DOCSLIB.ORG

Growth of Some Range Plant Species in Response To

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Growth of Some Range Plant Species in Response To Growth of some range plant species in response to boron concentration in a sand culture by Roseann Therese Wallander A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Science in Land Rehabilitation Montana State University © Copyright by Roseann Therese Wallander (1993) Abstract: Under Montana coal mine reclamation guidelines, soil and overburden material that contains more than 5 ug of hot water soluble (HWS) boron (B) per gram is not acceptable material for the plant growth zone. These guidelines are based on the toxicity of boron to crop plants. In the arid and semi-arid western United States native plant species are used for mined land reclamation. Boron toxicity of native species has not been well researched. The objective of this study was to assess the effects of excessive boron on plant species used for mined land reclamation. Atriplex canescens, Elymus cinereus, E. 1anceolatus, Medicago sativa, Melilotus officinalis, Oryzopsis hymenoides, Pascopyrum smithii and Pseudoroegneria spicata were seeded into pots in a greenhouse study. Each species was irrigated with six different boron concentrations (0.25, 1, 5, 10, 20, and 40 ug B mL^-1) in a diluted nutrient solution. Elymus lanceolatus was also seeded in a soil to which boron had been added. Emergence, plant height, aboveground yield, and plant boron concentrations were measured for each species for each boron treatment. Plants were observed for boron toxicity symptoms during the 96 day growing period. Whereas aboveground yield of alfalfa was stimulated by the addition of 1 ug B mL^-1, overall the relative yield of all but one species decreased as boron concentration in the nutrient solution increased. Yield of fourwing saltbush was not significantly reduced by any level of boron concentration. Bluebunch wheatgrass yield was significantly (p<0.05) reduced by 20 ug B mL^-1 in the nutrient solution. Yields of basin wildrye, thickspike wheatgrass, yellow sweetclover, Indian ricegrass, and western wheatgrass were significantly reduced by 10 ug B mL^-1 . Alfalfa yield was significantly reduced by 5 ug B mL^-1. Except for alfalfa, average boron concentrations of plants that correspond with significant yield reduction were higher than boron concentrations reported to cause yield reduction in crop species. Saturated paste extractable and HWS boron concentrations of the soil ranged from 0.6 to 16.0 ug B g^-1. Yield of thickspike wheatgrass grown in soil with 16 ug B g^-1 was not reduced. GROWTH OF SOME RANGE PLANT SPECIES IN RESPONSE TO BORON CONCENTRATION IN A SAND.CULTURE by Roseann Therese Wallander A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment , of the requirements for the degree ' ' " of Masters of Science ' in V ' : Land Rehabilitation MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY Bozeman, Montana ... May 1993 La) i i APPROVAL of a thesis submitted by Roseann Therese Wallander This thesis has been read by each member of the thesis committee and has been found to be satisfactory regarding content, English usage, format, citations, bibliographic style, and consistency, and is ready for submission to the College of Graduate Studies. "3 A ~ A J /- /? 9 3 Date Chairperson, Graduate Committee Approved for the Major Department 2 lM. Ill ^ Date Head, Major Department Approved for the College of Graduate Studies Date Graduate Dean iii STATEMENT OF PERMISSION TO USE In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillm ent of the requirements for a master's degree at Montana State University, I agree that the Library shall make it available to borrowers under rules of the Library. I f I have indicated my intention to copyright this thesis by including a copyright notice page, copying is allowable only for 4- scholarly purposes, consistent with "fair use" as prescribed in the U.S. Copyright Law. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this thesis in whole or in parts may be granted only by iv ACKNOWLEDGMENT The Reclamation Research Unit at Montana State University supplied the materials and laboratory space for this research project. I thank my committee Frank Munshower, Dennis Neuman* Bill Inskeep, and Doug Dollhopf for their guidance with this project. V TABLE OF CONTENTS • . Page APPROVAL .......................................... ..................... .... ............................. .... ii STATEMENT OF PERMISSION TO U S E ..................... ........ i i i ACKNOWLEDGMENT ".......................................................... iv LIST OF TABLES . ..................... .. .... ..... , . vii LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................... ix ABSTRACT ........... ................. ............. x INTRODUCTION. ..............................................................................................! I REVIEW OF LITERATURE . ..................... ........... 3 Boron in plants ....................... 3 Boron -in s o i l s ........................ 8 Boron in primary minerals ............... 8 Factors which influence available boron in soils .... 9 Boron adsorption in soils ....... ............................. » 11 Other elements that may influence boron in soils . 13 Boron assessment in soils and plants .................................. 13 Perennial, non-crop species response to boron ............................. 14 Nutrient solution culture ................. .................................................. 21 MATERIALS AND METHODS................ ................................ , 23 Sand culture .,...■........................................ ................................. 23 Soil c u l t u r e ............................................. .... .26 Measurements..................................................... .......................... 