Psidium cattleianum - Sabine
Purple Strawberry Guava
Other English Common Names: Strawberry Guava
Other Common Names: strawberry guava
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Psidium cattleianum Sabine (TSN 27239)
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.131341
Element Code: PDMRT0E020
Informal Taxonomy: Plants, Vascular - Flowering Plants - Myrtle Family
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Plantae Anthophyta Dicotyledoneae Myrtales Myrtaceae Psidium
Check this box to expand all report sections:
Concept Reference
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: Psidium cattleianum
Conservation Status

NatureServe Status

Global Status: GNR
Global Status Last Changed: 22Mar1994
Rounded Global Status: GNR - Not Yet Ranked
Reasons: Native to South America; introduced in the United States in Florida and also in Hawaii. In Hawaii it is a major pest plant, with control measures extensively studied there.
Nation: United States
National Status: NNA

U.S. & Canada State/Province Status
Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
United States Florida (SNA), Hawaii (SNA)

Other Statuses

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

U.S. States and Canadian Provinces

Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
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 FLexotic, HIexotic

Range Map
No map available.

Ecology & Life History
Basic Description: Small tree of the myrtle family (Myrtaceae).
Technical Description: Typically 2-6 m tall. Bark gray, reddish brown, or light brown, smooth or peeling. Leaves opposite, simple, with a fruity odor. Leaf blades 4-9 cm long and 2.5-4.5 cm long), obovate, and short-pointed at apex. Leaves leathery and hairless or essentially hairless, margins entire and rolled under. Veins pinnately arranged, inconspicuous, connected near edge of leaf by a single vein parallel with edge of leaf. Flowers solitary, sepals 4-5 mm long and retained in fruit. Petals white, 5-7 mm long. Stamens numerous, ovary inferior. Fruit a pear-shaped berry with numerous seeds. Fruit red-purple or yellow when mature. The red- fruited form (P. cattleianum f. lucidum) is the most common taxon in Hawaii, and probably the most common or only form in Kamakou Preserve. There are two yellow fruited forms in Hawaii, one a narrow tree similar to P. calltleianum f. lucidum, but with broadly ovoid yellow fruits larger than the red fruited form. The other yellow fruited form can develop into medium-sized trees with spreading canopies found sparingly in Hawaiian forests.
Reproduction Comments: Broad environmental tolerances, prolific production of fruit, expansive vegetative reproduction, and dispersal by feral pigs contribute to the success of strawberry guava as a weed. Regeneration is by seed and root sprouts. Both apparently contribute to thicket formation characteristic of strawberry guava, although their relative abundance may vary considerably from site to site (Huenneke and Vitousek 1989). Generally, root suckers of clonal species tend to dominate in thicket formation because of their rapid growth and high survivorship. Consistent with this, root sprouts of strawberry guava have greater leaf area (Huenneke and Vitousek 1989). However, the dynamics of thicket formation and the contributions of sprouts and seedling require further detailed study (Huenneke and Vitousek 1989). Stem densities were high in thickets, ranging from 3-9 stems/m2.

Strawberry guava is a prolific fruiter. Diong (1983 found an average of 15 seeds/fruit in lower Kipuhulu Valley on Maui. Huenneke and Vitousek (1989) found 25-70 seeds/fruit in five different study sites on Hawaii Island. Fruiting is more abundant for stems on the edge of the thickets.

Seeds are dispersed beyond the vicinity of the parent tree by alien frugivorous birds and feral pigs (Sus scrofa) (Smith 1985), although the evidence for bird dispersal is incomplete. La Rosa et al. (1987) demonstrated that myna (Acridotheros tristis) and Japanese white eye (Zosterops japonicus) will eat strawberry guava seed in captivity and that collected scat contained seeds that germinate at similar rates to control seeds. Diong (1983) demonstrated that feral pigs are very significant dispersers. He found strawberry guava in 90% of the scats observed in sites with guava. The germination rates of seeds in pig scat were similar to that of untreated seeds, although germination was more rapid when seeds passed through the digestive tracts of pigs. From the number of seeds found in scats, he calculated that each pig in densely infested portions of Kipuhulu Valley was responsible for dispersing approximately 8,000,000 seeds per month during the peak fruiting season.

