F231XY184AK Ecological Dynamics of the Site
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Willows of Interior Alaska
1 Willows of Interior Alaska Dominique M. Collet US Fish and Wildlife Service 2004 2 Willows of Interior Alaska Acknowledgements The development of this willow guide has been made possible thanks to funding from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service- Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge - order 70181-12-M692. Funding for printing was made available through a collaborative partnership of Natural Resources, U.S. Army Alaska, Department of Defense; Pacific North- west Research Station, U.S. Forest Service, Department of Agriculture; National Park Service, and Fairbanks Fish and Wildlife Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior; and Bonanza Creek Long Term Ecological Research Program, University of Alaska Fairbanks. The data for the distribution maps were provided by George Argus, Al Batten, Garry Davies, Rob deVelice, and Carolyn Parker. Carol Griswold, George Argus, Les Viereck and Delia Person provided much improvement to the manuscript by their careful editing and suggestions. I want to thank Delia Person, of the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge, for initiating and following through with the development and printing of this guide. Most of all, I am especially grateful to Pamela Houston whose support made the writing of this guide possible. Any errors or omissions are solely the responsibility of the author. Disclaimer This publication is designed to provide accurate information on willows from interior Alaska. If expert knowledge is required, services of an experienced botanist should be sought. Contents -
White Spruce (Sw) - Picea Glauca
White spruce (Sw) - Picea glauca Tree Species > White spruce Page Index Distribution Range and Amplitiudes Tolerances and Damaging Agents Silvical Characteristics Genetics and Notes BC Distribution of White spruce (Sw) Range of White spruce An open canopy stand of white spruce and trembling aspen on Morice River alluvial terrace. Pure white spruce stands are infrequent in th fire-disturbed, montane boreal landscape. Geographic Range and Ecological Amplitudes Description White spruce is a medium-sized (occasionally >55 m tall), evergreen conifer, with a fairly symmetrical, conical crown, a regular branching pattern that often extends to the ground, and a smooth, dark gray, scaly bark. The wood of white spruce is light, straight grained, and resilient. It is used primarily for lumber and pulp. Geographic Range Geographic element: North American transcontinental-incomplete Distribution in Western North America: (north) in the Pacific region; north and central in the Cordilleran region Ecological Climatic amplitude: Amplitudes subarctic – subalpine boreal – montane boreal – (cool temperate) Orographic amplitude: montane – subalpine Occurrence in biogeoclimatic zones: SWB, (ESSF), MS, BWBS, SBS, SBPS, (IDF), (ICH), (northern CWH) Edaphic Amplitude Range of soil moisture regimes: (very dry) – moderately dry – slightly dry – fresh – moist – very moist – wet Range of soil nutrient regimes: (very poor) – poor – medium – rich – very rich In the BWBS zone, white spruce grows well on medium and rich sites providing a Moder humus formation exists. Wildfires are the major disturbance factor in re-establishing a white spruce stand when acidic Mors begin to develop, a humus form which favors the regeneration and growth of black spruce. Without the fires, the more shade-tolerant black spruce would become a dominant species and form a climatic climax stand. -
Coptis Trifolia Conservation Assessment
