DOCSLIB.ORG

Berberidaceae)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

REPRODUCTIVE ECOLOGY OF A RARE SERPENTINE ENDEMIC, VANCOUVERIA CHRYSANTHA (BERBERIDACEAE) By Brian Dykstra A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of Humboldt State University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in Biology Committee Membership Dr. Michael R. Mesler, Committee Chair Dr. Erik S. Jules, Committee Member Dr. Alexandru M.F. Tomescu, Committee Member Dr. Jeffrey White, Committee Member Dr. Michael R. Mesler, Graduate Coordinator July 2014 ABSTRACT REPRODUCTIVE ECOLOGY OF A RARE SERPENTINE ENDEMIC, VANCOUVERIA CHRYSANTHA (BERBERIDACEAE) Brian Dykstra This study examined how pollinator visitation and local neighborhood density may affect pollen limitation (PL) of reproductive success for Vancouveria chrysantha Greene (Berberidaceae), a rare plant, strictly endemic to serpentine substrates in northwestern California and southwestern Oregon. Previous to this study nothing was known about its pollination biology. V. chrysantha is protandrous, self-incompatible, and presents pollen and nectar attractive to pollinators. Although infrequently seen, bumblebees were the most common floral visitor, and were the only visitor observed contacting receptive stigmas. The majority of individual plants studied experienced PL, and average supplemental-pollination seed set was nearly double that of natural open- pollination. Surprisingly, bumblebee visitation did not predict the degree of PL, suggesting that the amount or quality of pollen carried by bumblebees is more important than their rate of visitation. Increases is the number of neighbors at the largest spatial scale measured (25 m) significantly decreased PL, but the smallest scale (1 m) had no effect, indicating that near neighbors may not donate quality pollen, and larger spatial scales are more likely to encompass suitable pollen donors. The dependence of V. chrysantha on bumblebees and local neighborhoods large enough to harbor compatible mates has implications for the conservation and management of this rare plant; decreases in plant or bee abundance could negatively affect population persistence. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am grateful and in debt to many people who contributed to the development, implementation, and completion of this research project. Many thanks go to Dr. Michael Mesler, my advisor and instructor, for his encouragement, and for providing a great opportunity to research pollination biology under his guidance. Best wishes and many thanks to those who assisted me in the field, contributing much sweat and patience: Danielle Cummins, Shannon Davis, Edde Dula, Sasan Hariri-Moghadam, Laurel Hoffman, Rhianna Jones, Jian Kang, George Meindl, Samuel O’Dell, Hillary Ronney, Bobby Shearer, Glenn Shelton, and Kelly. Thank you to those who provided location information, especially Lisa Hoover, Scott Loring, and Steven Darrington. Thanks also go to Abbie Jossie, Erin Brandy, and Robin Taylor Davenport of the Medford District BLM and everyone else in Oregon who helped. Also thank you to my family for providing support. Thank You Shannon, Ruby and Poplyn! Funding was provided by a Humboldt State University Masters Grant. Thank you to all! I dedicate this work to Jian Kang, whose sense of adventure, humor, and hard work ethic lightened my spirits in the field. – iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................ ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................... iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................... iv TABLE OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................... vi INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1 MATERIALS AND METHODS ........................................................................................ 3 Study Species .................................................................................................................. 3 Study Site ........................................................................................................................ 7 Breeding System and Floral Biology .............................................................................. 9 Focal Plants ................................................................................................................... 10 Insect Visitation ............................................................................................................ 11 Pollen Limitation .......................................................................................................... 11 Neighborhood Density .................................................................................................. 