27 Statistical Design ......................................................... 28 RESULTS .......................................................... .... ..................... ......................... 30 Sand culture . ......................... ............................. 30 Atriplex canescens. .. .. 30 Elymus cinereus . 34 Elymus lanceolatus .. ...... ......... 36 Medicago sativa . : . ,. ....... 39 Melilotus officinalis . ... ......................... 44 . Oryzopsis hymenoides ^ . .............. 46 Pascopyrum sm ithii .................. .48 Pseudoroegneria spicata ..... , .... 54 Soil culture . ......................... 56 ETymus lanceolatus ................... 56 Comparison of species ....................................................... 62 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................ 64 REFERENCES CITED .................................................................... 66 Vi TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued Page APPENDICES ......................... .... ............................. ............ 74 APPENDIX A Nomenclature of plant species cited in the . text .......................................................................... 75 APPENDIX B Measurements ..................... ..... 78 APPENDIX C Boron injury symptoms . .; . 88 v ii LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Species used in the sand culture study. .................... 24 2. Hoagland's nutrient solution. .............................................. 24 3. Measured boron concentrations in the nutrient solutions. 25 4. Extractable boron concentration of soil. ............................. 27 5. Treatment means of A trip le x canescens grown in sand culture. ................................................................................ 31 6. Treatment means of Elymus cinereus grown in sand culture. 35 7. Treatment means of Elymus lanceolatus grown in sand culture............................................................................ ................................. 38 8. Treatment means of Medicago sativa grown in sand Culture. 42 9. Treatment means of Melilotus officinalis grown in sand culture....................................................... 45 10. Treatment means of Oryzopsis hymenoides grown in sand culture............................... 49 11. Treatment means of Paseopyrum sm ithii grown in sand culture.......................... 52 12. Treatment means of Pseudoroegneria spieata grown in sand culture. ............................. .... ......................... .... 55 13. Treatment means of Elymus lanceolatus grown in s o il. 58 14. Summary of analysis of variance across all species. ..... 62 15. Summary of yield reduction for all species........................ 63 16. Nomenclature of plant Species cited in the text ....... 76 17. Measurements of A trip le x canescens grown in sand culture. ...................................................................... 79 18. Measurements of Elymus cinereus grown in sand c u l t u r e . .................... 80 19. Measurements of Elymus lanceolatus grown in sand culture....................................................... 81 20. Measurements of Medicago sativa grown in sand culture. .............................................. 82 viii LIST OF TABLES - Continued Table Page 21. Measurements of Melilotus officinalis grown in sand culture. .............................................................................. 83 22. Measurements of Oryzopsis hymenoides grown in sand culture........................................... 84 23. Measurements of Pascopyrum sm ithii grown in sand culture. ..................................... 85 24. Measurements of PseudorOegneria spicata grown in sand culture........................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Grazing Potential and Management: Knapweeds Are Generally Unpalatable to Livestock, Especially When Mature. Nutritive Value of R
    Grazing potential and management: Knapweeds are generally unpalatable to livestock, especially when mature. Nutritive value of rosette and bud stages is high (protein levels similar to alfalfa). Methods of grazing of knapweeds and starthistle without damaging associated more desirable forage species have not been developed except in isolated cases. Knapweeds are aggressive invaders and quickly dominate disturbed areas in rangeland or pasture. Management that maintains the vigor of perennial vegetation can slow, but not prevent, the invasion of knapweeds. Poisonous or mechanical injury properties: The spines of yellow starthistle may cause mechanical injury to livestock. Yellow starthistle and Russian knapweed cause "chewing disease" (nigropallidal encephalomalacia) in horses. Rehabilitation potential: The best strategies for knapweeds combine prevention, containment and controL Herbicides can be used effectively to prevent spread, eliminate new infestations, and as part of rehabilitation programs for more productive land. The knapweeds, except Russian, are easily killed with herbicides, but produce large numbers of seeds and will reoccupy the site unless desired competitive vegetation is established. In northeastern Washington, pastures were rehabilitated by selective herbicide followed by nitrogen fertilizer to revitalize the remnant perennial grasses. Biological control insects include 3 gall-forming flies (Urophora spp.), a seed-feeding fly (Chaetorellia), 3 seed-feeding weevils (Bangasternus, Larinus and Eustenopus), a root-feeding beetle (Sphenoptera), a seed-feeding moth (Metzneria), and a root-feeding moth (Agapeta). The goal is to establish enough host-specific insects to overgraze the weed and limit its competitiveness. For further information, refer to Knapweeds of Washington (EB1393), Meadow Knapweed (EB1524) and the Pacific Northwest Weed Control Handbook.
