DOCSLIB.ORG

An International Terminology for Grazing Lands and Grazing Animals

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
An International Terminology for Grazing Lands and Grazing Animals Grass and Forage Science The Journal of the British Grassland Society The Official Journal of the European Grassland Federation An international terminology for grazing lands and grazing animals V.G. Allen, C. Batello, E.J. Berretta, J. Hodgson, M. Kothmann, X. Li, J. McIvor, J. Milne, C. Morris, A. Peeters and M. Sanderson The Forage and Grazing Terminology Committee Table of contents Page Preface Preface 2 In 1991, Terminology for Grazing Lands and Grazing Animals Members of the committee 3 was published with the objective of ‘developing a Acknowledgements 3 consensus of clear definitions of terms used in the grazing An International Terminology for Grazing of animals.’ This first effort involved primarily organiza- Lands and Grazing Animals tions and agencies within the USA but included repre- 1. Grazing land terms 4 sentation from New Zealand and Australia. It was the 2. Vegetation: descriptive terms 6 intent from the beginning to expand this to a truly 3. Forage growth and harvest 8 international effort at a later date. At the XVII Interna- 4. Forage nutritive value and intake 9 tional Grassland Congress (IGC), held jointly in New 5. Management of grazing lands 12 Zealand and Australia in 1993, a resolution was passed at 6. Land–forage–animal relationships 15 the final business meeting as follows: ‘It is recommended 7. Stocking methods 16 that the International Grassland Congress endorse the References 18 continuing development of uniformity of terminology Appendix I. References and additional 21 for grazing systems and grazing management, and that information for selected terms the Forage and Grazing Terminology Task Force report Appendix II. Terms not recommended for use 23 progress at the XVIII Congress.’ During the XVIII IGC, Index of terms 26 held in Canada in 1997, a new Terminology working group, chaired by Mort Kothmann, was formed to begin discussions regarding the first revision of this publication. As was the objective from the beginning, this first revision was to be international in scope and a focused effort was made to include broad international represen- tation and expertise. Preliminary work by the working group was accom- Correspondence to: Professor Vivien Gore Allen, Chair of the International Forage and Grazing Terminology Committee, plished during the next few years. In 2000, Termi- Plant and Soil Science Department, Texas Tech University, nology became the first project to be jointly supported P O Box 42122, Lubbock, TX, 79409-2122, USA. by the IGC and the International Rangeland Congress E-mail: [email protected] (IRC) and a new Terminology Committee was jointly This document may be copied with citation of source. appointed by Bob Clements (Chair, IGC Continuing Suggested format for citation: Committee) and Maureen Wolfson (President, IRC Allen V.G., C. Batello, E.J. Berretta, J. Hodgson, M. Continuing Committee). Work of the Terminology Kothmann, X. Li, J. McIvor, J. Milne, C. Morris, A. Peeters Committee progressed leading up to the first joint and M. Sanderson (2011) An international terminology for meeting of the IGC and the IRC in Hohhot, Inner grazing lands and grazing animals. Grass and Forage Science, Mongolia in the Peoples Republic of China. At the 66, 2–28. (n.) Noun meeting in 2008, resolutions were passed by both the (v.) Verb IGC and the IRC requesting that Terminology for (adj.) Adjective Grazing Lands and Grazing Animals be completed and (cf.) For comparison see presented at both the IX IRC in Argentina in 2011 and (e.g.) For example the XXII IGC in Australia in 2013. With the completion (Syn.) Synonym of this revision in 2010, the wishes of both congresses Re-use of this article is permitted in accordance with the will be fulfilled. Terms and Conditions set out at http://wileyonlinelibrary. As with the first edition of Terminology, our objective com/onlineopen#OnlineOpen_Terms has been to develop a consensus of terms and defi- Received 22 September 2010; revised 11 November 2010 nitions to ensure clear international communication 2 Ó 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Grass and Forage Science, 66, 2–28 doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2494.2010.00780.x Grazing lands and grazing animals 3 regarding grazing lands and grazing animals. Terms John Hodgson, New Zealand included here have relevance to both domesticated and Mort Kothmann, United States wild grazing animals. It is intended that these terms Xianglin Li, China enhance