DOCSLIB.ORG

Ground Vegetation Patterns of the Spruce-Fir Area of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ground Vegetation Patterns of the Spruce-Fir Area of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 12-1957 Ground Vegetation Patterns of the Spruce-Fir Area of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park Dorothy Louise Crandall University of Tennessee - Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss Part of the Botany Commons Recommended Citation Crandall, Dorothy Louise, "Ground Vegetation Patterns of the Spruce-Fir Area of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. " PhD diss., University of Tennessee, 1957. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/1624 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Dorothy Louise Crandall entitled "Ground Vegetation Patterns of the Spruce-Fir Area of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park." I have examined the final electronic copy of this dissertation for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Botany. Royal E. Shanks, Major Professor We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance: James T. Tanner, Fred H. Norris, A. J. Sharp, Lloyd F. Seatz Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) December 11, 19)7 To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by DorothY Louise Crandall entitled "Ground Vegetation Patterns of the Spruce-Fir Area of the Great Smoky Hountains National Park." I recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Botany. !¢�i Ma-r Professor� We have read this thesis and recownend its acceptance: C)�- ----- -------" 1 .J � :�'Jill � Accepted for the Council: '/' GROill'm VEGETATION PATTERNS OF THE SPRUCE-J:i'ffi AREA OF THE GREAT S}lOKY HOUNTAINS NATION PARK AL A THESIS Submitted to The Graduate Council of The University of Tennessee in Partial Fulfillment of the Hequirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Dorothy Louise Crandall December 1957 The author expresses her appreciation tc 1-toyal Shanks, Dr. 2. Department cf Botany, The University of Tennessee, for helpful his critic is s anc1 patient guidance; Stupka, Park Naturalist the m �thur of Great Smoky hountains National for his assistance; Dr. Naxwell Park E. Springer, Associate Agronomist, Agricultural ;:!,Xperiuent Station, The University of Tennessee, for field assistance anc information on soils. '_"he author is p·ateful Southern Followsh.ips Fund, an agency of tc the the Council of Southern Universities, Inc., for generous fellowship a for the yea r 1955-1956. TABLE CF GCNTENTS PAGE INTRGDUCTICl� 1 LITERATUHE 2 l'l.ETHCDS 8 CF STUDY T1ESCRIPTICN 12 GEFE2.Al, Vegetation 12 Climate 14 Soils 17 OUTLINE SITE • 20 OF TYPES Fir Site Types 20 Spruce-Fir Site Types 38 Spruce Site Types 53 Spruce-Hardwoods Site Types 63 'Jeech-Birch Gap ite Types 73 S S?ECIES ALTITVDE 81 JD•'T) SVCCESSICN 84 of Spruce Fir Seedlings 84 Germination and Survival and and Breakage 85 Windthrow Effect of �sturbance upon Lower Strata • 87 Cyclic Nature of Fir Stands 90 Succession Following Fire 92 Succession on Hocks 97 ...,ISCLSSION 100 iv PAGE SUIJ1l&'-?.Y 106 BIBLIOGHAPHY 109 APPENDIX 113 LIST TABLES CF PAGE 'l'A3LE Fir Site Types •.. ..... ... 21 I. II. Fir Site 'rypes-Cancpy anc Gnclerstory rees • • 23 T III. Percentage Distribution of 3asal .i.rea by Diameter Classes in Fir Site Types . 24 IV. Spruce-:•'ir Site Types 40 Spruce-Fir Site Types-Canop,y n erstory Trees 41 V. anc U d 7I. Percentage Distribution cf Basal Area Diameter Classes in Spruce-F'ir Site ypes • T 43 VII. Spruce Site Types 54 VIII. Spruce Site Types-C anop understory Trees .r and 55 Percentage Distributi on c Basal Area by Diameter IX. f Classes in Spruce Site Types . 