DOCSLIB.ORG

Integrated Pest Management Plan for Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Integrated Pest Management Plan for Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge Integrated Pest Management Plan for Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge Nye County, Nevada 2006 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service December 2006 Integrated Pest Management Plan for Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge Nye County, Nevada Monoculture of Russian knapweed Tamarix spp. bordering Peterson Reservoir. near Bradford Springs. The Integrated Pest Management Plan for Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge was prepared by staff of Ash Meadows National Wildllife Refuge and the Southern Nevada Field Office of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Marco Buske, Integrated Pest Management Specialist for Klamath Basin NWRC and Bob Wilson, Extension Educator, University of Nevada-Reno Cooperative Extension, reviewed this document. Brian Hobbs, Biologist for the Nevada Department of Wildlife, and Gary Scoppettone, Scientist with the Biological Resources Division of the U.S. Geological Survey, were also consulted. 2 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................ 6 I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 7 IMPACT OF INVASIVE SPECIES ................................................................................................................... 8 IMPACT OF INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES ON ASH MEADOWS NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE ...................... 8 IMPACT OF INVASIVE ANIMAL SPECIES ON ASH MEADOWS NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE ................... 9 ASH MEADOWS NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE MANAGEMENT SETTING .............................................. 10 MANDATES TO CONTROL NON-NATIVE AND INVASIVE SPECIES ............................................................ 10 FUNDING ................................................................................................................................................. 11 II. INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ................................................................... 16 INCORPORATING THE IPM PROGRAM INTO REFUGE MANAGEMENT ...................................................... 16 Endangered Species Management and Recovery ............................................................................... 16 Habitat Restoration ............................................................................................................................. 17 Resource Protection ............................................................................................................................ 17 Wildlife-dependent Recreation, Public Education and Outreach ....................................................... 18 IPM MANAGEMENT STRATEGY .............................................................................................................. 19 ASSESSMENT PROTOCOL ......................................................................................................................... 19 Resource-Based Refuge Management Unit Approach ........................................................................ 20 Targeted Species Approach ................................................................................................................ 20 III. INVASIVE AND PEST PLANT CONTROL ................................................................................. 26 INVASIVE AND PEST PLANT SPECIES MANAGEMENT: STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES ............................................................................................................................................. 26 Prevention and Early Detection of Weeds .......................................................................................... 26 Inventory and Monitoring ................................................................................................................... 27 Prioritization of Target Management Units and Species .................................................................... 28 Treatment ............................................................................................................................................ 29 Revegetation ........................................................................................................................................ 29 INVASIVE AND PEST PLANT CONTROL METHODS .................................................................................. 30 Cultural Control .................................................................................................................................. 31 Manual Control ................................................................................................................................... 32 Mechanical Control ............................................................................................................................ 33 Solarization ......................................................................................................................................... 35 Fire ...................................................................................................................................................... 37 Biological Control .............................................................................................................................. 38 Chemical Control ................................................................................................................................ 41 Chemicals Currently Approved for Vegetation Management on AMNWR ......................................... 42 IV. INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES INVENTORY AND PRIORITIZATION ................................... 48 INVENTORY ............................................................................................................................................. 48 CHARACTERIZATION OF INFESTATIONS AND PRIORITIZATION BY MANAGEMENT APPROACH .............. 49 Sub-basin Management Units ............................................................................................................. 49 Spring and Reservoir Management Units ........................................................................................... 50 Targeted Species ................................................................................................................................. 50 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................. 51 3 TARGET SPECIES ..................................................................................................................................... 59 Acroptilon repens ................................................................................................................................ 59 Bassia hyssopifolia .............................................................................................................................. 62 Bromus rubens .................................................................................................................................... 63 Cardaria draba ................................................................................................................................... 67 Centaurea melitensis and C. solstitialis .............................................................................................. 