CONSERVATION ASSESSMENT for Coptis trifolia (L.) Salisb. Originally issued as Management Recommendations December 1998 Marty Stein Reconfigured-January 2005 Tracy L. Fuentes USDA Forest Service Region 6 and USDI Bureau of Land Management, Oregon and Washington CONSERVATION ASSESSMENT FOR COPTIS TRIFOLIA Table of Contents Page List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. 2 List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ 2 Summary........................................................................................................................................ 4 I. NATURAL HISTORY............................................................................................................. 6 A. Taxonomy and Nomenclature.......................................................................................... 6 B. Species Description ........................................................................................................... 6 1. Morphology ................................................................................................................... 6 2. Reproductive Biology.................................................................................................... 7 3. Ecological Roles ............................................................................................................. 7 C. Range and Sites -
Economic and Ethnic Uses of Bryophytes
Economic and Ethnic Uses of Bryophytes Janice M. Glime Introduction Several attempts have been made to persuade geologists to use bryophytes for mineral prospecting. A general lack of commercial value, small size, and R. R. Brooks (1972) recommended bryophytes as guides inconspicuous place in the ecosystem have made the to mineralization, and D. C. Smith (1976) subsequently bryophytes appear to be of no use to most people. found good correlation between metal distribution in However, Stone Age people living in what is now mosses and that of stream sediments. Smith felt that Germany once collected the moss Neckera crispa bryophytes could solve three difficulties that are often (G. Grosse-Brauckmann 1979). Other scattered bits of associated with stream sediment sampling: shortage of evidence suggest a variety of uses by various cultures sediments, shortage of water for wet sieving, and shortage around the world (J. M. Glime and D. Saxena 1991). of time for adequate sampling of areas with difficult Now, contemporary plant scientists are considering access. By using bryophytes as mineral concentrators, bryophytes as sources of genes for modifying crop plants samples from numerous small streams in an area could to withstand the physiological stresses of the modern be pooled to provide sufficient material for analysis. world. This is ironic since numerous secondary compounds Subsequently, H. T. Shacklette (1984) suggested using make bryophytes unpalatable to most discriminating tastes, bryophytes for aquatic prospecting. With the exception and their nutritional value is questionable. of copper mosses (K. G. Limpricht [1885–]1890–1903, vol. 3), there is little evidence of there being good species to serve as indicators for specific minerals. -
Vermont Natural Community Types
Synonymy of Vermont Natural Community Types with National Vegetation Classification Associations Eric Sorenson and Bob Zaino Natural Heritage Inventory Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department October 17, 2019 Vermont Natural Community Type Patch State National and International Vegetation Classification. NatureServe. 2019. Size Rank NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Spruce-Fir-Northern Hardwood Forest Formation Subalpine Krummholz S S1 Picea mariana - Abies balsamea / Sibbaldiopsis tridentata Shrubland (CEGL006038); (Picea mariana, Abies balsamea) / Kalmia angustifolia - Ledum groenlandicum Dwarf-shrubland Montane Spruce-Fir Forest L-M S3 Picea rubens - Abies balsamea - Sorbus americana Forest (CEGL006128) Variant: Montane Fir Forest L-M S3 Abies balsamea - (Betula papyrifera var. cordifolia) Forest (CEGL006112) Variant: Montane Spruce Forest Lowland Spruce-Fir Forest L-M S3 Picea mariana - Picea rubens / Pleurozium schreberi Forest (CEGL006361) Variant: Well-Drained Lowland Spruce- L S2 Picea rubens - Abies balsamea - Betula papyrifera Forest (CEGL006273); Fir Forest Picea mariana - Picea rubens / Rhododendron canadense / Cladina spp. Woodland (CEGL006421) Montane Yellow Birch-Red Spruce Forest M S3 Betula alleghaniensis - Picea rubens / Dryopteris campyloptera Forest (CEGL006267) Variant: Montane Yellow Birch-Sugar L S3 Maple-Red Spruce Forest Red Spruce-Northern Hardwood Forest M S5 Betula alleghaniensis - Picea rubens / Dryopteris campyloptera Forest (CEGL006267) Red Spruce-Heath -
Picea Glauca Common Name: White Spruce Family Name: Pinaceae
