Perhaps some type of tradescantia (spiderwort)?

Could be http://oak.ppws.vt.edu/~flessner/weedguide/arahi.htm or http://oak.ppws.vt.edu/~flessner/weedguide/comco.htm

I saw online that up north they are not fans of it, but finding nothing much about it being a problem in Florida

I'm not sure but thought it was considered a weed.

"A weed is a plant growing where it isn't wanted." I take this a bit further and say a weed is a plant that quickly reseeds itself and establishes a dominance. I have seen some 'weeds' come up in my beds that I wouldn't mind allowing them to grow, but they flower and go to seed within a week or two of sprouting. That is just way too fast for my lazy gardening methods.
As for this plant itself, I don't know the type, but if it is not particularly aggressive, it looks like it could make for a nice groundcover.

Not going to get way into it but that notion that a "weed" is somehow just a plant type where that plant type is unwanted really misses the point that weeds are, by definition, non-native plants, most of which piggy-backed on agriculture's back, which thrive in the disturbed landscapes so common to mankind, agriculture of course being the prime example. Of course, I do realize that nobody cares.

+oM

If nobody cares about a little/lot more information/education, THAT'S a problem.

My part shade back yard is full of it and at first I had no idea what it (wavy leafed basket grass) was. I'll keep it for erosion control and competing out Bermuda grass.

Here's where I learned: http://eattheweeds.com/forum/index.php/topic,2287.msg16516.html#msg16516

it will take over an area pretty fast and yes it reseeds fast. If I see it in my garden OUT it goes! I think it came in with bags of leaves (along with spanish needles). I don't mind the way it looks but I like to have more control than I am going to have with this stuff. And yes chickens do love it.

Hi Laura! Does your basket grass pull up easy? I can kick mine loose with my foot. Funny you mention Spanish needles. I already yanked out all the bidens bipinnata because it was so rampant, but the bidens pilosa snuck up on me. I have so few pollinator flowers I was reluctant to get rid of all the blooming weeds. I am going to be a black eyed susan factory indoors this winter and yank out all those extra bidens next year. :)

Spanish needles ... That is what it is called... I call them the little daisy that the bees love. Lol those damn things grow like crazy and they are all over the place.

Yes, there is a certain butterfly whose life cycle depends on spanish needles but there are enough around here that I don't need to have them in my yard!!!

I told my neighbor, who can't grow grass, to try and grow basket grass. the HOA is after her and she doesn't have the money to "fix" it. I say mulch it in. As it is nothing grows in a large part of her front yard. (Shady yard-sugar sand)

I love this "weed," and for the person who said all weeds are non-native, that is patently false. Many of what we consider weeds are true natives. This one comes in a variegated form that many people grow in their gardens as ground cover. I use this as ground cover because 1) it's free around here -- just take all you want and 2) it chokes out crabgrass and bermuda.

I, too, love this as a ground cover. I think it is pretty, too. I do pull it out of my containers, but maybe it would be a good "mulch" as the roots are so shallow. I must rethink this.

hi

For me i find it only a problem during summer IF there is lost of rain even then other plants will grow through it . Occasionally I havest it and compost .

Much worse are the "weeds" I planted myself Asparagus ferns, Boston ferns wandering jew and oyster plant, mexican petunis phillipine violet And most obnoxious are the vines The one with yellow flowers and bright red seeds

and award for MOST obnoxious is wild morning glory!!lol During summer I often feel like buying a flame thrower lol gary

The term "weeds" is among the most maligned in the vernacular. So, somebody up above disagrees with me? No, they actually disagree with the world of botany! Check it out-weeds are species of non-native plants, most of which arrived here with agriculture and most of which are now maintained by the constant soil disturbance that is agriculture. In truth, nearly all common weed species came to this continent with seeds of crops such as wheat, etc. They didn't get here on their own. And while you, dear reader, can use any word you want-for any intended meaning that you want-that doesn't make you correct. If any word can be assigned any meaning, we really only need one word then, right? Why else would the world of objects be broken down into so many categories?