15 Data Analysis ................................................................................................................ 15 RESULTS ......................................................................................................................... 19 Breeding System and Floral Biology ............................................................................ 19 Insect Visitation ............................................................................................................ 26 Pollen Limitation .......................................................................................................... 37 DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................... 44 Breeding System and Floral Biology ............................................................................ 44 Insect Visitation ............................................................................................................ 45 iv Pollen Limitation .......................................................................................................... 47 Implications for Conservation ...................................................................................... 48 LITERATURE CITED ..................................................................................................... 52 v TABLE OF FIGURES FIGURE 1. FORTY-THREE RECORDED LOCATIONS OF V. CHRYSANTHA IN OREGON, BASED ON HERBARIUM SPECIMENS AND FIELD OBSERVATIONS (OREGON FLORA PROJECT 2013). DIAMONDS ARE OBSERVATIONS, LARGER CIRCLES INDICATE CLUSTERED RECORDS. ..... 5 FIGURE 2. FORTY-THREE RECORDED LOCATIONS OF V. CHRYSANTHA IN CALIFORNIA, BASED ON HERBARIUM SPECIMENS AND FIELD OBSERVATIONS (CALFLORA 2013). .................. 6 FIGURE 3. MAP OF APPROXIMATE STUDY AREA LOCATION. UTM ZONE 10, 436903 E, 4653464 N. CREATED WITH HTTP://WWW.GMAPGIS.COM/ ............................................ 8 FIGURE 4. LANDSCAPE OF THE STUDY AREA........................................................................ 8 FIGURE 5. FRUITS MANUALLY OPENED FOR OVULE AND SEED COUNTS. (A) A FRUIT WITH SEVERAL UNDEVELOPED OVULES (ARROW 1) AND ONE SEED (ARROW 2). (B) A FRUIT WHERE ALL 11 OVULES DEVELOPED INTO SEEDS. ........................................................ 13 FIGURE 6. DEHISCED FRUIT WITH SEEDS EXPOSED TO DISPERSAL VECTORS. ...................... 14 FIGURE 7. EARLY ANTHESIS. THE ANTHERS ARE UNDEHISCED (ARROW 1), THE PETALS (ARROW 2) AND SEPALS (ARROW 3) BEGIN TO REFLEX. ............................................... 21 FIGURE 8 (A AND B). TWO EXAMPLES OF STAMINATE PHASE FLOWERS. PETALS ARE PRODUCING NECTAR IN THEIR HOOD-SHAPED POUCHES (ARROW 1) AND ANTHERS HAVE DEHISCED, WITH POLLEN AMASSED AT TIP (ARROW 2). ................................................ 22 FIGURE 9. THREE CARPELLATE PHASE FLOWERS. PETALS SECRETE NECTAR (ARROW 1). THE STYLE EXTENDS BEYOND THE ANDROECIUM, AND EXPOSES A STICKY STIGMA vi (ARROW 2). IN THIS PHASE THE ANDROECIUM REMAINS FIRMLY ATTACHED, AND IS GRASPED BY BUMBLEBEES WHEN THEY COLLECT NECTAR. ......................................... 23 FIGURE 10. AUTO-POLLINATION. UNVISITED CARPELLATE PHASE FLOWERS (A, TENTED PLANT; B, FOCAL PLANT). THE POLLEN MASS AT TIP OF THE ANDROECIUM REMAINS LARGELY INTACT (ARROW 1) BUT SOME POLLEN HAS BEEN DEPOSITED ON THE STIGMA AS THE RESULT OF STYLE ELONGATION (ARROW 2). .................................................... 24 FIGURE 11. FLORAL SENESCENCE. BY THIS STAGE, SOME SEPALS AND PETALS HAVE FALLEN (ARROW 1), THE ENLARGED STIGMA IS COVERED WITH POLLEN GRAINS (ARROW 2), AND THE ANDROECIUM HAS ABSCISED (ARROW 3). ................................................ 25 FIGURE 12. PROPORTION OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF INSECTS VISITING FOCAL PLANTS IN 2010. BUMBLEBEES MADE 23 FOCAL PLANT VISITS; SMALL SOLITARY BEES MADE 4. FLIES, ANTS, AND BEETLES EACH MADE ONLY 1 FOCAL PLANT VISIT. N = 30 VISITS TO FOCAL PLANTS. ....................................................................................................................... 28 FIGURE 13. CONCURRENT POLLEN AND NECTAR COLLECTION BEHAVIOR BY BOMBUS. ...... 29 FIGURE 14. BUMBLEBEE VISITS TO CARPELLATE PHASE FLOWERS (A, B, AND D) AND A STAMINATE PHASE FLOWER (C). BEES GRASP THE ANDROECIUM, AND MOVE AROUND THE FLOWER IN A CIRCULAR FASHION. THE VENTRAL ABDOMINAL SURFACES CONTACTED POLLEN (C) AND RECEPTIVE STIGMAS (A, B, AND D). ................................ 30 FIGURE 15. AN UNIDENTIFIED SMALL SOLITARY BEE VISITS A STAMINATE PHASE FLOWER IN 2009. THIS BEE DID COLLECT NECTAR BY OCCASIONALLY CLIMBING TO THE PETALS ABOVE. .......................................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Plant List 2016

