DOCSLIB.ORG

Field-Based Evaluation of Two Herbaceous Plant Community Sampling Methods for Long-Term Monitoring in Northern Great Plains National Parks

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Field-Based Evaluation of Two Herbaceous Plant Community Sampling Methods for Long-Term Monitoring in Northern Great Plains National Parks In cooperation with the National Park Service Field-Based Evaluation of Two Herbaceous Plant Community Sampling Methods for Long-Term Monitoring in Northern Great Plains National Parks By Amy J. Symstad, Cody L. Wienk, and Andy Thorstenson Open-File Report 2006-1282 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey 1 U.S. Department of the Interior Gale A. Norton, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey P. Patrick Leahy, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia 2006 For product and ordering information: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS Suggested citation: Symstad, A.J., Wienk, C.L., and Thorstenson, Andy, 2006, Field-based evaluation of two herbaceous plant community sampling methods for long-term monitoring in northern Great Plains national parks: Helena, MT, U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2006-1282, 38 pages + 3 appendices. Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted material contained within this report. 2 Contents Contents ...............................................................................................................................................................................3 Introduction .........................................................................................................................................................................5 Vegetation in Northern Great Plains Parks................................................................................................................5 Potential Methods for Sampling Plant Community Composition ...........................................................................6 Study Objectives .............................................................................................................................................................8 Methods ...............................................................................................................................................................................8 Study Areas .....................................................................................................................................................................8 Sample Sites....................................................................................................................................................................9 Sampling.........................................................................................................................................................................11 Data Analysis.................................................................................................................................................................12 Results ................................................................................................................................................................................14 Between-Method Comparison of Values Obtained................................................................................................16 Repeatability..................................................................................................................................................................19 Number of Subsamples ...............................................................................................................................................20 Efficiency........................................................................................................................................................................27 Discussion..........................................................................................................................................................................29 Comparison of Values Obtained by Each Method..................................................................................................30 Repeatability among Observers.................................................................................................................................30 Precision and Number of Subsamples .....................................................................................................................32 Efficiency........................................................................................................................................................................33 Impacts of Sampling on Vegetation ..........................................................................................................................34 Conclusions and Recommendations.............................................................................................................................34 References Cited ..............................................................................................................................................................37 Figures Figure 1. Locations of NPS units in the Northern Great Plains I&M Network. The parks used in this study are underlined in red.................................................................................................................................. 9 Figure 2. Rank (x-axis)-abundance (y-axis) curves for the 46 plots sampled, by vegetation type. Each line-symbol combination within a graph represents a single plot. ............................................................ 15 Figure 3. Relationship between community-level response variable values obtained by the two sampling methods. Dashed lines are y=x....................................................................................................... 17 Figure 4. Least squares means and standard errors for log-transformed coefficients of variation among subsamples within plots for six response variables, by vegetation type. Different letters above symbols within a graph indicate significant (P < 0.05) differences between vegetation types. Vegetation type abbreviations follow those in Table 1.................................................................................21 Figure 5. Species-sample number curves for plots with (A) the lowest and (B) the highest species richness from each vegetation type. Solid lines are for the ocular method, dashed lines for the point-intercept method. (C) Difference between ocular and point-intercept methods in the number 3 of species added with an additional subsample. Open symbols are for plots with high species richness, closed symbols for plots with low species richness...................................................................25 Figure 6. Relationship between time to complete each sampling method (ocular = black circles and solid line; point-intercept = red triangles and dashed line) and (A) plot species richness or (B) total plant cover as measured by the point-intercept method............................................................................. 