DOCSLIB.ORG

Terrestrial Vegetation of the United States, Volume 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Terrestrial Vegetation of the United States, Volume 1 International Classification of Ecological Communities: TERRESTRIAL VEGETATION of the UNITED STATES VOLUME I The National Vegetation Classification System: Development, Status, and Applications This work was accomplished through a partnership with ecologists from the following Natural Heritage Programs and Conservation Data Centers Alabama Natural Heritage Program Navajo Natural Heritage Program Alaska Natural Heritage Program Nebraska Natural Heritage Program Alberta Natural Heritage Information Centre Nevada Natural Heritage Program Arizona Heritage Data Management System New Hampshire Natural Heritage Inventory Arkansas Natural Heritage Program New Jersey Natural Heritage Program Atlantic Canada Conservation Centre New Mexico Natural Heritage Program British Columbia Conservation Data Centre New York Natural Heritage Program California Natural Heritage Division North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Colorado Natural Heritage Program Ohio Natural Heritage Data Base Connecticut Natural Diversity Database Oklahoma Natural Heritage Inventory Delaware Natural Heritage Program Ontario Natural Heritage Information District of Columbia Natural Heritage Centre Program Oregon Natural Heritage Program Florida Natural Areas Inventory Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory- Georgia Natural Heritage Program Central Hawaii Natural Heritage Program Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory- Idaho Conservation Data Center East Illinois Natural Heritage Division Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory- Indiana Natural Heritage Data Center West Iowa Natural Areas Inventory Le Centre de Données sur le Patrimoine Kansas Natural Heritage Inventory Naturel du Québec Kentucky Natural Heritage Program Rhode Island Natural Heritage Program Louisiana Natural Heritage Program Saskatchewan Conservation Data Centre Maine Natural Areas Program and Maine South Carolina Heritage Trust Department of Inland Fisheries and South Dakota Natural Heritage Data Base Wildlife Tennessee Division of Natural Heritage Manitoba Conservation Data Centre Tennessee Valley Authority Regional Natural Maryland Heritage and Biodiversity Heritage Conservation Programs Texas Conservation Data Center Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Utah Natural Heritage Program Endangered Species Program Vermont Nongame and Natural Heritage Michigan Natural Features Inventory Program Minnesota Natural Heritage and Nongame Virginia Division of Natural Heritage Research and Minnesota County Washington Natural Heritage Program Biological Survey West Virginia Natural Heritage Program Mississippi Natural Heritage Program Wisconsin Natural Heritage Program Missouri Natural Heritage Database Wyoming Natural Diversity Database Montana Natural Heritage Program International Classification of Ecological Communities: TERRESTRIAL VEGETATION of the UNITED STATES VOLUME I The National Vegetation Classification System: Development, Status, and Applications D. H. Grossman, D. Faber-Langendoen, A. S. Weakley, M. Anderson, P. Bourgeron, R. Crawford, K. Goodin, S. Landaal, K. Metzler, K. Patterson, M. Pyne, M. Reid, and L. Sneddon Citation: Grossman, D. H., D. Faber-Langendoen, A. S. Weakley, M. Anderson, P. Bourgeron, R. Crawford, K. Goodin, S. Landaal, K. Metzler, K. D. Patterson, M. Pyne, M. Reid, and L. Sneddon. 1998. International classification of ecological communities: terrestrial vegetation of the United States. Volume I. The National Vegetation Classification System: development, status, and applications. The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, Virginia, USA. Anderson, M., P. Bourgeron, M. T. Bryer, R. Crawford, L. Engelking, D. Faber-Langendoen, M. Gallyoun, K. Goodin, D. H. Grossman, S. Landaal, K. Metzler, K. D. Patterson, M. Pyne, M. Reid, L. Sneddon, and A. S. Weakley. 1998. International classification of ecological communities: terrestrial vegetation of the United States. Volume II. The National Vegetation Classification System: list of types. The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, Virginia, USA. ISBN: 0-9624590-1-1 Copyright 1998 The Nature Conservancy Photographs on the front cover, from top to bottom: 1. Forest: Thuja plicata / Athyrium filix-femina, northern Idaho. The Nature Conservancy, Western Conservation Science. 2. Woodland: Juniperis monosperma Alliance, northern Arizona. The Nature Conservancy, Western Conservation Science. 3. Shrubland: Rhizophora mangle / Eleocharis cellulosa (grading into Eleocharis cellulosa Herbaceous Vegetation), Everglades National Park, Florida. Photograph by Jim Snyder. 4. Dwarf Shrubland: Vaccinium (angustifolium, myrtilloides, pallidum) High Allegheny Plateau/ Central Appalachian, Dolly Sods, West Virginia. Photograph by W. Beals. 5. Herbaceous Vegetation: Cladium mariscoides - Sanguisorba canadensis / Sphagnum subsecundum, Bluff Mountain Preserve, North Carolina. Photograph by Alan S. Weakley. 