DOCSLIB.ORG

Proceedings-Symposium on Cheatgrass Invasion, Shrub Die-Off

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Proceedings-Symposium on Cheatgrass Invasion, Shrub Die-Off THE FIRE EFFECTS INFORMATION SYSTEM: A TOOL FOR SHRUB INFORMATION MANAGEMENT Anne F. Bradley ABSTRACT Effects Information System or FEIS. FEIS is a computer­ based knowledge management tool designed to store and The Fire Effects Information System (FEIS) is a provide easy access to up-to-date information on the ef­ computer-based, menu-driven encyclopedia offire effects fects of fire and general ecology of plant species, wildlife and general ecological information for plant species, wild­ species, and plant communities. Information is stored in life species, and plant communities. It provides interpret­ the knowledge base as readable text providing a one-step ed, summarized information in an easy-to-use format and process for information retrieval. This is in contrast to will soon be available at any location with computer-to­ simple on-line citation retrieval systems where the user computer communication capabilities. When fully opera­ is still obliged to request and receive pertinent articles tional, FEIS will be national in scope. At present its main and sift through them for useful information. emphasis is on aridland shrubs and associated vegetation. New information is being added on a continuing basis. A list of FEIS contents to date and a sample output are SYSTEM DESCRIPTION included. FEIS has three basic components: the "Builder," the "Query," and the knowledge base. The Builder is the INTRODUCTION program used to enter new information or to edit and update text already entered. Access to the Builder is Forums such as the Wildland Shrub Symposium can limited to biologists or other professionals with there­ provide a valuable means of transmitting scientific infor­ sponsibility of maintaining the knowledge base (at pres­ mation to interested parties. However, important as they ent, these individuals are all Forest Service employees are, they reach only a limited audience. A larger number or cooperators stationed at the Intermountain Fire Sci­ of people may obtain information directly from scientific ences Laboratory, Missoula, MT). Putting information journal papers or through published summaries of re­ into the FEIS requires: (I) making a thorough bibliogra­ search literature or symposia proceedings. In theory, the phic search to identify relevant literature; (2) obtaining literature is accessible to all researchers and managers. the literature; (3) reading and evaluating the reliability The reality is not so simple, particularly for professionals of the literature received; (4) resolving conflicts, where involved in shrubland management. Many managers are possible, between contradictory pieces of information; stationed in isolated areas where access to research re­ (5) synthesizing the information in a written report; sults is slow or difficult. They have only limited time to (6) obtaining review comments from coworkers, supervi­ spend searching for and obtaining publications because sors, and the copy editor; (7) obtaining outside technical of the press of other duties. Research scientists them­ review from recognized experts; and (8) entry of the infor­ selves are finding it more and more challenging to keep mation into the knowledge base. up with the huge volume of reports published each year The Query provides viewing access to all users. The in literally hundreds ofjournals. A frustrating commu­ Query is menu-driven and no special knowledge of com­ nications gap exists between those who do research and puters or their operation is required to run the program. those who want to apply it effectively. On~ method of Users may scan text on a computer screen or request a bridging this gap is to make use of the current trend in file to be printed at their home stations. They are not rapid development and dissemination of computer tech­ able to alter the knowledge base using this program. nology to even the· most remote locations. The knowledge base contains all information input A collaborative effort between the Intermountain Re­ using the Builder, as well as some of the Builder and search Station's Intermountain Fire Sciences Laboratory Query program structural organization. The information and the Computer Science Department of the University in the FEIS is organized in a tree-like hierarchy (fig. 1). of Montana was initiated to develop a way to use com­ A user begins a search at the "root" of the inverted tree puter technology to deliver meaningful information more by making an initial decision to view information in one effectively. The result of this collaboration is the Fire of three basic categories: plant species, wildlife species, or ecosystem. The species or ecosystem of interest may be chosen from a menu of common and scientific names, Paper presented at the Symposium on Cheatgrass Invasion, Shrub Die­ or may be accessed by typing in the scientific name or a Off, and Other Aspects of Shrub Biology and Management, Las Vegas, NV, six- or seven-letter abbreviation (see appendix A). Plant April 5-7, 1989. Anne F. Bradley is an Ecologist, Intermountain Research Station, taxonomic nomenclature changes at intervals and the Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Intermountain Fire system permits access to a number of species by more Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT 59807. 