Appendix B. General Wetland Class and Association Descriptions
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Willows of Interior Alaska
1 Willows of Interior Alaska Dominique M. Collet US Fish and Wildlife Service 2004 2 Willows of Interior Alaska Acknowledgements The development of this willow guide has been made possible thanks to funding from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service- Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge - order 70181-12-M692. Funding for printing was made available through a collaborative partnership of Natural Resources, U.S. Army Alaska, Department of Defense; Pacific North- west Research Station, U.S. Forest Service, Department of Agriculture; National Park Service, and Fairbanks Fish and Wildlife Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior; and Bonanza Creek Long Term Ecological Research Program, University of Alaska Fairbanks. The data for the distribution maps were provided by George Argus, Al Batten, Garry Davies, Rob deVelice, and Carolyn Parker. Carol Griswold, George Argus, Les Viereck and Delia Person provided much improvement to the manuscript by their careful editing and suggestions. I want to thank Delia Person, of the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge, for initiating and following through with the development and printing of this guide. Most of all, I am especially grateful to Pamela Houston whose support made the writing of this guide possible. Any errors or omissions are solely the responsibility of the author. Disclaimer This publication is designed to provide accurate information on willows from interior Alaska. If expert knowledge is required, services of an experienced botanist should be sought. Contents -
A Guide to the Identification of Salix (Willows) in Alberta
A Guide to the identification of Salix (willows) in Alberta George W. Argus 2008 Devonian Botanical Garden Workshop on willow identification Jasper National Park, Alberta 2 Available from: George W. Argus 310 Haskins Rd, Merrickville R3, Ontario, Canada K0G 1N0 email: [email protected] http://aknhp.uaa.alaska.edu/willow/index.html 3 CONTENTS Preface............................................................................................................................... 5 Salicaceae ...........…………………...........……........................................……..........…. 8 Classification ..........……………….…..….................................................….............…. 9 Some Useful Morphological Characters .......................................................….............. 11 Key to the Species.............................................................................................................13 Taxonomic Treatment .........................................................…..……….………............ 18 Glossary .....………………………………………....…..................………...........….... 61 Cited and Selected References ......................................................................................... 64 Salix Web Sites ...................……..................................……..................……............…. 68 Distribution Maps ............................................................................................................ 69 TABLES Table 1. Comparison of Salix athabascensis and Salix pedicellaris .............................. -
Part 2 – Fruticose Species
Appendix 5.2-1 Vegetation Technical Appendix APPENDIX 5.2‐1 Vegetation Technical Appendix Contents Section Page Ecological Land Classification ............................................................................................................ A5.2‐1‐1 Geodatabase Development .............................................................................................. A5.2‐1‐1 Vegetation Community Mapping ..................................................................................... A5.2‐1‐1 Quality Assurance and Quality Control ............................................................................ A5.2‐1‐3 Limitations of Ecological Land Classification .................................................................... A5.2‐1‐3 Field Data Collection ......................................................................................................... A5.2‐1‐3 Supplementary Results ..................................................................................................... A5.2‐1‐4 Rare Vegetation Species and Rare Ecological Communities ........................................................... A5.2‐1‐10 Supplementary Desktop Results ..................................................................................... A5.2‐1‐10 Field Methods ................................................................................................................. A5.2‐1‐16 Supplementary Results ................................................................................................... A5.2‐1‐17 Weed Species -
Terrestrial Ecosystem Mapping and Wildlife Interpretations for the Dunedin Study Area
TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEM MAPPING AND WILDLIFE INTERPRETATIONS FOR THE DUNEDIN STUDY AREA by: for: Ksenia Barton, Linda Veach, Gillian Radcliffe, and Pamela Williams SLOCAN FOREST PRODUCTS LIMITED MADRONE CONSULTANTS LTD. Fort Nelson, B. C. October 1998 Acknowledgments ACKNOWLEDGMENTS A particular thank you is owed to Bob Christie of Slocan Forest Products for making this project possible and for his assistance throughout. We also thank Melanie Clark and Mary Osika for their help in many aspects. This project would not have been possible without the support of Slocan Forest Products and the funding of Forest Renewal British Columbia. Craig DeLong of the Prince George Forest Region provided a great deal of assistance in the classification of the BWBSmw2 and the SWBmk. Del Meidinger and Will MacKenzie of the B.C. Ministry of Forests (MOF) provided advice on mapping the biogeoclimatic units, and on wetland classification, respectively. Ted Lea and Corey Erwin of the B.C. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks (B.C. MOELP) made useful comments on draft ecosystem mapping and on a draft version of this report. Bob Maxwell of the B.C. MOELP did the same for bioterrain mapping. Carmen Cadrin of the B.C. MOELP advised on expanded legend formats. Wayne Blashill audited some plots on behalf of the Prince George Forest Region and provided useful comments. Difficult plant specimens were identified by Terry MacIntosh (vascular plants and bryophytes), Chris Brayshaw (willows), and Trevor Goward (lichens). Additional funding for this was provided by the B.C. MOELP. The Conservation Data Centre provided lists of rare species. Thanks to Lisa Wilkinson, Bruce Harrison, and Andy Stewart of the B.C. -
The Flora of Prince Albert National Park (An Annotated Catalogue of the Vascular Plants Recorded Within the Park Boundaries)
THE FLORA OF PRINCE ALBERT NATIONAL PARK (AN ANNOTATED CATALOGUE OF THE VASCULAR PLANTS RECORDED WITHIN THE PARK BOUNDARIES) Compiled by Vernon L. Harms, Emeritus Professor, The W.P. Fraser Herbarium, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK Introduction This constitutes an updated list of the native and naturalized (i.e. non-cultivated) vascular plants that have been recorded within the boundaries of Prince Albert National Park, in central Saskatchewan, Canada. The list is annotated to include common names, synonyms, generalized habitats, and status indications. It is nomenclaturaly updated to include most of the numerous taxonomic innovations proffered during the last decades, except when this compiler has disagreed. An attempt has been made to exclude erroneous reports (see Appendix A) and to list only well validated plant records, mostly substantiated by voucher specimens filed in recognized herbaria. But some probable species confirmed from sites adjacent to, but not within, the park boundaries have been tentatively retained on this list; these are indicated by the symbol, “V?”. Numerous individuals over the last half-century have contributed to the vascular plant list for Prince Albert National Park. These include the provincial compilations by Fraser and Russell, et al (1937, 1944, 1954), and Breitung (1957), and the park listings of Carbyn and Armbruster (1968), Koponen (1973), Gimbarzovsky (1973), Cameron (1975), Gunna, et al. (1976), Padbury, Head, and Souster (1978), Hudson, Syroteuk and Preneman (1981), Brunner (1985), Trottier (1985), Goode (1986), Hudson (1992), Koral (1996), Harms (1996, 1997a, 1997b), Thrasher-Haug (1997), and Pidwerbeski (1997). Of particular recent significance have been the revisions of the park list by John Hudson and Adam Pidwerbeski, with the present list representing an updating and fine-tuning of the latter. -
Canada: the State of the World's Forest Genetic Resources
CANADA This country report is prepared as a contribution to the FAO publication, The Report on the State of the World’s Forest Genetic Resources. The content and the structure are in accordance with the recommendations and guidelines given by FAO in the document Guidelines for Preparation of Country Reports for the State of the World’s Forest Genetic Resources (2010). These guidelines set out recommendations for the objective, scope and structure of the country reports. Countries were requested to consider the current state of knowledge of forest genetic diversity, including: Between and within species diversity List of priority species; their roles and values and importance List of threatened/endangered species Threats, opportunities and challenges for the conservation, use and development of forest genetic resources These reports were submitted to FAO as official government documents. The report is presented on www. fao.org/documents as supportive and contextual information to be used in conjunction with other documentation on world forest genetic resources. The content and the views expressed in this report are the responsibility of the entity submitting the report to FAO. FAO may not be held responsible for the use which may be made of the information contained in this report. Report On The State of Canada’s Forest Genetic Resources April 2012 Preparation of the report The report was prepared by: Tannis Beardmore Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service – Atlantic Region, Hugh John Fleming Forestry Centre, 1350 Regent St. S. PO 4000, Fredericton, New Brunswick, E3G 5P7. E-mail: [email protected] Kathleen Forbes Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service – Atlantic Region, Hugh John Fleming Forestry Centre, 1350 Regent St. -
2004 Northwest Territories Forest Ecosystem Classification Pilot Project
