Talk:Heracleum mantegazzianum

Heracleum sosnowskyi

What's the difference between this one and Heracleum sosnowskyi? The latter is very common in Central Russia, it was used for feeding cows, but spread everywhere. It's almost as big and causes nasty burns when touched.  Grue  15:52, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

And there is a third (sub?)species with the same size and properties: Heracleum persicum. I have Googled a bit, but their relationship isn't clear to me. Rp (talk) 10:00, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

USDA GRIN is a good source for a summary of the taxonomy of agriculturally important plants. It is a work in progress, with staff maintaining it. It considers these three to be separate species. As to how to identify the different plants, GRIN lists references on the page for a particular species that you might be able to obtain, hopefully. I would advise trying to get the most up-to-date reference for the geographic area involved: sometimes when a plant is introduced in a different place, identification characteristics of that new population aren't general enough to cover all the variation in its native range. As well as the references that GRIN cites, if you can find a reference guidebook to weeds of a particular area, it might have the clearest descriptions. Nadiatalent (talk) 12:58, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

For the distinction between mantegazzianum, sosnowskyi and persicum, see also https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1365-2338.2009.02313.x

where abouts in peterborough was the photo of the warning sign taken? - It was taken in a small woodland at the back of Orton Hall Hotel in Orton Longueville, PE2 193.117.31.1 (talk) 17:18, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

The reference URL at the end of the article needs a username and password. Dillthedog (talk) 09:10, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

From where originally?

The article says that Giant Hogweed was introduced to Britain, France and USA. From where was it brought? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.239.233.242 (talk) 11:24, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Toxic compounds - antidote

Web searches indicate that the toxic components of this plant involve furocoumarins / psoralens. Could someone smart look into this and add clear mention of this in the article as well as any antidote for them? I don't know what reference is best for this information. One of the web search results indicates that UV A is what activates the toxins. This should also be mentioned. Oldspammer (talk) 05:08, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

... overtaking the native species

Yes, it spreads in the wild, and thrives mainly in the city and on wind-sheltered locations; it certainly doesn't replace the common hogweed, which is very common in grassy roadsides. Rp (talk) 17:12, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

The reference to overtaking native species is to species that occupy the same habitat as Heracleum mantegazzianum. While it doesn't replace Heracleum sphondylium over the latter's whole ecological range, it may well be a more severe competitor to other species. I haven't seen much of it in the wild, but Pulicaria dysenterica or Angelica sylvestris might be among the species at risk, Lavateraguy (talk) 11:15, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Speculation doesn't belong in an article ... at least some evidence should be cited. Rp (talk) 07:40, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Wild parsnip or rhubarb?

Yes, they are mentioned as other common names for this plant in citation 2.

But they are clearly mistakes: both wild parsnip and wild rhubarb are quite easy to distinguish from Heracleum. Do any botanists use these names for this plant? If not I think they should be removed from this article. Rp (talk) 16:03, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes Rp I wondered about this too. I'm no botanist but I cannot see how Giant Hogweed is related to rhubarb. This is a most misleading misnomer. I asked someone what Giant Hogweed was and they called it "Wild Rhubarb" and pointed to a plant I know as Gunnera, which superficially looks like big rhubarb. Where I live Gunnera is called "Wild Rhubarb" yet it is not Giant Hogweed. The nomenclature needs tidied up and unified. I cut down a plant in my garden and was sprayed with sap which developed into photo-phytodermatitis and its a long lasting condition that I could have avoided if I'd known what I was dealing with. Could a botanist clear up the confusion in the names as it leads to mis-identification. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.26.99.127 (talk) 22:03, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Am I the only one who does not understand benefits in honey vs. highly toxic sap?

It is explained in detail that the sap is extremely detrimental to human health, causing severe problems, and at the same time purportedly it is still very much appreciated by beekepers in France?