263 This file was created by scanning the printed publication. Errors identified by the software have been corrected; however, some errors may remain. LEGEND: 0 FRAME / RELATIONSHIP (COMPONENT LINK) «0 MULTIPLE OCCURRENCES OF FRAMES OF THE SAME TYPE AND SUBSTRUCTURE Figure 1-Structure of fire effects information system. than one name. For example, information on bluebunch managing particular species or ecosystems have insights wheatgrass may be accessed by using the name Agropyron that can help their successors do a better job. Their valu­ spicatum or the more recent designation Pseudoroegneria able insights can be integrated into the system informa­ spicata. Information on each species or ecosystem is sub­ tion. For example, the Case Studies section in the Fire divided into topical areas. For example, the plant species Effects topical area (Appendix B) can potentially provide category contains information on plant distribution and a place to record the conditions that lead to successful fire occurrence, value and use, general botanical characteris­ application in different communities, whether this infor­ tics,· adaptations to fire, and fire effects. Each of these mation resides in the published literature or not. topical areas is further subdivided. Within the general The system is written in contmon LISP programming botanical and ecological characteristics topical area, one language. This language afforded greater flexibility may view a general text description of the plant's mor­ than others during program development because of phology and ecology, plant regeneration, site characteris­ some unique characteristics. Coded functions are inter­ tics, successional status, seasonal development, and a preted rather than compiled, allowing them to be tested characterization of the species using the lifeform classifi­ individually before being incorporated into the main pro­ cations developed by Raunkiaer (1934). An example of gram structure. Unlike FORTRAN and COBOL, a pro­ FEIS output is included in appendix B. grammer does not have to specify in advance the sizes All topical areas include a list of cited references. This and types of data to be handled. We found this to be a is an important feature, permitting the user to locate the useful feature as the scope of the FEIS project evolved. original source material if more detailed information is FEIS is an object-oriented, frame-based, knowledge-based needed. Complete citations of the literature used for each system. For those interested, further discussion of FEIS species or ecosystem summary are stored in a separate structure and development may be found in Fischer and computer bibliographi~ file that will also be accessible to Wright (1987). users when the system is fully implemented. The same knowledge base is accessed by both the Builder and the Query so that any updates made to the system are imme­ POTENTIAL USES OF THE SYSTEM diately available to users. Information in the system at Although the program's main focus is the effects of fire present is current to 1986 or later, depending on the on species or ecosystems, much of the information is ap­ species. plicable to other resource management needs. During FEIS has the unique potential to "capture" good in­ early development of the program, the prototype system formation that is rarely published in the scientific lit­ was demonstrated at several dozen field locations in erature. Professionals who have spent their careers Arizona, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, South Dakota, and 264 Utah. The participants listed the following potential SYSTEM STATUS uses ofFEIS: To date, the FEIS prototype system contains infor­ prescribed fire plans mation on 212 plant species, predominantly those that fire rehabilitation plans occur in arid shrublands. Also included are descriptions escaped fire analysis of 10 sagebrush cover types and eight wildlife species. land use plans Appendix A includes the current species list. A break­ exotic species control plans down of plant species lifeform by ecosystem is presented environmental assessments and impact statements in table 1. More entries are being made on a continuing vegetation management plans (range, wildlife basis. habitat, and silvicultural prescriptions) The prototype is being tested by managers
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ANTC Environmental Assessment
