|
Wildlife, Animals, and Plants
|
|
Introductory
SPECIES: Eragrostis curvula | Weeping Lovegrass
ABBREVIATION :
ERACUR
SYNONYMS :
NO-ENTRY
SCS PLANT CODE :
ERCU2
ERCUC2
COMMON NAMES :
weeping lovegrass
TAXONOMY :
The currently accepted scientific name of weeping lovegrass is
Eragrostis curvula (Schrad.) Nees [23,28,42,57]. It is in the family
Poaceae.
The following varieties are accepted:
E. c. var. curvula
E. c. var. conferta Nees [4,11]
LIFE FORM :
Graminoid
FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS :
No special status
OTHER STATUS :
NO-ENTRY
COMPILED BY AND DATE :
Roberta A. Walsh, October 1994
LAST REVISED BY AND DATE :
NO-ENTRY
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION :
Walsh, Roberta A. 1994. Eragrostis curvula. In: Remainder of Citation
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Eragrostis curvula | Weeping Lovegrass
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION :
Weeping lovegrass is native to South Africa [28,57]; it has been
introduced into North and South America [57]. Weeping lovegrass was
first introduced into the United States in 1932 [62]. It occurs in
North America from Massachusetts and New York [22] south to Florida [28]
and west to California [27,36]. It is common in Oklahoma, Texas, New
Mexico, and Arizona [28,31].
ECOSYSTEMS :
FRES12 Longleaf - slash pine
FRES13 Loblolly - shortleaf pine
FRES15 Oak - hickory
FRES16 Oak - gum - cypress
FRES21 Ponderosa pine
FRES30 Desert shrub
FRES31 Shinnery
FRES32 Texas savanna
FRES33 Southwestern shrubsteppe
FRES34 Chaparral - mountain shrub
FRES35 Pinyon - juniper
FRES38 Plains grasslands
FRES39 Prairie
FRES40 Desert grasslands
STATES :
AL AZ AR CA CO FL GA HI KS LA
MD MA MS NJ NM NY NC OK PA SC
TX VA WV MEXICO
ADMINISTRATIVE UNITS :
BUFF GATE LAMR
BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :
3 Southern Pacific Border
4 Sierra Mountains
7 Lower Basin and Range
12 Colorado Plateau
13 Rocky Mountain Piedmont
14 Great Plains
KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :
NO-ENTRY
SAF COVER TYPES :
67 Mohrs (shin) oak
80 Loblolly pine - shortleaf pine
83 Longleaf pine - slash pine
96 Overcup oak - water hickory
237 Interior ponderosa pine
239 Pinyon - juniper
241 Western live oak
242 Mesquite
SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES :
NO-ENTRY
HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES :
Common associates of weeping lovegrass include turbinella oak (Quercus
turbinella), pointleaf manzanita (Arctostaphylos pungens), Pringle
manzanita (A. pringlei), desert ceanothus (Ceanothus greggii), sugar
sumac (Rhus ovata), skunkbush sumac (R. trilobata), hollyleaf buckthorn
(Rhamnus crocea), Wright silktassel (Garrya wrightii), yellowleaf
silktassel (G. flavescens), birchleaf mountain-mahogany (Cercocarpus
betuloides), Mexican cliffrose (Cowania mexicana), and Lehmann lovegrass
(Eragrostis lehmanniana) [7,14,32,41].
Weeping lovegrass associates in sand dune vegetation in Woodward County,
Oklahoma, include sand sagebrush (Artemisia filifolia), bush morning
glory (Ipomoea leptophylla), sand pea (Tephrosia virginiana), horseweed
(Erigeron canadensis), partridge-pea (Chamaecrista fasciculata), slender
scurf-pea (Psoralea tenuiflora), grama (Bouteloua spp.), buffalo grass
(Buchloe dactyloides), sand paspalum (Paspalum stramineum), and
switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) [47].
VALUE AND USE
SPECIES: Eragrostis curvula | Weeping Lovegrass
WOOD PRODUCTS VALUE :
NO-ENTRY
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE :
Weeping lovegrass is used as a pasture grass [31,57].