56 Spruce-Hardwoods Site Types 65 x. Spruce-Hardwoods Site rypes-Canopy and Understcr.t rees 66 xr. T Percentabe Distribution of asa lu·ea by Diameter Classes XII. B l in Spruce-Hard"l'l'oods Site Types . 67 . 33ech-Birch Site Types . 75 ;�ri. Gap XIV. !Jeech-Birch Jap Site I'ypes-Canopy and Cnderstory Trees 79 Percentage Distribution of ='asal ea Diameter 1.'V. Ar by Classes in Beech-Birch '}ap Site Types 80 XVI. Number cf Herbaceous Spec ie s by .Altitude .:,crest Type • 82 an:� Percentage ove ra e of lierbaceous Species by XVII. C g -�titude and Forest Type ••••.•..• vi COinparison Disturbed and Areas on XVIII. of Undisturbed 88 x:::x. Sw'11.lnary of Types 101 Site LIST C. F FIG1Ji{ES FIGrRE PAGE Spruce-fir distribution the ;_1reat S:,lOky .Lountains l. in . 9 ') ' . 3ark of red spruce, Pice a rubens Sare:. 15 3. of .\bies fraseri ( Pursh ) Poir., heavily encrustecl Jark lichens, mosses and liverworts "fr'ith 16 4. C:rcun0 ccver pattern in Oxalis-P..ylocomiurn site ty_:Je shm.;ing Clintonia borealis (Ait.) 3.af., Gxalis montana Haf. anc1 mos2 Eylocomium splendens 26 the Hedv-r. 5. Oxalis-:·Iylocomium fir site tyl)e en Nt. Le CCJnte 27 6. Cxalis-1J'ryopteris fir r·ite en Clln,,J:;ans Dome 30 ty-�e 7. Chelone lyoni Pursh ar/ filix-femina (L.) J.t:b.yrium ·l.oth in fir site t;}'}le 3 1 0- D JiburnUJr•-Vaccinium-Dryopteris fir site tyre on slope 2. of Conte 34 I·:t. 12 Senecio rugelia Gray in Senecio fir site t;y"Pe on 0. A. t..rest Clingmans • 3 slc�e o: Dcm.e 5 10. :Deformed fir spruce trees en fog enshrouded slcpes ancl r-;yrtle Point, ht. Le Conte 37 cf ll. Cxalis-Hylocomiur:i spruce-fir site type en Su6arlc..nd 1-:ountain • • . 45 Luxuriant ground cover of Oxalis montana Raf. in 12. 0-H spruce-fir site type ••• 46 13. 3ase fir tree extensive n,cntana [l.af. cf and Cxalis crcund ccver spruce-fir site type • • • • • • • • 47 inC-H vi ii 14. ViLn.crnur.1- �-accinima-Dryopteris spruce-fir site on t. Co llins 50 1. 1). 'libnrnu.ni-!acciniwll-Lycopocium spnce .::ite type �vith ru[;elia (,ray and Cxalis montana sea ttered Senecic .b.. haf. anc: bare ;:;round, on 1in 6G Ht. ! gus l.c), Rhofoc'enfron s : ce alont; Trillium uap p cu site type '•'rail on Et. Le Conte 62 Birch t;a}) th cor.tplete understor.>' of 17. site v.d. P;ydr·angea arborescens . 77 1. 13. :=irch site ;,erbaceous ;::;round cover of t,ap 1>-Titil Ancelica triquinata 1-·'lich.x., Rudbeckia laciniata .w. Diphylleia cymesa Eichx. 8 and 7 19. r ted spruce tree on Collins . 86 Lp oo Et. 91 . 21. Succe s onal stage in development fir stand on ht. s i of Le Conte. Ground Cl.Ver of needles twiss 9 and 3 22. Fire scars on slopes of i•'orney llidge 94 • Growth srxubs and weedy herbaceous plants 2.3 o:.. following fire on slope of l,'crney l'1idge 95 ?4. Characteristic e et tion on steep s lopes below v g a Nyrtle Point . 98 . INTRODUCTION Although the spruce-fir area of the Southern Appalachians has interested several investigators, there have been few studies of the herbaceous plants in relation to the canopy and none with this rela- tionship as the primary objective. Ecological surveys have been made by Cain (1931, 1935), Oosting and Billings (1951), and Whittaker (1956), but their papers do not report details in reference to site types and include rather limited material on the ground cover. Possible site types were mentioned by 'iJhittaker but were not described and few sup- porting data of an objective nature were included. Cain in his 1935 paper on Ecological Studies of the Vegetation of the Great Smoky Eountains wrote To employ all layers in the characterization of forest types would confuse matters too greatly for applied science, yet to construct a forest type and site system on the tree layer alone is inadequate. He, too, will undoubtedly find the characterization at least