Florida "Invasive" Palms - which ones are actually bad?

[stevethegator]

Hello all, I haven't been on palmtalk in awhile as I've been busy finishing up school and moving back down to south Florida.

I've been doing a lot of yard work at the new place which already had a substantial native garden which the owner wanted me to help refurbish. In researching native plants I came across several palms which are on Broward County considers to be harmful invasives. These include:

Ptychosperma elegans

Dypsis lutescens

Caryota mitis

Phoenix senegalensis

Syagrus romanzoffiana

While certainly "non-native," most of these species simply blend in to existing habitat (making it look nicer IMO, esp with ptychosperma) and definitely don't deserve to be on the same list as casuarina, schinus, and melaleuca which form monotypic stands and displace all other vegation.

In fact, the only time I've ever heard of a palm being harmful to any natural habitat was on lignum vitae key, where the ranger told me the remnants of an old coconut plantation on the island's interior are preventing regeneration of the natural forest by covering the ground with dead fronds.

My point is, are these palms really harmful? Should growers in Florida really not plant them as is recommended? Thoughts?

[Palmdude]

Good question. I'm out in the swamps and wilds of Florida all the time. I've only seen a few wild queens and caryotas. I've yet to see a wild Ptychosperma. I see reclinatas everywhere though.

I've only seen these as single specimens and can't imagine how they're harming anything.

I wonder where these invasive palms are taking over, I'd like to see it.

Edited June 11, 2014 by Palmdude

[stevethegator]

Ptychosperma has recently naturalized in coastal hammocks in palm beach, broward, and Dade counties. I also see it popping up frequently in urban areas, out of hedges and such. I like it!

[sonoranfans]

reclinatas are considered invasive in my area and they do propagate quickly. Cutting down a reclinata adds an extra cost, its hazardous with all the spines. And if you cut down the trunks, it will come back from the subterranean trunk, that is especially invasive. I think Lutecens will do this too, though they dont self propagate notably in the tampa area. I suppose each county has its own invasives list based on what propagates itself quickly. In florida, "native plants" are localized, that is the different climates mean some "florida natives" are not native to other areas. Live oak dont do so well down south, havent seen any wild stands south of venice, yet they are all over tampa.

[redbeard917]

I remember seeing Phoenix reclinatas (=P. senegalensis?) lining the sides of the creek in Koreshan State Park near Estero, FL. They were certainly prolific, but were far from a monotypic stand like Brazilian pepper or something. IMO, it's hyperbole to call a palm like Ptychosperma elegans a harmful invasive; "naturalizing" would be a more accurate term. I think both species add visual appeal and though it's not usually thought of this way, increase biodiversity by adding a new species to the plant community.

On a semi-related note, volunteer Butia sometimes come up here, almost always directly under the mother tree. I've also seen CIDP and Cycas revoluta seedlings in nearby hedges.

[_Keith]

So, if it pops up in your yard and momma plant is not around, was the palm invasive or the bird/animal that pooped the seed. Inquiring minds want to know.

[Jerry@TreeZoo]

These palms can pop up anywhere, I guess, as birds will fly many miles away from their food sources. I think, though, that the Recs, Lutes and psychospermas are generally problems in remnant preserves, that are green islands in suburbia. The county and municipalities try to preserve the original natives in a static, unchanging habitat. Trying to keep a preserve static also dictates that certain natives are also eradicated when the forest areas become overpopulated with one species. I have seen live oaks and sabals destroyed to keep pinelands and cypress heads.

[sarasota alex]

Florida recognizes two categories of invasive plants.

Category I - Invasive exotics that are altering native plant communities by displacing native species, changing community structures or ecological functions, or hybridizing with natives. These are illegal to knowingly plant.

Category II - Invasive exotics that have increased in abundance or frequency but have not yet altered Florida plant communities to the extent shown by Category I species. These species may become ranked Category I, if ecological damage is demonstrated. These are ok to plant.

