|
Wildlife, Animals, and Plants
|
|
Introductory
SPECIES: Sphaeralcea coccinea | Scarlet Globemallow
ABBREVIATION :
SPHCOC
SYNONYMS :
Sphaeralcea coccinea (Nutt.) Rydb. [41]
SCS PLANT CODE :
SPCO
SPCOC
SPCOE
COMMON NAMES :
scarlet globemallow
red falsemallow
common globemallow
desert mallow
cowboy's delight
TAXONOMY :
The currently accepted scientific name of scarlet glogemallow is
Sphaeralcea coccinea (Pursh.) Rydb. [1,16,23]. Some authorities
recognize the following varieties [23]:
S. c. var. coccinea
S. c. var. dissecta (Nutt.) Kearney
S. c. var. elata (Baker) Kearney
LIFE FORM :
Forb
FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS :
NO-ENTRY
OTHER STATUS :
NO-ENTRY
COMPILED BY AND DATE :
H. Harris, January 1989
LAST REVISED BY AND DATE :
NO-ENTRY
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION :
Harris, Holly t. 1989. Sphaeralcea coccinea. In: Remainder of Citation
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Sphaeralcea coccinea | Scarlet Globemallow
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION :
Scarlet globemallow occurs from the Canadian provinces of British
Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba south and eastward to New
Mexico, Texas, and Mexico [16,41].
ECOSYSTEMS :
FRES15 Oak - hickory
FRES17 Elm - ash - cottonwood
FRES21 Ponderosa pine
FRES28 Western hardwoods
FRES29 Sagebrush
FRES30 Desert shrub
FRES31 Shinnery
FRES32 Texas savanna
FRES33 Southwestern shrubsteppe
FRES34 Chaparral - mountain shrub
FRES35 Pinyon - juniper
FRES36 Mountain grasslands
FRES37 Mountain meadows
FRES38 Plains grasslands
FRES39 Prairie
FRES40 Desert grasslands
STATES :
AZ CO ID IA KS MT NM NE NV ND
OK OR SD TX UT WA WY AB BC MB
SK MEXICO
ADMINISTRATIVE UNITS :
AGFO ARCH BADL BICA BLCA BRCA
CANY CARE CACA CHCU COLM DETO
DINO GLAC GLCA GRKO GRSA GUMO
JECA LAMR MEVE ROMO SCBL THRO
TICA WICA YELL
BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :
5 Columbia Plateau
6 Upper Basin and Range
8 Northern Rocky Mountains
9 Middle Rocky Mountains
10 Wyoming Basin
11 Southern Rocky Mountains
12 Colorado Plateau
13 Rocky Mountain Piedmont
14 Great Plains
15 Black Hills Uplift
16 Upper Missouri Basin and Broken Lands
KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :
K016 Eastern ponderosa forest
K017 Black Hills pine forest
K018 Pine - Douglas-fir forest
K023 Juniper - pinyon woodland
K024 Juniper steppe woodland
K037 Mountain mahogany - oak scrub
K038 Great Basin sagebrush
K040 Saltbrush - greasewood
K051 Wheatgrass - bluegrass
K055 Sagebrush steppe
K056 Wheatgrass - needlegrass shrubsteppe
K057 Galleta - threeawn shrubsteppe
K063 Foothills prairie
K064 Grama - needlegrass - wheatgrass
K065 Grama - buffalograss
K066 Wheatgrass - needlegrass
K067 Wheatgrass - bluestem - needlegrass
K068 Wheatgrass - grama - buffalograss
K070 Sandsage - bluestem prairie
K071 Shinnery
K074 Bluestem prairie
K075 Nebraska sandhills prairie
K076 Blackland prairie
K081 Oak savanna
K086 Juniper - oak savanna
K098 Northern floodplain forest
SAF COVER TYPES :
220 Rocky Mountain juniper
236 Bur oak
237 Interior ponderosa pine
238 Western juniper
239 Pinyon - juniper
241 Western live oak
SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES :
NO-ENTRY
HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES :
In many range studies scarlet globemallow is noted as the most common
forb in those areas that it is found; however, a grass species is
usually identified as the dominant understory species in related plant
community information. Scarlet globemallow has been noted as present
but not necessarily dominant in several plant typings:
Plant associations of Region Two: potential plant communities of
Wyoming, South Dakota, Nebraska, Colorado, and Kansas [22]
Grasslands of the Great Plains [40]
Analysis of grassland vegetation in selected key areas in southwestern
South Dakota [42]
VALUE AND USE
SPECIES: Sphaeralcea coccinea | Scarlet Globemallow
WOOD PRODUCTS VALUE :
NO-ENTRY
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE :
Scarlet globemallow is commonly eaten by almost all species of
herbivores where it occurs and is an important part of the diets of
small mammals, pronghorn, sheep, and cattle [17].
