Final Report USDA Ecological Site Description State-And-Transition Models Major Land Resource Area 28A and 28B Nevada February 2015
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
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. -
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. -
A Phylogeny of the Hubbardochloinae Including Tetrachaete (Poaceae: Chloridoideae: Cynodonteae)
Peterson, P.M., K. Romaschenko, and Y. Herrera Arrieta. 2020. A phylogeny of the Hubbardochloinae including Tetrachaete (Poaceae: Chloridoideae: Cynodonteae). Phytoneuron 2020-81: 1–13. Published 18 November 2020. ISSN 2153 733 A PHYLOGENY OF THE HUBBARDOCHLOINAE INCLUDING TETRACHAETE (CYNODONTEAE: CHLORIDOIDEAE: POACEAE) PAUL M. PETERSON AND KONSTANTIN ROMASCHENKO Department of Botany National Museum of Natural History Smithsonian Institution Washington, D.C. 20013-7012 [email protected]; [email protected] YOLANDA HERRERA ARRIETA Instituto Politécnico Nacional CIIDIR Unidad Durango-COFAA Durango, C.P. 34220, México [email protected] ABSTRACT The phylogeny of subtribe Hubbardochloinae is revisited, here with the inclusion of the monotypic genus Tetrachaete, based on a molecular DNA analysis using ndhA intron, rpl32-trnL, rps16 intron, rps16- trnK, and ITS markers. Tetrachaete elionuroides is aligned within the Hubbardochloinae and is sister to Dignathia. The biogeography of the Hubbardochloinae is discussed, its origin likely in Africa or temperate Asia. In a previous molecular DNA phylogeny (Peterson et al. 2016), the subtribe Hubbardochloinae Auquier [Bewsia Gooss., Dignathia Stapf, Gymnopogon P. Beauv., Hubbardochloa Auquier, Leptocarydion Hochst. ex Stapf, Leptothrium Kunth, and Lophacme Stapf] was found in a clade with moderate support (BS = 75, PP = 1.00) sister to the Farragininae P.M. Peterson et al. In the present study, Tetrachaete elionuroides Chiov. is included in a phylogenetic analysis (using ndhA intron, rpl32- trnL, rps16 intron, rps16-trnK, and ITS DNA markers) in order to test its relationships within the Cynodonteae with heavy sampling of species in the supersubtribe Gouiniodinae P.M. Peterson & Romasch. Chiovenda (1903) described Tetrachaete Chiov. with a with single species, T. -
Perennial Grass Community Response to Severe Drought, Topo
PERENNIAL GRASS COMMUNITY RESPONSE TO SEVERE DROUGHT, TOPO- EDAPHIC VARIATION, AND LONG-TERM HERBIVORY ON THE EDWARDS PLATEAU OF TEXAS A Thesis by COLIN SCOTT SHACKELFORD Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE August 2004 Major Subject: Rangeland Ecology and Management PERENNIAL GRASS COMMUNITY RESPONSE TO SEVERE DROUGHT, TOPO- EDAPHIC VARIATION, AND LONG-TERM HERBIVORY ON THE EDWARDS PLATEAU OF TEXAS A Thesis by COLIN SCOTT SHACKELFORD Submitted to Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Approved as to style and content by: ________________________ ________________________ Fred Smeins Raghavan Srinivasan (Chair of Committee) (Member) ________________________ ________________________ Charles Taylor Larry White (Member) (Member) ________________________ Steve Whisenant (Head of Department) August 2004 Major Subject: Rangeland Ecology and Management iii ABSTRACT Perennial Grass Community Response to Severe Drought, Topo-Edaphic Variation, and Long Term Herbivory on the Edwards Plateau of Texas. (August 2004) Colin Scott Shackelford, B.A., Austin College Chair of Advisory Committee: Dr. Fred Smeins Perennial grass vegetation dynamics of heavy grazing, moderate grazing and ungrazed treatments were analyzed during two extreme drought events: the drought of 1951 to 1956 and the drought events centered on the year 2000. Analysis of each drought event from weather records and Palmer Drought Severity Index values showed that the intensity, duration and pattern of each drought event were structurally unique. Grazing intensity was the primary driver of perennial grass species composition and community structure both during and between each drought event. -