No palm is listed as Cat I. Several are listed as Cat II however: Washingtonia robusta, Phoenix reclinata, Cocos nucifera, Syagrus romanzoffiana, Ptychosperma elegans, Livistona chinensis and Chamaedorea seifrizii. From what I've read evidence is currently being collected to also include the following palms as Cat II in the near future - Bismarckia nobilis, Dypsis lutescens and Caryota mitis.

Now IMHO Phoenix reclinata should be listed as Cat I. Not sure why it's not. It is agressive in pushing out the native mangroves and taking over their habitat. I remember reading about it on the FTBG webstie years ago. They had a study on that and I'm sure plenty of evidence. We have naturalized P. reclinata stands around the shores of Sarasota Bay where you can see how the mangroves have been pushed out.

[Tyrone]

The weeds on my property are Kikuyu grass and Blue gums that volunteer everywhere. I wish I had the Florida weed problem here. They are high quality desirable "weeds" in my opinion. But my opinion isn't worth much so......mumble mumble mumble......

[Zeeth]

Florida recognizes two categories of invasive plants.

Category I - Invasive exotics that are altering native plant communities by displacing native species, changing community structures or ecological functions, or hybridizing with natives. These are illegal to knowingly plant.

Category II - Invasive exotics that have increased in abundance or frequency but have not yet altered Florida plant communities to the extent shown by Category I species. These species may become ranked Category I, if ecological damage is demonstrated. These are ok to plant.

No palm is listed as Cat I. Several are listed as Cat II however: Washingtonia robusta, Phoenix reclinata, Cocos nucifera, Syagrus romanzoffiana, Ptychosperma elegans, Livistona chinensis and Chamaedorea seifrizii. From what I've read evidence is currently being collected to also include the following palms as Cat II in the near future - Bismarckia nobilis, Dypsis lutescens and Caryota mitis.

Now IMHO Phoenix reclinata should be listed as Cat I. Not sure why it's not. It is agressive in pushing out the native mangroves and taking over their habitat. I remember reading about it on the FTBG webstie years ago. They had a study on that and I'm sure plenty of evidence. We have naturalized P. reclinata stands around the shores of Sarasota Bay where you can see how the mangroves have been pushed out.

I agree. P. reclinata definitely is the most invasive palm that there is. I've seen L. chinensis take some native habitats over like a Cat. I as well (check out Emerson point), but not with the intensity as P. reclinata.

[Eric in Orlando]

2 palms that are naturalizing here at Leu Gardens that aren't listed; Arenga engleri and Chamaeodrea microspadix. Both come up in areas not near the parent plants. Arenga engleri seedlings are becoming very numerous.

Livistona chinensis also comes up alot aways from mature palms.

[stevethegator]

Thanks for the replies everyone!

I had forgotten livistona chinensis, there is a patch of forest along the turnpike near Clermont that has tons of them in there, they look to be displacing sabal palmetto in that forest

[Zeeth]

I've also seen Elaeis guineensis coming up wild in swampy areas near mature plants (FIT botanical garden).

[sonoranfans]

The fact that some palms are considered invasive in florida is an indication of how fortunate floridians are in the climate for palm growing. Having lived in arizona and now california(north, now south), its a bit shocking to come home to florida and see how lush the palms are, even public plantings look great. I seriously doubt any palm species is invasive in either california or arizona... I guess the downside is that floridans need to be vigilant in limiting the invasives and birds can carry the seeds for many miles. I do see some reclinatas in the wild live oak forrests, they seem to be very resilient even in deep shade.

[Keith N Tampa (ex SoJax)]

In my dry, sandy, nutrient poor soil, even the cat II invasives struggle. The most invasive plant on my property seems to be common bermuda grass. There is also one annoying dayflower, but I'm not sure which one. I hope it isn't the Bengal version! But by far the most annoying species if the dang Armadillo. It walked here, but by gosh, its one invasive, destructive creature. l hate them!

[Elvis Cruz]

The whole "native" vs "non-native" debate is more about politics than logical science.

I once asked a State of Florida geologist how long ago was it that South Florida was below sea level. He said 5,000 years.