Plant Profiles: HORT 2242 Landscape Plants II Botanical Name: Picea glauca Common Name: white spruce Family Name: Pinaceae – pine family General Description: Picea glauca is a large evergreen conifer widely distributed across the northern parts of North America. It is not, however, native to the Chicago area. The straight species is not considered highly ornamental compared to other spruces but with its ability to withstand cold, heat, wind and drought it is a very serviceable tree especially when used as a wind break. There are a few varieties and cultivars available in the trade. The most commonly used cultivar is Picea glauca ‘Conica’ (sometimes listed as P. glauca var. conica). Zone: 2-6 Resources Consulted: Dirr, Michael A. Manual of Woody Landscape Plants: Their Identification, Ornamental Characteristics, Culture, Propagation and Uses. Champaign: Stipes, 2009. Print. "The PLANTS Database." USDA, NRCS. National Plant Data Team, Greensboro, NC 27401-4901 USA, 2014. Web. 19 Feb. 2014. Creator: Julia Fitzpatrick-Cooper, Professor, College of DuPage Creation Date: 2014 Keywords/Tags: Pinaceae, tree, conifer, cone, needle, evergreen, Picea glauca, white spruce Whole plant/Habit: Description: Picea glauca is a broad dense conical tree, especially when young. The mature habit can vary but it generally is a narrow conical form. Image Source: Karren Wcisel, TreeTopics.com Image Date: September 21, 2008 Image File Name: white_spruce_4039.png Branch/Twig: Description: The stem is described as being pinkish- brown, glabrous and sometimes glaucous. Color can be relative I guess as I usually see more of a chalky white color. If you look closely at this image you will see the chalky, light colored stem peeking through the foliage. -
Appendix 2: Plant Lists
Appendix 2: Plant Lists Master List and Section Lists Mahlon Dickerson Reservation Botanical Survey and Stewardship Assessment Wild Ridge Plants, LLC 2015 2015 MASTER PLANT LIST MAHLON DICKERSON RESERVATION SCIENTIFIC NAME NATIVENESS S-RANK CC PLANT HABIT # OF SECTIONS Acalypha rhomboidea Native 1 Forb 9 Acer palmatum Invasive 0 Tree 1 Acer pensylvanicum Native 7 Tree 2 Acer platanoides Invasive 0 Tree 4 Acer rubrum Native 3 Tree 27 Acer saccharum Native 5 Tree 24 Achillea millefolium Native 0 Forb 18 Acorus calamus Alien 0 Forb 1 Actaea pachypoda Native 5 Forb 10 Adiantum pedatum Native 7 Fern 7 Ageratina altissima v. altissima Native 3 Forb 23 Agrimonia gryposepala Native 4 Forb 4 Agrostis canina Alien 0 Graminoid 2 Agrostis gigantea Alien 0 Graminoid 8 Agrostis hyemalis Native 2 Graminoid 3 Agrostis perennans Native 5 Graminoid 18 Agrostis stolonifera Invasive 0 Graminoid 3 Ailanthus altissima Invasive 0 Tree 8 Ajuga reptans Invasive 0 Forb 3 Alisma subcordatum Native 3 Forb 3 Alliaria petiolata Invasive 0 Forb 17 Allium tricoccum Native 8 Forb 3 Allium vineale Alien 0 Forb 2 Alnus incana ssp rugosa Native 6 Shrub 5 Alnus serrulata Native 4 Shrub 3 Ambrosia artemisiifolia Native 0 Forb 14 Amelanchier arborea Native 7 Tree 26 Amphicarpaea bracteata Native 4 Vine, herbaceous 18 2015 MASTER PLANT LIST MAHLON DICKERSON RESERVATION SCIENTIFIC NAME NATIVENESS S-RANK CC PLANT HABIT # OF SECTIONS Anagallis arvensis Alien 0 Forb 4 Anaphalis margaritacea Native 2 Forb 3 Andropogon gerardii Native 4 Graminoid 1 Andropogon virginicus Native 2 Graminoid 1 Anemone americana Native 9 Forb 6 Anemone quinquefolia Native 7 Forb 13 Anemone virginiana Native 4 Forb 5 Antennaria neglecta Native 2 Forb 2 Antennaria neodioica ssp. -
Molecular Phylogeny of Chinese Thuidiaceae with Emphasis on Thuidium and Pelekium
Molecular Phylogeny of Chinese Thuidiaceae with emphasis on Thuidium and Pelekium QI-YING, CAI1, 2, BI-CAI, GUAN2, GANG, GE2, YAN-MING, FANG 1 1 College of Biology and the Environment, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China. 