DOCSLIB.ORG

In Forest Management Presented on ;14L-2 3

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
In Forest Management Presented on ;14L-2 3 AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF J. Edward Dealy for the degree ofDoctor of Philosophy in Forest Management presented on ;14L-23; /2 Title: ECOLOGY OF CURLLEAF MOUNTAIN-MAHOGANY (CERCOCARPtJS LEDIFOLIUS NUTT.) IN EASTERN OREGON AND ADJAC-NT AREAJJ Abstract approved: signature redacted for privacy. Dr. Richard K. Hermann C ercocarpus ledifolius (curlleaf mountain- mahogany),a small, hardwood evergreen tree, was studied to provide informationon germination and initial seedling growth characteristics, and the species' relationship to its environment.and associated vegetation. Exceptional germination for this species resulted from botha wet cold treatment at 4°C for 170 days (88 percent), and a 15-minute soak in a 30 percent solution of H202 (64 percent).Total and partial embryo excision indicated two possible deterrents to germination: mechanical impedance by the seed coat or a gas diffusion block by the membrane surrounding the embryo.The latter was concluded to be the most likely deterrent. Planting techniques must provide for seed coat deterioration by fall seeding (which allows moist winter conditions to do this)or by a brief, strong chemical treatment before spring planting. A pronounced specialization was demonstrated for rapid root growth in relation to top growth of seedlings for at least 120 days following germination.Under optimum laboratory conditions, the six most vigorous seedlings extended roots an average 1. 13 m in 120 days, but developed only 4 cm2 of leaf area and 2. 35 cm of shoot height, indicating a high potential for re-establishment of natural stands after decimation by fire or logging, or in the face of grass and shrub competition.Seedling stem diameter immediately above the root crown was an indicator of root vigor.Seedlings with the largest diameter stems were deepest rooted. Relationships among Cercocarpus ledifolius ecosystemswere examined and 12 habitat types with their attendant plant associations, phases, and successional stages were delineated.Associations and their phases occurred due to topo.edaphic influences.No serious competition between C. ledifolius and other tree species existed in associations described. Where conifers occurred theywere uncom- mon and not expanding their territory.Graminoids were the most predominant understory group in all associations basedon dominance and constancy, with south slope associations generally having higher values than those on north slopes.Soil development was weak with no significant differences in solum development noted between exposures.However, percent surface stone on southerlyexposures was twice that on the northerly, and percent buried stone volume in the solum was almost one-thirdgreater on southerlyexposures. The survival of C. ledifoliusand the communities in which it was dominant were dependent on fireresistant rocky sites.Trees in these niches were largerand older than those on nearbynon rocky sites and providedan available seed source in case fire decimated adjacent stands. Ecology of Curlleaf Mountain-Mahogany (Cercocarpus ledifolius Nutt. ) in Eastern Oregon and Adjacent Areas by J, Edward Dealy A THESIS submitted to Oregon State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy June 1975 APPR OVED: /)I Signature redactedfor privacy. r L,t - Professor of Forest Management In charge of major Signature redactedfor privacy. Hea17ofDepar'nentof Forest Management Dean of Graduate School Date thesis is presented Typed by Ilene Anderton forJ. Edward Dealt ACKNOW LEDGEMENTS This research was financed by the U. S. D. A. Forest Service through the Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. Appreciation is extended to Mr. Philip A. Briegleb and Dr. Robert E. Buckmann, Directors, and Mr. Robert Harris, Mr. Robert F. Tarrant, and Mr. Charles J. Petersen, Assistant Directors, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station for their support in this program. Special thanks are due to Mr. Justin C. Smith, former Project Leader, for his support and encouragement, and Dr. Jack Ward Thomas, Project Leader, for manuscript editing, and constant encouragement and support in the final phase of this program. I extend a personal