Species Profile and Threats Database

For information to assist proponents in referral, environmental assessments and compliance issues, refer to the Policy Statements and Guidelines (where available), the Conservation Advice (where available) or the Listing Advice (where available).
In addition, proponents and land managers should refer to the Recovery Plan (where available) or the Conservation Advice (where available) for recovery, mitigation and conservation information.

EPBC Act Listing Status Listed as Critically Endangered as Acanthocladium dockeri
Listing and Conservation Advices Commonwealth Listing Advice on Acanthocladium dockeri (Threatened Species Scientific Committee, 2006ed) [Listing Advice].
Recovery Plan Decision Recovery Plan required, included on the Commenced List (1/11/2009).
Adopted/Made Recovery Plans Recovery Plan for Acanthocladium dockeri (Spiny Daisy) (Clarke, A., M.A. Robertson & A. Pieck, 2013) [Recovery Plan] as Acanthocladium dockeri.
Federal Register of
    Legislative Instruments
Declaration under s178, s181, and s183 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 - List of threatened species, List of threatened ecological communities and List of threatening processes (Commonwealth of Australia, 2000) [Legislative Instrument] as Acanthocladium dockeri.
Inclusion of species in the list of threatened species under section 178 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (48) (10/11/2006) (Commonwealth of Australia, 2006b) [Legislative Instrument] as Acanthocladium dockeri.
State Listing Status
NSW: Listed as Extinct (Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (New South Wales): August 2014 list) as Acanthocladium dockeri
SA: Listed as Endangered (National Parks and Wildlife Act 1972 (South Australia): June 2011 list) as Acanthocladium dockeri
Scientific name Acanthocladium dockeri [17632]
Family Asteraceae:Asterales:Magnoliopsida:Magnoliophyta:Plantae
Species author F.Muell.
Infraspecies author  
Reference Mueller, F.J.H. von (1861), Fragmenta Phytographiae Australiae 2(16): 156 [tax. nov.]
Other names Helichrysum dockeri [35558]
Distribution map Species Distribution Map

This is an indicative distribution map of the present distribution of the species based on best available knowledge. See map caveat for more information.

Illustrations Google Images

Scientific name: Acanthocladium dockeri

Common name: Spiny Everlasting

Other names: Spiny Daisy

The Spiny Everlasting is listed in Barker et al. (2005) as being conventionally accepted. The species is highly distinct from any other species, being the only species in the genus (Burbidge 1958; Harden 1992).

The Spiny Everlasting, a member of the daisy family, is a short, rigid, perennial shrub, with persistent woody stems and spine-tipped branches which are covered in short, dense, white-velvety hairs (indumentum) (Harden 1992).

Its leaves are alternate and attached directly to the stem. The florets are tubular and mostly bisexual. The florets occur in-between the leaf or branch, have no stem and have four to six modified leaves around the base of the flower head. The fruits are oblong and papillose (bumpy). The hairs or bristles at the base of each floret consist of two rows of bristles; bearded at the tip and fused at the base (Harden 1992).

The Spiny Everlasting is endemic to Australia (Harden 1992) and is currently only known from South Australia. Herbarium records (Adelaide Herbarium 2005; Davies 1992; Harden 1992) indicate that the Spiny Everlasting also grew in NSW at the time of European settlement.

The Spiny Everlasting was first recorded in NSW near the Darling River by Dr H Beckler during the Burke and Wills expedition in 1860. The species was not recorded again until 1910, when herbarium specimens were collected at Overland Corner on the Murray River in South Australia. By 1992 the Spiny Everlasting was believed to be extinct, as extensive searches in its general known localities failed to locate it (Davies 1992).

In 1999, a population of Spiny Everlasting was discovered near Laura, in the mid-north of South Australia; a further four populations have since been located in the region, with the latest population discovered in January 2007 (Jusaitis 2007). Three of the populations (Site 1 -"Thornlea", Site 2 -"Yangya Road", Site 3 - "Rusty Cab Road") are just east of Laura, Site 4 is near Hart ("Blyth to Brinkworth Road"), about 65 km south of Laura, and Site 5 ("Telowie") is about 35 km north-west of Laura. Studies into the genetic exchange between these five populations conclude that each can be regarded as discrete subpopulations (Jusaitis & Adams 2005; Adams pers. comm. in Jusaitis 2007).

