DOCSLIB.ORG

Preventing Extinction of At-Risk Plant Species in a Complex World Holly Lee Bernardo Washington University in St

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Preventing Extinction of At-Risk Plant Species in a Complex World Holly Lee Bernardo Washington University in St Washington University in St. Louis Washington University Open Scholarship Arts & Sciences Electronic Theses and Dissertations Arts & Sciences Summer 8-15-2018 Preventing Extinction of At-Risk Plant Species in a Complex World Holly Lee Bernardo Washington University in St. Louis Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/art_sci_etds Part of the Biodiversity Commons, Climate Commons, Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons, Environmental Indicators and Impact Assessment Commons, Natural Resources and Conservation Commons, and the Natural Resources Management and Policy Commons Recommended Citation Bernardo, Holly Lee, "Preventing Extinction of At-Risk Plant Species in a Complex World" (2018). Arts & Sciences Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 1609. https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/art_sci_etds/1609 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Arts & Sciences at Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Arts & Sciences Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY IN ST. LOUIS Division of Biology & Biomedical Science Evolution, Ecology & Population Biology Dissertation Examination Committee: Scott A. Mangan, Chair Tiffany M. Knight, Co-Chair Matthew Albrecht Jonathan Myers Rachel Penczykowski Adam Smith Preventing Extinction of At-Risk Plant Species in a Complex World by Holly Lee Bernardo A dissertation presented to The Graduate School of Washington University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy August 2018 St. Louis, Missouri © 2018, Holly Lee Bernardo Table of Contents List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ iv List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. v Acknowledgments.......................................................................................................................... vi Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... x Chapter 1: Introduction to the Dissertation ..................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background ...................................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Chapter Overview ............................................................................................................ 4 1.3 Population Modeling Framework .................................................................................... 6 1.4 Literature Cited ................................................................................................................ 9 Chapter 2: Increased drought frequency alters the optimal management strategy of an endangered plant ...................................................................................................................... 12 2.1 Abstract .......................................................................................................................... 13 2.2 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 14 2.3 Methods .......................................................................................................................... 16 2.4 Results ............................................................................................................................ 22 2.5 Discussion ...................................................................................................................... 26 2.6 Literature Cited .............................................................................................................. 30 2.7 Tables and Figures ......................................................................................................... 35 Chapter 3: Count population viability analysis finds that interacting local and regional threats affect the viability of a rare plant ...................................................................................... 47 3.1 Abstract .......................................................................................................................... 48 3.2 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 50 3.3 Methods .......................................................................................................................... 52 3.4 Results ............................................................................................................................ 61 3.5 Discussion ...................................................................................................................... 62 3.6 Literature Cited .............................................................................................................. 67 3.7 Tables and Figures ......................................................................................................... 72 Chapter 4: Using long term population monitoring data to prioritize conservation action among rare plant species in the Western Great Lakes region ....................................................... 79 4.1 Abstract .......................................................................................................................... 80 4.2 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 81 4.3 Methods .......................................................................................................................... 83 ii 4.4 Results ............................................................................................................................ 90 4.5 Discussion ...................................................................................................................... 91 4.6 Literature Cited .............................................................................................................. 99 4.7 Tables and Figures ....................................................................................................... 102 Chapter 5: Covarying threats and non-additive effects among threats lead to conflicting priorities in rare plant conservation ............................................................................................ 113 5.1 Abstract ........................................................................................................................ 114 5.2 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 116 5.3 Methods ........................................................................................................................ 119 5.4 Results .......................................................................................................................... 130 5.5 Discussion .................................................................................................................... 132 5.6 Literature Cited ............................................................................................................ 139 5.7 Tables and Figures ....................................................................................................... 