2004 Northwest Territories Forest Ecosystem Classification Pilot Project Final Report Prepared by: EcoDynamics Consulting Group International Inc., Prince Albert, Saskatchewan Prepared for: Government of the Northwest Territories, Department of Resources, Wildlife, and Economic Development November, 2004 NWT FEC Pilot Project Final Report November 2004 Table of Contents Section Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Project Background and Scope ....................................................................................... 1 1.2 Study Area Locations and Description ........................................................................... 2 2.0 PILOT PROJECT METHODOLOGY .......................................................................... 4 2.1 Field Sampling Approach ............................................................................................... 4 2.2 Field Data Collection ...................................................................................................... 4 3.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ....................................................................................... 6 3.1 Provisional Ecosite Calls ................................................................................................ 6 3.2 Apparent Environmental Gradients ................................................................................ 8 3.3 Utility of the Manual and Field Forms ........................................................................ -
Alberta Conservation Information Management System Ecological Community Tracking List
ALBERTA CONSERVATION INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ECOLOGICAL COMMUNITY TRACKING LIST Laurie Hamilton Compiled by Lorna Allen 2012 Front page: aspen / common blueberry woodland (CEAB000209 Populus tremuloides / Vaccinium myrtilloides woodland) Photo by Laurie Hamilton An open Populus tremuloides woodland of the Peace River Parkland and Dry Mixedwood Subregions. It may also occur in the Central Mixedwood, and possibly in the Athabasca Plain subregion. This community is associated with submesic to subxeric, well-drained, sandy soils. Populus tremuloides dominates the open canopy and is usually the only tree species present. There is a low shrub layer with Vaccinium myrtilloides dominant. Arctostaphylos uva-ursi and Maianthemum canadensis are the most common species in the herb/dwarf shrub layer. A detailed Community Characterization Abstract for this type is provided in Appendix 3. For copies of this report, contact: Alberta Conservation Information Management System Alberta Tourism, Parks and Recreation 2nd Floor, 9820 – 106 Street Edmonton, AB T5K 2J6 780-427-6621 ISBN No. 978-0-7785-9594-6 http://tpr.alberta.ca/parks/heritageinfocentre/default.aspx This publication may be cited as: Allen, L. 2012. Alberta Conservation Information Management System Ecological Community Tracking List. Alberta Tourism, Parks and Recreation, Edmonton, Alberta. Alberta Conservation Information Management System (ACIMS), Alberta Tourism, Parks and Recreation, 2nd Floor 9820 106 Street, Edmonton, AB T5K 2J6 (780)427-6621 ACIMS is a member of NatureServe Canada and NatureServe - a Network Connecting Science with Conservation. ALBERTA CONSERVATION INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ECOLOGICAL COMMUNITY TRACKING LIST Compiled by Lorna Allen Developing an Ecological Community Tracking and Watch List Natural ecological communities are defined as recurring assemblages of plant species; the species occurring together because they respond similarly to a variety of site attributes (Grossman et al 1994). -
Salix): Does This Result from a Trans-Specific Selective Sweep?
Molecular Ecology (2014) doi: 10.1111/mec.12837 Understanding the spectacular failure of DNA barcoding in willows (Salix): Does this result from a trans-specific selective sweep? DIANA M. PERCY,*† GEORGE W. ARGUS,‡ QUENTIN C. CRONK,*† ARON J. FAZEKAS,§ PRASAD R. KESANAKURTI,§ KEVIN S. BURGESS,¶ BRIAN C. HUSBAND,§ STEVEN G. NEWMASTER,§ SPENCER C.H. BARRETT** and SEAN W. GRAHAM*† *Department of Botany, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z4, †Biodiversity Research Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z4, ‡Canadian Museum of Nature, PO Box 3443 Stn “D”, Ottawa, ON, Canada K1P 6P4, §Department of Integrative Biology, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada N1G 2W1, ¶Department of Biology, Columbus State University, Columbus, GA 31907-5645, USA, **Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, University of Toronto, 25 Willcocks Street, Toronto, ON, Canada M5S 3B2 Abstract Willows (Salix: Salicaceae) form a major ecological component of Holarctic floras and consequently are an obvious target for a DNA-based identification system. We sur- veyed two to seven plastid genome regions (~3.8 kb; ~3% of the genome) from 71 Salix species across all five subgenera, to assess their performance as DNA barcode markers. Although Salix has a relatively high level of interspecific hybridization, this may not sufficiently explain the near complete failure of barcoding that we observed: only one species had a unique barcode. We recovered 39 unique haplotypes, from more than 500 specimens, that could be partitioned into six major haplotype groups. A unique variant of group I (haplotype 1*) was shared by 53 species in three of five Salix subgenera. -
Applying the Concept of Stewardship Responsibility in British Columbia