Sites 1–4 occur in remnant native grassland in the mid-north of South Australia and all are on roadside verges surrounded by agricultural land (Robertson 2002a, b, c, d, e). At Site 1 ("Thornlea"), the species is suckering into the edge of an adjacent privately owned paddock (Robertson 2002a, b). A herbarium specimen (AD111882) collected in 1999 was labelled as being collected "north of Caltowie" (Adelaide Herbarium 2005). Further information obtained from the collector indicated that the specimen was found along the Broken Hill rail line between Jamestown and Caltowie (Bates 2005, pers. comm.). Sections of this line were searched in 2000 (Jusaitis 2005, pers. comm.) and the entire length was searched unsuccessfully on both sides in 2005 (Clarke 2005, pers. comm.). It is possible that the specimen was wrongly labelled (Jusaitis 2005, pers. comm.). The fifth population (Site 5 "Telowie") occurs along a roadside and on the banks of a floodway/drain that cuts through the southern end of the population.

Surviving subpopulations occur in a number of regions defined under the Interim Biogeographical Regionalisation of Australia (IBRA) system (Environment Australia 2000c), including the Northern Lofty herbarium region (Barker et al. 2005), the St Vincent sub-region of the Eyre Yorke Block and the Broughton sub-region of the Flinders Lofty Block (Environment Australia 2000c). It also occurs within the Northern and York and the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Natural Resource Management (NRM) regions of South Australia. Historic South Australian collections were from the Murray herbarium region (Barker et al. 2005), the Murray Scroll Belt sub-region of the Riverina IBRA region (Environment Australia 2000c) and the South Australian Murray Darling Basin NRM region.

Prior to the discovery of the fifth subpopulation, it was estimated that the extent of occurrence of the Spiny Everlasting was 22.6 km². This was calculated using the smallest polygon in which no internal angle exceeds 180° that contains all the sites of occurrence. Sites were obtained from Robertson (2002a, b, c, d, e), Burbidge (1958), herbarium records, data from Plant Population, Opportune, Survey and Reserves databases in the South Australian Department for Environment and Heritage (SA DEH 2005) and from the Adelaide Herbarium (2005). This extent of occurrence will be greater following the discovery of the fifth "Telowie" subpopulation.

Records indicate that the species previously occurred adjacent to the Murray River at Overland Corner in South Australia and around Lake Pamamaroo on the Darling River in NSW. These areas are more arid than the sites of extant subpopulations, suggesting that this species would have been confined to the banks or flood plains of these river systems. Riparian habitats are largely continuous between these collection sites. Assuming that such habitats would extend at least 10 m on each side of the river and occur along the length of the river between the collection locations (a distance of 1300 km), it is hypothesised that the former extent of occurrence in the Murray-Darling Basin was at least 26 km².

It is also likely that the extent of occurrence in South Australia's mid-north has decreased dramatically. The native grassland habitat in which the species occurs once covered approximately 7500 km² of the mid-north, but has been reduced by 93% as a result of vegetation clearance and other agricultural activities (Davies 2000).

No areas of suitable habitat occur between the South Australian mid-north and the former Murray-Darling River subpopulations. A comparison of herbarium records, information in Burbidge (1958) and the results of subsequent extensive searching (Davies 1992) indicate that the extent of occurrence of the Spiny Everlasting has declined drastically since 1910. Therefore, it is estimated that the total extent of occurrence has decreased by over 50%.