of site classes within the forest types conveniently made on a basis cf certain critical species of the inferior layers. That is, we will find that site classes are indicated by certain species or species combina­ tions of herbs, shrubs, mosses, lichens, etc. as already demonstrated for northwestern America by Ilvessalo (1929), and for the Adirondack region by Heimburger (1934). Because the forest-site concept has never been specifically applied to the Southern Appalachian coniferous forests, an intensive study of the spruce-fir areas in the Great Smoky hountains National Park has been made with particular emphasis on the herbaceous and shrubby plant cover. This thesis will propose and describe such forest site types and will discuss ott�r interrelationships of the lower and upper strata of these forests. LITEfu\.TUHE The committee on Forest Terminology of the Society of American Foresters defines site as "An area considered as to its ecological factors with reference to capacity to produce forests or other vegeta­ tion, the combination of biotic, climatic and soil conditions •11 This corresponds to the ecologist's term habitat. In characterizing and classifying forest sites different investigators have used either char­ acteristics of the forest stand itself or environmental factors. Many of these attempts have used a single factor such as moisture, land form or chemical soil analysis, but no single criterion can in itself ade­ quately describe a site since the site type depends upon the interaction of all the edaphic, climatic and biotic factors.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Guide to the Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- LILIACEAE
    Guide to the Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- LILIACEAE LILIACEAE de Jussieu 1789 (Lily Family) (also see AGAVACEAE, ALLIACEAE, ALSTROEMERIACEAE, AMARYLLIDACEAE, ASPARAGACEAE, COLCHICACEAE, HEMEROCALLIDACEAE, HOSTACEAE, HYACINTHACEAE, HYPOXIDACEAE, MELANTHIACEAE, NARTHECIACEAE, RUSCACEAE, SMILACACEAE, THEMIDACEAE, TOFIELDIACEAE) As here interpreted narrowly, the Liliaceae constitutes about 11 genera and 550 species, of the Northern Hemisphere. There has been much recent investigation and re-interpretation of evidence regarding the upper-level taxonomy of the Liliales, with strong suggestions that the broad Liliaceae recognized by Cronquist (1981) is artificial and polyphyletic. Cronquist (1993) himself concurs, at least to a degree: "we still await a comprehensive reorganization of the lilies into several families more comparable to other recognized families of angiosperms." Dahlgren & Clifford (1982) and Dahlgren, Clifford, & Yeo (1985) synthesized an early phase in the modern revolution of monocot taxonomy. Since then, additional research, especially molecular (Duvall et al. 1993, Chase et al. 1993, Bogler & Simpson 1995, and many others), has strongly validated the general lines (and many details) of Dahlgren's arrangement. The most recent synthesis (Kubitzki 1998a) is followed as the basis for familial and generic taxonomy of the lilies and their relatives (see summary below). References: Angiosperm Phylogeny Group (1998, 2003); Tamura in Kubitzki (1998a). Our “liliaceous” genera (members of orders placed in the Lilianae) are therefore divided as shown below, largely following Kubitzki (1998a) and some more recent molecular analyses. ALISMATALES TOFIELDIACEAE: Pleea, Tofieldia. LILIALES ALSTROEMERIACEAE: Alstroemeria COLCHICACEAE: Colchicum, Uvularia. LILIACEAE: Clintonia, Erythronium, Lilium, Medeola, Prosartes, Streptopus, Tricyrtis, Tulipa. MELANTHIACEAE: Amianthium, Anticlea, Chamaelirium, Helonias, Melanthium, Schoenocaulon, Stenanthium, Veratrum, Toxicoscordion, Trillium, Xerophyllum, Zigadenus.
