Roads and the Reproductive Ecology of Hesperidanthus Suffrutescens, an Endangered Shrub

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Roads and the Reproductive Ecology of Hesperidanthus Suffrutescens, an Endangered Shrub Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU All Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies 5-2013 Roads and the Reproductive Ecology of Hesperidanthus suffrutescens, an Endangered Shrub Matthew B. Lewis Utah State University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd Part of the Animal Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Lewis, Matthew B., "Roads and the Reproductive Ecology of Hesperidanthus suffrutescens, an Endangered Shrub" (2013). All Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 1449. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/1449 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ROADS AND THE REPRODUCTIVE ECOLOGY OF HESPERIDANTHUS SUFFRUTESCENS, AN ENDANGERED SHRUB by Matthew B. Lewis A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in Ecology Approved: __________________________________ ________________________________ Eugene W. Schupp James H. Cane Major Professor Committee Member __________________________________ ________________________________ Thomas A. Monaco Mark R. McLellan Committee Member Vice President for Research and Dean of the School of Graduate Studies UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY Logan, Utah 2013 ii ABSTRACT Roads and the Reproductive Ecology of Hesperidanthus suffrutescens, an Endangered Shrub by Matthew B. Lewis, Master of Science Utah State University, 2013 Major Professor: Eugene W. Schupp Department: Wildland Resources I investigated the pollination ecology of Hesperidanthus suffrutescens, an endangered Utah shrub, as well as the effects that road dust and local plant density may have on successful reproduction. The breeding system study included four pollination treatments to determine the degree of self-compatibility. Flower visitors were collected and probable pollinators were identified. To determine the effects of road dust on reproduction, we measured dust deposition, plant size, and reproduction in plots of increasing distance from an unpaved road. We also measured dust effects on pollination success and stomatal conductance. We determined the number of individuals per plot and the relative isolation of individuals, and measured their reproductive success to determine any significant effects. Reproduction was measured as total fruit set per plant as well as estimates of total plant seeds and plant seed weight (mg). iii The results of the pollination treatments and the identity of pollinators are described in Chapter 2. Both autogamy and geitonogamy (selfing treatments) produced substantially and significantly fewer fruits, seeds, and seeds per fruit than xenogamy (outcrossing treatment). Additionally, outcrossed flowers produced significantly more fruits, seeds, and seeds per fruit than did open control flowers with no difference in mean seed weight. In total, 77 flower visitors were collected over the course of the study. Probable pollinators include several Andrena, Halictus, and Dialictus bees. The effects of road dust on the reproductive success of H. suffrutescens are discussed in Chapter 3. Dust deposition decreased with increased distance from the road and was significantly correlated with decreased fruit set for plants of a given size. Other reproductive metrics showed the same negative patterns although not significantly. The results suggest that dust may disrupt pollination and affect the physiology of plants, resulting in decreased reproduction. Dust deposition did not decrease pollination success of dusted flowers but did negatively impact stomatal conductance of leaves. The main effects of patch size and relative isolation on reproductive success are discussed in Chapter 4. Both patch size and relative isolation had no significant impacts on reproductive success. Increased patch size did indicate negative patterns on reproductive metrics, although not significantly. Similarly, increased isolation indicated increased reproductive success, although not significantly. (130 pages) iv PUBLIC ABSTRACT Matthew B. Lewis We studied the pollination ecology of the endangered Utah desert shrub, shrubby reed-mustard (Hesperidanthus suffrutescens). We also studied the impacts that dust from unpaved roads has on successful reproduction. In addition, we looked at the relationship between the total number of plants, the spacing of plants, and reproduction. We found that shrubby reed-mustard requires pollinators for successful pollination. Pollinators include many small native bees from the genera Andrena, Dialictus, and Halictus. Additionally, we found that reproduction of shrubby reed-mustard is limited, possibly due to scarcity of these bees. We found that dust from the road can decrease successful reproduction of shrubby reed- mustard likely due to a disruption in pollination success. Additionally, this dust can affect the physiology of plants and may also cause some of the reduced reproduction we found. While we did not find any significant effects of the number and spacing of plants on reproduction, the relationships suggest that these measures are important to successful reproduction. Land managers should make sure to conserve shrubby reed-mustard habitat to help conserve this endangered species and its pollinators. In addition, control of dust from unpaved roads should occur in areas with plants nearby. Overall, this study indicates that while the reproductive ecology of shrubby reed-mustard is complex, managers can use these results to assist in the conservation of this endangered Utah shrub. v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would first like to thank my advisor, Dr. Eugene