27 Figure 7. Number of times a method (point-intercept = black bars; ocular = red bars) did not detect a species that the other method did, for all 46 plots. ....................................................................................... 28 Figure 8. Photos of plots showing variability in terrain and obstructions to transect tapes. (A) TPCM03, (B) WPCM09, (C) WPCM12. .............................................................................................................. 32 Figure 9. Suggested modification of transect layout for point-intercept sampling. Red “X” indicates permanent marker. Black dots are approximate locations of points, spaced at 1-m intervals. Blue boxes are 1-m2 species-occurrence subplots................................................................................................ 35 Tables Table 1. Number of sample locations in each vegetation type for each park. ........................................ 10 Table 2. Mean and range (in parentheses) of variables descriptive of vegetation in each vegetation type sampled in this study.................................................................................................................................. 14 Table 3. Paired t-test and correlation results for point-intercept vs. ocular sampling methods for six community response variables......................................................................................................................... 16 Table 4.Comparison of repeatability for two methods of vegetation sampling based on correlation coefficients and paired t-tests.......................................................................................................................... 18 Table 5. Similarity indices and species turnover between first and second sampling for each method and double-sampled plot.................................................................................................................................... 19 Table 6. Results of mixed model analysis for effects of sampling method, vegetation type, response variable, and their interactions on log-transformed coefficient of variation. .......................................... 20 Tables 7 & 8. Means, standard deviations, coefficients
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ALLELOPATHIC EFFECT of INVASIVE SPECIES GIANT GOLDENROD (SOLIDAGO GIGANTEA AIT.) on CROPS and WEEDS* Renata Baličević, Marija
    Herbologia, Vol. 15, No. 1, 2015 DOI 10.5644/Herb.15.1.03 ALLELOPATHIC EFFECT OF INVASIVE SPECIES GIANT GOLDENROD (SOLIDAGO GIGANTEA AIT.) ON CROPS AND WEEDS* Renata Baličević, Marija Ravlić, Tea Živković* Faculty of Agriculture, Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, Kralja Petra Svačića 1d, 31000 Osijek, Croatia, corresponding author: [email protected] *Student, Graduate study Abstract The aim of the study was to determine allelopathic potential of inva- sive species giant goldenrod (Solidago gigantea Ait.) on germination and initial growth crops (carrot, barley, coriander) and weed species velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti Med.) and redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus L.). Experiments were conducted under laboratory conditions to determine effect of water extracts in petri dish bioassay and in pots with soil. Water extracts from dry aboveground biomass of S. gigantea in concentrations of 1, 5 and 10% were investigated. In petri dish bioassay, all extract con- centrations showed allelopathic effect on germination and seedling growth of crops with reduction over 25 and 60%, respectively. Both weed species germination and growth were greatly suppressed with extract application. In pot experiment, allelopathic effect was less pronounced. Reduction in emergence percent, shoot length and fresh weight of carrot were observed. Barley root length and fresh weight were reduced with the highest extract concentration. No significant effect on seedling emergence and growth of A. theophrasti was recorded, while emergence of A. retroflexuswas inhib- ited for 14.4%. Germination and growth of test species decreased propor- tionately as concentration of weed biomass in water extracts increased. Differences in sensitivity among species were recorded, with A. retroflexus being the most susceptible to extracts.
    [Show full text]
  • Native Forb Information Sheet
    United States Department of Agriculture Native Forb Information Sheet Missouri Information Sheet IS-MO-643Native Forb Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Missouri Conservation Practice 643 December 2017 Native forbs, or broadleaf plants, are a natural part of the Missouri landscape. They welcomed European settlers to the state, painting the prairie and savanna landscapes with vibrant colors that changed throughout the season while supporting an incredible diversity of native wildlife. More than 800 plant species, most of them forbs, have been identified on Missouri’s prairies. Missourians are demonstrating a rekindled interest in native forbs for their beauty, hardiness, and wildlife benefits. Native forbs are well adapted to Missouri’s climatic extremes, which range from potentially brutal cold in January to the often stifling heat of July. Once established, native forbs require few inputs and little maintenance. Native forbs feature a variety of shapes, sizes, color, and value to wildlife. The towering compass plant, the vibrant butterfly milkweed, the rather plain but very valuable roundhead lespedeza, and the unique rattlesnake master all add important diversity to any planting. Choosing which ones to plant can be difficult; contact your local conservation agency representative, or one of the vendors of native forb seed for assistance. You can find a list at www.plant-materials.nrcs.usda.gov/mopmc, www.grownative.org, or www.monativeseed.org. Seed vendors can be excellent sources of information, and they are often as eager as you are for your planting to be successful. Refer to Table 1 in this document for general information about native forbs that are most often available commercially.
