Controlling Non-Native Invasive Plants in Ohio Forests: Winged Burning Bush (Euonymus alatus)

Known by the scientific name Euonymus alatus, winged burning bush’s native distribution extends from Central China to northeastern Asia, but it has been present in the United States since the mid-1800s. It occurs from as far north as Ontario, Canada; south to Missouri, Kentucky, and South Carolina; and east to New Hampshire (Kartesz, 1999). Introduced as an ornamental shrub, winged burning bush has been prized as a low-maintenance hedge. Its bright-red leaves in the fall provide curb appeal that has made it a popular landscaping choice.

Due to aggressive vegetative spread, mainly by root suckering, winged burning bush can form dense thickets when it spreads into natural areas (Figure 1). This spread is compounded by its abundant fruit production and superb shade tolerance, which allow it to outcompete native plant communities, especially within the understory of woodlands. Because of its adaptability to a variety of soil and sunlight conditions, winged burning bush can also grow in pastures, forest edges, open woods, and roadsides. Described as prodigious seed producers (Fryer, 2009), their seeds are spread primarily by birds. However, studies have shown the seeds to be unpalatable to white-tailed deer. This indicates that winged burning bush may be resistant to browse which provides a competitive advantage in areas with high deer densities (Williams et al., 2008).

As of 2025, winged burning bush is not listed as an invasive plant banned from commercial sale by the Ohio Department of Agriculture (Invasive Plant Species, 2023), and it remains highly obtainable in the nursery trade. However, based on the Ohio Invasive Plants Council’s plant assessment protocol, winged burning bush possesses traits that make it invasive with a high potential for continued spread (Ohio Invasive Plants Council, 2022). Numerous other states in the region have identified winged burning bush as an invasive species, including Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Kentucky, and Indiana. However, similar to Ohio, the sale of winged burning bush is not legally regulated in many Midwest states, thus it remains widely available for purchase.

Identification

Winged burning bush is a woody perennial shrub that can grow to 12 feet tall but typically reaches heights of 8–10 feet. It has dark green, oppositely arranged, elliptical leaves that are finely serrated and generally less than 2 inches in length (Figure 2). The leaves are attached to the twig by very short petioles (stems) (Figure 2). The leaves turn brilliant crimson or purple in the fall (Figure 3). The green-to-brown twigs often form two to four corky wings, especially when young (Figure 4).

In the spring, small yellow flowers emerge in clusters of three from the leaf axils, and fruit begins to grow in the early fall. These small red capsules eventually split, revealing up to four red, berry-like arils that tend to blend in with the red foliage of the winged burning bush (Figure 5). Each of these arils contains up to two seeds which are dispersed by wildlife, especially birds (Swearingen & Bargeron, 2018).

Winged burning bush spreads easily by root suckering, as well as layering. Layering occurs when stems touching the ground produce roots, forming a clone of the parent plant. These vegetative methods of reproduction provide burning bush with a variety of ways to spread.

Ohio contains three native species of Euonymus that may look like winged burning bush:

1. Eastern wahoo Euonymus atropurpureus (found statewide).
2. Running strawberry bush Euonymus obovatus (found statewide).
3. Strawberry bush Euonymus americanus (native to southern Ohio counties).

Since these species can sometimes occupy the same sites as burning bush, proper identification is critical to avoid mistakenly controlling these native plants.

Control Methods

When attempting to control winged burning bush, multiple control tactics may be considered. These tactics vary based upon time of year, size of plants, size of infestation, and the comfort level of the applicator with the control tactic. As with all invasive species management, a plan should be made to evaluate the effectiveness of the treatment to determine if additional control measures are needed.

Mechanical Control

Hand-pulling winged burning bush seedlings can be a practical control option for isolated escapees less than 2-feet tall. Hand-pulling is best conducted when the soil is moist, as it is easier to remove the entire root system along with the upper stems. Hand-pulling is ineffective if portions of the root system remain in the soil. Mowing or brush-hogging can be used to cut back larger infestations of saplings, but either will result in resprouting which must be followed up with an herbicide application to achieve satisfactory control.

Foliar Spraying

Uniformly spraying the leaves, but not to the point of runoff, with a dilute solution of herbicide can be an effective treatment for controlling winged burning bush. Care should be taken to avoid runoff as a result of over-spraying or applying herbicide to avoid damage to non-target species. Foliar application may be effective any time after full development of the leaves in the spring until the leaves begin to turn color in the fall. Foliar spraying tall specimens (above the head of the applicator) should be avoided for the safety of the applicator and to avoid damage to non-target species. Shrubs taller than the applicator may be cut down. Resprouting vegetation may then be treated with a foliar application. Table 1 provides a detailed description of foliar herbicide options. In streamside areas or other wet areas, herbicide labeled for aquatic use is necessary.

