DOCSLIB.ORG

Nontarget Host Utilization of Thistle Species by Introduced Biological Control Agents and Spatial Prediction of Non-Target Feeding Habitats

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Nontarget Host Utilization of Thistle Species by Introduced Biological Control Agents and Spatial Prediction of Non-Target Feeding Habitats University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 12-2009 Nontarget host utilization of thistle species by introduced biological control agents and spatial prediction of non-target feeding habitats Gregory J. Wiggins University of Tennessee - Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss Part of the Plant Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Wiggins, Gregory J., "Nontarget host utilization of thistle species by introduced biological control agents and spatial prediction of non-target feeding habitats. " PhD diss., University of Tennessee, 2009. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/641 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Gregory J. Wiggins entitled "Nontarget host utilization of thistle species by introduced biological control agents and spatial prediction of non-target feeding habitats." I have examined the final electronic copy of this dissertation for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Plants, Soils, and Insects. Jerome F. Grant, Major Professor We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance: Paris L. Lambdin, Jack W. Ranney, John B. Wilkerson Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Gregory James Wiggins entitled “Non- target host utilization of thistle species by introduced biological control agents and spatial prediction of non-target feeding habitats.” I have examined the final electronic copy of this dissertation for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Plants, Soils and Insects. Jerome F. Grant, Major Professor We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance: Paris L. Lambdin Jack W. Ranney John B. Wilkerson Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official student records.) Non-target host utilization of thistle species by introduced biological control agents and spatial prediction of non-target feeding habitats A Dissertation Presented for The Doctor of Philosophy Degree The University of Tennessee, Knoxville Gregory J. Wiggins December 2009 Copyright © 2009 by Greg Wiggins All rights reserved. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I thank my major professor, Dr. Jerome F. Grant, for his guidance and support throughout this project. I would also like to thank the members of my graduate committee, Dr. Paris Lambdin, Dr. Jack Ranney, and Dr. John Wilkerson, for their attention and consideration of my research. I thank Dr. Ann Reed for her assistance with statistical analyses. I thank Dr. Frank van Manen for his assistance with habitat and spatial analysis. Special thanks to Dr. Charles O’Brien and Dr. Robert Anderson who confirmed identifications of weevil specimens collected during this project. I also thank Dr. Eugene Wofford for coordinating use of the University of Tennessee Herbarium. Many thanks to Renee Follum for her assistance with establishment of field sites and collection of data for caged plant and phenology studies. In addition, many thanks to the following people for assisting me in collection of data throughout the project: Amy and David Asbury, Isaac Deal, Josh Grant, Abdul Hakeem, Jared Oakes, David Paulsen, Coleman Timberlake, Alan Wallace, and Tracey Wiggins. Funding for this research was provided, in part, by the Environmental Protection Agency Greater Research Opportunities Fellowship program (fellowship #916586). I would like to thank my parents, Danny and Alice Wiggins, who have always loved and encouraged me throughout any endeavor I undertake. I would also like to thank Jimmy and Ginny Ellis for their continued care and support. Finally, I thank my wife and best friend Tracey Wiggins, whose loving friendship, tireless optimism, and boundless understanding make every day beautiful. iii ABSTRACT Rhinocyllus conicus Fröelich and Trichosirocalus horridus (Panzer) were introduced from Europe into North America as biological control agents of the exotic weed species Carduus nutans L. Concern exists over the feeding of these weevils on at least 25 species of native Cirsium thistles. Research was conducted to 1) estimate phenological synchrony of the eight thistle species in Tennessee with R. conicus and T. horridus, 2) investigate naturally-occurring populations of the five native Cirsium thistle species for non-target activity by R. conicus and T. horridus, 3) quantify the impacts to plants of each thistle species to feeding of R. conicus and T. horridus, and 4) identify potential areas of non-target feeding by the weevils using spatial analysis. Phenologies of two native species, C. carolinianum and C. horridulum, are synchronous with R. conicus reproduction, and all eight thistle species are phenologically synchronous with the reproduction of T. horridus. No non-target activity by R. conicus was observed in naturally-occurring populations of Cirsium thistles, but adults of T. horridus were documented for the first time on the native species C. carolinianum, C. horridulum, and C. muticum. In