    [Show full text]
  • Verbena Hastata BLUE VERVAIN HERB
    Verbena hastata BLUE VERVAIN HERB (A) Botany Family: Verbenaceae (Vervain). Synonyms: American blue vervain, American vervain, blue verbena, swamp verbena. Harvesting: The herb consists of the upper 30-40% of Verbena hastata harvested in the early part of its flowering period from early to mid July. The lower 75-80% of the primary stalk and the lower 50-60% of any well developed secondary stalks are not used. Related Species: There is virtually no research on any of our native species of Verbena. V. bracteata (prostrate vervain), V. simplex (narrow-leaved vervain) and V. stricta (hoary vervain) grow in open field habitats in dry sandy or gravelly soil. V. urticifolia (white vervain) grows in moist transition areas and open woodlands. Of the four, V. urticifolia is the only other species that I have worked with. It has very similar therapeutic properties to V. hastata and can be used as a substitute. This may also apply to other species, but I can't verify that at this time. All five of these species are capable of hybridizing with each other, indicating a strong genetic similarity. They also have a very similar flavour. This is a good indication that they have similar chemical constituents and therapeutic properties. Of the species of Verbena that are used in Western herbalism, V. officinalis (European vervain), the official species in Europe, is the only member of the genus for which there is some research. This species tends to be more commonly used in Europe, whereas V. hastata is more commonly used in North America. Some references state that V.
    [Show full text]
  • (Lamiaceae and Verbenaceae) Using Two DNA Barcode Markers
    J Biosci (2020)45:96 Ó Indian Academy of Sciences DOI: 10.1007/s12038-020-00061-2 (0123456789().,-volV)(0123456789().,-volV) Re-evaluation of the phylogenetic relationships and species delimitation of two closely related families (Lamiaceae and Verbenaceae) using two DNA barcode markers 1 2 3 OOOYEBANJI *, E C CHUKWUMA ,KABOLARINWA , 4 5 6 OIADEJOBI ,SBADEYEMI and A O AYOOLA 1Department of Botany, University of Lagos, Akoka, Yaba, Lagos, Nigeria 2Forest Herbarium Ibadan (FHI), Forestry Research Institute of Nigeria, Ibadan, Nigeria 3Department of Education Science (Biology Unit), Distance Learning Institute, University of Lagos, Akoka, Lagos, Nigeria 4Landmark University, Omu-Aran, Kwara State, Nigeria 5Ethnobotany Unit, Department of Plant Biology, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Nigeria 6Department of Ecotourism and Wildlife Management, Federal University of Technology, Akure, Ondo State, Nigeria *Corresponding author (Email, [email protected]) MS received 21 September 2019; accepted 27 May 2020 The families Lamiaceae and Verbenaceae comprise several closely related species that possess high mor- phological synapomorphic traits. Hence, there is a tendency of species misidentification using only the mor- phological characters. Herein, we evaluated the discriminatory power of the universal DNA barcodes (matK and rbcL) for 53 species spanning the two families. Using these markers, we inferred phylogenetic relation- ships and conducted species delimitation analysis using four delimitation methods: Automated Barcode Gap Discovery (ABGD), TaxonDNA, Bayesian Poisson Tree Processes (bPTP) and General Mixed Yule Coalescent (GMYC). The phylogenetic reconstruction based on the matK gene resolved the relationships between the families and further suggested the expansion of the Lamiaceae to include some core Verbanaceae genus, e.g., Gmelina.
    [Show full text]
  • Allelopathic Effect of Invasive Species Giant Goldenrod (Solidago Gigantea Ait.) on Wheat and Scentless Mayweed
    8th international scientific/professional conference SECTION II Izvorni znanstveni rad / original scientific paper Allelopathic effect of invasive species giant goldenrod (Solidago gigantea Ait.) on wheat and scentless mayweed Marija Ravlić1, Renata Baličević1, Ana Peharda2 1Faculty of Agriculture, Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, Kralja Petra Svačića 1d, Osijek, Croatia, e-mail: [email protected] 2Student, Faculty of Agriculture, Osijek, Croatia Abstract The aim of the research was to determine allelopathic potential of invasive species giant gol- denrod (Solidago giganetea Ait.) on germination and initial growth of wheat and weed species scentless mayweed (Tripleurospermum inodorum (L.) C.H. Schultz). Experiments were conducted under laboratory conditions to determine effect of water extracts in petri dish bioassay and in pots with soil. Water extracts from dry aboveground biomass of S. gigantea in concentrations of 1, 5 and 10 % (10, 50 and 100 g/l) were investigated. In petri dish bioassay, germination of wheat was slightly reduced, while all extract concentration inhibited wheat growth. T. inodorum germination and seedling growth was affected with higher extract concentration. Application of extract to pots had no effect on wheat emergence and growth, with the exception of 10 % extract which reduced root length. Emergence of T. inodorum was significantly decreased with 5 and 10 % extract for 38.5 and 49.0 %, respectively. Key words: allelopathy, Solidago gigantea Ait., crops, scentless mayweed, water extracts Introduction Excessive use of herbicides in most weed management systems is a major concern since it causes serious threats to the environment, public health and increases costs of crop production. The degree of weed seed germination inhibition and growth suppression which can be attributed to crop allelopathy is highly important and can be considered as a possible alternative weed management strategy (Asghari and Tewari, 2007., Macias, 1995.).