Basal Bark Application

This control tactic involves spraying the lower 10–18 inches of the uncut stems with an herbicide and oil-based carrier. A number of common oil-based carriers are available:

• diesel
• kerosene
• fuel oil
• methylated seed oil

The lower portions of the stems should be completely covered but not to the point of runoff. Care should be taken to avoid over-spraying as improper applications can negatively affect nontarget plants. An ideal time of year for basal bark application is from late spring to early fall, though this treatment method may be conducted any time of year if the ground is dry and not frozen. Table 2 provides a detailed description of basal bark herbicide options.

Cut Stump Application

If the shrub's top growth needs to be removed, the desired approach is to cut the stems near the soil line and apply herbicide to the stump. This is an effective treatment method for shrubs with a dense canopy that does not allow effective basal bark application. Either water-based or oil-based herbicides can be utilized for this treatment; however, their application techniques are different.

When applying a water-based herbicide, only the outer cambium layer and sapwood require treatment. To be effective, a water-based application to a cut stump must be conducted within a few minutes of cutting the trunk. Oil-based applications are not nearly as time sensitive. Oil-based applications should be completed prior to stump resprouting. A proper treatment technique for an oil-based herbicide is to treat the sapwood, cambium, and outer bark surface down to the ground level. These applications can be made any time of year if the stumps are dry and not frozen; however, control is often most effective from late spring through early fall. Table 3 provides a detailed description of herbicide options for cut-stump applications.

Management Calendar

Summary

Due to the popularity of winged burning bush as an ornamental shrub and its prevalence in landscape plantings, many opportunities exist for it to invade a variety of disturbed and undisturbed habitats. Once established, it can form dense thickets and negatively impact biodiversity, so an early detection and rapid response strategy should be used to control its spread. This fact sheet provides a coordinated set of actions designed to find and eradicate new and emerging invasive species. Early interventions are likely to be more successful and typically have a lower cost as compared to long-term management of well-established invasive species. For assistance with identification or control methods, contact an Agriculture and Natural Resources Extension educator, professional forester, or other qualified natural resources professional.

Herbicide labels must be followed. Not only are labels the law, but following the label also maximizes the potential for successful control. Remember that new winged burning bush may enter woodlands from existing dormant seeds within the seedbank or by way of wind or songbirds. Additionally, in managed areas, treated stems may resprout. A plan for monitoring treated areas should be followed for at least two years to achieve acceptable levels of control.

Herbicides, like all pesticides, are approved (labeled) for specific uses by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Approved locations, uses, and application methods are listed and described on the pesticide labeling. The herbicides listed in this fact sheet were appropriately labeled at the time of publication. Because pesticide labeling may change at any time, always verify that a particular herbicide is still labeled for your intended use. At the time of this writing, copies of most herbicide labels and safety data sheets could be obtained online at the crop data management system website (cdms.telusagcg.com). Other labels are available through the individual manufacturer’s website. The authors and Ohio State University Extension do not endorse any of the products mentioned and assume no liability resulting from the implementation of these recommendations.

Additional Resources

Download a PDF of this fact sheet.

References

Fryer, Janet L. (2009). Euonymus alatus. Fire Effects Information System.
fs.usda.gov/database/feis/plants/shrub/euoala/all.html

Invasive Plant Species. (2023). Rule 901:5-30-01. Ohio Laws & Administrative Rules, Ohio Legislative Service Commission.
codes.ohio.gov/ohio-administrative-code/rule-901:5-30-01

Kartesz, John T. (1999). A synonymized checklist and atlas with biological attributes for the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. (1st ed). In J. T. Kartesz, & C. A. Meacham. Synthesis of the North American flora, Version 1.0.  North Carolina Botanical Garden.
help.natureserve.org/biotics/content/record_management/Element_Files/Element_Tracking/ETRACK_Vascular_Plant_References.htm

Ohio Invasive Plants Council. (2022). Ohio invasive plant assessment protocol.
oipc.info/uploads/5/8/6/5/58652481/ohio_invasive_plant_assessment_2020.pdf

Swearingen, J., & Bargeron, C. (2018). Invasive plant atlas of the United States. University of Georgia Center for Invasive Species and Ecosystem Health.
invasiveplantatlas.org

Williams, Scott C. Ward, Jeffrey S., & Ramakrishnan, Uma. (2008). Endozoochory by white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) across a suburban/woodland interface. Forest Ecology and Management, 255(3–4), 940–947.
doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2007.10.003