• Reset your password

Main navigation

  • Home
  • About
    • Methodology
    • A Brief History of PRE
    • Funding and Support
  • Evaluations
  • Plants
  • Organizations
  • Community
  • Projects

User account menu

  • Log in
PRE — Plant Risk Evaluator

Ulmus pumila -- Arizona

Primary tabs

  • View
  • Issues

Evaluation Summary


photo by Wikipedia

Evaluation Date:  2023-02-20

Screener:  Michael Chamberland
 
Plant:  Ulmus pumila
Common Name(s):
Siberian Elm

State:  Arizona

PRE Score:  16
Questions Answered:  20
Screener Confidence (%):  77

Executive Summary

Siberian elm (Ulmus pumila) is native to northern China, Korea, Mongolia, and Eastern Siberia. The tree is is today regarded as naturalized or invasive in most regions where it has been introduced. Its invasion success can partly be explained by inter- and intraspecific hybridization. Introgression with native Ulmus is an issue in some regions, but not in Arizona which contains no native Ulmus species. Ulmus pumila has been noted as spreading in middle-elevations of Arizona, particularly in Yavapai County, Arizona. The plant reproduces by seed, which can be transported long-distances on wind and potentially adhering to vehicles and perhaps animals. The plants can emerge from root sprouts which complicates management with mechanical techniques.


Climate Matching Map

Attachment Size
ClimateMatch_AZ_Ulmus_pumila_3.pdf (1.14 MB) 1.14 MB

1. Question 1

Yes
1
Very High
Siberian elm is native to northern Asia and was introduced in North America in the 1860s. It has been planted throughout the Midwest and Great Plains for windbreaks and lumber. Siberian elm invades pastures, roadsides, and prairies throughout the Midwest and Great Plains regions of the United States. The trees are drought and cold resistant, allowing them to grow in areas where other trees cannot (Extension.org, 2019). Siberian elm has naturalized in nearly all counties in Indiana (Jacquart et al. 2007). It has also invaded Argentina (Hirsch & Hensen, 2010). Ulmus pumila is considered an invasive tree in 41 of the United States (Zalapa et al. 2010).
Anonymous,. 2019. “Ulmus Pumila, Siberian Elm -- Invasive Species”. Extension.org. https://invasive-species.extension.org/ulmus-pumila-siberian-elm/.
Jacquart, E, P O’Connor, K Collins, D Gorden, J Kiefer, and K Howe. 2007. “Assessment of Invasive Species in Indiana\textquoterights Natural Areas: Siberian Elm (Ulmus Pumila)”. Indiana Department of Natural Resources, 9 pp. https://www.in.gov/dnr/files/Official_Siberian_Elm_Assessment.pdf.
Hirsch, Heidi, and Isabell Hensen. 2010. “Investigations on the Invasion Success of Ulmus Pumila L. In North America and Argentina.”
Zalapa, Juan E., Johanne Brunet, and Raymond P. Guries. 2010. “The Extent of Hybridization and Its Impact on the Genetic Diversity and Population Structure of an Invasive Tree, Ulmus Pumila (Ulmaceae)”. Evolutionary Applications 3: 157\textendash168. doi:10.1111/j.1752-4571.2009.00106.x.

2. Question 2

Yes
2
Very High
Ulmus pumila is widely reported as invasive in North America, including western states (Perry et al. 2018, Reynolds et al. 2022) and Texas (TexasInvasives, 2023). The species is listed as a Class C noxious weed in New Mexico (Ashigh, et al. 2009). It is noted as naturalized in Yavapai Co, Arizona (Halldorson, 2022). It has also invaded Argentina (Hirsch & Hensen, 2010), which is mostly a climate match for Arizona.
Perry, L, L Reynolds, and P Shafroth. 2018. “Divergent Effects of Land-Use, Propagule Pressure, and Climate on Woody Riparian Invasion”. Biological Invasions 20: 3271-95.
2023. “Texas Invasives”. https://www.texasinvasives.org/plant_database/detail.php?symbol=ULPU.
Ashigh, Jamshid, James Wanstall, and Frank Sholedice. 2009. “NMSU: Troublesome Weeds of New Mexico”. http://aces.nmsu.edu/pubs/weeds/welcome.html$\#$a42.
Halldorson, Matt. 2022. “Yavapai County Native \& Naturalized Plants”. https://cals.arizona.edu/yavapaiplants/SpeciesDetail.php?genus=Ulmus\&species=pumila.
Hirsch, Heidi, and Isabell Hensen. 2010. “Investigations on the Invasion Success of Ulmus Pumila L. In North America and Argentina.”