That means we have no native trees. They all migrated here after sea level receded.

That's why our "native" live oak, quercus virginiana, grows in Virginia. It invaded here from the north.

That's why our "native" gumbo limbo (bursera simaruba) and "native" Jamaican mahogany (swietenia mahagoni) are found in the Caribbean - they invaded here from the south.

And on and on.

The definition of "native plant", at least in Miami-Dade County, is any plant that was here before 1492 – an arbitrary point in time, chosen because that was the year Christopher Columbus discovered the Bahamas and Cuba (he never set foot on what would become the continental United States, contrary to popular opinion and many elementary school history lessons).

If a "native" tree volunteers, that's called "volunteering".

If a "non-native" tree volunteers, that's called "invasive".

And yet "native" trees invade all the time. That's how they got here, but they did their invading before 1492, so they're grandfathered in to the world of political correctness.

The irony of it all: What is the most destructive, "non-native" species of all? Homo sapiens (var European?). Should we eradicate it?

Perhaps the Native Emperor isn't wearing any clothes.

[Keith N Tampa (ex SoJax)]

elvis, you make great points. that said, i do not want any more Brazilian pepper, ambrosia beetles,TX

phoenix palm decline, or citrus greening bacteria introduced. but i do hear what you are saying

[Zeeth]

The whole "native" vs "non-native" debate is more about politics than logical science.

I once asked a State of Florida geologist how long ago was it that South Florida was below sea level. He said 5,000 years.

That means we have no native trees. They all migrated here after sea level receded.

That's why our "native" live oak, quercus virginiana, grows in Virginia. It invaded here from the north.

That's why our "native" gumbo limbo (bursera simaruba) and "native" Jamaican mahogany (swietenia mahagoni) are found in the Caribbean - they invaded here from the south.

And on and on.

The definition of "native plant", at least in Miami-Dade County, is any plant that was here before 1492 – an arbitrary point in time, chosen because that was the year Christopher Columbus discovered the Bahamas and Cuba (he never set foot on what would become the continental United States, contrary to popular opinion and many elementary school history lessons).

If a "native" tree volunteers, that's called "volunteering".

If a "non-native" tree volunteers, that's called "invasive".

And yet "native" trees invade all the time. That's how they got here, but they did their invading before 1492, so they're grandfathered in to the world of political correctness.

The irony of it all: What is the most destructive, "non-native" species of all? Homo sapiens (var European?). Should we eradicate it?

Perhaps the Native Emperor isn't wearing any clothes.

I agree with you to a point. I consider something truly invasive if it has a net negative impact on species biodiversity. If it has a neutral, or positive, impact, then it's not invasive in my eyes. Trees like Melaleuca and Brazilian pepper and animals like the Burmese python have notable negative impacts on species biodiversity, whereas trees like Ptychosperma and animals like monk parakeet have neutral to positive impact. Monk parakeets even seem to take on the niche left behind when we drove the native Carolina parakeet to extinction, so they likely have a positive impact.

[stevethegator]

The whole "native" vs "non-native" debate is more about politics than logical science.

I once asked a State of Florida geologist how long ago was it that South Florida was below sea level. He said 5,000 years.

That means we have no native trees. They all migrated here after sea level receded.

That's why our "native" live oak, quercus virginiana, grows in Virginia. It invaded here from the north.

That's why our "native" gumbo limbo (bursera simaruba) and "native" Jamaican mahogany (swietenia mahagoni) are found in the Caribbean - they invaded here from the south.

And on and on.

The definition of "native plant", at least in Miami-Dade County, is any plant that was here before 1492 – an arbitrary point in time, chosen because that was the year Christopher Columbus discovered the Bahamas and Cuba (he never set foot on what would become the continental United States, contrary to popular opinion and many elementary school history lessons).

If a "native" tree volunteers, that's called "volunteering".

If a "non-native" tree volunteers, that's called "invasive".

And yet "native" trees invade all the time. That's how they got here, but they did their invading before 1492, so they're grandfathered in to the world of political correctness.

