tartarian (L. tatarica) and Standish’s honeysuckle (L. standishii); native species of Lonicera like American fly honeysuckle (L. canadensis), swamp fly-honeysuckle (L. oblongifolia) and mountain fly honeysuckle (L. villosa); northern bush-honeysuckle (Diervilla lonicera) which has leaves with toothed margins.

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Ecology

Habitat

Range and Habitat in Illinois

Amur Honeysuckle is well-established in the northeast, east-central, and southern sections of Illinois (see Distribution Map). This shrub undoubtedly occurs in other areas of the state, and it is becoming more common, particularly around cities. It is native to central and eastern Asia. Habitats include mesic deciduous woodlands, savannas and thickets, woodland edges, power-line clearances in wooded areas, fence rows, edges of yards, and semi-shaded waste areas. This shrub can invade both disturbed areas and high quality natural areas. In wooded and semi-wooded areas, it displaces native shrubs and destroys the understory of herbaceous wildflowers.
Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© John Hilty

Source: Illinois Wildflowers

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Habitat characteristics

More info for the terms: basal area, cover, density, mesic, peat, shrubs

It is likely that sites characteristics where bush honeysuckles occur in North America are generally similar for the 6 species considered in this summary. However, it is difficult to definitively ascertain which species share affinities for which site characteristics, especially when considered across the entire North American range of bush honeysuckle distribution. Information about site characteristics that favor bush honeysuckle establishment, persistence, and spread is often anecdotal. Consequently, the following information describes site characteristics where bush honeysuckles are likely to be found, but should not be considered a comprehensive assessment. More research is needed to determine relationships between various site characteristics and bush honeysuckle invasion.

In the North Carolina Piedmont and Coastal Plain, and in the South Carolina Piedmont, winter honeysuckle is found in woodlands and "waste places" [133]. In north-central Texas it escapes to "forest margins" [36].
Winter honeysuckle.
Horticulture Department/Auburn University.

According to Luken (personal observation cited in [104]) and Luken and others [98], in its native range, Amur honeysuckle commonly grows on sites with some type of canopy cover (open forests, flood plain forests, periodically disturbed floodplains, riparian habitats and scrub communities). In North America, it is found in both open and wooded habitats [99,131]. In southern Wisconsin, Cochrane [27] described Amur honeysuckle occurrence as mostly in partially shaded fencerows, weedy thickets, and brushy groves, and less frequently in woods [27]. In north-central Texas Amur honeysuckle escapes to "forest margins" [36], in Michigan it is found in "woods (upland and swampy), thickets, banks, fencerows, and often near a landscaped source" [186], and in southwestern Ohio it is mentioned as occurring in pastures and woodlands [18]. Hutchinson and Vankat [79] examined Amur honeysuckle distribution in southwestern Ohio along northerly and westerly transects, emanating from a supposed central population source from which invasive populations have subsequently dispersed. Their results suggest Amur honeysuckle population spread is closely linked to forest cover and forest connectivity across the landscape. They propose that large expanses of agricultural land act as a barrier to dispersal, perhaps due to habitat constraints on frugivorous birds that disperse seeds. Medley [112] found that Amur honeysuckle density was significantly (p = 0.001) correlated with proximity to the edge of a 13 acre (5.2 ha) mature deciduous forest stand in southwestern Ohio. However, Amur honeysuckle stem basal area was also significantly (p<0.05) correlated with proximity to stream channels, with some of the largest individuals located near the center of the stand along streambanks.  
Amur honeysuckle. © John M. Randall/The Nature Conservancy.

Morrow's honeysuckle is found in woodlands of the Blue Ridge mountains in Tennessee and Virginia [197], in thickets, fields, and hedgerows in New England [149], and along streambanks in Wyoming [39]. In lower Michigan, it escapes to roadsides, railroads, thickets, lakeshores, riverbanks, and woods [186].
Morrow's honeysuckle. © John M. Randall/The Nature Conservancy.

In Michigan, Tatarian honeysuckle escapes to roadsides, railroads, thickets, lakeshores, riverbanks, woods, fields, "waste places" and swamps [186], and in the northern Great Plains it escapes to open woods, stream banks, or brushy pastures [59,157]. It is found in riverbank thickets, along roadsides, and in "waste land" in New England [149], along fence rows and stream banks in Montana and Wyoming [38], and in riparian areas along the Big Sioux River in eastern South Dakota [35]. According to White [193], Tatarian honeysuckle is present, though not common, on poorly-drained shrub-dominated sites in southeastern Wisconsin [193]. Moffatt and McLachlan [121] included Tatarian honeysuckle among indicator species found in disturbed riparian forest in southern Manitoba. It was 1 of 2 nonnative plant species that was significantly (p<0.05) more likely to occur within "urban" or "suburban" sites compared with "rural" (agricultural) or "reference" (undisturbed) sites.  
Tatarian honeysuckle. Gary Fewless/UW-Green Bay Herbarium.

European fly honeysuckle is found in thickets and woods in New England [149]. It is apparently tolerant of "difficult" growing sites [177].
European fly honeysuckle. © Henriette Kress.

In Michigan, Bell's honeysuckle is found in habitats similar to those of Tatarian honeysuckle and Morrow's honeysuckle [186]. It is found along roadsides and "scrub areas" bordering human habitation in the Adirondacks [25], and in thickets and "waste places" in New England and the Piedmont of North Carolina [133,149]. A review by Barnes [7] indicates a wide range of sites may support Bell's honeysuckle populations in Wisconsin, including roadsides, fencerows, pastures or fields, railroad rights-of-way, lake, river, or stream banks, and wooded areas, particularly within openings or edges of woods. Barnes [7] showed that Bell's honeysuckle distribution within the University of Wisconsin Madison Arboretum was aggregated. He reasoned that the observed patterns of distribution were strongly influenced by site characteristics favorable to seedling establishment (see above).

Soils and topography: Soil requirements and tolerances vary among bush honeysuckles, but most taxa seem to grow best on well-drained sites.

Winter honeysuckle prefers moist but well-drained, loamy soil [127].

Amur honeysuckle performs best on moist, well-drained sites, but is adaptable to "poor" soils, compacted soils, various soil pHs, restricted root zones, drought and salt spray [17]. According to Vogel [185] the lower pH limit for Amur honeysuckle is 5.0. It escapes to calcareous slopes in north-central Texas [36], and grows in thin prairie soils over dolomite in southern Wisconsin [27]. Amur honeysuckle generally occurs in mesic habitats in Virginia [182]. According to Sharp and Belcher [150] the Amur honeysuckle cultivar 'Rem-Red' is "adapted" to deep, well-drained, fertile, sandy loam to clay loam soils, and is not "adapted" to droughty or wet soils. Lorenz and others [95] indicate that 'Rem-Red' "grows in medium-fertility, acid, clayey, loamy, and sandy soils, and tolerates somewhat poorly drained soil."

Morrow's honeysuckle prefers loamy, well-drained, moist soil [175]. In Virginia, it generally occurs in mesic habitats [182]. Vogel [185] reports that the lower pH limit for Morrow's honeysuckle is 5.0.

Barnes [7] indicates Tatarian honeysuckle occurs on a wide variety of soil types in central Asia. According to Lorenz and others [95], it "grows in medium-fertility, acid, clayey, loamy, and sandy soils, and tolerates moderately well-drained soil." Tatarian honeysuckle grows on peat and muck soils [110]. White [193] reports that it is present, though not common, on poorly-drained shrub-dominated sites in southeastern Wisconsin [193]. Tatarian honeysuckle generally occurs in mesic habitats in Virginia [182]. According to Vogel [185] the lower pH limit for Tatarian honeysuckle is 5.0. Tatarian honeysuckle is considered salt sensitive [166].

European fly honeysuckle performs best on moist, well-drained sites, but is adaptable to "poor" soils, various soil pHs, restricted root zones, drought, and salt spray, but is not tolerant of wet sites or poorly drained sites [17].

Mature Bell's honeysuckle shrubs were found growing over a variety of soils at the University of Wisconsin Madison Arboretum including: a) a droughty, infertile, loamy sand, b) a well- to moderately well drained, moderately fertile, silt loam, c) an imperfectly- to poorly drained silt loam, and d) a muck soil where the water table was at or near the surface in spring [7]. In a reciprocal transplant common garden experiment in southern Wisconsin, Barnes and Cottam [8] successfully transplanted Bell's honeysuckle shrubs at 2 sites with quite different soils. The wet site had muck soils with water-retaining capacity of 260% dry weight and organic matter content 64%, while the dry site was a loamy sand soil with water-retaining capacity of 50% dry weight and 2% organic matter. Survival of transplants, 50% at the dry site and 68% at the wet site, was not significantly different. Transplant origin (wet site or dry site) also did not affect performance at either common garden, indicating no evidence of ecotypic differentiation between populations based on soil type. Bell's honeysuckle generally occurs in mesic habitats in Virginia [182].

Climate: Winter honeysuckle is adapted to USDA zones 4-8 [37,114,127,173].

Amur honeysuckle distribution appears to be limited by drought and cold. Trisel [168] observed that during summer droughts in southwestern Ohio Amur honeysuckle leaves can become severely wilted, while native trees remain unaffected. However, based on unpublished data, it was further indicated that affected shrubs can fully recover from wilting with no apparent damage or mortality following rehydration. Trisel [168] also hypothesized that susceptibility to drought may result from its shallow root system, and that drought intolerance may be more pronounced in unshaded areas. Lorenz and others [95] characterize the Amur honeysuckle cultivar 'Rem-Red' as having "fair drought tolerance."

According to Trisel [168], Amur honeysuckle range expansion to the west and north may be limited by moisture and winter temperature. Several sources indicate that it is adapted to USDA zones 2-8 [17,37], or 3-8 [115,174]. Analysis of herbaria records by Trisel [168] indicates Amur honeysuckle "escapes" become limited in USDA zones 4-5 (winter low temperatures of -20.2 to -31 ◦F (-29 to -35 ◦C)). Lorenz and others [95] provide a map of plant hardiness zones of the northeastern U.S., based on average annual minimum temperature, and refer to these as "areas of climatic adaptation" where various plant species are recommended for planting for "conservation" purposes. They indicate that while some species "may grow in zones other than the ones indicated, maximum conservation effectiveness occurs within these zones." Based on this information, Amur honeysuckle is climatically adapted throughout the northeastern U.S. where average annual minimum temperature ranges from 20 to -30 ◦F (-6.7 to -34 ◦C).

Morrow's honeysuckle is adapted to USDA zones 4-6 and warmer parts of zone 3 [37,116,175].

Several sources indicate that Tatarian honeysuckle is adapted  to USDA zones 3-8 [117,128,176], or 2-8 [37]. Lorenz and others [95] provide a map of plant hardiness zones of the northeastern U.S., based on average annual minimum temperature, and refer to these as "areas of climatic adaptation" where various plant species are recommended for planting for "conservation" purposes. They indicate that while some species "may grow in zones other than the ones indicated, maximum conservation effectiveness occurs within these zones." Based on this information, Tatarian honeysuckle is climatically adapted throughout the northeastern U.S. where average annual minimum temperature ranges from 20 to -40  ◦F (-6.7 to -40 ◦C). Tatarian honeysuckle is apparently winter hardy in valleys of western Montana [93]. Lorenz and others [95] characterize Tatarian honeysuckle as having "fair drought tolerance."

European fly honeysuckle is adapted to USDA zones 4-6 [17,37,118].

Bell's honeysuckle is adapted to USDA zones 4-7 [37]. Average annual precipitation throughout the North American range of Bell's honeysuckle is between 9.8 and 59 inches (250-1500 mm), and average frost-free period is 80 to 240 days [8].

  • 104. Luken, James O.; Kuddes, Linda M.; Tholemeier, Tim C.; Haller, David M. 1997. Comparative responses of Lonicera maackii (Amur honeysuckle) and Lindera benzoin (spicebush) to increased light. The American Midland Naturalist. 138(2): 331-343. [49147]
  • 110. McComb, A. L. 1948. Survival and growth of trees and shrubs on peat and muck soils in Iowa. In: Report of the Iowa Agricultural Experiment Station. [Ames, IA]: [Iowa State University]: 261. [48499]
  • 112. Medley, Kimberly E. 1997. Distribution of the non-native shrub Lonicera maackii in Kramer Woods, Ohio. Physical Geography. 18(1): 18-36. [48832]
  • 114. Michigan State University Extension. 1999. Lonicera fragrantissima--winter honeysuckle, [Online]. In: Ornamental plants plus version 3.0. Michigan State University (Producer). Available: http://www.msue.msu.edu/imp/modzz/00000892.html [2004, August 26]. [51740]
  • 115. Michigan State University Extension. 1999. Lonicera maackii--Amur honeysuckle, [Online]. In: Ornamental plants plus version 3.0. Michigan State University (Producer). Available: http://www.msue.msu.edu/imp/modzz/00000897.html [2004, August 27]. [51739]
  • 116. Michigan State University Extension. 1999. Lonicera morrowii--Morrow honeysuckle, [Online]. In: Ornamental plants plus version 3.0. Michigan State University (Producer). Available: http://www.msue.msu.edu/imp/modzz/00000898.html [2004, August 28]. [51742]
  • 117. Michigan State University Extension. 1999. Lonicera tatarica--Tatarian honeysuckle, [Online]. In: Ornamental plants plus version 3.0. Michigan State University (Producer). Available: http://www.msue.msu.edu/imp/modzz/00000901.html [2004, August 28]. [51741]
  • 118. Michigan State University Extension. 1999. Lonicera xylosteum--European fly honeysuckle, [Online]. In: Ornamental plants plus version 3.0. Michigan State University (Producer). Available: http://www.msue.msu.edu/imp/modzz/00000902.html [2004, August 28]. [51814]
  • 121. Moffatt, S. F.; McLachlan, S. M. 2004. Understorey indicators of disturbance for riparian forests along an urban-rural gradient in Manitoba. Ecological Indicators. 4: 1-16. [51154]
  • 127. Oregon State University. 2004. Lonicera fragrantissima--winter honeysuckle, [Online]. In: Landscape plants: Images, identification, and information. Volume 2. Corvallis, OR: Department of Horticulture (Producer). Available: http://oregonstate.edu/dept/ldplants/lofr.htm [2004, August 26]. [51754]
  • 128. Oregon State University. 2004. Lonicera tatarica--Tatarian honeysuckle, [Online]. In: Landscape plants: Images, identification, and information. Volume 2. Corvallis, OR: Department of Horticulture (Producer). Available: http://oregonstate.edu/dept/ldplants/lota.htm [2004, August 30]. [51752]
  • 131. Pringle, James S. 1973. Lonicera maackii (Caprifoliaceae) adventive in Ontario. The Canadian Field-Naturalist. 87: 54-55. [47289]
  • 133. 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]
  • 149. Seymour, Frank Conkling. 1982. The flora of New England. 2d ed. Phytologia Memoirs 5. Plainfield, NJ: Harold N. Moldenke and Alma L. Moldenke. 611 p. [7604]
  • 150. Sharp, W. Curtis; Belcher, Cluster R. 1981. `Rem-Red' Amur honeysuckle--a multipurpose landscape shrub. American Nurseryman. 153(12): 7, 94-96. [47716]
  • 157. Stephens, H. A. 1973. Woody plants of the North Central Plains. Lawrence, KS: The University Press of Kansas. 530 p. [3804]
  • 166. Tinus, Richard W. 1984. Salt tolerance of 10 deciduous shrub and tree species. In: Murphy, Patrick M., compiler. The challenge of producing native plants for the Intermountain area: Proceedings, Intermountain Nurseryman's Association 1983 conference; 1983 August 8-11; Las Vegas, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-168. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 44-49. [6848]
  • 168. Trisel, Donald E. 1997. The invasive shrub, Lonicera maackii (Rupr.) Herder (Caprifoliaceae): factors contributing to its success and its effect on native species. Oxford, OH: Miami University. 199 p. Dissertation. [48165]
  • 17. Biggs, Scott. 2002. Lonicera xylosteum: European fly honeysuckle or fly honeysuckle. In: Pocket gardener, [Online]. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University, Department of Horticulture and Crop Science. Available: http://hcs.osu.edu/pocketgardener/source/description/lo_steum.html [2005, January 31]. [51293]
  • 173. University of Connecticut. 2004. Lonicera fragrantissima, [Online]. In: University of Connecticut plant database of trees, shrubs, and vines. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut (Producer). Available: http://www.hort.uconn.edu/plants/l/lonfra/lonfra3.html [2004, September 1]. [51743]
  • 174. University of Connecticut. 2004. Lonicera maackii--Amur honeysuckle, [Online]. In: University of Connecticut plant database of trees, shrubs, and vines. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut (Producer). Available: http://www.hort.uconn.edu/plants/l/lonmaa/lonmaa3.html [2004, August 27]. [51745]
  • 175. University of Connecticut. 2004. Lonicera morrowii--Morrow honeysuckle, [Online]. In: University of Connecticut plant database of trees, shrubs, and vines. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut (Producer). Available: http://www.hort.uconn.edu/plants/l/lonmor/lonmor3.html [2004, August 28]. [51747]
  • 176. University of Connecticut. 2004. Lonicera tatarica--Tatarian honeysuckle, [Online]. In: University of Connecticut plant database of trees, shrubs, and vines. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut (Producer). Available: http://www.hort.uconn.edu/plants/l/lontat/lontat3.html [2004, August 28]. [51749]
  • 177. University of Connecticut. 2004. Lonicera xylosteum, [Online]. In: University of Connecticut plant database of trees, shrubs, and vines. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut (Producer). Available: http://www.hort.uconn.edu/plants/l/lonxyl/lonxyl3.html [2004, August 30]. [51744]
  • 18. Braun, E. Lucy. 1961. The woody plants of Ohio. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press. 362 p. [12914]
  • 182. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage. 2003. Invasive alien plant species of Virginia, [Online]. Available: http://www.dcr.state.va.us/dnh/invlist.pdf [2003, August 25]. [44942]
  • 185. Vogel, Willis G. 1981. A guide for revegetating coal mine soils in the eastern United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-68. Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 190 p. [15576]
  • 186. Voss, Edward G. 1996. Michigan flora. Part III: Dicots (Pyrolaceae--Compositae). Cranbrook Institute of Science Bulletin 61/University of Michigan Herbarium. Ann Arbor, MI: The Regents of the University of Michigan. 622 p. [30401]
  • 193. White, Keith L. 1965. Shrub-carrs of southeastern Wisconsin. Ecology. 46(3): 286-304. [8858]
  • 197. Wofford, B. Eugene. 1989. Guide to the vascular plants of the Blue Ridge. Athens, GA: The University of Georgia Press. 384 p. [12908]
  • 25. Chapman, William K.; Bessette, Alan E. 1990. Trees and shrubs of the Adirondacks. Utica, NY: North Country Books, Inc. 131 p. [12766]
  • 27. Cochrane, Theodore S. 1995. Lonicera maackii (Caprifoliaceae) naturalized in Wisconsin. The Michigan Botanist. 34: 79-82. [47718]
  • 35. Dieter, Charles D.; McCabe, Thomas R. 1989. Factors influencing beaver lodge-site selection on a prairie river. The American Midland Naturalist. 122: 408-411. [9273]
  • 36. Diggs, George M., Jr.; Lipscomb, Barney L.; O'Kennon, Robert J. 1999. Illustrated flora of north-central Texas. Sida Botanical Miscellany No. 16. Fort Worth, TX: Botanical Research Institute of Texas. 1626 p. [35698]
  • 37. Dirr, Michael A. 1998. Manual of woody landscape plants: their identification, ornamental characteristics, culture, propagation and uses. 5th ed. Champagne, IL: Stipes Publishing Company. 1187 p. [48168]
  • 38. Dorn, Robert D. 1984. Vascular plants of Montana. Cheyenne, WY: Mountain West Publishing. 276 p. [819]
  • 39. Dorn, Robert D. 1988. Vascular plants of Wyoming. Cheyenne, WY: Mountain West Publishing. 340 p. [6129]
  • 59. Great Plains Flora Association. 1986. Flora of the Great Plains. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. 1392 p. [1603]
  • 7. Barnes, William J. 1972. The autecology of the Lonicera X bella complex. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin. 169 p. Dissertation. [48166]
  • 79. Hutchinson, Todd F.; Vankat, John L. 1998. Landscape structure and spread of the exotic shrub Lonicera maackii (Amur honeysuckle) in southwestern Ohio forests. The American Midland Naturalist. 139(2): 383-390. [29655]
  • 8. Barnes, William J.; Cottam, Grant. 1974. Some autecological studies of the Lonicera X bella complex. Ecology. 55(1): 40-50. [48173]
  • 93. Lackschewitz, Klaus. 1991. Vascular plants of west-central Montana--identification guidebook. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-227. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 648 p. [13798]
  • 95. Lorenz, David G.; Sharp, W. Curtis.; Ruffner, Joseph D. 1991. Conservation plants for the Northeast. Program Aid 1154. [Washington, DC]: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 43 p. [47719]
  • 98. Luken, J. O.; Tholemeier, T. C.; Kuddes, L. M.; Kunkel, B. A. 1995. Performance, plasticity, and acclimation of the nonindigenous shrub Lonicera maackii (Caprifoliaceae) in contrasting light environments. Canadian Journal of Botany. 73(12): 1953-1961. [26453]
  • 99. Luken, James O. 1988. Population structure and biomass allocation of the naturalized shrub Lonicera maackii (Rupr.) Maxim. in forest and open habitat. The American Midland Naturalist. 119(2): 258-267. [47293]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Key Plant Community Associations