I know I will convince exactly no one here with this semi-rant. But the word weeds does actually have a specific meaning, even if you don't happen to use it that way.

+oM

On seeing here both language "descriptivists" and "prescriptivists": http://www.pbs.org/speak/speech/correct/prescriptivism/

For years on Gardenweb I've seen debates over terminology perhaps because of the mixed audience, those who would use the academic labels for the purpose of precision and those who would use the vernacular labels for the purpose of expression. (Appropriate Language: Overview)

If I am invited to visit a person's garden, I would be honored, and in that honor I would strive to use that person's choice of academic or vernacular labels. The problem here is that on Gardenweb I never know who I am going to encounter, but one thing I do know, I am more comfortable with those ultimately dispensing with words and digging in elbow deep to transform the man made mono-cultures into oases of biodiversity.

But I catch myself on Gardenweb often just standing around talking with my hands on my hips. So, look what has been spreading right under my feet http://www.dnr.state.md.us/wildlife/Plants_Wildlife/WLBG/images/wlbg_carpet_comp.jpg while I've been babbling on.

Hi SweetMonkeyCheese79, what you've got is Day Flower and is prevalent in my Podocarpus hedge. Sometimes it appears in the garden. That little blue flower is nice and if you like it, a weed it is not. You can always thin it out if it starts crowding out the butterfly plants. It can smother out thin lawn turf but it pulls out easily. Enjoy that pretty blue-flowered crawler!

Wavyleaf Basket Grass, or Oplismenus hirtellus ssp. undulatifolius.

Perhaps in the world of Botany 'Weed' has a very specific definition. But gardeners are not necessarily botonists nor are botonists necessarily gardeners. I looked to make sure, but Merriam-Webster makes no mention of the Botanical definition, only the laymans' multiple definitions. One thing that holds true to our American 'English' is that it is constantly evolving (or devolving) and some words seem to change or lose meaning every year with some new and arguably idiotic words are being defined and considered proper terminology. I am not saying one definition of Weed is more right than another nor am I saying I don't care about the Botanical definition, it is always interesting to learn something new. I am just saying that just because a term is defined one way in one place doesn't mean that it can't be defined another way in another place and neither is more correct than the other. It is often dependent on how the term is used. "Right?"

Sorry, I didn't read the *comment at top of picture about the blue flower not having to do with the weed. Thanks celerygirl for nailing it: besides, I've never seen Dayflower have that wavy leaf.

Michael, rest assured it is not only you that takes exception to some of my rants! I guess I'm a stickler for word meanings, in that, to me, properly structured and used language is a reflection of properly used mentality or thought patterns themselves. But I do realize that where I'm at is not where most people are on this issue.

The reverse is often true as well-people calling especially "native" meadow and prairie plantings "weeds". I think...or at least hope...we can all agree these folks are missing the point. So if I plant a meadow, using all the grass and forb species native to a given area, and somebody else just doesn't "like" how it looks, are we then saying that person is "correct" in saying they are weeds? See what I'm getting at? The looseness of the thinking that goes with such statements is born of lack of awareness or knowledge, in cases such as I describe. The person thinks they are looking at "weeds" but I simply cannot accept that therefore, they are right in calling the plants so. Anyway, I'm not going to change the world here this morning, and besides, we have much that we do agree on!

+oM

There are a lot of people still who think if it isn't grass or a rose bush, then it is a weed. It actually makes the US a bit of a joke in the eyes of European gardeners. It was mentioned by one observer of American yards that, "If it grows more than six inches tall, cut it down and get rid of it." But I would like to think we are slowly changing that perception as people become more aware that a pristine lawn is neither economical nor responsible. Still, there are some stodgy, older people who grew up thinking that a green lawn was about as American as Apple Pie (It' s actually European, French I believe). So gardeners and horticulturalists have been promoting the idea that a weed is simply a plant where you don't want it. They are trying to get it through to people that a yellow flower in the center of the lawn doesn't have to be a bad thing. So they are trying to change the layman's definition of just what a weed is. If gardeners and horticulturalists said that anything non-native is a weed, they would catch backlask from people saying that their rose bush or Bird of Paradise or apple trees are most definitely not weeds becuase most people don't think in purely botanical terms.