    U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-NV-B010-2013-0024-EA Telecommunication Facilities at Kingston, Dyer, and Hickison Summit July 2013 Applicant: Arizona Nevada Tower Corporation 6220 McLeod Drive Ste. 100 Las Vegas, Nevada 89120 Battle Mountain District Bureau of Land Management 50 Bastian Road Battle Mountain, Nevada 89820 Table of Contents Page Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Background 1 1.3 Identifying Information 2 1.4 Location of Proposed Action 2 1.5 Preparing Office 2 1.6 Case File Numbers 2 1.7 Applicant 2 1.8 Proposed Action Summary 3 1.9 Conformance 3 1.10 Purpose & Need 3 1.11 Scoping, Public Involvement & Issues 4 Chapter 2 Proposed Action & Alternatives 11 2.1 Proposed Action 11 2.1.1 Best Management Practices 13 2.2 No Action Alternative 13 2.3 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Analysis 14 Chapter 3 Affected Environment & Environmental Consequences 15 3.1 Project Site Descriptions 15 3.2 Issues 16 3.2.1 Air Quality 18 3.2.1.1 Affected Environment 18 3.2.1.2 Environmental Consequences 18 3.2.2 Cultural/Historical Resources 18 3.2.2.1 Affected Environment 18 3.2.2.2 Environmental Consequences 18 3.2.3 Noxious Weeds/Invasive Non-native Plants 19 3.2.3.1 Affected Environment 19 3.2.3.2 Environmental Consequences 20 3.2.4 Native American Religious Concerns 20 3.2.4.1 Affected Environment 20 3.2.4.2 Environmental Consequences 20 3.2.5 Migratory Birds 21 3.2.5.1 Affected Environment 21 3.2.5.2 Environmental Consequences 22 3.2.6 Solid/Hazardous
    [Show full text]
  • "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."
    Intro 1996 National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands The Fish and Wildlife Service has prepared a National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary (1996 National List). The 1996 National List is a draft revision of the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary (Reed 1988) (1988 National List). The 1996 National List is provided to encourage additional public review and comments on the draft regional wetland indicator assignments. The 1996 National List reflects a significant amount of new information that has become available since 1988 on the wetland affinity of vascular plants. This new information has resulted from the extensive use of the 1988 National List in the field by individuals involved in wetland and other resource inventories, wetland identification and delineation, and wetland research. Interim Regional Interagency Review Panel (Regional Panel) changes in indicator status as well as additions and deletions to the 1988 National List were documented in Regional supplements. The National List was originally developed as an appendix to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al.1979) to aid in the consistent application of this classification system for wetlands in the field.. The 1996 National List also was developed to aid in determining the presence of hydrophytic vegetation in the Clean Water Act Section 404 wetland regulatory program and in the implementation of the swampbuster provisions of the Food Security Act. While not required by law or regulation, the Fish and Wildlife Service is making the 1996 National List available for review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • <I>Elymus Lanceolatus</I>
    Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU Forage and Range Research Laboratory Publications Forage and Range Research Laboratory 11-22-2018 Comparison of Space-Plant Versus Sward Plot Selection in Thickspike Wheatgrass (Elymus lanceolatus) Joseph G. Robins Utah State University, [email protected] Kevin B. Jensen Utah State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/forage_pubs Part of the Agriculture Commons, and the Plant Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Robins JG, Jensen KB. Comparison of space‐plant versus sward plot selection in thickspike wheatgrass (Elymus lanceolatus). Plant Breed. 2018;00:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/pbr.12662 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Forage and Range Research Laboratory at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Forage and Range Research Laboratory Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Received: 28 August 2018 | Revised: 1 October 2018 | Accepted: 7 October 2018 DOI: 10.1111/pbr.12662 ORIGINAL ARTICLE Comparison of space‐plant versus sward plot selection in thickspike wheatgrass (Elymus lanceolatus) Joseph G. Robins | Kevin B. Jensen USDA Forage and Range Research Laboratory, Utah State University, Logan, Abstract Utah Thickspike wheatgrass (Elymus lanceolatus [Scribn. & J.G. Sm.] Gould) is an important Correspondence native perennial grass species used for rangeland revegetation in North America. Joseph G. Robins, USDA Forage and Range Plant breeding efforts relying on space‐plant evaluations have resulted in limited Research Laboratory, Utah State University, Logan, UT. improvement in this species.