PALATABILITY :
Scarlet globemallow palatability is generally thought to be fair to
poor, although in the southwestern portions of its range it is an
important part of the diets of many animals [17,21,34]. Scarlet
globemallow provides excellent forage for deer, pronghorn and cattle,
and is a staple in black-tailed prairie dog diets [10,13,34].
The degree of use shown by livestock and wildlife species for scarlet
globemallow in several western states is rated as follows [7]:
Colorado Montana N.Dakota Utah Wyoming
-------- ------- -------- ---- -------
Cattle fair fair fair fair fair
Sheep fair fair fair fair fair
Horses poor poor fair poor fair
Pronghorn ---- fair ---- fair good
Elk ---- poor ---- fair poor
Mule deer ---- poor ---- fair ----
White-tailed deer ---- ---- ---- ---- fair
Small mammmals ---- ---- ---- fair ----
Small nongame birds ---- ---- ---- fair ----
Upland game birds ---- ---- ---- fair ----
Waterfowl ---- ---- ---- poor ----
Mule deer diets in New Mexico contained 3 percent scarlet globemallow in
a pinyon-juniper/oak area [26], and a study in Colorado determined that
scarlet globemallow is the largest single pronghorn dietary item in the
summer (18% of total diet) [10]. Summer use and preference values
of scarlet globemallow for cattle can be broken down by state:
State % of diet Preference Reference
----- --------- ---------- ---------
CO 11 --- [18]
15 high [44]
SD highest of any forb low [43]
NM 25 high [19]
Scarlet globemallow was found in higher proportions in cattle diets
where it grew on fertilized land in New Mexico [19].
Several studies have examined the importance of scarlet globemallow to
black-tailed prairie dogs and other small mammals. Black-tailed
prairie dogs apparently prefer scarlet globemallow in fall
(September-November) [13,18,35]. The following table presents the percent
composition of scarlet globemallow in the diets of several species.
Species State Overall Apr/May Jun/Aug Sept/Nov Dec/Mar Reference
------- ----- ------- ------- ------- -------- ------- ---------
gopher CO 10 -- 27 -- 1 [38]
prairie dog SD -- -- 2 20 -- [13]
CO 7 1 5 15 6 [21]
cottontail CO 15 5 12 28 14 [21]
cattle CO 6 7 11 3 2 [21]
NUTRITIONAL VALUE :
Scarlet globemallow contains high amounts of vitamin A, low amounts of
magnesium and calcium, and is considered highly digestible [17]. Scarlet
globemallow roots have a higher seasonal (fall) concentration of
carbohydrate reserves than any other organ; the average yearly
carbohydrate content in scarlet globemallow is 107 mg per gram of plant
[27].
COVER VALUE :
Scarlet globemallow provides fair cover for small nongame mammals and
birds [7].
VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES :
Scarlet globemallow readily invades disturbed areas. Webb and Guthery
[45] found that the percentage of scarlet globemallow cover increased
when a northwest Texas mesquite rangeland was disked:
1978 1979 1980
---- ---- ----
undisked 0.2 0.6 1.9
disked 1.0 0.8 2.3
A similar response occurred after a fire in western North Dakota. These
increases are primarily due to a reduction in competition from other
plants. The deep rhizomes of scarlet globemallow enable it to survive
disking, fires, and grazing; when other species are eliminated scarlet
globemallow proliferates [8]. To illustrate the degree to which scarlet
globemallow can withstand disturbance, changes in cover percentages
following various degrees of soil scarification are presented below [3]:
Treatment Year of succession (% cover)
--------- first fourth fifth sixth
----- ----- ----- -----
All plants removed with minimal 26 28 22 22
topsoil disturbance
Top 30 cm of soil removed 12 18 33 10
Top 1 m of soil removed 1 2 4 4
Top 2 m of soil removed 1 2 4 3
Scarlet globemallow has been known to volunteer on mine spoils to a
certain degree [28,32], but is not considered a colonizer on such [39].