caged plant studies, larvae of R. conicus completed development in heads of C. carolinianum and C. horridulum and reduced seed numbers of both native species. Basal meristems of all eight thistle species exposed to T. horridus were damaged at varying levels in caged plant studies, but no other impacts to plants were observed. Spatial analyses showed associations between Mahalanobis distance values and plant counts of Carduus nutans and Cirsium carolinianum in predicted habitats, and the occurrence of Carduus nutans was associated with the occurrence of both weevil species in these habitats. About 12% of the total study area consisted of habitats where C. nutans iv and Cirsium carolinianum overlap. The potential exists for these weevils to utilize native Cirsium species found in Tennessee as plant hosts. The spatial model developed during this study not only allows potential monitoring of populations of C. carolinianum to be more targeted, but also may be modified to apply to other systems involving interactions among introduced and native species. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page CHAPTER I. LITERATURE REVIEW............................................................................. 1 Invasive Species.............................................................................................................. 1 A Model System: Musk Thistle and Introduced Biological Control Agents................ 13 Objectives of Research ................................................................................................. 27 CHAPTER II. PHENOLOGIES OF NATIVE AND INTRODUCED THISTLE SPECIES AND THEIR SYNCHRONY WITH INTRODUCED BIOLOGICAL CONTROL AGENTS OF CARDUUS NUTANS.................................................................................. 29 Introduction................................................................................................................... 29 Materials and Methods.................................................................................................. 32 Results and Discussion ................................................................................................. 36 CHAPTER III. NON-TARGET ACTIVITY OF RHINOCYLLUS CONICUS AND TRICHOSIROCALUS HORRIDUS ON NATIVE CIRSIUM POPULATIONS IN TENNESSEE .................................................................................................................... 58 Introduction................................................................................................................... 58 Materials and Methods.................................................................................................. 60 Results and Discussion ................................................................................................. 63 CHAPTER IV. IMPACTS OF LARVAL FEEDING OF RHINOCYLLUS CONICUS ON PLANT REPRODUCTION AND LEVELS OF HOST UTILIZATION ON FIELD- CAGED TARGET AND NON-TARGET THISTLES IN TENNESSEE ....................... 66 Introduction................................................................................................................... 66 Materials and Methods.................................................................................................. 70 Results and Discussion ................................................................................................. 76 CHAPTER V. PLANT RESPONSES TO TRICHOSIROCALUS HORRIDUS ON FIELD-CAGED NON-TARGET NATIVE THISTLES IN TENNESSEE ..................... 87 Introduction................................................................................................................... 87 Materials and Methods.................................................................................................. 89 Results and Discussion ................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016
    Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016 Revised February 24, 2017 Compiled by Laura Gadd Robinson, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org C ur Alleghany rit Ashe Northampton Gates C uc Surry am k Stokes P d Rockingham Caswell Person Vance Warren a e P s n Hertford e qu Chowan r Granville q ot ui a Mountains Watauga Halifax m nk an Wilkes Yadkin s Mitchell Avery Forsyth Orange Guilford Franklin Bertie Alamance Durham Nash Yancey Alexander Madison Caldwell Davie Edgecombe Washington Tyrrell Iredell Martin Dare Burke Davidson Wake McDowell Randolph Chatham Wilson Buncombe Catawba Rowan Beaufort Haywood Pitt Swain Hyde Lee Lincoln Greene Rutherford Johnston Graham Henderson Jackson Cabarrus Montgomery Harnett Cleveland Wayne Polk Gaston Stanly Cherokee Macon Transylvania Lenoir Mecklenburg Moore Clay Pamlico Hoke Union d Cumberland Jones Anson on Sampson hm Duplin ic Craven Piedmont R nd tla Onslow Carteret co S Robeson Bladen Pender Sandhills Columbus New Hanover Tidewater Coastal Plain Brunswick THE COUNTIES AND PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCES OF NORTH CAROLINA Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016 Compiled by Laura Gadd Robinson, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org This list is dynamic and is revised frequently as new data become available. New species are added to the list, and others are dropped from the list as appropriate.
