Population Dynamics of Humboldt Bay Wallflower (Erysimum Menziesii) Over Three Decades on the North Spit of Humboldt Bay, California Andrea J

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Population Dynamics of Humboldt Bay Wallflower (Erysimum Menziesii) Over Three Decades on the North Spit of Humboldt Bay, California Andrea J Population Dynamics of Humboldt Bay wallflower (Erysimum menziesii) over three decades on the North Spit of Humboldt Bay, California Andrea J. Pickart, Annie Eicher, and Laurel Goldsmith U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service October 2018 INTRODUCTION Menzies’ wallflower (Erysimum menziesii) is a monocarpic perennial in the Brassicaceae restricted to early successional coastal dune habitats in Humboldt, Mendocino, and Monterey Counties, California. The current taxonomic treatment (Al-Shehbaz 2012) combines the different geographic populations as a single species, however, recent genetic work supports subspecies status for the Humboldt Bay population (Vorobik 2015), and it has been previously separated as Erysimum menziesii ssp. eurekense (Hickman 1993). Hereafter, we refer to the Humboldt Bay population as Humboldt Bay wallflower, by the genus name Erysimum or the common name “wallflower.” Humboldt Bay wallflower was listed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as an endangered species in 1992, with the recognized threats of invasive species displacement, recreational impacts, and lack of protected habitat (USFWS 1998). The wallflower is found only in the semi-stable foredune zone in the Abronia latifolia – Ambrosia chamissonis herbaceous alliance, also known as dune mat (Sawyer et al. 2005). This low-growing herbaceous community is characterized by relatively low cover (Pickart and Barbour 2007) in which wallflower assumes a patchy distribution. On the North Spit of Humboldt Bay, dune mat has been highly impacted by the spread of invasive species including: European beachgrass (Ammophila arenaria), ice plant (Carpobrotus edulis and C. edulis x C. chilensis), yellow bush lupine (Lupinus arboreus), and the annual grasses ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus) and rattlesnake grass (Briza maxima) (Pickart and Sawyer 1998). These species readily invade the sparse dune mat community, creating a dense canopy cover negatively correlated with wallflower presence (Duebendorfer 1992). Wallflower germinates in fall/winter following the onset of winter rains (Pickart et al. 2000) and then persists as a vegetative rosette for an average of three years before bolting (Pickart and Sawyer 1998) and flowering in late winter to early spring once it reaches a critical size threshold (Berg 1986). Fruits mature in summer, and the majority disperse close to the maternal plant in fall and winter. However, longer distance dispersal can also occur through a tumbleweed style of dispersal in which entire fruiting plants become dislodged and are transported by wind (Pickart and Sawyer 1998). There is no persistent seed bank, although some seeds remain viable in above-ground infructescence into a second year (Pickart 2004). Approximately 29% of dispersed seeds emerge and seedling mortality is very high, with only 05- 1.0% of seedlings reaching maturity (Pickart 2004). Mortality is highest during spring and summer months. Plants are subject to white rust disease caused by the biotrophic oomycete Albugo candida, which results in symptoms ranging from isolated white pustules to systemically infected plants in which reproduction is suppressed or prevented (Pickart 2004). A seasonal integral population model using demographic data from four cohorts of wallflower found that interannual variation in demographic rates was correlated with deviations from historical seasonal temperature averages (Schreiber 2015). Notably, fecundity of flowering individuals was lower during warmer winters, correlating with greater white rust disease severity. The model 1 predicted that warmer seasons contribute to lower population growth rates, with implications for a warming climate (Schreiber 2015). Management of Humboldt Bay dune habitats has been occurring for several decades, with the goal of restoration of invaded habitats to the early successional dune mat community through recovery of underlying processes (Pickart 2013), and in some cases with the stated goal of restoring habitat for Humboldt Bay wallflower (Pickart and Sawyer 1998). A survey of the wallflower over the entire North Spit was carried out in 1988 with the goal of establishing population levels, measuring geographic variation in population size, and to establish a baseline for measuring success of future management (Sawyer and André 1990). Since that time, population wide surveys have been carried out on approximately a decadal basis (Pickart et al. 2000). This paper documents results of the most recent (2015) survey and examines population trends over time. METHODS Methods in all surveys followed those established in the original 1988 baseline survey (Sawyer and André 1990). The North Spit was divided into 9 biopolitical strata representing geographically separate populations and/or those under separate management jurisdictions (Fig. 1). If a geographically continuous subpopulation was bisected by a management boundary, we created separate strata to allow us to detect differences due to management. Management entity and status for each strata is shown in Table 1. The 2015 survey occurred in the spring during the flowering