Purshia Tridentata Bitterbrush
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Arizona Cliffrose (Purshia Subintegra) on the Coconino National Forest Debra L
Arizona cliffrose (Purshia subintegra) on the Coconino National Forest Debra L. Crisp Coconino National Forest and Barbara G. Phillips, PhD. Coconino, Kaibab and Prescott National Forests Introduction – Arizona cliffrose Associated species Threats Management actions Major range-wide threats to Arizona Cliffrose There are numerous other plant include urbanization, recreation, road and benefiting Arizona cliffrose •A long lived endemic shrub known only from four disjunct populations in species associated with Arizona utility line construction and maintenance, central Arizona, near Cottonwood, Bylas, Horseshoe Lake and Burro cliffrose. These include four Region 3 •Establishment of the Verde Valley Botanical Area minerals exploration and mining, and Creek. Sensitive species: heathleaf wild in 1987 (Coconino National Forest) livestock and wildlife browsing. •Usually less than 2 m tall with pale yellow flowers and entire leaves that buckwheat (Eriogonum ericifolium va r. •Withdrawal of an important part of the ericifolium), Ripley wild buckwheat population from a proposed land exchange lack glands. The Cottonwood population is in a (Eriogonum ripleyi), Verde Valley sage (Coconino National Forest) developing urban/suburban area. The •Occurs only on white Tertiary limestone lakebed deposits of the Verde (Salvia dorrii va r. mearnsii) and Rusby Rusby milkwort population in the Cottonwood area is rapidly •No lands containing Endangered species will be Formation that are high in lithium, nitrates, and magnesium. milkwort (Polygala rusbyi). increasing and human impacts are evident in exchanged from federal ownership (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1995) •Listed as Endangered in 1984. A Recovery Plan was prepared in 1995. the habitat of Arizona cliffrose. Many areas that were “open land” when photographs •Closure of the Botanical Area and surrounding were taken in 1987 are now occupied. -
Spring 2019 Volume 42 Number 2 Natureserve Global Ranking
Spring 2019 Volume 42 Number 2 NatureServe Global Ranking Session at March 2019 UNPS Meeting NatureServe Global Ranking .... 2 Cliffrose Reminder ..................... 19 Utah Rare Plant Meeting 2019 . 4 Dorde Woodruff .......................... 20 Fritillaria pudica ......................... 12 Joel Tuhy Meeting ............................. 21 Eriogonum Society Meeting .... 15 Lifetime Members ....................... 21 Alma Winward ............................. 16 Penstemon Society Meeting .... 22 Bill Gray’s App Reviews ............ 19 Dave Wallace Weed Pull ........... 22 BYU Herbarium sheet image adapted to fit page. Original image available on SEINet http://swbiodiversity.org/seinet/index.php Utah Native Plant Society NatureServe Global Ranking Session at March 2019 UNPS Meeting by Anne Frances ([email protected]) and About Conservation Status Assessments, or Ranks Leah Oliver ([email protected]) Conservation status assessments are used to prioritize plant conservation efforts by evaluating a species’ risk of extinction (Master, 1991). Because of the recognized Abstract importance of status assessments to conservation, On March 4, 2019 the Utah Native Plant Society and several international policy initiatives and strategies NatureServe co-coordinated a Global Ranking session to include status assessments as part of their strategic review the conservation status of high priority plant species. goals. For example, Target 2 of the Convention on Global Ranks refer to NatureServe’s Conservation Status Biological Diversity’s Global Strategy for Plant Assessments, the most widely used platform for assessing Conservation calls for “an assessment of the conservation status of species in the United States and conservation status of all known plant species…to guide Canada. The meeting was hosted by Red Butte Botanic conservation action” by 2020 (CBD, 2012). Similarly, the Gardens in Salt Lake City. -
Overwintering Hosts for the Exotic Leafroller