    [Show full text]
  • The Solidago Lepida Complex (Asteraceae: Astereae)
    Semple, J.C., H. Faheemuddin, M. Sorour, and Y.A. Chong. 2017. A multivariate study of Solidago subsect. Triplinerviae in western North America: The Solidago lepida complex (Asteraceae: Astereae). Phytoneuron 2017-47: 1–43. Published 18 July 2017. ISSN 2153 733X A MULTIVARIATE STUDY OF SOLIDAGO SUBSECT. TRIPLINERVIVAE IN WESTERN NORTH AMERICA: THE SOLIDAGO LEPIDA COMPLEX (ASTERACEAE: ASTEREAE) JOHN C. SEMPLE , HARIS FAHEEMUDDIN , MARIAN K. SOROUR , AND Y. ALEX CHONG Department of Biology University of Waterloo Waterloo, Ontario Canada N2L 3G1 [email protected] ABSTRACT Solidago subsect. Triplinerviae includes four species native to western North America: S. altissima, S. elongata , S. gigantea, and S. lepida . All of these except S. gigantea have been included at one time or another within S. canadensis . While rather similar among themselves, each species is distinguished by different sets of indument, leaf, and inflorescence traits. A series of multivariate morphometric analyses were performed on 244 specimens to discover additional technical traits useful in separating the species and to elucidate problems with identification in a group of species complicated by multiple ploidy levels and considerable infraspecific variation. Statistical support for recognizing S. gigantea var. shinnersii and S. lepida var. salebrosa was generated in comparisons of the varieties with the typical variety in each species. Solidago subsect. Triplinerviae (Torrey & A. Gray) Nesom (Asteraceae: Astereae) includes 17 species native North and South America (Semple 2017 frequently updated). Semple and Cook (2006) recognized 11 species with infraspecific taxa in several species occurring in Canada and the USA: S. altiplanities Taylor & Taylor, S. altissima L., S. canadensis L., S. elongata Nutt., S.
    [Show full text]
  • Plants of the Sacony Marsh and Trail, Kutztown, PA- Phase II
    Plants of the Sacony Creek Trail, Kutztown, PA – Phase I Wildflowers Anemone, Canada Anemone canadensis Aster, Crooked Stem Aster prenanthoides Aster, False Boltonia asteroids Aster, New England Aster novae angliae Aster, White Wood Aster divaricatus Avens, White Geum canadense Beardtongue, Foxglove Penstemon digitalis Beardtongue, Small’s Penstemon smallii Bee Balm Monarda didyma Bee Balm, Spotted Monarda punctata Bergamot, Wild Monarda fistulosa Bishop’s Cap Mitella diphylla Bitter Cress, Pennsylvania Cardamine pensylvanica Bittersweet, Oriental Celastrus orbiculatus Blazing Star Liatris spicata Bleeding Heart Dicentra spectabilis Bleeding Heart, Fringed Dicentra eximia Bloodroot Sanguinara Canadensis Blue-Eyed Grass Sisyrinchium montanum Blue-Eyed Grass, Eastern Sisyrinchium atlanticum Boneset Eupatorium perfoliatum Buttercup, Hispid Ranunculus hispidus Buttercup, Hispid Ranunculus hispidus Camas, Eastern Camassia scilloides Campion, Starry Silene stellata Cardinal Flower Lobelia cardinalis Carolina pea shrub Thermopsis caroliniani Carrion flower Smilax herbacea Carrot, Wild Daucus carota Chickweed Stellaria media Cleavers Galium aparine Clover, Least Hop rifolium dubium Clover, White Trifolium repens Clover, White Trifolium repens Cohosh, Black Cimicifuga racemosa Columbine, Eastern Aquilegia canadensis Coneflower, Green-Headed Rudbeckia laciniata Coneflower, Thin-Leaf Rudbeckia triloba Coreopsis, Tall Coreopsis tripteris Crowfoot, Bristly Ranunculus pensylvanicus Culver’s Root Veronicastrum virginicum Cup Plant Silphium perfoliatum
    [Show full text]
  • Epipactis Gigantea Dougl