More info for the terms: hardwood, mesic, natural, shrub, shrubs

Precise information about habitat types and plant communities where bush honeysuckles may
occur is sparse. Information presented below is mostly gleaned from site descriptions where
research involving bush honeysuckles took place. It is not likely to be a representative
sample, much less an exhaustive review, of bush honeysuckle-invaded habitat types and
plant communities in North America. A review by Nyboer [126] indicates that, collectively,
bush honeysuckles can colonize a wide array of native habitats within their North American
range, including wetland, prairie, and forest communities. It is further asserted that,
although individual bush honeysuckle species may differ in their tolerances to various site characteristics, most natural communities within this range are susceptible to invasion by 1 or more
species.

Luken [99], Luken and Goessling [103], and Luken and Mattimiro [105] studied Amur honeysuckle
populations in northern Kentucky growing along roadsides (open-grown) and within forest stands
variously dominated by black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia), American elm (Ulmus americana),
slippery elm (U. rubra), sugar maple (Acer saccharum), hackberry
(Celtis occidentalis), and white ash (Fraxinus americana). Gould and Gorchov
[57], Miller and Gorchov [119], and Swanson and Vankat [163] described Amur honeysuckle as the
dominant shrub species growing in the understory of 3 southwestern Ohio hardwood forests.
Important overstory species in these forests were a) shagbark hickory (Carya ovata),
shellbark hickory (C. laciniosa), elms (Ulmus spp.), and northern red oak
(Quercus rubra), b) northern red oak, elms, sugar maple, and American beech
(Fagus grandifolia), and c) oaks (Quercus spp.), sugar maple, and hickories
(Carya spp.). Amur honeysuckle was also mentioned as occurring in another southwestern
Ohio forest dominated by sugar maple along with subdominants American beech, black cherry
(Prunus serotina), bitternut hickory (C. cordiformis), yellow-poplar
(Liriodendron tulipifera), and ash (Fraxinus spp.) [168]

Tatarian honeysuckle is found in mesic sugar maple- and red maple (Acer saccharinum)-dominated
forests in Vermont and Massachusetts [198].

Bell's honeysuckle is found in habitats similar to those where Tatarian honeysuckle and
Morrow's honeysuckle occur in Michigan [186]. It occurs in mesic sugar maple- and red
maple-dominated forests in Vermont and Massachusetts [198]. Bell's honeysuckle
and common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica) were the dominant shrub species in an oak (Q.
× palaeolithicola) -dominated forest in southern Wisconsin [87]. Bell's honeysuckle is
present, but not common, in southeastern Wisconsin shrub-carr communities, which
are wet-ground plant communities dominated by tall shrubs other than alder (Alnus
spp.), with an understory intermediate between meadow and lowland forest [193].
Barnes and Cottam [8] noted Bell's honeysuckle in all of the 30 terrestrial plant
communities located within the University of Wisconsin Madison Arboretum.
  • 103. Luken, James O.; Goessling, Norbert. 1995. Seedling distribution and potential persistence of the exotic shrub Lonicera maackii in fragmented forests. The American Midland Naturalist. 133(1): 124-130. [47287]
  • 105. Luken, James O.; Mattimiro, Daniel T. 1991. Habitat-specific resilience of the invasive shrub Amur honeysuckle (Lonicera maackii) during repeated clipping. Ecological Applications. 1(1): 104-109. [47294]
  • 119. Miller, Kara E.; Gorchov, David L. 2004. The invasive shrub, Lonicera maackii, reduces growth and fecundity of perennial forest herbs. Oecologia. 139(3): 359-375. [48522]
  • 126. Nyboer, Randy. 1992. Vegetation management guideline: bush honeysuckles--tatarian, Marrow's, belle, amur honeysuckle. Natural Areas Journal. 12(4): 218-219. [20074]
  • 163. Swanson, Ann M.; Vankat, John L. 2000. Woody vegetation and vascular flora of an old-growth mixed-mesophytic forest in southwestern Ohio. Castanea. 65(1): 36-55. [38933]
  • 168. Trisel, Donald E. 1997. The invasive shrub, Lonicera maackii (Rupr.) Herder (Caprifoliaceae): factors contributing to its success and its effect on native species. Oxford, OH: Miami University. 199 p. Dissertation. [48165]
  • 186. Voss, Edward G. 1996. Michigan flora. Part III: Dicots (Pyrolaceae--Compositae). Cranbrook Institute of Science Bulletin 61/University of Michigan Herbarium. Ann Arbor, MI: The Regents of the University of Michigan. 622 p. [30401]
  • 193. White, Keith L. 1965. Shrub-carrs of southeastern Wisconsin. Ecology. 46(3): 286-304. [8858]
  • 198. Woods, Kerry D. 1993. Effects of invasion by Lonicera tatarica L. on herbs and tree seedlings in four New England forests. The American Midland Naturalist. 130(1): 62-74. [21810]
  • 57. Gould, Andrew M. A.; Gorchov, David L. 2000. Effects of the exotic invasive shrub Lonicera maackii on the survival and fecundity of three species of native annuals. The American Midland Naturalist. 144(1): 36-50. [47522]
  • 8. Barnes, William J.; Cottam, Grant. 1974. Some autecological studies of the Lonicera X bella complex. Ecology. 55(1): 40-50. [48173]
  • 87. Kline, Virginia M.; McClintock, Tom. 1994. Effect of burning on a dry oak forest infested with woody exotics. In: Wickett, Robert G.; Lewis, Patricia Dolan; Woodliffe, Allen; Pratt, Paul, eds. Spirit of the land, our prairie legacy: Proceedings, 13th North American prairie conference; 1992 August 6-9; Windsor, ON. Windsor, ON: Department of Parks and Recreation: 207-213. [24695]
  • 99. Luken, James O. 1988. Population structure and biomass allocation of the naturalized shrub Lonicera maackii (Rupr.) Maxim. in forest and open habitat. The American Midland Naturalist. 119(2): 258-267. [47293]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Habitat: Rangeland Cover Types

More info on this topic.

This species is known to occur in association with the following Rangeland Cover Types (as classified by the Society for Range Management, SRM):

More info for the terms: cover, forb, fresh, mesic, shrub

SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES [151]:

101 Bluebunch wheatgrass

102 Idaho fescue

103 Green fescue

104 Antelope bitterbrush-bluebunch wheatgrass

105 Antelope bitterbrush-Idaho fescue

106 Bluegrass scabland

107 Western juniper/big sagebrush/bluebunch wheatgrass

109 Ponderosa pine shrubland

110 Ponderosa pine-grassland

201 Blue oak woodland

202 Coast live oak woodland

203 Riparian woodland

204 North coastal shrub

205 Coastal sage shrub

206 Chamise chaparral

207 Scrub oak mixed chaparral

208 Ceanothus mixed chaparral

209 Montane shrubland

210 Bitterbrush

211 Creosote bush scrub

212 Blackbush

213 Alpine grassland

214 Coastal prairie

215 Valley grassland

217 Wetlands

301 Bluebunch wheatgrass-blue grama

302 Bluebunch wheatgrass-Sandberg bluegrass

303 Bluebunch wheatgrass-western wheatgrass

304 Idaho fescue-bluebunch wheatgrass

305 Idaho fescue-Richardson needlegrass

306 Idaho fescue-slender wheatgrass

307 Idaho fescue-threadleaf sedge

308 Idaho fescue-tufted hairgrass

309 Idaho fescue-western wheatgrass

310 Needle-and-thread-blue grama

311 Rough fescue-bluebunch wheatgrass

312 Rough fescue-Idaho fescue

313 Tufted hairgrass-sedge

314 Big sagebrush-bluebunch wheatgrass

315 Big sagebrush-Idaho fescue

316 Big sagebrush-rough fescue

317 Bitterbrush-bluebunch wheatgrass

318 Bitterbrush-Idaho fescue

319 Bitterbrush-rough fescue

320 Black sagebrush-bluebunch wheatgrass

321 Black sagebrush-Idaho fescue

322 Curlleaf mountain-mahogany-bluebunch wheatgrass

323 Shrubby cinquefoil-rough fescue

324 Threetip sagebrush-Idaho fescue

401 Basin big sagebrush

402 Mountain big sagebrush

403 Wyoming big sagebrush

404 Threetip sagebrush

405 Black sagebrush

406 Low sagebrush

407 Stiff sagebrush

408 Other sagebrush types

409 Tall forb

411 Aspen woodland

412 Juniper-pinyon woodland

413 Gambel oak

414 Salt desert shrub

415 Curlleaf mountain-mahogany

416 True mountain-mahogany

417 Littleleaf mountain-mahogany

418 Bigtooth maple

419 Bittercherry

420 Snowbrush

421 Chokecherry-serviceberry-rose

422 Riparian

501 Saltbush-greasewood

601 Bluestem prairie

602 Bluestem-prairie sandreed

603 Prairie sandreed-needlegrass

604 Bluestem-grama prairie

605 Sandsage prairie

606 Wheatgrass-bluestem-needlegrass

607 Wheatgrass-needlegrass

608 Wheatgrass-grama-needlegrass

609 Wheatgrass-grama

610 Wheatgrass

611 Blue grama-buffalo grass

612 Sagebrush-grass

613 Fescue grassland

614 Crested wheatgrass

615 Wheatgrass-saltgrass-grama

704 Blue grama-western wheatgrass

709 Bluestem-grama

710 Bluestem prairie

711 Bluestem-sacahuista prairie

715 Grama-buffalo grass

717 Little bluestem-Indiangrass-Texas wintergrass

718 Mesquite-grama

722 Sand sagebrush-mixed prairie

727 Mesquite-buffalo grass

728 Mesquite-granjeno-acacia

729 Mesquite

730 Sand shinnery oak

731 Cross timbers-Oklahoma

732 Cross timbers-Texas (little bluestem-post oak)

733 Juniper-oak

734 Mesquite-oak

735 Sideoats grama-sumac-juniper

801 Savanna

802 Missouri prairie

803 Missouri glades

804 Tall fescue

805 Riparian

806 Gulf Coast salt marsh

807 Gulf Coast fresh marsh

ALASKAN RANGELANDS

901 Alder

903 Beach wildrye-mixed forb

904 Black spruce-lichen

905 Bluejoint reedgrass

906 Broadleaf forest

908 Fescue

909 Freshwater marsh

910 Hairgrass

912 Low scrub shrub birch-ericaceous

913 Low scrub swamp

914 Mesic sedge-grass-herb meadow tundra

915 Mixed herb-herbaceous

916 Sedge-shrub tundra

917 Tall shrub swamp

920 White spruce-paper birch

921 Willow
  • 151. Shiflet, Thomas N., ed. 1994. Rangeland cover types of the United States. Denver, CO: Society for Range Management. 152 p. [23362]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Habitat: Cover Types

More info on this topic.

This species is known to occur in association with the following cover types (as classified by the Society of American Foresters):

More info for the terms: cover, swamp

SAF COVER TYPES [42]:

1 Jack pine

5 Balsam fir

12 Black spruce

13 Black spruce-tamarack

14 Northern pin oak

15 Red pine

16 Aspen

17 Pin cherry

18 Paper birch

19 Gray birch-red maple

20 White pine-northern red oak-red maple

21 Eastern white pine

22 White pine-hemlock

23 Eastern hemlock

24 Hemlock-yellow birch

25 Sugar maple-beech-yellow birch

26 Sugar maple-basswood

27 Sugar maple

28 Black cherry-maple

30 Red spruce-yellow birch

31 Red spruce-sugar maple-beech

32 Red spruce

33 Red spruce-balsam fir

34 Red spruce-Fraser fir

35 Paper birch-red spruce-balsam fir

37 Northern white-cedar

38 Tamarack

39 Black ash-American elm-red maple

40 Post oak-blackjack oak

42 Bur oak

43 Bear oak

44 Chestnut oak

45 Pitch pine

46 Eastern redcedar

50 Black locust

51 White pine-chestnut oak

52 White oak-black oak-northern red oak

53 White oak

55 Northern red oak

57 Yellow-poplar

58 Yellow-poplar-eastern hemlock

59 Yellow-poplar-white oak-northern red oak

60 Beech-sugar maple

61 River birch-sycamore

62 Silver maple-American elm

63 Cottonwood

64 Sassafras-persimmon

65 Pin oak-sweetgum

66 Ashe juniper-redberry (Pinchot) juniper

67 Mohrs (shin) oak

68 Mesquite

69 Sand pine

70 Longleaf pine

71 Longleaf pine-scrub oak

72 Southern scrub oak

73 Southern redcedar

74 Cabbage palmetto

75 Shortleaf pine

76 Shortleaf pine-oak

78 Virginia pine-oak

79 Virginia pine

80 Loblolly pine-shortleaf pine

81 Loblolly pine

82 Loblolly pine-hardwood

83 Longleaf pine-slash pine

84 Slash pine

85 Slash pine-hardwood

87 Sweetgum-yellow-poplar

88 Willow oak-water oak-diamondleaf (laurel) oak

89 Live oak

91 Swamp chestnut oak-cherrybark oak

92 Sweetgum-willow oak

93 Sugarberry-American elm-green ash

94 Sycamore-sweetgum-American elm

95 Black willow

96 Overcup oak-water hickory

97 Atlantic white-cedar

98 Pond pine

100 Pondcypress

101 Baldcypress

102 Baldcypress-tupelo

103 Water tupelo-swamp tupelo

104 Sweetbay-swamp tupelo-redbay

107 White spruce

108 Red maple

109 Hawthorn

110 Black oak

201 White spruce

202 White spruce-paper birch

203 Balsam poplar

204 Black spruce

206 Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir

207 Red fir

210 Interior Douglas-fir

211 White fir

212 Western larch

213 Grand fir

215 Western white pine

216 Blue spruce

217 Aspen

218 Lodgepole pine

219 Limber pine

220 Rocky Mountain juniper

221 Red alder

222 Black cottonwood-willow

223 Sitka spruce

224 Western hemlock

225 Western hemlock-Sitka spruce

226 Coastal true fir-hemlock

227 Western redcedar-western hemlock

228 Western redcedar

229 Pacific Douglas-fir

230 Douglas-fir-western hemlock

231 Port-Orford-cedar

232 Redwood

233 Oregon white oak

234 Douglas-fir-tanoak-Pacific madrone

235 Cottonwood-willow

236 Bur oak

237 Interior ponderosa pine

238 Western juniper

239 Pinyon-juniper

243 Sierra Nevada mixed conifer

244 Pacific ponderosa pine-Douglas-fir

245 Pacific ponderosa pine

246 California black oak

247 Jeffrey pine

248 Knobcone pine

249 Canyon live oak

250 Blue oak-foothills pine

251 White spruce-aspen

252 Paper birch

253 Black spruce-white spruce

254 Black spruce-paper birch

255 California coast live oak
  • 42. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Habitat: Plant Associations

More info on this topic.

This species is known to occur in association with the following plant community types (as classified by Küchler 1964):

More info for the terms: bog, shrub

KUCHLER [91] PLANT ASSOCIATIONS:

K001 Spruce-cedar-hemlock forest

K002 Cedar-hemlock-Douglas-fir forest

K003 Silver fir-Douglas-fir forest

K004 Fir-hemlock forest

K005 Mixed conifer forest

K006 Redwood forest

K007 Red fir forest

K008 Lodgepole pine-subalpine forest

K009 Pine-cypress forest

K010 Ponderosa shrub forest

K011 Western ponderosa forest

K012 Douglas-fir forest

K013 Cedar-hemlock-pine forest

K014 Grand fir-Douglas-fir forest

K015 Western spruce-fir forest

K016 Eastern ponderosa forest

K017 Black Hills pine forest

K018 Pine-Douglas-fir forest

K019 Arizona pine forest

K020 Spruce-fir-Douglas-fir forest

K021 Southwestern spruce-fir forest

K022 Great Basin pine forest

K023 Juniper-pinyon woodland

K024 Juniper steppe woodland

K025 Alder-ash forest

K026 Oregon oakwoods

K027 Mesquite bosques

K028 Mosaic of K002 and K026

K029 California mixed evergreen forest

K030 California oakwoods

K033 Chaparral

K034 Montane chaparral

K035 Coastal sagebrush

K036 Mosaic of K030 and K035

K037 Mountain-mahogany-oak scrub

K038 Great Basin sagebrush

K039 Blackbrush

K040 Saltbush-greasewood

K041 Creosote bush

K047 Fescue-oatgrass

K048 California steppe

K050 Fescue-wheatgrass

K051 Wheatgrass-bluegrass

K053 Grama-galleta steppe

K055 Sagebrush steppe

K056 Wheatgrass-needlegrass shrubsteppe

K057 Galleta-threeawn shrubsteppe

K063 Foothills prairie

K064 Grama-needlegrass-wheatgrass

K065 Grama-buffalo grass

K066 Wheatgrass-needlegrass

K067 Wheatgrass-bluestem-needlegrass

K068 Wheatgrass-grama-buffalo grass

K069 Bluestem-grama prairie

K070 Sandsage-bluestem prairie

K073 Northern cordgrass prairie

K074 Bluestem prairie

K075 Nebraska Sandhills prairie

K076 Blackland prairie

K077 Bluestem-sacahuista prairie

K078 Southern cordgrass prairie

K081 Oak savanna

K082 Mosaic of K074 and K100

K083 Cedar glades

K084 Cross Timbers

K085 Mesquite-buffalo grass

K086 Juniper-oak savanna

K089 Black Belt

K090 Live oak-sea oats

K093 Great Lakes spruce-fir forest

K094 Conifer bog

K095 Great Lakes pine forest

K096 Northeastern spruce-fir forest

K097 Southeastern spruce-fir forest

K098 Northern floodplain forest

K099 Maple-basswood forest

K100 Oak-hickory forest

K101 Elm-ash forest

K102 Beech-maple forest

K103 Mixed mesophytic forest

K104 Appalachian oak forest

K106 Northern hardwoods

K107 Northern hardwoods-fir forest

K108 Northern hardwoods-spruce forest

K109 Transition between K104 and K106

K110 Northeastern oak-pine forest

K111 Oak-hickory-pine

K112 Southern mixed forest

K113 Southern floodplain forest

K114 Pocosin
  • 91. Kuchler, A. W. 1964. United States [Potential natural vegetation of the conterminous United States]. Special Publication No. 36. New York: American Geographical Society. 1:3,168,000; colored. [3455]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Habitat: Ecosystem

More info on this topic.