Diong (1983) perceived a mutualistic relationship between pigs and strawberry guava in Kipahulu Valley. Strawberry guava provided the main food source August-December. Pigs dispersed the plant to new areas, and these new establishments created favorable habitat for feral pigs. However, strawberry guava is not dependent on animal processing of seeds and dispersal. It germinates successfully in undisturbed forest. In fact, Huenneke and Vitousek (1989) found that seedling establishment was independent of soil disturbance, with naturally occurring seedlings found disproportionately on bryophyte mats and other undisturbed sites. Tunison et al. (in prep.) found seedling and sprout recruitment of strawberry guava in a mostly intact rainforest 10 years after removal of pigs.

Huenneke and Vitousek (1989) thought that strawberry guava does not form significant seed banks, but may rely on "seedling banks." They could find few seeds in the soil and these failed to germinate. However, Cuddihy (pers. comm.) found 50% percent germination of buried soil at nine months and 20% at 21 months.

Ecology Comments: Jacobi and Warshauer (in press) found strawberry guava from 100-1,300 m elevation gradient and over a rainfall gradient from 1,250 mm (50 in)- 7,000 mm (275 in)/year in 23 different vegetation types from dry grassland and scrub to tall native rainforest. It was most abundant in wet `ohi`a-tree fern rainforest and wet `ohi`a-koa rainforest. Strawberry guava is a highly shade-tolerant species, and seedlings and root sprouts are capable of growing in dense shade from taller canopy species and that of the parent plants. Sem (1984) found strawberry guava to be tolerant of moderately to highly acidic soils. Allelopathy may contribute to its success (Smith 1985). Brown et al. (1983) found that exudates from the roots of common guava (Psidium guajava) inhibited the growth of two plant species, and ruled out soil pH was responsible for the inhibition.

Genetic variability among taxa of Psidium cattleianum may contribute to broad environmental tolerances. Yellow fruited forms are more common at lower elevations in Hawaii Volcanoes National Park (Huennke and Vitousek 1989). Red-fruited forms dominate higher elevation sites.

The ability of strawberry guava to tolerate heavy litter fall may pre-adapt it to survival in Hawaiian rain forests. Huenneke and Vitousek (1989) found that in their study plots, when the smaller diameter strawberry guava stems were bent to the ground by the heavy litter of tree fern fronds, they invariably survived, and most sent up vigorous shoots after being bent. Native tree and shrub seedlings were typically killed by heavy tree fern litter.

Habitat Comments: Originally introduced to Hawaii in the early nineteenth century for the edible fruit (Neal 1965), strawberry guava now occurs widely on all major islands in mesic and principally rain forest environments up to 1300 m (Smith 1985). It is most abundant below 800 m elevation (Little and Skolmen 1989, Wagner et al 1990). Single-species stand formation is, however, well on its way at 1,100 m elevation in Hawaii Volcanoes National Park. The natural range for at least one of the yellow-fruited form is coastal Brazil in shrubby vegetation or early successional forest. It is not an aggressive species in its native habitat (Hodges 1988). The red-fruited form is found at approximately 900 m elevation in eastern Brazil (Smith, pers. comm.).
Economic Attributes
Economically Important Genus: Y
Management Summary
Stewardship Overview: Strawberry guava is a very serious habitat-disruptive pest in many parks and preserves in Hawaii because of its tendency to form mono-specific stands. It is a potential pest at Kamakou Preserve but not at Waikamoi, unless the preserve is expanded to lower elevations. Prolific fruiting, shade tolerance, clonal regenerative strategy, tolerance of heavy litter fall, and possible allelopathic effects contribute to the success of this species. Removal of feral pigs is the sine qua non and first step of successful management of strawberry guava because pigs disperse prodigious quantities of seed. This must be followed by manual, mechanical, and chemical control measures. These have proven successful when tested on a small scale, and recruitment is low in pig-free intact forest, even with dispersal into the treated area from densely infested adjacent areas. Biological control is the long-term management solution to strawberry guava, and the prospect of locating highly specific biocontrol agents is cause for optimism about the future of biological control for this pest. Clarification of the recovery process is the single most important monitoring need.