    [Show full text]
  • Checklist of Common Native Plants the Diversity of Acadia National Park Is Refl Ected in Its Plant Life; More Than 1,100 Plant Species Are Found Here
    National Park Service Acadia U.S. Department of the Interior Acadia National Park Checklist of Common Native Plants The diversity of Acadia National Park is refl ected in its plant life; more than 1,100 plant species are found here. This checklist groups the park’s most common plants into the communities where they are typically found. The plant’s growth form is indicated by “t” for trees and “s” for shrubs. To identify unfamiliar plants, consult a fi eld guide or visit the Wild Gardens of Acadia at Sieur de Monts Spring, where more than 400 plants are labeled and displayed in their habitats. All plants within Acadia National Park are protected. Please help protect the park’s fragile beauty by leaving plants in the condition that you fi nd them. Deciduous Woods ash, white t Fraxinus americana maple, mountain t Acer spicatum aspen, big-toothed t Populus grandidentata maple, red t Acer rubrum aspen, trembling t Populus tremuloides maple, striped t Acer pensylvanicum aster, large-leaved Aster macrophyllus maple, sugar t Acer saccharum beech, American t Fagus grandifolia mayfl ower, Canada Maianthemum canadense birch, paper t Betula papyrifera oak, red t Quercus rubra birch, yellow t Betula alleghaniesis pine, white t Pinus strobus blueberry, low sweet s Vaccinium angustifolium pyrola, round-leaved Pyrola americana bunchberry Cornus canadensis sarsaparilla, wild Aralia nudicaulis bush-honeysuckle s Diervilla lonicera saxifrage, early Saxifraga virginiensis cherry, pin t Prunus pensylvanica shadbush or serviceberry s,t Amelanchier spp. cherry, choke t Prunus virginiana Solomon’s seal, false Maianthemum racemosum elder, red-berried or s Sambucus racemosa ssp.
    [Show full text]
  • State of New York City's Plants 2018
    STATE OF NEW YORK CITY’S PLANTS 2018 Daniel Atha & Brian Boom © 2018 The New York Botanical Garden All rights reserved ISBN 978-0-89327-955-4 Center for Conservation Strategy The New York Botanical Garden 2900 Southern Boulevard Bronx, NY 10458 All photos NYBG staff Citation: Atha, D. and B. Boom. 2018. State of New York City’s Plants 2018. Center for Conservation Strategy. The New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, NY. 132 pp. STATE OF NEW YORK CITY’S PLANTS 2018 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6 INTRODUCTION 10 DOCUMENTING THE CITY’S PLANTS 10 The Flora of New York City 11 Rare Species 14 Focus on Specific Area 16 Botanical Spectacle: Summer Snow 18 CITIZEN SCIENCE 20 THREATS TO THE CITY’S PLANTS 24 NEW YORK STATE PROHIBITED AND REGULATED INVASIVE SPECIES FOUND IN NEW YORK CITY 26 LOOKING AHEAD 27 CONTRIBUTORS AND ACKNOWLEGMENTS 30 LITERATURE CITED 31 APPENDIX Checklist of the Spontaneous Vascular Plants of New York City 32 Ferns and Fern Allies 35 Gymnosperms 36 Nymphaeales and Magnoliids 37 Monocots 67 Dicots 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report, State of New York City’s Plants 2018, is the first rankings of rare, threatened, endangered, and extinct species of what is envisioned by the Center for Conservation Strategy known from New York City, and based on this compilation of The New York Botanical Garden as annual updates thirteen percent of the City’s flora is imperiled or extinct in New summarizing the status of the spontaneous plant species of the York City. five boroughs of New York City. This year’s report deals with the City’s vascular plants (ferns and fern allies, gymnosperms, We have begun the process of assessing conservation status and flowering plants), but in the future it is planned to phase in at the local level for all species.
    [Show full text]
  • Cranberry - Wikipedia
    8/16/2018 Cranberry - Wikipedia Cranberry Cranberries are a group of evergreen dwarf shrubs or trailing vines in the Cranberry subgenus Oxycoccus of the genus Vaccinium. In Britain, cranberry may refer to the native species Vaccinium oxycoccos,[1] while in North America, cranberry may refer to Vaccinium macrocarpon.[2] Vaccinium oxycoccos is cultivated in central and northern Europe, while Vaccinium macrocarpon is cultivated throughout the northern United States, Canada and Chile.[3] In some methods of classification, Oxycoccus is regarded as a genus in its own right.[4] They can be found in acidic bogs throughout the cooler regions of the Northern Hemisphere. Cranberry bush with fruit partially Cranberries are low, creeping shrubs or vines up to 2 meters (7 ft) long and 5 submerged to 20 centimeters (2 to 8 in) in height;[5] they have slender, wiry stems that are not thickly woody and have small evergreen leaves. The flowers are dark Scientific classification pink, with very distinct reflexed petals, leaving the style and stamens fully Kingdom: Plantae exposed and pointing forward. They are pollinated by bees. The fruit is a berry that is larger than the leaves of the plant; it is initially light green, Clade: Angiosperms turning red when ripe. It is edible, but with an acidic taste that usually Clade: Eudicots overwhelms its sweetness. Clade: Asterids Cranberries are a major commercial crop in certain American states and Order: Ericales Canadian provinces (see cultivation and uses below). Most cranberries are processed into products such as juice, sauce, jam, and sweetened dried Family: Ericaceae cranberries, with the remainder sold fresh to consumers.