3. Question 3

Yes
2
Very High
Ulmus pumila is today regarded as naturalized or invasive in most regions where it has been introduced. Its invasion success can partly be explained by inter- and intraspecific hybridization, leading to high genetic diversity in the corresponding non-native populations (Hirsch et al. 2016). Hirsch makes the distinction between naturalized and invasive, and indicates U. pumila can be naturalized and can also reach the magnitude of invasive. Siberian elm is listed as a Class C Noxious Weed in New Mexico (Beck & Wanstall, 2022).
Hirsch, Heidi, Isabell Hensen, Karsten Wesche, Daniel Renison, Catherina Wypior, Matthias Hartmann, and Henrik von Wehrden. 2016. “Non-Native Populations of an Invasive Tree Outperform Their Native Conspecifics”. AoB PLANTS 8: plw071. doi:10.1093/aobpla/plw071.
Beck, Leslie, and James Wanstall. 2022. “Noxious and Troublesome Weeds of New Mexico”. https://pubs.nmsu.edu/_circulars/CR698/.

4. Question 4

Yes
3
Very High
The Siberian elm is a native of relatively moist regions of East Asia, but occurs westwards up to the dry Gobi desert, where it is bound to water surplus sites and oases. In North America, the Siberian elm was widely planted on the plains as a fast growing
windbreak or shady tree, and naturalized populations can be found along river banks as well as on dry sites. Furthermore, this species spreads in the Argentinean Pampa where it colonizes old field and grasslands (Hirsh & Hensen, 2010). Siberian elm appears more characteristic of colder and less xeric regions than Arizona, but Arizona contains upland plains with cold winters as well. Siberian elm is listed as a Class C Noxious Weed in New Mexico. Class C species are widespread in the state (Beck & Wanstall, 2022).
Hirsch, Heidi, and Isabell Hensen. 2010. “Investigations on the Invasion Success of Ulmus Pumila L. In North America and Argentina.”
Beck, Leslie, and James Wanstall. 2022. “Noxious and Troublesome Weeds of New Mexico”. https://pubs.nmsu.edu/_circulars/CR698/.

5. Question 5

No
0
Low
The Chinese elm, Ulmus parvifolia can naturalize (reseed) in heavily and not so heavily irrigated landscapes in Phoenix and southern California (Martin, 2023). However this plant would not appear to meet the definition of invasive used by the PRE.
Martin, Chris. 2023. “Virtual Library of Phoenix Landscape Plants”. https://www.public.asu.edu/~camartin/plants/Plant\%20html\%20files/ulmusparvifolia.html.

6. Question 6

No
0
High
Ulmus pumila is found widely across northern Eurasia. It is naturalized across most of the USA and into Canada. It has some limited naturalization in Mexico and South America. It is not shown as present in climate-matching areas of Africa, Australia or the Middle-East (GBIF, 2017). The Siberian elm is a native of relatively moist regions of East Asia, but occurs westwards up to the dry Gobi desert, where it is bound to water surplus sites and oases (Hirsh & Hensen, 2010). The Siberian elm appears to have considerable adaptability to a variety of climates, but it is not found predominately in a climate matching Arizona.
Hirsch, Heidi, and Isabell Hensen. 2010. “Investigations on the Invasion Success of Ulmus Pumila L. In North America and Argentina.”
2017. “Ulmus Pumila L”. https://gbif.org/species/5361877.

7. Question 7

Yes
1
Very High
Siberian elm is an invasive tree that forms dense thickets, shading and crowding out native plants, thereby reducing forage for wild animals and livestock (Extension.org, 2019). It quickly out-competes desirable native plants, especially in sparsely vegetated or disturbed areas (USDA, 2014).
No references cited.