    [Show full text]
  • Petroleum Coke and Plants: Impact on Growth and Physiology
    Petroleum coke and plants: Impact on growth and physiology By: Colin Keiji Nakata A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies of The University of Manitoba in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of; MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Botany University of Manitoba Winnipeg, MB., Canada March 14th,2007 Copyright A 2007 by Colin Keiji Nakata THE TJNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA FACULTY OF GRADUATE STT]DIES ****:* COPYRIGHT PERMISSION Petroleum coke and Plants: Impact on growth and PhYsiolog¡r BY Colin Keiji Nakata A Thesis/Practicum submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies of The University of Manitoba in partial fulfillment of the requirement of the degree MASTER OF SCIENCE Colin Keiji Nakata @2007 permission has been granted to the Library of the University of Manitoba to lend or sell copies of this thesigpracticum,io the National Library of Canada to microfîlm this thesis and to lend or sell copies of túe film, aná to University Microfilms rnc. to publish an abstract of this thesis/practicum. This reproduction or copy of this thesis has been made available by authority of the copyright owner solóty for the purpose of private study and research, and may only be reproduced and copied owner. as permitied by copyright laws or with express written authorization from the copyright l1 Ansrnacr: Greenhouse studies were conducted to determine the effects of coke, a by-product of the oil sand industry, on the emergence, growth and physiology of Triticum aestivum, Deschampsia caespitosa, Calamagr-ostis canadensis, Agropyron trachycaulum, Oryzopsis hymenoides, Fragaria virginiana and Cornus set"icea. Accumulation of potentially toxic elements in plant tissues was also determined.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................1 CREATING A WILDLIFE FRIENDLY YARD ......................................................................2 With Plant Variety Comes Wildlife Diversity...............................................................2 Existing Yards....................................................................................................2 Native Plants ......................................................................................................3 Why Choose Organic Fertilizers?......................................................................3 Butterfly Gardens...............................................................................................3 Fall Flower Garden Maintenance.......................................................................3 Water Availability..............................................................................................4 Bird Feeders...................................................................................................................4 Provide Grit to Assist with Digestion ................................................................5 Unwelcome Visitors at Your Feeders? ..............................................................5 Attracting Hummingbirds ..................................................................................5 Cleaning Bird Feeders........................................................................................6
    [Show full text]
  • Apparent Competition with Bromus Tectorum Through Pyrenophora Semeniperda Reduces Establishment of Native Grasses
    Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive Theses and Dissertations 2011-03-16 Apparent Competition with Bromus tectorum Through Pyrenophora semeniperda Reduces Establishment of Native Grasses Katherine Temus Merrill Brigham Young University - Provo Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd Part of the Animal Sciences Commons BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Merrill, Katherine Temus, "Apparent Competition with Bromus tectorum Through Pyrenophora semeniperda Reduces Establishment of Native Grasses" (2011). Theses and Dissertations. 2956. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/2956 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Apparent competition with Bromus tectorum through Pyrenophora semeniperda reduces establishment of native grasses Katherine T. Merrill A thesis submitted to the faculty of Brigham Young University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Phil S. Allen, Chair Susan E. Meyer Samuel B. St. Clair Department of Plant and Wildlife Sciences Brigham Young University April 2011 Copyright © 2010 Katherine T. Merrill All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT Apparent competition with Bromus tectorum through Pyrenophora semeniperda reduces establishment of native grasses Katherine T. Merrill Department of Plant and Wildlife Sciences, BYU Master of Science Contributing to the success of Bromus tectorum in the Intermountain West may be a mechanism called apparent competition, which occurs when one species increases the pressure of a consumer on a second species. This indirect interaction has been documented only a few times in invasive plant systems, and never in a fungal pathosystem.