    Plant List 2016

    Established 1990 PLANT LIST 2016 European mail order website www.crug-farm.co.uk CRÛG FARM PLANTS • 2016 Welcome to our 2016 list hope we can tempt you with plenty of our old favourites as well as some exciting new plants that we have searched out on our travels. There has been little chance of us standing still with what has been going on here in 2015. The year started well with the birth of our sixth grandchild. January into February had Sue and I in Colombia for our first winter/early spring expedition. It was exhilarating, we were able to travel much further afield than we had previously, as the mountainous areas become safer to travel. We are looking forward to working ever closer with the Colombian institutes, such as the Medellin Botanic Gardens whom we met up with. Consequently we were absent from the RHS February Show at Vincent Square. We are finding it increasingly expensive participating in the London shows, while re-branding the RHS February Show as a potato event hardly encourages our type of customer base to visit. A long standing speaking engagement and a last minute change of date, meant that we missed going to Fota near Cork last spring, no such problem this coming year. We were pleasantly surprised at the level of interest at the Trgrehan Garden Rare Plant Fair, in Cornwall. Hopefully this will become an annual event for us, as well as the Cornwall Garden Society show in April. Poor Sue went through the wars having to have a rush hysterectomy in June, after some timely results revealed future risks.
  • Phylogeography of a Tertiary Relict Plant, Meconopsis Cambrica (Papaveraceae), Implies the Existence of Northern Refugia for a Temperate Herb

    Phylogeography of a Tertiary Relict Plant, Meconopsis Cambrica (Papaveraceae), Implies the Existence of Northern Refugia for a Temperate Herb

    Article (refereed) - postprint Valtueña, Francisco J.; Preston, Chris D.; Kadereit, Joachim W. 2012 Phylogeography of a Tertiary relict plant, Meconopsis cambrica (Papaveraceae), implies the existence of northern refugia for a temperate herb. Molecular Ecology, 21 (6). 1423-1437. 10.1111/j.1365- 294X.2012.05473.x Copyright © 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. This version available http://nora.nerc.ac.uk/17105/ NERC has developed NORA to enable users to access research outputs wholly or partially funded by NERC. Copyright and other rights for material on this site are retained by the rights owners. Users should read the terms and conditions of use of this material at http://nora.nerc.ac.uk/policies.html#access This document is the author’s final manuscript version of the journal article, incorporating any revisions agreed during the peer review process. Some differences between this and the publisher’s version remain. You are advised to consult the publisher’s version if you wish to cite from this article. The definitive version is available at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com Contact CEH NORA team at [email protected] The NERC and CEH trademarks and logos (‘the Trademarks’) are registered trademarks of NERC in the UK and other countries, and may not be used without the prior written consent of the Trademark owner. 1 Phylogeography of a Tertiary relict plant, Meconopsis cambrica 2 (Papaveraceae), implies the existence of northern refugia for a 3 temperate herb 4 Francisco J. Valtueña*†, Chris D. Preston‡ and Joachim W. Kadereit† 5 *Área de Botánica, Facultad deCiencias, Universidad de Extremadura, Avda. de Elvas, s.n.
  • Fair Use of This PDF File of Herbaceous