Overwintering Hosts for the Exotic Leafroller Parasitoid, Colpoclypeus florus: Implications for Habitat Manipulation to Augment Biological Control of Leafrollers in Pome Fruits Author(s): R. S. Pfannenstiel, T. R. Unruh and J. F. Brunner Source: Journal of Insect Science, 10(75):1-13. 2010. Published By: Entomological Society of America DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1673/031.010.7501 URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.1673/031.010.7501 BioOne (www.bioone.org) is a nonprofit, online aggregation of core research in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences. BioOne provides a sustainable online platform for over 170 journals and books published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses. Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Web site, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/page/terms_of_use. Usage of BioOne content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder. BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research. Journal of Insect Science: Vol. 10 | Article 75 Pfannenstiel et al. Overwintering hosts for the exotic leafroller parasitoid, Colpoclypeus florus: Implications for habitat manipulation to augment biological control of leafrollers in pome fruits R. S. Pfannenstiel1,2,3a, T. R. Unruh2, and J. F. Brunner1 1Tree Fruit Research and Extension Center, Washington State University, 1100 N. -
They Come in Teams
GBE Frankia-Enriched Metagenomes from the Earliest Diverging Symbiotic Frankia Cluster: They Come in Teams Thanh Van Nguyen1, Daniel Wibberg2, Theoden Vigil-Stenman1,FedeBerckx1, Kai Battenberg3, Kirill N. Demchenko4,5, Jochen Blom6, Maria P. Fernandez7, Takashi Yamanaka8, Alison M. Berry3, Jo¨ rn Kalinowski2, Andreas Brachmann9, and Katharina Pawlowski 1,* 1Department of Ecology, Environment and Plant Sciences, Stockholm University, Sweden 2Center for Biotechnology (CeBiTec), Bielefeld University, Germany 3Department of Plant Sciences, University of California, Davis 4Laboratory of Cellular and Molecular Mechanisms of Plant Development, Komarov Botanical Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, Saint Petersburg, Russia 5Laboratory of Molecular and Cellular Biology, All-Russia Research Institute for Agricultural Microbiology, Saint Petersburg, Russia 6Bioinformatics and Systems Biology, Justus Liebig University, Gießen, Germany 7Ecologie Microbienne, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique UMR 5557, Universite Lyon I, Villeurbanne Cedex, France 8Forest and Forestry Products Research Institute, Ibaraki, Japan 9Biocenter, Ludwig Maximilians University Munich, Planegg-Martinsried, Germany *Corresponding author: E-mail: [email protected]. Accepted: July 10, 2019 Data deposition: This project has been deposited at EMBL/GenBank/DDBJ under the accession PRJEB19438 - PRJEB19449. Abstract Frankia strains induce the formation of nitrogen-fixing nodules on roots of actinorhizal plants. Phylogenetically, Frankia strains can be grouped in four clusters. The earliest divergent cluster, cluster-2, has a particularly wide host range. The analysis of cluster-2 strains has been hampered by the fact that with two exceptions, they could never be cultured. In this study, 12 Frankia-enriched meta- genomes of Frankia cluster-2 strains or strain assemblages were sequenced based on seven inoculum sources. Sequences obtained via DNA isolated from whole nodules were compared with those of DNA isolated from fractionated preparations enhanced in the Frankia symbiotic structures. -
Reference Plant List
APPENDIX J NATIVE & INVASIVE PLANT LIST The following tables capture the referenced plants, native and invasive species, found throughout this document. The Wildlife Action Plan Team elected to only use common names for plants to improve the readability, particular for the general reader. However, common names can create confusion for a variety of reasons. Common names can change from region-to-region; one common name can refer to more than one species; and common names have a way of changing over time. For example, there are two widespread species of greasewood in Nevada, and numerous species of sagebrush. In everyday conversation generic common names usually work well. But if you are considering management activities, landscape restoration or the habitat needs of a particular wildlife species, the need to differentiate between plant species and even subspecies suddenly