communication in education, science, indus- John McIvor, Australia try and production and that they become the standard John Milne, United Kingdom for use in publications. It has been our goal to include Craig Morris, South Africa terms that are relevant specifically to grazing lands and Alain Peeters, Belgium grazing animals and to present these, where appropri- Matt Sanderson, United States ate, in a hierarchy that shows the relationships among such terms. For example, certain terms such as ‘grazing Supporting member land’ are all-inclusive and are then followed by terms relating to the various types of grazing lands. We have Garry Lacefield attempted to agree on a single, concise definition for Extension Forage Specialist each term and to avoid multiple definitions. Variations University of Kentucky, USA among terms used in countries where English is one of Secretary, Forage and Grassland Foundation the official languages were taken into account. Because of international variations in a few terms, we have Representatives to the International included a list of the various international interpreta- Congresses tions in an Appendix but have recommended the use of Jim O’Rourke a specific term and definition. It is hoped that this will Representative to the International Rangeland Con- take us towards a more uniform international language. gress In the case of most terms and definitions, we have Rancher, Chadron, Nebraska, USA arrived at a consensus opinion. In a few cases, use will Past president, International Rangeland Congress be needed to see whether these will stand the test of Continuing Committee time. We hope that in such cases, we have taken the Nan Zhibiao steps to move the language forward towards more Representative to the International Grassland Con- precise and meaningful terms and definitions. Finally, gress as we reviewed terms and definitions, there were some Dean, College of Pastoral Agriculture Science and that did not appear to contribute to clear commu- Technology nication. We have listed these in an Appendix and Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China provided an explanation for our recommendation that Member, International Grassland Congress Contin- they are not used. uing Committee Ours is a living language that will continue to evolve as new concepts emerge, techniques and methods International Congress change, and our international language becomes more Chairs ⁄ Presidents precise. Thus, the mechanism established by the IGC and the IRC for periodic review and revision of Guy Allard Terminology for Grazing Lands and Grazing Animals Associate Dean of Studies must be continued but with sufficient time between Universite´ Laval, Que´bec, Canada revisions to allow for adequate testing to see where Chair, International Grassland Congress Continuing terms are missing and revisions are required. Committee Finally, on behalf of the International Forage and Iain Wright Grazing Lands Terminology Committee, we are sub- Regional Representative for Asia mitting this International Terminology for Grazing Lands International Livestock Research Institute, India and Grazing Animals to the IGC and the IRC with our President, International Rangeland Congress Contin- appreciation for the challenge and opportunity that you uing Committee have entrusted to us. It has been a privilege and an honour to serve. Acknowledgements March, 2011 This publication was funded jointly by the Forage and Grassland Foundation, Inc., Lexington, Kentucky, USA, Members of the committee the International Grassland Congress, and the Interna- Vivien Allen, Chair, United States tional Rangeland Congress. Appreciation is expressed to Caterina Batello, Italy the Members of the Forage and Grazing Lands Task Elbio J. Berretta, Uruguay Force and Working Group (Mort Kothmann, Chair) for Ó 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Grass and Forage Science, 66, 2–28 4 V. G. Allen et al. preliminary work and to all who contributed their knowledge and suggestions in the development of An Note No. 1.1.2.1. International Terminology for Grazing Lands and Grazing The following terms are sometimes used and apply Animals. to agroforestry as follows: Agro-silvo-pastoralism (n.). Incorporates agricul- tural crops, potentially including forage crops and An international terminology for grazing livestock production, where trees may produce lands and grazing animals timber, pulp, fruits, rubber, syrup or browse for grazing animals. 