thanks to Dr. Richard K. Hermann, com- mittee chairman, for his wisdom, advice and encouragement and for his review of the manuscript.Also thanks are due his committee members for manuscript review. I appreciate the help of Pamela S. Talley, field assistant, for collection of field data, data analysis, and preparation of figures and tables.Her tireless efforts have made the final phase of this program much easier. I thank the secretarial staff of the La Grande Wildlife Habitat and Range Research Laboratory for manuscript preparation, especially Mrs. Marion L. Halsey for her exceptionalsupervision and extended personal efforts. Tb my wife, June, I extendmy deep appreciation for her personal sacrifice, encouragement and patienceover an extended period of time, and for her constant willingnessto assist in manu- script preparation,Also, I thank my children, John, Joe, and Kim for their exceptional cooperation throughoutthis endeavor. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1 PAST WORK 5 Tree Description 5 Distribution 7 Anatomy 7 Germination and Initial Growth io Nutrition 17 Insect Occurrence 19 Ecosystem Relationships 23 Soil Relationships 25 ORIGIN AND HISTORICAL DISTRIBUTION 27 Phylum Origin 27 Madro-Tertiary Flora 28 Species Migration 31 Ecological Position 32 METHODS 34 Study Area 34 Blue Mountains 34 Basin and Range Province 36 Owyhee Uplands 36 Germination and Initial Growth 37 Ecosystem Sampling 39 GERMINATION AND INITIAL GROWTH 42 Seed Production 42 Seed and Seedling Predation 42 Viability and Seed Examination 44 Stratification and Germination 46 Root Growth 52 Discussion 57 RECENT HISTORY OF CERCOCARPUSLEDIFOLIU5 STANDS 64 Logging 64 Animal Use 65 Tree Age -Stem Diameter Relationships 66 Page Discus sion 67 ECOSYSTEM RELATIONSHIPS 69 Cercocarpus ledifolius/Artemisiatridentata/ Festuca idahoensis h. t, 74 Poa sandbergii SuccessionalStage 74 !c2aruS ledifolius /Artemis ia tridentata / Agropyron canirLum h. t. 77 Stipa lemmonii SuccessionalStage 80 C ercocar pus ledifolius /Artemisiatridentata/ Poaamplah.t. 81 Stipa lcmmonii SuccessionalStage 81 Cercocarpus ledifolius/Festucaidahoensis h. t. 85 Cercocarpus ledifolius/Festuca idahoensis- Agropyron spicatum h. t. 88 Cercocarpus ledifolius/Elymuscinereus h.t. 91 Cercocarpus ledifôlius/Symphoricarposalbus/ Festuca idahoensjs h. t. 94 Cercocarpus ledifolius/Symphoricarposoreophilus/ Poa ampla h. t. 99 Arnica cordjfolja Phase 103 Cercocarus ledifolius/Symphoricarposoreophilus h.t. 107 Balsamorhjza sagittata Phase, Poasandbergii Successional Stage 107 Cercocarpus ledifolius/Symphoricarposoreophilus/ Festuca idahoensis h.t. 111 Poa sandbergii SuccessionalStage iii Cercocarpus ledifolius/Calamagrostisrubescens h. t. 116 Stipa lemmonii SuccessionalStage 119 Cercocarpus ledifolius/Calamagrostisrubescens- Festuca idahoensjs h.t. 122 Stipa lemmonii. SuccessionalStage Ecosystems with Relic Trees 125 Uncorrelated Ecosystems 129 Habitat Type Correlation 130 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 139 BIBLIOGRAPHY 142 APPENDIX A 149 APPENDIX B 159 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page Profile of the occurrence of Cercocarpus ledifolius in the conifer zone.Gross elevation, exposure, soil depth, and interspecies relationshipsare illustrated.Slanted shading below the horizon line indicates a general (and exaggerated) soil depth relationship. 2 Profile of the occurrence of Cercocarpus ledifolius in the high desert steppe.Gross elevation, exposure, soil depth, and interspecies relationship are illustrated.Slanted shading below the horizon line indicates a general (and exaggerated) soil depth relationship. 4 Photograph of the largest known Cercocarpus ledifoliuslocated on the Humbolt National Forest, Nevada, 6 Distribution of the genus Cercocarpus (all shading) and the species C. ledifolius (crosshatching). 8 Physiographic divisions of the study area.After Dicken (1955). 35 Distribution of Cercocarpus ledifolius (dashes) and descriptive study plots (dots)in the study area. 40 Comparison of Cercocarpus ledifolius seedling height to root extension in a growth chamber environment. 55 Comparison of Cercocarpus ledifolius seedling stem diameter to root length in a growth chamber environment. 56 Figure Page Regression curves showing Cercocar ledifolius tree diameters in relation to age for stands in the Whitehorse Mountains (stand A) and the Trout Creek Mountains (stand B). 