takes on critical importance. This appendix provides the reader with a cross reference between the common plant names used in this document’s text, and the scientific names that link common names to the precise species to which writers referenced. With regards to invasive plants, all species listed under the Nevada Revised Statute 555 (NRS 555) as a “Noxious Weed” will be notated, within the larger table, as such. A noxious weed is a plant that has been designated by the state as a “species of plant which is, or is likely to be, detrimental or destructive and difficult to control or eradicate” (NRS 555.05). To assist the reader, we also included a separate table detailing the noxious weeds, category level (A, B, or C), and the typical habitats that these species invade. -
A Guide to Native Plants for the Santa Fe Landscape
A Guide to Native Plants for the Santa Fe Landscape Penstemon palmeri Photo by Tracy Neal Santa Fe Native Plant Project Santa Fe Master Gardener Association Santa Fe, New Mexico March 15, 2018 www.sfmga.org Contents Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ii Chapter 1 – Annuals and Biennials ........................................................................................................................................................................ 1 Chapter 2 – Cacti and Succulents ........................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Chapter 3 – Grasses ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Chapter 4 – Ground Covers .................................................................................................................................................................................... 9 Chapter 5 – Perennials......................................................................................................................................................................................... 11 Chapter 6 – Shrubs ............................................................................................................................................................................................. -
Plants of Dinosaur National Monument [Uintah Co(S), Utah] Observed on CONPS Fieldtrip, 5/1/1993 to 5/2/1993 Leader(S): Lynne Riedel; Recorder(S); Loraine Yeatts
Plants of Dinosaur National Monument [Uintah Co(s), Utah] Observed on CONPS fieldtrip, 5/1/1993 to 5/2/1993 Leader(s): Lynne Riedel; Recorder(s); Loraine Yeatts Scientific Name Synonym Common Name * 1. Achillea lanulosa (A. millefolium ssp. lanulosa) Yarrow 2. Achnatherum hymenoides (Oryzopsis, Stipa) Indian ricegrass 3. Allium nevadensis Nevada onion 4. Alyssum desertorum Desert alyssum 5. Amelanchior utahensis Utah serviceberry 6. Amsonia jonesii 7. Androstephium breviflorum Wild hyacinth, funnel lily 8. Anisantha tectorum (Bromus tectorum) Cheatgrass * 9. Aquilegia micrantha Alcove columbine 10. Arabis vivariensis Rockcress * 11. Artemisia ludoviciana Praire sagewort 12. Asclepias cryptoceras Adobe milkweed 13. Astragalus chamaeleuce Cicada milkvetch 14. Astragalus chloodes Grass milkvetch 15. Astragalus duchesnesis Duchesne milkvetch 16. Astragalus saurinus Dinosaur milkvetch * 17. Atriplex grayia (Grayia spinosa) Spiny hop-sage 18. Camissonia scapoidea (Oenothera scapoidea) Barestem camissonia * 19. Cardaria latifolia (Lepidium latifolium) Whitetop 20. Carex aquatilis Water sedge 21. Castilleja chromosa Desert / common paintbrush 22. Castilleja scabrida Eastwood Paintbrush 23. Caulanthus crassicaulis Thick-stemmed wild cabbage, spindlestem 24. Ceratochephala orthoceras (Ranunculus testiculatus) Hornhead 25. Cercocarpus intricatus Narrowleaf / dwarf mountain mahogany 26. Chorispora tenella Purple mustard * 27. Chrysothamnus nauseosus Rubber rabbitbrush * 28. Cirsium ownbeyi Thistle * 29. Clematis sp 30. Collinsia parviflora Blue-eyed -
FY 2005 Plant Materials Project Summary Reports