    [Show full text]
  • KALMIOPSIS Journal of the Native Plant Society of Oregon
    KALMIOPSIS Journal of the Native Plant Society of Oregon Kalmiopsis leachiana ISSN 1055-419X Volume 20, 2013 &ôùĄÿĂùñü KALMIOPSIS (irteen years, fourteen issues; that is the measure of how long Journal of the Native Plant Society of Oregon, ©2013 I’ve been editing Kalmiopsis. (is is longer than I’ve lived in any given house or worked for any employer. I attribute this longevity to the lack of deadlines and time clocks and the almost total freedom to create a journal that is a showcase for our state and society. (ose fourteen issues contained 60 articles, 50 book reviews, and 25 tributes to Fellows, for a total of 536 pages. I estimate about 350,000 words, an accumulation that records the stories of Oregon’s botanists, native )ora, and plant communities. No one knows how many hours, but who counts the hours for time spent doing what one enjoys? All in all, this editing gig has been quite an education for me. I can’t think of a more e*ective and enjoyable way to make new friends and learn about Oregon plants and related natural history than to edit the journal of the Native Plant Society of Oregon. Now it is time for me to move on, but +rst I o*er thanks to those before me who started the journal and those who worked with me: the FEJUPSJBMCPBSENFNCFST UIFBVUIPSTXIPTIBSFEUIFJSFYQFSUJTF UIFSFWJFXFST BOEUIF4UBUF#PBSETXIPTVQQPSUFENZXPSL* especially thank those who will follow me to keep this journal &ôùĄÿĂ$JOEZ3PDIÏ 1I% in print, to whom I also o*er my +les of pending manuscripts, UIFTFSWJDFTPGBOFYQFSJFODFEQBHFTFUUFS BSFMJBCMFQSJOUFSBOE &ôùĄÿĂùñü#ÿñĂô mailing service, and the opportunity of a lifetime: editing our +ne journal, Kalmiopsis.
    [Show full text]
  • CDFG Natural Communities List
    Department of Fish and Game Biogeographic Data Branch The Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program List of California Terrestrial Natural Communities Recognized by The California Natural Diversity Database September 2003 Edition Introduction: This document supersedes all other lists of terrestrial natural communities developed by the Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). It is based on the classification put forth in “A Manual of California Vegetation” (Sawyer and Keeler-Wolf 1995 and upcoming new edition). However, it is structured to be compatible with previous CNDDB lists (e.g., Holland 1986). For those familiar with the Holland numerical coding system you will see a general similarity in the upper levels of the hierarchy. You will also see a greater detail at the lower levels of the hierarchy. The numbering system has been modified to incorporate this richer detail. Decimal points have been added to separate major groupings and two additional digits have been added to encompass the finest hierarchal detail. One of the objectives of the Manual of California Vegetation (MCV) was to apply a uniform hierarchical structure to the State’s vegetation types. Quantifiable classification rules were established to define the major floristic groups, called alliances and associations in the National Vegetation Classification (Grossman et al. 1998). In this document, the alliance level is denoted in the center triplet of the coding system and the associations in the right hand pair of numbers to the left of the final decimal. The numbers of the alliance in the center triplet attempt to denote relationships in floristic similarity. For example, the Chamise-Eastwood Manzanita alliance (37.106.00) is more closely related to the Chamise- Cupleaf Ceanothus alliance (37.105.00) than it is to the Chaparral Whitethorn alliance (37.205.00).