season. Using a Trimble GPS, large, discrete clusters of wallflowers were mapped as polygons, and isolated occurrences or small clusters were mapped as points. As in previous surveys, plants less than 3 cm in diameter were excluded in order to reduce non-detection error and because plants this small in spring have a low likelihood of survival (Pickart and Sawyer 1998). In each stratum, selected polygons were sampled and others were censused, resulting in a stratified sampling design where the two strata consisted of sampled versus censused occurrences. Small polygons, and large polygons with relatively low plant density were censused, as were all points. We assigned numbers to polygons that were not censused and randomly selected enough polygons to yield a total sample size of 30 plots in each stratum. Circular plots of 1 m radius were then placed systematically within the polygon along east-west transects. Spacing between plots and between transects was consistent within a stratum but varied between strata in order to accommodate 30 plots per stratum. We measured reproductive status and disease incidence of every fifth censused plant (constituting a systematic sample) and of all plants in every other sample plot (constituting a cluster sample). To determine the amount of available habitat at the time of each survey, we used aerial imagery from within a year of each survey date, and heads-up digitized all dune mat. The most recent interval was field verified, which assisted with interpretation of older photographs as well. In order to explore the role of invasive species on available habitat, we heads-up digitized invasive species (Lupinus arboreus, Ammophila arenaria, Carpobrotus spp., and annual grasses) for the most recent time interval only. 2 Figure 1. Map of the North Spit Humboldt Bay showing location of strata. Table 1. Ownership and management status of strata. Stratum Name Ownership Management Status BLM Wetland Protection Area BLM Protected, unmanaged BLM Endangered Plant Protection Area BLM Protected, managed Eureka Dunes Protected Area City of Eureka Protected, unmanaged Eureka Airport City of Eureka Unprotected, unmanaged Samoa Industrial Private Unprotected, unmanaged Samoa Dunes Pending and current Protected, unmanaged public ownership Humboldt Coastal Nature Center Friends of the Dunes Protected, managed Ma-le’l Dunes CMA BLM, USFWS Protected, managed Lanphere Dunes USFWS Protected, managed Bair addition USFWS Protected, managed 3 ANALYSIS We used simple random sampling formulas (Arnab 2017) to estimate subpopulation totals and standard errors for sampled polygons by substrata (sampled portions of each stand). We then added the census totals to the sampling estimate to estimate the size of each subpopulation. Simple random sampling formulas for proportions were used to determine the proportions of reproductive and rust-infected plants for the subsample derived from censused strata. Cluster sampling formulas were used to estimate proportions for the subsample derived from sampled strata. Stratified random sampling formulas were used to combine the systematic and cluster estimates for each stratum, and to calculate an estimate for the entire population. RESULTS Population Size The population-wide total has increased exponentially since sampling started in 1988, from approximately 20,000 to more than 133,000 individuals (Fig. 2). However, there was substantial intrapopulation variability, with the Lanphere Dunes and Bair addition subpopulations exhibiting a much higher rate of increase than all other subpopulations (Fig. 3). As of 2015, these two geographically continuous populations represented 64% of the total population but only 30% of the occupied habitat. Density of Erysimum individuals at Lanphere/Bair was 2.7 times greater than the average density elsewhere. 180000 160000 140000 120000 100000 80000 60000 PopulationSize 40000 20000 0 1988 1997 2006 2015 Year Figure 2. Change in population size from 1988-2015 (error bars are standard error) The number of total individuals increased from 1988 to 2015 in all subpopulations other than the BLM Endangered Plant Area (BLM EPPA), the Samoa industrial site (“Mills”), and the Samoa Dunes. 4 Figure 3. Population size over time by stratum (subpopulation). Density The density of individuals has varied by site and over time (Fig. 4). In general, densities have declined over time, with the exception of the Lanphere Dunes and Bair subpopulations,
Recommended publications
  • RESTORATION ACTION PLAN MARINA DUNES PRESERVE Marina, California
    RESTORATION ACTION PLAN MARINA DUNES PRESERVE Marina, California Prepared for: Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District 4860 Carmel Valley Road Carmel, CA 93923 Prepared by: Burleson Consulting Inc. 1900 Garden Road, Suite 210 Monterey, CA 93940 March 2021 This page intentionally left blank Restoration Action Plan, Marina Dunes Preserve CONTENTS CONTENTS ..........................................................................................................................................i APPENDICES ...................................................................................................................................... ii ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................................... iii 1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Setting ........................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Purpose ......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Approach ....................................................................................................................................... 2 2. UPDATED BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES .............................................................................. 3 2.1 Weed Eradication and Control .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Coastal Dunes
    BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES OF THE DEL MONTE FOREST COASTAL DUNES DEL MONTE FOREST PRESERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN Prepared for: Pebble Beach Company Post Office Box 1767 Pebble Beach, California 93953-1767 Contact: Mark Stilwell (831) 625-8497 Prepared by: Zander Associates 150 Ford Way, Suite 101 Novato, California 94945 Contact: Michael Zander July 2001 Zander Associates TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures and Plates 1.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................1 2.0 Overview of Dunes within the DMF Planning Area...................................................2 2.1 Remnant Dunes .......................................................................................................2 2.2 Rehabilitation Area..................................................................................................4 2.3 ESHA Boundary......................................................................................................6 3.0 Relationship to the DMF Plan .....................................................................................8 3.1 Preserve Areas (Area L and Signal Hill Dune) .......................................................8 3.2 Development Areas (New Golf Course and Facilities—Areas M & N).................8 3.2.1 General Design Considerations .......................................................................8 3.2.2 Golf Course Specific Design...........................................................................9 3.2.3 Golf
    [Show full text]
  • Terrestrial and Marine Biological Resource Information
    APPENDIX C Terrestrial and Marine Biological Resource Information Appendix C1 Resource Agency Coordination Appendix C2 Marine Biological Resources Report APPENDIX C1 RESOURCE AGENCY COORDINATION 1 The ICF terrestrial biological team coordinated with relevant resource agencies to discuss 2 sensitive biological resources expected within the terrestrial biological study area (BSA). 3 A summary of agency communications and site visits is provided below. 4 California Department of Fish and Wildlife: On July 30, 2020, ICF held a conference 5 call with Greg O’Connell (Environmental Scientist) and Corianna Flannery (Environmental 6 Scientist) to discuss Project design and potential biological concerns regarding the 7 Eureka Subsea Fiber Optic Cables Project (Project). Mr. O’Connell discussed the 8 importance of considering the western bumble bee. Ms. Flannery discussed the 9 importance of the hard ocean floor substrate and asked how the cable would be secured 10 to the ocean floor to reduce or eliminate scour. The western bumble bee has been 11 evaluated in the Biological Resources section of the main document, and direct and 12 indirect impacts are avoided. The Project Description describes in detail how the cable 13 would be installed on the ocean floor, the importance of the hard bottom substrate, and 14 the need for avoidance. 15 Consultation Outcomes: 16 • The Project was designed to avoid hard bottom substrate, and RTI Infrastructure 17 (RTI) conducted surveys of the ocean floor to ensure that proper routing of the 18 cable would occur. 19 • Ms. Flannery will be copied on all communications with the National Marine 20 Fisheries Service 21 California Department of Fish and Wildlife: On August 7, 2020, ICF held a conference 22 call with Greg O’Connell to discuss a site assessment and survey approach for the 23 western bumble bee.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Resources Report City of Fort Bragg Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrade
    BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES REPORT CITY OF FORT BRAGG WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT UPGRADE 101 West Cypress Street (APN 008-020-07) Fort Bragg Mendocino County, California prepared by: William Maslach [email protected] August 2016 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES REPORT CITY OF FORT BRAGG WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT UPGRADE 101 WEST CYPRESS STREET (APN 008-020-07) FORT BRAGG MENDOCINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR: Scott Perkins Associate Planner City of Fort Bragg 416 North Franklin Street Fort Bragg, California PREPARED BY: William Maslach 32915 Nameless Lane Fort Bragg, California (707) 732-3287 [email protected] Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... iv 1 Introduction and Background ............................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose ......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Scope of Work ............................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Location & Environmental Setting ................................................................................................ 1 1.4 Land Use ........................................................................................................................................ 2 1.5 Site Directions ..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Vascular Plants of the Coastal Dunes of Humboldt County, California