1. Grazing land terms Silvo-pastoralism (n.). Refers to the exclusive use of land for forest products and animal production by Note No. 1. browsing of shrubs and trees and ⁄ or grazing of 1. In this publication, ‘grazing animals’ refers to co-existing forage crops. grazing herbivores, both domesticated and wild, that feed mainly or only on forage and does not 1.1.2.2 Grazable forestland (n.). Forestland that include insects or other animals that consume produces, at least periodically, understory (understo- vegetation to some degree. rey) vegetation that can be grazed. Forage is indigenous 2. Some of the definitions of grazing land types or, if introduced, it is managed as though it were (below) imply current land use and some are indigenous (cf. Rangeland, 1.1.4). based on potential vegetation or land capability. 1.1.2.3 Woodland (n.). A plant community in which, The context should be specified if it is not in contrast to a typical forest, the trees are often small, apparent. characteristically short-boled relative to their crown 3. The grazing land terms, cropland, forestland, depth and forming only an open canopy with the pastureland ⁄ grassland and rangeland can pro- intervening area being occupied by shorter vegetation, vide the basis for land-use mapping units.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Manzano & Casas 2010 Pastoralism (Practical Action)
    Past, present and future of Trashumancia in Spain: nomadism in a developed country PABLO MANZANO BAENA and RAQUEL CASAS Spain presents exceptional ecological conditions for mobile pastoralism. Its semi- arid climate and its geography combine large biomass production in different places of the country at different times of the year. This creates an ecological rationale for the migration of large herbivores that was continued after the domestication of ruminants. Mobile livestock herding in Spain, known as transhumance, has been especially related to sheep husbandry and fi ne wool production and has been very important in the country’s past. In spite of a decline in mobile pastoralism from the 19th century onwards, its traces are still clear in Spanish legislation as well as in Spanish animal husbandry practices. But what are the reasons for this past importance? Why has mobile pastoral- ism declined and why, nevertheless, has it survived? In this paper we analyse the causes for its existence and for its past importance in Spain, and we describe the decline experienced in the two last centuries and present the present situation of transhumance and its future prospects. Keywords: pastoralism, Spain, transhumance, ecology, history Introduction Grasslands represent a large portion of the world’s continental surface and are the natural systems which support the largest herbivore biomass (Frank et al. 1998). Grasslands are usually represented in semi-arid areas of subtropi- cal and temperate countries, as high rainfall leads to a forested landscape or to more productive agricultural uses. Nomadic pasturelands are estimated to occupy 26 million km2, doubling the surface dedicated to agriculture (Grigg 1974).
    [Show full text]
  • Grassland Resources and Development of Grassland Agriculture in Temperate China
    124 Rangelands 10(3), June 1988 Grassland Resources and Development of Grassland Agriculture in Temperate China Zhu Tinachen Natural temperate grasslands occupy 2.4 million km2 or one-quarter ofthe area of China. They form a broad beltfrom the plains of the northeast to the Tibetan Plateau of the southwest (Fig. 1). The nature and distribution of thegrassland is determined in large part by the influence of the monsoon. In the north- east where the monsoon is well developed, the grassland owes its existenceto dry conditions in the spring. Westward and southwestward wherethe monsooninfluence is weaker, the grasslandsoccupy higherelevations (to as high as 5,000 m) in response to the semiarid and arid regional climate. Similarly, temperate grasslands occur at high elevations in mountains of the desert region in northwestern China, far beyond the continuous grassland belt. Some 4,000 species offlowering plants comprise thevegetation ofthese temper- ate grasslands.About 200 are important forage species. The livestock population in China is about 130 million Fig. I Steppe zone of China cattle units. Most of the livestock are dependent on these 1.Meadow steppe, 2.Typical steppe. 3.Desert steppe. 4. Shrub steppe. 5. Alpine steppe. natural temperategrasslands. GrasslandTypes responding to climate and distributed in the form of a belt. Meadows are not zonal; they are controlled by local envi- Based on the concept of zonal vegetation, the natural ronments.About 80 ofthe area of is occu- of China can be divided into two percent grassland temperategrasslands major pied by zone steppetypes and about 20 percent by meadow types: steppe and meadow.