    [Show full text]
  • Wildflowers Near Boise Cascade (Wenas) Campground (In the Upper
    Wildflowers Near Boise Cascade (Wenas) Campground (in the upper Wenas Valley) Boise Cascade Lands Yakima County, WA from a trip held May 24, 2019 T16N R16E S3; T17N R16E S34, S35 Updated: December 13, 2019 Common Name Scientific Name Family Ferns and Horsetails ____ Fragile Fern Cystopteris fragilis Cystopteridaceae Monocots - Sedges, Rushes, Grasses & Herbaceous Wildflowers ____ Tapertip Onion Allium accuminatum Amaryllidaceae ____ Common Camas Camassia quamash (ssp. maxima ?) Asparagaceae ____ Douglas' Brodiaea Triteleia grandiflora v. grandiflora Asparagaceae ____ Elk Sedge Carex geyeri Cyperaceae ____ Grass Widows Olsynium douglasii v. douglasii Iridaceae ____ Sagebrush Mariposa Calochortus macrocarpus ssp. macrocarpus Liliaceae ____ Yellow Bells Fritillaria pudica Liliaceae ____ Panicled Deathcamas Toxicoscordion paniculatum Melanthiaceae ____ Meadow Deathcamas Toxicosordion venenosum Melanthiaceae ____ Common Western Needlegrass Achnatherum (occidentale ssp. pubescens ?) Poaceae ____ Field Meadow Foxtail Alopecurus pratensis Poaceae ____ Smooth Brome Bromus inermis Poaceae ____ Cheatgrass Bromus tectorum Poaceae ____ Onepike Oatgrass Danthonia unispicata Poaceae ____ Bottlebrush Squirreltail Elymus elymoides Poaceae ____ Bulbous Bluegrass Poa bulbosa Poaceae ____ Bluebunch Wheatgrass Pseudoroegenaria spicata v. spicata Poaceae Trees and Shrubs ____ Blue Elderberry Sambucus cerulea Adoxaceae ____ Stiff Sagebrush Artemisia rigida Asteraceae ____ Gray Rabbitbrush Ericameria nauseosa v. speciosa Asteraceae ____ Shining Oregon Grape Berberis aquifolium Berberidaceae ____ Mountain Alder Alnus incana ssp. tenuifolia Betulaceae ____ Common Snowberry Symphoricarpos albus v. laevigatus Caprifoliaceae ____ Kinnikinnik Arctostaphylos nevadensis ssp. nevadensis Ericaceae ____ Wax Currant Ribes cereum v. cereum Grossulariaceae ____ Fir Abies amabilis or A. grandis Pinaceae ____ Ponderosa Pine Pinus ponderosa v. ponderosa Pinaceae ____ Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesii v. menziesii Pinaceae ____ Snowbrush Ceanothus velutinus v.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Survey of a Prairie Landscape in Montana's Glaciated
    Biological Survey of a Prairie Landscape in Montanas Glaciated Plains Final Report Prepared for: Bureau of Land Management Prepared by: Stephen V. Cooper, Catherine Jean and Paul Hendricks December, 2001 Biological Survey of a Prairie Landscape in Montanas Glaciated Plains Final Report 2001 Montana Natural Heritage Program Montana State Library P.O. Box 201800 Helena, Montana 59620-1800 (406) 444-3009 BLM Agreement number 1422E930A960015 Task Order # 25 This document should be cited as: Cooper, S. V., C. Jean and P. Hendricks. 2001. Biological Survey of a Prairie Landscape in Montanas Glaciated Plains. Report to the Bureau of Land Management. Montana Natural Heritage Pro- gram, Helena. 24 pp. plus appendices. Executive Summary Throughout much of the Great Plains, grasslands limited number of Black-tailed Prairie Dog have been converted to agricultural production colonies that provide breeding sites for Burrow- and as a result, tall-grass prairie has been ing Owls. Swift Fox now reoccupies some reduced to mere fragments. While more intact, portions of the landscape following releases the loss of mid - and short- grass prairie has lead during the last decade in Canada. Great Plains to a significant reduction of prairie habitat Toad and Northern Leopard Frog, in decline important for grassland obligate species. During elsewhere, still occupy some wetlands and the last few decades, grassland nesting birds permanent streams. Additional surveys will have shown consistently steeper population likely reveal the presence of other vertebrate declines over a wider geographic area than any species, especially amphibians, reptiles, and other group of North American bird species small mammals, of conservation concern in (Knopf 1994), and this alarming trend has been Montana.
    [Show full text]
  • Facilitation of Yucca Brevifolia Recruitment by Mojave Desert Shrubs
    UNLV Retrospective Theses & Dissertations 1-1-1998 Facilitation of Yucca brevifolia recruitment by Mojave Desert shrubs Steve B Brittingham University of Nevada, Las Vegas Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/rtds Repository Citation Brittingham, Steve B, "Facilitation of Yucca brevifolia recruitment by Mojave Desert shrubs" (1998). UNLV Retrospective Theses & Dissertations. 950. http://dx.doi.org/10.25669/ms22-zauw This Thesis is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by Digital Scholarship@UNLV with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Thesis in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/ or on the work itself. This Thesis has been accepted for inclusion in UNLV Retrospective Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Scholarship@UNLV. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter free, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted.