72 Elaeagnus angustifolia ........................................................................................................................ 79 Phragmites australis ........................................................................................................................... 82 Solanum elaeagnifolium ...................................................................................................................... 87 Sorghum halepense ............................................................................................................................. 88 Tamarix ramosissima and related Tamarix species............................................................................ 91 Tribulus terrestris ............................................................................................................................... 94 Typha domingensis .............................................................................................................................. 95 VI. INVASIVE ANIMAL CONTROL ................................................................................................... 99 INVASIVE ANIMAL SPECIES MANAGEMENT: STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES 99 Prevention and Early Detection of Invasive Animal Species .............................................................. 99 Inventory and Monitoring ................................................................................................................. 100 Prioritization of Target Management Units and Species .................................................................. 100 Treatment .......................................................................................................................................... 101 INVASIVE ANIMAL CONTROL METHODS............................................................................................... 102 Cultural Control ................................................................................................................................ 102 Physical Control ..............................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pest Management of Small Grains—Weeds
    PUBLICATION 8172 SMALL GRAIN PRODUCTION MANUAL PART 9 Pest Management of Small Grains—Weeds MICK CANEVARI, University of California Cooperative Extension Farm Advisor, San Joaquin County; STEVE ORLOFF, University of California Cooperative Extension Farm Advisor, Siskiyou County; RoN VARGAS, University of California Cooperative Extension Farm Advisor, UNIVERSITY OF Madera County; STEVE WRIGHT, University of California Cooperative Extension Farm CALIFORNIA Advisor, Tulare County; RoB WILsoN, University of California Cooperative Extension Farm Division of Agriculture Advisor, Lassen County; DAVE CUDNEY, Extension Weed Scientist Emeritus, Botany and and Natural Resources Plant Sciences, University of California, Riverside; and LEE JACKsoN, Extension Specialist, http://anrcatalog.ucdavis.edu Small Grains, Department of Plant Sciences, University of California, Davis This publication, Pest Management of Small Grains—Weeds, is the ninth in a fourteen- part series of University of California Cooperative Extension online publications that comprise the Small Grain Production Manual. The other parts cover specific aspects of small grain production practices in California: • Part 1: Importance of Small Grain Crops in California Agriculture, Publication 8164 • Part 2: Growth and Development, Publication 8165 • Part 3: Seedbed Preparation, Sowing, and Residue Management, Publication 8166 • Part 4: Fertilization, Publication 8167 • Part 5: Irrigation and Water Relations, Publication 8168 • Part 6: Pest Management—Diseases, Publication 8169 • Part 7:
    [Show full text]
  • "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."
    Intro 1996 National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands The Fish and Wildlife Service has prepared a National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary (1996 National List). The 1996 National List is a draft revision of the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary (Reed 1988) (1988 National List). The 1996 National List is provided to encourage additional public review and comments on the draft regional wetland indicator assignments. The 1996 National List reflects a significant amount of new information that has become available since 1988 on the wetland affinity of vascular plants. This new information has resulted from the extensive use of the 1988 National List in the field by individuals involved in wetland and other resource inventories, wetland identification and delineation, and wetland research. Interim Regional Interagency Review Panel (Regional Panel) changes in indicator status as well as additions and deletions to the 1988 National List were documented in Regional supplements. The National List was originally developed as an appendix to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al.1979) to aid in the consistent application of this classification system for wetlands in the field.. The 1996 National List also was developed to aid in determining the presence of hydrophytic vegetation in the Clean Water Act Section 404 wetland regulatory program and in the implementation of the swampbuster provisions of the Food Security Act. While not required by law or regulation, the Fish and Wildlife Service is making the 1996 National List available for review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • Genomespecific Introgression Between Wheat and Its Wild Relative
    doi: 10.1111/jeb.12040 SHORT COMMUNICATION Genome-specific introgression between wheat and its wild relative Aegilops triuncialis C. PARISOD*, C. DEFINOD*, A. SARR*, N. ARRIGO*† &F.FELBER*1 *Laboratory of Evolutionary Botany, Institute of Biology, University of Neuchaˆtel, Neuchaˆtel, Switzerland †Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA Keywords: Abstract barbed goatgrass; Introgression of sequences from crop species in wild relatives is of funda- containment strategy; mental and practical concern. Here, we address gene flow between culti- crop-to-wild gene flow; vated wheat and its widespread polyploid relative, Aegilops triuncialis, using genetically modified wheat; 12 EST-SSR markers mapped on wheat chromosomes. The presence of genome-specific introgression; wheat diagnostic alleles in natural populations of the barbed goatgrass hybridization; growing in proximity to cultivated fields highlights that substantial gene mapped EST-SSR; flow occurred when both species coexisted. Furthermore, loci from the A transgene escape. subgenome of wheat were significantly less introgressed than sequences from other subgenomes, indicating differential introgression into Ae. triun- cialis. Gene flow between such species sharing nonhomeologous chromo- somes addresses the evolutionary outcomes of hybridization and may be important for efficient gene containment. have been reported in European agro-ecosystems Introduction (Felber et al., 2007). With the advent of genetically Reproduction between genetically distinct taxa, pro- modified crops, the consequences of introgression on ducing offspring of mixed ancestry (i.e. hybridization), local biota are receiving growing attention (Chapman plays a crucial role in evolution (Arnold, 2006). & Burke, 2006; Kwit et al., 2011). However, interspecific gene flow has been generally The Triticum/Aegilops species complex represents an overlooked, and the factors determining the outcome outstanding model to evaluate crop-to-wild gene flow.