Schupp, for providing me with the opportunity to work on this project. This has been one of my most challenging yet rewarding journeys. Geno’s advice, insights, and scientific mentoring provided me with one of the most memorable experiences I have had. For this, I am very grateful. Secondly, I would like to thank my committee members, Dr. Thomas Monaco and Dr. James Cane, for their tireless efforts and commitment to the success of this research. Special thanks go to Susan Durham for excellent and insightful statistical advice and Janis Boettinger for logistical advice on dust samples. I would like to thank the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (award 601819G319) and Utah State University’s Utah Agricultural Experiment station and Ecology Center. Thanks to Marsha Bailey, Lana Barr, and especially Stephanie White for all of the help with the many administrative details. Many thanks go to friends and colleagues including Drew Rayburn, Jan Summerhays, Alexandra Reinwald, Jesse Poulos, and the many other friends who provided distraction when I needed it most. Thanks to Jessi Brunson for field assistance and logistics and Shannon Kay for taking care of my plant babies while I was in the field. I would also like to thank my family for their support, especially my mom, without whose love and hard work I would not be the person I am today. Finally, special thanks to my wife, Leah, for all of her patience, love, and support. Her help with all the school stress as well as her help at home has made all of my success possible. Thank you all. Matthew B. Lewis vi CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT .....................................................................................................................................................ii PUBLIC ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................................iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............................................................................................................................v LIST OF TABLES....................................................................................................................................... vii LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................................viii CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION TO ROAD DUST AND THE REPRODUCTIVE ECOLOGY OF HESPERIDANTHUS SUFFRUTESCENS, AN ENDANGERED SHRUB...................1 2. REPRODUCTIVE ECOLOGY OF THE ENDANGERED UTAH ENDEMIC HEPERIDANTHUS SUFFRUTESCENS WITH IMPICATIONS FOR CONSERVATION....................................................................................................................8 3. ROAD DUST CORRELATED WITH DECREASED REPRODUCTION OF AN ENDANGERED UTAH DESERT SHRUB (HESPERIDANTHUS SUFFRUTESCENS)..............................................................................................................56 4. THE ROLE OF DENSITY AND PATCH SIZE IN THE REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS OF THE ENDANGERED UTAH DESERT SHRUB HESPERIDANTHUS SUFFRUTESCENS .......................................................................92 5. CONCLUSION.................................................................................................................... 118 vii LIST OF TABLES Table Page 2.1 Generalized linear mixed-model analysis of fruit set ...............................................38 2.2 Generalized linear mixed-model analysis of seed set...............................................38 2.3 Generalized linear mixed-model analysis of seeds per fruit..................................38 2.4 Contingency table showing the frequency and percentage of seeds per fruit categories by treatment.........................................................................................................39
Recommended publications
  • US Fish and Wildlife Service
    BARNEBY REED-MUSTARD (S. barnebyi ) CLAY REED-MUSTARD SHRUBBY REED-MUSTARD (S,arguillacea) (S. suffrutescens) .-~ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service UTAH REED—MUSTARDS: CLAY REED-MUSTARD (SCHOENOCRAMBE ARGILLACEA) BARNEBY REED—MUSTARD (SCHOENOCRAMBE BARNEBYI) SI-IRUBBY REED-MUSTARD (SCHOENOCRAMBE SUFFRUTESCENS) RECOVERY PLAN Prepared by Region 6, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Approved: Date: (~19~- Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions which are believed to be required to recover and/or protect the species. Plans are prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, sometimes with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, State agencies, and others. Objectives will only be attained and funds expended contingent upon appropriations, priorities, and other budgetary constraints. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views or the official positions or approvals of any individuals or agencies, other than the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, involved in the plan formulation. They represent the official position of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service only after they have been signed by the Regional Director or Director as an~roved Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery tasks. Literature Citation should read as follows: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994. Utah reed—mustards: clay reed—mustard (Schoenocrambe argillacea), Barneby reed-mustard (Schoenocrambe barnebyl), shrubby reed—mustard (Schoenacranibe suffrutescens) recovery plan. Denver, Colorado. 22 pp. Additional copies may be purchased from: Fish and Wildlife Reference Service 5430 Grosvenor Lane, Suite 110 Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Telephone: 301/492—6403 or 1—800—582—3421 The fee for the plan varies depending on the number of pages of the plan.