Bjugstad and Whitman [4] seeded coal mine spoils in North Dakota, and
obtained a maximum of 21 scarlet globemallow plants in a square meter
plot, but usually fewer. On bentonite (clay) mine spoils in Montana,
scarlet globemallow was the most common forb in the surrounding area,
but it did not invade the spoils to any degree [32].
The planting of scarlet globemallow for rehabilitative purposes may not
be feasible since the seeds are hard to collect and therefore expensive, and
the germination rate is low. Since scarlet globemallow is somewhat
palatable and nutritious to livestock, disking or burning the range may
increase the occurrence of this plant [30].
OTHER USES AND VALUES :
Native North Americans chewed scarlet globemallow and applied it as a
paste to relieve the pain of burns and flesh wounds [43].
MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Nitrogen fertilization may increase the palatability of scarlet
globemallow [19], however fertilization does not increase biomass
production [9]. An exception to this is a study done by Goetz [15] in
which basal cover of scarlet globemallow increased after fertilization
on one site of three; Goetz believes that fertilization results are site
specific.
In a study of scarlet globemallow invasion patterns, Grygiel, Bonham and
Redente [17] found that scarlet globemallow will invade readily where a
native grass seed mixture has been planted on disturbed sites, but not
where introduced grasses are planted; fertilization made no difference.
Disking, burning, and even grazing increases scarlet globemallow
production on the range for several years if competition from grasses is
limited [8,17]. Scarlet globemallow is also very drought tolerant [21].
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Sphaeralcea coccinea | Scarlet Globemallow
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
Scarlet globemallow is a native, warm-season, perennial forb with a
stout woody taproot [34]. Erect or decumbent, this plant is 3 to 12
inches in height (7-30 cm). Leaves are grayish-green and palmately
lobed; the light pink to brick red flowers are clustered in terminal
spike-like racemes [17].
The roots of scarlet globemallow growing in Saskatchewan have been
described by Coupland and Johnson [5]. Maximum root depth is 40 to 72
inches (1-1.8 cm). The tap root decreases in diameter from 0.2 inch
(2-5 mm) near the soil surface, to 0.04 inch (1 mm) at the deepest
levels. There is little or no branching from the taproot in the top 40
inches (1 m) of soil in the central U.S., however in this study one or
two large branches (1-3 mm) are given off 11.8 inches from the surface
(30 cm), each as long as 48 inches (1.2 m). These branches follow
oblique courses before turning down to parallel the main root. Smaller
laterals come off throughout the length of the taproot; secondary
branches are scarce.
Scarlet globemallow is found in dry areas and is very drought and
grazing tolerant; it loses its leaves during times of drought [21]
and may actually increase in size in times of drought and overgrazing
[17].
Scarlet globemallow will produce seed prolifically only when moisture is
available; poor seed germination occurs due to a hard seed coat [17].
Scarlet globemallow reproduces mainly vegetatively by rhizomes [7,17].
RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :
Chamaephyte
REGENERATION PROCESSES :
Scarlet globemallow has a tendency to reproduce by rhizomes [17] and is a
natural colonizer of disturbed sites [17,39]. While it is debatable
whether scarlet globemallow will invade mine spoils [4,28,39], it does
increase in abundance when the range is disced or burned, perhaps due to
a reduction in competition from other plants [8,17,39]. Scarlet
globemallow is suppressed as disturbed communities mature, although it
is not eliminated [17].
Prolific seed production can occur if moisture is available, however a
hard seed coat prevents prolific seed germination [17]. Roth, Holechek,
and Hussain [30] applied mechanical and chemical treatments to scarlet
globemallow seeds to determine if germination might improve. Seed
scarification by soaking in sulfuric acid allowed a higher than normal
germination rate, as did soaking in dioxane, an organic material.