    Fair Use of This PDF File of Herbaceous

    Fair Use of this PDF file of Herbaceous Perennials Production: A Guide from Propagation to Marketing, NRAES-93 By Leonard P. Perry Published by NRAES, July 1998 This PDF file is for viewing only. If a paper copy is needed, we encourage you to purchase a copy as described below. Be aware that practices, recommendations, and economic data may have changed since this book was published. Text can be copied. The book, authors, and NRAES should be acknowledged. Here is a sample acknowledgement: ----From Herbaceous Perennials Production: A Guide from Propagation to Marketing, NRAES- 93, by Leonard P. Perry, and published by NRAES (1998).---- No use of the PDF should diminish the marketability of the printed version. This PDF should not be used to make copies of the book for sale or distribution. If you have questions about fair use of this PDF, contact NRAES. Purchasing the Book You can purchase printed copies on NRAES’ secure web site, www.nraes.org, or by calling (607) 255-7654. Quantity discounts are available. NRAES PO Box 4557 Ithaca, NY 14852-4557 Phone: (607) 255-7654 Fax: (607) 254-8770 Email: [email protected] Web: www.nraes.org More information on NRAES is included at the end of this PDF. Acknowledgments This publication is an update and expansion of the 1987 Cornell Guidelines on Perennial Production. Informa- tion in chapter 3 was adapted from a presentation given in March 1996 by John Bartok, professor emeritus of agricultural engineering at the University of Connecticut, at the Connecticut Perennials Shortcourse, and from articles in the Connecticut Greenhouse Newsletter, a publication put out by the Department of Plant Science at the University of Connecticut.
  • NATIVE PLANT FIELD GUIDE Revised March 2012

    NATIVE PLANT FIELD GUIDE Revised March 2012

    NATIVE PLANT FIELD GUIDE Revised March 2012 Hansen's Northwest Native Plant Database www.nwplants.com Foreword Once upon a time, there was a very kind older gentleman who loved native plants. He lived in the Pacific northwest, so plants from this area were his focus. As a young lad, his grandfather showed him flowers and bushes and trees, the sweet taste of huckleberries and strawberries, the smell of Giant Sequoias, Incense Cedars, Junipers, pines and fir trees. He saw hummingbirds poking Honeysuckles and Columbines. He wandered the woods and discovered trillium. When he grew up, he still loved native plants--they were his passion. He built a garden of natives and then built a nursery so he could grow lots of plants and teach gardeners about them. He knew that alien plants and hybrids did not usually live peacefully with natives. In fact, most of them are fierce enemies, not well behaved, indeed, they crowd out and overtake natives. He wanted to share his information so he built a website. It had a front page, a page of plants on sale, and a page on how to plant natives. But he wanted more, lots more. So he asked for help. I volunteered and he began describing what he wanted his website to do, what it should look like, what it should say. He shared with me his dream of making his website so full of information, so inspiring, so educational that it would be the most important source of native plant lore on the internet, serving the entire world.
  • Native Plant Alternatives To

    Native Plant Alternatives To

    NATIVE PLANT ALTERNATIVES TO English Ivy is a non-native, invasive plant that is severely damaging our urban forests and has been added to the WA State Noxious Weed List. It is often used as an ornamental climber or as a groundcover. Below is a list of native plants that can be used in its place. CLIMBERS GROWING CONDITIONS Western trumpet honeysuckle partial to full shade (Lonicera ciliosa) SOME BENEFITS OF NATIVE PLANTS GROUNDCOVER GROWING CONDITIONS Native plants are drought beach strawberry sun, part shade; tolerant and do not require extra (Fragaria chiloensis) dry to moderate moisture water once they are established. bunchberry, Canadian dogwood partial to full shade; Native plants provide food and (Cornus canadensis) humus-rich soil nesting sites for native wildlife coltsfoot moist shade (Petasites palmatus) Native plants do not require fertilizers or pesticides, which false lily-of-the-valley full to partial shade; helps to preserve water quality. (Maianthemum dilatatum) moist soil Roots of native plants reach fringe cup partial shade; varying depths in the soil which (Tellima grandiflora) moist soil helps to distribute water through inside-out flower sun to shade the soil and hold the soil in place. (Vancouveria hexandra) wgab 0209_IVYalternatives.ai kinnikinnick sun, some shade; For more info on English ivy and (Arctostaphylos uva-ursi) well drained soil other Noxious Weeds contact : King County Noxious Weed low Oregon grape prefers shade; Control Program (Mahonia nervosa) can tolerate sun 201 S Jackson St., Suite 600 Lyngby’s sedge moist shade Seattle, WA 98104 (Carex lyngbyei) 206-296-0290 e-mail: oak fern dry to moist shade or [email protected] (Gymnocarpium dryopteris) partial shade For info on native plants and partridgefoot sun; moist acid soil Ivy O.U.T.
  • Introduction