    [Show full text]
  • Silo Buster Forage Mixture Silo Buster Is a Forage Mixture Comprised of 50% Climbing Forage Peas, 25% Spring Triticale and 25% Forage Barley
    Silo Buster Forage Mixture Silo Buster is a forage mixture comprised of 50% Climbing Forage Peas, 25% Spring Triticale and 25% Forage Barley. Preparation Prepare a smooth seed bed to ease accurate seeding. Avoid surface trash unless proper no till seeding is used with appropriate equipment and an experienced operator. Planting Sow 2-2 ½ units per acre, ½ - 1” depth. Do not seed deeper than 1’ and sow as early as possible in the spring. The later part of April is ideal. Underseed with your normal hay or grass mix at the usual rate. For the proper amount of seed per acre start by setting the drill as if you were planting 120 lbs. of wheat. Feed quality and yield will suffer if less than 100 lbs./acre are planted. Fertilizer requirements are approximately 60 lbs. N, 30 lbs. P, and 60 lbs. K in the absence of a soil test. Silo Buster really comes into its own when its values as a nurse crop are examined. After quick emergence, Silo Buster develops more slowly than most nurse crops, allowing the underseeding to develop strong vigorous seedlings. When harvest is about three weeks away, Silo Buster grows very rapidly resulting in lots of high quality feed (approximately 7-9 ½ tonnes wet weight per acre). The peas in the mixture provide large amounts of nitrogen through heavy nodulation, if sufficient climbing pea inoculant is mixed with the seed. Harvest Harvest 55-70 days (depending on your area) from seeding but weather can accelerate or delay harvest. Remember the calendar is only a guide.
    [Show full text]
  • Delivering on Net Zero: Scottish Agriculture
    i Delivering on Net Zero: Scottish Agriculture A report for WWF Scotland from the Organic Policy, Business and Research Consultancy Authors: Nic Lampkin, Laurence Smith, Katrin Padel NOVEMBER 2019 ii Contents Executive summary............................................................................................................................................ iii 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 1 2 Portfolio of mitigation measures ............................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 3 2.2 Measuring greenhouse gas emissions and global warming potential .............................................. 3 2.3 Emission reduction measures to be analysed ................................................................................... 5 A. Improved nitrogen fertiliser use ............................................................................................................... 5 2.3.1 M1 (E1, FBC): Improving synthetic N utilisation ........................................................................ 5 2.3.2 M2 (E6): Controlled release fertilisers (CRF) ............................................................................. 6 2.3.3 M3 (E10): Precision applications to crops ................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Mid-Atlantic Native Meadows Guidelines for Planning, Preparation, Design, Installation, and Maintenance
    Mid-Atlantic Native Meadows Guidelines for Planning, Preparation, Design, Installation, and Maintenance Alice Sturm, Mahan Rykiel Associates Stephanie Frischie, Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation Mid-Atlantic Native Meadows Guidelines for Planning, Preparation, Design, Installation, and Maintenance Alice Sturm, Mahan Rykiel Associates Stephanie Frischie, Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation The Xerces Society is a nonprofit organization that protects the natural world by conserving invertebrates and their habitat. Established in 1971, the Society is a trusted source for science-based information and advice and plays a leading role in promoting the conservation of pollinators and many other invertebrates. We collaborate with people and institutions at all levels and our work to protect bees, butterflies, and other pollinators encompasses all landscapes. Our team draws together experts from the fields of habitat restoration, entomology, plant ecology, education, farming, and