    [Show full text]
  • Diversity of Water Bugs in Gujranwala District, Punjab, Pakistan
    Journal of Bioresource Management Volume 5 Issue 1 Article 1 Diversity of Water Bugs in Gujranwala District, Punjab, Pakistan Muhammad Shahbaz Chattha Women University Azad Jammu & Kashmir, Bagh (AJK), [email protected] Abu Ul Hassan Faiz Women University of Azad Jammu & Kashmir, Bagh (AJK), [email protected] Arshad Javid University of Veterinary & Animal Sciences, Lahore, [email protected] Irfan Baboo Cholistan University of Veterinary & Animal Sciences, Bahawalpur, [email protected] Inayat Ullah Malik The University of Lakki Marwat, Lakki Marwat, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/jbm Part of the Aquaculture and Fisheries Commons, Biodiversity Commons, Entomology Commons, Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons, and the Zoology Commons Recommended Citation Chattha, M. S., Faiz, A. H., Javid, A., Baboo, I., & Malik, I. U. (2018). Diversity of Water Bugs in Gujranwala District, Punjab, Pakistan, Journal of Bioresource Management, 5 (1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.35691/JBM.8102.0081 ISSN: 2309-3854 online (Received: May 16, 2019; Accepted: Sep 19, 2019; Published: Jan 1, 2018) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by CORE Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Bioresource Management by an authorized editor of CORE Scholar. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Diversity of Water Bugs in Gujranwala District, Punjab, Pakistan © Copyrights of all the papers published in Journal of Bioresource Management are with its publisher, Center for Bioresource Research (CBR) Islamabad, Pakistan. This permits anyone to copy, redistribute, remix, transmit and adapt the work for non-commercial purposes provided the original work and source is appropriately cited.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management
    U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Final Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-NV0S010-2009-1014-EA May 2016 Eastern Nevada Transmission Project APPLICANT Silver State Energy Association GENERAL LOCATION Clark County, Nevada BLM CASE FILE SERIAL NUMBER N-086357 PREPARING OFFICE U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Las Vegas Field Office 4701 N. Torrey Pines Drive Las Vegas, NV 89130 Phone: (702) 515-5172 Fax: (702) 515-5010 This page intentionally left blank. Table of Contents Chapter 1 - Purpose and Need ...................................................................................................1 1.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................1 1.2 Project Background ........................................................................................................1 1.3 Purpose and Need for Action .........................................................................................2 1.4 Decisions to be Made .....................................................................................................7 1.5 BLM Policies, Plans, Authorizing Actions, and Permit Requirements .........................7 Chapter 2 - Proposed Action and Alternatives ........................................................................9 2.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................9 2.1.1 Regulatory Framework for Alternatives
    [Show full text]
  • December 2012 Number 1
    Calochortiana December 2012 Number 1 December 2012 Number 1 CONTENTS Proceedings of the Fifth South- western Rare and Endangered Plant Conference Calochortiana, a new publication of the Utah Native Plant Society . 3 The Fifth Southwestern Rare and En- dangered Plant Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, March 2009 . 3 Abstracts of presentations and posters not submitted for the proceedings . 4 Southwestern cienegas: Rare habitats for endangered wetland plants. Robert Sivinski . 17 A new look at ranking plant rarity for conservation purposes, with an em- phasis on the flora of the American Southwest. John R. Spence . 25 The contribution of Cedar Breaks Na- tional Monument to the conservation of vascular plant diversity in Utah. Walter Fertig and Douglas N. Rey- nolds . 35 Studying the seed bank dynamics of rare plants. Susan Meyer . 46 East meets west: Rare desert Alliums in Arizona. John L. Anderson . 56 Calochortus nuttallii (Sego lily), Spatial patterns of endemic plant spe- state flower of Utah. By Kaye cies of the Colorado Plateau. Crystal Thorne. Krause . 63 Continued on page 2 Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights Reserved. Utah Native Plant Society Utah Native Plant Society, PO Box 520041, Salt Lake Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights City, Utah, 84152-0041. www.unps.org Reserved. Calochortiana is a publication of the Utah Native Plant Society, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organi- Editor: Walter Fertig ([email protected]), zation dedicated to conserving and promoting steward- Editorial Committee: Walter Fertig, Mindy Wheeler, ship of our native plants. Leila Shultz, and Susan Meyer CONTENTS, continued Biogeography of rare plants of the Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, Nevada.