The irony of it all: What is the most destructive, "non-native" species of all? Homo sapiens (var European?). Should we eradicate it?

Perhaps the Native Emperor isn't wearing any clothes.

I agree with you to a point. I consider something truly invasive if it has a net negative impact on species biodiversity. If it has a neutral, or positive, impact, then it's not invasive in my eyes. Trees like Melaleuca and Brazilian pepper and animals like the Burmese python have notable negative impacts on species biodiversity, whereas trees like Ptychosperma and animals like monk parakeet have neutral to positive impact. Monk parakeets even seem to take on the niche left behind when we drove the native Carolina parakeet to extinction, so they likely have a positive impact.

My feelings exactly. However, try explaining this to the "native plant people." Their first reaction when I tell them I'm into palms is "Ew, palms, you know those are exotic right??" Lol

[Jerry@TreeZoo]

Think of it this way:

You are starting your dream garden and you decide to have distinctive "regions" of species. So you have a Madagascar area, a South America Area, an Australian area, etc. After a while, you find D. lutey start popping up everywhere outside of its Madagascar range. What do you do to keep your original design? Do you abandon your design and let things grow anywhere they seem to thrive? Do you eradicate all the volunteers? Do you transplant the things growing in the wrong place?

I think there is a value to having most "native areas" remain native. On the other hand, anyone who only wants native plants is shortsighted IMO, and is denying themselves the enjoyment and enrichment that exotics can bring. And, lets not forget, if we never brought in exotic food crops, we would have all starved to death long ago.

[Eric in Orlando]

I have seen Roystonea regia naturalizing heavily in areas in SoFL, progeny of the cultivated Cuban forms. Has anyone seen it naturalizing near where native stands of the Florida form (formerly Roystonea elata) still exists in the wild ?

[Moose]

The whole "native" vs "non-native" debate is more about politics than logical science.

I once asked a State of Florida geologist how long ago was it that South Florida was below sea level. He said 5,000 years.

That means we have no native trees. They all migrated here after sea level receded.

That's why our "native" live oak, quercus virginiana, grows in Virginia. It invaded here from the north.

That's why our "native" gumbo limbo (bursera simaruba) and "native" Jamaican mahogany (swietenia mahagoni) are found in the Caribbean - they invaded here from the south.

And on and on.

The definition of "native plant", at least in Miami-Dade County, is any plant that was here before 1492 – an arbitrary point in time, chosen because that was the year Christopher Columbus discovered the Bahamas and Cuba (he never set foot on what would become the continental United States, contrary to popular opinion and many elementary school history lessons).

If a "native" tree volunteers, that's called "volunteering".

If a "non-native" tree volunteers, that's called "invasive".

And yet "native" trees invade all the time. That's how they got here, but they did their invading before 1492, so they're grandfathered in to the world of political correctness.

The irony of it all: What is the most destructive, "non-native" species of all? Homo sapiens (var European?). Should we eradicate it?

Perhaps the Native Emperor isn't wearing any clothes.

Elvis I am all for the native plants. However, many native plant devotees have become vigilant pressing the use of native plants to the point of obsession. They are pushing local governments to use them, some even vision to force private property owners to do the same. Bringing up the points you have made to the "native nazis" unfortunately falls on deaf ears.

[sonoranfans]

The whole "native" vs "non-native" debate is more about politics than logical science.

I once asked a State of Florida geologist how long ago was it that South Florida was below sea level. He said 5,000 years.

That means we have no native trees. They all migrated here after sea level receded.

That's why our "native" live oak, quercus virginiana, grows in Virginia. It invaded here from the north.

That's why our "native" gumbo limbo (bursera simaruba) and "native" Jamaican mahogany (swietenia mahagoni) are found in the Caribbean - they invaded here from the south.

And on and on.

The definition of "native plant", at least in Miami-Dade County, is any plant that was here before 1492 – an arbitrary point in time, chosen because that was the year Christopher Columbus discovered the Bahamas and Cuba (he never set foot on what would become the continental United States, contrary to popular opinion and many elementary school history lessons).