8. Question 8

No
0
Medium
A prescribed burn may be used in certain fire-adapted areas to remove and suppress top growth. Depending on fire intensity, burning will control seedlings, but saplings and older trees will usually survive and regrow from the root system (USDA, 2014). This account suggests the plant is not flammable and does not promote a fire regime. It also suggests that seedlings have vulnerability to fire. No sources were found that refer to the plant changing fire frequency or intensity.
USDA,. 2014. “Field Guide for Managing Siberian Elm in the Southwest.”

9. Question 9

Yes
1
Medium
Siberian elm forms dense thickets that close open areas and displace native plants, thereby reducing forage for wild animals and livestock (Extension.org, 2019). By inference, this could impact grazing systems.
Anonymous,. 2019. “Ulmus Pumila, Siberian Elm -- Invasive Species”. Extension.org. https://invasive-species.extension.org/ulmus-pumila-siberian-elm/.

10. Question 10

Yes
1
Medium
Siberian elm forms dense thickets that close open areas and displace native plants, thereby reducing forage for wild animals and livestock (Extension.org, 2019). By inference , it could slow or block the movement of larger animals.
Anonymous,. 2019. “Ulmus Pumila, Siberian Elm -- Invasive Species”. Extension.org. https://invasive-species.extension.org/ulmus-pumila-siberian-elm/.

11. Question 11

No
0
High
Reproduces primarily by seed; roots resprout when top growth is damaged. Trunks may be cut close to the ground to remove top growth. Anticipate that trunk and root resprouts will return later in the growing season (USDA, 2014). Ulmus pumila will resprout from the roots following damage to or cutting of the main stem, but this is not a significant mechanism of spread (Wesche et al. 2011).
USDA,. 2014. “Field Guide for Managing Siberian Elm in the Southwest.”
Wesche, K, D Walther, H von Wehrden, and I Hensen. 2011. “Trees in the Desert: Reproduction and Genetic Structure of Fragmented Ulmus Pumila Forests in Mongolian Drylands”. Flora 206: 91-99.

12. Question 12

No
0
High
Reproduces primarily by seed; roots resprout when top growth is damaged (USDA, 2014). Reproduction by fragmentation is not mentioned in the literature on Siberian elm reproduction.
USDA,. 2014. “Field Guide for Managing Siberian Elm in the Southwest.”

13. Question 13

Yes
1
Very High
Germination rate is high and seedlings soon establish in the bare ground found early in the growing season (TexasInvasives, 2023). Seeds of non-native populations of the woody Siberian elm, Ulmus pumila, germinated faster than those of native populations (Hirsch et al. 2016).
2023. “Texas Invasives”. https://www.texasinvasives.org/plant_database/detail.php?symbol=ULPU.
Hirsch, Heidi, Isabell Hensen, Karsten Wesche, Daniel Renison, Catherina Wypior, Matthias Hartmann, and Henrik von Wehrden. 2016. “Non-Native Populations of an Invasive Tree Outperform Their Native Conspecifics”. AoB PLANTS 8: plw071. doi:10.1093/aobpla/plw071.

14. Question 14

Yes
1
Medium
Jacquart et al. (2007) state that “[e]ven small trees can have >1,000 seeds.” This seems reasonable for mature trees, but the references provided by the authors either don’t support this assertion quantitatively or could not be found. Thus confidence for this answer can only be Medium.
Jacquart, E, P O’Connor, K Collins, D Gorden, J Kiefer, and K Howe. 2007. “Assessment of Invasive Species in Indiana\textquoterights Natural Areas: Siberian Elm (Ulmus Pumila)”. Indiana Department of Natural Resources, 9 pp. https://www.in.gov/dnr/files/Official_Siberian_Elm_Assessment.pdf.