    [Show full text]
  • Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- ERICACEAE
    Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- ERICACEAE ERICACEAE (Heath Family) A family of about 107 genera and 3400 species, primarily shrubs, small trees, and subshrubs, nearly cosmopolitan. The Ericaceae is very important in our area, with a great diversity of genera and species, many of them rather narrowly endemic. Our area is one of the north temperate centers of diversity for the Ericaceae. Along with Quercus and Pinus, various members of this family are dominant in much of our landscape. References: Kron et al. (2002); Wood (1961); Judd & Kron (1993); Kron & Chase (1993); Luteyn et al. (1996)=L; Dorr & Barrie (1993); Cullings & Hileman (1997). Main Key, for use with flowering or fruiting material 1 Plant an herb, subshrub, or sprawling shrub, not clonal by underground rhizomes (except Gaultheria procumbens and Epigaea repens), rarely more than 3 dm tall; plants mycotrophic or hemi-mycotrophic (except Epigaea, Gaultheria, and Arctostaphylos). 2 Plants without chlorophyll (fully mycotrophic); stems fleshy; leaves represented by bract-like scales, white or variously colored, but not green; pollen grains single; [subfamily Monotropoideae; section Monotropeae]. 3 Petals united; fruit nodding, a berry; flower and fruit several per stem . Monotropsis 3 Petals separate; fruit erect, a capsule; flower and fruit 1-several per stem. 4 Flowers few to many, racemose; stem pubescent, at least in the inflorescence; plant yellow, orange, or red when fresh, aging or drying dark brown ...............................................Hypopitys 4 Flower solitary; stem glabrous; plant white (rarely pink) when fresh, aging or drying black . Monotropa 2 Plants with chlorophyll (hemi-mycotrophic or autotrophic); stems woody; leaves present and well-developed, green; pollen grains in tetrads (single in Orthilia).
    [Show full text]
  • Pest Categorisation of Non‐EU Viruses of Rubus L
    SCIENTIFIC OPINION ADOPTED: 21 November 2019 doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2020.5928 Pest categorisation of non-EU viruses of Rubus L. EFSA Panel on Plant Health (PLH), Claude Bragard, Katharina Dehnen-Schmutz, Paolo Gonthier, Marie-Agnes Jacques, Josep Anton Jaques Miret, Annemarie Fejer Justesen, Alan MacLeod, Christer Sven Magnusson, Panagiotis Milonas, Juan A Navas-Cortes, Stephen Parnell, Roel Potting, Philippe Lucien Reignault, Hans-Hermann Thulke, Wopke Van der Werf, Antonio Vicent Civera, Jonathan Yuen, Lucia Zappala, Thierry Candresse, Elisavet Chatzivassiliou, Franco Finelli, Stephan Winter, Domenico Bosco, Michela Chiumenti, Francesco Di Serio, Franco Ferilli, Tomasz Kaluski, Angelantonio Minafra and Luisa Rubino Abstract The Panel on Plant Health of EFSA conducted a pest categorisation of 17 viruses of Rubus L. that were previously classified as either non-EU or of undetermined standing in a previous opinion. These infectious agents belong to different genera and are heterogeneous in their biology. Blackberry virus X, blackberry virus Z and wineberry latent virus were not categorised because of lack of information while grapevine red blotch virus was excluded because it does not infect Rubus. All 17 viruses are efficiently transmitted by vegetative propagation, with plants for planting representing the major pathway for entry and spread. For some viruses, additional pathway(s) are Rubus seeds, pollen and/or vector(s). Most of the viruses categorised here infect only one or few plant genera, but some of them have a wide host range, thus extending the possible entry pathways. Cherry rasp leaf virus, raspberry latent virus, raspberry leaf curl virus, strawberry necrotic shock virus, tobacco ringspot virus and tomato ringspot virus meet all the criteria to qualify as potential Union quarantine pests (QPs).