6. Nonvascular Vegetation: Racomitrium lanuginosum Montane Bog, Kanaele Bog, Hawaii. Photograph by Win Anderson. 7. Sparse Vegetation: Cobble-Gravel Shore, north shore of Lake Superior, Minnesota. Photograph by Don Faber-Langendoen. Background photograph: Seasonally Flooded Tropical or Subtropical Seasonal Evergreen Forest Formation, south of Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve, Florida. Photograph by Jim Snyder. Back Cover: Map of vegetation types, Scotts Bluff National Monument, Nebraska. Published courtesy of the USGS-NPS Mapping Program. Contents ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................................................. viii PREFACE........................................................................................ ix INTRODUCTION.............................................................................. 1 I. The Need for a Standard Classification of Ecological Communities ................................................................................... 1 II. Developing a Classification Approach: Key Issues ............................. 4 II.A. Vegetation or Multi-factor Classifications ..................................................... 4 II.B. Vegetation Pattern and the Continuum Concept........................................... 6 II.C. Natural versus Cultural Vegetation............................................................... 7 II.D. Existing Natural versus Potential Natural Vegetation ................................... 7 II.E. Physiognomic versus Floristic Characters .................................................... 8 II.E.1. Physiognomic Systems .................................................................... 8 II.E.2. Floristic Systems.............................................................................. 9 II.E.3. Physiognomic-Floristic Systems.................................................... 10 II.F. Identification of Vegetation Units ................................................................ 11 II.F.1. Delineating Stands of Vegetation (Entitation) .................................. 11 II.F.2. Identifying Vegetation Types: Quantitative Approaches .................. 11 II.F.3. Identifying Vegetation Types: Qualitative Approaches .................... 12 II.G. Classification and Mapping ....................................................................... 12 THE U.S. NATIONAL VEGETATION CLASSIFICATION ....................... 14 III. Guiding Principles of the U.S. National Vegetation Classification ................................................................................. 14 III.A. Base the Classification on Vegetation ........................................................ 14 III.B. Use a Systematic Approach to Classifying a Vegetation Continuum.......... 15 III.C. Apply the Classification to Natural Vegetation.......................................... 15 III.D. Apply the Classification to Existing Vegetation......................................... 16 III.E. Use a Physiognomic-Floristic Approach ................................................... 17 III.F. Identify Types Using a Pragmatic Approach............................................... 18 III.F.1. Delineating Stands........................................................................ 18 III.F.2. Identifying Vegetation Types ........................................................ 18 III.G. Facilitate Mapping Applications ...............................................................18 Table of Contents iii IV. The Structure of the U.S. National Vegetation Classification ................................................................................. 20 IV.A. System Level............................................................................................. 20 IV.B. Hierarchical Structure of the Terrestrial System ......................................... 20 IV.B.1. Physiognomic Levels ................................................................... 20 IV.B.2. Floristic Levels ............................................................................. 23 V. Development of the U.S. National Vegetation Classification and Its Relationship to Other Classification Systems ....................... 27 V.A. History of the Development of the USNVC System .................................... 27 V.B. Development of the USNVC Types.............................................................. 29 V.B.1. The Process of Identifying Plant Associations ................................ 30 V.B.1.a. Planning ............................................................................. 30 V.B.1.b. Data Review and Needs Assessment................................... 31 V.B.1.c. Data Collection..................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Plant Communities & Habitats