This species is known to occur in the following ecosystem types (as named by the U.S. Forest Service in their Forest and Range Ecosystem [FRES] Type classification):

ECOSYSTEMS [52]:

FRES10 White-red-jack pine

FRES11 Spruce-fir

FRES12 Longleaf-slash pine

FRES13 Loblolly-shortleaf pine

FRES14 Oak-pine

FRES15 Oak-hickory

FRES16 Oak-gum-cypress

FRES17 Elm-ash-cottonwood

FRES18 Maple-beech-birch

FRES19 Aspen-birch

FRES20 Douglas-fir

FRES21 Ponderosa pine

FRES22 Western white pine

FRES23 Fir-spruce

FRES24 Hemlock-Sitka spruce

FRES25 Larch

FRES26 Lodgepole pine

FRES27 Redwood

FRES28 Western hardwoods

FRES29 Sagebrush

FRES30 Desert shrub

FRES31 Shinnery

FRES32 Texas savanna

FRES33 Southwestern shrubsteppe

FRES34 Chaparral-mountain shrub

FRES35 Pinyon-juniper

FRES36 Mountain grasslands

FRES37 Mountain meadows

FRES38 Plains grasslands

FRES39 Prairie

FRES41 Wet grasslands

FRES42 Annual grasslands
  • 52. Garrison, George A.; Bjugstad, Ardell J.; Duncan, Don A.; Lewis, Mont E.; Smith, Dixie R. 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]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Habitat in the United States

Exotic bush honeysuckles are relatively shade-intolerant and most often occur in forest edge, abandoned field, pasture, roadsides and other open, upland habitats. Woodlands, especially those that have been grazed or otherwise disturbed, may also be invaded by exotic bush honeysuckles. Morrow's honeysuckle and pretty honeysuckle have the greatest habitat breadth and are capable of invading bogs, fens, lakeshores, sandplains and other uncommon habitat types.

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial Share Alike 3.0 (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0)

U.S. National Park Service Weeds Gone Wild website

Source: U.S. National Park Service

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Associations

Faunal Associations

The nectar of the flowers attracts such visitors as bumblebees and other long-tongued bees, Hummingbird moths (Hemaris spp.) and other Sphinx moths, and the Ruby-Throated Hummingbird. Some insects feed on various parts of Amur Honeysuckle and other honeysuckles (Lonicera spp.). The foliage is eaten by the moth caterpillars of Hemaris thysbe (Hummingbird Clearwing), Hemaris diffinis (Snowberry Clearwing), and miscellaneous other moths. The aphids Alphitoaphis lonicericola, Gypsoaphis oestlundi, and Hyadaphis foeniculi suck plant juices from honeysuckles, while the larvae of the long-horned beetle Agrilus cyanescens bore into the wood. The bright red berries are eaten by some songbirds, including the Catbird, Robin, Cardinal, Red-Wing Blackbird, Veery, Grackles, and Yellow-Breasted Chat. This helps to spread the seeds into new areas. Because of its abundant branches and tendency to develop leaves early in the spring, many songbirds use Amur Honeysuckle as a source of protective cover and as a nesting site. White-Tailed Deer occasionally browse on the leaves and twigs.
Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© John Hilty

Source: Illinois Wildflowers

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

General Ecology

Broad-scale Impacts of Plant Response to Fire

More info for the terms: prescribed fire, shrubs, surface fire

Kline and McClintock [87] observed Bell's honeysuckle sprouting from the base following
prescribed fire, but "resprouts were not very vigorous". Barnes [7] observed
fire effects on 2 populations of Bell's honeysuckle at the University of Wisconsin Madison
Arboretum. All 12 shrubs observed at 1 site resprouted from "the rootstock".
At the other site, a late-summer surface fire burned through a Bell's honeysuckle thicket,
leaving scorched bark on basal stems and killing but not consuming leaves. All plants subsequently
sampled had survived and had produced "basal sprouts" by early the following summer.

The Research Paper by Bowles and others 2007 provides information on postfire responses of several plant species, including Amur honeysuckle, that was not available when this review was originally written.
  • 7. Barnes, William J. 1972. The autecology of the Lonicera X bella complex. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin. 169 p. Dissertation. [48166]
  • 87. Kline, Virginia M.; McClintock, Tom. 1994. Effect of burning on a dry oak forest infested with woody exotics. In: Wickett, Robert G.; Lewis, Patricia Dolan; Woodliffe, Allen; Pratt, Paul, eds. Spirit of the land, our prairie legacy: Proceedings, 13th North American prairie conference; 1992 August 6-9; Windsor, ON. Windsor, ON: Department of Parks and Recreation: 207-213. [24695]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Plant Response to Fire

More info for the term: shrubs

Although information about asexual regeneration is relatively sparse, it is apparent that sprouting is a common response to mechanical stem damage in bush honeysuckles (see physical/mechanical control). Similarly, bush honeysuckles can also produce sprouts in response to damage from fire [7,75,87,102,126,152].

Bush honeysuckles may establish from bird-dispersed seed after fire. Since snags, surviving trees, or tall shrubs are often present in postfire environments where bush honeysuckles are likely to found (see habitat types and plant communities) and provide perches for frugivorous birds, bush honeysuckle postfire seedling establishment may occur in this environment.

  • 102. Luken, James O. 1996. Lonicera maackii, L. morrowii, L. tatarica--bush honeysuckle. In: Randall, John M.; Marinelli, Janet, eds. Invasive plants: Weeds of the global garden. Handbook #149. Brooklyn, NY: Brooklyn Botanic Garden: 60-61. [48501]
  • 126. Nyboer, Randy. 1992. Vegetation management guideline: bush honeysuckles--tatarian, Marrow's, belle, amur honeysuckle. Natural Areas Journal. 12(4): 218-219. [20074]
  • 152. Smith, Tim E., ed. 2004. Vegetation management guideline: bush honeysuckles: Morrow's and Amur honeysuckle [Lonicera morrowii Gray and L. maackii (Rupr.) Maxim.], [Online]. In: Missouri vegetation management manual. Jefferson City, MO: Missouri Department of Conservation (Producer). Available: http://www.conservation.state.mo.us/nathis/exotic/vegman/six.htm [2004, August 30]. [51529]
  • 7. Barnes, William J. 1972. The autecology of the Lonicera X bella complex. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin. 169 p. Dissertation. [48166]
  • 75. Hoffman, Randy; Kearns, Kelly, eds. 1997. Tatarian honeysuckle (Lonicera tatarica), Morrow's honeysuckle (Lonicera morrowii), Bella honeysuckle (Lonicera x bella). In: Wisconsin manual of control recommendations for ecologically invasive plants, [Online]. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Endangered Resources (Producer). Available: http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/land/er/invasive/factsheets/honeysuckles.htm [2004, August 28]. [51288]
  • 87. Kline, Virginia M.; McClintock, Tom. 1994. Effect of burning on a dry oak forest infested with woody exotics. In: Wickett, Robert G.; Lewis, Patricia Dolan; Woodliffe, Allen; Pratt, Paul, eds. Spirit of the land, our prairie legacy: Proceedings, 13th North American prairie conference; 1992 August 6-9; Windsor, ON. Windsor, ON: Department of Parks and Recreation: 207-213. [24695]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Broad-scale Impacts of Fire

More info for the terms: shrub, shrubs, surface fire

Barnes [7] observed the effects of fire on 2 populations of Bell's honeysuckle at the University of Wisconsin Madison Arboretum. At 1 site, all leaves and buds on 9 of 12 shrubs were "apparently" killed by a fire in early May. Some "dormant buds" did survive on 3 individuals and were actively growing by late May, although location of these buds was not discussed. No further information was provided on fire effects or burn characteristics. At another site, a late-summer surface fire burned through a Bell's honeysuckle thicket, leaving scorched bark on basal stems and killing but not consuming leaves. Basal and aerial sprouts began to appear within 3 weeks postfire, and some plants produced new leaves that summer. Although it appears that some plants were top-killed, all plants survived. Only 2 of 30 sampled plants produced fruit 1 year postfire.

Kline and McClintock [87] conducted 2 consecutive annual mid-April prescribed burns in an oak (Q.× palaeolithicola) -dominated forest in southern Wisconsin, where Bell's honeysuckle was common in the shrub layer. "Most of the individuals resprouted from the base, but the resprouts were not very vigorous. Some completely dead honeysuckles were observed" in the 1st postfire year.

  • 7. Barnes, William J. 1972. The autecology of the Lonicera X bella complex. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin. 169 p. Dissertation. [48166]
  • 87. Kline, Virginia M.; McClintock, Tom. 1994. Effect of burning on a dry oak forest infested with woody exotics. In: Wickett, Robert G.; Lewis, Patricia Dolan; Woodliffe, Allen; Pratt, Paul, eds. Spirit of the land, our prairie legacy: Proceedings, 13th North American prairie conference; 1992 August 6-9; Windsor, ON. Windsor, ON: Department of Parks and Recreation: 207-213. [24695]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Immediate Effect of Fire

More info for the terms: shrubs, top-kill

Fire may top-kill bush honeysuckle plants, and is likely to kill seedlings and unhealthy plants [75,126,152]. However, perennating tissues on roots and root crowns are often protected from fire damage by soil. By excavating numerous Bell's honeysuckle shrubs in Wisconsin, it was determined that most roots occurred at a depth of 0.98 to 5.9 inches (2.5-15 cm) and in many cases extended well beyond crown width [7].

Fire may also kill seeds [23,24], although this is not confirmed.

  • 126. Nyboer, Randy. 1992. Vegetation management guideline: bush honeysuckles--tatarian, Marrow's, belle, amur honeysuckle. Natural Areas Journal. 12(4): 218-219. [20074]
  • 152. Smith, Tim E., ed. 2004. Vegetation management guideline: bush honeysuckles: Morrow's and Amur honeysuckle [Lonicera morrowii Gray and L. maackii (Rupr.) Maxim.], [Online]. In: Missouri vegetation management manual. Jefferson City, MO: Missouri Department of Conservation (Producer). Available: http://www.conservation.state.mo.us/nathis/exotic/vegman/six.htm [2004, August 30]. [51529]
  • 23. Butterfield, Chuck; Stubbendieck, James; Stumpf, Julie. 1996. Lonicera tatarica: Effigy Mounds National Monument, [Online]. In: Species abstracts of highly disruptive exotic plants. Jamestown, ND: Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center (Producer). Available: http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/orhrdata/exoticab/effiloni.htm [2004, August 28]. [51705]
  • 24. Butterfield, Chuck; Stubbendieck, James; Stumpf, Julie. 1996. Lonicera tatarica: Pipestone National Monument, [Online]. In: Species abstracts of highly disruptive exotic plants. Jamestown, ND: Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center (Producer). Available: http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/orhrdata/exoticab/pipeloni.htm [2004, August 28]. [51707]
  • 7. Barnes, William J. 1972. The autecology of the Lonicera X bella complex. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin. 169 p. Dissertation. [48166]
  • 75. Hoffman, Randy; Kearns, Kelly, eds. 1997. Tatarian honeysuckle (Lonicera tatarica), Morrow's honeysuckle (Lonicera morrowii), Bella honeysuckle (Lonicera x bella). In: Wisconsin manual of control recommendations for ecologically invasive plants, [Online]. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Endangered Resources (Producer). Available: http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/land/er/invasive/factsheets/honeysuckles.htm [2004, August 28]. [51288]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Post-fire Regeneration

More info for the terms: adventitious, crown residual colonizer, geophyte, ground residual colonizer, initial off-site colonizer, secondary colonizer, shrub

POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY [159]:
Tall shrub, adventitious bud/root crown
Small shrub, adventitious bud/root crown
Geophyte, growing points deep in soil
Ground residual colonizer (on-site, initial community)
Crown residual colonizer (on-site, initial community)
Initial off-site colonizer (off-site, initial community)
Secondary colonizer (on-site or off-site seed sources)
  • 159. Stickney, Peter F. 1989. FEIS postfire regeneration workshop--April 12: Seral origin of species comprising secondary plant succession in Northern Rocky Mountain forests. 10 p. Unpublished draft on file at: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT. [20090]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Fire Ecology

More info for the terms: restoration, root crown

Information about the fire ecology of bush honeysuckles is lacking.

Fire adaptations: Although no information could be found regarding the evolutionary relationship between fire and bush honeysuckles in their native ranges, it appears that bush honeysuckles are adapted to survive fire by shielding perennating buds below the soil surface on roots and/or the root crown. Postfire sprouting has been documented [7,75,87,102,126,152] (see Fire Effects), although it is unclear if all bush honeysuckle taxa discussed possess similar abilities.

FIRE REGIMES: Information about bush honeysuckles and FIRE REGIMES is lacking. Research is needed that examines the interactions of fire and bush honeysuckles, effects these interactions may have on native communities and ecosystems, and effects on their respective FIRE REGIMES. For example, bush honeysuckles are present in oak-dominated communities in the eastern U.S. [57,87,119,163]. Historically, fire has been an important ecological influence in oak forests, woodlands, and savannas [34]. Understanding the response of bush honeysuckles (and other nonnative species) to periodic fire could be critical for management and restoration efforts in these and other areas.

The following table lists fire return intervals for communities or ecosystems throughout North America where bush honeysuckles may occur. This list is presented as a guideline to illustrate historic FIRE REGIMES and is not to be interpreted as a strict description of FIRE REGIMES for bush honeysuckles. For further information on FIRE REGIMES in these communities or ecosystems see the corresponding FEIS summary for the dominant taxa listed below.

