Melilotus officinalis http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/meloff/all.html

Index of Species Information

SPECIES: Melilotus officinalis

Introductory Distribution and Occurrence Management Considerations Botanical and Ecological Characteristics Fire Ecology Fire Effects References

Introductory

SPECIES: Melilotus officinalis

AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION : Sullivan, Janet. 1992. Melilotus officinalis. 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].

ABBREVIATION : MELOFF

SYNONYMS : NO-ENTRY

SCS PLANT CODE : MEOF

COMMON NAMES : yellow sweetclover sweetclover official melilot trefle d'odeur jaune (Quebec)

TAXONOMY : The accepted scientific name for yellow sweetclover is Melilotus officinalis (L.) Lam. Natural hybrids are rare [25,65].

LIFE FORM : Forb

FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS : No special status

1 of 14 9/24/2007 4:53 PM Melilotus officinalis http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/meloff/all.html

OTHER STATUS : NO-ENTRY

DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE

SPECIES: Melilotus officinalis

GENERAL DISTRIBUTION : Yellow sweetclover was introduced to North America from Europe in the 18th century as a forage crop species. It is now pandemic in the United States and nearly so in Canada, occurring more frequently in the southern third [29,62,64,66].

ECOSYSTEMS : FRES10 White - red - jack pine FRES14 Oak - pine FRES15 Oak - hickory FRES17 Elm - ash - cottonwood FRES18 Maple - beech - birch FRES20 Douglas-fir FRES21 Ponderosa pine FRES26 Lodgepole pine FRES28 Western hardwoods FRES29 Sagebrush FRES34 Chaparral - mountain shrub FRES35 Pinyon - juniper FRES38 Plains grasslands FRES39 Prairie

STATES : AL AK AZ AR CA CO CT DE FL GA HI ID IL IN IA KS KY LA ME MD MA MI MN MS MO MT NE NV NH NJ NM NY NC ND OH OK OR PA RI SC SD TN TX UT VT VA WA WI WY AB MB NB NF NT NS ON PE PQ SK YT

BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS : 1 Northern Pacific Border 2 Cascade Mountains 3 Southern Pacific Border 4 Sierra Mountains 5 Columbia Plateau 6 Upper Basin and Range 7 Lower Basin and Range 8 Northern Rocky Mountains 9 Middle Rocky Mountains 10 Wyoming Basin 11 Southern Rocky Mountains 12 Colorado Plateau 13 Rocky Mountain Piedmont 14 Great Plains 15 Black Hills Uplift 16 Upper Missouri Basin and Broken Lands

KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :

2 of 14 9/24/2007 4:53 PM Melilotus officinalis http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/meloff/all.html

Common in many Kuchler Plant Associations

SAF COVER TYPES : Common in many SAF Cover Types

SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES : NO-ENTRY

HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES : Yellow sweetclover is found in a wide variety of habitats. Clary and Medin [11] reported yellow sweetclover as an important forb in riparian zones dominated by Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratense) and bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata).

Hopkins and others [32] reported that yellow sweetcover is an important understory component of cottonwood (Populus spp.) woodlands. The overstory components are eastern cottonwood (P. deltoides var. deltoides), Rocky Mountain juniper (Juniperus scopulorum), and green ash (Fraxinus pensylvanica).

Girard and others [28] reported yellow sweetclover as a consistent, important understory species in an eastern cottonwood/green ash community type. The other dominant overstory species is Rocky Mountain juniper. Important shrubs are wolfberry and wild rose (Rosa woodsii). Dominant herbs are yellow sweetclover, veiny meadowrue (Thalictrum venulosum), and false Solomon's seal (Smilacina stellata), with no important grasses. They also reported a similar community type in the same series: eastern cottonwood/Rocky Mountain juniper plus green ash, with the same important shrubs. The herb layer is dominated by yellow sweetclover, poison ivy (Toxicodendron rydbergii), Canada wildrye (Elymus canadensis), and daisyseed meadowrue (Thalictrum dasycarpum). In addition, they reported a ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa)/Rocky Mountain juniper habitat type with the shrub layer dominated by wolfberry and the herb layer dominated by western wheatgrass (Pascopyrum smithii), blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis), and sedge. Yellow sweetclover is consistently present but not a major component of ground cover.

MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS

SPECIES: Melilotus officinalis

IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE : Eaten by most herbivores including elk, deer (all species), pronghorn, and domestic livestock, yellow sweetclover is an important range, forage, hay, and pasture species [20,62,64,66]. Yellow sweetclover will comprise up to 35 percent of pronghorn diet [5]. Mule deer diet consists of up to 77 percent yellow sweetclover in summer and early fall [16,20,44,45,49]. Kufeld [39] and Mackie [44] rated sweetclover as highly valuable for Rocky Mountain elk in summer and fall.

Yellow sweetclover is important to birds as cover and food, and is planted with grass seed to improve sage grouse and prairie chicken

3 of 14 9/24/2007 4:53 PM Melilotus officinalis http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/meloff/all.html

habitat [2,36,48,58,61]. It is considered important nesting habitat for dabbling ducks (mallard, gadwall, blue-winged teal) in hayland and seeded fields [12,41]. Cropland adjustment program areas (fields left fallow for wildlife habitat) in North Dakota containing yellow sweetclover as a principal species with wheatgrasses (Agropyron spp.) or brome grasses (Bromus spp.) and alfalfa (Medicago sativa) provide habitat for pheasants, sharp-tailed grouse, greater prairie chickens, American bitterns, marsh hawks (northern harriers), short-eared owls, and many species of passerine birds [19,36,67].

A problem with yellow sweetclover as a hay crop is sweetclover bleeding disease. Coumarin, which is present is sweetclover and gives its bitter taste, breaks down to dicoumarol when sweetclover becomes moldy. Dicoumarol is a powerful anticoagulant and causes hemorrhage in cattle (it is not as harmful to sheep or horses), and can result in death. Sweetclover bleeding disease can be avoided by proper curing of sweetclover hay and/or by interspersing the feeding of moldy hay with other materials, as it takes several weeks of feeding moldy hay to cause the disease. Cultivars with reduced coumarin content are available [9,64]. Bloat can also be caused by yellow sweetclover but occurs less frequently than with alfalfa (Medicago sativa) or clover (Trifolium spp.) [44,64].

PALATABILITY : Yellow sweetclover has a bitter taste, making it less palatable to cattle than other legumes. It is more palatable in early spring and summer, becoming woody in late summer and fall [62,64].

Palatability of yellow sweetclover for elk and deer is rated high in spring and summer, and for pronghorn is rated medium in summer [60].

Palatability of yellow sweetclover in several western states has been rated as follows [17]:

UT CO WY MT ND Cattle fair good good good good Sheep fair good good good good Horses fair fair good good good

NUTRITIONAL VALUE : Yellow sweetclover makes palatable and nutritious hay when properly cured. Protein content and digestible protein of yellow sweetclover hay was reported as follows [48]:

crude protein 15.0 % digestible protein-cattle 10.2 % goats 10.8 % horses 10.5 % rabbits 10.4 % sheep 10.6 %

COVER VALUE : Yellow sweetclover provides good cover for small mammals and birds [12,19,36,41]. Wildlife cover values for several western states are as follows [17]:

UT CO WY MT ND Elk ---- poor ---- poor ---- Mule deer fair ---- poor good good White-tailed deer ------poor ---- good Pronghorn fair ---- poor good good Upland game birds good good good good good Waterfowl fair ---- good ---- good Small nongame birds good good good good good Small mammals good good good good good

4 of 14 9/24/2007 4:53 PM Melilotus officinalis http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/meloff/all.html

VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES : Yellow sweetclover grows rapidly and is easy to establish, therefore it is widely used in grass and forb seed mixtures for stabilization of disturbed sites such as road cuts, mining disturbances and mine spoils [1,14,30,55] after any type of burn [10,15,23,31,37], and for rehabilitation of overgrazed rangeland [42,50,62].

OTHER USES AND VALUES : Yellow sweetclover is often planted in grass/forb seed mixtures on range sites, including pinyon (Pinus edulis)-juniper (Juniperus spp.) communities, to improve forage production [13,35,58,62], and for soil improvement, to increase available soil nitrogen and to improve drainage, aerate the soil, and increase water absorption in heavy clay soils [62,64].

Yellow sweetclover is considered an excellent source of nectar for honey production and also an excellent source of pollen [62].

Yellow sweetclover is used medicinally as a source of an anticoagulant (dicoumarol and derivatives) used to reduce postsurgical blood clots [62].

OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : Use of yellow sweetclover as an agricultural species has declined in part due to its tendency to "volunteer" for years after planting and to its weediness in colonizing disturbed sites. It is considered a noxious weed in some areas; its ability to colonize undisturbed habitat is related to the amount of disturbed area (including roads) adjacent to habitat and the amount of light penetrating to the understory [26]. Additional factors contributing to the decline in its use include: stand establishment problems due to sweetclover weevil (Sitona cylindricollis), bleeding disease, a decrease in rotation systems of cropping, and the availability of inexpensive nitrogen fertilizers [62,69].

Control: In an effort to restore native prairie, invading yellow sweetclover is controlled with a combination of brush-hogging, herbicides, and prescribed fire [8]. Yellow sweetclover is sensitive to 2,4-D, dicamba, tordon, aflon, nevuron, and dalapon. It is more difficult to kill with 2,4-D in the second year [67].

Establishment: To provide habitat for dabbling duck nesting, it is necessary to establish vigorous stands with the tallest, densest cover form possible. This can be achieved through a combination of prescribed fire and planned grazing for native seedings, but mechanical tillage, with reseeding every 2 years, is best to maintain introduced grasses and legumes [19]. Prairie grouse habitat can be developed on cultivated land by planting yellow sweetclover and leaving it undisturbed until stand vigor declines, and then restoring it by tillage and replanting or by prescribed fires [36].

If yellow sweetclover is to be used to convert sage range to grassland, there needs to be a minimum of 11 inches (30 cm) of annual precipitation. It should be seeded in grass mixtures at a rate of 1 to 2 pounds of yellow sweetclover seed per acre (2.2 kg/ha) [35]. Love and Jones [42] recommend a grazing rotation that includes no grazing the first year; light grazing the second; grazing early in the third year then removal of stock; a prescribed fire the fourth year, keeping stock off; then a repeat of the cycle, with the fifth year as the second. Removal of tops during the critical growth period in September reduces root growth and top growth the following year. No grazing or mowing should be done during this time [62,67]. Nitrogen fertilizers are not needed if sweetclover is inoculated with Rhizobium bacteria at seeding; it does respond to phosphorous, potassium, and sulfur fertizilation [64].

Elliot [22] found that yellow sweetclover does not affect seedling

5 of 14 9/24/2007 4:53 PM Melilotus officinalis http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/meloff/all.html

survival of ponderosa pine and can be used as part of soil stabilization seeding mixtures.

Rietveld [56] noted that the bunchgrasses contain a substance toxic to germination of sweetclover, and that sweetclover roots contain substances allelopathic to crested wheatgrass (Agropyron cristatum), Russian wildrye (Psathyrostachys juncea), intermediate wheatgrass (Thinipyrum intermedium), smooth brome (Bromus inermis), and timothy (Phleum pratense).

Diseases and Pests: Some diseases of yellow sweetclover include root rot (Phytophthora cactorum), brown root rot (Plenodomus meloliti), common leaf spot (Pseudopeziza meliloti), and gray stem canker (Ascochyta caulicola). The 'Yukon' cultivar is resistant to brown root rot and gray stem canker. Common leaf spot is controlled by cutting before defoliation becomes severe, and gray stem canker can be controlled through crop rotation and cutting fields cleanly [62,64].

The primary pest of yellow sweetclover is the sweetclover weevil (Sitona cylindricollis). To avoid infestation, new stands should not be planted adjacent to established stands. Cultivars that are more resistant to sweetclover weevil are available [62]. Other serious insect pests include grasshoppers and cutworms, which can be controlled with poisoned baits [69].

BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS

SPECIES: Melilotus officinalis

GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS : Yellow sweetclover is 20 to 60 inches (50-150 cm) tall. It is a biennial legume, with a narrow root crown producing 1 to 10 upright stems; short, erect rhizomes; a deep taproot; and adventitious roots that extend the root diameter to 12 to 16 inches (30-40 cm) [62,64,67]. The roots form nodules when infected with Rhizobium bacteria, but no mycorrhizal associates have been reported [67].

Yellow sweetclover will take up molybdenum at a higher rate than grasses, maintaining a low copper to molybdenum ratio when grown on sites with high concentrations of those metals [14].

RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM : Therophyte Hemicryptophyte

REGENERATION PROCESSES : Yellow sweetclover reproduces by seed. The seeds are "hard" (impervious to water) and require scarification before germinating. Natural scarification occurs through freezing and thawing; passage through animal digestive tract; or by fire. The seeds remain viable for 40 or more years, and can be either wind dispersed, carried by rainwater, or carried by animals [62,64,67]. Yellow sweetclover is winter hardy, with contractile roots that pull the crown 2 inches (5 cm) or more below the soil surface in the fall. No vegetative reproduction appears to occur in this species [64,67].

6 of 14 9/24/2007 4:53 PM Melilotus officinalis http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/meloff/all.html

SITE CHARACTERISTICS : Yellow sweetclover will grow on a wide variety of soil types and is tolerant of saline and alkaline soils [21,63,69]. It is not tolerant of acidic soils [33,63]. Often found on disturbed sites, yellow sweetclover can occupy a wide variety of sites, including roadsides, railroad beds, sand bars, and prairie dog colonies [46,52]. It is highly drought tolerant; water stress is critical only for a short period during germination [55,69].

Some common associates of sweetclover include white sweetclover (Melilotus alba), quackgrass (Agropyron repens), wild carrot (Daucus carota), black medic (Medicago lupulina), buckhorn plantain (Plantago lanceolata), goldenrod (Solidago spp.), common dandelion (Taraxacum officinale), milkweed (Asclepias syriaca), timothy, red clover (Trifolium pratense), and white clover (T. repens) [66].

Associates of yellow sweetclover in riparian zones dominated by Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratense) are slender wheatgrass (Elymus trachycaulus ssp. trachycaulus), sedge (Carex spp.), mannagrass (Glyceria spp), Baltic rush (Juncus balticus), field horsetail (Equisetum arvense), common yarrow (Achillea millefolium), Aster spp., clover (Trifolium spp.), and lupine (Lupinus spp.) [11].

SUCCESSIONAL STATUS : Obligate Initial Community species

Yellow sweetclover is not tolerant of shade. In a study of secondary succession in New Jersey, it was found only on newly abandoned fields (2 years) and not on older sites [4,67]. In a study of succession, Eichhorn [21] found it in various cover percentages (not steadily increasing or decreasing) up to 18 years following a wildfire in Montana. Rietveld [56] found yellow sweetclover as an invader species in a ponderosa pine/bunchgrass community, able to colonize disturbed areas. If the ground surface is covered by perennial species, yellow sweetclover tends to be eliminated, although it will persist on sites that have periodic disturbances [30,67]

Roberts [57], in a seed bank study of secondary succession, found sweetclover seeds only on early seral sites.

SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT : Germination of yellow sweetclover can occur at any time of year, with the largest flush of new seedlings in March and April. The first year of growth involves a primary, branched stem and a primary root, sometimes branched. Yellow sweetclover only rarely flowers the first year. The first year is characterized by rapid top growth through late summer, then a critical growth phase that occurs in mid-September, in which carbohydrates and nitrogen are transferred to the roots. During this phase and into winter dormancy the crown buds become enlarged and conspicuous. First year shoots die back with freezing temperatures [67].

The second year of growth begins in early spring with rapid growth from the crown buds or rhizomes, using the previous fall-accumulated reserves, which are not replenished. Flowering begins in May and June, continuing through frost, with seed set in June and July [62,67].

FIRE ECOLOGY

7 of 14 9/24/2007 4:53 PM Melilotus officinalis http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/meloff/all.html

SPECIES: Melilotus officinalis

FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS : Fire scarifies the seed coat of yellow sweetclover, increasing germination. Yellow sweetclover will colonize areas disturbed by fire [30,62].

POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY : Caudex, growing points in soil Ground residual colonizer (on-site, initial community) Secondary colonizer - off-site seed

FIRE EFFECTS

SPECIES: Melilotus officinalis

IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT : Fire can damage tissues of yellow sweetclover, particularly the crown buds of second-year plants. If these are killed by an early spring fire, the plant cannot produce any new stems. Fire can kill or injure stems at the base [30].

DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT : NO-ENTRY

PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE : Fire kill of the crown buds of second year effectively kills the plant. Death or injury to branched stems at the base will severely retard new growth; once the crown buds have expanded, new growth occur from the tip of branches and from buds in branch axils. No additional top growth will occur after stems have been severed or killed below the axil of the lowest lateral branch. An early May fire appears to result in a decrease in second-year plants and an increase in first-year plants. A July fire appears to decrease both first and second year plants, and a fall burn results in increased winter mortality if it occurs at or before the critical growth period [30].

DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE : The Research Project Summary Vegetation response to restoration treatments in ponderosa pine-Douglas-fir forests of western Montana provides information on prescribed fire and postfire response of plant community species including yellow sweetclover.

FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : Burning aids establishment of yellow sweetclover on grassland, probably because it aids germination of seeds through scarification and by creating openings in which sweetclover can establish. If the management goal is to establish yellow sweetclover, then an early spring fire would be recommended [30].

8 of 14 9/24/2007 4:53 PM Melilotus officinalis http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/meloff/all.html

If the management goal is to suppress yellow sweetclover, there are three strategies that may achieve that objective. The first strategy is an annual early May fire once the second-year shoots are visible. The second strategy involves burning every second year in July before the second-year plants have ripened seed. The third strategy is to burn annually near the beginning of the critical growth period. Whether the presence of the sweetclover is more damaging than the fire regime to the management objectives is a question that should be considered. A rotational scheme of this type of management is recommended: divide the area into plots that undergo different treatments and alter treatments over time [30,33].

REFERENCES

SPECIES: Melilotus officinalis

REFERENCES :

1. Anderson, Roger C.; Birkenholz, Dale E. 1983. Growth and establishment of prairie grasses and domestic forage on strip-mine soils. In: Kucera, Clair L., ed. Proceedings, 7th North American prairie conference; 1980 August 4-6; Springfield, MO. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri: 183-188. [3219]

2. Autenrieth, Robert; Molini, William; Braun, Clait, eds. 1982. Sage grouse management practices. Tech. Bull No. 1. Twin Falls, ID: Western States Sage Grouse Committee. 42 p. [7531]

3. Baker, William L.; Kennedy, Susan C. 1985. Presettlement vegetation of part of northwestern Moffat County, Colorado, described from remnants. Great Basin Naturalist. 45(4): 747-783. [384]

4. Bard, Gily E. 1952. Secondary succession on the Piedmont of New Jersey. Ecological Monographs. 22(3): 195-215. [4777]

5. Bayless, Steve. 1971. Relationships between big game and sagebrush. Paper presented at: Annual meeting of the Northwest Section of the Wildlife Society; 1971 March 25-26; Bozeman, MT. 14 p. On file with: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT. [17098]

6. Bernard, Stephen R.; Brown, Kenneth F. 1977. Distribution of mammals, reptiles, and amphibians by BLM physiographic regions and A.W. Kuchler's associations for the eleven western states. Tech. Note 301. Denver, CO: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 169 p. [434]

7. Biondini, Mario E.; Redente, Edward F. 1986. Interactive effect of stimulus and stress on plant community diversity in reclaimed lands. Reclamation and Revegetation Research. 4: 211-222. [449]

8. Bronny, Christopher. 1991. Dolomite hill prairie restoration underway at Byron Forest Preserve District (Illinois). Restoration & Management Notes. 9(2): 106-107. [17576]

9. Burrows, George E.; Tyrl, Ronald J.; Rollins, Dale;. [and others]. [n.d.]. Toxic plants of Oklahoma and the Southern Plains. E-868.

9 of 14 9/24/2007 4:53 PM Melilotus officinalis http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/meloff/all.html

Stillwater, OK: Oklahoma State University, Cooperative Extension Service. 40 p. [4994]

10. Clary, Warren P. 1988. Plant density and cover response to several seeding techniques following wildfire. Res. Note INT-384. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 6 p. [5609]

11. Clary, Warren P.; Medin, Dean E. 1990. Differences in vegetation biomass and structure due to cattle grazing in a northern Nevada riparian ecosystem. Res. Pap. INT-427. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 8 p. [15531]

12. Cowardin, Lewis M.; Gilmer, David S.; Shaiffer, Charles W. 1985. Mallard recruitment in the agricultural environment of North Dakota. Wildlife Monographs No. 92. Washington, DC: The Wildlife Society. 37 p. [18150]