    [Show full text]
  • December 2012 Number 1
    Calochortiana December 2012 Number 1 December 2012 Number 1 CONTENTS Proceedings of the Fifth South- western Rare and Endangered Plant Conference Calochortiana, a new publication of the Utah Native Plant Society . 3 The Fifth Southwestern Rare and En- dangered Plant Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, March 2009 . 3 Abstracts of presentations and posters not submitted for the proceedings . 4 Southwestern cienegas: Rare habitats for endangered wetland plants. Robert Sivinski . 17 A new look at ranking plant rarity for conservation purposes, with an em- phasis on the flora of the American Southwest. John R. Spence . 25 The contribution of Cedar Breaks Na- tional Monument to the conservation of vascular plant diversity in Utah. Walter Fertig and Douglas N. Rey- nolds . 35 Studying the seed bank dynamics of rare plants. Susan Meyer . 46 East meets west: Rare desert Alliums in Arizona. John L. Anderson . 56 Calochortus nuttallii (Sego lily), Spatial patterns of endemic plant spe- state flower of Utah. By Kaye cies of the Colorado Plateau. Crystal Thorne. Krause . 63 Continued on page 2 Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights Reserved. Utah Native Plant Society Utah Native Plant Society, PO Box 520041, Salt Lake Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights City, Utah, 84152-0041. www.unps.org Reserved. Calochortiana is a publication of the Utah Native Plant Society, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organi- Editor: Walter Fertig ([email protected]), zation dedicated to conserving and promoting steward- Editorial Committee: Walter Fertig, Mindy Wheeler, ship of our native plants. Leila Shultz, and Susan Meyer CONTENTS, continued Biogeography of rare plants of the Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, Nevada.
    [Show full text]
  • Threatened, Endangered, Candidate & Proposed Plant Species of Utah
    TECHNICAL NOTE USDA - Natural Resources Conservation Service Boise, Idaho and Salt Lake City, Utah TN PLANT MATERIALS NO. 52 MARCH 2011 THREATENED, ENDANGERED, CANDIDATE & PROPOSED PLANT SPECIES OF UTAH Derek Tilley, Agronomist, NRCS, Aberdeen, Idaho Loren St. John, PMC Team Leader, NRCS, Aberdeen, Idaho Dan Ogle, Plant Materials Specialist, NRCS, Boise, Idaho Casey Burns, State Biologist, NRCS, Salt Lake City, Utah Last Chance Townsendia (Townsendia aprica). Photo by Megan Robinson. This technical note identifies the current threatened, endangered, candidate and proposed plant species listed by the U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service (USDI FWS) in Utah. Review your county list of threatened and endangered species and the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Conservation Data Center (CDC) GIS T&E database to see if any of these species have been identified in your area of work. Additional information on these listed species can be found on the USDI FWS web site under “endangered species”. Consideration of these species during the planning process and determination of potential impacts related to scheduled work will help in the conservation of these rare plants. Contact your Plant Material Specialist, Plant Materials Center, State Biologist and Area Biologist for additional guidance on identification of these plants and NRCS responsibilities related to the Endangered Species Act. 2 Table of Contents Map of Utah Threatened, Endangered and Candidate Plant Species 4 Threatened & Endangered Species Profiles Arctomecon humilis Dwarf Bear-poppy ARHU3 6 Asclepias welshii Welsh’s Milkweed ASWE3 8 Astragalus ampullarioides Shivwits Milkvetch ASAM14 10 Astragalus desereticus Deseret Milkvetch ASDE2 12 Astragalus holmgreniorum Holmgren Milkvetch ASHO5 14 Astragalus limnocharis var.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management