Community or Ecosystem Dominant Species Fire Return Interval Range (years)
silver fir-Douglas-fir Abies amabilis-Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii > 200
grand fir Abies grandis 35-200 [1]
maple-beech-birch Acer-Fagus-Betula > 1,000
silver maple-American elm Acer saccharinum-Ulmus americana < 35 to 200
sugar maple Acer saccharum > 1,000
sugar maple-basswood Acer saccharum-Tilia americana > 1,000 [187]
California chaparral Adenostoma and/or Arctostaphylos spp. 129]
bluestem prairie Andropogon gerardii var. gerardii-Schizachyrium scoparium 90,129]
Nebraska sandhills prairie Andropogon gerardii var. paucipilus-Schizachyrium scoparium < 10
bluestem-Sacahuista prairie Andropogon littoralis-Spartina spartinae 129]
silver sagebrush steppe Artemisia cana 5-45 [73,132,199]
sagebrush steppe Artemisia tridentata/Pseudoroegneria spicata 20-70 [129]
basin big sagebrush Artemisia tridentata var. tridentata 12-43 [140]
mountain big sagebrush Artemisia tridentata var. vaseyana 15-40 [3,22,120]
Wyoming big sagebrush Artemisia tridentata var. wyomingensis 10-70 (40**) [181,201]
coastal sagebrush Artemisia californica < 35 to < 100
saltbush-greasewood Atriplex confertifolia-Sarcobatus vermiculatus 129]
plains grasslands Bouteloua spp. 129,199]
blue grama-needle-and-thread grass-western wheatgrass Bouteloua gracilis-Hesperostipa comata-Pascopyrum smithii 129,138,199]
blue grama-buffalo grass Bouteloua gracilis-Buchloe dactyloides 129,199]
cheatgrass Bromus tectorum 130,192]
California montane chaparral Ceanothus and/or Arctostaphylos spp. 50-100 [129]
sugarberry-America elm-green ash Celtis laevigata-Ulmus americana-Fraxinus pennsylvanica 187]
curlleaf mountain-mahogany* Cercocarpus ledifolius 13-1,000 [5,143]
mountain-mahogany-Gambel oak scrub Cercocarpus ledifolius-Quercus gambelii 129]
Atlantic white-cedar Chamaecyparis thyoides 35 to > 200 [187]
blackbrush Coleogyne ramosissima < 35 to < 100
northern cordgrass prairie Distichlis spicata-Spartina spp. 1-3 [129]
beech-sugar maple Fagus spp.-Acer saccharum > 1,000 [187]
California steppe Festuca-Danthonia spp. 129,160]
black ash Fraxinus nigra 187]
Ashe juniper Juniperus ashei < 35
western juniper Juniperus occidentalis 20-70
Rocky Mountain juniper Juniperus scopulorum 129]
cedar glades Juniperus virginiana 3-22 [63,129]
tamarack Larix laricina 35-200 [129]
western larch Larix occidentalis 25-350 [2,10,31]
creosotebush Larrea tridentata 129]
yellow-poplar Liriodendron tulipifera 187]
wheatgrass plains grasslands Pascopyrum smithii 129,132,199]
Great Lakes spruce-fir Picea-Abies spp. 35 to > 200
northeastern spruce-fir Picea-Abies spp. 35-200 [40]
southeastern spruce-fir Picea-Abies spp. 35 to > 200 [187]
Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir Picea engelmannii-Abies lasiocarpa 35 to > 200 [1]
black spruce Picea mariana 35-200
conifer bog* Picea mariana-Larix laricina 35-200 [40]
blue spruce* Picea pungens 35-200 [1]
red spruce* Picea rubens 35-200 [40]
pine-cypress forest Pinus-Cupressus spp. 1]
jack pine Pinus banksiana 40]
Rocky Mountain lodgepole pine* Pinus contorta var. latifolia 25-340 [9,10,164]
Sierra lodgepole pine* Pinus contorta var. murrayana 35-200 [1]
shortleaf pine Pinus echinata 2-15
shortleaf pine-oak Pinus echinata-Quercus spp. 187]
Colorado pinyon Pinus edulis 10-400+ [49,56,84,129]
slash pine Pinus elliottii 3-8 [187]
Jeffrey pine Pinus jeffreyi 5-30
western white pine* Pinus monticola 50-200 [1]
longleaf-slash pine Pinus palustris-P. elliottii 1-4 [124,187]
longleaf pine-scrub oak Pinus palustris-Quercus spp. 6-10 [187]
Pacific ponderosa pine* Pinus ponderosa var. ponderosa 1-47 [1]
interior ponderosa pine* Pinus ponderosa var. scopulorum 2-30 [1,6,94]
Arizona pine Pinus ponderosa var. arizonica 2-15 [6,30,148]
Table Mountain pine Pinus pungens 187]
red pine (Great Lakes region) Pinus resinosa 10-200 (10**) [40,51]
red-white-jack pine* Pinus resinosa-P. strobus-P. banksiana 10-300 [40,70]
pitch pine Pinus rigida 6-25 [21,71]
pocosin Pinus serotina 3-8
pond pine Pinus serotina 3-8
eastern white pine Pinus strobus 35-200
eastern white pine-eastern hemlock Pinus strobus-Tsuga canadensis 35-200
eastern white pine-northern red oak-red maple Pinus strobus-Quercus rubra-Acer rubrum 35-200
loblolly pine Pinus taeda 3-8
loblolly-shortleaf pine Pinus taeda-P. echinata 10 to < 35
Virginia pine Pinus virginiana 10 to < 35
Virginia pine-oak Pinus virginiana-Quercus spp. 10 to < 35
sycamore-sweetgum-American elm Platanus occidentalis-Liquidambar styraciflua-Ulmus americana 187]
galleta-threeawn shrubsteppe Pleuraphis jamesii-Aristida purpurea < 35 to < 100
eastern cottonwood Populus deltoides 129]
aspen-birch Populus tremuloides-Betula papyrifera 35-200 [40,187]
quaking aspen (west of the Great Plains) Populus tremuloides 7-120 [1,62,113]
Texas savanna Prosopis glandulosa var. glandulosa 129]
black cherry-sugar maple Prunus serotina-Acer saccharum > 1,000 [187]
Rocky Mountain Douglas-fir* Pseudotsuga menziesii var. glauca 25-100 [1,3,4]
coastal Douglas-fir* Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii 40-240 [1,123,136]
California mixed evergreen Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii-Lithocarpus densiflorus-Arbutus menziesii < 35
California oakwoods Quercus spp. 1]
oak-hickory Quercus-Carya spp. < 35
northeastern oak-pine Quercus-Pinus spp. 10 to 187]
oak-gum-cypress Quercus-Nyssa-spp.-Taxodium distichum 35 to > 200 [124]
southeastern oak-pine Quercus-Pinus spp. 187]
coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 2-75 [61]
white oak-black oak-northern red oak Quercus alba-Q. velutina-Q. rubra 187]
canyon live oak Quercus chrysolepis <35 to 200
blue oak-foothills pine Quercus douglasii-P. sabiniana 1]
northern pin oak Quercus ellipsoidalis 187]
Oregon white oak Quercus garryana 1]
bear oak Quercus ilicifolia 187]
California black oak Quercus kelloggii 5-30 [129]
bur oak Quercus macrocarpa 187]
oak savanna Quercus macrocarpa/Andropogon gerardii-Schizachyrium scoparium 2-14 [129,187]
shinnery Quercus mohriana 129]
chestnut oak Quercus prinus 3-8
northern red oak Quercus rubra 10 to < 35
post oak-blackjack oak Quercus stellata-Q. marilandica < 10
black oak Quercus velutina 187]
interior live oak Quercus wislizenii 1]
blackland prairie Schizachyrium scoparium-Nassella leucotricha 187]
little bluestem-grama prairie Schizachyrium scoparium-Bouteloua spp. 129]
redwood Sequoia sempervirens 5-200 [1,48,162]
southern cordgrass prairie Spartina alterniflora 1-3 [129]
baldcypress Taxodium distichum var. distichum 100 to > 300
pondcypress Taxodium distichum var. nutans 124]
western redcedar-western hemlock Thuja plicata-Tsuga heterophylla > 200 [1]
eastern hemlock-yellow birch Tsuga canadensis-Betula alleghaniensis > 200 [187]
western hemlock-Sitka spruce Tsuga heterophylla-Picea sitchensis > 200 [1]
elm-ash-cottonwood Ulmus-Fraxinus-Populus spp. 40,187]
*fire return interval varies widely; trends in variation are noted in the species review
**mean
  • 1. Arno, Stephen F. 2000. Fire in western forest ecosystems. In: Brown, James K.; Smith, Jane Kapler, eds. Wildland fire in ecosystems: Effects of fire on flora. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-42-vol. 2. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 97-120. [36984]
  • 10. Barrett, Stephen W.; Arno, Stephen F.; Key, Carl H. 1991. FIRE REGIMES of western larch - lodgepole pine forests in Glacier National Park, Montana. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 21: 1711-1720. [17290]
  • 102. Luken, James O. 1996. Lonicera maackii, L. morrowii, L. tatarica--bush honeysuckle. In: Randall, John M.; Marinelli, Janet, eds. Invasive plants: Weeds of the global garden. Handbook #149. Brooklyn, NY: Brooklyn Botanic Garden: 60-61. [48501]
  • 113. Meinecke, E. P. 1929. Quaking aspen: A study in applied forest pathology. Tech. Bull. No. 155. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 34 p. [26669]
  • 119. Miller, Kara E.; Gorchov, David L. 2004. The invasive shrub, Lonicera maackii, reduces growth and fecundity of perennial forest herbs. Oecologia. 139(3): 359-375. [48522]
  • 120. Miller, Richard F.; Rose, Jeffery A. 1995. Historic expansion of Juniperus occidentalis (western juniper) in southeastern Oregon. The Great Basin Naturalist. 55(1): 37-45. [26637]
  • 123. Morrison, Peter H.; Swanson, Frederick J. 1990. Fire history and pattern in a Cascade Range landscape. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-254. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 77 p. [13074]
  • 124. Myers, Ronald L. 2000. Fire in tropical and subtropical ecosystems. In: Brown, James K.; Smith, Jane Kapler, eds. Wildland fire in ecosystems: Effects of fire on flora. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-42-vol. 2. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 161-173. [36985]
  • 126. Nyboer, Randy. 1992. Vegetation management guideline: bush honeysuckles--tatarian, Marrow's, belle, amur honeysuckle. Natural Areas Journal. 12(4): 218-219. [20074]
  • 129. Paysen, Timothy E.; Ansley, R. James; Brown, James K.; [and others]. 2000. Fire in western shrubland, woodland, and grassland ecosystems. In: Brown, James K.; Smith, Jane Kapler, eds. Wildland fire in ecosystems: Effects of fire on flora. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-42-volume 2. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 121-159. [36978]
  • 132. Quinnild, Clayton L.; Cosby, Hugh E. 1958. Relicts of climax vegetation on two mesas in western North Dakota. Ecology. 39(1): 29-32. [1925]
  • 136. Ripple, William J. 1994. Historic spatial patterns of old forests in western Oregon. Journal of Forestry. 92(11): 45-49. [33881]
  • 138. Rowe, J. S. 1969. Lightning fires in Saskatchewan grassland. Canadian Field-Naturalist. 83: 317-324. [6266]
  • 140. Sapsis, David B. 1990. Ecological effects of spring and fall prescribed burning on basin big sagebrush/Idaho fescue--bluebunch wheatgrass communities. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University. 105 p. Thesis. [16579]
  • 143. Schultz, Brad W. 1987. Ecology of curlleaf mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus ledifolius) in western and central Nevada: population structure and dynamics. Reno, NV: University of Nevada. 111 p. Thesis. [7064]
  • 148. Seklecki, Mariette T.; Grissino-Mayer, Henri D.; Swetnam, Thomas W. 1996. Fire history and the possible role of Apache-set fires in the Chiricahua Mountains of southeastern Arizona. In: Ffolliott, Peter F.; DeBano, Leonard F.; Baker, Malchus, B., Jr.; [and others], tech. coords. Effects of fire on Madrean Province ecosystems: a symposium proceedings; 1996 March 11-15; Tucson, AZ. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-GTR-289. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 238-246. [28082]
  • 152. Smith, Tim E., ed. 2004. Vegetation management guideline: bush honeysuckles: Morrow's and Amur honeysuckle [Lonicera morrowii Gray and L. maackii (Rupr.) Maxim.], [Online]. In: Missouri vegetation management manual. Jefferson City, MO: Missouri Department of Conservation (Producer). Available: http://www.conservation.state.mo.us/nathis/exotic/vegman/six.htm [2004, August 30]. [51529]
  • 160. Stomberg, Mark R.; Kephart, Paul; Yadon, Vern. 2001. Composition, invasibility, and diversity in coastal California grasslands. Madrono. 48(4): 236-252. [41371]
  • 162. Stuart, John D. 1987. Fire history of an old-growth forest of Sequoia sempervirens (Taxodiaceae) forest in Humboldt Redwoods State Park, California. Madrono. 34(2): 128-141. [7277]
  • 163. Swanson, Ann M.; Vankat, John L. 2000. Woody vegetation and vascular flora of an old-growth mixed-mesophytic forest in southwestern Ohio. Castanea. 65(1): 36-55. [38933]
  • 164. Tande, Gerald F. 1979. Fire history and vegetation pattern of coniferous forests in Jasper National Park, Alberta. Canadian Journal of Botany. 57: 1912-1931. [18676]
  • 181. Vincent, Dwain W. 1992. The sagebrush/grasslands of the upper Rio Puerco area, New Mexico. Rangelands. 14(5): 268-271. [19698]
  • 187. Wade, Dale D.; Brock, Brent L.; Brose, Patrick H.; [and others]. 2000. Fire in eastern ecosystems. In: Brown, James K.; Smith, Jane Kapler, eds. Wildland fire in ecosystems: Effects of fire on flora. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-42-vol. 2. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 53-96. [36983]
  • 192. Whisenant, Steven G. 1990. Postfire population dynamics of Bromus japonicus. The American Midland Naturalist. 123: 301-308. [11150]
  • 199. Wright, Henry A.; Bailey, Arthur W. 1982. Fire ecology: United States and southern Canada. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 501 p. [2620]
  • 2. Arno, Stephen F.; Fischer, William C. 1995. Larix occidentalis--fire ecology and fire management. In: Schmidt, Wyman C.; McDonald, Kathy J., compilers. Ecology and management of Larix forests: a look ahead: Proceedings of an international symposium; 1992 October 5-9; Whitefish, MT. Gen. Tech. Rep. GTR-INT-319. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 130-135. [25293]
  • 201. Young, James A.; Evans, Raymond A. 1981. Demography and fire history of a western juniper stand. Journal of Range Management. 34(6): 501-505. [2659]
  • 21. Buchholz, Kenneth; Good, Ralph E. 1982. Density, age structure, biomass and net annual aboveground productivity of dwarfed Pinus rigida Moll. from the New Jersey Pine Barren Plains. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club. 109(1): 24-34. [8639]
  • 22. Burkhardt, Wayne J.; Tisdale, E. W. 1976. Causes of juniper invasion in southwestern Idaho. Ecology. 57: 472-484. [565]
  • 3. Arno, Stephen F.; Gruell, George E. 1983. Fire history at the forest-grassland ecotone in southwestern Montana. Journal of Range Management. 36(3): 332-336. [342]
  • 30. Cooper, Charles F. 1961. Pattern in ponderosa pine forests. Ecology. 42(3): 493-499. [5780]
  • 31. Davis, Kathleen M. 1980. Fire history of a western larch/Douglas-fir forest type in northwestern Montana. In: Stokes, Marvin A.; Dieterich, John H., technical coordinators. Proceedings of the fire history workshop; 1980 October 20-24; Tucson, AZ. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-81. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 69-74. [12813]
  • 34. Dey, Daniel. 2002. Fire history and postsettlement disturbance. In: McShea, William J.; Healy, William M., eds. Oak forest ecosystems: Ecology and management for wildlife. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press: 46-59. [43520]
  • 4. Arno, Stephen F.; Scott, Joe H.; Hartwell, Michael G. 1995. Age-class structure of old growth ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir stands and its relationship to fire history. Res. Pap. INT-RP-481. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 25 p. [25928]
  • 40. Duchesne, Luc C.; Hawkes, Brad C. 2000. Fire in northern ecosystems. In: Brown, James K.; Smith, Jane Kapler, eds. Wildland fire in ecosystems: Effects of fire on flora. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-42-vol. 2. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 35-51. [36982]
  • 48. Finney, Mark A.; Martin, Robert E. 1989. Fire history in a Sequoia sempervirens forest at Salt Point State Park, California. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 19: 1451-1457. [9845]
  • 49. Floyd, M. Lisa; Romme, William H.; Hanna, David D. 2000. Fire history and vegetation pattern in Mesa Verde National Park, Colorado, USA. Ecological Applications. 10(6): 1666-1680. [37590]
  • 5. Arno, Stephen F.; Wilson, Andrew E. 1986. Dating past fires in curlleaf mountain-mahogany communities. Journal of Range Management. 39(3): 241-243. [350]
  • 51. Frissell, Sidney S., Jr. 1968. A fire chronology for Itasca State Park, Minnesota. Minnesota Forestry Research Notes No. 196. St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota. 2 p. [34527]
  • 56. Gottfried, Gerald J.; Swetnam, Thomas W.; Allen, Craig D.; [and others]. 1995. Pinyon-juniper woodlands. In: Finch, Deborah M.; Tainter, Joseph A., eds. Ecology, diversity, and sustainability of the Middle Rio Grande Basin. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-GTR-268. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 95-132. [26188]
  • 57. Gould, Andrew M. A.; Gorchov, David L. 2000. Effects of the exotic invasive shrub Lonicera maackii on the survival and fecundity of three species of native annuals. The American Midland Naturalist. 144(1): 36-50. [47522]
  • 6. Baisan, Christopher H.; Swetnam, Thomas W. 1990. Fire history on a desert mountain range: Rincon Mountain Wilderness, Arizona, U.S.A. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 20: 1559-1569. [14986]
  • 61. Greenlee, Jason M.; Langenheim, Jean H. 1990. Historic FIRE REGIMES and their relation to vegetation patterns in the Monterey Bay area of California. The American Midland Naturalist. 124(2): 239-253. [15144]
  • 62. Gruell, G. E.; Loope, L. L. 1974. Relationships among aspen, fire, and ungulate browsing in Jackson Hole, Wyoming. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 33 p. In cooperation with: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Rocky Mountain Region. [3862]
  • 63. Guyette, Richard; McGinnes, E. A., Jr. 1982. Fire history of an Ozark glade in Missouri. Transactions, Missouri Academy of Science. 16: 85-93. [5170]
  • 7. Barnes, William J. 1972. The autecology of the Lonicera X bella complex. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin. 169 p. Dissertation. [48166]
  • 70. Heinselman, Miron L. 1970. The natural role of fire in northern conifer forests. In: The role of fire in the Intermountain West: Symposium proceedings; 1970 October 27-29; Missoula, MT. Missoula, MT: Intermountain Fire Research Council: 30-41. In cooperation with: University of Montana, School of Forestry. [15735]
  • 71. Hendrickson, William H. 1972. Perspective on fire and ecosystems in the United States. In: Fire in the environment: Symposium proceedings; 1972 May 1-5; Denver, CO. FS-276. [Washington, DC]: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 29-33. In cooperation with: Fire Services of Canada, Mexico, and the United States; Members of the Fire Management Study Group; North American Forestry Commission; FAO. [17276]
  • 73. Heyerdahl, Emily K.; Berry, Dawn; Agee, James K. 1994. Fire history database of the western United States. Final report. Interagency agreement: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency DW12934530; U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service PNW-93-0300; University of Washington 61-2239. Seattle, WA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Pacific Northwest Research Station; University of Washington, College of Forest Resources. 28 p. [+ Appendices]. Unpublished report on file with: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT. [27979]
  • 75. Hoffman, Randy; Kearns, Kelly, eds. 1997. Tatarian honeysuckle (Lonicera tatarica), Morrow's honeysuckle (Lonicera morrowii), Bella honeysuckle (Lonicera x bella). In: Wisconsin manual of control recommendations for ecologically invasive plants, [Online]. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Endangered Resources (Producer). Available: http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/land/er/invasive/factsheets/honeysuckles.htm [2004, August 28]. [51288]
  • 84. Keeley, Jon E. 1981. Reproductive cycles and FIRE REGIMES. In: Mooney, H. A.; Bonnicksen, T. M.; Christensen, N. L.; [and others], technical coordinators. FIRE REGIMES and ecosystem properties: Proceedings of the conference; 1978 December 11-15; Honolulu, HI. Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-26. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 231-277. [4395]
  • 87. Kline, Virginia M.; McClintock, Tom. 1994. Effect of burning on a dry oak forest infested with woody exotics. In: Wickett, Robert G.; Lewis, Patricia Dolan; Woodliffe, Allen; Pratt, Paul, eds. Spirit of the land, our prairie legacy: Proceedings, 13th North American prairie conference; 1992 August 6-9; Windsor, ON. Windsor, ON: Department of Parks and Recreation: 207-213. [24695]
  • 9. Barrett, Stephen W. 1993. FIRE REGIMES on the Clearwater and Nez Perce National Forests north-central Idaho. Final Report: Order No. 43-0276-3-0112. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory. 21 p. Unpublished report on file with: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT. [41883]
  • 94. Laven, R. D.; Omi, P. N.; Wyant, J. G.; Pinkerton, A. S. 1980. Interpretation of fire scar data from a ponderosa pine ecosystem in the central Rocky Mountains, Colorado. In: Stokes, Marvin A.; Dieterich, John H., technical coordinators. Proceedings of the fire history workshop; 1980 October 20-24; Tucson, AZ. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-81. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 46-49. [7183]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Successional Status

More info on this topic.

More info for the terms: codominant, cover, density, formation, hardwood, presence, shrub, shrubs, succession, tree, vines

Bush honeysuckles are likely to occur across a variety of successional habitats within their North American range [152]. Luken and McKnight [101] suggest that Amur honeysuckle can dominate habitats ranging from recently disturbed areas to mature forest.

Several studies document the influence of bush honeysuckles in old-field succession. Foster and Gross [50] examined woody plant establishment following abandonment of cultivation in a southwestern Michigan old-field habitat. Tatarian honeysuckle established in the 3rd season following abandonment. Average density increased steadily from 6.7 stems/acre in the year of establishment, to 91.1 stems/acre 4 years later (7 years following abandonment of agriculture). Fike and Niering [47] documented nearly 40 years of vegetation change in an old-field habitat in southeastern Connecticut. This site was cultivated until about 1945 and grazed until 1951. The initial survey in 1954 indicated a continuous perennial herbaceous cover with scattered woody plants <3.3 feet (1 m) tall. By 1960 the herbaceous community had decreased slightly and tree species were becoming more established. Presence of Morrow's honeysuckle (<1% cover) was first recorded in 1973, in conjunction with development of a thicket community of small trees, shrubs, and woody vines. This woody stratum was 13 to 20 feet (4-6 m) in height and had >40% cover. By 1983 Morrow's honeysuckle cover increased to 10% in a community characterized as "a young hardwood forest", with tree cover of 90%, shrub/vine cover of 85%, and herbaceous cover decreasing to about 40%. By the end of this study in 1993, there was a relatively continuous tree canopy 40 to 59 feet (12-18 m) in height, a 3.3 to 6.6 feet (1-2 m) high shrub stratum contributing about 50% cover, and 10% herbaceous cover. Morrow's honeysuckle was the dominant shrub species at 24% cover. Vankat and Snyder [179] examined floristics of a chronosequence of nearby stands corresponding to old-field/deciduous-forest succession in southwestern Ohio. Amur honeysuckle was present, but not common, in a 10-year-old goldenrod (Solidago spp.)- and fescue (Festuca spp.)-dominated old field, and in an approximately 50-year-old goldenrod-dominated old field with a sparse white ash-black cherry tree stratum. Amur honeysuckle was codominant in the understory (3.3 to 9.8 feet (1-3 m) tall) with sugar maple, and codominant in the ground layer (<3.3 feet (1 m)) with jewelweed (Impatiens capensis), in an approximately 90-year-old sugar maple-slippery elm forest. Vankat and Snyder [179] concede that conclusions about successional status of Amur honeysuckle, based on the above data, are limited by the study design. Nevertheless, Amur honeysuckle was common in a young closed-canopy forest stand, sparse in 2 old fields with some woody plant composition but no closed canopy, and absent from a 2-year-old abandoned agricultural field and an old-growth American beech-sugar maple forest.

