Campanula rapunculoides - L.
Creeping Bellflower
Other English Common Names: Rampion Bellflower
Other Common Names: rampion bellflower
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Campanula rapunculoides L. (TSN 34494)
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.148535
Element Code: PDCAM020Q0
Informal Taxonomy: Plants, Vascular - Flowering Plants - Other flowering plants
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Plantae Anthophyta Dicotyledoneae Campanulales Campanulaceae Campanula
Check this box to expand all report sections:
Concept Reference
Help
Concept Reference: Kartesz, J.T. 1994. A synonymized checklist of the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. 2nd edition. 2 vols. Timber Press, Portland, OR.
Concept Reference Code: B94KAR01HQUS
Name Used in Concept Reference: Campanula rapunculoides
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: GNR
Global Status Last Changed: 22Mar1994
Rounded Global Status: GNR - Not Yet Ranked
Nation: United States
National Status: NNA
Nation: Canada
National Status: NNA (11Oct2016)

U.S. & Canada State/Province Status
United States Colorado (SNA), Connecticut (SNA), Delaware (SNA), District of Columbia (SNA), Idaho (SNA), Illinois (SNA), Indiana (SNA), Iowa (SNA), Kansas (SNA), Kentucky (SNA), Maine (SNA), Maryland (SNA), Massachusetts (SNR), Michigan (SNA), Minnesota (SNA), Missouri (SNA), Montana (SNA), Nebraska (SNA), Nevada (SNA), New Hampshire (SNA), New Jersey (SNA), New Mexico (SNA), New York (SNA), North Carolina (SNA), North Dakota (SNA), Ohio (SNA), Oregon (SNA), Pennsylvania (SNA), Rhode Island (SNA), South Dakota (SNA), Texas (SNA), Utah (SNA), Vermont (SNA), Virginia (SNA), Washington (SNA), West Virginia (SNA), Wisconsin (SNA), Wyoming (SNA)
Canada Alberta (SNA), British Columbia (SNA), Manitoba (SNA), New Brunswick (SNA), Newfoundland Island (SNA), Nova Scotia (SNA), Ontario (SNA), Prince Edward Island (SNA), Quebec (SNA)

Other Statuses

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Distribution
Help
U.S. States and Canadian Provinces
Color legend for Distribution Map
NOTE: The distribution shown may be incomplete, particularly for some rapidly spreading exotic species.

U.S. & Canada State/Province Distribution
United States COexotic, CTexotic, DCexotic, DEexotic, IAexotic, IDexotic, ILexotic, INexotic, KSexotic, KYexotic, MA, MDexotic, MEexotic, MIexotic, MNexotic, MOexotic, MTexotic, NCexotic, NDexotic, NEexotic, NHexotic, NJexotic, NMexotic, NVexotic, NYexotic, OHexotic, ORexotic, PAexotic, RIexotic, SDexotic, TXexotic, UTexotic, VAexotic, VTexotic, WAexotic, WIexotic, WVexotic, WYexotic
Canada ABexotic, BCexotic, MBexotic, NBexotic, NFexotic, NSexotic, ONexotic, PEexotic, QCexotic

Range Map
No map available.

Ecology & Life History Not yet assessed
Help
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary Not yet assessed
Help
Population/Occurrence Delineation Not yet assessed
Help
Population/Occurrence Viability
Help
U.S. Invasive Species Impact Rank (I-Rank)
Help
Disclaimer: While I-Rank information is available over NatureServe Explorer, NatureServe is not actively developing or maintaining these data. Species with I-RANKs do not represent a random sample of species exotic in the United States; available assessments may be biased toward those species with higher-than-average impact.