144 Chapter 6: Conclusion................................................................................................................. 153 6.1 Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 154 6.2 Literature Cited ............................................................................................................ 158 Appendix A ................................................................................................................................. 159 Appendix B ................................................................................................................................. 168 Appendix C ................................................................................................................................. 172 Appendix D ................................................................................................................................. 233 Appendix E ................................................................................................................................. 247 iii List of Figures Figure 2.1: Life cycle diagram for Astragalus bibullatus ..............................................................40 Figure 2.2: Vital rate values with 95% confidence intervals. A) Survival probabilities. B) Growth and stasis probabilities. C) Fecundity vital rates. D) Population growth rates (). .........................................................................................................41 Figure 2.3: Heat map of simulation results of the probability of extinction. .................................44 Figure 2.4: Heat map of simulation results of the median time to extinction. ...............................45 Figure 2.5: Heat map of simulation results of the final population size. .......................................46
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • Species at Risk on Department of Defense Installations
    Species at Risk on Department of Defense Installations Revised Report and Documentation Prepared for: Department of Defense U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Submitted by: January 2004 Species at Risk on Department of Defense Installations: Revised Report and Documentation CONTENTS 1.0 Executive Summary..........................................................................................iii 2.0 Introduction – Project Description................................................................. 1 3.0 Methods ................................................................................................................ 3 3.1 NatureServe Data................................................................................................ 3 3.2 DOD Installations............................................................................................... 5 3.3 Species at Risk .................................................................................................... 6 4.0 Results................................................................................................................... 8 4.1 Nationwide Assessment of Species at Risk on DOD Installations..................... 8 4.2 Assessment of Species at Risk by Military Service.......................................... 13 4.3 Assessment of Species at Risk on Installations ................................................ 15 5.0 Conclusion and Management Recommendations.................................... 22 6.0 Future Directions.............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Eriogonum Visheri A
    Eriogonum visheri A. Nelson (Visher’s buckwheat): A Technical Conservation Assessment Prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project December 18, 2006 Juanita A. R. Ladyman, Ph.D. JnJ Associates LLC 6760 S. Kit Carson Cir E. Centennial, CO 80122 Peer Review Administered by Center for Plant Conservation Ladyman, J.A.R. (2006, December 18). Eriogonum visheri A. Nelson (Visher’s buckwheat): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/ projects/scp/assessments/eriogonumvisheri.pdf [date of access]. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The time spent and help given by all the people and institutions listed in the reference section are gratefully acknowledged. I would also like to thank the North Dakota Parks and Recreation Department, in particular Christine Dirk, and the South Dakota Natural Heritage Program, in particular David Ode, for their generosity in making their records, reports, and photographs available. I thank the Montana Natural Heritage Program, particularly Martin Miller, Mark Gabel of the Black Hills University Herbarium, Robert Tatina of the Dakota Wesleyan University, Christine Niezgoda of the Field Museum of Natural History, Carrie Kiel Academy of Natural Sciences, Dave Dyer of the University of Montana Herbarium, Caleb Morse of the R.L. McGregor Herbarium, Robert Kaul of the C. E. Bessey Herbarium, John La Duke of the University of North Dakota Herbarium, Joe Washington of the Dakota National Grasslands, and Doug Sargent of the Buffalo Gap National Grasslands - Region 2, for the information they provided. I also appreciate the access to files and assistance given to me by Andrew Kratz, Region 2 USDA Forest Service, and Chuck Davis, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Vascular Plants and a Brief History of the Kiowa and Rita Blanca National Grasslands
    United States Department of Agriculture Vascular Plants and a Brief Forest Service Rocky Mountain History of the Kiowa and Rita Research Station General Technical Report Blanca National Grasslands RMRS-GTR-233 December 2009 Donald L. Hazlett, Michael H. Schiebout, and Paulette L. Ford Hazlett, Donald L.; Schiebout, Michael H.; and Ford, Paulette L. 2009. Vascular plants and a brief history of the Kiowa and Rita Blanca National Grasslands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS- GTR-233. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 44 p. Abstract Administered by the USDA Forest Service, the Kiowa and Rita Blanca National Grasslands occupy 230,000 acres of public land extending from northeastern New Mexico into the panhandles of Oklahoma and Texas. A mosaic of topographic features including canyons, plateaus, rolling grasslands and outcrops supports a diverse flora. Eight hundred twenty six (826) species of vascular plant species representing 81 plant families are known to occur on or near these public lands. This report includes a history of the area; ethnobotanical information; an introductory overview of the area including its climate, geology, vegetation, habitats, fauna, and ecological history; and a plant survey and information about the rare, poisonous, and exotic species from the area. A vascular plant checklist of 816 vascular plant taxa in the appendix includes scientific and common names, habitat types, and general distribution data for each species. This list is based on extensive plant collections and available herbarium collections. Authors Donald L. Hazlett is an ethnobotanist, Director of New World Plants and People consulting, and a research associate at the Denver Botanic Gardens, Denver, CO.
