The two species are markedly different (to me), not the least of which Tree of Heaven makes a very tall tree - while Smooth Sumac will rarely reach the 20-25' (6-8 m) size. Their flowering/fruiting are quite different as well, not to mention remarkable fall color on Sumac while next to absent on Tree of Heaven.

If Ailanthus altissima were to produce fall color on the order of Rhus glabra, there'd be far more use of this plant on purpose instead of solely because of its invasive characteristics.

+oM

In addition, the suckering and seeding habit of Ailanthus outcompetes the local native vegetation, reducing the benefits available to wildlife via diminished populations of native plants. Reduced insect populations equals reduced bird populations.

Although, except for their leaves, I find them quite different looking. Ailanthus is a tree (tall) while the Rhus is a shrub (short). The flowers are similar, but the fruit/seeds look very different: the Rhus has a drupe while Ailanthus has a samara (not fleshy).

And I'd like to help people learn how to recognize it so that when it pops up in their property they could deal with it early.

What do you think, snasxs?

First of all, much invasive clean up work is done with volunteer people. People that also think that natural areas are worth preserving so that their original flora survive. Here is the southeast, there is many a "privet pull" going on that seeks to remove invasive chinese privet from streamsides of the Chattahoochee River. I have been helping with one such clean up for over 5 years. We have removed tons of privet. The native plants are beginning to re-establish themselves now, free of the choking shade of the privet.

Second roadside crews spend much time maintaining highways and roads. All we have to do is educate them about which plants are which and they can remove the invasive ones while they are in the area.

Third, I guess I really don't see this so much as "nature" at this point. These plants were unnaturally relocated here, leapfrogging over the thousands of years it would have taken nature to bring them here.

How do you feel about the Burmese pythons that are eating thousands and thousands of small mammals in the Everglades? Pythons that were brought here by man, now reproducing at a rapid rate and eating mammals as large as deer.

That is the same sort of thing that really invasive plants do to native plant populations.

I do look at this scientifically (and here I look beyond Ailanthus and speak of invasive non-native plants as a whole):

- these plants did not evolve here
- they do not support the ecosystem in which they now live
- they in fact reduce the carrying capacity for the native insects and birds because they do not support them, sometimes driving small populations of specialized fauna to extinction
- we can support the ecosystem by removing them.

What in that is not scientifically neutral?

By the way, you did not comment on the pythons.

I see no basis for the phrase "wasted money against NATURE", as used above by Snasxs.

BTW, are you going to answer Esh's question or address my comment?

You didn't clarify what was your point that I missed. I certainly would like to understand where you are coming from.

In fact, what is the point of this whole thread? I do think that perhaps you brought it up just so you could talk about Ailanthus. You and I have been around a long time - you used to like to promote plants that are not native to the U.S. even when they are invasive. Is that what you are trying to do here? Show that Ailanthus is so close in appearance to Rhus glabra that it doesn't matter which one we grow?

...then advocate for smallpox, AIDS, plenty of E. coli and Cryptosporidium in drinking water, German cockroaches, and salmonella in the food supply - all of those are Nature's components as well.

That position is a straw man, and snasxs knows it. No competent gardener or horticulturist confuses the two plants in question.

To press the point: would you (snasxs) plant Ailanthus altissima amongst any of the wonderful plants that you've posted images of on this forum? That's actually rhetorical; of course you wouldn't, because the allelopathy would denigrate that which you admire most.

For all readers,

I would like to introduce two insects that are specialized only to eat the Tree of Heaven.

The first is a moth.

The second look like a cross between a cicada and a butterfly. This second one is especially focused or specialized on the Tree of Heaven. Again, this insect ONLY eat the Tree of Heaven. They are very effective in controlling the Tree of Heaven.

Further, there are special parasitic wasps that specialize in eating this insect both adults and youngs.

Since the group of Brandon, Esh, beigestonehill, viburnumvalley and +oM are clearly able to identify so many differences between native Sumac's from the Tree of Heaven, chances are, there are substantial chemical differences between the native Sumac's and the Tree of Heaven. Therefore the insects are not able to survive on the native Sumac's and they only attack the Tree of Heaven which seems to be so very bitterly resented by the previously mentioned group.

there are substantial chemical differences between the native Sumac's and the Tree of Heaven

1. because of those chemical differences the native Sumac has specialized insects that need it to survive so when non-native plants out compete it, those native insects have no food.

2. the natural predators of the Ailanthus are still in Asia therefore they are not here to control the spread of the Ailanthus and it grows faster and more aggressively than in it's native range. It is a thug here.

Shutting down information is not the way to go

Who here is shutting down information? I am happy for people to learn as much as possible as to the scientific reasons why this plant is harmful to the native ecosystems of the eastern United States.

Yes, the first moth is a sub-group from the Ailanthus Silk Moth: Philosamia cynthia Walker et Felder. I know the Ailanthus Silk Moth has a native population in North America: US and Canada.

The second is Lycorma delicatula, or some kind of relatives. I don't think they present in the US.

I heard that the most potent insect that specializes in the Tree of Heaven is Eucryptorrhynchus brandti (Harold). There are researches on it.

Is Philosamina cynthia having a "native" population in the US or do you mean naturalized? I found this info:

"Today's European and American wild cynthia are the descendents of adults originally taken from Asia and introduced with the intention of establishing silk industries in the various countries to which they were taken."