13. Davis, James N.; Harper, Kimball T. 1990. Weedy annuals and establishment of seeded species on a chained juniper-pinyon woodland in central Utah. In: McArthur, E. Durant; Romney, Evan M.; Smith, Stanley D.; Tueller, Paul T., compilers. Proceedings--symposium on cheatgrass invasion, shrub die-off, and other aspects of shrub biology and management; 1989 April 5-7; Las Vegas, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-276. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 72-79. [12872]

14. DePuit, Edward J.; Coenenberg, Joe G. 1989. Complementary grazing of reclaimed mined land and native rangeland pastures in Montana. In: Walker, D. G.; Powter, C. B.; Pole, M. W., compilers. Reclamation, a global perspective: Proceedings of the conference; 1989 August 27-31; Calgary, AB. Edmonton, AB: Alberta Land Conservation and Reclamation Council: 185-198. [14356]

15. Despain, Del W. 1987. History and results of prescribed burning of pinyon-juniper woodland on the Hualapai Indian Reservation in Arizona. In: Everett, Richard L., compiler. Proceedings--pinyon-juniper conference; 1986 January 13-16; Reno, NV. Gen. Tech. Tep. INT-215. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 145-151. [4754]

16. Dietz, Donald R.; Nagy, Julius G. 1976. Mule deer nutrition and plant utilization. In: Workman; Low, eds. Mule deer decline in the West: A symposium; [Date of conference unknown]; [Location of conference unknown]. [Logan], UT: College of Natural Resources, Utah Agriculture Experiment Station: 71-78. [6909]

17. Dittberner, Phillip L.; Olson, Michael R. 1983. The plant information network (PIN) data base: Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming. FWS/OBS-83/86. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 786 p. [806]

18. Doerr, T. B.; Redente, E. F.; Reeves, F. B. 1984. Effects of soil disturbance on plant succession and levels of mycorrhizal fungi in a sagebrush-grassland community. Journal of Range Management. 37(2): 135-139. [810]

19. Duebbert, Harold F.; Jacobson, Erling T.; Higgins, Kenneth F.; Podoll, Erling B. 1981. Establishment of seeded grasslands for wildlife habitat in the praire pothole region. Special Scientific Report-Wildlife No. 234. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 21 p. [5740]

20. Dusek, Gary L. 1975. Range relations of mule deer and cattle in prairie habitat. Journal of Wildlife Management. 39(3): 605-616. [5938]

21. Eichhorn, Larry C.; Watts, C. Robert. 1984. Plant succession on burns in the river breaks of central Montana. Proceedings, Montana Academy of Science. 43: 21-34. [15478]

22. Elliott, Katherine J.; White, Alan S. 1987. Competitive effects of

10 of 14 9/24/2007 4:53 PM Melilotus officinalis http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/meloff/all.html

various grasses and forbs on ponderosa pine seedlings. Forest Science. 33(2): 356-366. [860]

23. Evanko, Anthony B. 1953. Performance of several forage species on newly burned lodgepole pine sites. Res. Note. 133. Missoula, MT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 6 p. [7905]

24. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]

25. Fernald, Merritt Lyndon. 1950. Gray's manual of botany. [Corrections supplied by R. C. Rollins]. Portland, OR: Dioscorides Press. 1632 p. (Dudley, Theodore R., gen. ed.; Biosystematics, Floristic & Phylogeny Series; vol. 2). [14935]

26. Forcella, Frank; Harvey, Stephen J. 1983. Eurasian weed infestation in western Montana in relation to vegetation and disturbance. Madrono. 30(2): 102-109. [7897]

27. Garrison, George A.; Bjugstad, Ardell J.; Duncan, Don A.; [and others]. 1977. Vegetation and environmental features of forest and range ecosystems. Agric. Handb. 475. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 68 p. [998]

28. Girard, Michele M.; Goetz, Harold; Bjugstad, Ardell J. 1989. Native woodland habitat types of southwestern North Dakota. Res. Pap. RM-281. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 36 p. [6319]

29. Great Plains Flora Association. 1986. Flora of the Great Plains. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. 1392 p. [1603]

30. Heitlinger, Mark E. 1975. Burning a protected tallgrass prairie to suppress sweetclover, Melilotus alba Desr. In: Wali, Mohan K, ed. Prairie: a multiple view. Grand Forks, ND: University of North Dakota Press: 123-132. [4435]

31. Helvey, J. D. 1980. Effects of a north central Washington wildfire on runoff and sediment production. Water Resources Bulletin. 16(4): 627-634. [8562]