    [Show full text]
  • 1Alan S. Weakley, 2Bruce A. Sorrie, 3Richard J. Leblond, 4Derick B
    NEW COMBINATIONS, RANK CHANGES, AND NOMENCLATURAL AND TAXONOMIC COMMENTS IN THE VASCULAR FLORA OF THE SOUTHEASTERN UNITED STATES. IV 1Alan S. Weakley, 2Bruce A. Sorrie, 3Richard J. LeBlond, 4Derick B. Poindexter UNC Herbarium (NCU), North Carolina Botanical Garden, Campus Box 3280, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-3280, U.S.A. [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] 5Aaron J. Floden 6Edward E. Schilling Missouri Botanical Garden (MO) Dept. of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology (TENN) 4344 Shaw Blvd. University of Tennessee Saint Louis, Missouri 63110, U.S.A. Knoxville, Tennessee 37996 U.S.A. [email protected] [email protected] 7Alan R. Franck 8John C. Kees Dept. of Biological Sciences, OE 167 St. Andrew’s Episcopal School Florida International University, 11200 SW 8th St. 370 Old Agency Road Miami, Florida 33199, U.S.A. Ridgeland, Mississippi 39157, U.S.A. [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT As part of ongoing efforts to understand and document the flora of the southeastern United States, we propose a number of taxonomic changes and report a distributional record. In Rhynchospora (Cyperaceae), we elevate the well-marked R. glomerata var. angusta to species rank. In Dryopteris (Dryopteridaceae), we report a state distributional record for Mississippi for D. celsa, filling a range gap. In Oenothera (Onagraceae), we continue the reassessment of the Oenothera fruticosa complex and elevate O. fruticosa var. unguiculata to species rank. In Eragrostis (Poaceae), we address typification issues. In the Trilliaceae, Trillium undulatum is transferred to Trillidium, providing a better correlation of taxonomy with our current phylogenetic understanding of the family.
    [Show full text]
  • The Genus Vaccinium in North America
    Agriculture Canada The Genus Vaccinium 630 . 4 C212 P 1828 North America 1988 c.2 Agriculture aid Agri-Food Canada/ ^ Agnculturo ^^In^iikQ Canada V ^njaian Agriculture Library Brbliotheque Canadienno de taricakun otur #<4*4 /EWHE D* V /^ AgricultureandAgri-FoodCanada/ '%' Agrrtur^'AgrntataireCanada ^M'an *> Agriculture Library v^^pttawa, Ontano K1A 0C5 ^- ^^f ^ ^OlfWNE D£ W| The Genus Vaccinium in North America S.P.VanderKloet Biology Department Acadia University Wolfville, Nova Scotia Research Branch Agriculture Canada Publication 1828 1988 'Minister of Suppl) andS Canada ivhh .\\ ailabla in Canada through Authorized Hook nta ami other books! or by mail from Canadian Government Publishing Centre Supply and Services Canada Ottawa, Canada K1A0S9 Catalogue No.: A43-1828/1988E ISBN: 0-660-13037-8 Canadian Cataloguing in Publication Data VanderKloet,S. P. The genus Vaccinium in North America (Publication / Research Branch, Agriculture Canada; 1828) Bibliography: Cat. No.: A43-1828/1988E ISBN: 0-660-13037-8 I. Vaccinium — North America. 2. Vaccinium — North America — Classification. I. Title. II. Canada. Agriculture Canada. Research Branch. III. Series: Publication (Canada. Agriculture Canada). English ; 1828. QK495.E68V3 1988 583'.62 C88-099206-9 Cover illustration Vaccinium oualifolium Smith; watercolor by Lesley R. Bohm. Contract Editor Molly Wolf Staff Editors Sharon Rudnitski Frances Smith ForC.M.Rae Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2011 with funding from Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada - Agriculture et Agroalimentaire Canada http://www.archive.org/details/genusvacciniuminOOvand
    [Show full text]
  • TESE COMPLETA Maria Carolina