2 College of Life Science, Nanchang University, 330031 Nanchang, China. E-mail: [email protected] Abstract We present molecular phylogenetic investigation of Thuidiaceae, especially on Thudium and Pelekium. Three chloroplast sequences (trnL-F, rps4, and atpB-rbcL) and one nuclear sequence (ITS) were analyzed. Data partitions were analyzed separately and in combination by employing MP (maximum parsimony) and Bayesian methods. The influence of data conflict in combined analyses was further explored by two methods: the incongruence length difference (ILD) test and the partition addition bootstrap alteration approach (PABA). Based on the results, ITS 1& 2 had crucial effect in phylogenetic reconstruction in this study, and more chloroplast sequences should be combinated into the analyses since their stability for reconstructing within genus of pleurocarpous mosses. We supported that Helodiaceae including Actinothuidium, Bryochenea, and Helodium still attributed to Thuidiaceae, and the monophyletic Thuidiaceae s. lat. should also include several genera (or species) from Leskeaceae such as Haplocladium and Leskea. In the Thuidiaceae, Thuidium and Pelekium were resolved as two monophyletic groups separately. The results from molecular phylogeny were supported by the crucial morphological characters in Thuidiaceae s. lat., Thuidium and Pelekium. Key words: Thuidiaceae, Thuidium, Pelekium, molecular phylogeny, cpDNA, ITS, PABA approach Introduction Pleurocarpous mosses consist of around 5000 species that are defined by the presence of lateral perichaetia along the gametophyte stems. Monophyletic pleurocarpous mosses were resolved as three orders: Ptychomniales, Hypnales, and Hookeriales (Shaw et al. -
Isoenzyme Identification of Picea Glauca, P. Sitchensis, and P. Lutzii Populations1
BOT.GAZ. 138(4): 512-521. 1977. (h) 1977 by The Universityof Chicago.All rightsreserved. ISOENZYME IDENTIFICATION OF PICEA GLAUCA, P. SITCHENSIS, AND P. LUTZII POPULATIONS1 DONALD L. COPES AND ROY C. BECKWITH USDA Forest Service,Pacific Northwest Forest and Range ExperimentStation ForestrySciences Laboratory, Corvalli.s, Oregon 97331 Electrophoretictechniques were used to identify stands of pure Sitka sprucePicea sitchensis (Bong.) Carr.and purewhite spruceP. glauca (Moench)Voss and sprucestands in whichintrogressive hybridization betweenthe white and Sitka sprucehad occurred.Thirteen heteromorphic isoenzymes of LAP, GDH, and TO were the criteriafor stand identification.Estimates of likenessor similaritybetween seed-source areas were made from 1) determinationsIntrogressed hybrid stands had isoenzymefrequencies that were in- termediatebetween the two purespecies, but the seedlingswere somewhat more like white sprucethan like Sitkaspruce. Much of the west side of the KenaiPeninsula appeared to be a hybridswarm area, with stands containingboth Sitka and white sprucegenes. The presenceof white sprucegenes in Sitka sprucepopula- tions was most easily detectedby the presenceof TO activity at Rm .52. White spruceshowed activity at that positionin 79% of its germinants;only 1% of the pure sitka sprucegerminants had similaractivity. Isoenzymevariation between stands of pure Sitka sprucewas less variablethan that betweeninterior white spruce stands (mean distinctionvalues were 0.11 for Sitka and 0.32 for white spruce). Clusteranalysis showedall six pure Sitka sprucepopulations to be similarat .93, whereaspure white sprucepopulations werenot similaruntil .69. Introduction mining quantitatively the genetic composition of Hybrids between Picea glauca (Moench) Voss and stands suspected of being of hybrid origin would be Sitka spruce Picea sitchensis (Bong.) Carr. were of great use to foresters and researchers. -
Summary Data
Table 11. Summary List of Species Identified in 2001-2002, Squam Lakes Watershed, New Hampshire. Page 1 of 12 Type Common Name Scientific Name Amphibians Bullfrog Rana catesbeiana Amphibians Eastern American toad Bufo americanus Amphibians Gray treefrog Hyla versicolor Amphibians Green frog Rana clamitans Amphibians Northern leopard frog Rana pipiens Amphibians Northern dusky salamander Desmognathus fuscus Amphibians Northern spring peeper Pseudacris crucifer Amphibians Northern two-lined salamander Eurycea bislineata Amphibians Pickerel frog Rana palustris Amphibians Redback salamander Plethodon cinereus Amphibians Red-spotted newt Notophthalmus viridescens Amphibians Spotted salamander Ambystoma maculatum Amphibians Wood frog Rana sylvatica Birds Alder Flycatcher Empidonax alnorum Birds American Bittern Botaurus lentiginosus Birds American Black Duck Anas rubripes Birds American Coot Fulica americana Birds