Are you saying that we should embrace having Ailanthus in the US so that this insect can have something to eat? I'm afraid that is not an argument that holds much weight from a scientific perspective.

Are you wanting us to support the feeding habits of the Gypsy moth too?

Perhaps the Wooly adelgid that feeds on hemlocks? I guess we really should be more sensitive to their needs ... What will they eat when they finish killing all our hemlocks?

I still am not sure what your point is on this post. It seems like you want us to keep Ailanthus around so that we can support an insect that doesn't even belong here.

In the meantime, invasive plants like Ailanthus crowd out native plants that are the food source for specialized native insects, thus reducing the populations of THOSE insects.

The question to you is why do you support a non-native insect's health over the health of native species?

Example 1: silk moths are native to the Americas.

Example 2: Ailanthus silk moth is dependent on the Tree of Heaven to breed.

I, for one, don't think you have ANYTHING to worry about regarding not being scientifically neutral (whatever that really means in this case). Especially with the way Snasxs picks and chooses what questions to respond to and which to just ignore, I think it's possible that she's got a hidden agenda of some kind. Either that, or she's just not communicating well. I'm still trying to decide for sure.

You didn't answer this one.

Example 1: silk moths are native to the Americas.

Do you have a link that says that this specific silk moth is native to the US?

- What do you think about what Esh said about DOT, etc being trained to ID and remove invasives?

- What does "wasted money against NATURE" mean, as used in the above conversation?

- How do you think Esh is not being "scientifically neutral"?

And, a new but closely related question....

- What exactly is "scientifically neutral", as used in the above conversation?

Ailanthus silkmoth
Samia cynthia (Drury, 1773)
Family: Saturniidae
Subfamily: Saturniinae

Identification: Wings are olive brown to brown with wide pinkish median bands. Each wing has a large crescent-shaped transparent spot edged with gold.

Wing Span: 4 1/8 - 5 1/2 inches (10.5 - 14 cm).

The specific species is believed to be introduced to North America by human activities. However, this is a speculation. The image below shows the specimens of some kinds of lunar moths (North American Species) and the variations of this silk moth. They are in the same family. Ailanthus silkmoth only attacks the Tree of Heaven. It is a role model non-native species, if it indeed is non-native. Its current distribution is spotty along the Atlantic coast from Connecticut to Georgia and west to northern Kentucky. Brandon, you should love them. They are also beautiful.

Lycorma delicatula

Eucryptorrhynchus brandti (Harold)

Yes, they do destroy the Tree of Heaven effectively.

IF a species of moth can only survive with the life cycle of an introduced exotic species (as stated previously), then it could not possibly have been native to North America - since there was no Ailanthus here before introduction. The rest of the argument dissolves thereafter.

Haven't seen any votes for any of the other pestilence mentioned earlier - what gives? What about West Nile virus? Bubonic plague? Swine flu? Awful lot of resources expended controlling those invasives - maybe should restrict such costs to only states outside VA.

My spouse is long-time accomplished microbiologist, often extolling their beauty and intricacies when viewing these deadly micro-organisms under a microscope or on a Petri dish.

Dang - sorry, brandon, there must have been an escape from the Bait Shop.

Props enough for me!

+oM

My cousin asked me what kind of sumac they were, and I told her it was the tree of heaven. Interesting tree at this age, from a distance they are unique. They've been around for so long and do provide shade. The leaves are very unappealing in the fall, and the bark as you approach is not attractive.

Interestlngly, sumac is ubiquitious on the farm, along with blackberry and locust. The sumac is beautiful in the fall, the blackberries are delicious, the locust is a nitrogen fixer but has some scary looking thorns and is a pest.

There is also an American Elm there that is at least eight foot in diameter. It sits out in a field and has a massive canopy. It's a horsey hideout, with it's shade, who knows how old it is. It's truely a sight to behold, up close and from afar.

Anyone in the DC and Maryland region realizes the main problems crowding out native plants are human overpopulation and the concrete structures and roads. If the Tree of Heavens crowd out 1, than humans crowd out 100. In the region, concrete and asphalt cover almost everything leaving small patches of disturbed land for pioneer plants like the Tree of Heaven. Large number of cars and massive traffic jam put pressure onto native land.

Sam, do you realize your picture actually makes my point. Clearly the Tree of Heaven is not competing with native plants in the picture. In a sense, the Tree of Heaven is helping to destruct the alien structures not native to North America and return them back to soil suitable for native plants. As a top predator, humans, such a Sam, react to the brainless Tree of Heaven in a brainy behavior unique to animal society.

As was pointed out earlier, development only increases the importance of managing invasives, and certainly doesn't excuse their use.

So snasxs, is that what is happening here?

Arktrees

It is finally revealed that snasxs has been basically just using semantics to shroud the effort to defend the defenseless: a lost botanical soul from the continental land mass due west of this continent, brainlessly trying to survive in this New World.

Anger or hatred? Not sure where that sentiment is derived, but it sure ISN'T Sinophobia as related elsewhere. For me, I'd dislike this plant's behavior in local environments whether it was from east Asia or from the moon.

As for unanswered questions: snasxs has never 'fessed up to the origin of this posting - the pretense of inability to discern differences between Rhus and Ailanthus, thus promoting equal acceptability of both.

The posting of Sun, Jan 29, 12 at 13:45 is especially telling in this regard. Who could believe THAT?