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 -
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. -
For the Love of Grass IX
For the Love of Grass IX Botanizing the Snake River Plains and Bonneville Lakebeds and Shorelines Jack Carlson, Wendall Oaks, Larry Holzworth, Dan Ogle, and Wendell Hassell May 10-15, 2016 Table of Contents Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 3 Day 1 – Monday, May 10 .................................................................................................... 5 Inventory Site 1 – Forage and Range Reseach Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service (ARS), Logan, Logan County, Utah ............................................................................. 5 Inventory Site 2 – Curlew National Grassland, Oneida County, Idaho ................................ 8 Day 2 – Tuesday, May 11 .................................................................................................. 13 Inventory Site 3 – Aberdeen Plant Materials Center (PMC), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), Bingham County, Idaho ...................................................... 13 Inventory Site 4 – Coffee Point, Bingham County, Idaho .................................................... 17 Day 3 – Wednesday, May 12 ............................................................................................ 21 Inventory Site 4A – Big Lost River Rest Area, Butte County, Idaho .................................. 21 Inventory Site 4B – Craters of the Moon National Monument, Butte County, Idaho ....... 22 Inventory Site 5 – Camas Prairie Centennial Marsh Wildlife -
Native Cool Season Grasses Guide
NATIVE COOL SEASON GRASSES GUIDE PURE STAND SEEDING RATES SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME HEIGHT (PLS LBS/ACRE) Achnatherum hymenoides Indian Rice Grass 1.5' 8 Agropyron smithii Western Wheatgrass 3' 12 Agropyron trachycaulum Slender Wheatgrass 3' 8 Bromus anomalus Nodding Brome 2' 18 Bromus carinatus California Brome 4' 15 Bromus ciliatus Fringed Brome 4' 10 Bromus kalmii Prairie Brome 3' 12 Bromus marginatus Mountain Brome 4' 25 Bromus purgans Hairy Wood Chess 4' 12 Calamagrostis canadensis Blue Joint Reed Grass (Canada Bluejoint) 4' 0.4 Danthonia spicata Poverty Oats 1' 4 Deschampsia cespitosa Tufted Hairgrass 3.5' 2 Elymus canadensis Canada Wildrye 3'–4' 8 Elymus elymoides Bottlebrush Squirreltail 1.5' 8 Elymus glaucus Blue Wildrye 5' 12 Elymus lanceolatus Thickspike (Streambank) Wheatgrass 2.5' 10 SEASONNATIVE COOL GRASSES GUIDE Elymus riparius Riverbank Wildrye 4' 8 Elymus villosus Silky Wildrye 3' 8 Elymus virginicus Virginia Wildrye 3' 12 Elymus wawawaiensis Snake River Wheatgrass 2.5' 18 Festuca arizonica Arizona Fescue 2' 3 Festuca campestris Rough Fescue 1.5' 8 Festuca idahoensis Idaho Fescue 2' 4 Festuca obtusa Nodding Fescue 2' 5 Festuca occidentalis Western Fescue 3' 5 Festuca saximontana Rocky Mountain Fescue 3' 2 75 SPEAK WITH A SPECIALIST NOW! | 888.498.7333 NATIVE COOL SEASON GRASSES GUIDE CONTINUED PURE STAND SEEDING RATES SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME HEIGHT (PLS LBS/ACRE) Glyceria canadensis Rattlesnake Grass 3' 1 Glyceria striata Fowl Manna Grass 3' 0.8 Hordeum brachyantherum Meadow Barley 2.5' 10 Hordeum jubatum Squirrel Tail Grass 2' 8 Koeleria cristata Prairie June Grass 2' 0.8 Leersia oryzoides Ride Cut Grass 4' 3 Leymus cinereus Great Basin Wildrye 5' 11 Leymus salinus Salina Wildrye 2.5' 12 Leymus triticoides Beardless Wildrye (Creeping Wildrye) 3' 9 Poa alpina Alpine Bluegrass 1.75' 2 Poa compressa Canada Bluegrass 8" 2 Poa fenderiana Muttongrass 2' 2 Poa nervosa Wheeler Bluegrass 1.8' 2 Poa palustris Fowl Bluegrass 2' 0.8 Poa secunda ssp. -
International Ecological Classification Standard