The extinction of the species from along the Murray and Darling Rivers suggests that the area of occupancy of the species has declined drastically, although the information recorded with the 19th century herbarium collections was insufficient to determine how common and widespread the species was along these rivers. The first four subpopulations to be discovered (Sites 1–4) have been surveyed in detail and their areas of occupancy measured in the field total 0.34 ha (Robertson 2002a, b, c, d, e). Data from herbarium records (Adelaide Herbarium 2005) and from the South Australian Department for Environment and Heritage Plant Population, Opportune, Survey, and Reserves databases (SA DEH 2005) were also included. The area of occupancy of extant subpopulations at sites 1–4 has not changed significantly since monitoring commenced in 2000 (Robertson 2005, pers. comm.). The Telowie subpopulation (Site 5) has been surveyed and the ramets are spread over an area of just 90 m² (Jusaitis 2007). Photo-monitoring of the subpopulation at Site 5 has commenced.

The current distribution of the Spiny Everlasting can be treated as three locations. One, in the vicinity of Laura, contains three subpopulations (Sites 1–4) within a radius of 4 km, the second (Site 4) occurs 65 km to the south near Hart and the third (Site 5) 65 km north-west of Laura. The Laura subpopulations are treated as a single location as they all occur on narrow roadside verges that could all be severely damaged during one event, for example by herbicide spraying or roadworks (Davies 2005, pers. comm.).

The distribution of the Spiny Everlasting is now severely fragmented, with subpopulations at Sites 1–4 occurring in remnant native grassland on roadside verges in the mid-north of South Australia. Three subpopulations occur just east of Laura, (with a maximum of 7.5 km between sites). The largest (Yangya) occupies both road verges for a distance of more than 300 m, while the other subpopulations extend less than 80 m along the verge. The verges have a maximum width of 5 m, and these three subpopulations are within centimetres of intensively cropped land. The fourth subpopulation occurs near Hart, about 65 km to the south, between a major sealed road and a disused rail reserve and is surrounded by agricultural land (Robertson 2002a, b, c, d, e). The fifth subpopulation is the only subpopulation known to occur on the western side of the Southern Flinders Ranges and occurs along a dirt road, near the graded edge of the road. It is about 1 km from the eastern edge of the Telowie Gorge Conservation Park.

Robertson (2002a) describes searches for new populations of the Spiny Everlasting on roadsides with remnant native grassland in the Northern Areas Council district of South Australia. As native grasslands previously covered extensive areas of the mid-north, it is possible that further populations survive. Any such populations are likely to be very limited in area and under the same threats as the known subpopulations.

Historic collection sites on the Murray River (near Overland Corner) and Darling River (Lake Pamamaroo) were searched unsuccessfully (Davies 1992; RF Parsons 1986, cited in Davies 1992). Similar habitats were also searched in Murray River National Park (formerly Katarapko Game Reserve), Murtho Forest Reserve and on Murtho Station (Davies 1992). These sites were found to be heavily degraded by rabbits and sheep grazing as well as by recreational activities, road making and weeds (RF Parsons 1986, cited in Davies 1992). If it is assumed that the Spiny Everlasting was confined to riparian habitat in these regions, it is unlikely that it will have persisted given the significant habitat change and degradation that has occurred since its last collection in 1910. Even if it does persist in these regions, it is likely to be under severe pressure from not only grazing, weeds and road/recreational activities, but also irrigation and salinity (Davies 2005, pers. comm.)

The Spiny Everlasting is confined to five known subpopulations in the mid-north of South Australia, with a total population of around 2975 shoots. Sites 1–3, containing 76% of all shoots, occur just east of Laura (maximum of 7.5 km between sites). The largest of these, at the "Yangya" site, consisted in 2001 of 928 shoots. The second largest subpopulation, "Thornlea", consisted of 832 shoots, while a third site, "Rusty Cab", consisted of 518 shoots. The fourth subpopulation, near Hart, about 65 km to the south, consisted of 631 shoots in 2001 and was confined to a strip 10 m wide by 49 m long (Robertson 2002a, b, c, d, e). Site 5, at Telowie, contains just 75 shoots.

In 2007, the South Australian Department of Environment and Heritage began translocations of cuttings (sourced from all five sites). Around 100 tubestock were planted at a roadside reserve between Caltowie and Stone Hut while a further 24 plants (sourced only from Site 3) were planted in the Caltowie cemetery (Pieck 2007).