    Plant Communities & Habitats CLASS READINGS Key to Common Trees of Bouverie Preserve Bouverie Vegetation Map This class will be held Deciduous & Evergreen Oaks of Bouverie Preserve almost entirely on the trail so dress Sun Leaves & Shade Leaves accordingly and bring Characteristics of the Oaks of Bouverie Preserve plenty of water Chaparral & Fire (California’s Changing Landscapes, Michael Barbour et.al., 1993) Bouverie Preserve Chaparral (DeNevers) ACR Fire Ecology Program Mixed Evergreen Forest (California’s Changing Landscapes, Michael Barbour et.al., 1993) Ecological Tolerances of Riparian Plants (River Partners) Call of the Galls (Bay Nature Magazine, Ron Russo, 2009) Oak Galls of Bouverie Preserve Leaves of Three (Bay Nature Magazine, Eaton & Sullivan, 2013) Mistletoe – Magical, Mysterious, & Misunderstood (Wirka) How Old is This Twig (Wirka) CALNAT: California Naturalist Handbook Chapter 4 (98-109, 114-115) Chapter 5 (117-138) Key Concepts By the end of this class, we hope you will be able to: Use a simple key to identify trees at Bouverie Preserve, Look around you and determine whether you are in oak woodland, mixed evergreen forest, riparian woodland, or chaparral -- and get a “feel” for each, Define: Plant Community, Habitat, Ecotone; understand how to discuss/investigate each with students, Stand under a large oak and guide students in exploring/discovering the many species that live on/around it, Find a gall on an oak leaf or twig and get excited about the lifecycle of the critters who live inside, Explain how chaparral plants are fire-adapted and look for evidence of these adaptations, Locate at least one granary tree and notice acorn woodpeckers that are guarding it, List some of the animals that rely on Bouverie’s oak woodland habitat, and Make an acorn whistle & count the years a twig has been growing SEQUOIA CLUB Resources When one tugs at a In the Bouverie Library single thing in nature, he A Manual of California Vegetation, second edition, finds it attached to the John Sawyer and Todd Keeler‐ Wolf (2009).
    [Show full text]
  • Grassland & Shrubland Vegetation
    Grassland & Shrubland Vegetation Missoula Draft Resource Management Plan Handout May 2019 Key Points Approximately 3% of BLM-managed lands in the planning area are non-forested (less than 10% canopy cover); the other 97% are dominated by a forested canopy with limited mountain meadows, shrublands, and grasslands. See table 1 on the following page for a break-down of BLM-managed grassland and shrubland in the planning area classified under the National Vegetation Classification System (NVCS). The overall management goal of grassland and shrubland resources is to maintain diverse upland ecological conditions while providing for a variety of multiple uses that are economically and biologically feasible. Alternatives Alternative A (1986 Garnet RMP, as Amended) Maintain, or where practical enhance, site productivity on all public land available for livestock grazing: (a) maintain current vegetative condition in “maintain” and “custodial” category allotments; (b) improve unsatisfactory vegetative conditions by one condition class in certain “improvement” category allotments; (c) prevent noxious weeds from invading new areas; and, (d) limit utilization levels to provide for plant maintenance. Alternatives B & C (common to all) Proposed objectives: Manage uplands to meet health standards and meet or exceed proper functioning condition within site or ecological capability. Where appropriate, fire would be used as a management agent to achieve/maintain disturbance regimes supporting healthy functioning vegetative conditions. Manage surface-disturbing activities in a manner to minimize degradation to rangelands and soil quality. Mange areas to conserve BLM special status species plants. Ensure consistency with achieving or maintaining Standards of Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management for Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016
    Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016 Revised February 24, 2017 Compiled by Laura Gadd Robinson, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org C ur Alleghany rit Ashe Northampton Gates C uc Surry am k Stokes P d Rockingham Caswell Person Vance Warren a e P s n Hertford e qu Chowan r Granville q ot ui a Mountains Watauga Halifax m nk an Wilkes Yadkin s Mitchell Avery Forsyth Orange Guilford Franklin Bertie Alamance Durham Nash Yancey Alexander Madison Caldwell Davie Edgecombe Washington Tyrrell Iredell Martin Dare Burke Davidson Wake McDowell Randolph Chatham Wilson Buncombe Catawba Rowan Beaufort Haywood Pitt Swain Hyde Lee Lincoln Greene Rutherford Johnston Graham Henderson Jackson Cabarrus Montgomery Harnett Cleveland Wayne Polk Gaston Stanly Cherokee Macon Transylvania Lenoir Mecklenburg Moore Clay Pamlico Hoke Union d Cumberland Jones Anson on Sampson hm Duplin ic Craven Piedmont R nd tla Onslow Carteret co S Robeson Bladen Pender Sandhills Columbus New Hanover Tidewater Coastal Plain Brunswick THE COUNTIES AND PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCES OF NORTH CAROLINA Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016 Compiled by Laura Gadd Robinson, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org This list is dynamic and is revised frequently as new data become available. New species are added to the list, and others are dropped from the list as appropriate.