    [Show full text]
  • Gopher–Plant–Fungal Interactions Affect
    Ecology, 84(1), 2003, pp. 120±128 q 2003 by the Ecological Society of America GOPHER±PLANT±FUNGAL INTERACTIONS AFFECT ESTABLISHMENT OF AN INVASIVE GRASS VALERIE T. E VINER1,3 AND F. S TUART CHAPIN, III2 1Department of Integrative Biology, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720 USA 2Institute of Arctic Biology, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska 99775 USA Abstract. Many attempts have been made to link invasions of exotic plants to speci®c plant traits and key attributes of invaded ecosystems. While these factors play a role in determining the potential for invasion, they are often inadequate in predicting the success of a speci®c invasion. We show that interactions of an invasive grass with other members of the community determine the local pattern of invasion. A fungus, Ulocladium atrum, aids the establishment of barbed goatgrass (Aegilops triuncialis) by weakening the grass's tough seed head, thereby accelerating germination and seedling establishment. In contrast, gophers, Thomomys bottae, decrease establishment of this invader by selectively burying patches of goatgrass seedlings under mounds. Plants that survive these gopher disturbances produce seeds that are uninfected by Ulocladium atrum, which may further decrease the establishment of the next generation of goatgrass. A ®eld survey indicated that goatgrass achieves dominance in areas with minimal gopher disturbance, but has limited establishment in pastures with high gopher activity, indicating that the landscape pattern of gopher activity in¯uences patterns of goatgrass invasion by manipulating gopher±plant±fungal interactions. Key words: Aegilops triuncialis; California (USA) annual grasslands; disturbance; fungus; ger- mination; goatgrass; plant invasion; pocket gophers; species interactions, role in plant invasion; Thomomys bottae; Ulocladium atrum.
    [Show full text]
  • Checklist of the Vascular Plants of Redwood National Park
    Humboldt State University Digital Commons @ Humboldt State University Botanical Studies Open Educational Resources and Data 9-17-2018 Checklist of the Vascular Plants of Redwood National Park James P. Smith Jr Humboldt State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.humboldt.edu/botany_jps Part of the Botany Commons Recommended Citation Smith, James P. Jr, "Checklist of the Vascular Plants of Redwood National Park" (2018). Botanical Studies. 85. https://digitalcommons.humboldt.edu/botany_jps/85 This Flora of Northwest California-Checklists of Local Sites is brought to you for free and open access by the Open Educational Resources and Data at Digital Commons @ Humboldt State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Botanical Studies by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Humboldt State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A CHECKLIST OF THE VASCULAR PLANTS OF THE REDWOOD NATIONAL & STATE PARKS James P. Smith, Jr. Professor Emeritus of Botany Department of Biological Sciences Humboldt State Univerity Arcata, California 14 September 2018 The Redwood National and State Parks are located in Del Norte and Humboldt counties in coastal northwestern California. The national park was F E R N S established in 1968. In 1994, a cooperative agreement with the California Department of Parks and Recreation added Del Norte Coast, Prairie Creek, Athyriaceae – Lady Fern Family and Jedediah Smith Redwoods state parks to form a single administrative Athyrium filix-femina var. cyclosporum • northwestern lady fern unit. Together they comprise about 133,000 acres (540 km2), including 37 miles of coast line. Almost half of the remaining old growth redwood forests Blechnaceae – Deer Fern Family are protected in these four parks.