Shoots at each of the five sites can be considered as different subpopulations, as Jusaitis and Adams (2005) and Jusaitis (2007) found that no sexual reproduction, and therefore no gene exchange, was occurring. All herbarium collections from the mid-north in Adelaide Herbarium (1995) and all records from the South Australian Department for Environment and Heritage (SA DEH 2005) refer to the subpopulations at Sites 1–4.

Herbarium collections indicate that at least two subpopulations occurred along the Murray-Darling river system; one at Overland Corner in South Australia and another near Menindee in NSW, probably at the junction of Lake Pamamaroo with the Darling River (Burbidge 1958). Extensive searches of these sites indicate that these two subpopulations are now extinct (Adelaide Herbarium 2005; Davies 1992; Harden 1992).

Excavation of plants at each site revealed that plants multiply vegetatively by root suckering (Jusaitis & Bond 1999). Plants emerging up to 3 m away were traced back to parent plants via underground root connections. To date, no seedlings have been observed at any site and seed set is low despite a range of pollinating insects being observed working flowers. Jusaitis and Adams' (2005) work on allozyme electrophoresis suggests that each subpopulation consists of a single genet (a group of genetically identical individuals derived by asexual reproduction from a single individual). These findings and the large numbers of shoots at each site suggest that the species is clonal and the genets at each site are probably of great age. The length of time that the genets are able to survive is unknown but would depend greatly on future management and threats.

The plantings of the tubestock from each of the five subpopulations near Caltowie (Pieck, 2007) may encourage cross-pollination, leading to a more genetically diverse population.

Plants at three of the four mid-north sites were counted in both 2000 and 2001. The number of Spiny Everlasting shoots at Site 1 increased from 775 to 823 between 2000 and 2001 and increased from 352 to 518 at Site 3, despite (or possibly because of) being burnt by a fire in January 2001. The Yangya subpopulation (Site 2) appears to be the most at risk; numbers decreased from 1576 to 928 between 2000 and 2001 (Robertson 2002a, b, c, d, e). Significant defoliation of Spiny Everlasting occurred at this site in spring 2001 as a result of herbicide and/or snail damage (Robertson 2002c). These measurements were made over only one year and the changes are not necessarily indicative of longer term trends. Monitoring has not been undertaken over a long enough period to determine if the species experiences extreme natural fluctuations in population numbers. Former subpopulations along the Murray Darling system are probably extinct. No data exist indicating the former sizes of these subpopulations.

No extant subpopulations of Spiny Everlasting are conserved in the reserves system or under heritage agreements (Robertson 2002a).

Extant subpopulations of Spiny Everlasting are confined to remnant grassland on low hills (altitude 270–350 m) and plains (altitude 180 m) in the mid-north of South Australia (Robertson 2002a, b, c, d, e). For Sites 1–4, the soils are light brown, light clay to clay loam, with low salinity and a pH of approximately 7.4 (Jusaitis, cited in Robertson 2002a). The climate is typically Mediterranean, with cool, wet winters and hot, dry summers (average rainfall 426 mm per year at Thornlea, 429 mm per year at Blyth) (Australian Bureau of Meteorology 2002; Robertson 2002a). The main indigenous plant species occurring with Spiny Everlasting are Scented Mat-rush, Lomandra effusa, spear and wallaby grasses and various native forbs (Robertson 2002a). This type of habitat has largely been cleared for winter cereal cropping throughout the region. All known extant subpopulations of Spiny Everlasting occur on narrow road reserves that have been repeatedly disturbed in the past (Robertson 2002a, b, c, d, e). The soil at Site 5 is of sandy loam structure, contrasting with the heavier clay loams of the other populations; average annual rainfall is similar to that of the Laura sites (Jusaitis 2007).

Details on herbarium collections describe the species as previously occurring on low sand hills near the Darling River in NSW, and near the River Murray in South Australia.