American Crow Corvus brachyrhynchos Birds American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis Birds American Green-winged Teal Anas crecca Birds American Kestrel Falco sparverius Birds American Redstart Setophaga ruticilla Birds American Robin Turdus migratorius Birds American Tree Sparrow Spizella arborea Birds American Woodcock Scolopax minor Birds Atlantic Brant Branta bernicla Birds Bald Eagle* Haliaeetus leucocephalus* Birds Baltimore Oriole Icterus galbula Birds Bank Swallow Riparia riparia Birds Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica Birds Barred Owl Strix varia Birds Belted Kingfisher Ceryle alcyon Birds Black-and-white Warbler Mniotilta varia Birds -
Here Is Glaucum) Looks Like Tiny Pine Seedlings on This Disturbed Soil Along Forest Edge
Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program informationinformation forfor thethe conservationconservation ofof biodiversitybiodiversity Wild Heritage News January—March 2014 Bryophytes and Lichens of Dry Oak Heath Forest Communities Inside This Issue by Scott Schuette Bryophytes and Pg 1 Lichens Pennsylvania is flush with a diversity of biodiversity ripe for exploration if one just Edge of Range Pg 4 forest communities, some garnering looks a little bit closer at the smaller Species special attention due to the quality of organisms living within this forest plant diversity and others for the community. Preserving Records Pg 6 hardwood resources they provide. The of our Work dry oak heath forests fall into the latter Bryophytes and lichens are present in category. These forest communities are every forest community, regardless of size Notes from the Pg 7 found throughout the state occurring on and condition. It is well-documented that Field moderately dry to xeric, acidic sites that bryophytes and lichens are sensitive to Measures of Pg 12 usually have shallow or sometimes sandy human disturbance and, as a result, have Progress soils. The dominant tree canopy is been used as indicators of habitat quality. chestnut oak (Quercus montana) mixed These organisms tend to live on the trees with black oak (Quercus velutina), white and shrubs as epiphytes (rootless, oak (Quercus alba), and red maple (Acer independent living plants), but they can rubrum). Other tree species that are also completely cover boulders or reside commonly present in the subcanopy Photo Banner: include sassafras (Sassafras albidum), Scott Schuette sweet birch (Betula lenta), black gum (Nyssa sylvatica), and eastern white pine The stair-step moss (Pinus strobus). -
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Species List, Version 2018-07-24
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Species List, version 2018-07-24 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge biology staff July 24, 2018 2 Cover image: map of 16,213 georeferenced occurrence records included in the checklist. Contents Contents 3 Introduction 5 Purpose............................................................ 5 About the list......................................................... 5 Acknowledgments....................................................... 5 Native species 7 Vertebrates .......................................................... 7 Invertebrates ......................................................... 55 Vascular Plants........................................................ 91 Bryophytes ..........................................................164 Other Plants .........................................................171 Chromista...........................................................171 Fungi .............................................................173 Protozoans ..........................................................186 Non-native species 187 Vertebrates ..........................................................187 Invertebrates .........................................................187 Vascular Plants........................................................190 Extirpated species 207 Vertebrates ..........................................................207 Vascular Plants........................................................207 Change log 211 References 213 Index 215 3 Introduction Purpose to avoid implying