I-Rank: High/Low
Rounded I-Rank: Unknown
I-Rank Reasons Summary: Campanula rapunculoides is established in most states in the continental U.S. except California, Arizona, and the southeast. It is a vigorous, persistent herbaceous perennial that spreads by deep-seated creeping roots and seeds and has been described as an almost ineradicable weed. It primarily occurs in disturbed areas such as waste ground, lawns, meadows, old fields, and rich gravelly roadsides. In Manitoba, Campanula rapunculoides is spreading from an abandoned homestead and threatening to take over the northernmost site of a globally uncommon species that is rare in Canada and uncommon in the U.S. It is not known to impact this species in the U.S. but more information is needed. More information is also needed about its ecological impacts and management difficulty.

Subrank I - Ecological Impact: Medium/Low
Subrank II - Current Distribution/Abundance: High/Low
Subrank III - Trend in Distribution/Abundance: Medium/Low
Subrank IV - Management Difficulty: High/Low
I-Rank Review Date: 14Jun2004
Evaluator: Tomaino, A.
Native anywhere in the U.S?
Native Range: Native to Eurasia (Gleason and Cronquist 1991).

Download "An Invasive Species Assessment Protocol: Evaluating Non-Native Plants for their Impact on Biodiversity". (PDF, 1.03MB)
Provide feedback on the information presented in this assessment

Screening Questions

S-1. Established outside cultivation as a non-native? YES
Comments: Established outside cultivation in the U.S. (Kartesz 1999).

S-2. Present in conservation areas or other native species habitat? Yes
Comments: In North Carolina and Virigina it occurs in disturbed areas and is rare (Weakely draft 2004). In the northeastern U.S., it is a persistent weed in lawns, roadsides, and waste ground (Gleason and Cronquist 1991).

Subrank I - Ecological Impact: Medium/Low

1. Impact on Ecosystem Processes and System-wide Parameters:Low significance/Insignificant
Comments: No mention of changes in abiotic ecosystem processes or system-wide parameters found in the literature; assumption is that any alterations are not significant or major/irreversible.

2. Impact on Ecological Community Structure:Medium/Low significance
Comments: A perennial 2 to 4 feet tall and spreading by deep-seated creeping roots (Whitson et al. 1996).

3. Impact on Ecological Community Composition:High/Moderate significance
Comments: A perennial 2 to 4 feet tall and spreading by deep-seated creeping roots (Whitson et al. 1996). Campanula rapunculoides is a moderately successful competitor at Pipestone National Monument, Minnesota and Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore.

4. Impact on Individual Native Plant or Animal Species:High/Low significance
Comments: In Manitoba, Campanula rapunculoides is spreading from an abandoned homestead and threatening to take over the northernmost site of Cypripedium candidum, a globally uncommon species that is rare in Canada and uncommon in the U.S. (Haber 1998). Information about Campanula rapunculoides impacting Cypripedium candidum in the the U.S. was not found but presumeably it may impact particular native species in the U.S. as well.

5. Conservation Significance of the Communities and Native Species Threatened:Low significance
Comments: In Texas, Campanula rapunculoides was found in a woodland of Quercus glaucoides on a rocky limestone slope above the Sabinal River (Brown 1985). Presumeably, this area is of conservation significance. However, Campanula rapunculoides seems to usually occur in disturbed habitats. Campanula rapunculoides occurs in meadows, old fields, and rich gravelly roadsides (Muenscher 1955). In North Carolina and Virigina, it occurs in disturbed areas and is rare (Weakely draft 2004). In the northeastern U.S., it is a persistent weed in lawns, roadsides, and waste ground (Gleason and Cronquist 1991).

Subrank II. Current Distribution and Abundance: High/Low

6. Current Range Size in Nation:High/Moderate significance
Comments: Established across most the U.S. except California, Arizona, and the southeast(Kartesz 1999). Patchy in most states. See the subnational distribution data in these sources: Rice 2004, Rocky Mountain Herbarium 1998, Utah State University 1988, Great Plains Flora Association 1977, Weber et al. 2004, Wisconsin State Herbarium 2004, Iverson et al. 1999, Voss 1996, Cooperrider 1988, Rhodes and Klein 1993, Weldy et al. 2002, Hough 1983, and University of Tennessee Herbarium 2002.