    [Show full text]
  • Recovery Plan Endangered and Species Nevada
    RECOVERYPLAN FOR THE ENDANGEREDAND THREATENED SPECIES OF&H MEADOWS, NEVADA Prepared by Don W. Sada U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Reno, Nevada RECOVERY PLAN FOR THE ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES OF ASH MEADOWS, NEVADA Prepared By Don W. Sada U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Reno, Nevada for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Portland, Oregon ~FP2 3 ‘:XN Date This plan covers the following federally listed species in Ash Meadows, Nevada and California: Devil’s Hole pupfish, Warm Springs pupfish, Ash Meadows Arnargosa pupfish, Ash Meadows speckled dace, Ash Meadows naucorid, Ash Meadows blazing star, Ash Meadows ivesia, Ainargosa niterwort, Spring-loving centaury, Ash Meadows sunray, Ash Meadows inilk-vetch, and Ash Meadows guxnplant. THIS IS THE COMPLETED ASH MEADOWS SPECIES RECOVERY PLAN. IT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE. IT DOES NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT OFFICIAL POSITIONS OR APPROVALS OF COOPERATING AGENCIES (AND IT DOES NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT THE VIEWS OF ALL INDIVIDUALS) WHO PLAYED THE KEY ROLE IN PREPARING THIS PLAN. THIS PLAN IS SUBJECT TO MODIFICATION AS DICTATED BY NEW FINDINGS AND CHANGES IN SPECIES STATUS, AND COMPLETION OF TASKS DESCRIBED IN THE PLAN. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES WILL BE ATTAINED AND FUNDS EXPENDED CONTINGENT UPON APPROPRIATIONS, PRIORITIES, AND OTHER BUDGETARY CONSTRAINTS. LITERATURE CITATION SHOULD READ AS FOLLOWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1990. Recovery plan for the endangered and threatened species of Ash Meadows, Nevada. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. 123 pp. Additional copies may be obtained from Fish and Wildlife Reference Service 5430 Grosvenor Lane, Suite 110 Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Telephone: 301-492-6403 1-800-582-3421 : ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: This plan results from the efforts of many who spent considerable time and energy to prevent the destruction of Ash Meadows and the extinction of its diverse endemic biota.
    [Show full text]
  • Lundiana 8-1 2007.P65
    Lundiana 8(1):9-12, 2007 © 2007 Instituto de Ciências Biológicas - UFMG ISSN 1676-6180 Notas sobre Naucoroidea (Hemiptera: Naucoridae). 3ra. Serie. Estudios con microscopio electrónico de barrido: corion de los huevos de Ambrysus (Ambrysus) attenuatus Montandon, Ambrysus (Ambrysus) acutangulus Montandon y Ambrysus (Ambrysus) stali La Rivers Mónica L. López Ruf División Científica de Entomología, Museo de La Plata, Paseo del Bosque, B1900FWA La Plata, Argentina. E-mail: [email protected] Abstract Notes on Naucoroidea (Insecta: Heteroptera). 3rd. Series. Scanning electron microscopy studies: the chorion of the eggs of Ambrysus (A.) attenuatus Montandon, A. (A.) acutangulus Montandon and A. (A.) stali La Rivers. Chorionic sculpturing differs interespecifically in Ambrysus Stål. The eggs of three species were examined with scanning electron microscopy, described and illustrated. Different patterns on the chorion were found in the three species. In A. acutangulus and A. stali, a rounded area with different pattern appears at the anterior pole and the design disappears near the micropyla. In A. attenuatus the pattern is uniform on the surface. Keywords: Heteroptera, Naucoridae, morphology, eggs, chorion. Introducción Material y métodos El corion de los huevos de las Naucoridae no se ha descripto Los huevos fueron obtenidos de los oviductos de hembras tradicionalmente debido, quizás, a que sus tramas superficiales colectadas en una campaña a finales de la primavera, en el se encuentran en el límite de resolución de los microscopios Parque Provincial Salto Encantado del Valle del Cuñá Pirú estereoscópicos y son opacos para los microscopios ópticos. El (Provincia de Misiones). Debido a la época, las hembras de MEB brinda la posibilidad de observarlos con claridad.