conservation biology with a single passion: Protecting the life that sustains us. The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation 628 NE Broadway, Suite 200, Portland, OR 97232 Tel (855) 232-6639 Fax (503) 233-6794 www.xerces.org Regional offices from coast to coast The Xerces Society is an equal opportunity employer and provider. Xerces® is a trademark registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Founded in 1983, Mahan Rykiel Associates is a 35-person landscape architecture, urban design, and planning firm located in Baltimore, Maryland. The firm works across scales to imagine and realize projects that enrich the human condition and support vibrant natural systems. Research and discovery guide project development that includes public parks, civic plazas, state infrastructure, mixed-use housing, private residences, healthcare facilities, hotels, and commercial centers.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolutionary Ecology of Mast-Seeding in Temperate and Tropical Oaks (Quercus Spp.) Author(S): V
    Evolutionary Ecology of Mast-Seeding in Temperate and Tropical Oaks (Quercus spp.) Author(s): V. L. Sork Source: Vegetatio, Vol. 107/108, Frugivory and Seed Dispersal: Ecological and Evolutionary Aspects (Jun., 1993), pp. 133-147 Published by: Springer Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20046304 Accessed: 23-08-2015 21:54 UTC Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Vegetatio. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 128.97.245.17 on Sun, 23 Aug 2015 21:54:56 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Vegetatio 107/108: 133-147, 1993. T. H. Fleming and A. Estrada (eds). Frugivory and Seed Dispersal: Ecological and Evolutionary Aspects. 133 ? 1993 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in Belgium. Evolutionary ecology of mast-seeding in temperate and tropical oaks (Quercus spp.) V. L. Sork Department of Biology, University ofMissouri-St. Louis, St. Louis, MO 63121, USA Keywords: Acorn production,Mast-fruiting, Mast-flowering, Pollination efficiency, Predator-satiation hypothesis, Quercus Abstract Mast-seeding is the synchronous production of large seed crops within a population or community of two or more species every years.
    [Show full text]
  • Impact of Slope of Growing Trays on Productivity of Wheat Green Fodder by a Nutrient Film Technique System
    water Article Impact of Slope of Growing Trays on Productivity of Wheat Green Fodder by a Nutrient Film Technique System Andrius Grigas 1, Aurelija Kemzurait¯ e˙ 1,* , Dainius Steponaviˇcius 1, Aušra Steponaviˇciene˙ 2 and Rolandas Domeika 1 1 Institute of Agricultural Engineering and Safety, Vytautas Magnus University, Agriculture Academy, Studentu˛St. 15A, LT-53362 Kaunas, Lithuania; [email protected] (A.G.); [email protected] (D.S.); [email protected] (R.D.) 2 Catering Department, Kaunas University of Applied Sciences, Pramones˙ Ave. 22, LT-50387 Kaunas, Lithuania; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 28 September 2020; Accepted: 24 October 2020; Published: 27 October 2020 Abstract: Application of hydroponic systems in feed production has not been extensively studied. Therefore, there is insufficient data on the effect of the slope of hydroponic growing trays used in the nutrient film technique on wheat fodder yield and its qualitative parameters. The slope of the trays has only been studied for food crops. This study conducted experimental research using a nutrient film technique hydroponic fodder growing device to evaluate the impact of growing tray slope angle on hydroponic wheat fodder production. The slope angle of the growing trays was changed from 2.0% (1.15◦) to 8.0% (4.57◦) with increments of 1.5% (0.86◦). This research used two different light sources for wheat sprout illumination: indoor lighting (fluorescent lamps) and light-emitting diode illumination. In addition, two nutrient solutions were used for sprout irrigation: tap water and a solution enriched with macro- and microelements. Experimental studies confirmed the hypothesis that the slope angle of growing trays significantly affects the yield of wheat fodder grown for seven days.