    Epipactis gigantea Dougl. ex Hook. (stream orchid): A Technical Conservation Assessment Prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project March 20, 2006 Joe Rocchio, Maggie March, and David G. Anderson Colorado Natural Heritage Program Colorado State University Fort Collins, CO Peer Review Administered by Center for Plant Conservation Rocchio, J., M. March, and D.G. Anderson. (2006, March 20). Epipactis gigantea Dougl. ex Hook. (stream orchid): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http: //www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/epipactisgigantea.pdf [date of access]. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This research was greatly facilitated by the helpfulness and generosity of many experts, particularly Bonnie Heidel, Beth Burkhart, Leslie Stewart, Jim Ferguson, Peggy Lyon, Sarah Brinton, Jennifer Whipple, and Janet Coles. Their interest in the project, valuable insight, depth of experience, and time spent answering questions were extremely valuable and crucial to the project. Nan Lederer (COLO), Ron Hartman, Ernie Nelson, Joy Handley (RM), and Michelle Szumlinski (SJNM) all provided assistance and specimen labels from their institutions. Annette Miller provided information for the report on seed storage status. Jane Nusbaum, Mary Olivas, and Barbara Brayfield provided crucial financial oversight. Shannon Gilpin assisted with literature acquisition. Many thanks to Beth Burkhart, Janet Coles, and two anonymous reviewers whose invaluable suggestions and insight greatly improved the quality of this manuscript. AUTHORS’ BIOGRAPHIES Joe Rocchio is a wetland ecologist with the Colorado Natural Heritage Program where his work has included survey and assessment of biologically significant wetlands throughout Colorado since 1999. Currently, he is developing bioassessment tools to assess the floristic integrity of Colorado wetlands.
    [Show full text]
  • Floristic Quality Assessment Report
    FLORISTIC QUALITY ASSESSMENT IN INDIANA: THE CONCEPT, USE, AND DEVELOPMENT OF COEFFICIENTS OF CONSERVATISM Tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) the State tree of Indiana June 2004 Final Report for ARN A305-4-53 EPA Wetland Program Development Grant CD975586-01 Prepared by: Paul E. Rothrock, Ph.D. Taylor University Upland, IN 46989-1001 Introduction Since the early nineteenth century the Indiana landscape has undergone a massive transformation (Jackson 1997). In the pre-settlement period, Indiana was an almost unbroken blanket of forests, prairies, and wetlands. Much of the land was cleared, plowed, or drained for lumber, the raising of crops, and a range of urban and industrial activities. Indiana’s native biota is now restricted to relatively small and often isolated tracts across the State. This fragmentation and reduction of the State’s biological diversity has challenged Hoosiers to look carefully at how to monitor further changes within our remnant natural communities and how to effectively conserve and even restore many of these valuable places within our State. To meet this monitoring, conservation, and restoration challenge, one needs to develop a variety of appropriate analytical tools. Ideally these techniques should be simple to learn and apply, give consistent results between different observers, and be repeatable. Floristic Assessment, which includes metrics such as the Floristic Quality Index (FQI) and Mean C values, has gained wide acceptance among environmental scientists and decision-makers, land stewards, and restoration ecologists in Indiana’s neighboring states and regions: Illinois (Taft et al. 1997), Michigan (Herman et al. 1996), Missouri (Ladd 1996), and Wisconsin (Bernthal 2003) as well as northern Ohio (Andreas 1993) and southern Ontario (Oldham et al.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Plants for Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve
    Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve Plant Checklist DRAFT as of 29 November 2005 FERNS AND FERN ALLIES Equisetaceae (Horsetail Family) Vascular Plant Equisetales Equisetaceae Equisetum arvense Present in Park Rare Native Field horsetail Vascular Plant Equisetales Equisetaceae Equisetum laevigatum Present in Park Unknown Native Scouring-rush Polypodiaceae (Fern Family) Vascular Plant Polypodiales Dryopteridaceae Cystopteris fragilis Present in Park Uncommon Native Brittle bladderfern Vascular Plant Polypodiales Dryopteridaceae Woodsia oregana Present in Park Uncommon Native Oregon woodsia Pteridaceae (Maidenhair Fern Family) Vascular Plant Polypodiales Pteridaceae Argyrochosma fendleri Present in Park Unknown Native Zigzag fern Vascular