7. Proportion of Current Range Where the Species is Negatively Impacting Biodiversity:Medium/Low significance
Comments: In North Carolina and Virigina Campanula rapunculoides occurs in disturbed areas and is rare (Weakely draft 2004). In the northeastern U.S., it is a persistent weed in lawns, roadsides, and waste ground (Gleason and Cronquist 1991). Campanula rapunculoides is a moderately successful competitor at Pipestone National Monument, Minnesota and Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore. In Texas, Campanula rapunculoides was found in a woodland of Quercus glaucoides on a rocky limestone slope above the Sabinal River (Brown 1985); presumeably, it is having some negative impacts at this site.

8. Proportion of Nation's Biogeographic Units Invaded:High/Moderate significance
Comments: At most 84% of units, inferred from Kartesz (1999) and TNC (2001). At least 20% of units, inferred from Kartesz (1999) and TNC (2001).

9. Diversity of Habitats or Ecological Systems Invaded in Nation:Low significance
Comments: Occurs in meadows, old fields, and rich gravelly roadsides (Muenscher 1955). In North Carolina and Virigina it occurs in disturbed areas and is rare (Weakely draft 2004). In the northeastern U.S., it is a persistent weed in lawns, roadsides, and waste ground (Gleason and Cronquist 1991). In Texas, Campanula rapunculoides was found in a woodland of Quercus glaucoides on a rocky limestone slope above the Sabinal River (Brown 1985).

Subrank III. Trend in Distribution and Abundance: Medium/Low

10. Current Trend in Total Range within Nation:Medium/Low significance
Comments: Generalized range already covers northern portion of region (Kartesz 1999). Naturalized about properties and roadsides throughout the U.S. (Bailey 1976). Occurs in disturbed areas; assumption is that disturbed areas are not declining and therefore this species' total range is not declining.

11. Proportion of Potential Range Currently Occupied:Low significance
Comments: Inferred from USDA (1990) and Kartesz (1999), 30-90% of its potential generalized range in the U.S. is currently occupied.

12. Long-distance Dispersal Potential within Nation:Low significance
Comments: Fruit is a capsule (Muenscher 1955). Little potential for long distance dispersal (APRS Implementation Team 2001).

13. Local Range Expansion or Change in Abundance:High/Low significance
Comments: Naturalized about properties and roadsides throughout the U.S. (Bailey 1976). Occurs in disturbed areas; assumption is that disturbed areas are not decreasing and therefore this species' local range is not stable or decreasing.

14. Inherent Ability to Invade Conservation Areas and Other Native Species Habitats:Low significance
Comments: Naturalized about properties and roadsides throughout the U.S. (Bailey 1976). In North Carolina and Virigina it occurs in disturbed areas and is rare (Weakely draft 2004). In the northeastern U.S., it is a persistent weed in lawns, roadsides, and waste ground (Gleason and Cronquist 1991).

15. Similar Habitats Invaded Elsewhere:Moderate significance
Comments: Occurs in Canada (Kartesz 1999); therefore it is known as an escape outside the region of interest. In Manitoba, Campanula rapunculoides is spreading from an abandoned homestead and threatening to take over the northernmost site of Cypripedium candidum, a globally uncommon species that is rare in Canada and uncommon in the U.S. (Haber 1998). This habitat has apparently not yet been invaded in the U.S.

16. Reproductive Characteristics:Moderate significance
Comments: A vigorous, persistent species, spreading by rhizomes and seeds (Bailey 1976). A perennial 2 to 4 feet tall and spreading by deep-seated creeping roots (Whitson et al. 1996). Sprouts from roots (APRS Implementation Team 2001). Produces less than 1000 seeds per plant (APRS Implementation Team 2001). Seeds remain viable in the soil for 1 to 5 years or less than 1 year (APRS Implementation Team 2001).