    [Show full text]
  • Illustrated Flora of East Texas Illustrated Flora of East Texas
    ILLUSTRATED FLORA OF EAST TEXAS ILLUSTRATED FLORA OF EAST TEXAS IS PUBLISHED WITH THE SUPPORT OF: MAJOR BENEFACTORS: DAVID GIBSON AND WILL CRENSHAW DISCOVERY FUND U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION (NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, USDA FOREST SERVICE) TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT SCOTT AND STUART GENTLING BENEFACTORS: NEW DOROTHEA L. LEONHARDT FOUNDATION (ANDREA C. HARKINS) TEMPLE-INLAND FOUNDATION SUMMERLEE FOUNDATION AMON G. CARTER FOUNDATION ROBERT J. O’KENNON PEG & BEN KEITH DORA & GORDON SYLVESTER DAVID & SUE NIVENS NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY OF TEXAS DAVID & MARGARET BAMBERGER GORDON MAY & KAREN WILLIAMSON JACOB & TERESE HERSHEY FOUNDATION INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT: AUSTIN COLLEGE BOTANICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF TEXAS SID RICHARDSON CAREER DEVELOPMENT FUND OF AUSTIN COLLEGE II OTHER CONTRIBUTORS: ALLDREDGE, LINDA & JACK HOLLEMAN, W.B. PETRUS, ELAINE J. BATTERBAE, SUSAN ROBERTS HOLT, JEAN & DUNCAN PRITCHETT, MARY H. BECK, NELL HUBER, MARY MAUD PRICE, DIANE BECKELMAN, SARA HUDSON, JIM & YONIE PRUESS, WARREN W. BENDER, LYNNE HULTMARK, GORDON & SARAH ROACH, ELIZABETH M. & ALLEN BIBB, NATHAN & BETTIE HUSTON, MELIA ROEBUCK, RICK & VICKI BOSWORTH, TONY JACOBS, BONNIE & LOUIS ROGNLIE, GLORIA & ERIC BOTTONE, LAURA BURKS JAMES, ROI & DEANNA ROUSH, LUCY BROWN, LARRY E. JEFFORDS, RUSSELL M. ROWE, BRIAN BRUSER, III, MR. & MRS. HENRY JOHN, SUE & PHIL ROZELL, JIMMY BURT, HELEN W. JONES, MARY LOU SANDLIN, MIKE CAMPBELL, KATHERINE & CHARLES KAHLE, GAIL SANDLIN, MR. & MRS. WILLIAM CARR, WILLIAM R. KARGES, JOANN SATTERWHITE, BEN CLARY, KAREN KEITH, ELIZABETH & ERIC SCHOENFELD, CARL COCHRAN, JOYCE LANEY, ELEANOR W. SCHULTZE, BETTY DAHLBERG, WALTER G. LAUGHLIN, DR. JAMES E. SCHULZE, PETER & HELEN DALLAS CHAPTER-NPSOT LECHE, BEVERLY SENNHAUSER, KELLY S. DAMEWOOD, LOGAN & ELEANOR LEWIS, PATRICIA SERLING, STEVEN DAMUTH, STEVEN LIGGIO, JOE SHANNON, LEILA HOUSEMAN DAVIS, ELLEN D.
