Producer-Consumer Biomass in Montane Forests on the Arizona Mogollon Plateau
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Great Basin Naturalist Volume 44 Number 4 Article 9 10-31-1984 Producer-consumer biomass in montane forests on the Arizona Mogollon Plateau Warren P. Clary Shrub Sciences Laboratory, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Provo, Utah Peter F. Ffolliott University of Arizona, Tucson Frederic R. Larson Forestry Sciences Laboratory, Anchorage, Alaska Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn Recommended Citation Clary, Warren P.; Ffolliott, Peter F.; and Larson, Frederic R. (1984) "Producer-consumer biomass in montane forests on the Arizona Mogollon Plateau," Great Basin Naturalist: Vol. 44 : No. 4 , Article 9. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn/vol44/iss4/9 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]. PRODUCER-CONSUMER BIOMASS IN MONTANE FORESTS ON THE ARIZONA MOGOLLON PLATEAU Warren P. Clary', Peter F. Ffolliott-, and Frederic R. Larson' .\bstract.— a substantially complete compilation of prodiicer-consmner biomass was achieved for two montane forest reference stands on the Arizona Mogollon Plateau. This compilation, containing published and previously unpublished data, shows these ponderosa-pine-dominated stands to be near the lower end of the biomass range of commercial forest types. The two stands averaged approximately 75 metric tons/ha of plant biomass. Consumers made up less than 0.01 percent of the forest biomass. About 9/10 of the measured consumer biomass consisted of domestic and native riuninants. Knowledge of biomass quantity and distri- Description of Study Areas bution is useful for conceptualizing biological The study areas, part of the Colorado conditions of an ecosystem, and is necessary Plateau physiographic province (Fenneman for the study of primary and secondary pro- 1931 lie immediately north of the Mogol- duction, nutrient cycling, hydrology, and fire. ), lon Rim in central Arizona. The ponderosa Information on biomass is limited for many pine ecosystem occurs at elevations between vegetation types. Consumer data are particu- 1830 and 2590 m, although ponderosa pine is larly lacking in forested ecosystems where most strongly dominant between 2130 and mammalian herbivores are relatively less im- 2380 m (Schubert 1974). It spans the altitu- portant than in grassland ecosystems. Com- dinal range of Merriam's Tran.sition Zone paratively open forests, such as those of the (Merriam southwestern ponderosa pine (Finns pon- 1890, 1898). Most of the information presented was ob- derosa) ecosystem, represent an intermediate tained from the Beaver Creek watershed ecological position between dense humid for- south of Flagstaff, Arizona (Brown et al. ests and the more arid grasslands. Although 1974) and from Stermer Ridge near Heber, large herbivores are not as obvious here as in Arizona (Ffolliott and Baker 1977). A sum- the grasslands, their roles are significant. mary of their mean characteristics follows: Many different tree densities may occur within a forest ecosystem. Each density pro- vides a different combination of biological components. As information is accumulated from a variety of forested conditions, more accurate judgements can be made concerning the impact of vegetation management on the amount of plant and animal life likely to be supported. The purpose of this paper is to synthesize the current published and unpublished infor- mation on producer-consumer biomass from several representative situations within the montane forest ecosystem on the Arizona Mogollon Plateau. These values are com- pared to situations where the forest stand has undergone severe changes. 628 Great Basin Naturalist Vol. 44, No. 4 present, and quaking aspen (Popiilns tremu- 1950s to the late 1970s. Some of the informa- loides) was occasionally found. The her- tion has not been reported previously, but baceous layer was dominated by such grami- much has been obtained from reports and noids as mutton bluegrass {Poa fendleriana), publications from the primary reference bottlebrush squirreltail (Sitanion hystrix), areas and supplemental study areas. The bio- blue grama {Bouteloua gracilis), black drop- mass estimates are most complete on the two seed {Sporobohis interruptiis), and dryland reference areas. Therefore, information from sedge (Carex geophila). In some areas Arizona these will be presented as base condition for fescue {Festuca arizonica) and mountain muh- forest stands on the Mogollon Plateau. Esti- ly {Muhlenbergia montana) were prevalent. mates of how the biomass quantity and com- Typical forbs and half-shmbs were showy as- position changes as tree density decreases ter {Aster commutatus), showy goldeneye {Vi- from either cutting or fire are based on infor- guiera midtiflora), western ragweed {Am- mation from supplemental areas. hrosio psilostachya), and broom snakeweed Assumptions for this synthesis include: (Gutierrezia sarothrae). The shrub layer was 1. The primary reference areas represent typical un- represented by Gambel oak sprouts and an even-aged cut-over ponderosa pine stands. occasional buckbrush ceanothus {Ceanothus 2. Typical forest grazing practices are followed on the fendleri) or New Mexico locust {Robinia cattle allotments. neomexicana). 