Management and monitoring needs at Kamakou consist of feral pig control, scouting and mapping to locate all individuals, manual, mechanical, and chemical control measures, and vigilant monitoring of reinvasion and seedling recruitment.

Species Impacts: Psidium cattleianum readily displaces native plant species, eventually forming single species stands. Smith (1985) characterized it as the worst pest in Hawaiian rain forests. Its most serious infestations are on Hawai`i Island when it invades forests undergoing `ohi`a dieback and in Kipuhulu Valley on Maui (Hodges 1988). It is probably not a serious threat to Waikamoi because Psidium appears to be limited by elevation, with essentially no individuals above 1,300 m. Waikamoi's boundaries are currently above this elevation. Psidium now is sparingly established in disturbed areas, principally roadsides, in Kamakou Preserve. It is intensifying in forest reserves at lower elevation, and may represent an important potential threat to Kamakou. Using Jacobi's and Warshauer's model (Jacobi and Warshauer, in press), all of Kamakou falls within the potential habitat of strawberry guava, based on current elevational and rainfall characteristics of strawberry guava habitat. However, suitable forest habitat near the ridge line lies at the extremes of the rainfall and elevational gradients and may not be optimal habitat for strawberry guava.
Restoration Potential: Information on recovery potential is anecdotal and limited. Tomich (pers. comm.) experimentally controlled strawberry guava in a 15 X 15 m site in an extensive dense guava stand on Hawaii Island from which essentially all native plants had been excluded. He found that after 10 years that native ferns, especially Athyrium sandwicensium, had become abundant in the understory and that a few native trees had become established. In Hawaii Volcanoes National Park and Kalopa State Park, guava thickets were removed from the understory of native forest with an intact canopy (Tunison et al. in prep., Tomich, pers. comm.). These appeared to resist the invasion of other alien plant species, although the extent of native species recovery in unknown. Low recruitment levels of strawberry guava in sites with intact overstory and feral pigs control, even those surrounded by high densities of this weed, suggest high potential for the recovery of native vegetation.
Management Requirements: Active searching, distribution mapping, and control measures needed at Kamakou Preserve. Major control programs are needed in many preserves and parks in the state.

Diong (1983) demonstrated the effectiveness of feral pigs as dispersal agents. The obvious implication is that feral pig control is the first step in strawberry guava control and serves as a form of cultural control. However, it is not the only measure needed. Huenneke and Vitousek (1989) reported that soil disturbance does not encourage germination, and that most germinants were found on undisturbed sites normally supporting native plant establishment. Once strawberry guava is established, recruitment will continue without control efforts, even after pigs are removed (Tunison et al. in prep.)

Manual and mechanical control measures work reasonably well and are recommended where practical. Seedlings and saplings originating from seed can be uprooted. Stems up to two inches (basal diameter) can be uprooted with a weed wrench, although some roots may need to be cut once the plant is partly uprooted (Tomich, pers. comm.). Uprooted plants may resprout or re-root in areas with greater than 2000 mm of rain/year or drier areas after prolonged rain, especially if the plants are set on the ground. Manual and mechanical methods are less effective on root sprouts.

