Rubus ulmifolius - Schott
Elmleaf Blackberry
Other Common Names: elmleaf blackberry
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Rubus ulmifolius Schott (TSN 504890)
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.131281
Element Code: PDROS1K7V0
Informal Taxonomy: Plants, Vascular - Flowering Plants - Rose Family
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Plantae Anthophyta Dicotyledoneae Rosales Rosaceae Rubus
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: Rubus ulmifolius
Taxonomic Comments: Native to central Europe and the Mediterranean region (Bailey). FNA (vol. 9, 2014) expands the concept of Rubus ulmifolius to include R. discolor, while Kartesz (1994) here treats them as distinct.
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G5
Global Status Last Reviewed: 23Dec1994
Global Status Last Changed: 23Dec1994
Rounded Global Status: G5 - Secure
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 California (SNA), Nevada (SNA), New Jersey (SNA)

Other Statuses

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Distribution
Help
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 CAexotic, NJexotic, NVexotic

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: Low/Insignificant
Rounded I-Rank: Low
I-Rank Reasons Summary: Rubus ulmifolius has escaped from cultivation in California, Nevada, and New Jersey but apparently only in scattered disturbed areas in each of these states. In California, Rubus ulmifolius is uncommon and generally occurs in moist disturbed areas. It has been observed to form large tangles on a roadside at the edge of a serpentine area in California. In Nevada, Rubus ulmifolius is rare and grows over bushes and fences as a garden escape. In New Jersey, Rubus ulmifolius was collected in 1937 and described as common locally but apparently it has not spread widely since that time. Rubus ulmifolius appears to have a low impact on biodiversity in the U.S.
Subrank I - Ecological Impact: Low/Insignificant
Subrank II - Current Distribution/Abundance: Low/Insignificant
Subrank III - Trend in Distribution/Abundance: Medium/Low
Subrank IV - Management Difficulty: Unknown
I-Rank Review Date: 22Apr2004
Evaluator: Tomaino, A.
Native anywhere in the U.S?
Native Range: Native to Europe and north Africa (GRIN 2001).

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 California, Rubus ulmifolius var. inermis generally occurs in moist +/- disturbed areas and is uncommon (Hickman 1993). In Napa/Lake County California, Rubus ulmifolius var. ulmifolius is locally common along a roadside at the edge of serpentine where it forms large tangles (Hrusa et al. 2002 in Baldwin et al. 2004).

Subrank I - Ecological Impact: Low/Insignificant

1. Impact on Ecosystem Processes and System-wide Parameters:Insignificant

2. Impact on Ecological Community Structure:Medium significance/Insignificant
Comments: It has been observed to form large tangles on a roadside at the edge of a serpentine area in California (Baldwin et al. 2004).

3. Impact on Ecological Community Composition:High/Low significance
Comments: It has been observed to form large tangles on a roadside at the edge of a serpentine area in California (Baldwin et al. 2004).

4. Impact on Individual Native Plant or Animal Species:Low significance/Insignificant
Comments: Apparently it is not having significant impacts on individual native species. It is currently known from scattered locations in California and Nevada (Baldwin et al. 2004; Kartesz 1988).

5. Conservation Significance of the Communities and Native Species Threatened:Medium/Low significance
Comments: Apparently, it usually inhabitats disturbed areas (Hickman 1993; Kartesz 1988). However, it has been observed to form large tangles on a roadside at the edge of a serpentine area in California (Baldwin et al. 2004). This serpentine area may be of conservation signficiance.

Subrank II. Current Distribution and Abundance: Low/Insignificant

6. Current Range Size in Nation:Low significance/Insignificant
Comments: Established in California, Nevada, and New Jersey (Kartesz 1999) but apparently only in scattered areas in each of these states. In California, Rubus ulmifolius is uncommon and generally occurs in moist +/- disturbed areas (Hickman 1993). In Nevada, Rubus ulmifolius is rare and grows over bushes and fences as a garden escape (Kartesz 1988). In New Jersey, the only known specimen of Rubus ulmifolius was collected in 1937 and described as common locally (Hough 1983).

7. Proportion of Current Range Where the Species is Negatively Impacting Biodiversity:Low significance/Insignificant
Comments: In California, Rubus ulmifolius is uncommon and generally occurs in moist +/- disturbed areas (Hickman 1993). In Napa/Lake County California, Rubus ulmifolius is locally common along a roadside at the edge of serpentine where it forms large tangles (Hrusa et al. 2002 in Baldwin et al. 2004). In Nevada, Rubus ulmifolius is rare and grows over bushes and fences as a garden escape (Kartesz 1988). In New Jersey, the only known specimen of Rubus ulmifolius was collected in 1937 and described as common locally (Hough 1983). It is not included in Gleason and Cronquist (1991). Rubus ulmifolius apparently is not currently a threat in New Jersey. Rubus ulmifolius is falsely reported from Hawaii (Kartesz 1999; Wagner et al. 1999). In the Pacific Northwest, Rubus ulmifolius is classified as need more information (WNPS 1997). Apparently, Rubus ulmifolius is not naturalized in Oregon or Washington (Kartesz 1999).

8. Proportion of Nation's Biogeographic Units Invaded:Low significance
Comments: Approximately 10% of units, inferred from Kartesz (1999), Baldwin et al. (2004), and TNC (2001).

9. Diversity of Habitats or Ecological Systems Invaded in Nation:Low significance/Insignificant
Comments: In California, Rubus ulmifolius var. inermis generally occurs in moist +/- disturbed areas and is uncommon (Hickman 1993). In Napa/Lake County California, Rubus ulmifolius var. ulmifolius is locally common along a roadside at the edge of serpentine where it forms large tangles (Hrusa et al. 2002 in Baldwin et al. 2004). In Nevada, Rubus ulmifolius is rare and grows over bushes and fences as a garden escape (Kartesz 1988). In New Jersey, the only known specimen of Rubus ulmifolius was collected in 1937 and described as common locally (Hough 1983), however, the habitat is not described.

