DOCSLIB.ORG

University Microfilms International300 N

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
University Microfilms International300 N INFORMATION TO USERS This was produced from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure you of complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark it is an indication that the film inspector noticed either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, or duplicate copy. Unless we meant to delete i copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed, you will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photo­ graphed the photographer has followed a definite method in “sectioning” the material. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand comer of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. For any illustrations that cannot be reproduced satisfactorily by xerography, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and tipped into your xerographic copy. Requests can be made to our Dissertations Customer Services Department. 5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases we have filmed the best available copy. University M icrofilms International 300 N. ZEEB ROAD, ANN ARBOR, Ml 48106 18 BEDFORD ROW, LONDON WC1R 4EJ, ENGLAND 8100185 La D u k e , Jo h n C a r l SYSTEMATICS OF TITHONIA DESF. EX GMELIN (COMPOSITAE, HELIANTHEAE) The Ohio State University PH.D. 1980 University Microfilms International300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106 Copyright 1980 by La Duke, John Carl All Rights Reserved SYSTEMATICS OF TITHONIA DESF. EX GMELIN (COMPOSITAE, HELIANTHEAE) DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By John C, La Duke * * ic * * The Ohio State University 1980 Reading Committee: Approved By: Dr. Tod F. Stuessy Dr. Daniel J. Crawford Dr. Ronald L. Stuckey Dr. Gary L. Floyd Departm Botany ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Numerous people have assisted in the completion of this dissertation. Dr. Tod F. Stuessy, my major professor, is acknowledged for his encouragement and guidance in all phases of the study. Special thanks go to my committee Drs. Daniel J. Crawford, Ronald L. Stuckey, and Gary L. Floyd for their comments and criticisms of the dissertation. Field work for this study was supported by NSF grant DEB-7618763 which is gratefully acknowledged. Appreciation is extended to many graduate students who through their stimulating discussions contributed to the study. I also wish to thank the curators of the numerous herbaria who loaned specimens for this study (A, ARIZ, B, BM, BR, C, CAS, CGE, CM, CR, D S , DUKE, ENCB, F, FI, FSU, GH, GOET, LIV, M, MEXU, MICH, MO, MPU, NA, NY, OS, OXF, POM, RSA, S, SMU, TEX, U C , UPS, US, W, YU). Special thanks to my family for their support. VITA November 21, 1950 ........... Born - Jackson, Michigan 1973........................... B.S., Texas Tech University, Lubbock 1974-1975 .................... Teaching Assistant, Department of Biological Sciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock 1975 ......................... M.S., Texas Tech University, Lubbock 1975-1979 .................... Graduate Teaching Associate, The Ohio State University, Columbus 1976 ......................... NSF - Doctoral Dissertation Research Grant 19 79 ......................... Ralph E. Alston Award, B.S.A. Annual Meeting 1979-1980 .................... Presidential Fellow, The Ohio State University, Columbus PUBLICATIONS La Duke, John C. and D.K. Northington. 1978. The systematics of Sphaeralcea coccinea (Nutt.) Rydberg. Southwestern Natur. 23: 651-660. Gardner, R.C. and J.C. La Duke. 1978. Phyletic and cladistic relationships in Lipochaeta DC (Compositae). Syst. Bot. 3: 197-207. La Duke, J.C. and D.J. Crawford. 1979. Character compatibil­ ity and phyletic relationships among several closely related species of Chenopodium of the western United States. Taxon 28: 307-314. FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Systematic Botany Studies in the phylogenetic relationships of Tithonia (Compositae). Professor Tod F. Stuessy. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ....................................... a VITA..................................................... U i LIST OF TABLES......................................... v i LIST OF F I G U R E S ....................................... v a CHAPTER I. REVISION OF TITHONIA ......................... 1 Introduction .............................. 1 Taxonomic History ......................... 1 Generic and Subtribal Relationships ... 4 Cytology .................................. 9 Isolating Mechanisms .................... 13 Concepts of Species, Varieties, and S e c t i o n s ................................ 15 Numerical Taxonomy......................... 16 Phylogenetic Reconstruction .............. 