    Humboldt State University Digital Commons @ Humboldt State University Botanical Studies Open Educational Resources and Data 4-2019 Vascular Plants of the Coastal Dunes of Humboldt County, California James P. Smith Jr Humboldt State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.humboldt.edu/botany_jps Part of the Botany Commons Recommended Citation Smith, James P. Jr, "Vascular Plants of the Coastal Dunes of Humboldt County, California" (2019). Botanical Studies. 41. https://digitalcommons.humboldt.edu/botany_jps/41 This Flora of Northwest California-Checklists of Local Sites is brought to you for free and open access by the Open Educational Resources and Data at Digital Commons @ Humboldt State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Botanical Studies by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Humboldt State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. VASCULAR PLANTS OF THE COASTAL DUNES OF HUMBOLDT COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Compiled by James P. Smith, Jr. Professor Emeritus of Botany Department of Biological Sciences Humboldt State University Arcata, California Ninth Edition • August 2019 Amaryllidaceae — Onion or Amaryllis Family F E R N S Allium unifolium •One-leaved onion Dennstaedtiaceae — Bracken Fern Family Anacardiaceae — Cashew Family Pteridium aquilinum var. pubescens • Bracken fern Toxicodendron diversilobum • Poison-oak Ophioglossaceae — Adder’s-tongue Family Apocynaceae — Dogbane or Milkweed Family Botrychium multifidum • Leathery
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating the Effects of Mechanical and Manual
    EVALUATING THE EFFECTS OF MECHANICAL AND MANUAL REMOVAL OF Ammophila arenaria WITHIN COASTAL DUNES OF HUMBOLDT COUNTY ____________ A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State University, Chico ____________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in Biological Sciences ____________ by Ayla Joy Mills Spring 2015 EVALUATING THE EFFECTS OF MECHANICAL AND MANUAL REMOVAL OF Ammophila arenaria WITHIN COASTAL DUNES OF HUMBOLDT COUNTY A Thesis by Ayla Joy Mills Spring 2015 APPROVED BY THE DEAN OF GRADUATE STUDIES AND VICE PROVOST FOR RESEARCH: _________________________________ Eun K. Park, Ph.D. APPROVED BY THE GRADUATE ADVISORY COMMITTEE: ______________________________ _________________________________ Guy Q. King, Ph.D. Kristina Schierenbeck, Ph.D., Chair Graduate Coordinator _________________________________ Colleen Hatfield, Ph.D. ______________________________ _________________________________ Guy Q. King, Ph.D. Adrienne Edwards, Ph.D. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my advisor and committee chair Kristina Schierenbeck. She has given me great advice and assistance throughout the process. I would also like to thank my knowledgeable committee members Colleen Hatfield and Adrienne Edwards. A special thanks to Amber Transou and California State Park’s North Coast Redwood District for providing me with guidance, funding, equipment, and for making this project possible. I’d like to thank my wonderful husband Jason who helped me set up my plots and collect data, even when it was cold and raining. I couldn’t have done it without you. I would like to thank my Mom who helped me financially and emotionally make it through graduate school. I would also like to thank my best friend Krystal Godfrey for always being there to listen to me vent and also for helping collect data.
    [Show full text]
  • Erysimum Menziesii
    http://www.flowershots.net/Brassicaceae.html Erysimum menziesii NEW CROP PROJECT - HORT 5051 BY: CALEB SIMON Taxonomy Erysimum menziesii is federally endangered Brassicaceae family Erysimum menziesii common name is Menzies’ wallflower (Berkeley). In 1992 Erysimum menziesii, was divided into four subspecies 1. E. m. ssp eurekense (Humboldt Bay wallflower) 2. E. m. ssp menziesii (Also known as Menzies’ wallflower) 3. E. m. ssp yadonii (Yadon’s wallflower) 4. E. m. ssp concinnum (curly wallflower) (FWS). This grouping of Erysimum subspecies is collectively known as Menzies’ wallflower. Geographic Distribution North American native. From northern Southern Oregon to central California bioregions include the North Coast and Central Coast Altitude: 0 to 300 meters above sea level (Berkeley). Native Habitat Erysimum is found growing on Coastal fore dunes, headlands and cliffs (Berkeley). On the nearshore dunes and swales Erysimum menziesii grows in association with other low growing plants such as beach sagewort, sand-dune bluegrass, dune goldenrod, beach bursage, coast buckwheat, sand verbena, and beach pea. Non-native plants like iceplant, and yellow lupine grow in the same habitat and prove problematic for Erysimum menziesii establishment (FWS). http://www.fws.gov/arcata/es/plants/menziesWallflower/gallery/large/menziesWallflower7.jpg Taxonomic Description biennial or a short lived perennial 12 inches high and 12 inches wide Flowers blooms February to April (FWS) Yadon’s wallflower blooms from May to June clustered racemes petals are clawed, ranging in color from yellow to orange stigma has 2 lobes (Berkeley). Leaves basal rosettes simple, fleshy, spoon-shaped leaves, cauline leaf margins are entire to lobed (Berkeley) Erysimum menziesii is a ‘semelparous (monocarpic) perennial’; this means that the plant only flowers and produces fruit one time during its life, after that it will die.