    Introduction

    INTRODUCTION Although much of the San Francisco Bay Region is densely populated and industrialized, many thousands of acres within its confines have been set aside as parks and preserves. Most of these tracts were not rescued until after they had been altered. The construction of roads, the modification of drainage patterns, grazing by livestock, and the introduction of aggressive species are just a few of the factors that have initiated irreversible changes in the region’s plant and animal life. Yet on the slopes of Mount Diablo and Mount Tamal- pais, in the redwood groves at Muir Woods, and in some of the regional parks one can find habitats that probably resemble those that were present two hundred years ago. Even tracts that are far from pristine have much that will bring pleasure to those who enjoy the study of nature. Visitors to our region soon discover that the area is diverse in topography, geology, cli- mate, and vegetation. Hills, valleys, wetlands, and the seacoast are just some of the situa- tions that will have one or more well-defined assemblages of plants. In this manual, the San Francisco Bay Region is defined as those counties that touch San Francisco Bay. Reading a map clockwise from Marin County, they are Marin, Sonoma, Napa, Solano, Contra Costa, Alameda, Santa Clara, San Mateo, and San Francisco. This book will also be useful in bordering counties, such as Mendocino, Lake, Santa Cruz, Monterey, and San Benito, because many of the plants dealt with occur farther north, east, and south. For example, this book includes about three-quarters of the plants found in Monterey County and about half of the Mendocino flora.
  • Native Herbaceous Plants in Our Gardens

    Native Herbaceous Plants in Our Gardens

    Native Herbaceous Plants in Our Gardens A Guide for the Willamette Valley Native Gardening Awareness Program A Committee of the Emerald Chapter of the Native Plant Society of Oregon Members of the Native Gardening Awareness Program, a committee of the Emerald chapter of the NPSO, contributed text, editing, and photographs for this publication. They include: Mieko Aoki, John Coggins, Phyllis Fisher, Rachel Foster, Evelyn Hess, Heiko Koester, Cynthia Lafferty, Danna Lytjen, Bruce Newhouse, Nick Otting, and Michael Robert Spring 2005 1 2 Table of Contents Native Herbaceous Plants in Our Gardens ...........................5 Shady Woodlands .................................................................7 Baneberry – Actaea rubra ................................................... 7 Broad-leaved Bluebells – Mertensia platyphylla .....................7 Hound’s-tongue – Cynoglossum grande ............................... 8 Broad-leaved Starflower –Trientalis latifolia ..........................8 Bunchberry – Cornus unalaschkensis (formerly C. canadensis) ....8 False Solomon’s-seal – Maianthemum racemosum ................ 9 Fawn Lily – Erythronium oregonum .........................................9 Ferns ..........................................................................10-12 Fringecup – Tellima grandiflora and T. odorata ..................... 12 Inside-out Flower – Vancouveria hexandra ....................... 13 Large-leaved Avens – Geum macrophyllum ...................... 13 Meadowrue – Thalictrum spp. ...............................................14
  • Classification of the Vegetation Alliances and Associations of Sonoma County, California

    Classification of the Vegetation Alliances and Associations of Sonoma County, California

    Classification of the Vegetation Alliances and Associations of Sonoma County, California Volume 1 of 2 – Introduction, Methods, and Results Prepared by: California Department of Fish and Wildlife Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program California Native Plant Society Vegetation Program For: The Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District The Sonoma County Water Agency Authors: Anne Klein, Todd Keeler-Wolf, and Julie Evens December 2015 ABSTRACT This report describes 118 alliances and 212 associations that are found in Sonoma County, California, comprising the most comprehensive local vegetation classification to date. The vegetation types were defined using a standardized classification approach consistent with the Survey of California Vegetation (SCV) and the United States National Vegetation Classification (USNVC) system. This floristic classification is the basis for an integrated, countywide vegetation map that the Sonoma County Vegetation Mapping and Lidar Program expects to complete in 2017. Ecologists with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the California Native Plant Society analyzed species data from 1149 field surveys collected in Sonoma County between 2001 and 2014. The data include 851 surveys collected in 2013 and 2014 through funding provided specifically for this classification effort. An additional 283 surveys that were conducted in adjacent counties are included in the analysis to provide a broader, regional understanding. A total of 34 tree-overstory, 28 shrubland, and 56 herbaceous alliances are described, with 69 tree-overstory, 51 shrubland, and 92 herbaceous associations. This report is divided into two volumes. Volume 1 (this volume) is composed of the project introduction, methods, and results. It includes a floristic key to all vegetation types, a table showing the full local classification nested within the USNVC hierarchy, and a crosswalk showing the relationship between this and other classification systems.
  • Abies Bracteata Revised 2011 1 Abies Bracteata (D. Don) Poit