Mechanical treatments (i.e., carpel removal and scarification of seed
coat) improved germination, but embryos died withing one week. Since
dioxane is carcinogenic and highly flammable, sulfuric acid is
recommended to potentially increase the germination rate of native
globemallow species.
Applications of fertilizers seem to have little effect on scarlet
globemallow production [9], except in certain local range conditions
[15]. However, fertilizing globemallow may improve rangeland by reducing
the exploitation of other plants by livestock [19].
SITE CHARACTERISTICS :
Scarlet globemallow grows mainly in dry grassland prairies at elevations
of 3,500 to 9,000 feet (1,067-2,473 m) [7]. Precipitation in the
central and northwestern grassland areas averages 10 to 40 inches
(26-100 cm) falling mostly in summer; temperatures vary from -20
degrees Fahrenheit in winter to 85 degrees Fahrenheit in summer (-29 -
32 degrees C) [11].
Scarlet globemallow growth in specific soils are rated as follows [7]:
UT CO WY MT ND
------ ------ ------ ------ ------
gravel fair poor fair poor fair
sand good fair good fair fair
sandy loam good good good good good
loam good good good good good
clay loam good good good good good
clay fair fair fair fair fair
dense clay poor poor poor poor poor
Scarlet globemallow was most commonly found in sandy loam and loam in a
study in Colorado [20].
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS :
Scarlet globemallow is considered a pioneer on disturbed sites and is
present in early seral stages [31,39]. This species will aggressively
invade an open area, but will not aggressively compete with established
plants, especially grasses. After infiltrating newly disturbed areas,
scarlet globemallow is somewhat suppressed by competing species as the
community matures, although it maintains a constant presence in the
community; scarlet globemallow will release again if a second
disturbance occurs [17].
SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT :
Phenologic Event Date Reference
---------------- ---- ---------
growth starts March (New Mexico) [24]
April-May (Colorado) [7]
flowers bloom and
fruit matures April-October [7,24]
stem elongation May [27]
fall quiescence November [27]
FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Sphaeralcea coccinea | Scarlet Globemallow
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS :
Scarlet globemallow is able to survive fires since the bulk of the plant
is situated underground [8]. Rhizomes will send new shoots up soon
after fire and other disturbances [17]. Scarlet globemallow is a colonizing
species; it invades disturbed areas readily and proliferates until
grasses begin to outcompete it [8,17].
POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY :
Rhizomatous herb, rhizome in soil
FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Sphaeralcea coccinea | Scarlet Globemallow
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT :
The aerial portions of scarlet globemallow are killed by fire, but
extensive rhizomes allow it to resprout immediately (same season)
following a fire [8]. Scarlet globemallow is thought to increase in
abundance and vigor after fire [17].
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT :
NO-ENTRY
PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE :
Dix [8] compared the frequency of scarlet globemallow on a burned North
Dakota grassland site and adjacent unburned sites:
burned unburned
------ --------
Squaw Creek 42 12
North Rim 12 10
More scarlet globemallow plants existed on the burned sites due to a
lack of competition from grasses.
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE :
NO-ENTRY
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
NO-ENTRY
REFERENCES
SPECIES: Sphaeralcea coccinea | Scarlet Globemallow
REFERENCES :
1. Bare, Janet E. 1979. Wildflowers and weeds of Kansas. Lawrence, KS: The
Regents Press of Kansas. 509 p. [3801]
2. Bernard, Stephen R.; Brown, Kenneth F. 1977. Distribution of mammals,
reptiles, and amphibians by BLM physiographic regions and A.W. Kuchler's
associations for the eleven western states. Tech. Note 301. Denver, CO:
U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 169 p.
[434]
3. Biondini, Mario E.; Bonham, Charles D.; Redente, Edward F. 1985.
Secondary successional patterns in a sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata)
community as they relate to disturbance and soil biological activity.