    [Show full text]
  • California Native Plant Society – Vascular Plants Marina Dunes State Park
    2006 CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY – VASCULAR PLANTS MARINA DUNES STATE PARK Abronia latifolia - yellow sand verbena Leymus triticoides - beardless ryegrass Abronia umbellata - pink sand verbina Linaria canadensis - toad-flax Achillea millefolium - common yarrow Lolium multiflorum - Italian ryegrass Agoseris apargioides var. apargioides - sandhill dandelion Lotus scoparius - deerweed Ambrosia chamissonis - beach bur Lotus strigosus - Bishop's lotus Amsinckia spectabilis - seaside fiddleneck Lupinus albifrons var. albifrons - silver bush lupine Armeria maritima ssp. californica - sea pink/Calif. thrift Lupinus arboreus - yellow bush/tree lupine Artemisia pycnocephala - beach sagewort Lupinus chamissonis - silver beach lupine Astragalus nuttallii - Gray's locoweed Lupinus nanus - sky lupine/Douglas' annual lupine Atriplex leucophylla - beach saltbush/sea-scale Madia sativa - coast tarweed Avena barbata - slender wild oat Marah fabaceus - man-root/wild cucumber Bromus carinatus - California brome Melilotus indica - Indian melilot Bromus diandrus - ripgut grass Nemophila menziesii - baby blue-eyes Bromus madritensis ssp. rubens - red brome Phacelia ramosissima - branching phacelia Bromus racemosus - smooth-flowered soft cheat Platystemon californicus - cream cups Cakile maritima - sea rocket Poa annua - annual bluegrass Calandrinia ciliata - red maids Poa douglasii - dune bluegrass Calystegia soldanella - beach morning-glory Polygonum arenastrum - common knotweed Camissonia cheiranthifolia - beach evening primrose Polygonum paronychia -
    [Show full text]
  • 5-Year Review of Menzies' Wallflower
    Menzies’ Wallflower (Erysimum menziesii) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Field Office Arcata, California June 2008 5-YEAR REVIEW Species reviewed: Menzies’ wallflower (Erysimum menziesii) TABLE OF CONTENTS I. General Information A. Methodology B. Reviewers C. Background II. Review Analysis A. Application of the 1996 Distinct Population Segment (DPS) Policy B. Recovery Criteria C. Updated Information and Current Species Status 1. Biology and Habitat 2. Five-Factor Analysis D. Synthesis III. Results IV. Recommendations for Future Actions V. References 1 5-YEAR REVIEW Menzies’ wallflower (Erysimum menziesii) I. GENERAL INFORMATION A. Methodology used to complete the review: This review was conducted by David Imper, Ecologist, with the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service or USFWS), based on all information contained in files at that office and provided by other agencies. No comments were received from the public or other agencies in response to the Federal Notice. B. Reviewers Lead Region – Region 8, California and Nevada; Diane Elam, Deputy Division Chief for Listing, Recovery, and Habitat Conservation Planning, and Jenness McBride, Fish and Wildlife Biologist; (916)414-6464 Lead Field Office – Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office; Mike Long (707)822-7201 Cooperating Field Office(s) – Ventura, California C. Background 1. FR Notice citation announcing initiation of this review: Federal Register 71(55):14538-14542, March 22, 2006 2. Listing history Original Listing FR notice: 50 Federal Register 27848-27859 Date listed: June 22, 1992 Entity listed: Erysimum menziesii (species) Classification: Endangered Revised Listing, if applicable: NA 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Investigation Report
    Biological Investigation Report: Humboldt County APN 505-121-031 Survey Dates: March 18 and March 21, 2019 Prepared for Open Door Community Health Centers Arcata, Ca 95521 Contact: Project Manager Laura Kadlecik Tel: (707) 826-8633 x 5165 Prepared by Claire Brown March 28, 2019 Natural Resources Management Corporation 1434 Third Street, Eureka, CA 95501 (707) 442-1735 Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3 Background: Historic Land Use ..................................................................................................................... 3 Wildlife .......................................................................................................................................................... 