3. A livestock animal-\mit represents 1121 kg/ha live weight. The vertebrate animal biomass was domi- 4. Native consumer populations have luiiform distribu- nated by Riminants. Cattle {Bos taunts), elk tion of sex and age classes. {Cervus canadensis), and deer {Odocoilens Information sources used to estimate bio- hemionns) were the primary species. Impor- mass are shown in Tables 1 and 2. Only tant smaller mammals included deer mouse aboveground living biomass near growing {Peromysciis maniculatns), brush mouse {P. boylei), Mexican woodrat {Neotoma mexi- cana), cliff chipmimk {Eutamias dorsalis), Table 1. Sources of producer biomass estimates for gray-collared chipmunk (£. cinereicollis), Beaver Creek and Stermer Ridge. golden-mantled ground squirrel {Spermo- Woody plants phihis lateralis), Mexican vole {Microtus mex- Ponderosa pine icanus), cottontail {Sylvdagus nuttallii), and — Individual stem equations from Gholz et al. Abert squirrel {Sciurus aberti). Reptiles in- (1979). (Data from Fort Valley Experimental For- cluded eastern fence lizard {Sceloporus iindu- est, Arizona). — Stand tables from Brown et al. (1974) and latits) and tree lizard {Urosarus ornatus). The Ffolliott and Baker (1977). more common birds included common flicker Gambel oak {Colaptes auratus), Steller's jay {Cyanocitta — Individual stem equations based on file data, stelleri), white-breasted nuthatch {Sitta caroli- Shrub Sciences Laboratory, Provo, Utah. — Stand tables from Brown et al. (1974) and nensis), pygmy nuthatch (S. pygmaea), Ffolliott and Baker (1977). Grace's warbler {Dendroica graciae), and Alligator juniper gray-headed junco {Junco caniceps). Insects —Individual stem biomass based on data from Bar- and other invertebrates were excluded from ger and Ffolliott (1972) and Miller et al. (1981), this study. and equations from Gholz et al. (1979). — Stand tables from Brown et al. and Supplemental information from other pon- (1974) Ffolliott and Baker (1977). derosa-pine-dominated montane forest stands Aspen was obtained from the Rattle Burn area —Individual stem equations from Peterson et al. southwest of Flagstaff (Campbell et al. 1977), (1970), -Stand table Brown et al. from several wildfire burns northwest of from (1974). Shrubs (including Gambel oak sprouts) Flagstaff (Lowe et al. 1978), and from an ear- —Field sample for current leaf and twig growth ad- lier informational synthesis (Clary 1978). justed to total biomass based on Whittaker and Woodwell (1969) and Brown (1976). Background and Procedures Herbaceous plants The information presented was synthesized —Data from Clary (1975) and Ffolliott and Baker (1977). from source data collected from the late October 1984 Clary et al.: Montane Forest Biomass 629 season end was calculated. Two trophic lev- Differences in biomass on the supplemen- els are presented— producers and consumers. tal study areas (with and without reductions Because no reliable carnivore information in overstory tree density) are expressed as was found, no attempt was made to estimate percent change because of some differences biomass of carnivores. Also, because of a lack among areas in manner of data collection. of insect information for the herbaceous lay- er, no insect biomass was estimated for modi- Results in Reference Areas fied forest conditions. Producer Table 2. Sources of consumer biomass estimates tor Beaver Creek and Stermer Ridge.' Plant biomass on the two reference areas, Beaver Creek and Stermer Ridge, totaled Domestic 83,459 and 67,943 kg/ha, respectively (Table Cattle —Biomass based on average animal-unit-month car- 3). Coniferous trees made up approximately rying capacities (Clary 1975) and from field sam- 89 percent and hardwood trees approx- pling of fecal dropping densities. imately 11 percent of the producer biomass, and shrubs and herbaceous plants contributed Native only trace amounts. conifer Elk The category — .\nimal-days from fecal group data of Neff (1972), consisted of 98 percent ponderosa pine and 2 Knise (1972), Clary and Larson (1971), Ffolliott and Baker (1977), and Neff (pers. comm.).