Vegetatio. 60: 25-36. [448]
4. Bjugstad, Ardell J.; Whitman, Warren C. 1982. Perennial forbs for
wildlife habitat restoration on mined lands in the northern Great
Plains. In: Western proceedings, 62nd annual conference of the Western
Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies; 1982 July 19-22; Las Vegas,
Nevada. [Place of publication unknown]: [Publisher unknown]: 257-271. On
file with: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain
Research Station, Fire Sciences Lab, Missoula, MT. [2932]
5. Coupland, Robert T.; Johnson, R. E. 1965. Rooting characteristics of
native grassland species of Saskatchewan. Journal of Ecology. 53:
475-507. [702]
6. Dickinson, C. E.; Dodd, Jerrold L. 1976. Phenological pattern in the
shortgrass prairie. American Midland Naturalist. 96(2): 367-378. [799]
7. Dittberner, Phillip L.; Olson, Michael R. 1983. The plant information
network (PIN) data base: Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, Utah, and
Wyoming. FWS/OBS-83/86. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior,
Fish and Wildlife Service. 786 p. [806]
8. Dix, Ralph L. 1960. The effects of burning on the mulch structure and
species composition of grasslands in western North Dakota. Ecology.
41(1): 49-56. [808]
9. Dwyer, Don D. 1971. Nitrogen fertilization of blue grama range. Bulletin
585. Las Cruces, NM: New Mexico State University, Agricultural
Experiment Station. 8 p. [3521]
10. Ellis, James E.; Travis, Michael. 1975. Comparative aspects of foraging
behaviour of pronghorn antelope and cattle. Journal of Applied Ecology.
12(2): 411-420. [4645]
11. Espenshade, Edward B., Jr., editor. 1987. Goode's world atlas. 17 ed.
Chicago, IL: Rand McNally. 367 p. [4852]
12. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and
Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
13. Fagerstone, K. A.; Tietjen, H. P.; Williams, O. 1981. Seasonal variation
in the diet of black-tailed prairie dogs. Journal of Mammalogy. 62(4):
820-824. [906]
14. Garrison, George A.; Bjugstad, Ardell J.; Duncan, Don A.; [and others].
1977. Vegetation and environmental features of forest and range
ecosystems. Agric. Handb. 475. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service. 68 p. [998]
15. Goetz, Harold. 1969. Composition and yields of native grassland sites
fertilized at different rates of nitrogen. Journal of Range Management.
22(6): 384-390. [1029]
16. Great Plains Flora Association. 1986. Flora of the Great Plains.
Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. 1392 p. [1603]
17. Grygiel, Carolyn E; Bonham, Charles D.; Redente, Edward F. 1984.
Combined effects of environmental and agronomic factors on the invasion
patterns of Sphaeralcea coccinea (Nutt.) Rydb. (Malvacea). Phytologia.
56(3): 145-153. [4641]
18. Hansen, Richard M.; Gold, Ilyse K. 1977. Blacktail prairie dogs, desert
cottontails and cattle trophic relations on shortgrass range. Journal of
Range Management. 30(3): 210-214. [4644]
19. Havstad, Kris; Pieper, Rex D.; Donart, Gary B.; {and others]. 1979.
Cattle diets on a fertilized blue grama upland range site. Journal of
Range Management. 32(5): 398-401. [4646]
20. Hyder, D. N.; Bement, R. E.; Remmenga, E. E.; Terwilliger, C., Jr. 1966.
Vegetation-soils and vegetation-grazing relations from frequency data.
Journal of Range Management. 19: 11-17. [1234]
21. Johnson, James R.; Nichols, James T. 1970. Plants of South Dakota
grasslands: A photographic study. Bull. 566. Brookings, SD: South Dakota
State University, Agricultural Experiment Station. 163 p. [18501]
22. Johnston, Barry C. 1987. Plant associations of Region Two: Potential
plant communities of Wyoming, South Dakota, Nebraska, Colorado, and
Kansas. 4th ed. R2-ECOL-87-2. Lakewood, CO: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. 429 p. [3519]
23. Kearney, Thomas H.; Peebles, Robert H.; Howell, John Thomas; McClintock,
Elizabeth. 1960. Arizona flora. 2d ed. Berkeley, CA: University of
California Press. 1085 p. [6563]
24. Kemp, Paul R. 1983. Phenological patterns of Chihuahuan desert plants in
relation to the timing of water availability. Journal of Ecology. 71:
427-436. [5054]
25. Kuchler, A. W. 1964. Manual to accompany the map of potential vegetation
of the conterminous United States. Special Publication No. 36. New York:
American Geographical Society. 77 p. [1384]