    [Show full text]
  • Phase I Vital Signs Monitoring Plan for the San Francisco Bay Area Network
    1 San Francisco Bay Area Network 2 Phase II Vital Signs Monitoring Plan 3 Working Draft 4 5 6 7 [Golden Gate image here when posted to web site!] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 San Francisco Bay Area Network (SFAN) 28 Eugene O’Neill National Historic Site (EUON) 29 Fort Point National Historic Site (FOPO) 30 Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GOGA) 31 John Muir National Historic Site (JOMU) 32 Muir Woods National Monument (MUWO) 33 Pinnacles National Monument (PINN) 34 Point Reyes National Seashore (PORE) 35 Presidio of San Francisco (PRES) SFAN_Phase II draftv9.doc 1 Brad Welch 26 September 2003 1 Table of Contents 2 Page 3 4 List of Figures 5 5 List of Tables 6 6 Acknowledgments 8 7 8 Executive Summary 9 9 10 Chapter 1 Introduction and Background 10 11 1.1 Purpose 10 12 1.1.1 Justification for Integrated Natural Resource 13 Monitoring 10 14 1.1.2 Legislation, Policy, and Guidance 11 15 1.2 Monitoring Goals and Strategies 14 16 1.2.1 Role of Inventory, Monitoring, and Research in Resource 17 Management 14 18 1.2.2 Goals for Vital Signs Monitoring 16 19 1.2.3 Strategic Approaches to Monitoring 16 20 1.2.3.1 Scope and Process for Developing an 21 Integrated Monitoring Program 16 22 1.2.3.2 Strategies for Determining What to Monitor 18 23 1.2.3.3 Integration: Ecological, Spatial, Temporal, 24 and Programmatic 20 25 1.2.3.4 Limitations of the Monitoring Program 20 26 1.2.3.5 SFAN Monitoring Plan and GPRA Goals 21 27 1.2.3.6 SFAN Strategic Approach to Monitoring 22 28 1.3 Overview of Network Parks and Selected
    [Show full text]
  • "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."