If a "native" tree volunteers, that's called "volunteering".

If a "non-native" tree volunteers, that's called "invasive".

And yet "native" trees invade all the time. That's how they got here, but they did their invading before 1492, so they're grandfathered in to the world of political correctness.

The irony of it all: What is the most destructive, "non-native" species of all? Homo sapiens (var European?). Should we eradicate it?

Perhaps the Native Emperor isn't wearing any clothes.

I agree with you to a point. I consider something truly invasive if it has a net negative impact on species biodiversity. If it has a neutral, or positive, impact, then it's not invasive in my eyes. Trees like Melaleuca and Brazilian pepper and animals like the Burmese python have notable negative impacts on species biodiversity, whereas trees like Ptychosperma and animals like monk parakeet have neutral to positive impact. Monk parakeets even seem to take on the niche left behind when we drove the native Carolina parakeet to extinction, so they likely have a positive impact.

My feelings exactly. However, try explaining this to the "native plant people." Their first reaction when I tell them I'm into palms is "Ew, palms, you know those are exotic right??" Lol

I also agree that the "native" scam is just a way for people to make money. Had a neighbor with "all native" trying to sell everyone on it and the plants arent cheap. I put in a bunch of palms and when the neighbors saw a couple nice bismarckia, brahea clara, copenicia, and indian coral tree etc, they decided that the native landscape was comparatively drab, just dull green with lots of sticky shrubs. Aside from the copernicia the "exotics" were notably cheaper than the natives(from a "native" nursery). However like Keith, I agree that brazilian pepper and some other plants are pernicious, they take over and kill off everything else. I think the aggresiveness of the non native should be considered. And those pythons could kill off endemic species, we do not want that. Fish species(asian carp, snakeheads) can and have invaded waterways and destroy or threaten to destroy the endemic species. When the invasion is pernicious, it should be looked at differently.

[JasonD]

I've seen Adonidia merrillii naturalizing in the Keys.

[Tyrone]

I've seen Adonidia merrillii naturalizing in the Keys.

Again, a "weed" problem I would just love to have.

But alas it will never happen.

[Jimbean]

Phoenix reclinata is invasive around my area.

washingtonia robusta, syagrus romanzoffiana, livistona chinensis naturalize locally.

[Brian Bruning]

• Acrocomia sp. I suspect totai is naturalizing around Orlando. I wonder if Copernicia alba will as well. Both tolerate some degrees of frost.

Warren Dolby grew A. totai in his Oakland garden. His home burned in the big fire of 1991 but many of his palms survived including this one. I suspect that being from a savanna it is somewhat fire tolerant. It grew for him but slowly due to lack of summer heat. Our winter lows here in the lower hills are 25F (-4C).

[Palmsbro]

  Syagrus romanzoffiana and Washingtonia are starting to pop up in nature preserves. Livistonas are all around, and I am starting to to worry a bit about the native Sabal palmetto strands due to the competetive strain from fast-growing palms that produce prodigious amounts of seeds like Livistonas, Washingtonias, and Syagrus.

[PalmTreeDude]

Can we get more pictures of invasive palms out in the wild? 

[Palmsbro]

7 hours ago, PalmTreeDude said:

Can we get more pictures of invasive palms out in the wild? 

I found this Syagrus  in Sawgrass Lake Park in St. Petersburg, Fl. When I visited, I remember there being more seedlings near here but this is all I found on Google street view:

[Botanicus]

The terms "native", "non-native" etc. have no biological meaning. Here is an example using animals in North America:

A few interesting dates in North American natural history:
65 mya. DINOSAURS (then extinction) 
65 mya. Survivors: TURTLES, SALAMANDERS, ALLIGATORS 
60 mya. Rocky mountains; Bearpaw Seaway drains; North America is born 
55 mya. HORSES and CAMELS (evolve in NA) 
55 mya. RHINOCEROS (immigrates from Asia) 
40 mya. DOG FAMILY (evolves in NA) 
40 mya. CAT FAMILY (immigrates from Asia) 
35 mya. TREE FROGS, TOADS, LIZARDS (floats from South America) 
35 mya. RAVEN (immigrates from Australia) [BATS; other birds] 
35 mya. SNAKES (immigrate from Asia) 
30 mya. SQUIRRELS (co-evolve with Nut Trees in NA) 
20 mya. GRASSES (co-evolve with big mammals; later lawnmowers) 
17 mya. ELEPHANTS (immigrate from Africa via Asia) 
15 mya. BEAR FAMILY (immigrates from Asia) 
15 mya. CHEETAH (evolves in North America, immigrates to Asia) 
5 mya. DEER and MOUNTAIN SHEEP (immigrate from Asia) 
5 mya. RHINOCEROS goes extinct in NA 
5 mya. HUMAN ANCESTORS evolve in Africa 
3 mya. POSSUM, ARMADILLO, PORCUPINE, GROUND SLOTHS (immigrate fr S.A.)
3 mya. SQUIRREL, RABBIT, RACCOON, MICE/RAT, PECCARY (PIG), DEER, CAT, DOG, BEAR, LLAMA (colonize South America across Isthmus of Panama) 
3 mya. CAMELS and HORSES (colonize Asia and Africa fr. NA, [Zebra]) 
2 mya. ICE AGES: POLAR BEAR (evolves in Arctic) 
400,000 ya BISON (buffalo immigrate from Asia) 
15,000 ya PEOPLE (immigrate from Asia) 
13,000 ya EXTINCTION OF PLANT-EATERS: GROUND SLOTHS, GLYPTODONTS, ELEPHANTS, HORSES, CAMELS 
13,000 ya EXTINCTION OF MEAT-EATERS: DIRE WOLF, SABERTOOTH CAT, GIANT BEAR 
500 ya HORSES return (brought back by Spanish)

[Palmsbro]

5 hours ago, Botanicus said:

The terms "native", "non-native" etc. have no biological meaning. Here is an example using animals in North America:

A few interesting dates in North American natural history:
65 mya. DINOSAURS (then extinction) 
65 mya. Survivors: TURTLES, SALAMANDERS, ALLIGATORS 
60 mya. Rocky mountains; Bearpaw Seaway drains; North America is born 
55 mya. HORSES and CAMELS (evolve in NA) 
55 mya. RHINOCEROS (immigrates from Asia) 
40 mya. DOG FAMILY (evolves in NA) 
40 mya. CAT FAMILY (immigrates from Asia) 
35 mya. TREE FROGS, TOADS, LIZARDS (floats from South America) 
35 mya. RAVEN (immigrates from Australia) [BATS; other birds] 
35 mya. SNAKES (immigrate from Asia) 
30 mya. SQUIRRELS (co-evolve with Nut Trees in NA) 
20 mya. GRASSES (co-evolve with big mammals; later lawnmowers) 
17 mya. ELEPHANTS (immigrate from Africa via Asia) 
15 mya. BEAR FAMILY (immigrates from Asia) 
15 mya. CHEETAH (evolves in North America, immigrates to Asia) 
5 mya. DEER and MOUNTAIN SHEEP (immigrate from Asia) 
5 mya. RHINOCEROS goes extinct in NA 
5 mya. HUMAN ANCESTORS evolve in Africa 
3 mya. POSSUM, ARMADILLO, PORCUPINE, GROUND SLOTHS (immigrate fr S.A.)
3 mya. SQUIRREL, RABBIT, RACCOON, MICE/RAT, PECCARY (PIG), DEER, CAT, DOG, BEAR, LLAMA (colonize South America across Isthmus of Panama) 
3 mya. CAMELS and HORSES (colonize Asia and Africa fr. NA, [Zebra]) 
2 mya. ICE AGES: POLAR BEAR (evolves in Arctic) 
400,000 ya BISON (buffalo immigrate from Asia) 
15,000 ya PEOPLE (immigrate from Asia) 
13,000 ya EXTINCTION OF PLANT-EATERS: GROUND SLOTHS, GLYPTODONTS, ELEPHANTS, HORSES, CAMELS 
13,000 ya EXTINCTION OF MEAT-EATERS: DIRE WOLF, SABERTOOTH CAT, GIANT BEAR 
500 ya HORSES return (brought back by Spanish)

To me, at least, something being native means that it has evolved long enough in said area that it is 'native' to have evolved into a separate species or that it has been present in the 'native' area for at least 10,000 years without causing ecological damage.