68 Young Cercocarpus plants browsed heavily by deer and elk. 72 Illustration of a relic stand of Cercocarpus ledifolius showing the largest diameter tree (64 cm) yet discovered in the study area.Note smaller trees in the background on less rocky soil. 98 Mean dominance and constancy values of shrubs (S), graminoids (G), and forbs (F) comparedamong groups of similar plant associations. 136 Mean dominance and constancy values of shrubs (S), graminoids (G)9 and forbs (F) for all plant associations combined (solid line), associationson south slopes (dashed line)9 and associationson north slopes (dotted line). 137 LIST OF TABLES Table Page Treatment effects on germination of Cercocarpus ledifolius seed (Woolfolk, 1959). 12 Analyses of Cercocarpus ledifolius (Hickman, 1966). Data is in percent except for the Ca:P ratio. 18 A tabulation of insects found on Cercocarpus ledifolius including order, family, genus, species, and their relationships to the plant. 20 Results of X-ray examination and viability tests of broken
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Table of Contents
    Appendix C Botanical Resources Table of Contents Purpose Of This Appendix ............................................................................................................. Below Tables C-1. Federal and State Status, Current and Proposed Forest Service Status, and Global Distribution of the TEPCS Plant Species on the Sawtooth National Forest ........................... C-1 C-2. Habit, Lifeform, Population Trend, and Habitat Grouping of the TEPCS Plant Species for the Sawtooth National Forest ............................................................................... C-3 C-3. Rare Communities, Federal and State Status, Rarity Class, Threats, Trends, and Research Natural Area Distribution for the Sawtooth National Forest ................................... C-5 C-4. Plant Species of Cultural Importance for the Sawtooth National Forest ................................... C-6 PURPOSE OF THIS APPENDIX This appendix is designed to provide detailed information about habitat, lifeform, status, distribution, and habitat grouping for the Threatened, Proposed, Candidate, and Sensitive (current and proposed) plant species found on the Sawtooth National Forest. The detailed information is provided to enable managers to more efficiently direct the implementation of Botanical Resources goals, objectives, standards, and guidelines. Additionally, this appendix provides detailed information about the rare plant communities located on the Sawtooth National Forest and should provide additional support of Forest-wide objectives. Species of cultural
    [Show full text]
  • P L a N T L I S T Water-Wise Trees and Shrubs for the High Plains
    P L A N T L I S T Water-Wise Trees and Shrubs for the High Plains By Steve Scott, Cheyenne Botanic Gardens Horticulturist 03302004 © Cheyenne Botanic Gardens 2003 710 S. Lions Park Dr., Cheyenne WY, 82001 www.botanic.org The following is a list of suitable water-wise trees and shrubs that are suitable for water- wise landscaping also known as xeriscapes. Many of these plants may suffer if they are placed in areas receiving more than ¾ of an inch of water per week in summer. Even drought tolerant trees and shrubs are doomed to failure if grasses or weeds are growing directly under and around the plant, especially during the first few years. It is best to practice tillage, hoeing, hand pulling or an approved herbicide to kill all competing vegetation for the first five to eight years of establishment. Avoid sweetening the planting hole with manure or compost. If the soil is needs improvement, improve the whole area, not just the planting hole. Trees and shrubs generally do best well with no amendments. Many of the plants listed here are not available in department type stores. Your best bets for finding these plants will be in local nurseries- shop your hometown first! Take this list with you. Encourage nurseries and landscapers to carry these plants! For more information on any of these plants please contact the Cheyenne Botanic Gardens (307-637-6458), the Cheyenne Forestry Department (307-637-6428) or your favorite local nursery. CODE KEY- The code key below will assist you in selecting for appropriate characteristics.