    [Show full text]
  • Rule 40-12-4-.01 Limitations on Noxious Weed Seeds(MARKED)
    Rule 40-12-4-.01. Limitations on Noxious Weed Seeds It is unlawful to sell, offer for sale, or expose for sale, any agricultural or vegetable seed for planting purposes in this State if the noxious weed seeds per pound of pure seed is in excess of the following limitations: (a) Prohibited Noxious Weed Seeds. Name Limitations 1. Balloonvine (Cardiospermum halicacabum)………………..…………….....Prohibited 2. Bindweed, Field (Convolvulus arvensis) ……….………………...…….…..Prohibited 3. Bindweed, Hedge (Calystegia sepium) ………….………………...………..Prohibited 4. Cocklebur (Xanthium spp.) …………………….…………………...…..…..Prohibited 5. Crotalaria (Crotalaria spp.) …………………….…………………...…….....Prohibited 6. Morningglory, Giant or Moonflower (Ipomoea turbinata) ………………………………………………....…..Prohibited 7. Nutsedge, Purple (Cyperus rotundus) ………………...………………...…..Prohibited 8. Nutsedge, Yellow (Cyperus esculentus).. ……….….………………..……..Prohibited 9. Tropical Soda Apple (Solanum viarum) …………………………...…...…..Prohibited 10. Tussock, Serrated (Nassella trichotoma) ………………………………..…..Prohibited Genus Species Common Name Limitations Acalypha ostryifolia Hophornbeam Copperleaf Prohibited Acalypha virginica Three-seeded mercury Prohibited Calystegia Spp. Hedge Bindweed Prohibited Cardiospermum halicacabum Balloonvine Prohibited Convolvulus arvensis Bindweed, Field Prohibited Convolvulus Equitans Bindweed, hoary Prohibited Conyza canadensis Horseweed (Marestail) Prohibited Crotalaria Spp. Crotalaria Prohibited Cyperus esculentus Nutsedge, Yellow Prohibited Cyperus rotundus Nutsedge, Purple Prohibited
    [Show full text]
  • Comparative Analysis and Implications of the Chloroplast Genomes of Three Thistles (Carduus L., Asteraceae)
    Comparative analysis and implications of the chloroplast genomes of three thistles (Carduus L., Asteraceae) Joonhyung Jung1,*, Hoang Dang Khoa Do1,2,*, JongYoung Hyun1, Changkyun Kim1 and Joo-Hwan Kim1 1 Department of Life Science, Gachon University, Seongnam, Gyeonggi, Korea 2 Nguyen Tat Thanh Hi-Tech Institute, Nguyen Tat Thanh University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam * These authors contributed equally to this work. ABSTRACT Background. Carduus, commonly known as plumeless thistles, is a genus in the Asteraceae family that exhibits both medicinal value and invasive tendencies. However, the genomic data of Carduus (i.e., complete chloroplast genomes) have not been sequenced. Methods. We sequenced and assembled the chloroplast genome (cpDNA) sequences of three Carduus species using the Illumina Miseq sequencing system and Geneious Prime. Phylogenetic relationships between Carduus and related taxa were reconstructed using Maximum Likelihood and Bayesian Inference analyses. In addition, we used a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in the protein coding region of the matK gene to develop molecular markers to distinguish C. crispus from C. acanthoides and C. tenuiflorus. Results. The cpDNA sequences of C. crispus, C. acanthoides, and C. tenuiflorus ranged from 152,342 bp to 152,617 bp in length. Comparative genomic analysis revealed high conservation in terms of gene content (including 80 protein-coding, 30 tRNA, and four rRNA genes) and gene order within the three focal species and members of subfamily Carduoideae. Despite their high similarity, the three species differed with respect to the number and content of repeats in the chloroplast genome. Additionally, eight Submitted 28 February 2020 hotspot regions, including psbI-trnS_GCU, trnE_UUC-rpoB, trnR_UCU-trnG_UCC, Accepted 11 December 2020 Published 14 January 2021 psbC-trnS_UGA, trnT_UGU-trnL_UAA, psbT-psbN, petD-rpoA, and rpl16-rps3, were identified in the study species.
    [Show full text]
  • Thistles of Colorado
    Thistles of Colorado About This Guide Identification and Management Guide Many individuals, organizations and agencies from throughout the state (acknowledgements on inside back cover) contributed ideas, content, photos, plant descriptions, management information and printing support toward the completion of this guide. Mountain thistle (Cirsium scopulorum) growing above timberline Casey Cisneros, Tim D’Amato and the Larimer County Department of Natural Resources Weed District collected, compiled and edited information, content and photos for this guide. Produced by the We welcome your comments, corrections, suggestions, and high Larimer County quality photos. If you would like to contribute to future editions, please contact the Larimer County Weed District at 970-498- Weed District 5769 or email [email protected] or [email protected]. Front cover photo of Cirsium eatonii var. hesperium by Janis Huggins Partners in Land Stewardship 2nd Edition 1 2 Table of Contents Introduction 4 Introduction Native Thistles (Pages 6-20) Barneyby’s Thistle (Cirsium barnebyi) 6 Cainville Thistle (Cirsium clacareum) 6 Native thistles are dispersed broadly Eaton’s Thistle (Cirsium eatonii) 8 across many Colorado ecosystems. Individual species occupy niches from Elk or Meadow Thistle (Cirsium scariosum) 8 3,500 feet to above timberline. These Flodman’s Thistle (Cirsium flodmanii) 10 plants are valuable to pollinators, seed Fringed or Fish Lake Thistle (Cirsium 10 feeders, browsing wildlife and to the centaureae or C. clavatum var. beauty and diversity of our native plant americanum) communities. Some non-native species Mountain Thistle (Cirsium scopulorum) 12 have become an invasive threat to New Mexico Thistle (Cirsium 12 agriculture and natural areas. For this reason, native and non-native thistles neomexicanum) alike are often pulled, mowed, clipped or Ousterhout’s or Aspen Thistle (Cirsium 14 sprayed indiscriminately.
