Description
Mentha is a difficult genus, owing to morphological similarity, variability, and hybridization.
Potentially Misidentified Species - Mentha arvensis is native to both North America and Europe. Mentha xgracilis (Gingermint, Red Mint, Small-Leafed Mint; synonyms are M. xcardiaca; M. xgentilis; M. xmuelleriana) is a hybrid of M. arvensis X M. spicata). Mentha aquatica (Water Mint), is introduced, as is M. xpiperita (Peppermint), a cultivated artifical hybrid of M. spicata X M. aquatica (Gleason 1963; Kartesz 1994).
Taxonomy
| Kingdom | Phylum | Class | Order | Family | Genus |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Plantae | Magnoliophyta | Magnoliopsida | Lamiales | Lamiaceae | Mentha |
Synonyms
Invasion History
Chesapeake Bay Status
| First Record | Population | Range | Introduction | Residency | Source Region | Native Region | Vectors |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1753 | Established | Stable | Introduced | Boundary Resident | Europe | Eurasia | Ornamental(Garden Escape) |
History of Spread
Mentha spicata (Spearmint) was probably introduced very early as a garden plant, with early herbarium and floral records from VA. It was mentioned for North America in Linneaus' 'Species Plantarum' in 1753, but these records could have been from cultivated plants (Brown et al. 1987; Reveal 1983). It was reported as occurring 'on the banks of rivers and near springs, Canada to Pennsylvania' (Pursh 1814), and was widely naturalized in the Northeast by 1848 (Gray 1848). It is now found throughout temperate North America in wet habitats (Fernald 1950; Gleason and Cronquist 1991). Mentha spicata is common in the Hudson River valley and the Great Lakes basin (Mills et al. 1993; Mills et al. 1997).
Mentha spicata is included on a list of 172 spp. reported from the D.C. area by Henry Muhlenberg in 1809 (McAtee 1922), and is included in five 19th century floras for Washington and Baltimore (Aikin 1837; Brereton 1830; Potomac-Side Naturalists' Club 1876; Sollers 1888). It is treated as widespread in statewide floras (Shreve et al. 1910; Brown and Brown 1984; Harvill et al. 1992).
Tatnall (1946) considered M. spicata more common on the Piedmont than the Coastal Plain, and we have found only one specific records of M. spicata from tidal marshes, and that was in association with the hybrid M. X gracilis (Gingermint): One plant, taken 'Near Mentha gentilis (=M. X gracilis) in edge of marsh, west side of Bay near Havre de Grace lighthouse', July 28th, 1902 (U.S. National Herbarium Collections). Mentha X gracilis is a hybrid of M. spicata and the native, circumboreal M. arvensis (Field Mint). M. X gracilis has been 'long in cultivation' (Gleason 1963), so hybrids could have originated either from wild M. arvensis, or from the escape of already hybridized garden plants.
History References - Aikin 1837; Brereton 1830; Brown and Brown 1984; Brown et al. 1987 ; Fernald 1950; Gleason 1963; Gleason and Cronquist 1991; Gray 1848; Harvill et al. 1992; McAtee 1922; Mills et al. 1993; Mills et al. 1997; Potomac-Side Naturalists' Club 1876; Pursh 1814; Reveal 1983; Shreve et al. 1910; Simmons et al. 1995; Sollers 1888; Tatnall 1946; U.S. National Herbarium Collections; Ward 1881
Invasion Comments
Ecology
Environmental Tolerances
| For Survival | For Reproduction | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Minimum | Maximum | Minimum | Maximum | |
| Temperature (ºC) | ||||
| Salinity (‰) | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
| Oxygen | ||||
| pH | ||||
| Salinity Range | fresh-meso |
Age and Growth
| Male | Female | |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum Adult Size (mm) | 300.0 | 300.0 |
| Typical Adult Size (mm) | 525.0 | 525.0 |
| Maximum Adult Size (mm) | 750.0 | 750.0 |
| Maximum Longevity (yrs) | ||
| Typical Longevity (yrs |
Reproduction
| Start | Peak | End | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reproductive Season | |||
| Typical Number of Young Per Reproductive Event |
|||
| Sexuality Mode(s) | |||
| Mode(s) of Asexual Reproduction |
|||
| Fertilization Type(s) | |||
| More than One Reproduction Event per Year |
|||
| Reproductive Startegy | |||
| Egg/Seed Form |
Impacts
Economic Impacts in Chesapeake Bay
Mentha spicata (Spearmint) is widespread as a weed of disturbed wet areas in the Chesapeake Bay watershed (Brown and Brown 1984; Harvill et al. 1992), but it appears to be rare in tidal wetlands (Tatnall 1946), where it has no documented economic impacts. It is widely grown in gardens as a flavoring, but is not cultivated commercially in MD (Brown and Brown 1984).
References- Brown and Brown 1984; Harvill et al. 1992; Tatnall 1946
Economic Impacts Outside of Chesapeake Bay
Mentha spicata (Spearmint) is widely grown as garden crop and occasionally a commercial crop in the United States and elsewhere (Gleason 1963). We are aware of no reported impacts from feral populations.
Ecological Impacts on Chesapeake Native Species
Mentha spicata (Spearmint) is widespread as a weed of disturbed wet areas in the Chesapeake Bay watershed (Brown and Brown 1984; Harvill et al. 1992), but it appears to be rare in tidal wetlands (Tatnall 1946).