    [Show full text]
  • Sagebrush Establishment on Mine Lands
    2000 Billings Land Reclamation Symposium BIG SAGEBRUSH (ARTEMISIA TRIDENTATA) COMMUNITIES - ECOLOGY, IMPORTANCE AND RESTORATION POTENTIAL Stephen B. Monsen and Nancy L. Shaw Abstract Big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata Nutt.) is the most common and widespread sagebrush species in the Intermountain region. Climatic patterns, elevation gradients, soil characteristics and fire are among the factors regulating the distribution of its three major subspecies. Each of these subspecies is considered a topographic climax dominant. Reproductive strategies of big sagebrush subspecies have evolved that favor the development of both regional and localized populations. Sagebrush communities are extremely valuable natural resources. They provide ground cover and soil stability as well as habitat for various ungulates, birds, reptiles and invertebrates. Species composition of these communities is quite complex and includes plants that interface with more arid and more mesic environments. Large areas of big sagebrush rangelands have been altered by destructive grazing, conversion to introduced perennial grasses through artificial seeding and invasion of annual weeds, principally cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum L.). Dried cheatgrass forms continuous mats of fine fuels that ignite and burn more frequently than native herbs. As a result, extensive tracts of sagebrush between the Sierra Nevada and Rocky Mountains are rapidly being converted to annual grasslands. In some areas recent introductions of perennial weeds are now displacing the annuals. The current weed invasions and their impacts on native ecosystems are recent ecological events of unprecedented magnitude. Restoration of degraded big sagebrush communities and reduction of further losses pose major challenges to land managers. Loss of wildlife habitat and recent invasion of perennial weeds into seedings of introduced species highlight the need to stem losses and restore native vegetation where possible.
    [Show full text]
  • Shrubland Ecotones Proceedings RMRS-P-11 September1999 Abstract
    Some pages in this file were created by scanning the printed publication. Errors identified by the software have been corrected; however, some errors may remain. United States Department of Agriculture Proceedings: Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station Shrubland Ecotones Proceedings RMRS-P-11 September1999 Abstract McArthur, E. Durant; Ostler, W. Kent; Wambolt, Carl L., comps. 1999. Proceedings: shrubland ecotones; 1998 August 12–14; Ephraim, UT. Proc. RMRS-P-11. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 299 p. The 51 papers in this proceedings include an introductory keynote paper on ecotones and hybrid zones and a final paper describing the mid-symposium field trip as well as collections of papers on ecotones and hybrid zones (15), population biology (6), community ecology (19), and community rehabilitation and restoration (9). All of the papers focus on wildland shrub ecosystems; 14 of the papers deal with one aspect or another of sagebrush (subgenus Tridentatae of Artemisia) ecosystems. The field trip consisted of descriptions of biology, ecology, and geology of a big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) hybrid zone between two subspecies (A. tridentata ssp. tridentata and A. t. ssp. vaseyana) in Salt Creek Canyon, Wasatch Mountains, Uinta National Forest, Utah, and the ecotonal or clinal vegetation gradient of the Great Basin Experimental Range, Manti-La Sal National Forest, Utah, together with its historical significance. The papers were presented at the 10th Wildland Shrub Symposium: Shrubland Ecotones, at Snow College, Ephraim, UT, August 12–14, 1998. Keywords: wildland shrubs, ecotone, hybrid zone, population biology, community ecology, restoration, rehabilitation. Acknowledgments The symposium, field trip, and subsequent publication of these proceedings were facilitated by many people and organizations.