    U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Environmental Assessment UT- 080 – 06 – 280 October OIL SHALE RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION PROJECT WHITE RIVER MINE, UINTAH COUNTY, UTAH U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Vernal Field Office 170 South 500 East Vernal, Utah 84078 Phone: 435-781-4400 Fax: 435-781-4410 United States Department of the Interior BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT Vernal Field Office 170 South 500 East Vernal, UT 84078 (435) 781-4400 Fax: (435) 781-4410 IN REPLY REFER TO: UT-080-06-280 September 18, 2006 Dear Reader: Enclosed for your review and comment is the Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Oil Shale Research, Development And Demonstration Project at the location of the former White River Shale Oil Company Mine in Uintah County, Utah. The EA was prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) directing the preparation of the document. The EA describes the three phases of work that would occur to test the ATP retort process, and its ability to extract oil from mined oil shale. The project is located approximately 30 miles south of Vernal, Utah, within Township 10 South, Range 24 East of Uintah County, Utah. The Proposed Action calls for 3 different phases of work. The first phase would consist mainly of hauling stockpiles of oil shale to a retorting demonstration plant in Canada. The second phase would consist of moving a demonstration retort processing plant to the former White River Mine area, processing stockpiles of oil shale that are on the surface, and eventually re-opening the White River Mine, and the commencement of mining of oil shale.
    [Show full text]
  • New Notice Identifies Vertebrate Listing Candidates Protection Recommended for Three Plants
    October 1985 Vol. X No. 10 Department of interior. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Technical Bulletin Endangered Species Program, Washington, D.C. 20240 New Notice Identifies Vertebrate Listing Candidates In the September 18, 1985, Federal Register, the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) issued a "Review of Vertebrate Wildlife," replacing and updating an ear- lier version that appeared in 1982. The main purpose of the new notice is to identify those native U.S. vertebrate taxa—fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals—that are considered candidates for possible addition to the Federal List of Endangered and Threa- tened Wildlife, and to request comments and information that may assist in deter- mining whether or not to actually pro- pose such addition. The identified animals are placed in one of three categories that reflect their biological status: m Category 1 comprises taxa for which g the FWS currently has substantial a information on hand to support the S biological appropriateness of prop- osing to list as Endangered or Threatened. The golden-cheei<ed warbler fDendroica chrysopariaj is one of the 515 vertebrate (continued on page 12) taxa identified as candidates for future listing. Protection Recommended for Three Plants The Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) The plant is a low growing perennial on three sides and posted it as closed to proposed during September to list three with small, oval, greenish-white leaves motor vehicles, ORVs still enter through plants as Endangered. All are restricted that are densely arranged in tight the unfenced side. The Steamboat buck- in range, and are thought to be vulnera- rosettes.