    [Show full text]
  • April 2021 Volume 38, Number 4
    April 2021 Volume 38, Number 4 This is an online meeting. We will send you a link the day before the meeting. We will be back with in-person meetings as soon as our venues are open and safe. April 21, 7:00 pm Program Carex By Randy Mears The genus Carex is contained within the Family Cyperaceae (Sedge Family). Ironically, it is one of the least known genera to most people and happens to be the largest genus of flowering plants in the United States with more than 500 species represented. The unifying character of all Carex species is a structure called the perigynium which is a modified scale with fused margins which surrounds the pistillate flowers and is only open at the tip. This structure is paramount for separating all Carex species from one another. There are currently 73 species known to occur within the state of Florida. This presentation will, in large part, be a photographic introduction to most of the species that occur in Florida. Randy Mears is a Florida native born in Plant City. He has been studying Florida native plant species for more than 30 years and has become especially interested in grasses and sedges. He is a wonderful person to have show up a field trip since his knowledge of the sedge- family plants comes with lots of field experience. Randy is a Perigynia on Carex intumescens. Photo by Shirley member of the Suncoast chapter. Denton. 1 Plant Sale at USF Botanical Garden USF again had to cancel its plant sale. We have been invited by the USF Botanical Gardens to have our own Suncoast Chapter plant sale at the botanical gardens on April 10.
    [Show full text]
  • Suitability of Root and Rhizome Anatomy for Taxonomic
    Scientia Pharmaceutica Article Suitability of Root and Rhizome Anatomy for Taxonomic Classification and Reconstruction of Phylogenetic Relationships in the Tribes Cardueae and Cichorieae (Asteraceae) Elisabeth Ginko 1,*, Christoph Dobeš 1,2,* and Johannes Saukel 1,* 1 Department of Pharmacognosy, Pharmacobotany, University of Vienna, Althanstrasse 14, Vienna A-1090, Austria 2 Department of Forest Genetics, Research Centre for Forests, Seckendorff-Gudent-Weg 8, Vienna A-1131, Austria * Correspondence: [email protected] (E.G.); [email protected] (C.D.); [email protected] (J.S.); Tel.: +43-1-878-38-1265 (C.D.); +43-1-4277-55273 (J.S.) Academic Editor: Reinhard Länger Received: 18 August 2015; Accepted: 27 May 2016; Published: 27 May 2016 Abstract: The value of root and rhizome anatomy for the taxonomic characterisation of 59 species classified into 34 genera and 12 subtribes from the Asteraceae tribes Cardueae and Cichorieae was assessed. In addition, the evolutionary history of anatomical characters was reconstructed using a nuclear ribosomal DNA sequence-based phylogeny of the Cichorieae. Taxa were selected with a focus on pharmaceutically relevant species. A binary decision tree was constructed and discriminant function analyses were performed to extract taxonomically relevant anatomical characters and to infer the separability of infratribal taxa, respectively. The binary decision tree distinguished 33 species and two subspecies, but only five of the genera (sampled for at least two species) by a unique combination of hierarchically arranged characters. Accessions were discriminated—except for one sample worthy of discussion—according to their subtribal affiliation in the discriminant function analyses (DFA). However, constantly expressed subtribe-specific characters were almost missing and even in combination, did not discriminate the subtribes.