    [Show full text]
  • Newsletter of the Arkansas Native Plant Society
    CLAYTONIA Newsletter of the Arkansas Native Plant Society Vol. 28 No. 2 An Audience With The Queen Fall/Winter 2008 By Theo Witsell In this issue: Craig “Coondog” Fraiser and I recently spent two long hot days in the Dr. Henry Robison Retires Springfield Plateau Page 3 section of the Ozarks exploring sinkhole ponds Creeping St. John’s Wort and two anonymous Page 4 spring-fed stream gorges*. We had hoped to find some new species Spring Meeting Minutes for Arkansas – Virginia Page 6 sneezeweed (Helenium virginicum), forked aster Field Trip Reports (Eurybia furcata) and tall Page 7 larkspur (Delphinium exaltatum), but struck out Showy lady’s-slipper orchid (Cypripedium reginae). Photo by John Pelton. Bellflower Seed Needed on all counts. But deep Page 10 down, unspoken even, we were both secretly hoping to discover a new population of the showy lady’s-slipper orchid (Cypripedium reginae), far and away the rarest and most seldom-seen lady’s- Fall Meeting Info slipper in Arkansas. It is so rare, and so spectacular, that it often goes by its other name: Page 11 The Queen. Woody Plant CD-ROM Review As we hiked up the rugged canyon of our first stream, we searched likely habitat for Page 13 forked aster (bases of bluffs and limestone ledges with an accumulation of rich, moist soil), but to no avail. But the scenery was spectacular and the water was among the Emerald Ash Borer cleanest and clearest I’ve ever seen in Arkansas. So clear, in fact, that the depth could be deceiving, turning what looked like a knee-deep step into a cold, take-your-breath- Almost to Arkansas away belly-deep plunge.
    [Show full text]
  • Status Report on Ownbey's Thistle (Cirsium Ownbeyi)
    Status Report on Ownbey’s thistle (Cirsium ownbeyi ) in Southwest Wyoming Prepared for the Bureau of Land Management Wyoming State Office By Walter Fertig Wyoming Natural Diversity Database University of Wyoming 1604 Grand Ave. Laramie, WY 82070 8 February 1999 Agreement # K910-A4-0011 Task Order No. TO-015 Abstract Cirsium ownbeyi (Ownbey’s thistle) is a regional endemic of northeastern Utah, northwestern Colorado, and southwestern Wyoming and was formerly a Category 2 candidate for listing under the Endangered Species Act. Prior to 1998, it was known from only two locations in Wyoming and was considered a high priority species of special concern. Surveys in 1998 relocated both known occurrences and resulted in the discovery of five new populations. The state population is currently estimated at 56,000-74,000 plants in about 100 acres of occupied habitat. C. ownbeyi typically occurs in sparsely vegetated openings on slopes and ridgetops within a matrix of sagebrush grasslands on whitish to reddish limey slate derived from the Green River Formation. Although most populations are secure at present, some sites could be negatively impacted by heavy recreation use by off-road vehicles or weed control programs using broadleaf herbicides. Five populations are found on BLM lands in Sweetwater County, including two on designated ACECs. Although not recommended for federal listing under the Endangered Species Act, C. ownbeyi is restricted enough in its habitat requirements and range that it should be considered “sensitive” during BLM resource management planning. 2 Table of Contents Page Abstract . 2 I. Introduction . 5 II. Methods . 5 III. Species Information .