    Intro 1996 National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands The Fish and Wildlife Service has prepared a National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary (1996 National List). The 1996 National List is a draft revision of the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary (Reed 1988) (1988 National List). The 1996 National List is provided to encourage additional public review and comments on the draft regional wetland indicator assignments. The 1996 National List reflects a significant amount of new information that has become available since 1988 on the wetland affinity of vascular plants. This new information has resulted from the extensive use of the 1988 National List in the field by individuals involved in wetland and other resource inventories, wetland identification and delineation, and wetland research. Interim Regional Interagency Review Panel (Regional Panel) changes in indicator status as well as additions and deletions to the 1988 National List were documented in Regional supplements. The National List was originally developed as an appendix to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al.1979) to aid in the consistent application of this classification system for wetlands in the field.. The 1996 National List also was developed to aid in determining the presence of hydrophytic vegetation in the Clean Water Act Section 404 wetland regulatory program and in the implementation of the swampbuster provisions of the Food Security Act. While not required by law or regulation, the Fish and Wildlife Service is making the 1996 National List available for review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding the Causes of Bush Encroachment in Africa: the Key to Effective Management of Savanna Grasslands
    Tropical Grasslands – Forrajes Tropicales (2013) Volume 1, 215−219 Understanding the causes of bush encroachment in Africa: The key to effective management of savanna grasslands OLAOTSWE E. KGOSIKOMA1 AND KABO MOGOTSI2 1Department of Agricultural Research, Ministry of Agriculture, Gaborone, Botswana. www.moa.gov.bw 2Department of Agricultural Research, Ministry of Agriculture, Francistown, Botswana. www.moa.gov.bw Keywords: Rangeland degradation, fire, indigenous ecological knowledge, livestock grazing, rainfall variability. Abstract The increase in biomass and abundance of woody plant species, often thorny or unpalatable, coupled with the suppres- sion of herbaceous plant cover, is a widely recognized form of rangeland degradation. Bush encroachment therefore has the potential to compromise rural livelihoods in Africa, as many depend on the natural resource base. The causes of bush encroachment are not without debate, but fire, herbivory, nutrient availability and rainfall patterns have been shown to be the key determinants of savanna vegetation structure and composition. In this paper, these determinants are discussed, with particular reference to arid and semi-arid environments of Africa. To improve our current under- standing of causes of bush encroachment, an integrated approach, involving ecological and indigenous knowledge systems, is proposed. Only through our knowledge of causes of bush encroachment, both direct and indirect, can better livelihood adjustments be made, or control measures and restoration of savanna ecosystem functioning be realized. Resumen Una forma ampliamente reconocida de degradación de pasturas es el incremento de la abundancia de especies de plan- tas leñosas, a menudo espinosas y no palatables, y de su biomasa, conjuntamente con la pérdida de plantas herbáceas. En África, la invasión por arbustos puede comprometer el sistema de vida rural ya que muchas personas dependen de los recursos naturales básicos.
    [Show full text]
  • Grass Varieties for North Dakota
    R-794 (Revised) Grass Varieties For North Dakota Kevin K. Sedivec Extension Rangeland Management Specialist, NDSU, Fargo Dwight A. Tober Plant Materials Specialist, USDA-NRCS, Bismarck Wayne L. Duckwitz Plant Materials Center Manager, USDA-NRCS, Bismarck John R. Hendrickson Research Rangeland Management Specialist, USDA-ARS, Mandan North Dakota State University Fargo, North Dakota June 2011 election of the appropriate species and variety is an important step in making a grass seeding successful. Grass species and varieties differ in growth habit, productivity, forage quality, drought resistance, tolerance Sto grazing, winter hardiness, seedling vigor, salinity tolerance and many other characteristics. Therefore, selection should be based on the climate, soils, intended use and the planned management. Planting a well-adapted selection also can provide long-term benefi ts and affect future productivity of the stand. This publication is designed to assist North Dakota producers and land managers in selecting perennial grass species and varieties for rangeland and pasture seeding and conservation planting. Each species is described following a list of recommended varieties Contents (releases). Variety origin and the date released are Introduction. 2 included for additional reference. Introduced Grasses . 3 A Plant Species Guide for Special Conditions, found Bromegrass . 3 near the end of this publication, is provided to assist Fescue . 4 in selection of grass species for droughty soils, arid Orchardgrass . 4 Foxtail. 5 or wet environments, saline or alkaline areas and Wheatgrass . 5 landscape/ornamental plantings. Several factors should Timothy. 7 be considered before selecting plant species. These Wildrye . 7 include 1) a soil test, 2) herbicides previously used, Native Grasses .