    [Show full text]
  • Common Plants at the UHCC
    Flora Checklist Texas Institute for Coastal Prairie Research and Education University of Houston Donald Verser created this list by combining lists from studies by Grace and Siemann with the UHCC herbarium list Herbarium Collections Family Scientific Name Synonym Common Name Native Growth Accesion Dates Locality Comments Status Habit Numbers Acanthaceae Ruellia humilis fringeleaf wild petunia N forb 269 10/9/1973 Acanthaceae Ruellia nudiflora violet wild petunia N forb Agavaceae Manfreda virginica false aloe N forb Agavaceae Polianthes sp. polianthes ? forb 130 8/3/1971 2004 roadside Anacardiaceae Toxicodendron radicans eastern poison ivy N woody/vine Apiaceae Centella erecta Centella asiatica erect centella N forb 36 4/11/2000 Area 2 Apiaceae Daucus carota Queen Anne's lace I forb 139-142 1971 / 72 No collections by Dr. Brown. Perhaps Apiaceae Eryngium leavenworthii Leavenworth's eryngo N forb 144 7/20/1971 wooded area in pipeline ROW E. hookeri instead? Apiaceae Eryngium yuccifolium button eryngo N forb 77,143,145 71, 72, 2000 Apiaceae Polytaenia texana Polytaenia nuttallii Texas prairie parsley N forb 32 6/6/2002 Apocynaceae Amsonia illustris Ozark bluestar N Forb 76 3/24/2000 Area 4 Apocynaceae Amsonia tabernaemontana eastern bluestar N Forb Aquifoliaceae Ilex vomitoria yaupon N woody Asclepiadaceae Asclepias lanceolata fewflower milkweed N Forb Not on Dr. Brown's list. Would be great record. Asclepiadaceae Asclepias longifolia longleaf milkweed N Forb 84 6/7/2000 Area 6 Asclepiadaceae Asclepias verticillata whorled milkweed N Forb 35 6/7/2002 Area 7 Asclepiadaceae Asclepias viridis green antelopehorn N Forb 63, 92 1974 & 2000 Asteraceae Acmella oppositifolia var.
    [Show full text]
  • Literature Cited
    Literature Cited Robert W. Kiger, Editor This is a consolidated list of all works cited in volumes 19, 20, and 21, whether as selected references, in text, or in nomenclatural contexts. In citations of articles, both here and in the taxonomic treatments, and also in nomenclatural citations, the titles of serials are rendered in the forms recommended in G. D. R. Bridson and E. R. Smith (1991). When those forms are abbre- viated, as most are, cross references to the corresponding full serial titles are interpolated here alphabetically by abbreviated form. In nomenclatural citations (only), book titles are rendered in the abbreviated forms recommended in F. A. Stafleu and R. S. Cowan (1976–1988) and F. A. Stafleu and E. A. Mennega (1992+). Here, those abbreviated forms are indicated parenthetically following the full citations of the corresponding works, and cross references to the full citations are interpolated in the list alphabetically by abbreviated form. Two or more works published in the same year by the same author or group of coauthors will be distinguished uniquely and consistently throughout all volumes of Flora of North America by lower-case letters (b, c, d, ...) suffixed to the date for the second and subsequent works in the set. The suffixes are assigned in order of editorial encounter and do not reflect chronological sequence of publication. The first work by any particular author or group from any given year carries the implicit date suffix “a”; thus, the sequence of explicit suffixes begins with “b”. Works missing from any suffixed sequence here are ones cited elsewhere in the Flora that are not pertinent in these volumes.
    [Show full text]
  • Checklist of the Vascular Plants of Redwood National Park
    Humboldt State University Digital Commons @ Humboldt State University Botanical Studies Open Educational Resources and Data 9-17-2018 Checklist of the Vascular Plants of Redwood National Park 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, "Checklist of the Vascular Plants of Redwood National Park" (2018). Botanical Studies. 85. https://digitalcommons.humboldt.edu/botany_jps/85 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]. A CHECKLIST OF THE VASCULAR PLANTS OF THE REDWOOD NATIONAL & STATE PARKS James P. Smith, Jr. Professor Emeritus of Botany Department of Biological Sciences Humboldt State Univerity Arcata, California 14 September 2018 The Redwood National and State Parks are located in Del Norte and Humboldt counties in coastal northwestern California. The national park was F E R N S established in 1968. In 1994, a cooperative agreement with the California Department of Parks and Recreation added Del Norte Coast, Prairie Creek, Athyriaceae – Lady Fern Family and Jedediah Smith Redwoods state parks to form a single administrative Athyrium filix-femina var. cyclosporum • northwestern lady fern unit. Together they comprise about 133,000 acres (540 km2), including 37 miles of coast line. Almost half of the remaining old growth redwood forests Blechnaceae – Deer Fern Family are protected in these four parks.