    [Show full text]
  • Characterising Forages for Ruminant Feeding**
    116 Characterising Forages for Ruminant Feeding** R. A. Dynes*, D. A. Henry and D. G. Masters CSIRO Livestock Industries, Private Mail Bag 5, Wembley, WA 6913, Australia ABSTRACT : Forages are the most important feed resource for ruminants worldwide, whether fed as pastures, forage crops or conserved hay, silage or haylage. There is large variability in the quality of forages so measurement and prediction of feeding value and nutritive value are essential for high levels of production. Within a commercial animal production system, methods of prediction must be inexpensive and rapid. At least 50% of the variation in feeding value of forages is due to variation in voluntary feed intake. Identification of the factors that constrain voluntary feed intake allows these differences to be managed and exploited in forage selection. Constraints to intake have been predicted using combinations of metabolic and physical factors within the animal while simple measurements such as the energy required to shear the plant material are related to constraints to intake with some plant material. Animals respond to both pre- and post-ingestive feedback signals from forages. Pre-ingestive signals may play a role in intake with signals including taste, odour and texture together with learned aversions to nutrients or toxins (post-ingestive feedback signals). The challenge to forage evaluation is identification of the factors which are most important contributors to these feedback signals. Empirical models incorporating chemical composition are also widely used. The models tend to be useful within the ranges of the datasets used in their development but none can claim to have universal application.
    [Show full text]
  • Ten Key Findings on Livestock Mobility in West Africa
    A Research Study on Transhumance in the Sahel (2014-2017) 10 KEY FINDINGS ON LIVESTOCK MOBILITY IN WEST AFRICA – A REALITY CHECK Editorial team: Brigitte Thébaud (Nordic Consulting Group), Christian Corniaux (CIRAD-PPZS, Dakar), Arnaud François and Annabelle Powell (Acting For Life) English adaptation by Dolf Noppen (Nordic Consulting Group) The suggestions and opinions expressed are those of the authors only. Cover photo: Herds from Burkina-Faso returning from transhumance in Togo (@Gilles Coulon/Tendance Floue for AFL, 2016) Graphic design: ©Sandra Derichs A Research Study on Transhumance in the Sahel (2014-2017) 10 KEY FINDINGS ON LIVESTOCK MOBILITY IN WEST AFRICA – A REALITY CHECK March 2018 This brochure has been prepared as part of the project “Strengthening Resilience through Livestock Mobility”, implemented by Acting For Life together with local partners, funded by UK-Aid and co-financed by the European Union. 2 - Transhumance and livestock mobility in West Africa SUMMARY Introduction 5 FINDING 6 17 In addition to inter-annual climate variations, FINDING 1 7 mobile herders are faced with increasingly Livestock mobility is practised throughout West recurrent extreme events Africa and is part of highly diversified livelihood systems FINDING 7 19 Animal health remains a critical problem for FINDING 2 9 mobile herders Year after year, the contribution of mobile herders to local economies is considerable and FINDING 8 21 benefits a wide range of actors Apart from diseases, mobility involves other risks which also result in animal losses
    [Show full text]
  • Livestock Performance for Sheep and Cattle Grazing Lowland Permanent Pasture: Benchmarking Potential of Forage-Based Systems
    agronomy Article Livestock Performance for Sheep and Cattle Grazing Lowland Permanent Pasture: Benchmarking Potential of Forage-Based Systems Robert J. Orr 1, Bruce A. Griffith 1, M. Jordana Rivero 1,* and Michael R. F. Lee 1,2 1 Rothamsted Research, Sustainable Agriculture Sciences, North Wyke, Okehampton, Devon EX20 2SB, UK; [email protected] (R.J.O.); bruce.griffi[email protected] (B.A.G.); [email protected] (M.R.F.L.) 2 University of Bristol, Bristol Veterinary School, Langford, Somerset BS40 5DU, UK * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +44-1837-512302 Received: 29 January 2019; Accepted: 18 February 2019; Published: 21 February 2019 Abstract: Here we describe the livestock performance and baseline productivity over a two-year period, following the establishment of the infrastructure on the North Wyke Farm Platform across its three farmlets (small farms). Lowland permanent pastures were continuously stocked with yearling beef cattle and ewes and their twin lambs for two years in three farmlets. The cattle came into the farmlets as suckler-reared weaned calves at 195 32.6 days old weighing 309 45.0 kg, were ± ± housed indoors for 170 days then turned out to graze weighing 391 54.2 kg for 177 days. Therefore, ± it is suggested for predominantly grass-based systems with minimal supplementary feeding that target live weight gains should be 0.5 kg/day in the first winter, 0.9 kg/day for summer grazing and 0.8 kg/day for cattle housed and finished on silage in a second winter. The sheep performance suggested that lambs weaned at 100 days and weighing 35 kg should finish at 200 days weighing 44 to 45 kg live weight with a killing out percentage of 44%.