    [Show full text]
  • Inventory of Sensitive Species and Ecosystems in Utah, Endemic And
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
    [Show full text]
  • Schoenocrambe Suffrutescens (Shrubby Reed-Mustard)
    Schoenocrambe suffrutescens (Shrubby Reed-mustard) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation Photo courtesy of Bekee Hotze, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Utah Field Office – Ecological Services West Valley City, Utah 84119 November 2010 5-YEAR REVIEW Schoenocrambe suffrutescens (Shrubby reed-mustard) 1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION 1.1 Purpose of 5-Year Reviews The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) is required by Section 4(c)(2) of the Endangered Species Act (hereafter referred to as the “ESA”) to conduct a status review of each listed species at least once every 5 years. The purpose of a 5-year review is to evaluate whether or not the species’ status has changed since it was listed (or since the most recent 5-year review). Based on the 5-year review, we recommend whether the species should be removed from the list of endangered and threatened species, be changed in status from endangered to threatened, or be changed in status from threatened to endangered. Our original listing as endangered or threatened is based on the species’ status considering the five threat factors described in Section 4(a)(1) of the ESA. These same five factors are considered in any subsequent reclassification or delisting decisions. In the 5-year review, we consider the best available scientific and commercial data on the species, and focus on new information available since the species was listed or last reviewed. If we recommend a change in listing status based on the results of the 5-year review, we must propose to do so through a separate rule-making process including public review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • Revised Biological Assessment for the Utah Greater Sage-Grouse Land Use Plan Amendment and Final Environmental Impact Statement
    Revised Biological Assessment for the Utah Greater Sage-Grouse Land Use Plan Amendment and Final Environmental Impact Statement July 14, 2015 FS_0081605 Revised Biological Assessment for Utah Greater Sage-Grouse Land Use Plan Amendment and Environmental Impact Statement Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 5 Background ................................................................................................................................................... 5 Purpose and Need for GRSG LUP Amendment ........................................................................................... 6 Description of Planning Area ........................................................................................................................ 6 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ........................................................................................... 10 SPECIES CONSIDERED IN THE ANALYSIS ............................................................................................. 10 SPECIES INFORMATION AND CRITICAL HABITAT ............................................................................. 42 A. Wildlife and Fish .................................................................................................................................... 42 Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis)—Threatened ........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2017 Spring Newsletter
    The Penstemaniac NEWSLETTER OF THE AMERICAN PENSTEMON SOCIETY VOLUME 11 NO 2 SPRING 2017 ESTABLISHED 1946 AMERICAN PENSTEMON SOCIETY joined by the UTAH NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY Annual Meeting, June 2-5, 2017 Uintah Conference Center, 313 E 200 S, Vernal, Utah, 435/ 789-8001 www.uintahconferencecenter.com An updated schedule will be available on the American Penste- mon Society (http://penstemons.org) and Utah Native Plant Society (www. unps.org) web sites ahead of the meeting. Schedule Friday, June 2 Uintah Confer- ence Center (address above) Noon–5 pm Registration at the reception desk by the doors in the south lobby. Registration materials will include an updated schedule, de- Uintah Conference Center tailed information about field trips, a key to the penstemons of the area, and information about the field trip leaders and banquet speakers + a baseball cap + Field Trip Sign-up + Waiver of Liability + packet of information from Uintah County Travel & Tourism with area attractions and list of Vernal restaurants 2–pm APS Board Meeting, Split Mt. rooms 1 & 2, main floor of the Conference Center 4–5 pm Poster presentation on the relationships of the presently described varieties of the Pen- stemon scariosus complex, including geographical maps of the distribution of morphological char- acters and molecular relationships across the region; Mikel Stevens, Robert Johnson, Andi Wolfe, Rosa Rodriguez Pena, and Jason Stettler; Mezzanine, second floor of the Conference Center 5–6 pm Get-acquainted Social, appetizers and soft drinks, Mezzanine, second
    [Show full text]