34 Morphology and TaxonomicCriteria .... 46 Taxonomic Treatment ....................... 49 List of References......................... 139 II. FLAVONOID CHEMISTRY AND SYSTEMATICS OF TITHONIA (COMPOSITAE)......................... 146 A b s t r a c t .................................. 147 Materials and Methods .................... 150 R e s u l t s ..................................... 150 D i s c u s s i o n ................................ 163 APPENDIX A. Data matrix for the population study of the taxa of Tithonia........................... 178 v LIST OF TABLES TABLE CHAPTER I Page 1. Chromosome numbers in Tithonia ............ 10 2. Characters and character states of Tithonia used in the numerical study................ 18 3. Characters and character states used in the phylogenetic reconstruction of Tithonia. 38 4. Data matrix for the phylogenetic reconstruc­ tion of T i t h o n i a ........................... 39 CHAPTER II 1. Populations of Tithonia examined for flavonoids.................................. 151 2. Distribution of flavonoids in taxa of T i t h o n i a .................................. 154 3. Color reactions, Rf values and UV spectral data for selected flavonoids in Tithonia . 156 v i LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page CHAPTER I 1-4. Achenes of Viguiera and Tithonia ............ 7 1. V. excelsa 2. T . tubaeformis 3. T . fruticosa 4. T. calva var. calva 5-6. Pales of Viguiera and Tithonia .............. 7 5. V. rosei 6. T. calva var. calva 7. Phenogram of populations of Tithonia using UPGMA........................................... 23 8-9. First three principal component axes from analyzing populations of Tithonia u n r o t a t e d .................................... 26 10. Cluster analysis (UPGMA) of summarized data for taxa of T i t h o n i a .................. 29 11. Principal component analysis (unrotated) in three dimensions of summarized data for taxa of Tithonia .............................. 31 12-13. Cladograms of taxa of T i t h o n i a .............. 42 12. Based on character compatibility 13. Based on Wagner 78 14. Leaf outlines of T. rotundifolia............ 56 15. Disk corolla of T, rotundifolia ............ 56 16. Disk achene of T. rotundifolia.............. 56 v ii 17. Distribution of Tithonia rotundifolia in Mexico and Central America .................. 61 18. Leaf outlines of T. brachypappa.............. 67 19. Disk corolla of T. brachypappa.............. 67 20. Outermost disk achene of T. brachypappa. 67 21. Inner disk achene of T. brachypappa.......... 67 22. Distribution in Mexico and adjacent United States of Tithonia koelzii, T. brachypappa, T. calva var. calva, T. calva var. lancifolia, T. calva var. auriculata, T, fruticosa, and T. thurberi..................................... 70 23. Leaf of T. tubaeformis....................... 74 24. Disk corolla of T. tubaeformis.............. 74 25. Disk achene of T. tubaeformis .............. 74 26. Distribution of Tithonia tubaeformis in Mexico and Central America .................. 78 27. Leaf of T. thurberi .......................... 83 28. Disk corolla of T. thurberi................... 83 29. Disk achene of T. thurberi ................... 83 30. Leaf of T. koelzii ............................ 89 31. Disk corolla of T. koelzii ................... 89 32. Disk achene of T. koelzii..................... 89 33. Distribution of Tithonia pedunculata, T. diversifolia, and T. longiradiata Th Mexico and Central A m e r i c a ......................... 92 34. Leaf outlines of T. diversifolia............ 95 35. Disk corolla of T. diversifolia.............. 95 36. Disk achene of T. diversifolia.............. 95 37. Leaf of T. fruticosa .......................... 104 38. Disk corolla of T. fruticosa ................ 104 viii Disk achene of T, fruticosa .............. 104 Leaf of T. pedunculata.................... 109 Disk corolla of T. pedunculata........... 109 Disk achene of T, pedunculata ........... 109 Leaf, disk corolla, and disk achene of three varieties of Tithonia calva .... 116 43. Leaf, T. calva
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Endangered, Threatened, Extinct, Endemic, and Rare Or Restricted Utah Vascular Plants