Plant Polypodiales Pteridaceae Cheilanthes feei Present in Park Uncommon Native Slender lip fern Vascular Plant Polypodiales Pteridaceae Cryptogramma acrostichoides Present in Park Unknown Native American rockbrake Selaginellaceae (Spikemoss Family) Vascular Plant Selaginellales Selaginellaceae Selaginella densa Present in Park Rare Native Lesser spikemoss Vascular Plant Selaginellales Selaginellaceae Selaginella weatherbiana Present in Park Unknown Native Weatherby's clubmoss CONIFERS Cupressaceae (Cypress family) Vascular Plant Pinales Cupressaceae Juniperus scopulorum Present in Park Unknown Native Rocky Mountain juniper Pinaceae (Pine Family) Vascular Plant Pinales Pinaceae Abies concolor var. concolor Present in Park Rare Native White fir Vascular Plant Pinales Pinaceae Abies lasiocarpa Present
    [Show full text]
  • New York Natural Heritage Program
    Kohler Environmental Center Ecological Community Classification and Mapping New York Natural Heritage Program The NY Natural Heritage Program is a partnership between the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) and the State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry. New York Natural Heritage Program 625 Broadway, 5th Floor Albany, NY 12233-4757 (518) 402-8935 Fax (518) 402-8925 www.nynhp.org Kohler Environmental Center Ecological Community Classification and Mapping Gregory J. Edinger A report prepared by the New York Natural Heritage Program 625 Broadway, 5th Floor Albany, NY 12233-4757 www.nynhp.org for Choate Rosemary Hall 333 Christian Street. Wallingford, CT 06492 January 2014 Please cite this report as follows: Edinger, G.J. 2014. Kohler Environmental Center Ecological Community Classification and Mapping. New York Natural Heritage Program, Albany, NY. Cover photos: top left: shallow emergent marsh (CEGL006446) at point A06; top right: red maple-hardwood swamp (CEGL006406) at point C03; bottom: coastal oak-beech forest (CEGL006377) at point C02. New York Natural Heritage Program Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 3 Purpose and Study Area Overview ............................................................................................................. 3 Study Area Physical Setting and Environment .........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Narrow-Leaved Vervain Verbena Simplex
    Natural Heritage Narrow-leaved Vervain & Endangered Species Verbena simplex Lehm. Program www.mass.gov/nhesp State Status: Endangered Federal Status: None Massachusetts Division of Fisheries & Wildlife DESCRIPTION: Narrow-leaved Vervain (Verbena simplex) is a perennial herb of circumneutral to basic outcrops or ledges. A member of the vervain family (Verbenaceae), it has opposite leaves and lavender flowers that bloom from May to September. AIDS TO IDENTIFICATION: Narrow-leaved Vervain is up to 2 feet tall (60 cm), with an erect, finely hairy stem that is simple or branched sparingly toward the top. The leaves are opposite, 1.2 to 4 inches (3–10 cm) long, with forward-facing (serrate) teeth. They are narrowly lanceolate in shape and taper toward nearly stalkless (sessile) bases. The lavender flowers, which grow on slender spikes, are very small (up to 0.3 inch; 8 mm), and tube-shaped, with five lobes flaring out at the summit. Narrow-leaved Vervain produces fruit from early July to mid-September. Gleason, H.A. 1952. The New Britton and Brown Illustrated Flora of the SIMILAR SPECIES: Blue Vervain (Verbena hastata) Northeastern United States and Adjacent Canada. Published for the NY resembles the Narrow-leaved Vervain, but is a plant of Botanical Garden by Hafner Press. New York. moist meadows and swales and is unlikely to be found in the dry, rocky habitat of the Narrow-leaved Vervain. Its Narrow-leaved Vervain, starting at 4 inches (10 cm). leaves are short-stalked and longer than those of Only the largest leaves of Narrow-leaved Vervain reach this length. The inflorescence of Blue Vervain is composed of many branches of spikes, compared to the more simple inflorescence of the Narrow-leaved Vervain, with spikes either solitary or merely in threes.
    [Show full text]