    [Show full text]
  • Linking Physiological Traits and Species Abundance to Invasion Resistance
    Linking physiological traits and species abundance to invasion resistance Jeremy James Framework • Plant community composition influences ecosystem properties • Much emphasis on effects of functional group diversity on ecosystem properties • Invasive plant management can be improved by managing plant communities based on functional traits as opposed to functional groups Outline • An example of how functional traits influence ecosystem properties (N capture and invasion) – Traits related to N capture – Trait effects on ecosystems are moderated by species abundance • What traits might be important to consider when revegetating areas prone to weed invasion? – At the seedling stage traits affecting initial growth rate important • Conclusions and future directions Functional group diversity, nitrogen capture and invasion resistance Study site Group Code Common Name Scientific Name Annual BRTE cheatgrass Bromus tectorum L. Annual TACA medusahead Taeniatherum caput-medusae (L.) Nevski Bunchgrass PSSP bluebunch wheatgrass Pseudoroegneria spicata (Pursh) A. Löve Bunchgrass ELEL bottlebrush squirreltail Elymus elymoides (Raf.) Swezey Bunchgrass POSE Sandberg’s bluegrass Poa secunda J. Presl Forb LOTR nineleaf biscuitroot Lomatium triternatum (Pursh) Coult. & Rose Forb CRIN grey hawksbeard Crepis intermedia Gray Experimental design • 15N was injected into soils around 7 study species • Injections were made: – 3 times during the growing season (April, May June) – At 2 soil depth (2-7 cm, 17-22 cm) + - – Using 2 forms of N (NH4 , NO3 ) • Removal plots
    [Show full text]
  • Predicting Foundation Bunchgrass Species Abundances: Model-Assisted Decision-Making in Protected-Area Sagebrush Steppe 1, 2 3 3 4 THOMAS J
    #825 Predicting foundation bunchgrass species abundances: model-assisted decision-making in protected-area sagebrush steppe 1, 2 3 3 4 THOMAS J. RODHOUSE, KATHRYN M. IRVINE, ROGER L. SHELEY, BRENDA S. SMITH, SHIRLEY HOH, 5 5 DANIEL M. ESPOSITO, AND RICARDO MATA-GONZALEZ 1Upper Columbia Basin Network, National Park Service, 63095 Deschutes Market Road, Bend, Oregon 97701 USA 2Northern Rocky Mountain Science Center, United States Geological Survey, 2327 University Way, Suite 2, Bozeman, Montana 59715 USA 3Agricultural Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, 67826-A, Highway 205, Burns, Oregon 97720 USA 4John Day Fossil Beds National Monument, National Park Service, 32651 Highway 19, Kimberly, Oregon 97848 USA 5Department of Animal and Rangeland Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon 97331 USA Citation: Rodhouse, T. J., K. M. Irvine, R. L. Sheley, B. S. Smith, S. Hoh, D. M. Esposito, and R. Mata-Gonzalez. 2014. Predicting foundation bunchgrass species abundances: model-assisted decision-making in protected-area sagebrush steppe. Ecosphere 5(9):108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/ES14-00169.1 Abstract. Foundation species are structurally dominant members of ecological communities that can stabilize ecological processes and influence resilience to disturbance and resistance to invasion. Being common, they are often overlooked for conservation but are increasingly threatened from land use change, biological invasions, and over-exploitation. The pattern of foundation species abundances over space and time may be used to guide decision-making, particularly in protected areas for which they are iconic. We used ordinal logistic regression to identify the important environmental influences on the abundance patterns of bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata), Thurber’s needlegrass (Achnatherum thurber- ianum), and Sandberg bluegrass (Poa secunda) in protected-area sagebrush steppe.