A number of effective chemical control measures have been developed. Strawberry guava is sensitive to picloram, dicamba, glyphosate, and triclopyr. Kageler and Eldredge (1985) found that undiluted picloram (Tordon 22K) was highly effective on strawberry guava as a cut stump treatment. Tordon 22K was used at Hawaii Volcanoes but discontinued because of unfavorable effects on non-target plants. It was replaced by Tordon RTU, which was nearly as effective, but less harmful to surrounding vegetation (Tunison et al. in prep.). Undiluted dicamba (Banvel) proved to be highly effective in a cut surface treatment (Arakaki et al. 1986). Mootoka et al. (1983) found undiluted glyphosate (Roundup) to be effective using a "hack and squirt" method. Cuddihy (pers. comm.) found undiluted triclopyr ester (Garlon 4) to be effective as a cut-stump treatment, with 80% of plants dead and 90% of treated plants without resprouts after 21 months. A frill application of undiluted triclopyr amine (Garlon 3A) was somewhat less effective, with 11 of 20 stems dead and all trees defoliated after 21 months. Fifty percent Garlon 4 and 3A were about 50% effective. A major drawback of cut-stump treatment methods in very wet areas (>5000 mm rainfall/yr) was resprouting of slash from cut stump and wood fragments from felling larger trees. Garlon is recommended because of its lack of mobility and relatively short half-life, 4-6 weeks. In addition, the research is more thorough and definitive on control methods for Garlon than other herbicides.

Biological control is the only feasible long-term management strategy for strawberry guava (Smith 1985). However, until recently, biological control has been perceived as unfeasible because common guava, grown commercially in Hawaii, is a congener of strawberry guava (Gardner and Davis 1982). Biological control is being reexamined. Hodges (1988) found several insects that defoliate strawberry guava in its natural range and felt that insect biological control agents could be found that did not attack common guava. He did not find any evidence of pathogens causing serious damage. Memoranda of agreement has been concluded between the University of Hawaii and two Brazilian Universities to locate species attacking strawberry guava and not common guava. It is thought that highly specific insect pests can be found because common guava and strawberry guava are sympatric in their natural range (Smith pers. comm.).

Monitoring Requirements: Monitoring is needed in Hawaii to assess management effectiveness and recovery potential for sites in Hawaii's parks and preserves heavily infested with strawberry guava. Strawberry guava is currently at insufficient densities at Kamakou Preserve to warrant such monitoring.

In heavily infested parks and preserves, monitoring should focus on specific sites from which removal is carried out to indicate the feasibility of this action, effects on non-target native plant species, and recovery of native vegetation. Monitoring at Kamakou should consist of scouting and mapping (followed by eradication).

Management Programs: The major control programs in Hawaii are at Hawaii Volcanoes National Park in Special Ecological Areas (500 ha) (Tunison et al. in prep.) and Kalopa State Park (40 ha) (Tomich, pers. comm.). Strawberry guava has been ranked as a high priority weed species at Kamakou Preserve and control efforts have been initiated. Some control efforts have been made at Manuka Natural Area Reserve.
Monitoring Programs: Monitoring has been conducted at Hawaii Volcanoes National Park to assess changes in cover and spread in the Park and population densities in managed areas. Weed control transects in Kamakou Preserve provide similar monitoring. Tomich (pers. comm.) is monitoring the recovery of an experimental control plot on the Hamakua Coast of Hawaii Island.
Management Research Programs: Huenneke and Vitousek (1989) are studying stem demography in five sites on Hawaii Island from 150-762 m elevation. Field work will be completed in 1991 after five years of study (Huenneke, pers. comm.).
Management Research Needs: Topics important to management of the species include clarifying the contribution of sprouts and seedlings, allelopathy, dispersal by rodents and birds, seed bank characteristics, germination site requirements, sprouting response of stems buried by litter, growth rates of stems, and onset of reproductive activity. This applies to management of strawberry guava throughout the state. No research is needed specifically for Kamakou Preserve. Biological control research needs are described separately.
Population/Occurrence Delineation Not yet assessed
Population/Occurrence Viability
U.S. Invasive Species Impact Rank (I-Rank) Not yet assessed
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author: TIM TUNISON
Management Information Edition Author: TIM TUNISON
Element Ecology & Life History Author(s): TIM TUNISON

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).

  • Arakaki, A., E. Misaki, and P. Motooka. 1986. Summary of herbicide trials for pasture, range, and non-cropland weed control. Hitahr Brief No. 052. Hawaii Institute of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources.