Habitat Fragmentation, Population Isolation and Low Genetic Variability
The grassland habitat in which Spiny Everlasting occurs has been heavily fragmented and selectively cleared for agriculture in the Southern Lofty Ranges (Davies 1982, 2000), with the result that all remaining subpopulations are isolated from each other. The five known subpopulations represent five quite distinct genetic clones (Jusaitis & Adams 2005, Jusaitis 2007).

Consequently, the main threats to the species are the small number of known subpopulations (five), the small area they cover (approximately 0.3 ha) and their confinement to narrow road verges adjacent to crop-land. Fragmentation potentially reduces gene flow and consequently the genetic diversity of subpopulations which in turn can result in in-breeding depression and a reduced ability to adapt to change.

There is a high probability that human induced and stochastic events will further reduce the sizes and extent of all subpopulations.

Pollen Viability and Seedling Recruitment
Trials have found low levels of seed set as a result of low pollen viability. In the field, plants have only been observed reproducing vegetatively by suckering from roots and shoots. In the laboratory, seedlings have only been successfully raised by tissue culture, indicating low seedling vigour (Jusaitis & Adams 2005; Robertson 2002a).

Jusaitis and Adams (2002) also describe secondary dispersal of seed being prevented by the formation of a mucilaginous coating around hydrated seed. This reduces the ability of the species to colonise new areas of suitable habitat. No seedlings have been observed in the field and seed production is extremely low (Jusaitis & Adams, 2005; Robertson 2002a). Robertson (2002a) comments on low seedling vigour in the species even when grown in the laboratory.

Lack of successful sexual reproduction threatens Spiny Everlasting in the longer term, as it prevents maintenance of genetic diversity through recombination.

Herbivory by Snails
The introduced common White or Vineyard Snail Cernuella virgata has a dramatic impact on individuals of Spiny Everlasting during the wetter months. Trials have shown that the snails actively graze on both stems and leaves of the plant during winter and spring (Jusaitis, cited in Robertson 2002a). This removes the outer tissue layers, resulting in weakening or ringbarking of the stems, death of leaves and often death of complete shoots above the site of injury. Plants may resprout below, or occasionally above, the injury (Robertson 2002a). These snails have been in the Laura district for only about 10 years and their impact may be increasing. They are found at the sites of all Spiny Everlasting subpopulations (Robertson 2002a, b, c, d, e). If snail numbers continue to increase, their impact is likely to become increasingly severe, making the subpopulations more vulnerable to other factors.

Grazing of Habitat by Vertebrates
The Spiny Everlasting has apparently become extinct along the Murray and Darling Rivers. Davies (1992) and Robertson (2002a) hypothesise that one contributing factor was degradation of its former habitats by rabbits and sheep grazing.

The continuing degradation of habitat by rabbits will limit the success of any reintroductions of Spiny Everlasting to its former sites along these rivers. However, neither Robertson (2002a) nor Jusaitis and Adams (2005) mention vertebrate grazing as a threat to extant subpopulations.

Weed Invasion
Heavy weed invasion occurs at all sites. The dominant non-native plant species at all sites are annual, predominantly Wild Oats (Avena barbata) and other annual grasses. Salvation Jane (Echium plantagineum) and Wild Turnip (Rapistrum rugosum) are dominant weeds at Hart. The main perennial weed species are Wild Sage (Salvia verbenaca) at all sites and Soursob (Oxalis pes-caprae), Rice Millet (Piptatherum miliaceum) and Scabious (Scabiosa atropurpurea) at the Hart site. Scattered plants of Horehound (Marrubium vulgare) occur at the Laura sites (Robertson 2002a,b,c,d,e). Numerous healthy Spiny Everlasting plants have been observed among dense, tall stands of Wild Oats, Salvation Jane and annuals of the cabbage family, but it is possible that weed competition may limit the species' growth during a dry winter. Competition from weeds may also contribute to the lack of seedling recruitment.

The spread of perennial exotic grasses such as Buffel Grass, Tall Wheat Grass and Fountain Grass in the mid-north could have a much more deleterious effect on Spiny Everlasting because of these grasses' deep roots and ability to produce dense swards. These perennial exotic grasses are only beginning to invade this region. Tall Wheat Grass is presently being widely promoted for reclamation of saline areas, while nurseries are selling Fountain Grass widely.