Can't say I disagree with any of that. And if, by being in perhaps a bit too much of a hurry to explain myself, I gave the impression that any non-native plant is therefore a weed, well, I also didn't mean that! In my conception, weeds are annual, biennial or perennial plants which are here in N. America solely due to man's influence-primarily agriculture-and which depend upon the constant disturbance that is human civilization for their success. In this conception, a dandelion is a weed. Try to picture the fate of that species if today-right now-all human activity ceased: Sure, there'd be dandelions all over creation, and probably for years to come. But in time, the increasing height of whatever vegetation was left to take over would shade out the surface and make life impossible for dandelions. Maybe not the best example since seeds would still be around for quite some time, and whenever wind or fire cleared an area, dandelions could recolonize that spot. But even seeds don't last forever. In the complete absence of human activity, in time, dandelions would die out. Now I will readily admit, the existence today of so many non-native, exotic invasives all over the place will tend to distort this neat package. I don't believe common buckthorn, for one example, will ever be totally gone from the continent. It's just way too shade-tolerant. So there's that, and I do certainly consider common buckthorn to be a weed, as well as a scourge and a few other choice words I could sprinkle in here!

Meanwhile, the 6 or 8 thousand Norway spruce I've planted up on my land in N. Wisconsin, along with other tree types....I do not consider weeds. So, somebody sure could poke holes in my definition. But again, in my conception-and it's not just "mine"-weeds are associated with agriculture...not having had any other mans of getting here, let alone becoming so successful.

One of the things I do for my job is work with our city's stormwater engineers, helping to manage our large number of sites. Before I got onboard with this group, they had been led down the "native vegetation" pathway, which at least in the upper midwest always means only one thing-prairies! So even though this part of Wisconsin was heavily forested prior to European civilization getting here, quite a number of practitioners can't think of any plant community type when the words native vegetation are uttered. So a huge part of my goal has been to expand this concept. We plant pockets of things like tamarack and N. white cedar trees, we install red-osier dogwood shrubs-all things that are, in my conception, far more "native" than the prairie plant community which after all, is really more a southern or central plains thing. There were pockets of prairie up here, not so much where I'm at, but to our south and west, but these were ALL here because of the practice of Indians setting the land ablaze. So, what's really "natural"? I better quit. Obviously, I could write about this stuff all day! But I was going to say, to many of the folks viewing one of our prairie plantings (not prairie "restorations", please), all they see are weeds. They are not correct, just because they don't understand what they're looking at.

+oM

I read a quote once where an Englishman said that only in America did we spend billions of dollars to grow a crop we could not eat. He was talking about lawns. I watch a lot of British garden shows, and find that most of their houses have small courtyards, if any yards at all and only the very wealthy have what we consider real lawns. I think lawns are a waste, and applaud the movement to allow people to grow food instead of lawns. Lawn maintenance is a pure waste of money, which is why I'm turning every bit of ground I have to work with here in my apartment (which is quite a bit for an apartment) into ornamental or edible gardens.

As an early member of the lawn-haters group, I've come full-circle to where now, as often as not, I find myself defending the practice of having lawns in our landscapes. But.....it's all a matter of degree. When I look at the typical industrial park areas, each business with its enormous lawn that never gets used for anything, that's a waste. But a smallish lawn as a part of a residential landscape makes perfect sense to me. What other plant community type can you walk on? But that's just it...I tend to think of lawns as pathways to other garden features, not the main show itself.

+oM

I think the difference is the use of the terms turf or lawn (not to start another debate of terminology! :). Turf grass isn't the devil. Not by a long shot. It provides good places for kids to play, for dogs to walk, a place to set up a cooling sprinkler in summer, a place to lay in the cool grass and watch clouds and on and on. But unless you frequently host weddings or carnivals, expansive lawns are just time and money sinks for no purpose other than boosting one's own ego. But that's just my opinion.