    [Show full text]
  • Plant List for Web Page
    Stanford Working Plant List 1/15/08 Common name Botanical name Family origin big-leaf maple Acer macrophyllum Aceraceae native box elder Acer negundo var. californicum Aceraceae native common water plantain Alisma plantago-aquatica Alismataceae native upright burhead Echinodorus berteroi Alismataceae native prostrate amaranth Amaranthus blitoides Amaranthaceae native California amaranth Amaranthus californicus Amaranthaceae native Powell's amaranth Amaranthus powellii Amaranthaceae native western poison oak Toxicodendron diversilobum Anacardiaceae native wood angelica Angelica tomentosa Apiaceae native wild celery Apiastrum angustifolium Apiaceae native cutleaf water parsnip Berula erecta Apiaceae native bowlesia Bowlesia incana Apiaceae native rattlesnake weed Daucus pusillus Apiaceae native Jepson's eryngo Eryngium aristulatum var. aristulatum Apiaceae native coyote thistle Eryngium vaseyi Apiaceae native cow parsnip Heracleum lanatum Apiaceae native floating marsh pennywort Hydrocotyle ranunculoides Apiaceae native caraway-leaved lomatium Lomatium caruifolium var. caruifolium Apiaceae native woolly-fruited lomatium Lomatium dasycarpum dasycarpum Apiaceae native large-fruited lomatium Lomatium macrocarpum Apiaceae native common lomatium Lomatium utriculatum Apiaceae native Pacific oenanthe Oenanthe sarmentosa Apiaceae native 1 Stanford Working Plant List 1/15/08 wood sweet cicely Osmorhiza berteroi Apiaceae native mountain sweet cicely Osmorhiza chilensis Apiaceae native Gairdner's yampah (List 4) Perideridia gairdneri gairdneri Apiaceae
    [Show full text]
  • Milk Thistle
    Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Biological Control BIOLOGY AND BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF EXOTIC T RU E T HISTL E S RACHEL WINSTON , RICH HANSEN , MA R K SCH W A R ZLÄNDE R , ER IC COO M BS , CA R OL BELL RANDALL , AND RODNEY LY M FHTET-2007-05 U.S. Department Forest September 2008 of Agriculture Service FHTET he Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team (FHTET) was created in 1995 Tby the Deputy Chief for State and Private Forestry, USDA, Forest Service, to develop and deliver technologies to protect and improve the health of American forests. This book was published by FHTET as part of the technology transfer series. http://www.fs.fed.us/foresthealth/technology/ On the cover: Italian thistle. Photo: ©Saint Mary’s College of California. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call 202-720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. The use of trade, firm, or corporation names in this publication is for information only and does not constitute an endorsement by the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Floristic Quality Assessment Report
    FLORISTIC QUALITY ASSESSMENT IN INDIANA: THE CONCEPT, USE, AND DEVELOPMENT OF COEFFICIENTS OF CONSERVATISM Tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) the State tree of Indiana June 2004 Final Report for ARN A305-4-53 EPA Wetland Program Development Grant CD975586-01 Prepared by: Paul E. Rothrock, Ph.D. Taylor University Upland, IN 46989-1001 Introduction Since the early nineteenth century the Indiana landscape has undergone a massive transformation (Jackson 1997). In the pre-settlement period, Indiana was an almost unbroken blanket of forests, prairies, and wetlands. Much of the land was cleared, plowed, or drained for lumber, the raising of crops, and a range of urban and industrial activities. Indiana’s native biota is now restricted to relatively small and often isolated tracts across the State. This fragmentation and reduction of the State’s biological diversity has challenged Hoosiers to look carefully at how to monitor further changes within our remnant natural communities and how to effectively conserve and even restore many of these valuable places within our State. To meet this monitoring, conservation, and restoration challenge, one needs to develop a variety of appropriate analytical tools. Ideally these techniques should be simple to learn and apply, give consistent results between different observers, and be repeatable. Floristic Assessment, which includes metrics such as the Floristic Quality Index (FQI) and Mean C values, has gained wide acceptance among environmental scientists and decision-makers, land stewards, and restoration ecologists in Indiana’s neighboring states and regions: Illinois (Taft et al. 1997), Michigan (Herman et al. 1996), Missouri (Ladd 1996), and Wisconsin (Bernthal 2003) as well as northern Ohio (Andreas 1993) and southern Ontario (Oldham et al.
    [Show full text]