    [Show full text]
  • Coptis Trifolia Conservation Assessment
    CONSERVATION ASSESSMENT for Coptis trifolia (L.) Salisb. Originally issued as Management Recommendations December 1998 Marty Stein Reconfigured-January 2005 Tracy L. Fuentes USDA Forest Service Region 6 and USDI Bureau of Land Management, Oregon and Washington CONSERVATION ASSESSMENT FOR COPTIS TRIFOLIA Table of Contents Page List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. 2 List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ 2 Summary........................................................................................................................................ 4 I. NATURAL HISTORY............................................................................................................. 6 A. Taxonomy and Nomenclature.......................................................................................... 6 B. Species Description ........................................................................................................... 6 1. Morphology ................................................................................................................... 6 2. Reproductive Biology.................................................................................................... 7 3. Ecological Roles ............................................................................................................. 7 C. Range and Sites
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Assessment of Greater Sage-Grouse and Sagebrush Habitats
    Conservation Assessment of Greater Sage-grouse and Sagebrush Habitats J. W. Connelly S. T. Knick M. A. Schroeder S. J. Stiver Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies June 2004 CONSERVATION ASSESSMENT OF GREATER SAGE-GROUSE and SAGEBRUSH HABITATS John W. Connelly Idaho Department Fish and Game 83 W 215 N Blackfoot, ID 83221 [email protected] Steven T. Knick USGS Forest & Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center Snake River Field Station 970 Lusk St. Boise, ID 83706 [email protected] Michael A. Schroeder Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife P.O. Box 1077 Bridgeport, WA 98813 [email protected] San J. Stiver Wildlife Coordinator, National Sage-Grouse Conservation Framework Planning Team 2184 Richard St. Prescott, AZ 86301 [email protected] This report should be cited as: Connelly, J. W., S. T. Knick, M. A. Schroeder, and S. J. Stiver. 2004. Conservation Assessment of Greater Sage-grouse and Sagebrush Habitats. Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. Unpublished Report. Cheyenne, Wyoming. Cover photo credit, Kim Toulouse i Conservation Assessment of Greater Sage-grouse and Sagebrush Habitats Connelly et al. Author Biographies John W. Connelly Jack has been employed as a Principal Wildlife Research Biologist with the Idaho Department of Fish and Game for the last 20 years. He received his B.S. degree from the University of Idaho and M.S. and Ph.D. degrees from Washington State University. Jack is a Certified Wildlife Biologist and works on grouse conservation issues at national and international scales. He is a member of the Western Sage and Columbian Sharp-tailed Technical Committee and the Grouse Specialists’ Group.
    [Show full text]
  • Temperature Variability in the Bay of Biscay During the Past 40 Years, from an in Situ Analysis and a 3D Global Simulation
    ARTICLE IN PRESS Continental Shelf Research 29 (2009) 1070–1087 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Continental Shelf Research journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/csr Temperature variability in the Bay of Biscay during the past 40 years, from an in situ analysis and a 3D global simulation S. Michel a,Ã, A.-M. Treguier b, F. Vandermeirsch a a Dynamiques de l’Environnement Coˆtier/Physique Hydrodynamique et Se´dimentaire, IFREMER, BP 70, 29280 Plouzane´, France b Laboratoire de Physique des Oce´ans, CNRS-IFREMER-IRD-UBO, BP 70, 29280 Plouzane´, France article info abstract Article history: A global in situ analysis and a global ocean simulation are used jointly to study interannual to decadal Received 21 June 2008 variability of temperature in the Bay of Biscay, from 1965 to 2003. A strong cooling is obtained at all Received in revised form depths until the mid-1970’s, followed by a sustained warming over 30 years. Strong interannual 21 November 2008 fluctuations are superimposed on this slow evolution. The fluctuations are intensified at the surface and Accepted 27 November 2008 are weakest at 500 m. A good agreement is found between the observed and simulated temperatures, Available online 6 February 2009 in terms of mean values, interannual variability and time correlations. Only the decadal trend is Keywords: significantly underestimated in the simulation. A comparison to satellite sea surface temperature (SST) Bay of Biscay data over the last 20 years is also presented. The first mode of interannual variability exhibits a quasi- Interannual temperature variability uniform structure and is related to the inverse winter North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) index.
    [Show full text]