    Abies Bracteata Revised 2011 1 Abies Bracteata (D. Don) Poit

    Lead Forest: Los Padres National Forest Forest Service Endemic: No Abies bracteata (D. Don) Poit. (bristlecone fir) Known Potential Synonym: Abies venusta (Douglas ex Hook.) K. Koch; Pinus bracteata D. Don; Pinus venusta Douglas ex Hook (Tropicos 2011). Table 1. Legal or Protection Status (CNDDB 2011, CNPS 2011, and Other Sources). Federal Listing Status; State Heritage Rank California Rare Other Lists Listing Status Plant Rank None; None G2/S2.3 1B.3 USFS Sensitive Plant description: Abies bracteata (Pinaceae) (Fig. 1) is a perennial monoecious plant with trunks longer than 55 m and less than 1.3 m wide. The branches are more-or-less drooping, and the bark is thin. The twigs are glabrous, and the buds are 1-2.5 cm long, sharp-pointed, and non- resinous. The leaves are less than 6 cm long, are dark green, faintly grooved on their upper surfaces, and have tips that are sharply spiny. Seed cones are less than 9 cm long with stalks that are under15 mm long. The cones have bracts that are spreading, exserted, and that are 1.5–4.5 cm long with a slender spine at the apex. Taxonomy: Abies bracteata is a fir species and a member of the pine family (Pinaceae). Out of the fir species growing in North America (Griffin and Critchfield 1976), Abies bracteata has the smallest range and is the least abundant. Identification: Many features of A. bracteata can be used to distinguish this species from other conifers, including the sharp-tipped needles, thin bark, club-shaped crown, non-resinous buds, and exserted spine tipped bracts (Gymnosperms Database 2010).
  • Avery Park Native Plant Garden Species List – Compiled by Carolyn Ver Linden

    Avery Park Native Plant Garden Species List – Compiled by Carolyn Ver Linden

    Avery Park Native Plant Garden Species list – compiled by Carolyn Ver Linden Ecosystem Common name Genus Species Family D-C wdlnd Big leaf maple Acer macrophyllum Maple (Aceraceae). D-C wdlnd Vine maple Acer circinatum Maple (Aceraceae). D-C wdlnd Pacific Dogwood Cornus nuttallii Dogwood (Cornaceae). D-C wdlnd Western Yew Taxus brevifolia Yew (Taxaceae). D-C wdlnd Red huckleberry Vaccinium parvifolium Heath (Ericaceae). D-C wdlnd Salal Gaultheria shallon Heath (Ericaceae). D-C wdlnd Red-flowering currant Ribes sanguineum Currant (Grossulariaceae). D-C wdlnd Thimbleberry Rubus parviflorus Rose (Roseaceae). D-C wdlnd Oceanspray Holodiscus discolor Rose (Roseaceae). D-C wdlnd Cascade Oregon grape Berberis nervosa Barberry (Berberidaceae) D-C wdlnd Snowberry Symphoricarpos albus Honeysuckle (Caprifoliaceae). D-C wdlnd Orange Honeysuckle Lonicera ciliosa Honeysuckle (Caprifoliaceae). D-C wdlnd Bleeding heart Dicentra formosa Fumitory (Fumariaceae). D-C wdlnd Bunchberry Cornus canadensis Dogwood (Cornaceae). D-C wdlnd Fairy bells Disporum smithii Lily (Liliaceae) D-C wdlnd False Lily-of-the-Valley Maianthemum dilatatum Lily (Liliaceae) D-C wdlnd False Solomon’s seal Smilacina racemosa Lily (Liliaceae) D-C wdlnd Ginger Asarum caudatum Birthwort (Aristolochiaceae) D-C wdlnd Inside out flower Vancouveria hexandra Barberry (Berberidaceae). D-C wdlnd Lady fern Athyrium filix-femina Fern (Polypodiaceae) D-C wdlnd Meadow sidalcea Sidalcea campestris Mallow (Malvaceae). D-C wdlnd Oregon fawn lily or trout lily Erythronium oregonum Lily (Liliaceae) D-C
  • Phytophthora Ramorum Description