    Great Basin Naturalist Volume 35 Number 4 Article 1 12-31-1975 Endangered, threatened, extinct, endemic, and rare or restricted Utah vascular plants Stanley L. Welsh Brigham Young University N. Duane Atwood Bureau of Land Management, Cedar City, Utah James L. Reveal University of Maryland, College Park, and Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn Recommended Citation Welsh, Stanley L.; Atwood, N. Duane; and Reveal, James L. (1975) "Endangered, threatened, extinct, endemic, and rare or restricted Utah vascular plants," Great Basin Naturalist: Vol. 35 : No. 4 , Article 1. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn/vol35/iss4/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Western North American Naturalist Publications at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Great Basin Naturalist by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. The Great Basin Naturalist Published at Provo, Utah, by Brigham Young University Volume 35 December 31, 1975 No. 4 ENDANGERED, THREATENED, EXTINCT, ENDEMIC, AND RARE OR RESTRICTED UTAH VASCULAR PLANTS Stanley L. Welshi, N. Duane Atwood-, and James L. ReveaP Abstract.— The status of 382 vascular plant taxa with distribution in Utah is presented. Some 66 species are possibly endangered, 198 threatened, 7 extinct, and 20 extirpated within the state; 4 spe- cies have questionable taxonomic status. Included in the list are nearly 225 species of endemic plants, many of which are among the possibly endangered, threatened, and extinct or extirpated plants. Bibliographic citations, type locality, status, and distribution by counties is included for each species or infraspecific taxon.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Havasu City Recommended Landscaping Plant List
    Lake Havasu City Recommended Landscaping Plant List Lake Havasu City Recommended Landscaping Plant List Disclaimer Lake Havasu City has revised the recommended landscaping plant list. This new list consists of plants that can be adapted to desert environments in the Southwestern United States. This list only contains water conscious species classified as having very low, low, and low-medium water use requirements. Species that are classified as having medium or higher water use requirements were not permitted on this list. Such water use classification is determined by the type of plant, its average size, and its water requirements compared to other plants. For example, a large tree may be classified as having low water use requirements if it requires a low amount of water compared to most other large trees. This list is not intended to restrict what plants residents choose to plant in their yards, and this list may include plant species that may not survive or prosper in certain desert microclimates such as those with lower elevations or higher temperatures. In addition, this list is not intended to be a list of the only plants allowed in the region, nor is it intended to be an exhaustive list of all desert-appropriate plants capable of surviving in the region. This list was created with the intention to help residents, businesses, and landscapers make informed decisions on which plants to landscape that are water conscious and appropriate for specific environmental conditions. Lake Havasu City does not require the use of any or all plants found on this list. List Characteristics This list is divided between trees, shrubs, groundcovers, vines, succulents and perennials.
    [Show full text]
  • Nakedstem Sunray (Enceliopsis Nudicaulis [A. Gray] A. Nelson)
    NAKEDSTEM SUNRAY Enceliopsis nudicaulis (A. Gray) A. Nelson Asteraceae – Aster family Corey L. Gucker and Nancy L. Shaw | 2020 ORGANIZATION NOMENCLATURE Nakedstem sunray (Enceliopsis nudicaulis) (A. Names, subtaxa, chromosome number(s), hybridization. Gray) A. Nelson belongs to the Ecliptinae subtribe and Heliantheae tribe within the Asteraceae family. Nomenclature follows Welsh et al. (2016). NRCS Plant Code. ENNU (USDA NRCS 2019). Range, habitat, plant associations, elevation, soils. Synonyms. Encelia nudicaulis A. Gray Common Names. Nakedstem sunray, Ash Life form, morphology, distinguishing characteristics, reproduction. Meadows sunray, nakedstem, naked-stemmed daisy, sunray (USFWS 1983; Curtis 2006; Welsh et al. 2016; USDA NRCS 2019). Growth rate, successional status, disturbance ecology, importance to Subtaxa. Some systematists (Cronquist 1972; animals/people. Welsh et al. 2016) recognize nakedstem sunray varieties: corrugata and bairdii, although others do not support varietal distinctions (Sanders and Current or potential uses in restoration. Clark 1987; Curtis 2006). Chromosome Number. Reported chromosome numbers include: 2n = 32, 34, and 36; but most Seed sourcing, wildland seed collection, seed cleaning, storage, consistently reported are 2n = 34 and 36 (Reveal testing and marketing standards. and Styer 1974; Hickman 1993; Curtis 2006; Welsh et al. 2016). Recommendations/guidelines for producing seed. Hybridization. The possibility of hybrids within the Enceliopsis genus have been suggested based on DNA evidence. Sequencing of two nuclear and two chloroplast regions suggests that a single Recommendations/guidelines for producing planting stock. plant collected from co-occurences of nakedstem sunray and Panamint daisy (E. covillei) in California may represent a hybrid or backcrossed individual (Fehlberg and Ranker 2007). Hybrids of nakedstem Recommendations/guidelines, wildland restoration successes/ failures.