Subrank IV. General Management Difficulty: High/Low

17. General Management Difficulty:High/Moderate significance
Comments: Ranked as a lesser threat, hard to control at Pipestone National Monument in Minnesota (Hiebert and Stubbendieck 1993). An almost ineradicable weed (Bailey 1976). A perennial 2 to 4 feet tall and spreading by deep-seated creeping roots (Whitson et al. 1996). Sprouts from roots (APRS Implementation Team 2001). Small patches can be eradicated by digging the roots out (Muenscher 1955). Extensive areas in fields should be plowed under and planted with a cultivated crop (Muenscher 1955).

18. Minimum Time Commitment:Medium significance/Insignificant
Comments: Seeds remain viable in the soil for 1 to 5 years or less than 1 year (APRS Implementation Team 2001). Sprouts from roots (APRS Implementation Team 2001). No mention of control requiring more than 10 years found in the literature; assumption is that control requires less than 10 years.

19. Impacts of Management on Native Species:High/Low significance
Comments: Specific control methods for natural areas not found in the literature. However, digging the roots out (Muenscher 1955) or plowing under (Muenscher 1955) would likely impact native species at least to some extent.

20. Accessibility of Invaded Areas:High/Low significance
Comments: An ornamental plant, frequently escaping from gardens to become a weed problem (Whitson et al. 1996). At least in some areas, accessibility may be a problem.
Authors/Contributors
Help

Botanical data developed by NatureServe and its network of natural heritage programs (see Local Programs), The North Carolina Botanical Garden, and other contributors and cooperators (see Sources).

References
Help
  • Alien plants ranking system (APRS) Implementation Team. 2001a. Alien plants ranking system version 7.1. Southwest Exotic Plant Information Clearinghouse, Flagstaff, AZ. Online. Available: http://www.usgs.nau.edu/swepic/ (accessed 2004).

  • Bailey, L.H., and E.Z. Bailey. 1976. Hortus Third: a concise dictionary of plants cultivated in the United States and Canada. Macmillan Publishing Co., New York. 1290 pp.

  • Brown, L. E. 1985. Campanula rapunculoides (Campanulaceae) new to Texas. Sida 11(1): 102.

  • Cooperrider, T. S. 1995. The Dicotyledoneae of Ohio, Part 2: Linaceae through Campanulaceae. Ohio State University Press, Columbus. 656 pp.

  • Haber, E. 1998. Invasive Plants Alert: 1997-98 Report. Invasive Plants of Canada Project,National Botanical Services, Ottawa, ON, Canada. May 1998. Online. Available: http://24.43.80.213/nbs/IPCAN/97_98rpt.html (accessed 11 June 2004).

  • Hiebert, R. D., and J. Stubbendieck. 1993. Handbook for Ranking Exotic Plants for Management and Control. Natural Resources Report NPS/NRMWRO/NRR93/08. U. S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Denver, Colorado. July 1993. Online. Available: http://www2.nature.nps.gov/pubs/ranking/ranking.htm (accessed 2004).

  • Hough, M.Y. 1983. New Jersey wild plants. Harmony Press, Harmony, NJ. 414 pp.

  • Iverson, L.R., D. Ketzner and J. Karnes. 1999. Illinois Plant Information Network. Database at http://fs.fed.us/ne/delaware/ilpin/ilpin.html. Illinois Natural History Survey and USDA Forest Service.

  • Kartesz, J.T. 1994. A synonymized checklist of the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. 2nd edition. 2 vols. Timber Press, Portland, OR.

  • Kartesz, J.T. 1999. A synonymized checklist and atlas with biological attributes for the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. First edition. In: Kartesz, J.T., and C.A. Meacham. Synthesis of the North American Flora, Version 1.0. North Carolina Botanical Garden, Chapel Hill, N.C.

  • Meades, S.J. & Hay, S.G; Brouillet, L. 2000. Annotated Checklist of Vascular Plants of Newfoundland and Labrador. Memorial University Botanical Gardens, St John's NF. 237pp.