    [Show full text]
  • Lonicera Spp
    Species: Lonicera spp. http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/shrub/lonspp/all.html SPECIES: Lonicera spp. Choose from the following categories of information. Introductory Distribution and occurrence Botanical and ecological characteristics Fire ecology Fire effects Fire case studies Management considerations References INTRODUCTORY SPECIES: Lonicera spp. AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION FEIS ABBREVIATION SYNONYMS NRCS PLANT CODE COMMON NAMES TAXONOMY LIFE FORM FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS OTHER STATUS AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION: Munger, Gregory T. 2005. Lonicera spp. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/ [2007, September 24]. FEIS ABBREVIATIONS: LONSPP LONFRA LONMAA LONMOR LONTAT LONXYL LONBEL SYNONYMS: None NRCS PLANT CODES [172]: LOFR LOMA6 LOMO2 LOTA LOXY 1 of 67 9/24/2007 4:44 PM Species: Lonicera spp. http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/shrub/lonspp/all.html LOBE COMMON NAMES: winter honeysuckle Amur honeysuckle Morrow's honeysuckle Tatarian honeysuckle European fly honeysuckle Bell's honeysuckle TAXONOMY: The currently accepted genus name for honeysuckle is Lonicera L. (Caprifoliaceae) [18,36,54,59,82,83,93,133,161,189,190,191,197]. This report summarizes information on 5 species and 1 hybrid of Lonicera: Lonicera fragrantissima Lindl. & Paxt. [36,82,83,133,191] winter honeysuckle Lonicera maackii Maxim. [18,27,36,54,59,82,83,131,137,186] Amur honeysuckle Lonicera morrowii A. Gray [18,39,54,60,83,161,186,189,190,197] Morrow's honeysuckle Lonicera tatarica L. [18,38,39,54,59,60,82,83,92,93,157,161,186,190,191] Tatarian honeysuckle Lonicera xylosteum L.
    [Show full text]
  • A Vegetation Map of Carlsbad Caverns National Park, New Mexico 1
    ______________________________________________________________________________ A Vegetation Map of Carlsbad Caverns National Park, New Mexico ______________________________________________________________________________ 2003 A Vegetation Map of Carlsbad Caverns National Park, New Mexico 1 Esteban Muldavin, Paul Neville, Paul Arbetan, Yvonne Chauvin, Amanda Browder, and Teri Neville2 ABSTRACT A vegetation classification and high resolution vegetation map was developed for Carlsbad Caverns National Park, New Mexico to support natural resources management, particularly fire management and rare species habitat analysis. The classification and map were based on 400 field plots collected between 1999 and 2002. The vegetation communities of Carlsbad Caverns NP are diverse. They range from desert shrublands and semi-grasslands of the lowland basins and foothills up through montane grasslands, shrublands, and woodlands of the highest elevations. Using various multivariate statistical tools, we identified 85 plant associations for the park, many of them unique in the Southwest. The vegetation map was developed using a combination of automated digital processing (supervised classifications) and direct image interpretation of high-resolution satellite imagery (Landsat Thematic Mapper and IKONOS). The map is composed of 34 map units derived from the vegetation classification, and is designed to facilitate ecologically based natural resources management at a 1:24,000 scale with 0.5 ha minimum map unit size (NPS national standard). Along with an overview of the vegetation ecology of the park in the context of the classification, descriptions of the composition and distribution of each map unit are provided. The map was delivered both in hard copy and in digital form as part of a geographic information system (GIS) compatible with that used in the park.
    [Show full text]
  • CDFG Natural Communities List
    Department of Fish and Game Biogeographic Data Branch The Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program List of California Terrestrial Natural Communities Recognized by The California Natural Diversity Database September 2003 Edition Introduction: This document supersedes all other lists of terrestrial natural communities developed by the Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). It is based on the classification put forth in “A Manual of California Vegetation” (Sawyer and Keeler-Wolf 1995 and upcoming new edition). However, it is structured to be compatible with previous CNDDB lists (e.g., Holland 1986). For those familiar with the Holland numerical coding system you will see a general similarity in the upper levels of the hierarchy. You will also see a greater detail at the lower levels of the hierarchy. The numbering system has been modified to incorporate this richer detail. Decimal points have been added to separate major groupings and two additional digits have been added to encompass the finest hierarchal detail. One of the objectives of the Manual of California Vegetation (MCV) was to apply a uniform hierarchical structure to the State’s vegetation types. Quantifiable classification rules were established to define the major floristic groups, called alliances and associations in the National Vegetation Classification (Grossman et al. 1998). In this document, the alliance level is denoted in the center triplet of the coding system and the associations in the right hand pair of numbers to the left of the final decimal. The numbers of the alliance in the center triplet attempt to denote relationships in floristic similarity. For example, the Chamise-Eastwood Manzanita alliance (37.106.00) is more closely related to the Chamise- Cupleaf Ceanothus alliance (37.105.00) than it is to the Chaparral Whitethorn alliance (37.205.00).