    [Show full text]
  • Naomi S. Fraga Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
    The California Deserts: Plant Life at the Extremes Naomi S. Fraga Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden Red Pass, Death Valley NP Eastern Kern County, California Western Mojave Desert 29 million acres (45,000 sq mi), or 28% of California's landmass. GIS layer source: Omernick ecoregions level 3 Great Basin Mojave Sonoran A Conspiracy of Extremes Bruce Pavlick- 2008 The California Deserts - Topography: 14,246 to -279 ft. - Geology: Limestone, granite, sand dunes - Temperature: below freezing to 134°F (1913) - Changing history over the past 12,000 years - Transition to modern desert complete by 8,500 to 5,000 years ago Krascheninnikovia lanata (winterfat) “Water, water, water....There is no shortage of water in the desert but exactly the right amount, a perfect ratio of water to rock, water to sand, insuring that wide free open, generous spacing among plants and animals, homes and towns and cities, which makes the arid West so different from any other part of the nation. There is no lack of water here unless you try to establish a city where no city should be.” ― Edward Abbey, Desert Solitaire: A Season in the Wilderness Dutch Cleanser Mine, Red Rock Canyon SP Desert Flora - 2377 taxa native to desert (37% of the CA flora) - 785 taxa that do not occur elsewhere in CA (33%) - 232 naturalized taxa (9%) when compared CA (17%) Sources Desert Jepson Manual (2002) Jepson e-flora (2017) Pavlick (2008) Hesperocallis undulata (desert lily) Topographic diversity= species diversity Great Basin 1363 Taxa Mojave 1409 Taxa Sonoran 709 Taxa Remarkable Flora Dr. Frank Vasek’s students circling King Clone on April 1, 1979.
    [Show full text]
  • Special Status Vegetation Species and Noxious Weeds
    5.3.10 Special Status Vegetation Species and Noxious Weeds 5.3.10.1 Affected Environment Special Status Vegetation Species Overview. This section presents information on the 58 special status plant species that potentially occur in the survey area, based on habitat requirements. The list of species was derived from an overall list of 101 species, including plants listed by the USFWS list as threatened, endangered, proposed, candidate, and conservation agreement species potentially occurring in Mohave and Coconino counties, Arizona, and Washington and Kane counties, Utah; Glen Canyon GCNRA Special Status Plant Species list; and the BLM Sensitive Plant Species List for the Arizona Strip, and for Kane and Washington counties, Utah (Table 5-88). Table 5-88 Special Status Plant Species with Potential to Occur within the Area of Potential Effect Page 1 of 4 Found in Area of Species Name and Family Status1 Potential Effect (Yes/No) Acer glabrum (Rocky Mountain maple) GCNRA G5 No Aceraceae Acer grandidentatum (Bigtooth maple) GCNRA G5 No Aceraceae `Aralia racemosa (American spikenard) GCNRA G5 No Araliaceae Arctomecon humilis (Dwarf bear-poppy) ESA LE No Papaveraceae Asclepias welshii (Welsh’s milkweed) ESA LT, CH No Asclepidaceae Astragalus ampullarioides (Shivwits milkvetch) ESA LE, CH No Fabaceae Astragalus ampullarius (Gumbo milkvetch) BLM UT No Fabaceae Astragalus holmgreniorum (Paradox [Holmgren] milkvetch) ESA LE, CH No Fabaceae Astragalus striatiflorus (Escarpment milkvetch) BLM UT No Fabaceae Camissonia bairdii (Baird camissonia) BLM
    [Show full text]
  • Encelia Farinosa A. Gray Ex Torr NRCS CODE: Tribe: Heliantheae ENFA Family: Asteraceae Order: Asterales Subclass: Asteridae Class: Magnoliopsida