  • Muenscher, W. C. 1955. Weeds. The MacMillan Co., New York.

  • Rhoads, A.F., and W.M. Klein, Jr. 1993. The vascular flora of Pennsylvania: Annotated checklist and atlas. American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia, PA. 636 pp.

  • Rice, P.M. 2004. February 19 last update. Invaders Database System. Division of Biological Sciences, University of Montana, Missoula. Online. Available: http://invader.dbs.umt.edu (accessed 2004).

  • Rocky Mountain Herbarium. 1998. Atlas of the Vascular Flora of Wyoming. University of Wyoming. Online. Available: http://www.esb.utexas.edu/tchumley/wyomap/atlas.htm (accessed 2004).

  • The Great Plains Flora Association. 1977. Atlas of the flora of the Great Plains. Iowa State Univ. Press. 600 pp.

  • The Nature Conservancy. 2001. Map: TNC Ecoregions of the United States. Modification of Bailey Ecoregions. Online . Accessed May 2003.

  • USDA Agricultural Research Service. 1990. USDA Plants Hardiness Zone Map. Misc. Publ. Number 1475.

  • University of Tennessee Herbarium and Austin Peay State University. 2002. Database of Tennessee Vascular Plants. Department of Botany, Knoxville. Online. Available: http://tenn.bio.utk.edu/vascular/vascular.html (accessed 2004).

  • Utah State Univserity. 1988. Atlas of the vascular plants of Utah, digital version of paper atlas authored by Beverly J. Albee, Leila M. Shultz, and Sherel Goodrich and published by the Utah Museum of Natural History. Online. Available: http://www.gis.usu.edu/Geography-Department/utgeog/utvatlas/index.html (accessed 2004).

  • Voss, E.G. 1996. Michigan Flora. Part III. Dicots (Pyrolaceae-Compositae). Cranbrook Institute of Science Bulletin 61 and Univ. Michigan Herbarium. Ann Arbor, Michigan. 622 pp.

  • Weakley, A. S. 2004. Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia. Draft as of March 2004. UNC Herbarium, North Carolina Botanical Garden, Chapel Hill. Available online: http://www.herbarium.unc.edu/flora.htm. Accessed 2004.

  • Weber, W. R., W. T. Corcoran, M. Brunell, and P. L. Redfearn. 2004. February last update. Atlas of Missouri vascular plants, dot map edition. Online. Available: http://biology.smsu.edu/Herbarium/Plants%20of%20the%20Interior%20Highlands/ATLAS%20MISSOURI%20VASCULAR%20PLANTS,%20DOT%20MAP%20EDITION.htm (accessed 2004)

  • Weldy, T., R. Mitchell, and R. Ingalls. 2002. New York Flora Atlas. New York Flora Association, New York State Museum, Albany, NY. Online. Available: http://nyflora.org/atlas/atlas.htm (accessed 2004).

  • Whitson, T.D. (ed.), L.C. Burrill, S.A. Dewey, D.W. Cudney, B.E. Nelson, R.D. Lee, R. Parker. 1996. Weeds of the West. 5th edition. The Western Society of Weed Science in cooperation with the Western United States Land Grant Universities Cooperative Extension Services, Newark, CA. 630 pp.

  • Wisconsin State Herbarium. 2004, January 20, 2004 last update. Wisconsin state herbarium vascular plant species database. Available: http://www.botany.wisc.edu/wisflora/. (Accessed 2004).

Use Guidelines & Citation

Use Guidelines and Citation

The Small Print: Trademark, Copyright, Citation Guidelines, Restrictions on Use, and Information Disclaimer.

Note: All species and ecological community data presented in NatureServe Explorer at http://explorer.natureserve.org were updated to be current with NatureServe's central databases as of November 2016.
Note: This report was printed on

Trademark Notice: "NatureServe", NatureServe Explorer, The NatureServe logo, and all other names of NatureServe programs referenced herein are trademarks of NatureServe. Any other product or company names mentioned herein are the trademarks of their respective owners.