It appears that bush honeysuckle establishment is often facilitated by some form of habitat disturbance [152]. In forested habitats, Amur honeysuckle performs best near edges and in canopy gaps, where light levels are favorable [98].

Once established, the ability of bush honeysuckles to persist and spread within various successional habitats is less clear. Hutchinson and Vankat [78] assert that late successional forests dominated by shade-tolerant tree species such as sugar maple and American beech are more resistant to Amur honeysuckle invasion, probably due to low light levels near the forest floor. Luken [101] suggested forest patches having complete canopy closure can resist Amur honeysuckle invasion, but if canopy gaps are created, Amur honeysuckle can establish and persist. Bush honeysuckle populations, once established, can persist for many years. Age of Bell's honeysuckle shrubs studied in southern Wisconsin ranged from 12 to 34 years, with a mean of 20.4 years [7].

There are suggestions that bush honeysuckles could alter successional trajectories in ways that favor their persistence. Collier and others [29] hypothesized that Amur honeysuckle invasion may alter patterns of forest succession in southwestern Ohio. If development of a dense Amur honeysuckle shrub layer suppresses establishment of shade-tolerant tree seedlings, recruitment of mid- and late successional tree species may be inhibited. Hypothetically then, as older canopy trees die, closed-canopy forests could change to open-canopy woodlands or even Amur honeysuckle-dominated shrublands. Luken [100] demonstrated that Amur honeysuckle dominance in the shrub layer of northern Kentucky hardwood forests can suppress advance regeneration of overstory species. Woods [198] came to a similar conclusion after finding a significant (p<0.01) negative correlation between Tatarian honeysuckle cover and tree seedling (<3.3 feet (1 m tall)) density (in this study Tatarian honeysuckle and Bell's honeysuckle were not distinguished, although the text referred only to Tatarian honeysuckle (see Taxonomy)). In contrast, tree seedlings 3.3 to 6.6 feet (1-2 m) tall were not significantly (p<0.05) related to Tatarian honeysuckle cover. Woody seedlings in this larger size class frequently overtopped Tatarian honeysuckle. Examination of growth rings revealed that establishment of these larger seedlings predated Tatarian honeysuckle invasion. It was speculated that persistent Tatarian honeysuckle cover could suppress advance regeneration of overstory species, possibly leading to changes in canopy composition or even conversion of forests to more open canopies or shrublands. Gorchov and Trisel [55] provide direct evidence that Amur honeysuckle invasion can inhibit tree seedling establishment in southwestern Ohio. For further discussion, see Impacts.

Shade tolerance: Most sources characterize bush honeysuckles as intermediate in shade tolerance, adapted to grow in full sun to partial shade conditions [17,95,127,173,174,175,177,185]. Descriptions of Amur honeysuckle shade tolerance range from shade intolerant [98] to intermediate [185] to tolerant [174] to "amazing" shade tolerance [37].

Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation [182] indicates the following light regimes for bush honeysuckles occurring in Virginia:

Full Sun Part Sun Shade
Winter honeysuckle X X
Amur honeysuckle X
Morrow's honeysuckle X X X
Tatarian honeysuckle X X
Bell's honeysuckle X X

One reason often cited for an apparent competitive advantage of bush honeysuckles over native shrubs (see Impacts) is the ability of bush honeysuckles to respond rapidly to changes in light availability. While bush honeysuckles have some ability to establish and persist in relatively low light environments, growth is typically greatest under high light availability. For example, Harrington and others [66] found Bell's honeysuckle aboveground growth rates were significantly (p=0.0008) higher in open habitat than under a mature closed-canopy hardwood forest. Amur honeysuckle can respond to gap formation in otherwise shaded habitats via phenotypic plasticity in photosynthetic capability of shade-grown leaves, as well as by rapid stem elongation and production of new leaves with even greater photosynthetic capacity [98]. Luken and others [104] compared performance of Amur honeysuckle shrubs with the indigenous shade-tolerant northern spicebush (Lindera benzoin), under shade and full sun. They transplanted forest-grown plants into pots and grew them in a greenhouse under full sun, 25% full sun, or 1% full sun treatments. Relative stem growth rates (integrated over an 11-week period) under the 1% full sun treatment were similar for both species. Amur honeysuckle stem growth was greatest under full sun, while maximum stem growth for northern spicebush occurred under the 25% full sun treatment. Amur honeysuckle stem growth was substantially greater than spicebush under both the 25% and 100% full sun treatments. Observed differences in leaf-level morphology and physiology, and biomass allocation indicate that Amur honeysuckle has a much greater ability than spicebush to acclimate and respond to enhanced light levels that might occur following forest canopy disturbance. This trait, coupled with an ability to tolerate heavy shade comparable to native shade-tolerant shrubs such as spicebush, indicates Amur honeysuckle may be highly competitive under a range of conditions, and may persist under a variety of successional stages and pathways in eastern deciduous forests.

  • 100. Luken, James O. 1990. Forest and pasture communities respond differently to cutting of exotic Amur honeysuckle. Restoration & Management Notes. 8(2): 122-123. [13757]
  • 101. Luken, James O. 1993. Prioritizing patches for control of invasive plant species: a case study with Amur honeysuckle. In: McKnight, Bill N., ed. Biological pollution: the control and impact of invasive exotic species: Proceedings; 1991 October 25-26; Indianapolis, IN. Indianapolis, IN: Indiana Academy of Science: 211-214. [47288]
  • 104. Luken, James O.; Kuddes, Linda M.; Tholemeier, Tim C.; Haller, David M. 1997. Comparative responses of Lonicera maackii (Amur honeysuckle) and Lindera benzoin (spicebush) to increased light. The American Midland Naturalist. 138(2): 331-343. [49147]
  • 127. Oregon State University. 2004. Lonicera fragrantissima--winter honeysuckle, [Online]. In: Landscape plants: Images, identification, and information. Volume 2. Corvallis, OR: Department of Horticulture (Producer). Available: http://oregonstate.edu/dept/ldplants/lofr.htm [2004, August 26]. [51754]
  • 152. Smith, Tim E., ed. 2004. Vegetation management guideline: bush honeysuckles: Morrow's and Amur honeysuckle [Lonicera morrowii Gray and L. maackii (Rupr.) Maxim.], [Online]. In: Missouri vegetation management manual. Jefferson City, MO: Missouri Department of Conservation (Producer). Available: http://www.conservation.state.mo.us/nathis/exotic/vegman/six.htm [2004, August 30]. [51529]
  • 17. Biggs, Scott. 2002. Lonicera xylosteum: European fly honeysuckle or fly honeysuckle. In: Pocket gardener, [Online]. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University, Department of Horticulture and Crop Science. Available: http://hcs.osu.edu/pocketgardener/source/description/lo_steum.html [2005, January 31]. [51293]
  • 173. University of Connecticut. 2004. Lonicera fragrantissima, [Online]. In: University of Connecticut plant database of trees, shrubs, and vines. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut (Producer). Available: http://www.hort.uconn.edu/plants/l/lonfra/lonfra3.html [2004, September 1]. [51743]
  • 174. University of Connecticut. 2004. Lonicera maackii--Amur honeysuckle, [Online]. In: University of Connecticut plant database of trees, shrubs, and vines. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut (Producer). Available: http://www.hort.uconn.edu/plants/l/lonmaa/lonmaa3.html [2004, August 27]. [51745]
  • 175. University of Connecticut. 2004. Lonicera morrowii--Morrow honeysuckle, [Online]. In: University of Connecticut plant database of trees, shrubs, and vines. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut (Producer). Available: http://www.hort.uconn.edu/plants/l/lonmor/lonmor3.html [2004, August 28]. [51747]
  • 177. University of Connecticut. 2004. Lonicera xylosteum, [Online]. In: University of Connecticut plant database of trees, shrubs, and vines. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut (Producer). Available: http://www.hort.uconn.edu/plants/l/lonxyl/lonxyl3.html [2004, August 30]. [51744]
  • 179. Vankat, John L.; Snyder, Gary W. 1991. Floristics of a chronosequence corresponding to old field-deciduous forest succession in southwestern Ohio. I. Undisturbed vegetation. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club. 118(4): 365-376. [18758]
  • 182. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage. 2003. Invasive alien plant species of Virginia, [Online]. Available: http://www.dcr.state.va.us/dnh/invlist.pdf [2003, August 25]. [44942]
  • 185. Vogel, Willis G. 1981. A guide for revegetating coal mine soils in the eastern United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-68. Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 190 p. [15576]
  • 198. Woods, Kerry D. 1993. Effects of invasion by Lonicera tatarica L. on herbs and tree seedlings in four New England forests. The American Midland Naturalist. 130(1): 62-74. [21810]
  • 29. Collier, Matthew H.; Vankat, John L.; Hughes, Michael R. 2002. Diminished plant richness and abundance below Lonicera maackii, an invasive shrub. The American Midland Naturalist. 147(1): 60-71. [40237]
  • 37. Dirr, Michael A. 1998. Manual of woody landscape plants: their identification, ornamental characteristics, culture, propagation and uses. 5th ed. Champagne, IL: Stipes Publishing Company. 1187 p. [48168]
  • 47. Fike, Jean; Niering, William A. 1999. Four decades of old field vegetation development and the role of Celastrus orbiculatus in the northeastern United States. Journal of Vegetation Science. 10(4): 483-492. [37337]
  • 50. Foster, Bryan L.; Gross, Katherine L. 1999. Temporal and spatial patterns of woody plant establishment in Michigan old fields. The American Midland Naturalist. 142(2): 229-243. [36648]
  • 55. Gorchov, David L.; Trisel, Donald E. 2003. Competitive effects of the invasive shrub, Lonicera maackii (Rupr.) Herder (Caprifoliaceae), on the growth and survival of native tree seedlings. Plant Ecology. 166: 13-24. [48164]
  • 66. Harrington, Robin A.; Brown, Becky J.; Reich, Peter B.; Fownes, James H. 1989. Ecophysiology of exotic and native shrubs in southern Wisconsin. II. Annual growth and carbon gain. Oecologia. 80: 368-373. [9240]
  • 7. Barnes, William J. 1972. The autecology of the Lonicera X bella complex. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin. 169 p. Dissertation. [48166]
  • 78. Hutchinson, Todd F.; Vankat, John L. 1997. Invasibility and effects of Amur honeysuckle in southwestern Ohio forests. Conservation Biology. 11(5): 1117-1124. [48346]
  • 95. Lorenz, David G.; Sharp, W. Curtis.; Ruffner, Joseph D. 1991. Conservation plants for the Northeast. Program Aid 1154. [Washington, DC]: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 43 p. [47719]
  • 98. Luken, J. O.; Tholemeier, T. C.; Kuddes, L. M.; Kunkel, B. A. 1995. Performance, plasticity, and acclimation of the nonindigenous shrub Lonicera maackii (Caprifoliaceae) in contrasting light environments. Canadian Journal of Botany. 73(12): 1953-1961. [26453]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Regeneration Processes

More info for the terms: adventitious, competition, cover, density, epigeal, forbs, frequency, fresh, layering, litter, perfect, root crown, shrub, shrubs, vine

Bush honeysuckles regenerate from seeds, as well as vegetatively following disturbance.

Breeding system: As of this writing (2005) there is very little available information about bush honeysuckle breeding systems. According to Stephens [157] Tatarian honeysuckle flowers are perfect.

Pollination: According to Hauser [68] Morrow's honeysuckle, Tatarian honeysuckle, and Bell's honeysuckle are pollinated by bumblebees. Graenicher states [58] Bell's honeysuckle is pollinated by a variety of bees and perhaps by hummingbirds.

Seed production: Information about seed production is sparse, but it is apparent that some bush honeysuckles are capable of producing substantial numbers of seeds. Barnes [7] indicates Bell's honeysuckle produces consistent annual seed crops. A single "typical" Bell's honeysuckle shrub, about 6.6 feet (2 m) tall, growing in southern Wisconsin, produced 3,554 berries in 1 year. Numbers of seeds/fruit, sampled from several shrubs at this site, averaged 5 to 7, indicating that a "typical" plant may produce >20,000 seeds annually [7].

Estimates of annual fruit production for Amur honeysuckle and European fly honeysuckle in southwestern Ohio ranged from 0 to 1.2 million berries per plant, and approximately 400 million berries ha-1 [80]. According to Welsh and others [191], winter honeysuckle fruits are "seldom formed", although no further explanation was provided.

There is some evidence for shrub age and size as determinants of reproductive ability. According to Sharp and Belcher [150], Amur honeysuckle plants begin flowering in the 3rd or 4th year, after which flowers appear on stems 2 years old and older. Deering and Vankat [33] compared reproductive state with shrub age and height within an Amur honeysuckle population in southwestern Ohio. Established shrubs took 3-8 years to reach reproductive age. At age 3 only 5.7% of individuals were reproductive, while >50% were reproductive by age 5. All shrubs ≥8.2 feet (2.5 m) tall were reproductive, while none <3.3 feet (1 m) tall were reproductive. Bell's honeysuckle shrubs may also produce fruit at as young as 3 years of age [7].

Site characteristics may also affect seed production. Amur honeysuckle flowering and fruiting were significantly (p=0.001 and p=0.03, respectively) correlated with light availability in southern Vermont [139].

Seed dispersal: Several sources indicate bush honeysuckle seeds are dispersed primarily by frugivorous birds [7,80,93,126,186]. Bartuszevige and Gorchov [12] showed that a wide variety of bird species consumed Amur honeysuckle fruit in southwestern Ohio. They also confirmed that American robins dispersed viable Amur honeysuckle seed, usually into woodlot edge and fencerow habitats. White-tailed deer may also consume and disperse viable seeds of Tatarian honeysuckle, Morrow's honeysuckle, Bell's honeysuckle, and Amur honeysuckle [180]. Barnes [7] suggests that "many, if not most" fruits fall near the parent plant. For more information see Importance to Livestock and Wildlife.

Seed banking: It appears the potential for bush honeysuckles to form seed banks is low, but more research is needed to confirm this assertion and to determine interspecific differences. According to Luken and Mattimiro [105], seeds of Amur honeysuckle are "not long-lived in the soil." Hidayati and others [74] concluded that neither winter honeysuckle, Amur honeysuckle, or Morrow's honeysuckle have the potential to form persistent seed banks. However, Stevens and Jorgensen [158] found 12-year-old Tatarian honeysuckle seed to be still viable. They compared germination in seed stored for 12 years with fresh seed. Stored seeds were kept in a dry, open warehouse where temperatures over a 25-year study period ranged from -21.8 to 100.9 °F (-29.9 to 38.3 °C). Seeds from both lots were germinated over a 16-month period in a refrigerator (34 to 38 °F (1.1-3.3°C)). Germination rates were 57% for fresh seed and 31% for 12-year-old seed.

Germination: Bush honeysuckle germination requirements are variable between species.

Winter honeysuckle seeds require warm plus cold stratification prior to breaking dormancy. Although seeds mature in late spring/early summer, they generally will not germinate until late winter/early spring of the following year. A greenhouse study by Hidayati and others [74] indicated that winter honeysuckle seeds germinated while buried under 2 inches (5 cm) of leaf litter or 2.8 inches (7 cm) of soil.

Stratification requirements for Amur honeysuckle seed germination are unclear. According to Luken and Goessling [103], seeds are released in a nondormant condition, and germinate easily in warm, moist conditions. According to Hidayati and others [74], Amur honeysuckle seeds require a period of either warm- or cold stratification. Nevertheless, they are dispersed in fall and may germinate in fall or spring [74,103]. According to Hidayati and others [74], if seeds mature early enough and are subjected to a sufficiently long warm stratification period prior to onset of cold winter temperatures, they may germinate in fall. Late-maturing seeds are cold-stratified over winter, and will germinate in early spring when warm temperatures induce embryo growth.

Light seems to enhance Amur honeysuckle seed germination, but it is not obligatory. In a laboratory experiment, Amur honeysuckle germination was significantly (p<0.01) higher in light (35 µmol m-2 s-1, 14/10 hour light/dark photoperiod) than in dark (light excluded). Nevertheless, after 88 days, mean cumulative germination ranged from 53.7% to 81.3% in light, and from 31.3% to 55.0% in dark [103]. Hidayati and others [74] found that Amur honeysuckle seeds were not inhibited by burial under 2 inches (5 cm) of leaf litter or 2.8 inches (7 cm) of soil in a greenhouse.

Germination may be enhanced when seeds are separated from the fruit pulp. Bartuszevige and Gorchov [12] found that seeds within intact fruit were significantly less viable (44% germination) than either seeds that were separated from pulp by hand (76% germination) or seeds that had passed through the guts of American robins (86% germination), after 12 weeks of favorable laboratory germination conditions.

Morrow's honeysuckle seeds, which are dispersed in summer, require warm stratification only and typically germinate prior to winter [74]. Germination will occur in light or dark. Hidayati and others [74] found that, while Morrow's honeysuckle seeds germinated more readily under light than in dark under laboratory conditions, they were not inhibited by burial under 2 inches (5 cm) of leaf litter or 2.8 inches (7 cm) of soil in a greenhouse. A greenhouse study by Ruesink [139] demonstrated no effect of shading (25% vs. full light) on germination.

Tatarian honeysuckle seed germination is affected by scarification and cold stratification. Krefting and Roe [89] tested the effects of cold stratification, and ingestion and passage by American robins, on Tatarian honeysuckle seed germination. Unstratified seeds recovered from bird droppings germinated more readily (46%) than unstratified controls (24.5%). Stratification (90 days at 41 to 50 °F (5-10 °C) prior to feeding to birds) resulted in substantial improvement in germination, regardless of whether seeds had passed through bird guts (95% for bird ingested seeds, 92% for stratified controls). Although unstratified seed germinated more rapidly if passed through bird guts, this effect was not detected with stratified seed. Apparently avian frugivory has some positive effect on Tatarian honeysuckle seeds with seedcoat dormancy, while simultaneously, cold stratification is effective for breaking internal dormancy.

According to Barnes [7] Bell's honeysuckle germination is epigeal.