32. Hopkins, Rick B.; Cassel, J. Frank; Bjugstad, Ardell J. 1986. Relationships between breeding birds and vegetation in four woodland types of the Little Missouri National Grasslands. Res. Pap. RM-270. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 12 p. [2758]

33. Hulbert, Lloyd C. 1986. Fire effects on tallgrass prairie. In: Clambey, Gary K.; Pemble, Richard H., eds. The prairie: past, present and future: Proceedings, 9th North American prairie conference; 1984 July 29 - August 1; Moorhead, MN. Fargo, ND: Tri-College University Center for Environmental Studies: 138-142. [3550]

34. Jordan, Daniel R.; Nunna, Mal K.; Dancer, William S. 1986. Productivity potential and classification of selected abandoned mine lands in western North Dakota. In: Clambey, Gary K.; Pemble, Richard H., eds. The prairie: past, present and future: Proceedings, 9th North American prairie conference; 1984 July 29 - August 1; Moorhead, MN. Fargo, ND: Tri-College University Center for Environmental Studies: 230-235. [3585]

35. Kearl, W. Gordon. 1986. Economics of range reseeding. Bulletin 864. Laramie, WY: University of Wyoming, Agriculture Experiment Service, Department of Agriculture Economics. 20 p. [4629]

36. Kirsch, Leo M.; Klett, Albert T.; Miller, Harvey W. 1973. Land use and prairie grouse population relationships in North Dakota. Journal of Wildlife Management. 37(4): 449-453. [16206]

11 of 14 9/24/2007 4:53 PM Melilotus officinalis http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/meloff/all.html

37. Kruse, William H. 1972. Effects of wildfire on elk and deer use of a ponderosa pine forest. Res. Note RM-226. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 4 p. [5045]

38. Kuchler, A. W. 1964. Manual to accompany the map of potential vegetation of the conterminous United States. Special Publication No. 36. New York: American Geographical Society. 77 p. [1384]

39. Kufeld, Roland C. 1973. Foods eaten by the Rocky Mountain elk. Journal of Range Management. 26(2): 106-113. [1385]

40. Leege, Thomas A.; Godbolt, Grant. 1985. Herebaceous response following prescribed burning and seeding of elk range in Idaho. Northwest Science. 59(2): 134-143. [1436]

41. Lokemoen, John T.; Duebbert, Harold F.; Sharp, David E. 1990. Homing and reproductive habits of mallards, gadwalls, and blue-winged teal. Wildlife Monographs. 106: 1-28. [18102]

42. Love, R. Merton; Jones, Burle J. 1952. Improving California brush ranges. Circular 371. Berkeley, CA: Univeristy of California, Agriculture Experiment Station. 13 p. [16664]

43. Lyon, L. Jack; Stickney, Peter F. 1976. Early vegetal succession following large northern Rocky Mountain wildfires. In: Proceedings, Tall Timbers fire ecology conference and Intermountain Fire Research Council fire and land management symposium; 1974 October 8-10; Missoula, MT. No. 14. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station: 355-373. [1496]

44. Mackie, Richard J. 1970. Range ecology and relations of mule deer, elk, and cattle in the Missouri River Breaks, Montana. Wildlife Monographs No. 20. 79 p. [5897]

45. Mahgoub, El Fatih; Pieper, Rex D.; Holechek, Jerry L.; [and others]. 1987. Botanical content of mule deer diets in south-central New Mexico. New Mexico Journal of Science. 27(1): 21-27. [3259]

46. Malanson, George P.; Butler, David R. 1991. Floristic variation among gravel bars in a subalpine river, Montana, U.S.A. Arctic and Alpine Research. 23(3): 273-278. [16470]

47. Martin, Alexander C.; Zim, Herbert S.; Nelson, Arnold L. 1951. American wildlife and plants. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc. 500 p. [4021]

48. National Academy of Sciences. 1971. Atlas of nutritional data on United States and Canadian feeds. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences. 772 p. [1731]

49. Neff, Don J. 1974. Forage preferences of trained deer on the Beaver Creek watersheds. Special Report No. 4. Phoenix, AZ: Arizona Game and Fish Department. 61 p. [162]

50. Nichols, James T.; Johnson, James R. 1969. Range productivity as influenced by biennial sweetclover in western South Dakota. Journal of Range Management. [Volume unknown]: 342-347. [19971]