technical subcommittee component report Applying the Concept of Stewardship Responsibility in British Columbia PREPARED BY: FRED L. BUNNELL, L. KREMSATER AND I. HOUDE FOR: THE BIODIVERSITY BC TECHNICAL SUBCOMMITTEE FOR THE REPORT ON THE STATUS OF BIODIVERSITY IN BC DECEMBER 2006 Applying the Concept of Stewardship Responsibility in British Columbia By: Fred L. Bunnell L. Kremsater I. Houde Prepared for: The Biodiversity BC Technical Sub Committee For the Report on the Status on Biodiversity in BC December 2006 Summary Lists of species at risk are designed primarily to provide an easily understood estimate of risk and extinction. The lists have become linked to decision-making processes, often in unhelpful ways. Unhelpful guidance can be reduced through the concept of responsibility. The broad concept of stewardship responsibility is simple: within a jurisdiction we should allocate greater effort to conserve species for which we have a greater proportion of the global population or range (responsibility). That is, other things being equal, a species having 70% of its population or range within British Columbia should receive greater conservation effort than a species having 2% of its range within the province. The concept is widely applied in international conservation efforts and can be adapted readily to a particular jurisdiction. For most species, responsibility is estimated from the proportion of occupied range occurring within British Columbia. The task is simple but tedious because a variety of sources are required for the vast majority of species. Estimating responsibility for ecosystems confronts a major challenge: there is far less agreement on what is the same ecosystem than on what is the same species. -
NWT Species 2006-2010 Report
NWT SPECIES 2006–2010 General Status Ranks of Wild Species in the Northwest Territories In collaboration with: Wildlife Management Advisory Council (NWT) Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication NWT species 2006-2010 : general status ranks of wild species in the Northwest Territories. “This document was edited and published by the Working Group on General Status of NWT Species: Department of Environment and Natural Resources, GNWT in collaboration with Government of Canada, Environment Canada, Canadian Wildlife Service, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Sahtu Renewable Resources Board, Gwich’in Renewable Resource Board, Wildlife Management Advisory Council (NWT), Fisheries Joint Management Committee” Includes bibliographical references: III p. ISBN 0-7708-0148-X 1. Wildlife monitoring – Northwest Territories 2. Biodiversity conservation – Northwest Territories. 3. Endangered species – Northwest Territories. 4. Animals – Northwest Territories. 5. Plants – Northwest Territories. I. Working Group on General Status of NWT Species (NWT) II. Northwest Territories. Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources III. Title: General status ranks of wild species in the Northwest Territories. QH106.2.N67N87 2006 333.95’16097193 C2006-903694-2 Suggested citation: Working Group on General Status of NWT Species. 2006. NWT Species 2006-2010 - General Status Ranks of Wild Species in the Northwest Territories, Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Government of the Northwest Territories, Yellowknife, NT. III pp. Copyright © 2006 by Government of the Northwest Territories, Department of Environment and Natural Resources. All rights reserved. Portions of this report may be reproduced for educational reasons, provided credit is given to the Government of the Northwest Territories. This document is also available at www.nwtwildlife.com. -
Since the Publication of the Genus Salix in Alaska and the Yukon in 1973, Many Changes Have Been Made in Salix Nomenclatural and Classification
Preface 14 November 2001 George W. Argus ([email protected]) Since the publication of The Genus Salix in Alaska and the Yukon in 1973, many changes have been made in Salix nomenclatural and classification. In order the bring this volume up to date the following changes and corrections should be noted. 1. Nomenclatural changes and corrections Table 1. p. 11, line 20. Johnson and Packer 1968 chromosome number for Salix rotundifolia Trautv. applies to Salix phlebophylla Andersson. Table 1. p. 11, line 39. Johnson and Packer 1968 chromosome number for Salix brachycarpa Nutt. ssp. niphoclada applies to Salix hastata L. Table 1. p. 11, line 41. Johnson and Packer 1968 chromosome number for Salix glauca was retracted by the authors. Table 1. p. 12, line 21. The Taylor and Mulligan 1968 chromosome number for Salix scouleriana Barratt ex Hooker applies to Salix hookeriana J. Barratt ex Hook. p. 35. Salix lasiandra Benth. = Salix lucida Muhl. subsp. lasiandra (Benth.) E. Murray p. 41. Salix babylonica L. in Alaska was reidentified as Salix ´sepulcralis Simonk. p. 43. Salix interior Rowlee = Salix exigua Nutt. subsp. interior (Rowlee) Cronquist p. 81-89. Header and Section 7. Glaucae Pax should read Salix sect. Diplodictya C. K. Schneider p. 89. Salix brachycarpa Nutt. ssp. brachycarpa = Salix brachycarpa Nutt. var. brachycarpa p. 91. Salix brachycarpa Nutt. ssp. niphoclada (Rydb.) Argus = Salix niphoclada Rydb. p. 97. The Beringia Phase (var. glauca) = Salix glauca L. subsp. stipularis (Flod. ex Häyrén) Hiitonen p. 97. The Western Phase (var. acutifolia) = Salix glauca L. subsp. acutifolia (Hook.) Hultén p. 98. The Rocky Mountain Phase (var.