    [Show full text]
  • INDIAN RICEGRASS Erosion Control/Reclamation: One of Indian Ricegrass' Greatest Values Is for Stabilizing Sites Susceptible to Achnatherum Hymenoides Wind Erosion
    Plant Guide INDIAN RICEGRASS Erosion control/reclamation: One of Indian ricegrass' greatest values is for stabilizing sites susceptible to Achnatherum hymenoides wind erosion. It is well adapted to stabilization of (Roemer & J.A. Schultes) disturbed sandy soils in mixes with other species. It is naturally an early invader onto disturbed sandy Barkworth sites (after and in concert with needle and thread Plant Symbol = ACHY grass). It is also one of the first to establish on cut and fill slopes. It does not compete well with Contributed By: USDA NRCS Idaho State Office aggressive introduced grasses during the establishment period, but is very compatible with slower developing natives, such as Snake River wheatgrass (Elymus wawawaiensis), bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata), thickspike wheatgrass (Elymus lanceolata ssp. lanceolata), streambank wheatgrass (Elymus lanceolata ssp. psammophila), western wheatgrass (Pascopyrum smithii), and needlegrass species (Stipa spp. and Ptilagrostis spp.). Drought tolerance combined with fibrous root system and fair to good seedling vigor, make Indian ricegrass desirable for reclamation in areas receiving 8 to 14 inches annual precipitation. Wildlife: Forage value is mentioned in the grazing/rangeland/hayland section above. Due to the abundance of plump, nutritious seed produced by Indian ricegrass, it is considered an excellent food source for birds, such as morning doves, pheasants, and songbirds. Rodents collect the seed for winter food supplies. It is considered good cover habitat for small
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparison of Cumulative-Germination Response of Cheatgrass (Bromus Tectorum L.) and Five Perennial Bunchgrass Species to Simulated Field-Temperature Regimes
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln U.S. Department of Agriculture: Agricultural Publications from USDA-ARS / UNL Faculty Research Service, Lincoln, Nebraska 2010 A comparison of cumulative-germination response of cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum L.) and five perennial bunchgrass species to simulated field-temperature regimes Stuart P. Hardegree USDA-Agricultural Research Service, [email protected] Corey A. Moffet USDA-Agricultural Research Service Bruce A. Roundy Brigham Young University Thomas A. Jones USDA-Agricultural Research Service Stephen J. Novak Boise State University See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usdaarsfacpub Part of the Agricultural Science Commons Hardegree, Stuart P.; Moffet, Corey A.; Roundy, Bruce A.; Jones, Thomas A.; Novak, Stephen J.; Clark, Patrick E.; Pierson, Frederick B.; and Flerchinger, Gerald N., "A comparison of cumulative-germination response of cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum L.) and five perennial bunchgrass species to simulated field- temperature regimes" (2010). Publications from USDA-ARS / UNL Faculty. 855. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usdaarsfacpub/855 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the U.S. Department of Agriculture: Agricultural Research Service, Lincoln, Nebraska at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Publications from USDA-ARS / UNL Faculty by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University
    [Show full text]
  • An Agricultural Law Research Article the Federal Seed Act: Regulation
    University of Arkansas School of Law [email protected] $ (479) 575-7646 An Agricultural Law Research Article The Federal Seed Act: Regulation of Feed Sales and Remedies Available to the See Purchaser by James B. Wadley Originally published in SOUTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW 27 S. D. L. REV. 453 (1982) www.NationalAgLawCenter.org THE FEDERAL SEED ACT: REGULATION OF SEED SALES AND REMEDIES AVAILABLE TO THE SEED PURCHASER* JAMES B. WADLEY·· INTRODUCTION. 453 NATURE AND SCOPE OF THE FEDERAL SEED ACT................... 454 RESTRICTIONS ON SEED PRODUCERS AND DISTRIBUTORS. 457 Laheling Requirements.......................................... 457 Advertising. .. .. 460 RESTRICTIONS ON IMPORTATION AND STAINING OF SEEDS........... 461 Importation and Staining 0/Seeds. 461 Cert!fied Seed . .. 462 Treated Seed. 463 Record Keeping . 464 REGULATION OF WEED SEEDS....................................... 465 DISCLAIMERS AND WARRANTIES. 467 ENFORCEMENT OF THE FEDERAL SEED ACT. • . • . 472 REMEDIES AVAILABLE TO THE SEED PURCHASER.................... 474 CONCLUSION 475 INTRODUCTION The sale of seed is of particular interest to the farmer. If the farmer receives the wrong seed, or defective seed, the farmer may not discover the error until it is too late to replant. If this occurs, the loss to the farmer in­ cludes, in addition to the cost of the seed, the value of the lost crop. Simi­ larly, if the farmer plants seed that is contaminated with undesirable weed seeds, it may take years and countless dollars to eventually rid the farm of the infestation. To protect the farmer, the federal government and state legislatures have adopted statutes regulating the sale and shipment of seeds. I This arti­ • This article is based in part on a chapter from "Agricultural Law" published by Little, Brown and Company.