51. Nixon, Charles M.; McClain, Milford W.; Russell, Kenneth R. 1970. Deer food habits and range characteristics in Ohio. Journal of Wildlife Management. 34(4): 870-886. [16398]

52. Orr, Howard K. 1970. Runoff and erosion control by seeded and native vegetation on a forest burn: Black Hills, South Dakota. Res. Pap. RM-60. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 12 p. [1802]

53. Platt, William J. 1975. The colonization and formation of equilibrium plant species associations on badger disturbances in a tall-grass prairie. Ecological Monographs. 45: 285-305. [6903]

12 of 14 9/24/2007 4:53 PM Melilotus officinalis http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/meloff/all.html

54. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]

55. Richardson, Bland Z. 1985. Reclamation in the Intermountain Rocky Mountain Region. In: McCarter, M. K., ed. Design of non-impounding mine waste dumps; [Date of conference unknown]; [Location of conference unknown]. New York: American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers, Inc: 177-192. [12780]

56. Rietveld, W. J. 1977. Phytotoxic effects of bunchgrass residues on germination and initial root growth of yellow sweetclover. Journal of Range Management. 30(1): 39-43. [15889]

57. Roberts, Teresa L.; Vankat, John L. 1991. Floristics of a chronosequence corresponding to old field-deciduous forest succession in southwestern Ohio. II. Seed banks. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club. 118(4): 377-384. [17752]

58. Rosenstock, Steven S.; Stevens, Richard. 1989. Herbivore effects on seeded alfalfa at four pinyon-juniper sites in central Utah. Journal of Range Management. 42(6): 483-489. [9772]

59. Rumble, Mark A.; Newell, Jay A.; Toepfer, John E. 1988. Diets of greater prairie chickens on the Sheyenne National Grasslands. In: Bjugstad, Ardell J., technical coordinator. Prairie chickens on the Sheyenne National Grasslands [symposium proceedings]; 18 September 18; Crookston, MN. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-159. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 49-54. [5202]

60. Shaw, A. F.; Cooper, C. S. 1973. The Interagency forage, conservation and wildlife handbook. Bozeman, MT: Montana State University, Extension Service. 205 p. [5666]

61. Sieg, Carolyn Hull. 1991. Geographic affinity of bird species associated with Rocky Mountain juniper woodlands and adjacent grasslands in southwestern South Dakota. Prairie Naturalist. 23(1): 25-33. [17006]

62. Smith, W. K.; Gorz, H. J. 1965. Sweetclover improvement. Advances in Agronomy. 17: 163-231. [18590]

63. Smith, Dale; Graber, L. F. 1948. The influence of top growth removal on the root and vegetative development of biennial sweetclover. Journal of the American Society of Agronomy. 40: 818-831. [18611]

64. Smoliak, S.; Penney, D.; Harper, A. M.; Horricks, J. S. 1981. Alberta forage manual. Edmonton, AB: Alberta Agriculture, Print Media Branch. 87 p. [19538]

65. Stevenson, George A. 1969. An agronomic and taxonomic review of the genus Melilotus Mill. Canadian Journal of Plant Science. 49(1): 1-20. [18589]

66. Stubbendiek, James; Conard, Elverne C. 1989. Common legumes of the Great Plains: an illustrated guide. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. 330 p. [11049]

67. Turkington, Roy A.; Cavers, Paul B.; Rempel, Erika. 1978. The biology of Canadian weeds. 29. Melilotus alba Ders. and M. officinalis (L.) Lam. Canadian Journal of Plant Science. 58: 523-537. [18588]

68. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1982. National list of scientific plant names. Vol. 1. List of plant names. SCS-TP-159. Washington, DC. 416 p. [11573]

69. Welsh, Stanley L.; Atwood, N. Duane; Goodrich, Sherel; Higgins, Larry C., eds. 1987. A Utah flora. Great Basin Naturalist Memoir No. 9. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University. 894 p. [2944]

13 of 14 9/24/2007 4:53 PM Melilotus officinalis http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/meloff/all.html

70. Wheeler, W. A.; Hill, D. D. 1957. Grassland seeds. Princeton, NJ: D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc. 628 p. [18902]

FEIS Home Page

14 of 14 9/24/2007 4:53 PM