Road and Farm Maintenance
Spiny Everlasting subpopulations have been variously subjected to road widening (Thornlea), roadside slashing (Yangya and Hart) and herbicide spraying (Yangya) since 1999. There is an ongoing risk of chemical drift from crop-land and it has been usual practice for adjacent landowners to apply broad-spectrum herbicide non-selectively to at least one of the roadsides (Yangya) to create a firebreak. Local farmers often remove grass along fencelines using herbicide to reduce snail problems in crops. The presence of proclaimed plants (those designated as noxious weeds under national and/or state/territory legislation; e.g. Horehound at Yangya) within Spiny Everlasting subpopulations represents a risk of damage from spraying by landholders or control officers. Trees had been planted on roadsides at Yangya and Rusty Cab (since destroyed by fire at Rusty Cab) before the Spiny Everlasting's discovery there. The introduction of non-indigenous trees and shrubs into grassland alters the habitat significantly, posing a potential threat to Spiny Daisy subpopulations (Robertson 2002a, b, c,d, e).

The location of all Spiny Everlasting subpopulations adjacent to roadsides and cropping land means that all these factors will continue to be threats in the future.

Altered Hydrology
Robertson (2002a) suggests that another reason Spiny Everlasting may have become extinct along the Murray and Darling Rivers is that the river regulation and irrigation developments have interfered with its preferred hydrological regime (eg seasonal flooding). The altered hydrology of the Murray and Darling Rivers is likely to limit the success of any reintroductions of Spiny Everlasting to its former sites along these rivers.

Other threats
The lack of genetic diversity in all surviving subpopulations of Spiny Everlasting makes them highly susceptible to pathogens. Low seed set and the low vigour of seedlings also reduce the ability of subpopulations to survive catastrophic events such as severe drought. Where such events result in the death of all living plants it is unlikely that seedling regeneration from a soil seed bank will occur (Davies 2005, pers. comm.).

An Interim Recovery Team for the Spiny Everlasting established in 1999 includes regional community members, Northern Areas Council and Transport South Australia personnel (Robertson 2002a).

The Recovery Team has engaged a regional project/liaison officer and a consultant recovery planner. The regional project/liaison officer and the consultant recovery planner have continued to implement a Draft Recovery Plan (Robertson 2002a). This has included the laying of baits for snails; the slashing of Wild Oats; the spot-spraying, pulling and hoeing up of Horehound and other broadleaf weeds; and informing local landowners of the existence and significance of the sites and management needs of the Spiny Everlasting. Regular monitoring of photopoints has continued at the mid-north sites to detect visual changes to the sites (Clarke 2005, pers. comm.).

In 2005, a threatened-plant officer was employed by the South Australian Department for Environment and Heritage with funding from the Northern and Yorke Natural Resource Management Board. The Spiny Everlasting is one of three focal species within this project. Future Recovery Actions planned by the Recovery Team include (Clarke 2005, pers. comm.):

  • the continuing employment of the regional threatened flora officer as well as a contractor to undertake on-ground work;
  • the continuing employment of the threatened-species community liaison officer;
  • herbicide treatment trials on plantings of Spiny Everlasting adjacent to existing subpopulations;
  • an ongoing program to promote general public awareness and increase public involvement in the conservation of the species;
  • the production of a new fact sheet for release in the Riverland and NSW to encourage searching in the vicinity of historic collection sites;
  • targeted searches for additional extant populations in the mid-north and other areas within the species' historical range;
  • ongoing monitoring, and the production of a plan to standardise monitoring;
  • translocation of plants to other areas of suitable habitat, preparation of a translocation plan and a trial of different management techniques;
  • revision of Site Action Plans;
  • negotiation to move the existing road at the Rusty Cab site to protect existing subpopulations; and
  • cross-pollination experiments.

The taxonomy of the Spiny Everlasting is described in Mueller (1861), Burbidge (1958), Haegi and colleagues (1986) and Harden (1992). The distribution, habitat and conservation status of the species are described in Leigh and colleagues (1984), Davies (1992) and Robertson (2002a, b, c, d, e). Jusaitis and Adams (2002, 2005) describe the genetic status of the species.