3 Pre-field Review ........................................................................................................................................ 3 Field Survey ............................................................................................................................................... 4 Survey Results ........................................................................................................................................... 5 Vegetation and Sensitive Plant Species ........................................................................................................ 5 Pre-field Review .......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Thomas Coulter's Californian Exsiccata
    Aliso: A Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Botany Volume 37 Issue 1 Issue 1–2 Article 2 2019 Plantae Coulterianae: Thomas Coulter’s Californian Exsiccata Gary D. Wallace California Botanic Garden, Claremont, CA Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.claremont.edu/aliso Part of the Botany Commons Recommended Citation Wallace, Gary D. (2020) "Plantae Coulterianae: Thomas Coulter’s Californian Exsiccata," Aliso: A Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Botany: Vol. 37: Iss. 1, Article 2. Available at: https://scholarship.claremont.edu/aliso/vol37/iss1/2 Aliso, 37(1–2), pp. 1–73 ISSN: 0065-6275 (print), 2327-2929 (online) PLANTAE COULTERIANAE: THOMAS COULTER’S CALIFORNIAN EXSICCATA Gary D. Wallace California Botanic Garden [formerly Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden], 1500 North College Avenue, Claremont, California 91711 ([email protected]) abstract An account of the extent, diversity, and importance of the Californian collections of Thomas Coulter in the herbarium (TCD) of Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland, is presented here. It is based on examination of collections in TCD, several other collections available online, and referenced literature. Additional infor- mation on historical context, content of herbarium labels and annotations is included. Coulter’s collections in TCD are less well known than partial duplicate sets at other herbaria. He was the first botanist to cross the desert of southern California to the Colorado River. Coulter’s collections in TCD include not only 60 vascular plant specimens previously unidentified as type material but also among the first moss andmarine algae specimens known to be collected in California. A list of taxa named for Thomas Coulter is included.
    [Show full text]
  • Flora-Lab-Manual.Pdf
    LabLab MManualanual ttoo tthehe Jane Mygatt Juliana Medeiros Flora of New Mexico Lab Manual to the Flora of New Mexico Jane Mygatt Juliana Medeiros University of New Mexico Herbarium Museum of Southwestern Biology MSC03 2020 1 University of New Mexico Albuquerque, NM, USA 87131-0001 October 2009 Contents page Introduction VI Acknowledgments VI Seed Plant Phylogeny 1 Timeline for the Evolution of Seed Plants 2 Non-fl owering Seed Plants 3 Order Gnetales Ephedraceae 4 Order (ungrouped) The Conifers Cupressaceae 5 Pinaceae 8 Field Trips 13 Sandia Crest 14 Las Huertas Canyon 20 Sevilleta 24 West Mesa 30 Rio Grande Bosque 34 Flowering Seed Plants- The Monocots 40 Order Alistmatales Lemnaceae 41 Order Asparagales Iridaceae 42 Orchidaceae 43 Order Commelinales Commelinaceae 45 Order Liliales Liliaceae 46 Order Poales Cyperaceae 47 Juncaceae 49 Poaceae 50 Typhaceae 53 Flowering Seed Plants- The Eudicots 54 Order (ungrouped) Nymphaeaceae 55 Order Proteales Platanaceae 56 Order Ranunculales Berberidaceae 57 Papaveraceae 58 Ranunculaceae 59 III page Core Eudicots 61 Saxifragales Crassulaceae 62 Saxifragaceae 63 Rosids Order Zygophyllales Zygophyllaceae 64 Rosid I Order Cucurbitales Cucurbitaceae 65 Order Fabales Fabaceae 66 Order Fagales Betulaceae 69 Fagaceae 70 Juglandaceae 71 Order Malpighiales Euphorbiaceae 72 Linaceae 73 Salicaceae 74 Violaceae 75 Order Rosales Elaeagnaceae 76 Rosaceae 77 Ulmaceae 81 Rosid II Order Brassicales Brassicaceae 82 Capparaceae 84 Order Geraniales Geraniaceae 85 Order Malvales Malvaceae 86 Order Myrtales Onagraceae
    [Show full text]