    [Show full text]
  • F.3 References for Appendix F
    F-1 APPENDIX F: ECOREGIONS OF THE 11 WESTERN STATES AND DISTRIBUTION BY ECOREGION OF WIND ENERGY RESOURCES ON BLM-ADMINISTERED LANDS WITHIN EACH STATE F-2 F-3 APPENDIX F: ECOREGIONS OF THE 11 WESTERN STATES AND DISTRIBUTION BY ECOREGION OF WIND ENERGY RESOURCES ON BLM-ADMINISTERED LANDS WITHIN EACH STATE F.1 DESCRIPTIONS OF THE ECOREGIONS Ecoregions delineate areas that have a general similarity in their ecosystems and in the types, qualities, and quantities of their environmental resources. They are based on unique combinations of geology, physiography, vegetation, climate, soils, land use, wildlife, and hydrology (EPA 2004). Ecoregions are defined as areas having relative homogeneity in their ecological systems and their components. Factors associated with spatial differences in the quality and quantity of ecosystem components (including soils, vegetation, climate, geology, and physiography) are relatively homogeneous within an ecoregion. A number of individuals and organizations have characterized North America on the basis of ecoregions (e.g., Omernik 1987; CEC 1997; Bailey 1997). The intent of such ecoregion classifications has been to provide a spatial framework for the research, assessment, management, and monitoring of ecosystems and ecosystem components. The ecoregion discussions presented in this programmatic environmental impact statement (PEIS) follow the Level III ecoregion classification based on Omernik (1987) and refined through collaborations among U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regional offices, state resource management agencies, and other federal agencies (EPA 2004). The following sections provide brief descriptions of each of the Level III ecoregions that have been identified for the 11 western states in which potential wind energy development may occur on BLM-administered lands.
    [Show full text]
  • Representativeness Assessment of Research Natural Areas on National Forest System Lands in Idaho
    USDA United States Department of Representativeness Assessment of Agriculture Forest Service Research Natural Areas on Rocky Mountain Research Station National Forest System Lands General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-45 in Idaho March 2000 Steven K. Rust Abstract Rust, Steven K. 2000. Representativeness assessment of research natural areas on National Forest System lands in Idaho. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-45. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 129 p. A representativeness assessment of National Forest System (N FS) Research Natural Areas in ldaho summarizes information on the status of the natural area network and priorities for identification of new Research Natural Areas. Natural distribution and abundance of plant associations is compared to the representation of plant associations within natural areas. Natural distribution and abundance is estimated using modeled potential natural vegetation, published classification and inventory data, and Heritage plant community element occur- rence data. Minimum criteria are applied to select only viable, high quality plant association occurrences. In assigning natural area selection priorities, decision rules are applied to encompass consideration of the adequacy and viability of representation. Selected for analysis were 1,024 plant association occurrences within 21 4 natural areas (including 115 NFS Research Natural Areas). Of the 1,566 combinations of association within ecological sections, 28 percent require additional data for further analysis; 8, 40, and 12 percent, respectively, are ranked from high to low conservation priority; 13 percent are fully represented. Patterns in natural area needs vary between ecological section. The result provides an operational prioritization of Research Natural Area needs at landscape and subregional scales.
    [Show full text]
  • Cercocarpus Montanus Cercocarpus Montanus ‘USU-CEMO-001’ ‘USU-CEMO- Was Collected As a Suspected Dwarf Plant in TM Moffat County, CO, on 20 June 2014
    HORTSCIENCE 55(11):1871–1875. 2020. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI15343-20 Origin Cercocarpus montanus Cercocarpus montanus ‘USU-CEMO-001’ ‘USU-CEMO- was collected as a suspected dwarf plant in TM Moffat County, CO, on 20 June 2014. This 001’: A New Sego Supreme Plant unique, procumbent specimen was discovered laying over a rock on a windy ridge at an Asmita Paudel, Youping Sun, and Larry A. Rupp elevation of 2708 m (Fig. 2A). The appearance Center for Water Efficient Landscaping, Department of Plants, Soils, and looked different from the typical C. montanus Climate, Utah State University, 4820 Old Main Hill, Logan, UT 84322 nearby (Fig. 2B). The leaves are smaller and narrower with less serrations compared with Richard Anderson the typical plants (Fig. 2C). Healthy cuttings USU Botanical Center, 725 Sego Lily Drive, Kaysville, UT 84037 were collected, wrapped in moist newspapers and placed on ice until transferred to a cooler at Additional index words. alder-leaf mountain mahogany, cutting propagation, landscape plant, 4 °C. On 21 June, the terminal cuttings were native plant, true mountain mahogany rinsed in 1% ZeroTol (27.1% hydrogen diox- ide, 2.0% peroxyacetic acid, 70.9% inert in- gredient; BioSafe Systems, Hartford, CT), Sego SupremeTM is a plant introduction mose style with elongated achenes wounded by scraping 1 cm of bark from the program developed by the Utah State Uni- (Fig. 1B) (Shaw et al., 2004). It possesses base of the cutting on one side, treated with versity (USU) Botanical Center (Anderson an extensive root system and adapts to 2000 mg·L–1 indole-3-butyric acid (IBA)/1000 et al., 2014) to introduce native and adaptable medium to coarse textured soil.