    [Show full text]
  • Fort Ord Natural Reserve Plant List
    UCSC Fort Ord Natural Reserve Plants Below is the most recently updated plant list for UCSC Fort Ord Natural Reserve. * non-native taxon ? presence in question Listed Species Information: CNPS Listed - as designated by the California Rare Plant Ranks (formerly known as CNPS Lists). More information at http://www.cnps.org/cnps/rareplants/ranking.php Cal IPC Listed - an inventory that categorizes exotic and invasive plants as High, Moderate, or Limited, reflecting the level of each species' negative ecological impact in California. More information at http://www.cal-ipc.org More information about Federal and State threatened and endangered species listings can be found at https://www.fws.gov/endangered/ (US) and http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/nongame/ t_e_spp/ (CA). FAMILY NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME LISTED Ferns AZOLLACEAE - Mosquito Fern American water fern, mosquito fern, Family Azolla filiculoides ? Mosquito fern, Pacific mosquitofern DENNSTAEDTIACEAE - Bracken Hairy brackenfern, Western bracken Family Pteridium aquilinum var. pubescens fern DRYOPTERIDACEAE - Shield or California wood fern, Coastal wood wood fern family Dryopteris arguta fern, Shield fern Common horsetail rush, Common horsetail, field horsetail, Field EQUISETACEAE - Horsetail Family Equisetum arvense horsetail Equisetum telmateia ssp. braunii Giant horse tail, Giant horsetail Pentagramma triangularis ssp. PTERIDACEAE - Brake Family triangularis Gold back fern Gymnosperms CUPRESSACEAE - Cypress Family Hesperocyparis macrocarpa Monterey cypress CNPS - 1B.2, Cal IPC
    [Show full text]
  • Origin and Age of Australian Chenopodiaceae
    ARTICLE IN PRESS Organisms, Diversity & Evolution 5 (2005) 59–80 www.elsevier.de/ode Origin and age of Australian Chenopodiaceae Gudrun Kadereita,Ã, DietrichGotzek b, Surrey Jacobsc, Helmut Freitagd aInstitut fu¨r Spezielle Botanik und Botanischer Garten, Johannes Gutenberg-Universita¨t Mainz, D-55099 Mainz, Germany bDepartment of Genetics, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA cRoyal Botanic Gardens, Sydney, Australia dArbeitsgruppe Systematik und Morphologie der Pflanzen, Universita¨t Kassel, D-34109 Kassel, Germany Received 20 May 2004; accepted 31 July 2004 Abstract We studied the age, origins, and possible routes of colonization of the Australian Chenopodiaceae. Using a previously published rbcL phylogeny of the Amaranthaceae–Chenopodiaceae alliance (Kadereit et al. 2003) and new ITS phylogenies of the Camphorosmeae and Salicornieae, we conclude that Australia has been reached in at least nine independent colonization events: four in the Chenopodioideae, two in the Salicornieae, and one each in the Camphorosmeae, Suaedeae, and Salsoleae. Where feasible, we used molecular clock estimates to date the ages of the respective lineages. The two oldest lineages both belong to the Chenopodioideae (Scleroblitum and Chenopodium sect. Orthosporum/Dysphania) and date to 42.2–26.0 and 16.1–9.9 Mya, respectively. Most lineages (Australian Camphorosmeae, the Halosarcia lineage in the Salicornieae, Sarcocornia, Chenopodium subg. Chenopodium/Rhagodia, and Atriplex) arrived in Australia during the late Miocene to Pliocene when aridification and increasing salinity changed the landscape of many parts of the continent. The Australian Camphorosmeae and Salicornieae diversified rapidly after their arrival. The molecular-clock results clearly reject the hypothesis of an autochthonous stock of Chenopodiaceae dating back to Gondwanan times.
    [Show full text]