Seeds of Tatarian honeysuckle, Morrow's honeysuckle, Bell's honeysuckle, and Amur honeysuckle remain germinable following passage through the guts of white-tailed deer. Vellend [180] measured 76% germination for seeds collected from deer feces, compared with 81% for fresh-collected seeds.

Seedling establishment/growth: Bush honeysuckle seedling establishment appears most successful where litter cover and herbaceous competition are sparse [126,185]. Luken [100] found that after clipping established Amur honeysuckle plants in forested and pasture habitats, Amur honeysuckle seedlings established in forested plots at approximately twice the rate of those in pastures. In pasture plots, grasses and forbs were relatively undisturbed, and probably continued suppression of Amur honeysuckle seedlings. Barnes [7] sampled Bell's honeysuckle seedling density and frequency at 4 sites in southern Wisconsin. The site with the highest seedling frequency (39%) was characterized as a red pine (Pinus resinosa)- and eastern white pine (P. strobus)-dominated overstory and a sparse understory. This site had a primarily pine straw litter layer of variable depth over sandy loam and loamy sand soils. Within this site, Bell's honeysuckle seedlings were found within microsites having little to no litter cover. The site with the greatest seedling density (5,280 seedlings acre-1 ) contained a "very dense" population of mature Bell's honeysuckle shrubs, with near-continuous cover in some places. Observations indicate that at this site, seedlings occurred mainly under mature Bell's honeysuckle, where litter accumulation and herbaceous competition were sparse. Two other sites each had only 1 and 2 Bell's honeysuckle seedlings total. Among reasons provided for the paucity of seedlings at these sites were lack of soil disturbance, a thick layer of leaf litter from the oak overstory, and strong herbaceous and vine competition. A subsample was obtained from another section within 1 of these seedling-poor sites, where a dense population of mature Bell's honeysuckle shrubs had been eradicated during the previous year. Because of eradication treatments, plant litter and herbaceous competition were sparse. Consistent with other observations, substantial numbers of seedlings (26% occurrence, 2,560 seedlings acre-1) were found where litter cover and herbaceous competition were sparse and a seed source had been present [7].

However, the relationship between canopy cover and bush honeysuckle seedling establishment and growth is not straightforward. According to a review by Nyboer [126], bush honeysuckles commonly establish under tall shrubs or trees that serve as perch areas for seed-dispersing birds. As discussed above, canopy shading may also suppress strong herbaceous competition and permit greater bush honeysuckle seedling establishment. However, too much shading may result in reduced seedling establishment and growth [98]. Luken and Goessling [103] studied Amur honeysuckle seedling establishment in forest patches dominated by sugar maple, white ash, and American elm in northern Kentucky. Seedling densities were greatest near the edges of forest patches and declined steadily toward their interior. While they were unable to establish a firm causal link between light levels and seedling densities, light levels and seedling densities were significantly positively correlated (p<0.05; r = 0.88) along transects from forest edge to interior. Ruesink [139] compared Morrow's honeysuckle greenhouse-grown seedlings under full-sun conditions with identical seedlings grown under 25% of full sun. After 50 days, full-sun seedlings were twice as tall and produced 6 times more aboveground biomass. It is likely that in most habitats where seeds are present, such as under the canopy of preexisting bush honeysuckle shrubs or where frugivorous birds find perch sites proximate to fruiting bush honeysuckles, any disturbance that increases light at ground level is likely to release bush honeysuckle seedlings [100].

Deering and Vankat [33] described the age structure and allometric development of a relatively isolated Amur honeysuckle population of recent origin (colonized ~ 1979) in southwestern Ohio. First-year shrubs averaged 1.3 feet (0.4 m) tall and 2 basal stems per shrub. Most individuals were >3.3 feet (1 m) tall by their 3rd year. For the first 4 years of development, numbers of 1-year-old stems averaged 2.2 to 2.6 per shrub. Individual plants averaged 4.3 total stems per plant by age 3. As shrubs reached reproductive age (beginning at 3-8 years), height growth continued, but recruitment of new stems ceased. With time, resource allocation shifted from new basal stem production and height growth in young shrubs to a balance of height growth, radial growth of existing stems, and reproduction in older shrubs [33].

Asexual regeneration: Information on asexual regeneration in bush honeysuckles is generally sparse. Studies cited below are specific to Amur honeysuckle and Bell's honeysuckle. Although it seems likely that these traits are shared by other bush honeysuckles, applicability to other taxa is not confirmed. Since Bell's honeysuckle is a hybrid of Morrow's honeysuckle and Tatarian honeysuckle (see Taxonomy), it is likely that either or both of the parent species share the traits discussed for Bell's honeysuckle below. More information is needed to determine similarities and differences in the biology of asexual regeneration in bush honeysuckles.

Amur honeysuckle will sprout from adventitious buds on the root crown in response to stem damage [105,168]. Repeated cutting throughout the growing season results in continued but diminished sprouting (see Physical/mechanical control) [168]. The sprouting response of Amur honeysuckle to any particular stem damage event does not appear to diminish with stem age [105].

Bell's honeysuckle reproduces asexually by root suckering and layering [7]. Barnes [7] studied root suckering and layering in 4 populations of Bell's honeysuckle in Wisconsin. Between 4 and 7% of shrubs sampled exhibited suckers. Suckers were encountered primarily on small shrubs, and those found on large, mature plants were usually within 2 to 3 feet (60-90 cm) of the root crown. Frequency of layering was estimated by examining all branches of sampled shrubs in contact with the soil surface for evidence of root development. Layering frequency varied between sites, with 1 site having 3% of shrubs showing evidence of layering, 2 sites having 9%, and a 4th site 19%. Layering frequency appeared to be positively related to soil moisture and duration of contact between branch and soil, although there were no supporting data. Barnes [7] also indicated that suckering and layering occurred most frequently on sites where Bell's honeysuckle seedling establishment was poorest.

  • 100. Luken, James O. 1990. Forest and pasture communities respond differently to cutting of exotic Amur honeysuckle. Restoration & Management Notes. 8(2): 122-123. [13757]
  • 103. Luken, James O.; Goessling, Norbert. 1995. Seedling distribution and potential persistence of the exotic shrub Lonicera maackii in fragmented forests. The American Midland Naturalist. 133(1): 124-130. [47287]
  • 105. Luken, James O.; Mattimiro, Daniel T. 1991. Habitat-specific resilience of the invasive shrub Amur honeysuckle (Lonicera maackii) during repeated clipping. Ecological Applications. 1(1): 104-109. [47294]
  • 12. Bartuszevige, Anne M.; Gorchov, David L. [In press]. Avian seed dispersal of an invasive shrub, Lonicera maackii. Biological Invasions. 10 p. [52865]
  • 126. Nyboer, Randy. 1992. Vegetation management guideline: bush honeysuckles--tatarian, Marrow's, belle, amur honeysuckle. Natural Areas Journal. 12(4): 218-219. [20074]
  • 139. Ruesink, Ana. 1998. Links between land use and Lonicera: patterns of honeysuckle invasion in a post-agricultural landscape. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont. 55 p. Thesis. [48162]
  • 150. Sharp, W. Curtis; Belcher, Cluster R. 1981. `Rem-Red' Amur honeysuckle--a multipurpose landscape shrub. American Nurseryman. 153(12): 7, 94-96. [47716]
  • 157. Stephens, H. A. 1973. Woody plants of the North Central Plains. Lawrence, KS: The University Press of Kansas. 530 p. [3804]
  • 158. Stevens, Richard; Jorgensen, Kent R. 1994. Rangeland species germination through 25 and up to 40 years of warehouse storage. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Kitchen, Stanley G., compilers. Proceedings--ecology and management of annual rangelands; 1992 May 18-22; Boise, ID. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-313. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 257-265. [24292]
  • 168. Trisel, Donald E. 1997. The invasive shrub, Lonicera maackii (Rupr.) Herder (Caprifoliaceae): factors contributing to its success and its effect on native species. Oxford, OH: Miami University. 199 p. Dissertation. [48165]
  • 180. Vellend, Mark. 2002. A pest and an invader: white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus Zimm.) as a seed dispersal agent for honeysuckle shrubs (Lonicera L.). Natural Areas Journal. 22(3): 230-234. [43284]
  • 185. Vogel, Willis G. 1981. A guide for revegetating coal mine soils in the eastern United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-68. Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 190 p. [15576]
  • 186. Voss, Edward G. 1996. Michigan flora. Part III: Dicots (Pyrolaceae--Compositae). Cranbrook Institute of Science Bulletin 61/University of Michigan Herbarium. Ann Arbor, MI: The Regents of the University of Michigan. 622 p. [30401]
  • 191. Welsh, Stanley L.; Atwood, N. Duane; Goodrich, Sherel; Higgins, Larry C., eds. 1987. A Utah flora. The Great Basin Naturalist Memoir No. 9. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University. 894 p. [2944]
  • 33. Deering, Ryan H.; Vankat, John L. 1999. Forest colonization and developmental growth of the invasive shrub Lonicera maackii. The American Midland Naturalist. 141(1): 43-50. [48344]
  • 58. Graenicher, S. 1900. The fertilization of Symphoricarpos and Lonicera. Bulletin of the Wisconsin Natural History Society. 1: 141-156. [48171]
  • 68. Hauser, Edward J. P. 1966. The natural occurrence of a hybrid honeysuckle (Lonicera X bella) in Ohio and Michigan. The Michigan Botanist. 5: 211-217. [47292]
  • 7. Barnes, William J. 1972. The autecology of the Lonicera X bella complex. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin. 169 p. Dissertation. [48166]
  • 74. Hidayati, Siti N.; Baskin, Jerry M.; Baskin, Carol C. 2000. Dormancy-breaking and germination requirements of seeds of four Lonicera species (Caprifoliaceae) with underdeveloped spatulate embryos. Seed Science Research. 10: 459-469. [41725]
  • 80. Ingold, James L.; Craycraft, Mary Jo. 1983. Avian frugivory on honeysuckle (Lonicera) in southwestern Ohio in fall. Ohio Journal of Science. 3: 256-258. [48343]
  • 89. Krefting, Laurits W.; Roe, Eugene I. 1949. The role of some birds and mammals in seed germination. Ecological Monographs. 19(3): 269-286. [8847]
  • 93. Lackschewitz, Klaus. 1991. Vascular plants of west-central Montana--identification guidebook. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-227. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 648 p. [13798]
  • 98. Luken, J. O.; Tholemeier, T. C.; Kuddes, L. M.; Kunkel, B. A. 1995. Performance, plasticity, and acclimation of the nonindigenous shrub Lonicera maackii (Caprifoliaceae) in contrasting light environments. Canadian Journal of Botany. 73(12): 1953-1961. [26453]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Growth Form (according to Raunkiær Life-form classification)

More info on this topic.

More info for the terms: geophyte, hemicryptophyte, phanerophyte

RAUNKIAER [134] LIFE FORM:
Phanerophyte
Hemicryptophyte
Geophyte
  • 134. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Life Form

More info for the term: shrub

Shrub

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Life History and Behavior

Cyclicity

Phenology

More info on this topic.

More info for the terms: formation, phenology, shrub, shrubs, tree

A reason often cited for an apparent competitive advantage of bush honeysuckles over native shrubs (see Impacts) is the advantage of longer leaf display. Barnes [7] compared Bell's honeysuckle leaf lifespan with that of several native shrub species in southern Wisconsin. Average period for functional leaves on Bell's honeysuckle shrubs at this site was May 18 to October 30. The following table provides observed duration from fully expanded leaves to the time when 50% of leaves are no longer green for sympatric shrub species in southern Wisconsin.

Bell's honeysuckle gray dogwood (Cornus racemosa) red-osier dogwood (Cornus sericea) American hazel (Corylus americana) chokecherry (Prunus virginiana) common buckthorn red raspberry (Rubus idaeus)
days 169 111 111 111 140 165 160

Trisel [168] studied leaf phenology of Amur honeysuckle and some sympatric tree and shrub species in southwestern Ohio. During all 3 years studied, Amur honeysuckle displayed fully expanded leaves for significantly (p<0.001) longer than all native species (except northern red oak and slippery elm whose small sample size precluded comparison). Amur honeysuckle was always the 1st species to expand leaves and the last to lose them. During 1994, Amur honeysuckle began leaf expansion in March and retained leaves into late November. The following table provides, for each species studied, the mean number of days between the initial and last census date during which expanded green leaves accounted for >50% of that individual's total number of leaves.

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
Sugar maple

166

163 167
Ohio buckeye (Aesculus glabra) 111 136 122
pawpaw (Asimina triloba) 166 165 167
bitternut hickory 152 153
eastern redbud (Cercis canadensis) 151
American beech 170 157 171
white ash 157 155
blue ash (Fraxinus quadrangulata) 162 155
northern spicebush 171 167 169
Amur honeysuckle 238 207 224
black cherry 198 194 181
northern red oak 174 169
slippery elm 181 184
blackhaw (Viburnum prunifolium) 195 185 189

Harrington and others [65] demonstrated phenological differences in carbon gain between Bell's honeysuckle and the native shrub gray dogwood in southern Wisconsin. Under the canopy of a mature deciduous forest where understory light was about 4-6% of ambient levels, Bell's honeysuckle shrubs made approximately 47% of their annual carbon gain (35% in spring and 12% in fall) during two 2-week periods when gray dogwood was leafless. Leaf emergence in Bell's honeysuckle was around April 10, approximately 2 weeks prior to gray dogwood. Bell's honeysuckle retained leaves until around November 10, about 2 weeks longer than gray dogwood.

Reported flowering dates for bush honeysuckles:

Winter honeysuckle Amur honeysuckle Morrow's honeysuckle Tatarian honeysuckle European fly honeysuckle Bell's honeysuckle
Adirondacks [25] June
southern Appalachians [144,145,146,147] May-June May-early June May-early June May-June
Blue Ridge Mountains (TN, VA) [197] May-June
Connecticut [173,174,175,176,177] early spring mid-spring mid-spring May May
Great Plains [59] May-June
north-central Great Plains [157] late April-May
northern Illinois [26] mid-May to mid-June
Michigan spring [114] May [68], May-June [54] May [68] May [68]
Minnesota [54] May-June [54]
New England [149] May mid-May to mid-June mid-May to mid-June mid-May to early June
eastern Canada and northern New England [81] June
southern New England [81] May
North Carolina Piedmont [133] April-May
North Carolina Piedmont and Coastal Plain; South Carolina Piedmont [133] February-early April
northeastern U.S. [95] May-June
northeastern U.S. and adjacent Canada [54] May-June May-June
Ohio May-June [17] May [68] May [68] early May [17] May [68]
southwestern Ohio [80] early May early May
western Oregon [127,128] December-March after leaves begin unfolding
southeastern U.S. [165] January-February
north-central Texas [36] January-April March
West Virginia [161] May-June May-June
Wisconsin May-June [54] mid-May to early June [7]
southeastern Wisconsin [58] May-June

Reported fruiting dates for bush honeysuckles (This information represents a general guideline. Fruiting dates vary among sites and years. Observations of "fruiting" are typically subjective and may refer to fruit formation or ripening):

  Winter honeysuckle Amur honeysuckle Morrow' honeysuckle Tatarian honeysuckle European fly honeysuckle Bell's honeysuckle
Adirondacks [25] August
southern Appalachians [144,145,146,147] August-September June-July June-July June to mid-summer
Connecticut [173,174,175,176,177] mid-summer late summer late summer July-August August
Great Plains [59] mid-summer
north-central Great Plains [157] July-August
southern New Jersey [150] October-November
North Carolina Piedmont and Coastal Plain; South Carolina Piedmont [133] April-May
northeastern U.S. late fall [95] July [95], July-August [81] August [81]
Ohio [17] September
southwestern Ohio [80] early June-early September early June-early September
Western Oregon [127] late spring
Wisconsin [7] late June-late September

Amur honeysuckle and Bell's honeysuckle fruit can persist on the plant well into winter [12,97,150,185], while Morrow's honeysuckle and Tatarian honeysuckle fruit abscise soon after ripening [150,185].