    Phytophthora Ramorum Description

    A CHRONOLOGY OF PHYTOPHTHORA RAMORUM, CAUSE OF SUDDEN OAK DEATH AND OTHER FOLIAR DISEASES 3/21 • Ten nurseries are participating in OR’s P. ramorum Nursery Program; of these, eight are interstate shippers under federal compliance agreements, in Polk (1), Washington (1), Marion (3), Columbia (1), Lane (1), and Linn (1) Counties. The ODA also holds compliance agreements with two intrastate shippers, in Clackamas and Lincoln Counties. To date, five nurseries have been inspected and sampled with results pending for three nurseries. Two nurseries had no detections, marking their sixth consecutive inspection with no P. ramorum found. They will be formally released for successfully completing program requirements. One released grower is an intrastate shipper located in Clackamas County, first confirmed in 2012; the other is an interstate shipper located in Marion County, also first confirmed in 2012. 2/21 • Nine CA nurseries that were previously positive for P. ramorum are currently being inspected and sampled in compliance with federal regulations. At one previously positive nursery, 12 infected, 1-gallon Loropetalum sp. plants were detected in January. Four states and 41 counties were notified about required trace-forward inspections. Inspections have been completed in all 41 counties and there were no additional positive plants found. • OR conducted delimitation work at an interstate shipper in Linn County that was confirmed positive in late November 2020. After two rounds of delimitation surveys, 26 plant, 1 water (taken from a puddle adjacent to a confirmed positive plant), and 18 soil samples were confirmed P. ramorum positive. After marking out destruction zones, the grower agreed to destroy all material within the quarantine and destruction zones around each confirmed positive plant.
  • The Ethnobotany of the Yurok, Tolowa, and Karok Indians of Northwest California

    The Ethnobotany of the Yurok, Tolowa, and Karok Indians of Northwest California

    THE ETHNOBOTANY OF THE YUROK, TOLOWA, AND KAROK INDIANS OF NORTHWEST CALIFORNIA by Marc Andre Baker 'A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of Humboldt State University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts June, 1981 THE ETHNOBOTANY OF THE YUROK, TOLOWA, AND KAROK INDIANS OF NORTHWEST CALIFORNIA by Marc A. Baker Approved by the Master's Thesis Corrunittee V~+J~.Jr, Chairman ~;'J.~''c \. (l .:, r---- (I'. J~!-\ Approved by the Graduate Dean ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS An ethnobotanical study necessitates the cooperation of individuals who among themselves have a wide range of diverse interests. Dr. James Payne Smith, Jr., Professor of Botany was the chief coordinator of this unity as well as my princi- pal advisor and editor. Most of the botanical related prob- lems and many grammatical questions were discussed with him. Torn Nelson, Herbarium Assistant of the HSU Herbarium, aided in the identification of many plant specimens. Dr. Jim Waters, Professor of Zoology, dealt with cor- rections concerning his field, and discerningly and meticu- lously proofread the entire text. From the formal field of ethnology, Dr. Pat Wenger, Professor of Anthropolo~y, worked with me on problems in linguistics, phonetics, and other aspects of ethnography. He also discussed with me many definitions, theories, and atti- tudes of modern ethnologists. The field work would not have been possible without the help of Torn Parsons, Director of the Center for Community Development, Arcata, California. Mr. Parsons has been work- ing with the Tolowa, Karok, and Yurok for many years and was able to introduce me to reliable and authentic sources of cultural information.