    MARIA CAROLINA DE ABREU Sistemática de Oxalis L. sect. Thamnoxys (Endl.) Progel no Brasil Recife, 2011 MARIA CAROLINA DE ABREU ii Sistemática de Oxalis L. sect. Thamnoxys (Endl.) Progel no Brasil Tese apresentada ao Programa de Pós- graduação em Botânica da Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco como requisito obrigatório necessário para a obtenção do título de Doutora em Botânica. Orientadora: Profª Drª. Margareth Ferreira de Sales (UFRPE) Conselheirros: Prof. Dr. Marcos José da Silva (UFG) Prof. Dr. Reginaldo Carvalho (UFRPE) Recife, 2011 iii Ficha Catalográfica A162s Abreu, Maria Carolina de Sistemática de Oxalis sect. Thamnoxys (Endl.) Progel no Brasil / Maria Carolina de Abreu. -- 2011. 151 f. : il. Orientadora: Margareth Ferreira de Sales. Tese (Doutorado em Botânica) – Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco, Departamento de Biologia, Recife, 2011. Inclui anexos, apêndices e referências. 1. Oxalidaceae 2. Filogenia 3. Taxonomia 4. Microscopia eletrônica de varredura I. Sales, Margareth Ferreira de, Orientadora II. Título CDD 582 ii MARIA CAROLINA DE ABREU Sistemática de Oxalis L. sect. Thamnoxys (Endl.) Progel no Brasil Tese defendida e aprovada em 14/02/2011 Profª. Drª. Margareth Ferreira de Sales - UFRPE 1ª Examinadora - Orientadora Profº. Dr. André Laurênio de Melo UFRPE – UAST 2ª Examinador Profª. Drª. Carmen Sílvia Zickel - UFRPE 3ª Examinadora Profº. Dr. José Iranildo Miranda de Melo - UEPB 4ª Examinador Drª. Rita de Cássia Araújo Pereira - IPA 5ª Examinadora Profª. Drª. Suzene Izídio da Silva - UFRPE 1ª Suplente Profª. Drª. Ana Paula de Souza Gomes - FIS 2ª Suplente iii DEDICATÓRIA DEDICO aos que são fomento, Instituição, alicerce, pé direito e teto, responsáveis pela minha existência, formação e caráter: Família Abreu.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to the Southern Blue Ridge Ecoregional Conservation Plan
    SOUTHERN BLUE RIDGE ECOREGIONAL CONSERVATION PLAN Summary and Implementation Document March 2000 THE NATURE CONSERVANCY and the SOUTHERN APPALACHIAN FOREST COALITION Southern Blue Ridge Ecoregional Conservation Plan Summary and Implementation Document Citation: The Nature Conservancy and Southern Appalachian Forest Coalition. 2000. Southern Blue Ridge Ecoregional Conservation Plan: Summary and Implementation Document. The Nature Conservancy: Durham, North Carolina. This document was produced in partnership by the following three conservation organizations: The Nature Conservancy is a nonprofit conservation organization with the mission to preserve plants, animals and natural communities that represent the diversity of life on Earth by protecting the lands and waters they need to survive. The Southern Appalachian Forest Coalition is a nonprofit organization that works to preserve, protect, and pass on the irreplaceable heritage of the region’s National Forests and mountain landscapes. The Association for Biodiversity Information is an organization dedicated to providing information for protecting the diversity of life on Earth. ABI is an independent nonprofit organization created in collaboration with the Network of Natural Heritage Programs and Conservation Data Centers and The Nature Conservancy, and is a leading source of reliable information on species and ecosystems for use in conservation and land use planning. Photocredits: Robert D. Sutter, The Nature Conservancy EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This first iteration of an ecoregional plan for the Southern Blue Ridge is a compendium of hypotheses on how to conserve species nearest extinction, rare and common natural communities and the rich and diverse biodiversity in the ecoregion. The plan identifies a portfolio of sites that is a vision for conservation action, enabling practitioners to set priorities among sites and develop site-specific and multi-site conservation strategies.