    [Show full text]
  • Texas Big Tree Registry a List of the Largest Trees in Texas Sponsored by Texas a & M Forest Service
    Texas Big Tree Registry A list of the largest trees in Texas Sponsored by Texas A & M Forest Service Native and Naturalized Species of Texas: 320 ( D indicates species naturalized to Texas) Common Name (also known as) Latin Name Remarks Cir. Threshold acacia, Berlandier (guajillo) Senegalia berlandieri Considered a shrub by B. Simpson 18'' or 1.5 ' acacia, blackbrush Vachellia rigidula Considered a shrub by Simpson 12'' or 1.0 ' acacia, Gregg (catclaw acacia, Gregg catclaw) Senegalia greggii var. greggii Was named A. greggii 55'' or 4.6 ' acacia, Roemer (roundflower catclaw) Senegalia roemeriana 18'' or 1.5 ' acacia, sweet (huisache) Vachellia farnesiana 100'' or 8.3 ' acacia, twisted (huisachillo) Vachellia bravoensis Was named 'A. tortuosa' 9'' or 0.8 ' acacia, Wright (Wright catclaw) Senegalia greggii var. wrightii Was named 'A. wrightii' 70'' or 5.8 ' D ailanthus (tree-of-heaven) Ailanthus altissima 120'' or 10.0 ' alder, hazel Alnus serrulata 18'' or 1.5 ' allthorn (crown-of-thorns) Koeberlinia spinosa Considered a shrub by Simpson 18'' or 1.5 ' anacahuita (anacahuite, Mexican olive) Cordia boissieri 60'' or 5.0 ' anacua (anaqua, knockaway) Ehretia anacua 120'' or 10.0 ' ash, Carolina Fraxinus caroliniana 90'' or 7.5 ' ash, Chihuahuan Fraxinus papillosa 12'' or 1.0 ' ash, fragrant Fraxinus cuspidata 18'' or 1.5 ' ash, green Fraxinus pennsylvanica 120'' or 10.0 ' ash, Gregg (littleleaf ash) Fraxinus greggii 12'' or 1.0 ' ash, Mexican (Berlandier ash) Fraxinus berlandieriana Was named 'F. berlandierana' 120'' or 10.0 ' ash, Texas Fraxinus texensis 60'' or 5.0 ' ash, velvet (Arizona ash) Fraxinus velutina 120'' or 10.0 ' ash, white Fraxinus americana 100'' or 8.3 ' aspen, quaking Populus tremuloides 25'' or 2.1 ' baccharis, eastern (groundseltree) Baccharis halimifolia Considered a shrub by Simpson 12'' or 1.0 ' baldcypress (bald cypress) Taxodium distichum Was named 'T.