    SPECIES Encelia farinosa A. Gray ex Torr NRCS CODE: Tribe: Heliantheae ENFA Family: Asteraceae Order: Asterales Subclass: Asteridae Class: Magnoliopsida juvenile plant, 3/3/2010, Riverside Co. A. Montalvo , 2003-2010, Riverside Co. Subspecific taxa None currently accepted (JepsonOnline 2nd Ed. 2010). Synonyms Encelia farinosa Torry & A. Gray corrected to current authorship (JepsonOnline) ENFAF Encelia farinosa A. Gray ex Torr. var. farinosa brittlebush ENFAP Encelia farinosa A. Gray ex Torr. var. phenicodonta (S.F. Blake) I.M. Johnst. brittlebush ENFAR Encelia farinosa A. Gray ex Torr. var. radians Brandegee ex S.F. Blake Common name brittlebush Also: brittle bush, brittle-bush, brittlebush encelia, incienso, incienso brittlebush, common brittlebush, white brittlebush; brown-center brittlebush for what was considered to be variety phenocodonta ; incienso is used for taxa in multiple families and desert encelia is also used for other species of Encelia (Painter 2009). Taxonomic relationships There are seven other species of Encelia in North America plus additional species in South America (JepsonOnline 2010). The genus Encelia is in the large tribe Heliantheae which also contains the native sunflower, Helianthus annuus L. Phylogenetic studies based on DNA show that Enceliopsis and Geraea are closely related genera and that diversification of species of Encelia has been quite recent (Fehlberg & Ranker 2007). Relationships among the various species of Encelia confirmed hypotheses by Clark (1998) based on chemical and morphological traits. Related taxa in region Four species and spontaneous hybrids of Encelia occur in southern California and may overlap with E. farinosa in some part of its range (FNA 2010, JepsonOnline 2010): E. actoni Elmer (in the southern Sierra Nevada, Tehachapi and Western Transverse Ranges, San Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountains, Mojave and Sonoran Deserts, and Desert Mountains; overlaps with E.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography
    ASH ME A DOWS REFE R ENCES by Kathleen Capels and Terence Yorks, High Level Research http://www.hlresearch.org/ in cooperation with Frank J. Smith, Western Ecological Services http://ecocorridors.com/western-ecological.php Note: all hyperlinks were checked for validity in late July 2009. Some may require entering the desired genera or local site name into a search space on the linked page to generate appropriate information. Abrams, Leroy, and Roxana Stinchfield Ferris. 1960. Bignoniaceae to Compositae: Begonias to Sunflowers. Vol. 4 of Illustrated Flora of the Pacific States: Washington, Oregon, and California. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. [Enceliopsis] Baldwin, Bruce G., Steve Boyd, Barbara J. Ertter, Robert W. Patterson, Thomas J. Rosatti, and Dieter H. Wilken, eds. 2002. The Jepson Desert Manual: Vascular Plants of Southeasten California. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. [Centaurium, Ivesia, Nitrophila] Barneby, R[upert] C. 1970 [published 1971]. A new Astragalus (Fabaceae) from Nevada. Madroño 20(8):395–398. [Astragalus] Beacham, Walter, Frank V. Castronova, and Suzanne Sessine. 2000. Dicots. Vol. 4 of Beacham’s Guide to the Endangered Species of North America. Detroit: Gale Group. [Nitrophila] Beatley, Janice C. 1969. Vascular Plants of the Nevada Test Site, Nellis Air Force Range, and Ash Meadows (Northern Mojave and Southern Great Basin Deserts, South-Central Nevada). Los Angeles: University of California Laboratory of Nuclear Medicine and Radiation Biology. [Astragalus, Centaurium, Cordylanthus, Enceliopsis, Grindelia, Ivesia, Mentzelia, Nitrophila, Spiranthes] ———. 1970. Additions to Vascular Plants of the Nevada Test Site, Nellis Air Force Range, and Ash Meadows. Los Angeles: University of California Laboratory of Nuclear Medicine and Radiation Biology.