  • 114. Michigan State University Extension. 1999. Lonicera fragrantissima--winter honeysuckle, [Online]. In: Ornamental plants plus version 3.0. Michigan State University (Producer). Available: http://www.msue.msu.edu/imp/modzz/00000892.html [2004, August 26]. [51740]
  • 12. Bartuszevige, Anne M.; Gorchov, David L. [In press]. Avian seed dispersal of an invasive shrub, Lonicera maackii. Biological Invasions. 10 p. [52865]
  • 127. Oregon State University. 2004. Lonicera fragrantissima--winter honeysuckle, [Online]. In: Landscape plants: Images, identification, and information. Volume 2. Corvallis, OR: Department of Horticulture (Producer). Available: http://oregonstate.edu/dept/ldplants/lofr.htm [2004, August 26]. [51754]
  • 128. Oregon State University. 2004. Lonicera tatarica--Tatarian honeysuckle, [Online]. In: Landscape plants: Images, identification, and information. Volume 2. Corvallis, OR: Department of Horticulture (Producer). Available: http://oregonstate.edu/dept/ldplants/lota.htm [2004, August 30]. [51752]
  • 133. 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]
  • 144. Seiler, John R.; Jensen, Edward C.; Peterson, John A. 2004. Lonicera maackii fact sheet, [Online]. In: Dendrology at Virginia Tech: I.D. fact sheets. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, College of Natural Resources (Producer). Available: http://www.cnr.vt.edu/dendro/dendrology/syllabus/lmaackii.htm [2004, August 27]. [51250]
  • 145. Seiler, John R.; Jensen, Edward C.; Peterson, John A. 2004. Lonicera morrowii fact sheet, [Online]. In: Dendrology at Virginia Tech: I.D. fact sheets. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, College of Natural Resources (Producer). Available: http://www.cnr.vt.edu/dendro/dendrology/syllabus/lmorrowii.htm [2004, August 27]. [51283]
  • 146. Seiler, John R.; Jensen, Edward C.; Peterson, John A. 2004. Lonicera tatarica fact sheet, [Online]. In: Dendrology at Virginia Tech: I.D. fact sheets. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, College of Natural Resources (Producer). Available: http://www.cnr.vt.edu/dendro/dendrology/syllabus/ltatarica.htm [2004, August 27]. [51284]
  • 147. Seiler, John R.; Jensen, Edward C.; Peterson, John A. 2004. Lonicera X bella fact sheet, [Online]. In: Dendrology at Virginia Tech: I.D. fact sheets. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, College of Natural Resources (Producer). Available: http://www.cnr.vt.edu/dendro/dendrology/syllabus/lonicera_bella.htm [2004, August 27]. [51286]
  • 149. Seymour, Frank Conkling. 1982. The flora of New England. 2d ed. Phytologia Memoirs 5. Plainfield, NJ: Harold N. Moldenke and Alma L. Moldenke. 611 p. [7604]
  • 150. Sharp, W. Curtis; Belcher, Cluster R. 1981. `Rem-Red' Amur honeysuckle--a multipurpose landscape shrub. American Nurseryman. 153(12): 7, 94-96. [47716]
  • 157. Stephens, H. A. 1973. Woody plants of the North Central Plains. Lawrence, KS: The University Press of Kansas. 530 p. [3804]
  • 161. Strausbaugh, P. D.; Core, Earl L. 1977. Flora of West Virginia. 2nd ed. Morgantown, WV: Seneca Books, Inc. 1079 p. [23213]
  • 165. Tilt, Ken; Fischman, Bernice, compilers. 2004. Lonicera fragrantissima: winter honeysuckle. In: Plant identification resource, [Online]. Auburn, AL: Auburn University, Horticulture Department (Producer). Available: http://www.ag.auburn.edu/hf/landscape/dbpages/343.html [2004, August 26]. [51291]
  • 168. Trisel, Donald E. 1997. The invasive shrub, Lonicera maackii (Rupr.) Herder (Caprifoliaceae): factors contributing to its success and its effect on native species. Oxford, OH: Miami University. 199 p. Dissertation. [48165]
  • 17. Biggs, Scott. 2002. Lonicera xylosteum: European fly honeysuckle or fly honeysuckle. In: Pocket gardener, [Online]. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University, Department of Horticulture and Crop Science. Available: http://hcs.osu.edu/pocketgardener/source/description/lo_steum.html [2005, January 31]. [51293]
  • 173. University of Connecticut. 2004. Lonicera fragrantissima, [Online]. In: University of Connecticut plant database of trees, shrubs, and vines. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut (Producer). Available: http://www.hort.uconn.edu/plants/l/lonfra/lonfra3.html [2004, September 1]. [51743]
  • 174. University of Connecticut. 2004. Lonicera maackii--Amur honeysuckle, [Online]. In: University of Connecticut plant database of trees, shrubs, and vines. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut (Producer). Available: http://www.hort.uconn.edu/plants/l/lonmaa/lonmaa3.html [2004, August 27]. [51745]
  • 175. University of Connecticut. 2004. Lonicera morrowii--Morrow honeysuckle, [Online]. In: University of Connecticut plant database of trees, shrubs, and vines. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut (Producer). Available: http://www.hort.uconn.edu/plants/l/lonmor/lonmor3.html [2004, August 28]. [51747]
  • 176. University of Connecticut. 2004. Lonicera tatarica--Tatarian honeysuckle, [Online]. In: University of Connecticut plant database of trees, shrubs, and vines. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut (Producer). Available: http://www.hort.uconn.edu/plants/l/lontat/lontat3.html [2004, August 28]. [51749]
  • 177. University of Connecticut. 2004. Lonicera xylosteum, [Online]. In: University of Connecticut plant database of trees, shrubs, and vines. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut (Producer). Available: http://www.hort.uconn.edu/plants/l/lonxyl/lonxyl3.html [2004, August 30]. [51744]
  • 185. Vogel, Willis G. 1981. A guide for revegetating coal mine soils in the eastern United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-68. Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 190 p. [15576]
  • 197. Wofford, B. Eugene. 1989. Guide to the vascular plants of the Blue Ridge. Athens, GA: The University of Georgia Press. 384 p. [12908]
  • 25. Chapman, William K.; Bessette, Alan E. 1990. Trees and shrubs of the Adirondacks. Utica, NY: North Country Books, Inc. 131 p. [12766]
  • 26. Clark, Ross C. 1984. Amur honeysuckle: a significant but weedy early season nectar producer. American Bee Journal. 124(12): 857. [48348]
  • 36. Diggs, George M., Jr.; Lipscomb, Barney L.; O'Kennon, Robert J. 1999. Illustrated flora of north-central Texas. Sida Botanical Miscellany No. 16. Fort Worth, TX: Botanical Research Institute of Texas. 1626 p. [35698]
  • 54. 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]
  • 58. Graenicher, S. 1900. The fertilization of Symphoricarpos and Lonicera. Bulletin of the Wisconsin Natural History Society. 1: 141-156. [48171]
  • 59. Great Plains Flora Association. 1986. Flora of the Great Plains. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. 1392 p. [1603]
  • 65. Harrington, Robin A.; Brown, Becky J.; Reich, Peter B. 1989. Ecophysiology of exotic and native shrubs in southern Wisconsin. I. Relationship of leaf characteristics, resource availability, and phenology to seasonal patterns of carbon gain. Oecologia. 80(3): 356-367. [48355]
  • 68. Hauser, Edward J. P. 1966. The natural occurrence of a hybrid honeysuckle (Lonicera X bella) in Ohio and Michigan. The Michigan Botanist. 5: 211-217. [47292]
  • 7. Barnes, William J. 1972. The autecology of the Lonicera X bella complex. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin. 169 p. Dissertation. [48166]
  • 80. Ingold, James L.; Craycraft, Mary Jo. 1983. Avian frugivory on honeysuckle (Lonicera) in southwestern Ohio in fall. Ohio Journal of Science. 3: 256-258. [48343]
  • 81. Jackson, Lawrence W. 1974. Honeysuckles. In: Gill, John D.; Healy, William M., compilers. Shrubs and vines for northeastern wildlife. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-9. Upper Darby, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station: 71-82. [17800]
  • 95. Lorenz, David G.; Sharp, W. Curtis.; Ruffner, Joseph D. 1991. Conservation plants for the Northeast. Program Aid 1154. [Washington, DC]: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 43 p. [47719]
  • 97. Luken, J. O.; Thieret, John W. 1987. Sumac-directed patch succession on northern Kentucky roadside embankments. Transactions of the Kentucky Academy of Science. 48(3-4): 51-54. [22088]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Reproduction

Biology and Spread

Open-grown exotic bush honeysuckles fruit prolifically and are highly attractive to birds. In the eastern United States, over twenty species of birds feed on the persistent fruits and widely disseminate seeds across the landscape. In established populations, vegetative sprouting also aids in the persistence of these exotic shrubs.

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial Share Alike 3.0 (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0)

U.S. National Park Service Weeds Gone Wild website

Source: U.S. National Park Service

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Molecular Biology and Genetics

Molecular Biology

Barcode data: Lonicera maackii

The following is a representative barcode sequence, the centroid of all available sequences for this species.


Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 (CC BY 3.0)

© Barcode of Life Data Systems

Source: Barcode of Life Data Systems (BOLD)

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Statistics of barcoding coverage: Lonicera maackii

Barcode of Life Data Systems (BOLDS) Stats
Public Records: 3
Specimens with Barcodes: 7
Species With Barcodes: 1
Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 (CC BY 3.0)

© Barcode of Life Data Systems

Source: Barcode of Life Data Systems (BOLD)

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Conservation

Conservation Status

National NatureServe Conservation Status

Canada

Rounded National Status Rank: NNA - Not Applicable

United States

Rounded National Status Rank: NNA - Not Applicable

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

NatureServe Conservation Status

Rounded Global Status Rank: GNR - Not Yet Ranked

Reasons:

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

More info for the term: natural

Winter honeysuckle, Amur honeysuckle, Morrow's honeysuckle, Tatarian honeysuckle, and Bell's honeysuckle are ranked as severe threats by the Tennessee Exotic Pest Plant Council [156], and Amur honeysuckle, Morrow's honeysuckle, and Tatarian honeysuckle are ranked as severe threats by the Kentucky Exotic Pest Plant Council [85]. Morrow's honeysuckle is ranked highly invasive, Amur honeysuckle and Tatarian honeysuckle moderately invasive, and winter honeysuckle and Bell's honeysuckle occasionally invasive by the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation [182].

U.S. Forest Service Region 8 (Southern Region) lists winter honeysuckle, Amur honeysuckle, Morrow's honeysuckle, and Tatarian honeysuckle as category 1 weeds (exotic plant species that are known to be invasive and persistent throughout all or most of their range within the Southern Region and that can spread into and persist in native plant communities and displace native plant species and therefore pose a demonstrable threat to the integrity of the natural plant communities in the Region). The introduction of category 1 species is prohibited on National Forest System Lands [171].

Morrow's honeysuckle, Tatarian honeysuckle, and Bell's honeysuckle are "high-priority" nonnative invasive plants of the Ottawa National Forest (MI) [170].

  • 156. Southeast Exotic Pest Plant Council, Tennessee Chapter. 2001. Invasive exotic pest plants in Tennessee, [Online]. Available: http://www.exoticpestplantcouncil.org/states/TN/TNIList.html [2001, October 19]. [38459]
  • 170. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Ottawa National Forest. 2003. Ottawa National Forest: Non-native invasive plant program, [Online]. In: Botany information. Ironwood, MI: Ottawa National Forest (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r9/ottawa/forest_management/botany/invasive_folder/index_ottawa_national_forest.htm [2004, August 30]. [51735]
  • 171. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Region. 2001. Regional invasive exotic plant species list. Regional Forester's list and ranking structure: invasive exotic plant species of management concern, [Online]. In: Invasive plants of southern states list. Southeast Exotic Pest Plant Council (Producer). Available: http://www.se-eppc.org/fslist.cfm [2003, August 25]. [44944]
  • 182. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage. 2003. Invasive alien plant species of Virginia, [Online]. Available: http://www.dcr.state.va.us/dnh/invlist.pdf [2003, August 25]. [44942]
  • 85. Kentucky Exotic Pest Plant Council. 2001. Invasive exotic plant list, [Online]. Southeast Exotic Pest Plant Council (Producer). Available: http://www.se-eppc.org/states/KY/KYlists.html [2005, April 13]. [44948]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Management

Prevention and Control

Young plants can be pulled by hand, larger plants either pulled using weed wrench-type tool or cut repeatedly. Systemic herbicides containing glyphosate or triclopyr can be applied to foliage, bark or cut stems.

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Relevance to Humans and Ecosystems

Benefits

Cultivation

Amur Honeysuckle prefers full sun to light shade, moist to dry-mesic conditions, and soil containing loam or clay-loam. It develops leaves early in the spring and hangs on to its leaves until fairly late in the fall. As a result, there is a strong tendency to snuff out any plants that attempt to grow underneath it. Because this shrub spreads aggressively, it should not be used in landscaping.
Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© John Hilty

Source: Illinois Wildflowers

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Other uses and values

More info for the terms: natural, reclamation, restoration, shrub

Winter honeysuckle has been cultivated as an early-flowering ornamental with very fragrant flowers [114,191]. It has also been recommended as a hedge or screen plant [37].

Amur honeysuckle has been cultivated as an ornamental in North America [106,131,150], and as of 1996, was still commercially available [106]. Beginning in the 1960s, USDA Soil Conservation Service developed and distributed the Amur honeysuckle cultivar 'Rem-Red' for use as an ornamental shrub, promoted as valuable for wildlife and as useful for soil conservation and as a windbreak, border, hedge, or screen [95,150]. Amur honeysuckle, along with Tatarian honeysuckle and Morrow's honeysuckle, is among species recommended for use in strip mine site reclamation [77,185]. Amur honeysuckle makes a very productive honey plant [26]. However, due to its invasive propensity in natural and seminatural woodlands, Clark [26] recommends against its use outside urban areas where it is already an established part of the flora.

Tatarian honeysuckle has been cultivated as an ornamental [18,150,191], and Dirr [37] provides a list of 14 available cultivars. It has been recommended as a windbreak, shelterbelt, or hedge species [28,53,95,110,157,169], especially in areas with extreme seasonal temperatures [142]. Tatarian honeysuckle has been characterized as useful for range restoration and soil stabilization [109], and has been used for streambank reclamation [188].

Bell's honeysuckle has been used for landscape and ornamental purposes in the northern U.S. [8].

  • 106. Luken, James O.; Thieret, John W. 1996. Amur honeysuckle, its fall from grace. Bioscience. 46(1): 18-24. [26048]
  • 109. McArthur, E. Durant; Giunta, Bruce C.; Plummer, A. Perry. 1977. Shrubs for restoration of depleted range and disturbed areas. Utah Science. 35: 28-33. [25035]
  • 110. McComb, A. L. 1948. Survival and growth of trees and shrubs on peat and muck soils in Iowa. In: Report of the Iowa Agricultural Experiment Station. [Ames, IA]: [Iowa State University]: 261. [48499]
  • 114. Michigan State University Extension. 1999. Lonicera fragrantissima--winter honeysuckle, [Online]. In: Ornamental plants plus version 3.0. Michigan State University (Producer). Available: http://www.msue.msu.edu/imp/modzz/00000892.html [2004, August 26]. [51740]
  • 131. Pringle, James S. 1973. Lonicera maackii (Caprifoliaceae) adventive in Ontario. The Canadian Field-Naturalist. 87: 54-55. [47289]
  • 142. Schroeder, W. R. 1988. Planting and establishment of shelterbelts in humid severe-winter regions. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment. 22/23: 441-463. [8774]
  • 150. Sharp, W. Curtis; Belcher, Cluster R. 1981. `Rem-Red' Amur honeysuckle--a multipurpose landscape shrub. American Nurseryman. 153(12): 7, 94-96. [47716]
  • 157. Stephens, H. A. 1973. Woody plants of the North Central Plains. Lawrence, KS: The University Press of Kansas. 530 p. [3804]
  • 169. Tuskan, Gerald A.; Laughlin, Kevin. 1991. Windbreak species performance and management practices as reported by Montana and North Dakota landowners. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. 46(3): 225-228. [15084]
  • 18. Braun, E. Lucy. 1961. The woody plants of Ohio. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press. 362 p. [12914]
  • 185. Vogel, Willis G. 1981. A guide for revegetating coal mine soils in the eastern United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-68. Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 190 p. [15576]
  • 188. Ward, Don; Thompson, Robert; Kelly, Dennis. 1986. Willow planting guide: Manti-LaSal National Forest. In: R-4 Hydrograph No. 54. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Range and Watershed Management. 12 p. [2936]
  • 191. Welsh, Stanley L.; Atwood, N. Duane; Goodrich, Sherel; Higgins, Larry C., eds. 1987. A Utah flora. The Great Basin Naturalist Memoir No. 9. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University. 894 p. [2944]
  • 26. Clark, Ross C. 1984. Amur honeysuckle: a significant but weedy early season nectar producer. American Bee Journal. 124(12): 857. [48348]
  • 28. Cole, T. J. 1980. Hedges for Canadian gardens. No. 899. Ottawa: Agriculture Canada. 38 p. [48349]
  • 37. Dirr, Michael A. 1998. Manual of woody landscape plants: their identification, ornamental characteristics, culture, propagation and uses. 5th ed. Champagne, IL: Stipes Publishing Company. 1187 p. [48168]
  • 53. George, Ernest J. 1953. Thirty-one-year results in growing shelterbelts on the Northern Great Plains. Circular No. 924. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 57 p. [4567]
  • 77. Hughes, H. Glenn. 1990. Ecological restoration: fact or fantasy on strip-mined lands in western Pennsylvania? In: Hughes, H. Glenn; Bonnicksen, Thomas M., eds. Restoration '89: the new management challenge: Proceedings, 1st annual meeting of the Society for Ecological Restoration; 1989 January 16-20; Oakland, CA. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Arboretum; Society for Ecological Restoration: 237-243. [14699]
  • 8. Barnes, William J.; Cottam, Grant. 1974. Some autecological studies of the Lonicera X bella complex. Ecology. 55(1): 40-50. [48173]
  • 95. Lorenz, David G.; Sharp, W. Curtis.; Ruffner, Joseph D. 1991. Conservation plants for the Northeast. Program Aid 1154. [Washington, DC]: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 43 p. [47719]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Importance to Livestock and Wildlife

More info for the terms: competition, cover, presence, selection, shrubs, tree

Although it appears bush honeysuckles are typically planted for other purposes, they may provide some value for wildlife and are occasionally planted for this use. According to Sharp and Belcher [150], Tatarian honeysuckle has been planted for summer wildlife food in the eastern U.S., and Luken and Thieret [106] state Amur honeysuckle has been planted in the eastern U.S. for wildlife habitat "improvement."

White-tailed deer browse bush honeysuckle twigs and foliage [150]. Vellend [180] confirmed the presence of Tatarian honeysuckle, Morrow's honeysuckle, Bell's honeysuckle, and Amur honeysuckle seeds in white-tailed deer scat in central New York, but it is unclear if fruits were eaten purposely or inadvertently. Bush honeysuckle fruits are borne in leaf axils, so white-tailed deer that are browsing on leaves and twigs are also likely to ingest fruits in season. While Velland [180] did not specify which plant parts are selected by deer, he inferred that leaves and twigs are purposely browsed, and it is obvious that fruits are at least not avoided.

Tatarian honeysuckle is browsed by eastern cottontail [64,150]. Small mammals eat fallen bush honeysuckle fruit in late winter and early spring [150]. Deer mice extract and consume Amur honeysuckle seeds from intact fruits. However, it is speculated that relative presence or absence of Amur honeysuckle has little effect on small mammal forage habitat quality, and conversely, small mammal seed predation probably has little influence on Amur honeysuckle fecundity [195].

Bush honeysuckle fruits are eaten at least occasionally by songbirds, and avian frugivory is thought to be an important bush honeysuckle seed dispersal mechanism. Amur honeysuckle fruits are eaten at least occasionally by songbirds, especially in winter, and Tatarian honeysuckle fruits are eaten by songbirds in summer, soon after maturity (see Seasonal Development) [64,95,150]. Bartuszevige and Gorchov [12] studied avian Amur honeysuckle seed dispersal in southwestern Ohio. Out of 17 bird species captured near fruiting Amur honeysuckle shrubs, 12 were found to have consumed fruit. American robin, cedar waxwing, European starling, hermit thrush, and northern mockingbird defecated viable Amur honeysuckle seed. American tree sparrow, Carolina chickadee, dark-eyed junco, northern cardinal, song sparrow, tufted titmouse, and white-throated sparrow displayed evidence of consuming fruit, but without evidence of passing viable seed. Species that showed no evidence of Amur honeysuckle frugivory included brown creeper, Carolina wren, downy woodpecker, golden-crowned kinglet, and white-breasted nuthatch. Eastern bluebirds were also observed eating Amur honeysuckle fruit, but were not captured in the study [12]. Wild turkey, ruffed grouse, northern bobwhite, and ring-necked pheasant use Amur honeysuckle for food [150].

Palatability/nutritional value: As of this writing (2005) very little information is available concerning palatability/nutritional value of bush honeysuckles. Analysis of Amur honeysuckle and European fly honeysuckle fruit in southwestern Ohio showed C:N ratios ranging from 29:1 to 56:1 (mean = 41.1, SD = 9.17) and percent lipid ranging from 4.53% to 5.01% (mean = 4.78%, SD = 0.20) [80].

Although avian frugivory is thought to be an important seed dispersal mechanism, preference for bush honeysuckle fruit as a food source is unclear. McRae [111] noted Tatarian honeysuckle as a major dietary component of northern bobwhite, especially after mid-February, at 2 northwestern Georgia piedmont upland forest sites. Apparently the raisin-like fruit of Tatarian honeysuckle is not necessarily a preferred late-season food, but provides available forage for songbirds when preferred foods are scarce [150]. According to Dirr [37], birds will consume Amur honeysuckle fruit if other food is unavailable.