Copyright Notice: Copyright © 2017 NatureServe, 4600 N. Fairfax Dr., 7th Floor, Arlington Virginia 22203, U.S.A. All Rights Reserved. Each document delivered from this server or web site may contain other proprietary notices and copyright information relating to that document. The following citation should be used in any published materials which reference the web site.

Citation for data on website including State Distribution, Watershed, and Reptile Range maps:
NatureServe. 2017. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org. (Accessed:

Citation for Bird Range Maps of North America:
Ridgely, R.S., T.F. Allnutt, T. Brooks, D.K. McNicol, D.W. Mehlman, B.E. Young, and J.R. Zook. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Birds of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Bird Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Robert Ridgely, James Zook, The Nature Conservancy - Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International - CABS, World Wildlife Fund - US, and Environment Canada - WILDSPACE."

Citation for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
Patterson, B.D., G. Ceballos, W. Sechrest, M.F. Tognelli, T. Brooks, L. Luna, P. Ortega, I. Salazar, and B.E. Young. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Mammals of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Bruce Patterson, Wes Sechrest, Marcelo Tognelli, Gerardo Ceballos, The Nature Conservancy-Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International-CABS, World Wildlife Fund-US, and Environment Canada-WILDSPACE."

Citation for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe. 2004. Global Amphibian Assessment. IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe, Washington, DC and Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
"Data developed as part of the Global Amphibian Assessment and provided by IUCN-World Conservation Union, Conservation International and NatureServe."

NOTE: Full metadata for the Bird Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/birdDistributionmapsmetadatav1.pdf.

Full metadata for the Mammal Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/mammalsDistributionmetadatav1.pdf.

Restrictions on Use: Permission to use, copy and distribute documents delivered from this server is hereby granted under the following conditions:
  1. The above copyright notice must appear in all copies;
  2. Any use of the documents available from this server must be for informational purposes only and in no instance for commercial purposes;
  3. Some data may be downloaded to files and altered in format for analytical purposes, however the data should still be referenced using the citation above;
  4. No graphics available from this server can be used, copied or distributed separate from the accompanying text. Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved by NatureServe. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring by implication, estoppel, or otherwise any license or right under any trademark of NatureServe. No trademark owned by NatureServe may be used in advertising or promotion pertaining to the distribution of documents delivered from this server without specific advance permission from NatureServe. Except as expressly provided above, nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring any license or right under any NatureServe copyright.
Information Warranty Disclaimer: All documents and related graphics provided by this server and any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server are provided "as is" without warranty as to the currentness, completeness, or accuracy of any specific data. NatureServe hereby disclaims all warranties and conditions with regard to any documents provided by this server or any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, including but not limited to all implied warranties and conditions of merchantibility, fitness for a particular purpose, and non-infringement. NatureServe makes no representations about the suitability of the information delivered from this server or any other documents that are referenced to or linked to this server. In no event shall NatureServe be liable for any special, indirect, incidental, consequential damages, or for damages of any kind arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information contained in any documents provided by this server or in any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, under any theory of liability used. NatureServe may update or make changes to the documents provided by this server at any time without notice; however, NatureServe makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. Since the data in the central databases are continually being updated, it is advisable to refresh data retrieved at least once a year after its receipt. The data provided is for planning, assessment, and informational purposes. Site specific projects or activities should be reviewed for potential environmental impacts with appropriate regulatory agencies. If ground-disturbing activities are proposed on a site, the appropriate state natural heritage program(s) or conservation data center can be contacted for a site-specific review of the project area (see Visit Local Programs).

Feedback Request: NatureServe encourages users to let us know of any errors or significant omissions that you find in the data through (see Contact Us). Your comments will be very valuable in improving the overall quality of our databases for the benefit of all users.