    [Show full text]
  • Desert Plants of Utah
    DESERT PLANTS OF UTAH Original booklet and drawings by Berniece A. Andersen Revised May 1996 HG 505 FOREWORD The original Desert Plants of Utah by Berniece A. Andersen has been a remarkably popular book, serving as a tribute to both her botanical knowledge of the region and to her enthusiastic manner. For these reasons, we have tried to retain as much of the original work, in both content and style, as possible. Some modifications were necessary. We have updated scientific names in accordance with changes that have occurred since the time of the first publication and we have also incorporated new geographic distributional data that have accrued with additional years of botanical exploration. The most obvious difference pertains to the organization of species. In the original version, species were organized phylogenetically, reflecting the predominant concepts of evolutionary relationships among plant families at that time. In an effort to make this version more user-friendly for the beginner, we have chosen to arrange the plants primarily by flower color. We hope that these changes will not diminish the enjoyment gained by anyone familiar with the original. We would also like to thank Larry A. Rupp, Extension Horticulture Specialist, for critical review of the draft and for the cover photo. Linda Allen, Assistant Curator, Intermountain Herbarium Donna H. Falkenborg, Extension Editor TABLE OF CONTENTS The Nature of Deserts ........................................................1 Utah’s Deserts ........................................................2
    [Show full text]
  • Utah's Mojave Desert Flora
    Sego Lily March 2010 33 (2) March 2010 (volume 33 number 2) Utah’s Mojave Desert Flora By Walter Fertig Above: Joshua trees, chollas, creo- snow. Lack of moisture for much sote bush, bur-sage, and other Mo- of the year helps explain the jave Desert shrubs on the flanks of It is no accident that the ―deserted‖ appearance of deserts, the Beaver Dam Mountains. Photo words ―desert‖ and ―deserted‖ share which, with few exceptions, have a by Douglas N. Reynolds. the same origin. Both refer to areas very sparse covering of plants. that seem desolate and empty. High rates of evaporation and cover. High temperatures alone, Ecologists define deserts more pre- transpiration are facilitated by however, do not define deserts, as cisely to include those lands where high temperatures, and not sur- some of the driest areas on Earth are annual rates of evaporation and prisingly most deserts fall within the cold polar deserts of the high transpiration of water by plants ex- latitudes of high solar radiation, arctic and dry valleys of Antarctica. ceeds precipitation from rain and low humidity, and minimal cloud For our purposes, [continued pg 6] Copyright 2010 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights Reserved. Utah Native Plant Society Education: Ty Harrison Sego Lily Editor: Walter Fertig Horticulture: Maggie Wolf ([email protected]). The deadline for Invasive Weeds: Susan Fitts the May 2010 Sego Lily is 15 April Rare Plants: Walter Fertig 2010. Scholarship: Bill Gray Copyright 2010 Utah Native Plant So- Chapters and Chapter Presidents ciety. All Rights Reserved Cache: Amy Croft and Michael Piep Cedar City: Marguerite Smith The Sego Lily is a publication of the Officers Escalante: Harriet Priska Utah Native Plant Society, a 501(c)(3) President: Walter Fertig (Kane Co) Fremont: Lisa White not-for-profit organization dedicated Vice President: Kipp Lee (Salt Lake Co) Manzanita: Walter Fertig to conserving and promoting steward- Treasurer: Charlene Homan (Salt Lake Mountain: Mindy Wheeler ship of our native plants.