    [Show full text]
  • Alternate Crops for Eastern Oregon: Research
    ALTERNATE CROPS FOR EASTERN OREGON: RESEARCH 1Stephen Machado, 2Brian Tuck, and 1Christopher Humphreys 1Oregon State University, Columbia Basin Agricultural Research Center, P.O. Box 370, Pendleton, OR 97801. Tel: (541) 278 4416 Email: [email protected] 2Oregon State University, Extension Service, Wasco County, 400 E. Scenic Drive, Suite 2.278, The Dalles, OR 97058. Tel: (541) 296 5494 Email: [email protected] 1 Table of Contents Crop Page Chickpeas (Cicer arietinum) 4 Lentils (Lens culinaris) 10 Peas (Pisum sativum) 17 Faba beans. (Vicia faba) 24 Linola/Flax. (Linum usitatissimum) 27 Safflower (Carthamus tinctorious) 30 Sunflower (Helianthus annus) 33 Mustard. (Brassica spp.) 36 Buckwheat (Fagopyrum esculentum/sagittatum Moench) 39 Millet (Panicum miliaceum L.) 42 Corn (Zea mays L.) 47 Lupin (L. albus L., L. augustifolius L., L. luteus L., L. 50 mutabalis L., and L. cosentenii L.) Indian Ricegrass (Achnatherum hymenoides, Oryzopsis 58 hymenoides) Green Needlegrass (Stipa viridula) 64 2 Introduction The Pacific Northwest (PNW) Columbia Plateau is semi-arid with rainfall ranging from 12 to 18 inches. About 70 percent of annual precipitation occurs from November to April during winter and water available to plants during spring and summer depends on how much water is stored in the soil. Because of steep slopes prevalent in the PNW, soil erosion is a major problem in fields that do not have sufficient residue cover. Cropping systems that improve water infiltration and storage, reduce evaporation, and increase water use efficiency of crops on a sustainable basis should be developed. Wheat/fallow rotation is the traditional crop production system in the PNW Columbia Plateau.
    [Show full text]
  • Abundances of Coplanted Native Bunchgrasses and Crested Wheatgrass After 13 Years, Author(S): Aleta M
    #843 Abundances of Coplanted Native Bunchgrasses and Crested Wheatgrass after 13 Years, Author(s): Aleta M. Nafus, Tony J. Svejcar, David C. Ganskopp and Kirk W. Davies Source: Rangeland Ecology & Management, 68(2):211-214. Published By: Society for Range Management URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.1016/j.rama.2015.01.011 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. #843 Rangeland Ecology & Management 68 (2015) 211–214 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Rangeland Ecology & Management journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/rama Abundances of Coplanted Native Bunchgrasses and Crested Wheatgrass after 13 Years☆,☆☆ Aleta M. Nafus a,⁎, Tony J. Svejcar b,DavidC.Ganskoppc,KirkW.Daviesd a Graduate Student, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97330, USA b Research Leader, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Burns, OR 97720, USA c Emeritus Rangeland Scientist, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Known High Quality Or Rare Plant Communities and Wetland Ecosystems
    Appendix A Upper Middle Mainstem Columbia River Subbasin Plan Known High Quality or Rare Plant Communities and Wetland Ecosystems Table 1 Known high quality or rare plant communitites and wetland ecosystems of the UMM Subbasin, WA. SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME Abies amabilis - Tsuga mertensiana cover Pacific silver fir - mountain hemlock type forest Abies amabilis / Achlys triphylla forest Pacific silver fir / vanillaleaf Abies amabilis cover type Pacific silver fir forest Abies grandis / Acer circinatum forest Grand fir / vine maple Abies lasiocarpa / Calamagrostis rubescens Subalpine fir / pinegrass forest Abies lasiocarpa / Ledum glandulosum forest Subalpine fir / glandular labrador-tea Abies lasiocarpa / Rhododendron albiflorum Subalpine fir / cascade azalea woodland Abies lasiocarpa /Vaccinium scoparium Subalpine fir / grouseberry forest Abies lasiocarpa cover type Subalpine fir forest Abies procera cover type Noble fir forest Acer circinatum cover type Vine maple shrubland Alnus viridis ssp. Sinuata shrubland Sitka alder (provisional) SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME Artemisia arbuscula / Festuca idahoensis Low sagebrush /Idaho fescue dwarf-shrub herbaceous vegetation Artemisia rigida / Poa secunda dwarf-shrub Stiff sagebrush / Sandberg's bluegrass herbaceous vegetation Artemisia rigida cover type Stiff sagebrush shrubland Artemisia tridentata / Festuca idahoensis Big sagebrush / Idaho fescue shrub herbaceous vegetation Artemisia tridentata cover type Big sagebrush shrubland Artemisia tridentata ssp. Wyomingensis / Wyoming big sagebrush
    [Show full text]