Haha, I can see my evil influence spreading across yet another one of Houzz's boards! No actually Michael, we're in complete agreement. Lawns can provide landscape services not available from any other type of planting, and you did a good job of laying that out. And also in agreement, it's the proliferation of giant lawns which make no sense in today's landscape. I get it-the need for early man to see what's sneaking up on him. But really, is that where we're at as a society? No, I wouldn't think so. I mentioned the never-gets-used commercial lawns and another one is the giant house out in the new subdivision with the giant lawn, one or two token trees-probably non-native types that will never provide any shade-some clumps of Knockout roses with a backdrop of feather reed grass, some Rudbeckias and done! Oh, let's not forget the irrigation system (Hey, I'm in Wisconsin, not the desert!), the lawncare company's van parked out front, the monthly treatments (whether the lawn needs them or not)...you get the picture. Such an incredible waste.

It will be interesting to see if today's young folk will fall into this trap. They seem not to care about some of the things that our previous generations managed to get caught up in. Food gardening, for one example, is much higher on their list. Oh, how wonderful it would be to see all of that useless turf getting converted into other types of plantings.

+oM

Lawns do not have to be turf grass. Many people are turning to ground covers that are just as amenable to children playing and dogs walking and laying down to look at stars. Turf grass is nice, but it's just too expensive to maintain and takes too many chemicals. But if you aren't into gardening, it's better to have turf grass to prevent soil erosion than it is to have bare ground.

"It will be interesting to see if today's young folk will fall into this
trap. They seem not to care about some of the things that our previous
generations managed to get caught up in. Food gardening, for one
example, is much higher on their list. Oh, how wonderful it would be to
see all of that useless turf getting converted into other types of
plantings."

I don't know about how much hope the youth of today give me. Sometimes when watching certain shows, I get a feeling of hope, but when I pass by the high schools or head up to Gainesville (home of UF) and see all the gas-guzzling cars and trucks driven by the students, I get the feeling that the shows are representing a rather small demographic.

One thing that does give me a little hope is, surprisingly, the nearby retirement community, The Villages. When I first moved to Florida back in '10 and got into gardening in '11, I was noticing how many days a week the gator UTVs were riding on the road verges spraying fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides. Regularly every week the sprinklers would run, regardless of how much it had been raining. The sprinklers would even run while it was raining. One person tried to defend this to me saying that the sprinklers would only run to keep the retention ponds from flooding, but I witnessed them running during the rain while the retention ponds were very low.

Now fast forward to the winter/spring of 2014/2015 when I went down to visit their newer section around the Brownwood division. I noticed that the road verges there had been planted with native bunch grasses, mimosa and other low water plantings. Through this summer I noticed that the sprinkler systems in the older areas didn't run as often and the gators no longer patrolled with chemicals spraying. They were letting areas of the grass turn brown and adapt to the rainfall and have been slowly increasing the sizes of planted areas. Seeing that a huge 'conservative', money-making community such as The Villages change their ways to more responsible, eco-friendly practices gives me a lot of hope. I no longer drive down their roadways frowning, but feeling hopeful that things are indeed changing.

That said, it is some of the residents of this retirement community who continue to say, "I don't care what some hippy says, I'm going to pay whatever it takes to whoever will take my money to keep having the greenest lawn on the block." And some of them are frowning at the switch from grass to natural plantings.

Dirty, of course you are right that a lawn does not absolutely imply turf. But let's be honest...it almost always does. In addition, and this just might reflect the limits of my knowledge, the list of plant types which can truly withstand foot traffic is short. Oh I know, your creeping thyme inbetween flagstones, that sort of thing. But if we're talking an actual lawn where kids play ball, dogs run around, etc. it is really only certain species of turf grass that can take that abuse. But where foot traffic is less a concern, I really like and appreciate those other groundcover beds and so on. Michael, your word regarding The Villages are most interesting. I know people who want to move there and even though that setup would be no good for me, I get it that it does appeal to many. Good to hear that even an outfit with the mindset that they do have would be seeking to amend their practices, even if only to save $$. Funny how this nation's culture wars now include environment as a key point of departure. We're a weird country!

+oM