    [Show full text]
  • Invasiveness of Some Biological Control Insects and Adequacy of Their Ecological Risk Assessment and Regulation
    Invasiveness of Some Biological Control Insects and Adequacy of Their Ecological Risk Assessment and Regulation S. M. LOUDA, A. E. ARNETT,* T. A. RAND, AND F. L. RUSSELL School of Biological Sciences, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68588, U.S.A. Abstract: The problem of invasive species has reignited interest in biological control as a management tool. Classical biological control involves deliberate release of exotic natural enemies into new environments in an attempt to limit the density of an invasive species. Persistent, sustained limitation of invasive species by co- evolved natural enemies is a seductive concept. Evidence now suggests, however, that biological control through the release of natural enemies can carry unanticipated ecological risks. There have been ecological side effects of distributing a deliberately introduced weevil ( Rhinocyllus conicus) and an adventitious weevil ( Larinus planus) for the biological control of exotic thistles. Both weevils have had major direct effects on key population-growth parameters of native thistles, and R. conicus has had an indirect effect on the interaction between a thistle and a native insect. These findings led us to review how ecological risk is evaluated, and to ask whether pre-release tests can predict the types of ecological effects documented. We conclude that, when done thoroughly, the tests used can determine host specificity by identifying physiological host range, but the usual tests cannot be relied upon to predict the ecological host range or impact on populations of less-pre- ferred but accepted native species. Our data provide support for suggestions that the behavioral and develop- mental data now taken need to be supplemented with additional data on population parameters to better predict field-host use, population growth, interaction strengths, and ecological outcomes for native species that are potential hosts.
    [Show full text]
  • The Antagonistic and Mutualistic Plant-Insect Interactions of Pitcher's Thistle
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by ScholarShip THE ANTAGONISTIC AND MUTUALISTIC PLANT-INSECT INTERACTIONS OF PITCHER’S THISTLE (CIRSIUM PITCHERI [TORR. EX EAT.] TORR. & A. GRAY, ASTERACEAE), A FEDERALLY THREATENED GREAT LAKES DUNE AND COBBLE SHORE ENDEMIC PLANT Jaclyn N. Inkster April 2016 Director of Thesis: Dr. Claudia L. Jolls Major Department: Department of Biology Biological control is one of the tools used for integrated pest management of invasive plant species but it is not without risks to native plants. I researched the non-target impacts of the biological control agent, the seed head weevil Larinus planus (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) on the Great Lakes dune and cobble shore endemic threatened thistle, Cirsium pitcheri (Asteraceae). Pitcher’s thistle is an herbaceous perennial monocarpic plant with no means of vegetative reproduction, relying solely on seed set for population persistence. The seed head weevil is univoltine and lays eggs in thistle heads. The developing larva chews the ovules or seeds before emerging as an adult to overwinter in leaf litter. I repeatedly surveyed Pitcher’s thistle plants from three populations in northern lower Michigan for impacts. The insect oviposits on thistle heads from mid-June to early July, before C. pitcheri flowering. Heads that received oviposition were on average 12-14 mm in diameter. Approximately 32% of the 1,695 heads surveyed had oviposition. A subset of dissected heads had 56% weevil egg mortality. With weevil survival, the number of filled seeds was reduced by 62%. A generalized linear mixed binary logistic model reported date of oviposition and size of heads as significant predictors of oviposition on heads.
    [Show full text]
  • INPS Newsletter October 2006
    NEWSLETTER IOWA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY Volume 12, Issue 3 October 2006 An Aster By Any Other Name...?: The Dismantling of the Genus Aster by Deb Lewis (based on information by Dr. George Yatskievych in Steyermark’s Flora of Missouri, Volume 2) Fall in Iowa brings forth an abundance of blooming asters in our landscapes in shades of purple, white, blue and pink that contrast with the yellows and golds of the sunflowers and goldenrods. While we’ve been aware of some controversy over the “correct” scientific name of some of the species, like sneezewort aster (Solidago/Aster ptarmicoides), recent molecular work has really brought about major changes! The experts now tell us that we have NO native asters (of the genus Aster as currently recognized) in