Great Basin Native Plant Selection and Increase Project: 2006
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Great Basin Native Plant Selection and Increase Project FY06 Progress Report USDI Bureau of Land Management Great Basin Restoration Initiative USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Shrub Sciences Laboratory, Provo, UT and Boise, ID Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, Great Basin Research Center, Ephraim, UT USDA Agricultural Research Service, Forage and Range Research Laboratory, Logan, UT USDA Agricultural Research Service, Bee Biology and Systematics Laboratory, Logan, UT Utah Crop Improvement Association, Logan, UT Association of Official Seed Certifying Agencies, Moline, IL USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service - Idaho, Utah, Nevada, and the Aberdeen Plant Materials Center, Aberdeen, ID Brigham Young University, Provo, UT USDA Forest Service, National Seed Laboratory, Dry Branch, GA Colorado State University Cooperative Extension, Tri-River Area, Grand Junction, CO USDA Agricultural Research Service, Western Regional Plant Introduction Station, Pullman, WA Oregon State University, Malheur Experiment Station, Ontario, OR USDA Agricultural Research Service, Eastern Oregon Agricultural Research Center, Burns, OR Great Basin Native Plant Selection and Increase Project FY06 Progress Report March 2007 COOPERATORS USDI Bureau of Land Management, Great Basin Restoration Initiative USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Shrub Sciences Laboratory, Provo, UT and Aquatic Sciences Laboratory, Boise, ID Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, Great Basin Research Center, Ephraim, UT USDA Agricultural Research Service, Forage and Range Research Laboratory, Logan, UT USDA Agricultural Research Service, Bee Biology and Systematics Laboratory, Logan, UT Utah Crop Improvement Association, Logan, UT Association of Official Seed Certifying Agencies, Moline, IL USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, Idaho, Utah, Nevada, and Aberdeen Plant Materials Center, Aberdeen, ID Brigham Young University, Provo, UT USDA Forest Service, National Seed Laboratory, Dry Branch, GA Colorado State University Cooperative Extension, Tri-River Area, Grand Junction, CO USDA Agricultural Research Service, Western Regional Plant Introduction Station, Pullman, WA Oregon State University, Malheur Experiment Station, Ontario, OR USDA Agricultural Research Service, Eastern Oregon Agricultural Research Center, Burns, OR i Great Basin Native Plant Selection and Increase Project FY06 Progress Report Introduction The use of native plants for rehabilitation after wildfires and restoration of disturbed wildlands is being encouraged by various BLM programs, initiatives, and policies. Examples include the 2001-2006 Interior Appropriations Bills, the Great Basin Restoration Initiative, Departmental guidance (DOI Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation Manual), Executive Order 13112 (Invasive Species – 2/99) and the BLM’s Standards for Rangeland Health. The 2007 USDI Healthy Lands Initiative calls for landscape-scale restoration to reduce the spread of invasive species and re-establish native communities. This project integrates several proposals to increase native plant production and use within the Great Basin, utilizing an applied science approach in a collaborative project. Original partners in this proposal included BLM (Utah, Idaho, and Nevada); USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Grassland, Shrubland and Desert Ecosystems Program, Boise, ID and Provo, UT; Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, Great Basin Research Center, Ephraim, UT; Utah Crop Improvement Association, Logan, UT; USDA Agricultural Research Service, Forage and Range Research Laboratory, Logan, UT; and USDA Agricultural Research Service, Bee Biology and Systematics Laboratories, Logan, UT. Other cooperators have been added over time to address specific research issues. Project Priorities The project covers development of native plant materials and practices for their use on degraded rangelands. Initial and ongoing priorities include: 1) development of native plant materials for restoration and the cultural practices required for their increase; 2) management or re-establishment of wildland seed sources; 3) technology to improve the diversity of introduced species monocultures; and 4) technology transfer. Focus of the Project is now shifting to include development of application strategies and technologies to improve native plant establishment. New projects in 2006 included studies to evaluate rangeland drills and determine appropriate native seed application rates. The BLM representatives recommend that following identification of a funding level for this proposal, the BLM representatives, with input from the cooperators, will develop