FY 2005 Plant Materials Project Summary Reports From the Natural Resources Conservation Service To the National Park Service Native Plants For National Parks NATIONAL PARK SERVICE A Cooperative Program between the National ParkService, U.S. Department of the Interior and Natural Resources Conservation Service, Department U.S. Department of Agriculture ofthe Interior FY 2005 Plant Materials Project Summary Reports from the Natural Resources Conservation Service to the National Park Service April 2006 Compiled By Russell J. Haas NRCS Plant Materials Technical Advisor to NPS National Park Service, Denver Service Center, Lakewood Colorado INTRODUCTION This is the 2005 NRCS Plant Materials Centers annual progress report on cooperative project agreements between the National Park Service (NPS) and the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), formerly the Soil Conservation Service. These projects relate to development of native plant materials for park roads and restoration projects. The NPS and NRCS have been cooperating in testing and increasing of native plants under a Memorandum of Understanding and Interagency Agreement since 1989. The NRCS Plant Materials Centers have prepared two types of reports. (1) Brief One Page Summary (attached) and (2) A comprehensive Annual Technical Report. The "One Page Summary Report" is sent to parks with current projects, to respective NPS field areas and associated park resource managers and respective NRCS offices. Additional copies of the "one page summary report" are available on request. This report can be requested from Russ Haas, NRCS National Technical Advisor, National Park Service, Denver Service Center, Planning and Site Design, PO Box 25287, Lakewood CO. 80225. E- Mail [email protected] or Phone 303- 969- 2172. -
Sedona Plant List
Sedona Plant List Botanical Name Common Name Botanical Name Common Name Perennials/Annuals Achillea millefolium Western Yarrow Machaeranthera canescens Purple Aster Agastache cana Hummingbird Mint Mimulus cardinalis Crimson Monkey Flower Agastache rupestris Licorice Mint Mimulus guttatus Yellow Monkey Flower Antennaria parvifolia Small Leaf Pussytoes Mirabilis multiflora Desert Four O’Clock Antennaria rosulata Kaibab Pussytoes Monarda menthaefolia Beebalm Aquilegia chrysantha Golden Columbine Oenothera caespitosa Tufted Evening Primrose Artemesia frigida Fringed Sage Oenothera hookeri Hookers Evening Primrose Oenothera pallida Pale Evening Primrose Asclepias tuberosa Butterflyweed Penstemon ambiguus Bush Penstemon Aster comutatus White Aster Penstemon barbatus Scarlet Bugler Baileya multiradiata Desert Marigold Penstemon eatonii Firecracker Penstemon Berlandieria lyrata Chocolate Flower Penstemon linarioides Mat Penstemon Penstemon palmeri Palmer’s Penstemon Calylophus hartwegii Hartweg Evening Penstemon pseudospectabilis Arizona Penstemon Primrose Castilleja integra Paintbrush Penstemon rostriflorus Bridge Penstemon Datura meteloides Sacred Datura Penstemon strictus Rocky Mt Penstemon Erigeron divergens Fleabane Psilostrophe tagetina Paper Flower Eschscholtzia californica California Poppy Ratibida columnaris Prairie Coneflower Sphaeralcea grossulariaefolia Gooseberry Globemallow Gaillardia pinnatifida Adobe Blanketflower Psilostrophe tagetina Paper Flower Geranium caespitosum Purple Crainsbill Ratibida columnaris red Mexican Hat Heterotheca -
Potentilla Ambigens Greene (Silkyleaf Cinquefoil): a Technical Conservation Assessment
Potentilla ambigens Greene (silkyleaf cinquefoil): A Technical Conservation Assessment Prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project June 12, 2006 David G. Anderson Colorado Natural Heritage Program Colorado State University Fort Collins, CO Peer Review Administered by Society for Conservation Biology Anderson, G.D. (2006, June 12). Potentilla ambigens Greene (silkyleaf cinquefoil): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/ projects/scp/assessments/potentillaambigens.pdf [date of access]. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This research was facilitated by the helpfulness and generosity of many experts, particularly Leanne Benton, Barry Bernier, Jeff Connor, Bonnie Heidel, Tim Hogan, Bill Jennings, Barry Johnston, Eric Lane, Tim Lowry, Stephanie Neid, Lonnie Pilkington, Steve Popovich, Renée Rondeau, Richard Scully, Bob Sivinski, and William A. Weber. Their interest in the project and time spent answering questions were extremely valuable, and their insights into the distribution, cultivation, threats, habitat, and ecology of Potentilla ambigens were crucial to this project. Leanne Benton provided many element occurrence records and photographs, and she has helped to raise awareness of this species at Rocky Mountain National Park and in Estes Park. Barry Bernier was generous with information on P. ambigens from Rocky Mountain National Park. Thanks also to Beth Burkhart, Kathy Carsey, Janet Coles, Greg Hayward, Gary Patton, Jim Maxwell, Andy Kratz, and Joy Bartlett for their feedback and involvement in this project. Thanks to Kimberly Nguyen for the work on the layout and for bringing this assessment to Web publication. Jane Nusbaum and Barbara Brayfield provided crucial financial oversight. Annette Miller provided information for the report on seed storage status. -