Competition - Mentha spicata is a potential competitor with the native Mentha arvensis, but this has not been documented.
Hybridization - Mentha spicata hybridizes with the native Mentha arvensis. The resulting, asexually reproducing hybrid M. X gracilis, is considered uncommon in the Chesapeake Bay watershed (Brown and Brown 1984; Harvill et al. 1919), but is more widely reported in tidal marshes than the two parent species (Hitchcock and Standley 1919; Simmons et al. 1995; Strong and Kelloff 1993; Tatnall 1946. The hybrid is sterile, and reproduces asexually , but the occurence of at least two named, formerly distinguished forms, 'M. X cardiaca' and 'M. X gentilis' with morphological differences (Brown and Brown 1984; see illustrations) suggests variabilty of the hybrid genotype.
References - Brown and Brown 1984; Hitchcock and Standley 1919; Simmons et al. 1995; Strong and Kelloff 1993; Tatnall 1946
Ecological Impacts on Other Chesapeake Non-Native Species
Mentha spicata (Spearmint) is widespread as a weed of disturbed wet areas in the Chesapeake Bay watershed (Brown and Brown 1984; Harvill et al. 1992), but it appears to be rare in tidal wetlands (Tatnall 1946). It is a potential competitor with other exotic mints, including M. X gracilis, M. X piperita, and M. aquatica, but this has not been documented.
References- Brown and Brown 1984; Harvill et al. 1992; Tatnall 1946
References
Aikin, W. E. A. (1837) Catalogue of phenogamous plants and ferns, native or naturalized, growing in the vicinity of Baltimore, Maryland., Transactions of the Maryland Academy of Sciences and Literature 1: 55-91Brereton, J. A. (1830) Prodromus of the Flora Columbiana, , Washington, D.C.. Pp.
Brown, Melvin L.; Brown, Russell G. (1984) Herbaceous Plants of Maryland, , College Park. Pp.
Brown, Melvin L.; Reveal, J. L; Broome, C. R.; Frick, George F. (1987) Comments on the vegetation of colonial Maryland, Huntia 7: 247-283
Fernald, Merritt L. (1950) Gray's Manual of Botany, In: (Eds.) . , New York. Pp.
Gleason, Henry A. (1963) The new Britton and Brown illustrated flora of the northeastern United States and adjacent Canada, In: (Eds.) . , New York. Pp.
Gleason, Henry A.; Cronquist, Arthur (1991) Manual of vascular plants of northeastern United States and adjacent Canada, In: (Eds.) . , Bronx, New York. Pp.
Gray, Asa (1848) A manual of botany of the northern United States., In: (Eds.) . , Boston. Pp.
Harvill, A. M.; Bradley, Ted R.; Stevens, Charles E.; Wieboldt, Thomas F.; Ware, Donna M. E.; Ogle, Douglas W.; Ramsey, Gwynn W.; Fleming, Gary P. (1992) Atlas of the Virginia Flora, , Burkeville, VA. Pp.
Hitchcock, A. S.; Standley, P. C. (1919) Flora of the District of Columbia and Vicinity., In: (Eds.) . , Washington, D. C.. Pp.
Kartesz, John T. (1994) A synonymized checklist of the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland., In: (Eds.) . , Portland OR. Pp.
McAtee, W. L. (1922) Muhlenberg on plants collected in the district of Columbia about 1809, Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 35: 63-72
Mills, Edward L.; Leach, Joseph H.; Carlton, James T.; Secor, Carol L. (1993) Exotic species in the Great Lakes: a history of biotic crises and anthropogenic introductions., Journal of Great Lakes Research 19: 1-54
Mills, Edward L.; Scheuerell, Mark D.; Carlton, James T.; Strayer, David (1997) Biological invasions in the Hudson River: an inventory and historical analysis., New York State Museum Circular 57: 1-51
1997-2024 USDA PLANTS Database.. Onine databse
Pursh, Frederick (1814) Flora Americae Septentrionalis or, a Systematic Arrangement and Description of the Plants of North America, , Hirschburg. Pp.
Resource Management Inc. (1993) National list of plant species that occur in wetlands., , Minneapolis.. Pp.
Reveal, James L. (1983) Significance of pre-1753 botanical explorations in temperate North America on Linnaeus' first edition of Species Plantarum, Phytologia 53: 1-96
Shreve, Forrest M.; Chrysler, M. A.; Blodgett, Frederck H.; Besley, F. W. (1910) The Plant Life of Maryland, , Baltmore. Pp.
Simmons, Mark P.; Ware, Donna M.; Hayden, W. John (1995) The vascular flora of the Potomac River watershed of King George County, Virginia, Castanea 60: 179-209
Sollers, Basil (1888) Check list of plants compiled for the vicinity of Baltimore., , Baltimore. Pp.
Strong, Mark T.; Kelloff, Carol L. (1994) Intertidal vascular plants of Brent Marsh, Potomac River, Stafford County, Virginia, Castanea 59: 354-366
Stuckey, Ronald L.; Phillips, W. Louis (1970) Distributional history of Lycopus europaeus (European water-horehound) in North America, Rhodora 72: 351-369
Tatnall, Robert R. (1946) Flora of Delaware and the Eastern Shore, , Wilmington. Pp.
Ward, L. F. (1881) Guide to the flora of Washington and Vicinity, United States National Museum Bulletin 22: 1-264