15. Question 15

Yes
1
High
Wesche et al. (2011) reported germination rates of 48-74% (depending on substrate type) for U. pumila in field tests within the species native range in Mongolia. Given the high germination rates reported from laboratory studies (74-89 %; Hirsch et al. 2012, Song et al. 2011) it seems reasonable to infer that > 25% of seeds would germinate in the wild given appropriate substrate, temperature, and moisture habitats within the species’ naturalized range.
No references cited.

16. Question 16

No
0
High
Ulmus pumila is listed as requiring 8 years to be minimum seed-bearing age (Bonner & Karrfalt, 2008). Ulmus pumila can produce seed in as few as 10 years (Zalapa et al. 2010).
No references cited.

17. Question 17

No
0
Medium
Clusters of smooth, circular, winged, samara-type fruit with single seed in center occur from April to May (USDA, 2014).
USDA,. 2014. “Field Guide for Managing Siberian Elm in the Southwest.”

18. Question 18

No
0
Very Low
Siberian elm seed is primarily dispersed via wind, although seed may also be transported by water and animals (USDA, 2014). Detail is not available concerning the mode or distance of animal dispersal.
USDA,. 2014. “Field Guide for Managing Siberian Elm in the Southwest.”

19. Question 19

Yes
1
Very High
Wind carries seed to distant areas where new colonies can form. Seeds are produced early in spring and spread by the wind (TexasInvasives, 2023). Siberian elm seed is primarily dispersed via wind, although seed may also be transported by water and animals (USDA, 2014). Field studies by Blass et al. (2010) found windborne dispersal of U. pumila seeds exceeded 100 m. The authors also found that 99% of U. pumila seeds remained afloat in water for 24 hours, suggesting a capacity for long-distance water-borne dispersal.
2023. “Texas Invasives”. https://www.texasinvasives.org/plant_database/detail.php?symbol=ULPU.
USDA,. 2014. “Field Guide for Managing Siberian Elm in the Southwest.”
Blass, C, K Ronnenberg, O Tackenberg, I Hensen, and K Wesche. 2010. “The Relative Importance of Different Seed Dispersal Modes in Dry Mongolian Rangelands”. Journal of Arid Environments 74: 991\textendash997.

20. Question 20

Yes
1
High
Seed may be carried long distances by adhering to surfaces and undercarriages of logging equipment and vehicles (USDA, 2014).
USDA,. 2014. “Field Guide for Managing Siberian Elm in the Southwest.”

Total PRE Score

16
20
77

PRE Score Legend

The PRE Score is calculated by adding the point totals for each (answered) question.

< 13 : Low Potential Risk
13 - 15 : Moderate Potential Risk
> 15 : High Potential Risk

Questions Answered Legend

It is important to answer at least 16 questions to consider a PRE Score as "valid".

≥ 16 : Valid (80% or more questions answered)
≤ 15 : Invalid (not enough questions answered)

Evaluation Credits and Citation


Screener:  Michael Chamberland

 

Below is a recommend citation when referencing this evaluation in other works:

Chamberland, Michael. "Ulmus pumila -- Arizona" Plant Risk Evaluator (PRE) published 2023-02-20 https://pretool.org/evaluations/1808

 


Please cite this evaluation. We need your support here!

PRE Evaluations take a long time to research, so please credit this site and evaluation appropriately.


Evaluation Reviewers

Michael Chamberland reviewed on 2023-02-26
Ron Vanderhoff reviewed on 2023-02-26
Alex Simmons reviewed on 2023-02-23
Jutta Burger reviewed on 2023-02-22

 

Associated Project

2022 Western IPM Grant Project

"Expanding Continuity and Capacity in Invasive Plant Risk Assessments across Western States" is a continuation of the successful 2021 project titled "Building Continuity Across State Invasvie Plant Lists: Evaluating Invasive Risk of Horticultural Plants." Both 2021 and 2022's projects are funded by the Western Integrated Pest Management Center. Project partners for this year inclue the California Invasive Plant Council, PlantRight, The University of Arizona, Western Invasive Species Network, Pacific Northwest Invasive Species Council, the Yurok Tribe, and Nevada State Parks. 


 

Associated Organizations, Agencies, and Institutions

PlantRight
The University of Arizona

 

Copyright © 2025 PRETool.org - All rights reserved