A draft recovery plan (Robertson 2002a) and site action plans (Robertson 2002b, c, d, e) have been written for the species and are being implemented. These plans are currently being revised (Robertson & Clarke, in preparation) and translocation and monitoring plans are in preparation.

A fifth site action plan is being prepared for the more recently discovered "Telowie" site (Jusaitis 2007) and translocation of over 100 plants has been carried out in two different locations near Caltowie (Pieck 2007).

The following table lists known and perceived threats to this species. Threats are based on the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) threat classification version 1.1.

Threat Class Threatening Species References
Agriculture and Aquaculture:Livestock Farming and Grazing:Grazing pressures and associated habitat changes Commonwealth Listing Advice on Acanthocladium dockeri (Threatened Species Scientific Committee, 2006ed) [Listing Advice].
Ecosystem/Community Stresses:Indirect Ecosystem Effects:Restricted geographical distribution (area of occupancy and extent of occurrence) Commonwealth Listing Advice on Acanthocladium dockeri (Threatened Species Scientific Committee, 2006ed) [Listing Advice].
Human Intrusions and Disturbance:Human Intrusions and Disturbance:Mechanical disturbance during construction, maintanance or recreational activities Commonwealth Listing Advice on Acanthocladium dockeri (Threatened Species Scientific Committee, 2006ed) [Listing Advice].
Invasive and Other Problematic Species and Genes:Invasive Non-Native/Alien Species:Competition and/or habitat degradation Oryctolagus cuniculus (Rabbit, European Rabbit) Commonwealth Listing Advice on Acanthocladium dockeri (Threatened Species Scientific Committee, 2006ed) [Listing Advice].
Invasive and Other Problematic Species and Genes:Invasive Non-Native/Alien Species:Competition and/or habitat degradation by weeds Commonwealth Listing Advice on Acanthocladium dockeri (Threatened Species Scientific Committee, 2006ed) [Listing Advice].
Invasive and Other Problematic Species and Genes:Invasive and Other Problematic Species and Genes:Predation, competition, habitat degradation and/or spread of pathogens by introduced species Commonwealth Listing Advice on Acanthocladium dockeri (Threatened Species Scientific Committee, 2006ed) [Listing Advice].
Pollution:Airborne Agricultural pollutants:Herbicide drift Commonwealth Listing Advice on Acanthocladium dockeri (Threatened Species Scientific Committee, 2006ed) [Listing Advice].

Adelaide Herbarium (2005). ADHERB database. South Australia: Department of Environment and Heritage.

Australian Bureau of Meteorology (2002). Climatic trends. [Online]. Available from

Barker, W.R., R.M. Barker, J.P. Jessop & H.P. Vonow, eds. (2005). Census of South Australian Vascular Plants, 5th edition. In: Journal of the Adelaide Botanical Gardens Supplement 1. [Online]. Adelaide: Botanic Gardens of Adelaide & State Herbarium. Available from:

Bates, R. (2005). Personal communication.

Burbidge, N.T. (1958). A monographic study of Helichrysum subgenus Ozothamnus (Compositae) and of two related genera formerly included therein. Australian Journal of Botany. 6:229-284.

Clarke, A. (2005). Personal communication.

Davies R.J-P. (1982). The Conservation of Major Plant Associations in South Australia. Adelaide, South Australia: Conservation Council of South Australia.

Davies, R. (2000). Nomination for Listing of Iron Grass (Lomandra effusa - L. multiflora ssp. Dura) Tussock Grassland as a Threatened Ecological Community under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.

Davies, R. (2005). Personal communication.

Davies, R.J.P. (1992). Threatened Plants of the Murray Mallee, Mt Lofty Range and Kangaroo Island Region of South Australia. Conservation Council of South Australia.

Department for Environment and Heritage, South Australia (SA DEH) (2005). Biological Database of South Australia (Plants Populations, Roadside Vegetation, Opportune, Survey and Reserve databases).