    [Show full text]
  • Native Forb Information Sheet
    United States Department of Agriculture Native Forb Information Sheet Missouri Information Sheet IS-MO-643Native Forb Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Missouri Conservation Practice 643 December 2017 Native forbs, or broadleaf plants, are a natural part of the Missouri landscape. They welcomed European settlers to the state, painting the prairie and savanna landscapes with vibrant colors that changed throughout the season while supporting an incredible diversity of native wildlife. More than 800 plant species, most of them forbs, have been identified on Missouri’s prairies. Missourians are demonstrating a rekindled interest in native forbs for their beauty, hardiness, and wildlife benefits. Native forbs are well adapted to Missouri’s climatic extremes, which range from potentially brutal cold in January to the often stifling heat of July. Once established, native forbs require few inputs and little maintenance. Native forbs feature a variety of shapes, sizes, color, and value to wildlife. The towering compass plant, the vibrant butterfly milkweed, the rather plain but very valuable roundhead lespedeza, and the unique rattlesnake master all add important diversity to any planting. Choosing which ones to plant can be difficult; contact your local conservation agency representative, or one of the vendors of native forb seed for assistance. You can find a list at www.plant-materials.nrcs.usda.gov/mopmc, www.grownative.org, or www.monativeseed.org. Seed vendors can be excellent sources of information, and they are often as eager as you are for your planting to be successful. Refer to Table 1 in this document for general information about native forbs that are most often available commercially.
    [Show full text]
  • Common Plants at the UHCC
    Flora Checklist Texas Institute for Coastal Prairie Research and Education University of Houston Donald Verser created this list by combining lists from studies by Grace and Siemann with the UHCC herbarium list Herbarium Collections Family Scientific Name Synonym Common Name Native Growth Accesion Dates Locality Comments Status Habit Numbers Acanthaceae Ruellia humilis fringeleaf wild petunia N forb 269 10/9/1973 Acanthaceae Ruellia nudiflora violet wild petunia N forb Agavaceae Manfreda virginica false aloe N forb Agavaceae Polianthes sp. polianthes ? forb 130 8/3/1971 2004 roadside Anacardiaceae Toxicodendron radicans eastern poison ivy N woody/vine Apiaceae Centella erecta Centella asiatica erect centella N forb 36 4/11/2000 Area 2 Apiaceae Daucus carota Queen Anne's lace I forb 139-142 1971 / 72 No collections by Dr. Brown. Perhaps Apiaceae Eryngium leavenworthii Leavenworth's eryngo N forb 144 7/20/1971 wooded area in pipeline ROW E. hookeri instead? Apiaceae Eryngium yuccifolium button eryngo N forb 77,143,145 71, 72, 2000 Apiaceae Polytaenia texana Polytaenia nuttallii Texas prairie parsley N forb 32 6/6/2002 Apocynaceae Amsonia illustris Ozark bluestar N Forb 76 3/24/2000 Area 4 Apocynaceae Amsonia tabernaemontana eastern bluestar N Forb Aquifoliaceae Ilex vomitoria yaupon N woody Asclepiadaceae Asclepias lanceolata fewflower milkweed N Forb Not on Dr. Brown's list. Would be great record. Asclepiadaceae Asclepias longifolia longleaf milkweed N Forb 84 6/7/2000 Area 6 Asclepiadaceae Asclepias verticillata whorled milkweed N Forb 35 6/7/2002 Area 7 Asclepiadaceae Asclepias viridis green antelopehorn N Forb 63, 92 1974 & 2000 Asteraceae Acmella oppositifolia var.
    [Show full text]