    [Show full text]
  • National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands 1996
    National List of Vascular Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary Indicator by Region and Subregion Scientific Name/ North North Central South Inter- National Subregion Northeast Southeast Central Plains Plains Plains Southwest mountain Northwest California Alaska Caribbean Hawaii Indicator Range Abies amabilis (Dougl. ex Loud.) Dougl. ex Forbes FACU FACU UPL UPL,FACU Abies balsamea (L.) P. Mill. FAC FACW FAC,FACW Abies concolor (Gord. & Glend.) Lindl. ex Hildebr. NI NI NI NI NI UPL UPL Abies fraseri (Pursh) Poir. FACU FACU FACU Abies grandis (Dougl. ex D. Don) Lindl. FACU-* NI FACU-* Abies lasiocarpa (Hook.) Nutt. NI NI FACU+ FACU- FACU FAC UPL UPL,FAC Abies magnifica A. Murr. NI UPL NI FACU UPL,FACU Abildgaardia ovata (Burm. f.) Kral FACW+ FAC+ FAC+,FACW+ Abutilon theophrasti Medik. UPL FACU- FACU- UPL UPL UPL UPL UPL NI NI UPL,FACU- Acacia choriophylla Benth. FAC* FAC* Acacia farnesiana (L.) Willd. FACU NI NI* NI NI FACU Acacia greggii Gray UPL UPL FACU FACU UPL,FACU Acacia macracantha Humb. & Bonpl. ex Willd. NI FAC FAC Acacia minuta ssp. minuta (M.E. Jones) Beauchamp FACU FACU Acaena exigua Gray OBL OBL Acalypha bisetosa Bertol. ex Spreng. FACW FACW Acalypha virginica L. FACU- FACU- FAC- FACU- FACU- FACU* FACU-,FAC- Acalypha virginica var. rhomboidea (Raf.) Cooperrider FACU- FAC- FACU FACU- FACU- FACU* FACU-,FAC- Acanthocereus tetragonus (L.) Humm. FAC* NI NI FAC* Acanthomintha ilicifolia (Gray) Gray FAC* FAC* Acanthus ebracteatus Vahl OBL OBL Acer circinatum Pursh FAC- FAC NI FAC-,FAC Acer glabrum Torr. FAC FAC FAC FACU FACU* FAC FACU FACU*,FAC Acer grandidentatum Nutt.
    [Show full text]
  • Master Plant List for Texas Range and Pasture Plant
    MASTER PLANT LIST FOR TEXAS RANGE AND RS1.044 PASTURE PLANT IDENTIFICATION CONTEST MASTER PLANT LIST NAME OF PLANT SEASON OF LONGEVITY GROWTH ORIGIN ECONOMIC VALUE Latin Names are for reference only WILDLIFE GRAZING GRASSES Annual Perennial Cool Warm Native Introduced Good Fair Poor Good Fair Poor Poison 1 Alkali sacaton Sporobolus airoides X X X X X 2 Bahiagrass Paspalum notatum X X X X X 3 Barnyardgrass Echinocloa crusgalli var. crusgalli X X X X X 4 Beaked panicum Panicum anceps X X X X X 5 Bermudagrass Cynodon dactylon X X X X X 6 Big bluestem Adropogon gerardii X X X X X 7 Black grama Bouteloua eriopoda X X X X X 8 Blue grama Bouteloua gracilis X X X X X 9 Broomsedge bluestem Andropogon virginicus X X X X X 10 Brownseed paspalum Paspalum plicatulum X X X X X 11 Buffalograss Buchloe dactyloides X X X X X 12 Buffelgrass Pennisetum ciliare X X X X X 13 Burrograss Scleropogon brevifolius X X X X X 14 Bush muhly Muhlenbergia porteri X X X X X 15 California cottontop Digitaria californica X X X X X 16 Canada wildrye Elymus canadensis X X X X X 17 Common carpetgrass Axonopus affinis X X X X X 18 Common curlymesquite Hilaria belangeri X X X X X 19 Dallisgrass Paspalum dilatatum X X X X X 20 Eastern gamagrass Tripsacum dactyloides X X X X X 21 Fall witchgrass Leptoloma cognatum X X X X X 22 Florida paspalum Paspalum floridanum X X X X X 23 Green sprangletop Leptochloa dubia X X X X X 24 Gulf cordgrass Spartina spartinae X X X X X 25 Hairawn muhly Muhlenbergia capillaris X X X X X 26 Hairy grama Boutelous hirsuta X X X X X 27 Hairy tridens Erioneuron pilosum X X X X X 28 Hall panicum Panicum hallii var.
    [Show full text]