    [Show full text]
  • Complete Iowa Plant Species List
    !PLANTCO FLORISTIC QUALITY ASSESSMENT TECHNIQUE: IOWA DATABASE This list has been modified from it's origional version which can be found on the following website: http://www.public.iastate.edu/~herbarium/Cofcons.xls IA CofC SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME PHYSIOGNOMY W Wet 9 Abies balsamea Balsam fir TREE FACW * ABUTILON THEOPHRASTI Buttonweed A-FORB 4 FACU- 4 Acalypha gracilens Slender three-seeded mercury A-FORB 5 UPL 3 Acalypha ostryifolia Three-seeded mercury A-FORB 5 UPL 6 Acalypha rhomboidea Three-seeded mercury A-FORB 3 FACU 0 Acalypha virginica Three-seeded mercury A-FORB 3 FACU * ACER GINNALA Amur maple TREE 5 UPL 0 Acer negundo Box elder TREE -2 FACW- 5 Acer nigrum Black maple TREE 5 UPL * Acer rubrum Red maple TREE 0 FAC 1 Acer saccharinum Silver maple TREE -3 FACW 5 Acer saccharum Sugar maple TREE 3 FACU 10 Acer spicatum Mountain maple TREE FACU* 0 Achillea millefolium lanulosa Western yarrow P-FORB 3 FACU 10 Aconitum noveboracense Northern wild monkshood P-FORB 8 Acorus calamus Sweetflag P-FORB -5 OBL 7 Actaea pachypoda White baneberry P-FORB 5 UPL 7 Actaea rubra Red baneberry P-FORB 5 UPL 7 Adiantum pedatum Northern maidenhair fern FERN 1 FAC- * ADLUMIA FUNGOSA Allegheny vine B-FORB 5 UPL 10 Adoxa moschatellina Moschatel P-FORB 0 FAC * AEGILOPS CYLINDRICA Goat grass A-GRASS 5 UPL 4 Aesculus glabra Ohio buckeye TREE -1 FAC+ * AESCULUS HIPPOCASTANUM Horse chestnut TREE 5 UPL 10 Agalinis aspera Rough false foxglove A-FORB 5 UPL 10 Agalinis gattingeri Round-stemmed false foxglove A-FORB 5 UPL 8 Agalinis paupercula False foxglove
    [Show full text]
  • Gaudineer Scenic Area Plant List 9
    On 22 September 2011the West Virginia Native Plant Society was treated to a tour of the Gaudineer Scenic Area Loop Trail lead by Elizabeth Byers as part of the annual meeting. Elizabeth generously provided the participants with a check list of the plants likely to be found on this trip. The following is a list of those plants seen In the drizzle that day by the group. Herbs continued Trees and Shrubs Osmorhiza claytonia Hairy Sweet Cicely Acer pensylvanicum Striped Maple Oxalis Montana White Wood Sorrel Acer rubrum Red Maple Pilea pumila Clearweed Acer saccharum Sugar Maple Prunella vulgaris Heal‐all Acer spicatum Mountain Maple Rumex crispus Dock Betula alleghaniensis Yellow Birch Saxifraga micrathidifolia Lettuce Saxifrage Fagus grandifolia American Beech Solidago curtisii Curtis’ Goldenrod Magnolia acuminata Cucumber magnolia Symphyotrichum prenanthoides Crooked –stem Aster Magnolia fraseri Mountain magnolia Trillium undulatum Painted Trillium Prunus serotina Black Cherry Tussilago farfara Coltsfoot Virburnum lantanoides Hobblebush Viola Violet Viola rotundifolia Round Leaf Violet Herbs Urtica dioica Wild nettle Actaea pachypoda Doll’s Eyes Arctium minus Common Burdock Mosses and Liverworts Dryopteris campyloptera Mountain Wood Fern Bazzania trilobata Three‐toothed Bazzania Dryopteris intermedia Intermediate Shield Fern Dicranum scoparium Windswept Moss Epifagus virginiana Beechdrops Hylocomium splendens Splendid Stair‐step Moss Eurybia divaricata White Wood Aster Spagnum spp. Peat Moss Galium triflorium Sweet scented Bedstraw Thuidium delicatulum Delicate Fern Moss Glyceria striata Fowl Mannagrass Impatiens capensis Spotted Jewelweed Impatiens pallid Pale Jewelweed Laportea canadensis Wood Nettle Leersia virginica White Grass Maianthemum canadense Wild Lily‐of –the Valley Medeola virginiana Indian Cucumber‐root Mitchella repens Partridge Berry .
    [Show full text]