  • Brown, R. L., C. S. Tang, and R. K. Nishimoto. 1983. Growth inhibition from guava root exudates. HortScience 13(3): 316-318.

  • Cuddihy, L.W. 1991. Biological Technician, Hawaii Volcanoes National Park. Personal communication with Tim Tunison, P.O. Box 754, Volcano, Hawaii 96785, May 31, 1991.

  • Diong, C. H. 1983. Population biology and management of the feral pig (Sus scrofa L.) in Kipahulu Valley, Maui. PhD Thesis, Univ. Hawaii, Honolulu. 408 pp.

  • Eldredge, E. and D. W. Kageler. 1985. Herbicidal control methods for strawberry guava (Psidium cattleianum). An unpulbished report available in Resources Management files, Hawaii Volcanoes National Park.

  • Gardner, D. E. and C. J. Davis. 1982. The prospects for biological control of nonnative plants in Hawaiian national parks. Tech. Report 45. Coop. Natl. Park Resour. Studies Unit. Univ. of Hawaii, Honolulu. 55 pp.

  • Hodges, C. S. 1988. Preliminary exploration for potential biological control agents for Psidium cattleianum. Tech. Report 66. Coop. Natl. Park Resour. Studies Unit. Univ. of Hawaii, Honolulu. 32 pp.

  • Huenneke, L.F. and P. M. Vitousek. 1989. Seedling and clonal recruitment of the invasive tree Psidium cattleianum: implications for management of native Hawaiian forests. Biological Conservation 53: 199-211.

  • Jacobi, J. D., and F. R. Warshauer. In press. The current and potential distribution of six introduced plants species in upland habitats on the island of Hawaii. In C. P. Stone, C. W. Smith, and J. T. Tunison (eds.), Alien Plant Invasions in Native Ecosystems of Hawaii: Management and Research. Univ. Hawaii Coop. Natl. Park Resour. Studies Unit. Univ. Hawaii Press, Honolulu.

  • 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.

  • LaRosa, A. M., C. W. Smith, and D. E. Gardner. 1987. Role of alien and native birds in dissemination of firetree (Myrica faya Ait.- Myricaceae) and associated plants in Hawaii. Pacific Science 39(4): 372-378.

  • Little, E. L., Jr. and R. G. Skolmen. 1989. Common Forest Trees of Hawaii (Native and Introduced). U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Agriculture Handbook No. 679. 321 pp. Illustrated.

  • Motooka, P., G. Nagai, and L. Ching. 1983. Cut surface application of glyphosate to control tropical brush species. Abstracts, 1983 meeting of the Weed Science Society of America.

  • Neal, M. C. 1965. In gardens of Hawaii. Bishop Museum Special Publication 50. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. 924 pp.

  • Sem, G. S. 1984. A population study and distribution of strawberry guava (Psidium cattleianum) in Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, Hawaii. Master's thesis. Univ. Hawaii, Honolulu. 84 pp.

  • Smith, C. W. 1985. Impact of alien plants on Hawaii's native biota. pp. 180-250. in C. P. Stone and J. M. Scott (eds.). Hawaii's terrestrial ecosystems: preservation and management. Univ. Hawaii Coop. Natl. Park Resour. Studies Unit, University of Hawaii Press. 584 pp.

  • Tunison, J. T., M. R. Gates, and N. G. Zimmer. In prep. Alien plant control in Special Ecological Areas, Hawaii Volcanoes National Park: a progress report, 1985-1990. Tech. Report. Coop. Natl. Park Resour. Studies Unit. Univ. of Hawaii, Honolulu.

  • Wagner, W.L., D.R. Herbst, and S.H. Sohmer. 1990. Manual of the flowering plants of Hawaii. Univ. Hawaii Press and Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. 1853 pp.

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 were updated to be current with NatureServe's central databases as of March 2019.
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 © 2019 NatureServe, 2511 Richmond (Jefferson Davis) Highway, Suite 930, Arlington, VA 22202, 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. 2019. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available (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:

Full metadata for the Mammal Range Maps of North America is available at:

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.