    [Show full text]
  • Kamiak Butte
    Checklist of Plants from Kamiak Butte (List alphabetical by genera within major groups) Ferns Cheilanthes gracillima lace lip-fern Cystopteris fragilis brittle bladder-fern Polypodium hesperium polypody Polystichum munitum swordfern Pteridium aquilinum bracken fern; brake fern Conifers Abies grandis grand fir Larix occidentalis western larch Pinus ponderosa ponderosa pine Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas fir Flowering plants Acer negundo box elder Achillea millefolium yarrow Agoseris heterophylla false dandelion Alyssum alyssoides alyssum Amelanchier alnifolia serviceberry Anaphalis margaritacea pearly-everlasting Anemone piperi windflower Antennaria luzuloides woodrush pussytoes Antennaria microphylla rosy pussytoes Antennaria racemosa raceme pussytoes Anthemis cotula mayweed, chamomile Apocynum androsaemifolium spreading dogbane Arabis sparsiflora sicklepod rockcress Arctostaphylos uva-ursi bearberry, kinnikinnik Arenaria congesta ballhead sandwort Arenaria microphylla bigleaf sandwort Arnica cordifolia heart-leaf arnica Artemisia absinthium wormwood Aster conspicuus showy aster Aster occidentalis western mountain aster Astragalus arrectus Palouse milkvetch Astragalus canadensis Canadian milkvetch Athysanus pusillus sandweed Balsamorhiza sagittata arrowleaf balsamroot Barbarea orthoceras American watercress Berberis repens creeping Oregon grape Besseya rubra red besseya Bromus brizaeformis rattlesnake grass Bromus carinatus California brome Bromus japonicus Japanese brome Bromus tectorum downy cheatgrass Bromus vulgaris Columbia brome
    [Show full text]
  • Montana Flora ID Specifications and Post-Fire Effects
    Students Investigating Burns FIRE EFFECTS ON MONTANA FLORA Identification tools and forest fire effects on forbs, shrubs, trees and weeds found in Montana’s Rocky Mountain Region Beth Neely Amy Cilimburg Avian Science Center University of Montana October 18, 2004 www.avainscience.org 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Primrose Family (Primulaceae)……………..…………...21 Shooting Star; Dodecatheon pulchellum Tall mountain shooting star (D. jeffreyi) Forbs (Wildflowers) & Shrubs Aster Family (Asteraceae)……………………………... ….5 Purslane Family (Portulaceae)…………………...………22 Arrowleaf Balsamroot; Balsamorhiza sagittata Miner’s Lettuce; Claytonia perfoliata Hawkweed; Hieracium albertinum,Hieracium albiflorum Heartleaf Arnica; Arnica cordifolia Rose Family (Rosaceae)…………..………………… ... ...23 Yarrow; Achillea millefolium Birch-Leaved Spiraea; Spiraea betulifolia Ninebark (Mallow Ninebark); Physocarpus malvaceus Barberry Family (Berberidaceae)…………………...… … 9 Serviceberry; Amelanchier alnifolia Oregon-grape; Mahonia repens Strawberry; Fragaria virginiana Buckthorn family(Rhamnaceae)………..………... … .. ..10 Saxifrage Family (Saxifragaceae)……..…………………27 Redstemmed buckbrush; Ceanothus sanguineus Starflower (Woodland Star); Lithophragma parviflorum Evening Primrose Family(Onagraceae)…………………11 Fireweed; Epilobium angustifolium Trees Pine Family (Pinaceae)………...…………………...…… 29 Figwort Family (Scrophulariaceae)……………………...12 Douglas Fir; Pseudotsuga menziesii Blue-eyed Mary; Collinsia parviflora Lodgepole Pine; Pinus contorta Ponderosa Pine; Pinus ponderosa Geranium Family(Geraniaceae)………………….
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Vegetation of Central Southwest Oregon, Based on GLO
    HISTORICAL VEGETATION OF CENTRAL SOUTHWEST OREGON, BASED ON GLO SURVEY NOTES Final Report to USDI BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT Medford District October 31, 2011 By O. Eugene Hickman and John A. Christy Consulting Rangeland Ecologist Oregon Biodiversity Information Center Retired, USDA - NRCS Portland State University 61851 Dobbin Road PSU – INR, P.O. Box 751 Bend, Oregon 97702 Portland, Oregon 97207-0751 (541, 312-2512) (503, 725-9953) [email protected] [email protected] Suggested citation: Hickman, O. Eugene and John A. Christy. 2011. Historical Vegetation of Central Southwest Oregon Based on GLO Survey Notes. Final Report to USDI Bureau of Land Management. Medford District, Oregon. 124 pp. ______________________________________________________________________________ 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................................................ 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................................................... 5 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................................. 7 SW OREGON PRE-GLO SURVEY HISTORY ....................................................................................................................... 7 THE GENERAL LAND OFFICE, ITS FUNCTION AND HISTORY...........................................................................................
    [Show full text]