[Palmsbro]

Also, I believe that a species could also be considered native if the land was 'made' less than a century ago. After this period any already 'native' species continues to be native.

In addition, any species that becomes locally extinct, but if the niche left behind by its extinction continues to exist up to 20,000 years after the local extinction, then the species is still native to the area.

[Eric in Orlando]

Just because something is "native" doesn't mean it will always survive. Florida has such a wide variety of habitats, from dry, salty coastal regions and near desert-like xeric sandscrub hills to moist forests, wet prairies, mangrove wetlands and cypress swamps. Too often I see things planted because they wanted to use "native" plants and it is in the wrong habitat. A good example is northwest of Orlando they are building the Wekiva Expressway. They just opened a new section. One part goes through very upland, dry rolling hills. Soil is porous sand. So what did they plant? Sweetbay Magnolia and Bald Cypress. Great plants but not for that location. They are watering them to get them established. But after that there is no irrigation. They will be dead after a long drought. No wonder the tolls are so high.

 

[Eric in Orlando]

As for palms, the only one I see maybe becoming a problem is Phoenix reclinata in south FL and the warmer parts of central FL. This is because of its potential size in a wild situation where it grows unpruned. It can become a sold mass and crowd out native vegetation. Further north hardier Phoenix reclinata hybrids might be similar in central FL. But I think so far they are naturalizing in wild areas adjacent to urban situations. 

[ck_in_fla]

I moved into my current home in December of 1983.  In early 1984, I started planting small trees in the yard.  At that time, my parents lived in South East Orlando.  They had 14 acres with a totally enclosed lake.  Along the far shore of the lake were many Syagrus romanzofflana (aka Queen palms).  With abundant irrigation (the lake), most of these were so large, I couldn't get my arms around the trunks.  I always viewed them as what "real" Queen palms should look like.  They were huge!

Well, in early 1984, I dig up a few small Queen palms from the far side of my parent's lake and planted them in my yard.

Fast forward to 2018...

Now I have four Queen palms in my front yard that are growing in a cluster all arching away from each other.  A couple of these are 70 to 80 feet tall.  There are also two tall Queen palms on the other side of the front yard.  These are approaching 40 feet in height.  All of these bloom profusely and the seeds are spread by birds and squirrels.  I have noticed Queen palms growing in places where they were obviously not planted by humans.  My next door neighbor has two in her front yard and at least two in her back yard.  I have one growing in my back yard that I didn't plant.  All of these no doubt originated from seed from my original trees.

So, Queen palms are definitely naturalizing here in Winter Springs, Florida.  :-)

 

[sonoranfans]

I think invasive refers to plants that can out compete native species.  If a plant self propagate and thereby reduce populations/propagation of a native, its generally considered invasive.  

[Matthew92]

There are quite some impressive naturalized thickets of Livistona chinensis in areas along the main interstate heading south into Orlando with a Syagrus r. mixed in here and there as well.

[Moose]

3 hours ago, Eric in Orlando said:

As for palms, the only one I see maybe becoming a problem is Phoenix reclinata in south FL and the warmer parts of central FL. This is because of its potential size in a wild situation where it grows unpruned. It can become a sold mass and crowd out native vegetation. Further north hardier Phoenix reclinata hybrids might be similar in central FL. But I think so far they are naturalizing in wild areas adjacent to urban situations. 

Case in point, the old zoo property at Crandon Park on Key Biscayne. Phoenix reclinata is a solid mass gone unchecked by human intervention.