Iowa, rather that all of our aster species now have a new name. Worldwide, what has been considered in the past to be Aster has now been split into at least 25 genera. Of course our already completed floristic checklists for various areas in Iowa, as well as The Vascular Plants of Iowa: A Checklist and Natural History by Lawrence J. Eilers and Dean M. Roosa use the name Aster for these species – so why should we be concerned about these changes? New publications are likely to pick up these new names, as it appears that these changes are well-founded based on several studies. The Asteraceae (daisy family) treatment for Flora of North America will most likely follow these concepts. These changes have already appeared in several recent publications, including the very recently published 2nd volume of Steyermark’s Flora of Missouri by Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Checklist of the Missouri Flora for Floristic Quality Assessment
    Ladd, D. and J.R. Thomas. 2015. Ecological checklist of the Missouri flora for Floristic Quality Assessment. Phytoneuron 2015-12: 1–274. Published 12 February 2015. ISSN 2153 733X ECOLOGICAL CHECKLIST OF THE MISSOURI FLORA FOR FLORISTIC QUALITY ASSESSMENT DOUGLAS LADD The Nature Conservancy 2800 S. Brentwood Blvd. St. Louis, Missouri 63144 [email protected] JUSTIN R. THOMAS Institute of Botanical Training, LLC 111 County Road 3260 Salem, Missouri 65560 [email protected] ABSTRACT An annotated checklist of the 2,961 vascular taxa comprising the flora of Missouri is presented, with conservatism rankings for Floristic Quality Assessment. The list also provides standardized acronyms for each taxon and information on nativity, physiognomy, and wetness ratings. Annotated comments for selected taxa provide taxonomic, floristic, and ecological information, particularly for taxa not recognized in recent treatments of the Missouri flora. Synonymy crosswalks are provided for three references commonly used in Missouri. A discussion of the concept and application of Floristic Quality Assessment is presented. To accurately reflect ecological and taxonomic relationships, new combinations are validated for two distinct taxa, Dichanthelium ashei and D. werneri , and problems in application of infraspecific taxon names within Quercus shumardii are clarified. CONTENTS Introduction Species conservatism and floristic quality Application of Floristic Quality Assessment Checklist: Rationale and methods Nomenclature and taxonomic concepts Synonymy Acronyms Physiognomy, nativity, and wetness Summary of the Missouri flora Conclusion Annotated comments for checklist taxa Acknowledgements Literature Cited Ecological checklist of the Missouri flora Table 1. C values, physiognomy, and common names Table 2. Synonymy crosswalk Table 3. Wetness ratings and plant families INTRODUCTION This list was developed as part of a revised and expanded system for Floristic Quality Assessment (FQA) in Missouri.
    [Show full text]
  • Noteworthy Collections Reports of Four Rare
    54 THE MICHIGAN BOTANIST Vol. 55 NOTEWORTHY COLLECTIONS REPORTS OF FOUR RARE PLANTS IN MICHIGAN, INCLUDING TWO NON-NATIVE SPECIES Bradford S. Slaughter Michigan Natural Features Inventory Michigan State University Extension P.O. Box 13036 Lansing, MI 48901-3036 [email protected] Eurybia furcata (E. S. Burgess) G. L. Nesom Asteraceae Forked aster. Significance of the Report. The first reports from Michigan since 1934. Previous knowledge. Eurybia furcata (previously known as Aster furcatus E. S. Burgess) is a regional endemic aster of open forests, bluffs, riverbanks, and ledges in the midwestern United States, where it is known from Michigan, Wis- consin, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, and Arkansas (Swink and Wilhelm 1994; Kartesz 2013; NatureServe 2014). The species is of conservation concern in all of these states, with fewer than 100 populations documented rangewide. Because of its apparent rarity and the apparently limited number of genotypes, the species is considered globally vulnerable (G3) by NatureServe (2014). Discussion. Three populations of Eurybia furcata were documented in sum- mer 2014 along the Tittabawassee and Chippewa Rivers in Midland County. The species was previously known in Michigan from two collections, one from the south bank of the River Raisin in Monroe Co. (S. Alexander s.n., September 28, 1906, MICH) and one from the vicinity of a Boy Scout cabin on the Chippewa River in Midland County (R.R. Dreisbach 8359, September 3, 1934, MICH). Prior to this report, the 1934 collection was the last record of Eurybia furcata in the state, and the species is listed as critically imperiled (S1) and state threatened (Michigan Natural Features Inventory 2007).
    [Show full text]