INTERNATIONAL ECOLOGICAL CLASSIFICATION STANDARD: TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGICAL CLASSIFICATIONS Groups and Macrogroups of Washington June 26, 2015 by NatureServe (modified by Washington Natural Heritage Program on January 16, 2016) 600 North Fairfax Drive, 7th Floor Arlington, VA 22203 2108 55th Street, Suite 220 Boulder, CO 80301 This subset of the International Ecological Classification Standard covers vegetation groups and macrogroups attributed to Washington. This classification has been developed in consultation with many individuals and agencies and incorporates information from a variety of publications and other classifications. Comments and suggestions regarding the contents of this subset should be directed to Mary J. Russo, Central Ecology Data Manager, NC <[email protected]> and Marion Reid, Senior Regional Ecologist, Boulder, CO <[email protected]>. Copyright © 2015 NatureServe, 4600 North Fairfax Drive, 7th floor Arlington, VA 22203, U.S.A. All Rights Reserved. Citations: The following citation should be used in any published materials which reference ecological system and/or International Vegetation Classification (IVC hierarchy) and association data: NatureServe. 2015. International Ecological Classification Standard: Terrestrial Ecological Classifications. NatureServe Central Databases. Arlington, VA. U.S.A. Data current as of 26 June 2015. Restrictions on Use: Permission to use, copy and distribute these data is hereby granted under the following conditions: 1. The above copyright notice must appear in all documents and reports; 2. Any use must be for informational purposes only and in no instance for commercial purposes; 3. Some data may be altered in format for analytical purposes, however the data should still be referenced using the citation above. Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved by NatureServe. -
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 -
Final Report USDA Ecological Site Description State-And-Transition Models Major Land Resource Area 28A and 28B Nevada February 2015
Final Report USDA Ecological Site Description State-and-Transition Models Major Land Resource Area 28A and 28B Nevada February 2015 Tamzen K. Stringham1 Patti Novak-Echenique2 Paul Blackburn3 Cody Coombs4 Devon Snyder5 Amanda Wartgow6 Authors are 1Professor, 5,6Rangeland Ecologists, Dept. of Agriculture, Nutrition and Veterinary Sciences University of Nevada, Reno, NV, 2State Rangeland Management Specialist, USDA-NRCS Reno, NV, 3MLRA Soil Survey Leader, USDA-NRCS Elko, NV, and 4Hazardous Fuels Program Manager, BLM, Ely, NV Cite as: Stringham, T.K., P. Novak-Echenique, P. Blackburn, C. Coombs, D. Snyder, and A. Wartgow. 2015. Final Report for USDA Ecological Site Description State-and-Transition Models, Major Land Resource Area 28A and 28B Nevada. University of Nevada Reno, Nevada Agricultural džƉĞƌŝŵĞŶƚ^ƚĂƚŝŽŶ Research Report 2015-01. p. 1524. Cooperators: USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service, USDA Agricultural Research Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management and Eureka County, NV. Final Report submitted to USDA Agricultural Research Service as fulfillment of Agreement # 58-5370-2-211 Disturbance Response Group 4B Contents Page DRG 4B – Modal Site Claypan 12-14” 028BY037NV Ecological sites within DRG 4 Ϯϲϰ Narrative Ϯϲϱ Modal State-and-Transition model Ϯϴϭ References Ϯϴϯ Additional STMs within DRG 4 Ϯϴϲ 263 Ecological Sites within Disturbance Response Group 4B: Modal Site: Claypan 12-14” 028BY037NV Group Name Site ID Claypan 12-14"P.Z. 028BY037NV Claypan 14+" P.Z. 028BY036NV 4B Calcareous Claypan 14-16" P.Z. 028BY092NV Gravelly Claypan 14+" P.Z. 028BY035NV Cobbly Claypan 12-14" P.Z. 028BY039NV 264 MLRA 28B Group 4B Disturbance Response Group (DRG) 4B consists of five ecological sites. -
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.