Does that mean that the compound that permeates the whole plant (sap) and is toxic in small quantities is somehow completely absent from the flower? And if so, how is that possible? Or do the bees decompose the chemical during the honey production? Then it should be explained. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.41.252.228 (talk) 17:18, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

The plant is edible. Its toxicity is phototoxicity, it refers to its effect on the human skin. Rp (talk) 21:45, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

How to eliminate?

Strange, that there is nothing about that in the article. Such a dangerous plant should be eliminated. Children may play with it. I heard, that simple cutting gives adverse effect. --Hans Eo (talk) 13:21, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Even stranger that many other phototoxic plants, such as parsnip, are allowed to roam freely, while this species is singled out for extermination. Rp (talk) 21:47, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Heracleum mantegazzianum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081015025338/http://biosecurity.govt.nz/files/pests/plants/nppa/nppa-accord-manual.pdf to http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/files/pests/plants/nppa/nppa-accord-manual.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090116184652/http://www.invadingspecies.com/Invaders.cfm?A=Page&PID=31 to http://www.invadingspecies.com/Invaders.cfm?A=Page&PID=31
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/39809.htmll

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:01, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Heracleum mantegazzianum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140419015019/http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/taxon.pl?18896 to http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/taxon.pl?18896
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120402032205/http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?itemId=1086728597&r.l1=1079068363&r.l2=1082900123&r.l3=1086726920&r.s=sc&type=RESOURCES to http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?itemId=1086728597&r.l1=1079068363&r.l2=1082900123&r.l3=1086726920&r.s=sc&type=RESOURCES

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:36, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Heracleum sibiricum

(This question is targeted at @Velella but any input will be appreciated.)

Regarding the revision made at 23:22 on 11 September 2018, is it Heracleum sphondylium subsp sibiricum or Heracleum sibiricum? How do you know?

Thanks. Tom Scavo (talk) 22:58, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

I have only just seen this - the ping didn't work for some reason. My source was The New Flora of the British Isles (2nd edition) Clive Stace, p515-516. ISBN 0 521 58935 5. Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   10:04, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Although I have evidence in support of Heracleum sibiricum, I can't say that evidence is authoritative, so I won't further introduce the term Heracleum sibiricum until someone puts a stake in the ground by creating page Heracleum sibiricum. In the meantime, I will remove the vacuous reference to Heracleum sibiricum on the Heracleum parent page (which I introduced on 3 September 2018) and any other reference I can find. Tom Scavo (talk) 12:27, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

For the record, Heracleum sphondylium subsp sibiricum is an accepted name but Heracleum sibiricum is not. Tom Scavo (talk) 18:33, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Dutch entry

The latin name of this plant is not linked to the Dutch name: Reuzenberenklauw. So when you want to read about this plant in Dutch (Nederlands) you won’t find the Dutch page on the list of languages. BENL-SK (talk) 08:21, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Works now. Rp (talk) 22:34, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Distribution in Eastern Europe and Russia?

The article now states that the plant is widespread in Eastern Europe (and Russia), referring to a source that only has this to say about it:

Buttenschøn and Nielsen (2007) commented that H. mantegazzianum has been widely grown as a forage plant in eastern Europe in the past.

This may well be, but the same source and other sources make the same claim about H. sosnowskyi, not H. mantegazianum, so it would be nice to have confirmation from a more local source so as to rule out the possibility of confusion. Rp (talk) 22:32, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Similar species section

I'm not very happy with this section. It seems arbitrary.

Similarity is in the eye of the beholder. Who would ever confuse a wild parsnip with a giant hogweed? It is much smaller, has completely different leaves, and yellow flowers 1/10 or 1/20 the size of a giant hogweed wheel.

Besides, its purpose isn't clear. Wikipedia isn't a field guide.

It may be better to strike this altogether, or only leave the table. Rp (talk) 23:10, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Agreed, and removing it. Most of those comparisons are nonsensical. What would be useful though is to expand the table to cover Heracleum sphondylium, H. sosnowskyi and H. persica, but I don't have adequate info to do it myself, except for the first. - MPF (talk) 22:39, 28 July 2024 (UTC)