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

10. Current Trend in Total Range within Nation:Medium/Low significance
Comments: In California, Rubus ulmifolius is uncommon and generally occurs in moist +/- disturbed areas (Hickman 1993). In Nevada, Rubus ulmifolius is rare and grows over bushes and fences as a garden escape (Kartesz 1988). In New Jersey, the only known specimen of Rubus ulmifolius was collected in 1937 and described as common locally (Hough 1983). Apparently it is not expanding in most or all directions but since it occurs in disturbed areas it is probably not declining either.

11. Proportion of Potential Range Currently Occupied:High/Moderate significance
Comments: Inferred from USDA (1990), Baldwin et al. (2004), and Kratesz (1999), less than 30% of its potential range is currently occupied.

12. Long-distance Dispersal Potential within Nation:Moderate significance
Comments: It is grown for its fruit (Bailey 1949). Presumeably, animals may occasionally disperse it long distances.

13. Local Range Expansion or Change in Abundance:Medium/Low significance
Comments: In Napa/Lake County California, Rubus ulmifolius var. ulmifolius is locally common along a roadside at the edge of serpentine where it forms large tangles (Hrusa et al. 2002 in Baldwin et al. 2004). Apparently, it is expanding at this site. However, it does not appear to be increasing rapidly across its range. In California, Rubus ulmifolius is uncommon and generally occurs in moist +/- disturbed areas (Hickman 1993). In Nevada, Rubus ulmifolius is rare and grows over bushes and fences as a garden escape (Kartesz 1988). In New Jersey, the only known specimen of Rubus ulmifolius was collected in 1937 and described as common locally (Hough 1983).

14. Inherent Ability to Invade Conservation Areas and Other Native Species Habitats:Low significance
Comments: In California, Rubus ulmifolius is uncommon and generally occurs in moist +/- disturbed areas (Hickman 1993). In Nevada, Rubus ulmifolius is rare and grows over bushes and fences as a garden escape (Kartesz 1988). Apparently, it usually occurs in disturbed areas.

15. Similar Habitats Invaded Elsewhere:Moderate significance
Comments: In New Zealand, it occurs on roadsides, streamsides, waste places, neglected pasture, hillsides, margins of forest and scrub (Webb et al. 1988 in PIER 2003). It is not known to have escaped in streamsides, at least, in the region of interest. It has also invaded Australia, where it is considered a noxious weed (GRIN 2001).

16. Reproductive Characteristics:Low significance
Comments: It reproduces by seed (PIER 2003). It is a scrambling shrub with primocanes low-arching and interlacing (Webb et al. 1988 in PIER 2003).

Subrank IV. General Management Difficulty: Unknown

17. General Management Difficulty:High/Low significance
Comments: It has been observed to form large tangles on a roadside at the edge of a serpentine area in California (Baldwin et al. 2004).

18. Minimum Time Commitment:Unknown
Comments: It has been observed to form large tangles on a roadside at the edge of a serpentine area in California (Baldwin et al. 2004).

19. Impacts of Management on Native Species:Unknown

20. Accessibility of Invaded Areas:High/Low significance
Comments: It is grown for its fruit (Bailey 1949). Presumeably, accessibility may be an issue in some areas.
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
  • Bailey, L.H. 1949. Manual of Cultivated Plants: Most Commonly Grown in the Continental United States and Canada. MacMillan Publishing Co., New York, New York. 1116 p.

  • Baldwin, B.G., S. Boyd, B.J. Ertter, D.J. Keil, R.W. Patterson, T.J. Rosatti and D.H. Wilken. 2004. Jepson Flora Project, Jepson Online Interchange for California Floristics. Regents of the University of California, Berkeley. Online. Available: http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/jepson_flora_project.html (Accessed 2004).

  • Gleason, H.A., and A. Cronquist. 1991. Manual of vascular plants of northeastern United States and adjacent Canada. New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, New York. 910 pp.

  • Hickman, J. C., ed. 1993. The Jepson manual: Higher plants of California. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA. 1400 pp.

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

  • Kartesz, J.T. 1988. A flora of Nevada. Ph.D. dissertation. Univ. of Nevada, Reno. 3 volumes. 1729 pp.

  • 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.

  • Pacific Island Ecosystems at Risk Project (PIER). 2003. Plant threats to Pacific ecosystems - species of environmental concern. Last updated 20 December 2003. Online. Available: http://www.hear.org/pier/threats.htm. (Accessed 2004).

  • Randall, R.P. 2002. A global compendium of weeds. R.G. and F.J. Richardson, Melbourne. 905 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.

  • USDA, ARS, National Genetic Resources Program. 2001. Germplasm Resources Information Network - (GRIN). [Online Database]. National Germplasm Resources Laboratory, Beltsville, Maryland.URL: http://www.ars-grin.gov/var/apache/cgi-bin/npgs/html/taxon.pl?6438. (Accessed 2004)

  • Wagner, W.L., D.R. Herbst, and S.H. Sohmer. 1999. Manual of the flowering plants of Hawaii. Revised edition. Volumes 1 and 2. Univ. Hawaii Press and Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. 1919 pp.

  • Washington Native Plant Society (WNPS). 1997. Preliminary List of Exotic Pest Plants of Greatest Ecological Concern in Oregon and Washington. ONLINE. http://www.wnps.org/eppclist.html. Accessed 2004, January.

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 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 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.