  • Threatened, Endangered and Candidate Plant Species of Utah
    TECHNICAL NOTE USDA - Natural Resources Conservation Service Boise, Idaho and Salt Lake City, Utah TN PLANT MATERIALS NO. 52 January 2013 Revision THREATENED, ENDANGERED & CANDIDATE PLANT SPECIES OF UTAH Derek Tilley, Agronomist, NRCS, Aberdeen, Idaho Loren St. John, PMC Team Leader, NRCS, Aberdeen, Idaho Dan Ogle, Plant Materials Specialist, NRCS, Boise, Idaho (ret.) Casey Burns, State Biologist, NRCS, Salt Lake City, Utah Richard Fleenor, Plant Materials Specialist, NRCS, Spokane, Washington Last Chance Townsendia (Townsendia aprica). Photo by Megan Robinson. This technical note identifies the current threatened, endangered, candidate and proposed plant species listed by the U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service (USDI FWS) in Utah. 2 Table of Contents Introduction 4 Map of Utah Threatened, Endangered and Candidate Plant Species 6 Threatened & Endangered Species Profiles 7 Arctomecon humilis Dwarf Bear-poppy ARHU3 8 Asclepias welshii Welsh’s Milkweed ASWE3 10 Astragalus ampullarioides Shivwits Milkvetch ASAM14 12 Astragalus desereticus Deseret Milkvetch ASDE2 14 Astragalus holmgreniorum Holmgren Milkvetch ASHO5 16 Astragalus limnocharis var. montii Heliotrope Milkvetch ASLIM 18 Carex specuicola Navajo Sedge CASP9 20 Cycladenia humilis var. jonesii Jones’ Waxy Dogbane CYHUJ 22 Glacocarpum suffrutescens Shrubby Reed-Mustard GLSU 24 Lepidium barnebyanum Barneby Ridge-cress LEBA 26 Lesquerella tumulosa or L. rubicundula Kodachrome Bladderpod LERU4 28 Pediocactus despainii San Rafael Cactus PEDE17 30 Pediocactus winkleri Winkler Cactus PEWI2
    [Show full text]
  • Schoenocrambe Suffrutescens (Shrubby Reed-Mustard)
    Schoenocrambe suffrutescens (Shrubby Reed-mustard) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation Photo courtesy of Bekee Hotze, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Utah Field Office – Ecological Services West Valley City, Utah 84119 November 2010 5-YEAR REVIEW Schoenocrambe suffrutescens (Shrubby reed-mustard) 1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION 1.1 Purpose of 5-Year Reviews The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) is required by Section 4(c)(2) of the Endangered Species Act (hereafter referred to as the “ESA”) to conduct a status review of each listed species at least once every 5 years. The purpose of a 5-year review is to evaluate whether or not the species’ status has changed since it was listed (or since the most recent 5-year review). Based on the 5-year review, we recommend whether the species should be removed from the list of endangered and threatened species, be changed in status from endangered to threatened, or be changed in status from threatened to endangered. Our original listing as endangered or threatened is based on the species’ status considering the five threat factors described in Section 4(a)(1) of the ESA. These same five factors are considered in any subsequent reclassification or delisting decisions. In the 5-year review, we consider the best available scientific and commercial data on the species, and focus on new information available since the species was listed or last reviewed. If we recommend a change in listing status based on the results of the 5-year review, we must propose to do so through a separate rule-making process including public review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • Utah Flora: Brassicaceae (Cruciferae)
    Great Basin Naturalist Volume 37 Number 3 Article 1 9-30-1977 Utah flora: Brassicaceae (Cruciferae) Stanley L. Welsh Brigham Young University James L. Reveal University of Maryland, College Park, and Smithsonian Institutuion, Washington, D.C. Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn Recommended Citation Welsh, Stanley L. and Reveal, James L. (1977) "Utah flora: Brassicaceae (Cruciferae)," Great Basin Naturalist: Vol. 37 : No. 3 , Article 1. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn/vol37/iss3/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Western North American Naturalist Publications at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Great Basin Naturalist by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. The Great Basin Naturalist Published at Provo, Utah, by Brigham Young University ISSN 0017-3614 Volume 37 September 30, 1977 No. 3 UTAH FLORA: BRASSICACEAE (CRUCIFERAE) Stanley L. Welsh' James L. Reveal- Abstract.— The mustard family, Brassicaceae (Cruciferae) is revised for the state of Utah. Treated are 155 spe- cies and 44 varieties, including 37 species of introduced weeds or escaped cultivated plants. A key to the genera and species is included, along with detailed descriptions, distribution data, and pertinent comments for many of the taxa. Proposed new varieties are: Lepidium montanum Nutt. var. stellae Welsh & Reveal; L. montanum var. neeseae Welsh & Reveal; Lesquerella hemiphysaria Maguire var. liicens Welsh & Reveal; Physaria aciitifolia Rydb. var. purpurea Welsh & Reveal; and, Tfielypodhtm sagittatum (Nutt.) Endl. in Walp. var. vennicularis Welsh & Reveal. The following new combinations are made: Arabis confinis S.
    [Show full text]