    [Show full text]
  • Annotated Checklist of Vascular Flora, Arches National Park
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Program Center Annotated Checklist of Vascular Flora Arches National Park Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/NCPN/NRTR—2009/220 ON THE COVER Double Arch, Arches National Park, Utah. Photograph by Walter Fertig. Annotated Checklist of Vascular Flora Arches National Park Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/NCPN/NRTR—2009/220 Authors Walter Fertig Moenave Botanical Consulting 1117 W. Grand Canyon Dr. Kanab, UT 84741 Sarah Topp Northern Colorado Plateau Network National Park Service P.O. Box 848 Moab, UT 84532 Mary Moran Southeast Utah Group National Park Service P.O. Box 907 Moab, UT 84532 Editing and Design Alice Wondrak Biel Northern Colorado Plateau Network National Park Service P.O. Box 848 Moab, UT 84532 June 2009 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Program Center Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Program Center publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, con- servation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Technical Report Series is used to disseminate results of scientifi c stud- ies in the physical, biological, and social sciences for both the advancement of science and the achievement of the National Park Service mission. The series provides contributors with a forum for displaying comprehensive data that are often deleted from journals because of page limitations. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the in- formation is scientifi cally credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner.
    [Show full text]
  • Mohave Palisades
    Proposed Lands with Wilderness Characteristics: Black Mountains North A proposal report to the Bureau of Land Management, Kingman Field Office, Arizona August, 2015 Prepared by: Joseph M. Trudeau & Amber R. Fields Black Mountains North Proposed LWC Table of Contents PREFACE: This Proposal was developed according to BLM Manual 6310 page 3 MAP: Black Mountains North Proposed Lands with Wilderness Characteristics (LWC) page 5 SECTION 1: Proposed LWC Overview Unit Location page 6 Brief Boundary Description page 6 Landforms & Biological Communities page 6 Previous Wilderness Inventories page 7 SECTION 2: Wilderness Characteristics The proposed LWC meets the minimum size criteria for roadless lands page 7 The proposed LWC is affected primarily by the forces of nature page 7 The proposed LWC provides outstanding opportunities for solitude or primitive & unconfined recreation page 9 The proposed LWC has supplemental values that enhance the wilderness experience & deserve protection page 10 Works Cited page 12 SECTION 3: Detailed Boundary & Routes Description Narrative Description of the Proposed LWC Boundary page 13 SECTION 4: Photopoint data Data Tables & Photographs to accompany the Detailed Boundary & Routes Description page 16 Cover Photo: From the eastern boundary of the proposed LWC, looking across the unit to the southwest, towards Lake Mohave and distant mountains in Nevada. Arizona Wilderness Coalition Page 2 of 22 Trudeau & Fields, 2015 Black Mountains North Proposed LWC PREFACE: This Proposal was developed according to BLM Manual 6310
    [Show full text]
  • Detrital Wash Watershed – Arizona Rapid Watershed Assessment April 2007
    Detrital Wash Watershed – Arizona Rapid Watershed Assessment April 2007 Prepared by: USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service – Arizona University of Arizona, Water Resources Research Center In cooperation with: Arizona Association of Conservation Districts Arizona Department of Agriculture Arizona Department of Environmental Quality Arizona Department of Water Resources Arizona Game & Fish Department Arizona State Land Department USDA Forest Service USDI Bureau of Land Management Released by: Sharon Megdal David McKay Director State Conservationist University of Arizona U.S. Department of Agriculture Water Resources Research Center Natural Resources Conservation Service Principle Investigators: Dino DeSimone – Natural Resources Conservation Service, Phoenix, Arizona Keith Larson – Natural Resources Conservation Service, Phoenix, Arizona Kristine Uhlman – Water Resources Research Center, University of Arizona D. Phil Guertin – School of Natural Resources, University of Arizona Deborah Young – Associate Director, Cooperative Extension, University of Arizona The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at
    [Show full text]