Ingold and Raycraft [80] examined 115 individuals of 26 bird species for evidence of Amur honeysuckle and European fly honeysuckle frugivory in southwestern Ohio between mid-September and mid-November. Nine species (American robin, gray-cheeked thrush, Swainson's thrush, gray catbird, cedar waxwing, northern cardinal, purple finch, American goldfinch, and white-throated sparrow), and 21 of 82 individuals representing these species, showed evidence of feeding on fruits. Sixteen species (35 total individuals) exhibited no evidence of Amur honeysuckle/European fly honeysuckle fruit consumption (Carolina chickadee, tufted titmouse, brown creeper, white-eyed vireo, red-eyed vireo, Tennessee warbler, magnolia warbler, bay-breasted warbler, ovenbird, common yellowthroat, yellow-breasted chat, indigo bunting, American tree sparrow, field sparrow, fox sparrow, and song sparrow). The low proportion of species (and individuals within these species) found to be feeding on Amur honeysuckle and European fly honeysuckle fruit led to questions concerning forage quality, especially since these fruits were abundant and conspicuous in the study area.

Although information is sparse, in some cases bush honeysuckle frugivory may be harmful to birds. Casual observations indicate that Tatarian honeysuckle fruit can be toxic to birds [15], but this is not confirmed. There is some evidence to indicate birds that eat bush honeysuckle fruit may experience changes in feather coloration. Apparently Morrow's honeysuckle fruit contains the carotenoid rhodoxanthin, which causes normally yellow tail feather bands in cedar waxwings to appear orange. Similar yellow-to-orange changes in feather color have been described in Kentucky warblers and white-throated sparrows, perhaps also as a result of bush honeysuckle fruit consumption. While no definitive impact has yet been established as a result of this phenomenon, subtle differences in coloration within species may affect behavior such as mate selection [196].

Cover value: Bush honeysuckles probably provide some cover for wildlife. Amur honeysuckle provides nesting sites and protection for songbirds from late spring to late fall, and cover for rabbits [150]. Tatarian honeysuckle provides year-round cover for birds and small mammals [95].

However, indirect effects of bush honeysuckle invasion on wildlife may be difficult to predict. Schmidt and Whelan [141] examined the effect of Amur honeysuckle invasion on nest predation of American robins in northern Illinois deciduous woodlands. Nests built in Amur honeysuckle had significantly (p<0.001) higher daily nest mortality rate compared with nests built in native species. Reasons offered for increased nest predation in Amur honeysuckle included lower nest height (compared with many native shrubs and trees), absence of sharp thorns (compared with native hawthorns (Crataegus spp.)), and branch architecture that may facilitate predator (e.g. raccoon) movement. Unfortunately, Amur honeysuckle may provide more attractive nest sites due to its early leaf flush (see Seasonal Development) and sturdy branches. In fact, American robins significantly (r2=0.912, p<0.01) increased their use of Amur honeysuckle over the 6-year study period. Wood thrush also nested in Amur honeysuckle, although use was apparently limited by competition from American robins.

  • 106. Luken, James O.; Thieret, John W. 1996. Amur honeysuckle, its fall from grace. Bioscience. 46(1): 18-24. [26048]
  • 111. McRae, W. Alan. 1980. Unusual bobwhite foods on abandoned piedmont farmlands. Georgia Journal of Science. 38: 49-54. [41041]
  • 12. Bartuszevige, Anne M.; Gorchov, David L. [In press]. Avian seed dispersal of an invasive shrub, Lonicera maackii. Biological Invasions. 10 p. [52865]
  • 141. Schmidt, Kenneth A.; Whelan, Christopher J. 1999. Effects of exotic Lonicera and Rhamnus on songbird nest predation. Conservation Biology. 13(6): 1502-1506. [48497]
  • 15. Bergtold, W. H. 1930. Intoxicated robins. The Auk. 47: 571. [48172]
  • 150. Sharp, W. Curtis; Belcher, Cluster R. 1981. `Rem-Red' Amur honeysuckle--a multipurpose landscape shrub. American Nurseryman. 153(12): 7, 94-96. [47716]
  • 180. Vellend, Mark. 2002. A pest and an invader: white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus Zimm.) as a seed dispersal agent for honeysuckle shrubs (Lonicera L.). Natural Areas Journal. 22(3): 230-234. [43284]
  • 195. Williams, Charles E.; Ralley, Jonathan J.; Taylor, Douglas H. 1992. Consumption of seeds of the invasive Amur honeysuckle, Lonicera maackii (Rupr.) Maxim., by small mammals. Natural Areas Journal. 12(2): 86-89. [48496]
  • 196. Witmer, Mark. 1996. The telltale tail. Living Bird. 15(1): 16-20. [48495]
  • 37. Dirr, Michael A. 1998. Manual of woody landscape plants: their identification, ornamental characteristics, culture, propagation and uses. 5th ed. Champagne, IL: Stipes Publishing Company. 1187 p. [48168]
  • 64. Gysel, Leslie W.; Lemmien, Walter. 1955. The growth and wildlife use of planted shrubs and trees at the W. K. Kellogg Multiple Use Forest. The Quarterly Bulletin. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University, Agricultural Experiment Station. 38(1): 139-145. [48353]
  • 80. Ingold, James L.; Craycraft, Mary Jo. 1983. Avian frugivory on honeysuckle (Lonicera) in southwestern Ohio in fall. Ohio Journal of Science. 3: 256-258. [48343]
  • 95. Lorenz, David G.; Sharp, W. Curtis.; Ruffner, Joseph D. 1991. Conservation plants for the Northeast. Program Aid 1154. [Washington, DC]: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 43 p. [47719]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Risks

Ecological Threat in the United States

Exotic bush honeysuckles can rapidly invade and overtake a site, forming a dense shrub layer that crowds and shades out native plant species. They alter habitats by decreasing light availability, by depleting soil moisture and nutrients, and possibly by releasing toxic chemicals that prevent other plant species from growing in the vicinity. Exotic bush honeysuckles may compete with native bush honeysuckles for pollinators, resulting in reduced seed set for native species. In addition, the fruits of exotic bush honeysuckles, while abundant and rich in carbohydrates, do not offer migrating birds the high-fat, nutrient-rich food sources needed for long flights, that are supplied by native plant species.

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial Share Alike 3.0 (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0)

U.S. National Park Service Weeds Gone Wild website

Source: U.S. National Park Service

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Ecological Threat in the United States

Amur honeysuckle impedes reforestation of cut or disturbed areas and prevents reestablishment of native plants. It leafs out earlier than most natives and form dense thickets too shady for most native species. Additionally, researchers in the Midwest found increased nest predation of robins using Amur honeysuckle as a result of plant structure which facilitates access to nests by predators such as snakes. While the carbohydrate-rich fruits of exotic honeysuckles provide some nutrition for birds and rodents in winter, they do not compare to the lipid-rich fruits of native species that provide greater energy to sustain migrating birds.

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Wikipedia

Lonicera maackii

Lonicera maackii (Amur Honeysuckle or Bush Honeysuckle) is a species of honeysuckle in the family Caprifoliaceae, native to temperate Asia in northern and western China (south to Yunnan), Mongolia, Japan (central and northern Honshū, rare), Korea, and southeastern Russia (Primorsky Krai).[2]

It is listed as an endangered species in Japan.[3][4] It has escaped from cultivation and become naturalized in New Zealand and the eastern United States; in the forests of the latter, it has become an important invasive species.[5]

It is a deciduous large shrub growing to 6 m tall with stems up to 10 centimeters diameter. The leaves are oppositely arranged, 5–9 cm long and 2–4 cm broad, with an entire margin, and with at least some rough hairs on them. The flowers are produced in pairs, commonly with several pairs grouped together in clusters; they are 2 cm long, two-lipped, white later turning yellow or light orange in color; flowering is from mid spring to early summer.

Foliage and fruit in autumn

The fruit is a bright red to black semi-translucent berry 2–6 mm diameter containing numerous small seeds; they ripen in autumn, and are eaten by birds, which disperse the seeds in their droppings. It is fast growing and favours shady habitats such as the forest understory, neglected urban areas, and fence rows. It can form extremely dense thickets.[6][7][8]

Cultivation and uses[edit]

It is grown as an ornamental plant for its attractive flowers, and also as a hedge. A number of cultivars have been selected for garden use, including 'Erubescens' with pink flowers, and 'Rem Red' with erect habit.[6]

The flowers are sometimes used by children, who remove the blossom by hand, and pull off the bottom to suck out the sweet nectar in the center. The red berries are mildly poisonous to humans and should not be eaten.

As an invasive species[edit]

Lonicera maackii planted as a hedge.

Spread of this plant is illegal or controlled in some areas of the United States due to its well documented invasive character.[5][7][9][10][11] It is listed as a "invasive, banned" species in Connecticut, "prohibited" in Massachusetts, and a "Class B noxious weed" in Vermont.[12] It is also officially listed as an invasive species by government agencies in Wisconsin and Tennessee.[12]

This plant is adaptable and successful in a wide range of conditions. In the United States, Amur honeysuckle was once planted to control erosion, and as hedges. It spread quickly as birds eat the fruit and disperse the seeds, and was soon naturalized. Notably, in deciduous forest understories of the eastern United States it forms dense growths with thick canopies that shade out native shrubs, young trees, and wild flowers.[5][7][9][10][11] Uncontrolled, these growths create a near monoculture of Amur Honeysuckle.[5][7][9][10][11] This species poses a serious threat not only to the diversity of the ecosystems which they invade but also to forest regeneration itself.[5][7][9][10][11] as the plant is known for reducing the growth and diversity of native seedlings.[13] Moreover studies have shown that plant is responsible for having a negative impact on birds,[14] and tadpoles.[15] In 2010 a study showed that plant may also be linked with tick-born diseases such as Erlichiosis.[16]

Honeysuckle can be controlled by cutting, flaming, or burning the plant to root level and repeating on two-week increments until nutrient reserves in the roots are depleted. To ensure eradication newly cut stumps should be treated with herbicide. Control through prescribed burning has been found to be most effective during the seed dispersal phase (late summer, early fall).[5] Honeysuckle can also be controlled through annual applications of glyphosate which thoroughly soak the leaves, or through grubbing of the shallowly rooted young plants. Both of these methods are only practical if high labor costs and soil damage are not of concern.

Due to the invasive nature of this species and the ecological threat it possess it may be inadvisable to cultivate this plant in climates similar to those found where this species has become invasive (e.g. eastern United States).[9] It has been suggested that existing specimens found outside of their native range in east Asia should be removed and replaced with alternative non-invasive species.[11] Possible alternative fast growing, shade tolerant, deciduous shrubs include Calycanthus floridus, Cornus mas, Cornus sericea, Forsythia hybrids, Hydrangea spp., Syringa vulgaris, Viburnum cassinoides, Viburnum dentatum, Viburnum dilatatum, Viburnum opulus, Viburnum prunifolium, Viburnum trilobum, Weigela florida.[11]

Etymology and authority[edit]

The common name Amur Honeysuckle comes from the Amur River which is the world's eighth longest river. This river forms the border between the Russian Far East and Manchuria in China. L. maackii is native to the area surrounding this river. The species name maackii is derived from Richard Maack, a 19th-century Russian naturalist.[11]

Some internet sources incorrectly list the species authority as (Rupr.) Herder; the correct authority is (Rupr.) Maxim.[2]

References[edit]

Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 3.0 (CC BY-SA 3.0)

Source: Wikipedia

Unreviewed

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Names and Taxonomy

Taxonomy

More info for the term: shrubs

The currently accepted genus name for honeysuckle is Lonicera L.
(Caprifoliaceae) [18,36,54,59,82,83,93,133,161,189,190,191,197]. This report
summarizes information on 5 species and 1 hybrid of Lonicera:

Lonicera fragrantissima Lindl. & Paxt. [36,82,83,133,191] winter honeysuckle

Lonicera maackii Maxim. [18,27,36,54,59,82,83,131,137,186] Amur honeysuckle

Lonicera morrowii A. Gray [18,39,54,60,83,161,186,189,190,197] Morrow's honeysuckle

Lonicera tatarica L. [18,38,39,54,59,60,82,83,92,93,157,161,186,190,191] Tatarian honeysuckle

Lonicera xylosteum L. [18,54,60,83,186] European fly honeysuckle

Lonicera × bella Zabel [54,60,83,133,186,190]
Bell's honeysuckle. This is a cross between L. tatarica and L. morrowii
that has arisen in cultivation and probably spontaneously in the wild [7,54,68,133,186].
According to Barnes [7], Bell's honeysuckle is intermediate to its parent species in most
characteristics, but "many of these characteristics vary between extremes so that often
detection of the hybrid nature of an individual can only be accomplished by looking at a large
number of characters." Field observations in Ohio and Michigan suggest that Tatarian
honeysuckle is the pollen parent of Bell's honeysuckle [68]. Bush honeysuckle shrubs in
southern Vermont were described as a "hybrid complex", with most individuals
resembling the Morrow's honeysuckle type, but some apparently more influenced by Tatarian
honeysuckle [139]. Barnes [7] illustrates the difficulty often encountered in distinguishing
between Bell's honeysuckle and its parent species, and asserts that in many instances
Bell's honeysuckle is misidentified in the literature as Tatarian honeysuckle or Morrow's
honeysuckle. Chapman and Bessette [25] describe Bell's honeysuckle as the dominant
"species" in Adirondack Park, New York, with pure specimens of either Tatarian
honeysuckle or Morrow's honeysuckle becoming difficult to find.

When discussing characteristics typical (or likely to be typical) of all 6 of the above
taxa, this report refers to them collectively as bush honeysuckle(s). When referring
to individual taxa, the common names listed above are used.

Although apparently not widely escaped, additional hybrids may be formed among the
abovementioned taxa and others, as described below [60,72]:

Lonicera × minutiflora Zabel (bunchberry honeysuckle), a cross between L. morrowii
and L.× xylosteoides.

Lonicera × muendeniensis Rehd. (Muenden honeysuckle), a cross between L.× bella
and L. ruprechtiana (Manchurian honeysuckle).

Lonicera × muscaviensis Rehd. (Muscovy honeysuckle), a cross between L. morrowii and L. ruprechtiana.

Lonicera × notha Zabel (Rutarian honeysuckle),
a cross between L. ruprechtiana and L. tatarica.

Lonicera × salicifolia Dieck ex Zabel (willowleaf honeysuckle), a cross between
L. ruprechtiana and L.× xylosteoides.

Lonicera × xylosteoides Tausch (Vienna honeysuckle),
a cross between L. tatarica and L. xylosteum.
  • 131. Pringle, James S. 1973. Lonicera maackii (Caprifoliaceae) adventive in Ontario. The Canadian Field-Naturalist. 87: 54-55. [47289]
  • 133. 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]
  • 137. Rolfsmeier, Steven B.; Steinauer, Robert F.; Sutherland, David M. 1999. New floristic records for Nebraska--5. Transactions, Nebraska Academy of Sciences. 25: 15-22. [37459]
  • 139. Ruesink, Ana. 1998. Links between land use and Lonicera: patterns of honeysuckle invasion in a post-agricultural landscape. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont. 55 p. Thesis. [48162]
  • 157. Stephens, H. A. 1973. Woody plants of the North Central Plains. Lawrence, KS: The University Press of Kansas. 530 p. [3804]
  • 161. Strausbaugh, P. D.; Core, Earl L. 1977. Flora of West Virginia. 2nd ed. Morgantown, WV: Seneca Books, Inc. 1079 p. [23213]
  • 18. Braun, E. Lucy. 1961. The woody plants of Ohio. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press. 362 p. [12914]
  • 186. Voss, Edward G. 1996. Michigan flora. Part III: Dicots (Pyrolaceae--Compositae). Cranbrook Institute of Science Bulletin 61/University of Michigan Herbarium. Ann Arbor, MI: The Regents of the University of Michigan. 622 p. [30401]
  • 189. Weber, William A. 1987. Colorado flora: western slope. Boulder, CO: Colorado Associated University Press. 530 p. [7706]
  • 190. Weber, William A.; Wittmann, Ronald C. 1996. Colorado flora: eastern slope. 2nd ed. Niwot, CO: University Press of Colorado. 524 p. [27572]
  • 191. Welsh, Stanley L.; Atwood, N. Duane; Goodrich, Sherel; Higgins, Larry C., eds. 1987. A Utah flora. The Great Basin Naturalist Memoir No. 9. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University. 894 p. [2944]
  • 197. Wofford, B. Eugene. 1989. Guide to the vascular plants of the Blue Ridge. Athens, GA: The University of Georgia Press. 384 p. [12908]
  • 25. Chapman, William K.; Bessette, Alan E. 1990. Trees and shrubs of the Adirondacks. Utica, NY: North Country Books, Inc. 131 p. [12766]
  • 27. Cochrane, Theodore S. 1995. Lonicera maackii (Caprifoliaceae) naturalized in Wisconsin. The Michigan Botanist. 34: 79-82. [47718]
  • 36. Diggs, George M., Jr.; Lipscomb, Barney L.; O'Kennon, Robert J. 1999. Illustrated flora of north-central Texas. Sida Botanical Miscellany No. 16. Fort Worth, TX: Botanical Research Institute of Texas. 1626 p. [35698]
  • 38. Dorn, Robert D. 1984. Vascular plants of Montana. Cheyenne, WY: Mountain West Publishing. 276 p. [819]
  • 39. Dorn, Robert D. 1988. Vascular plants of Wyoming. Cheyenne, WY: Mountain West Publishing. 340 p. [6129]
  • 54. 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]
  • 59. Great Plains Flora Association. 1986. Flora of the Great Plains. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. 1392 p. [1603]
  • 60. Green, P. S. 1966. Identification of the species and hybrids in the Lonicera tatarica complex. Journal of the Arnold Arboretum. 47: 75-88. [48352]
  • 68. Hauser, Edward J. P. 1966. The natural occurrence of a hybrid honeysuckle (Lonicera X bella) in Ohio and Michigan. The Michigan Botanist. 5: 211-217. [47292]
  • 7. Barnes, William J. 1972. The autecology of the Lonicera X bella complex. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin. 169 p. Dissertation. [48166]
  • 72. Herman, Dale E.; Chaput, Lawrence J. 1989. Evaluation of Lonicera taxa for honeysuckle aphid susceptibility, winter hardiness, and plant use. In: Landis, Thomas D., technical coordinator. Proceedings, Intermountain Forest Nursery Association; 1989 August 14-18; Bismarck, ND. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-184. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 119-126. [17061]
  • 82. Jones, Stanley D.; Wipff, Joseph K.; Montgomery, Paul M. 1997. Vascular plants of Texas. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. 404 p. [28762]
  • 83. Kartesz, John T.; Meacham, Christopher A. 1999. Synthesis of the North American flora (Windows Version 1.0), [CD-ROM]. Available: North Carolina Botanical Garden. In cooperation with the Nature Conservancy, Natural Resources Conservation Service, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [2001, January 16]. [36715]
  • 92. Kudish, Michael. 1992. Adirondack upland flora: an ecological perspective. Saranac, NY: The Chauncy Press. 320 p. [19376]
  • 93. Lackschewitz, Klaus. 1991. Vascular plants of west-central Montana--identification guidebook. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-227. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 648 p. [13798]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Common Names

winter honeysuckle

Amur honeysuckle

Morrow's honeysuckle

Tatarian honeysuckle

European fly honeysuckle

Bell's honeysuckle

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Disclaimer

EOL content is automatically assembled from many different content providers. As a result, from time to time you may find pages on EOL that are confusing.

To request an improvement, please leave a comment on the page. Thank you!