priorities, given the available funding. This document provides a review of work completed in 2006. Appendix I summarizes ongoing plant materials research and the principal investigators for each study. Funding Strategy This effort requires sustained funding over a long period to be successful. To meet this need, Interagency Agreements are used to transfer the majority of the approved funds to the USDA FS Rocky Mountain Research Station, Grassland, Shrubland and Desert Ecosystem Program. ii Mike Pellant, Great Basin Restoration Initiative Coordinator, is the Contracting Officer’s Representative for the Agreement. The BLM representatives recommend that following identification of annual funding levels, the BLM representatives, with input from the cooperators, will develop priorities. The Rocky Mountain Research, Grassland, Shrubland and Desert Ecosystems Program prepares or amends agreements with the other cooperators on this project and distributes funding to these other entities per the Interagency Agreement and annual task orders. The Rocky Mountain Research Station assesses a reasonable 12% indirect charge used internally to administer this assistance agreement with BLM for in-house funding. No indirect charge is assessed on pass-through funds to cooperators. An estimated 20 WM’s per year will be required from FY02-08 for BLM coordination in the states of Utah, Oregon and Nevada, however, BLM will pursue these needs outside of this agreement. Acknowledgments We thank our collaborators for their expertise and in kind contributions that have made it possible to address the many issues involved in native plant materials development and use. We offer a special thanks to Durant McArthur for his continuing support and to Ann DeBolt for her assistance in writing and compiling this report and for her contributions to the Project. Nancy Shaw, Team Leader Mike Pellant, Coordinator Great Basin Native Plant Great Basin Restoration Initiative Selection and Increase Project iii Table of Contents Nancy Shaw Plant material development, seed technology and seed Ann DeBolt production of Great Basin forbs..………..……………….…….1 Robert Cox Durant McArthur Forb and shrub genetics research…………………….……….12 Stewart Sanderson Scott Jensen Status of work with Astragalus, Agoseris, Lupinus, Phlox, And Hesperostipa.………..…….…………….……………....14 Jason Vernon Native plant material development and seed and seeding Therese Meyer technology for native Great Basin forbs and grasses…………19 Alison Whittaker R.C. Johnson Genetic diversity patterns of Allium acuminatum in the Barbara Hellier Great Basin…………………………………………………....29 Loren St. John Establishment and maintenance of certified Generation 1 Dan Ogle (G1) seed. Propagation of native forbs. Plant display nursery evaluation. Development of technology to improve the diversity of introduced grass stands…………………….…….37 Tom Jones Native plant genetics, ecophysiology, plant materials Steve Larson development, and seed increase……….…….………….….…47 Mike Peel Tom Monaco Doug Johnson Val Anderson Agronomic and cultural care of wildland plants, and seed Robert Johnson yield losses in forbs (Asteraceae) due to fruit flies Bruce Roundy (Tephritidae)……………………………….………………....53 Clinton C. Shock Seed production of native forbs shows little response to Erik B.G. Feibert irrigation in a wet year………………..……………………....60 Lamont Saunders Clinton C. Shock Tolerance of seven native forbs to preemergence and ……….68 Joey Ishida postemergence herbicides Corey Ransom Robert Karrfalt Development of germination protocols, seed weight, purity, Victor Vankus and seed conditioning/cleaning protocols for Great Basin grasses and forbs………………………………………….......80 iv Brad Geary Establishment of native plants through improved Scott Jensen propagation techniques and seedling disease control….……..83 James H. Cane Pollinator and seed predator studies…………………..……...88 Robert Hammon Insect pests of selected grass and forb species in the Great Basin………………………………….……………..…93 Bruce A. Roundy Diversification of crested wheatgrass stands………..……….95 Val Anderson Brad Jessop April Hulet Jennifer Coleman Bruce Roundy Wet thermal time modeling of seedling establishment……..101 Val Anderson Brad Jessop Jennifer Coleman Jane Mangold Reestablishing native plant diversity in crested wheatgrass stands in the Great Basin…………………………………....107 Harold Wiedemann Revegetation equipment catalog …………………….……...114 Ann DeBolt The Association of Official Seed Certifying Agencies Chet Boruff Cooperative Native Seed Increase Program………….……..116 Stanford Young Establishment and maintenance of the buy-back program for Michael Bouck certified seed……..…………………………………….……120 APPENDIX Appendix I. Great Basin Native Plant Selection and Increase Project: Status of Research Species……………………………………………………127 v Project Title: Plant Material Development, Seed Technology and Seed Production of Great Basin