Plants of Hot Springs Valley and Grover Hot Springs State Park Alpine County, California
Plants of Hot Springs Valley and Grover Hot Springs State Park Alpine County, California Compiled by Tim Messick and Ellen Dean This is a checklist of vascular plants that occur in Hot Springs Valley, including most of Grover Hot Springs State Park, in Alpine County, California. Approximately 310 taxa (distinct species, subspecies, and varieties) have been found in this area. How to Use this List Plants are listed alphabetically, by family, within major groups, according to their scientific names. This is standard practice for plant lists, but isn’t the most user-friendly for people who haven’t made a study of plant taxonomy. Identifying species in some of the larger families (e.g. the Sunflowers, Grasses, and Sedges) can become very technical, requiring examination of many plant characteristics under high magnification. But not to despair—many genera and even species of plants in this list become easy to recognize in the field with only a modest level of study or help from knowledgeable friends. Persistence will be rewarded with wonder at the diversity of plant life around us. Those wishing to pursue plant identification a bit further are encouraged to explore books on plants of the Sierra Nevada, and visit CalPhotos (calphotos.berkeley.edu), the Jepson eFlora (ucjeps.berkeley.edu/eflora), and CalFlora (www.calflora.org). The California Native Plant Society (www.cnps.org) promotes conservation of plants and their habitats throughout California and is a great resource for learning and for connecting with other native plant enthusiasts. The Nevada Native Plant Society nvnps.org( ) provides a similar focus on native plants of Nevada. -
Conservation of Priority Birds in Sagebrush Ecosystems1
Conservation of Priority Birds in Sagebrush Ecosystems1 Terrell D. Rich,2 Michael J. Wisdom,3 and Victoria A. Saab4 ________________________________________ Abstract Sagebrush ecosystems occupy over 62,000,000 ha of habitat. Estimated current population sizes are, not the western US. However, they have been degraded or surprisingly, drastically reduced from historic numbers. completely eliminated by agricultural conversion, over- The Western Meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta) showed grazing by domestic livestock, invasion of exotic the least percent reduction and Grasshopper Sparrow plants, expansion of pinyon and juniper woodlands, un- the most. For six species that had significant or near characteristic wildfires, and fragmentation. This habitat significant declines in the Columbia Plateau since 1966 loss has led to an increasing number of special status and for which we had historic and current habitat species, including 630 plant and animal species of con- estimates, the estimated historical declines were all servation concern. In this paper, we focus on the 22 remarkably similar to recent trends. Trends and man- taxa of sagebrush associated birds that are priorities in agement activities on public lands in Idaho, Oregon, Partners in Flight Bird Conservation Plans. These and Washington that may be contributing to dispro- range from sagebrush obligates–Greater Sage-grouse portionate declines in priority birds include an increase (Centrocercus urophasianus), Gunnison Sage-grouse in the area burned annually by wildfire, an increase in (C. minimus), Sage Thrasher (Oreoscoptes montanus), the biomass of grazing cattle, and continued fencing Sage Sparrow (Amphispiza belli), Brewer’s Sparrow and water development that spread negative impacts (Spizella breweri)–to grassland associates such as over an ever greater portion of the landscape.