Environment Australia (2000c). Revision of the Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia (IBRA) and development of version 5.1. [Online]. Available from:

Haegi, L. in Jessop JP & Toelken HR (Eds) (1986). Flora of South Australia, Part 3, 4th edition. Government Printer, Adelaide.

Harden, G.J. (Ed.) (1992). Flora of New South Wales Volume 3. Kensington, NSW: University of NSW Press.

Jusaitis, M. (2005). Personal communication.

Jusaitis, M. (2007). New population of the endangered Spiny Daisy discovered at Telowie, SA. SA Veg on the Edge. 7, No 1:pp 2-3. Adelaide.

Jusaitis, M. & A. Bond (1999). Extinct daisy rediscovered in South Australia. Danthonia. 8:12-13.

Jusaitis, M. & M. Adams (2002). Quantifying the genetic status of Acanthocladium dockeri F. Muell. (Spiny Daisy). National Parks and Wildlife, South Australia.

Jusaitis, M. & M. Adams (2005). Conservation implications of clonality and limited sexual reproduction in the endangered shrub Acanthocladium dockeri (Asteraceae). Australian Journal of Botany. 53(6):535-544.

Leigh, J., R. Boden & J. Briggs (1984). Extinct and Endangered Plants of Australia. Melbourne, Victoria: Macmillan.

Mueller F.J.H von (1861). Fragmenta Phytographiae Australiae 2 (15). Page(s) 156. Government Printer, Melbourne.

Pieck, A (2007). Saving threatened flora in the Northern and Yorke Region. SA Veg on the Edge. 1, No 1:pp 3,4. Adelaide.

Robertson, M. (2005). Personal communication.

Robertson, M.A. (2002a). Draft Recovery Plan for Acanthocladium dockeri (Spiny Daisy). South Australian Department for Environment and Heritage, Northern Areas Council.

Robertson, M.A. (2002b). Spiny Daisy Acanthocladium dockeri Recovery Site Action Plan 2002: Site 1; Thornlea. Department for Environment and Heritage, Northern Areas Council.

Robertson, M.A. (2002c). Spiny Daisy Acanthocladium dockeri Recovery Site Action Plan 2002: Site 2; Yangya Road. Department for Environment and Heritage, Northern Areas Council.

Robertson, M.A. (2002d). Spiny Daisy Acanthocladium dockeri Recovery Site Action Plan 2002: Site 3; 'Rusty Cab' Road. Department for Environment and Heritage, Northern Areas Council.

Robertson, M.A. (2002e). Spiny Daisy Acanthocladium dockeri Recovery Site Action Plan 2002: Site 4, Blyth to Brinkworth Road, near Hart. Department for Environment and Heritage, Northern Areas Council.

Robertson, MA & Clarke A (in prep.). A national recovery plan for Acanthocladium dockeri (spiny daisy). Department for Environment and Heritage, Clare, South Australia.

EPBC Act email updates can be received via the Communities for Communities newsletter and the EPBC Act newsletter.

This database is designed to provide statutory, biological and ecological information on species and ecological communities, migratory species, marine species, and species and species products subject to international trade and commercial use protected under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (the EPBC Act). It has been compiled from a range of sources including listing advice, recovery plans, published literature and individual experts. While reasonable efforts have been made to ensure the accuracy of the information, no guarantee is given, nor responsibility taken, by the Commonwealth for its accuracy, currency or completeness. The Commonwealth does not accept any responsibility for any loss or damage that may be occasioned directly or indirectly through the use of, or reliance on, the information contained in this database. The information contained in this database does not necessarily represent the views of the Commonwealth. This database is not intended to be a complete source of information on the matters it deals with. Individuals and organisations should consider all the available information, including that available from other sources, in deciding whether there is a need to make a referral or apply for a permit or exemption under the EPBC Act.

Citation: Department of the Environment (2014). Acanthocladium dockeri in Species Profile and Threats Database, Department of the Environment, Canberra. Available from: Accessed Tue, 30 Sep 2014 21:09:03 +1000.