26. Mahgoub, El Fatih; Pieper, Rex D.; Holechek, Jerry L.; [and others].
1987. Botanical content of mule deer diets in south-central New Mexico.
New Mexico Journal of Science. 27(1): 21-27. [3259]
27. Menke, John W.; Trlica, M. J. 1981. Carbohydrate reserve, phenology, and
growth cycles of nine Colorado range species. Journal of Range
Management. 34(4): 269-277. [1639]
28. Parady, Fred E., III. 1984. Reclamation techniques in southwestern
Wyoming. In: Symposium on the reclamation of lands disturbed by surface
mining: a cornerstorne for communication and understanding: Proceedings,
1984 annual meeting of the American Society for Surface Mining and
Reclamation: 1984 July 10-13; Owensboro, KY. [Place of publication
unknown]: [Publisher unknown]: 87-92. [1813]
29. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant
geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
30. Roth, Timothy E.; Holechek, J. L.; Hussain, Mohammed Y. 1987.
Germination response of three globemallow species to chemical treatment.
Journal of Range Management. 40(2): 173-175. [4643]
31. Schott, M. R.; Pieper, R. D. 1987. Succession of pinyon-juniper
communities after mechanical disturbance in southcentral New Mexico.
Journal of Range Management. 40(1): 88-94. [3913]
32. Sieg, Carolyn Hull; Uresk, Daniel W.; Hansen, Richard M. 1983.
Plant-soil relationships on bentonite mine spoils and sagebrush-
grassland in the northern High Plains. Journal of Range Management.
36(3): 289-294. [4642]
33. Stickney, Peter F. 1989. Seral origin of species originating in northern
Rocky Mountain forests. Unpublished draft on file at: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Fire
Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT; RWU 4403 files. 7 p. [20090]
34. Stubbendieck, J.; Hatch, Stephan L.; Hirsch, Kathie J. 1986. North
American range plants. 3rd ed. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska
Press. 465 p. [2270]
35. Summers, Carol A.; Linder, Raymond L. 1978. Food habits of the
black-tailed prairie dog in western South Dakota. Journal of Range
Management. 31(2): 134-136. [2294]
36. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1994. Plants
of the U.S.--alphabetical listing. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 954 p. [23104]
37. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Biological Survey. [n.d.]. NP
Flora [Data base]. Davis, CA: U.S. Department of the Interior, National
Biological Survey. [23119]
38. Vaughan, Terry A. 1967. Food habits of the northern pocket gopher.
American Midland Naturalist. 77(1): 176-189. [2427]
39. Wagner, Warren L.; Martin, William C.; Aldon, Earl F. 1978. Natural
succession on strip-mined lands in northwestern New Mexico. Reclamation
Review. 1: 67-73. [2436]
40. Weaver, J. E.; Albertson, F. W. 1956. Grasslands of the Great Plains.
Lincoln, NE: Johnsen Publishing Company. 395 p. [2463]
41. Welsh, Stanley L.; Atwood, N. Duane; Goodrich, Sherel; Higgins, Larry
C., eds. 1987. A Utah flora. Great Basin Naturalist Memoir No. 9. Provo,
UT: Brigham Young University. 894 p. [2944]
42. Whitman, W. C. 1979. Analysis of grassland vegetation on selected key
areas in southwestern North Dakota. A report on a project of the North
Dakota regional environmental assessment Program. Contract No. 7-01-2.
Fargo, ND: North Dakota State University, Department of Botany. [Total
pages unknown]. [3321]
43. Uresk, Daniel W. 1986. Food habits of cattle on mixed-grass prairie on
the Northern Great Plain Plains. Prairie Naturalist. 18(4): 211-218.
[94]
44. Vavra, M.; Rice, R. W.; Hansen, R. M.; Sims, P. L. 1977. Food habits of
cattle on shortgrass range in northeastern Colorado. Journal of Range
Management. 30(4): 261-263. [5628]
45. Webb, William M.; Guthery, Fred S. 1983. Response of wildlife food
plants to spring discing of mesquite rangeland in northwest Texas.
Journal of Range Management. 36(3): 351-353. [4344]
Index
Related categories for Species: Sphaeralcea coccinea
| Scarlet Globemallow
|
 |