Weeping lovegrass forage value is fair for livestock; it is relatively
poor for wildlife [50].
In central Arizona, Angora goats were introduced to the Tonto National
Forest in hopes that they would trample weeping lovegrass seeds into the
soil. However, they pulled up and ate a high percentage of the
seedlings within 3 weeks after seeding [32].
PALATABILITY :
Weeping lovegrass is most palatable in the spring, when it is actively
growing [29]; palatability to livestock is rated fair at that time [56].
Weeping lovegrass becomes unpalatable with maturity, and may be grazed
very little from flowering in early summer through dormancy in the fall
[50,54].
In Arizona, livestock frequently prefer weeping lovegrass to many native
grasses in the spring. On some Arizona ranges, it is highly productive
and moderately palatable [30]. However, in northwestern Oklahoma,
weeping lovegrass was judged to be the least palatable of 57 species
tested. It was relatively more palatable in the winter because it
greens up earlier in the spring and continues growth later in the fall
than native warm-season grasses [47].
NUTRITIONAL VALUE :
In Woodward County, Oklahoma, weeping lovegrass protein content declined
from April to January and showed a slight increase the following March [47].
In Lubbock County, Texas, the crude protein content of weeping lovegrass
aboveground phytomass was evaluated 1 year after establishment. Protein
content dropped from 12.0 percent in May to 3.4 percent in September in
uncut plots. During the same time period, crude protein of 30-day-old
regrowth in cut plots remained between 8.7 and 12.3 percent [35].
COVER VALUE :
NO-ENTRY
VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES :
Weeping lovegrass has been planted for soil conservation. It has been
used as ground cover on bare, disturbed, and burned areas, on areas
around airports and landing strips, and on steep slopes. It has been
planted for siltation control on drainageways and for erosion control on
roadsides, drainage ditches, and dikes [27,49,56,57]. There are no
long-term studies evaluating the efficacy of weeping lovegrass for soil
conservation [63].
Weeping lovegrass has been used for grassland revegetation in the
southern United States [28], particularly after invasion by woody shrubs
[10]. It is used on sandy soils in the Southern Great Plains because of
excellent seed production and ease of establishment [55]. Garcia [20]
stated that weeping lovegrass provides excellent soil protection on the
High Plains of New Mexico [20].
Some severely degraded southwestern grasslands may never be able to
return to their original condition; in these areas weeping lovegrass can
help stabilize soils, prevent further erosion, and provide some wildlife
habitat. However, weeping lovegrass plantations have much lower plant
and animal species richness than do undisturbed native grasslands [4].
Weeping lovegrass has been seeded in central Arizona chaparral after
brush removal in order to increase annual stream flow. Heavily
transpiring, deep-rooted evergreen shrubs were replaced with weeping
lovegrass and other shallow-rooted vegetation. Streamflow increased,
and the increase has lasted for 18 years with maintenance [26].
Weeping lovegrass is suitable for quick, temporary cover for erosion
control on minesoils while other more persistent perennials are
developing. It is relatively short lived (2-4 years) on minesoils in
the eastern United States unless mowed, burned, or grazed to retard
senescence. Even then, weeping lovegrass gradually gives way to other
perennial species. It is tolerant of extremely acid minesoils, on which
it establishes easily and quickly. It is best used in a mixture with
other perennial grasses and legumes, especially in mid- to late-spring
seedings [10,53,54].
Excellent stands of weeping lovegrass were established by no-till
planting in early June on sloping, eroded, acidic soils in the Piedmont
region of Virginia [58].
OTHER USES AND VALUES :
Weeping lovegrass is cultivated as an ornamental grass [22,27,28,31].
MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Information on weeping lovegrass culture and cultivars is available
[12,55,56].
Effective management for productivity in seeded stands of weeping
lovegrass in northwestern Oklahoma includes (1) removing old growth; (2)
fertilizing conservatively; (3) deferring grazing in spring until plants
are 6 inches high; (4) practicing rotation grazing; (5) mowing or
grazing to a 4-inch stubble throughout the summer; (6) resting from
September 1 to December 1, and then grazing in winter with supplements
for cattle. Weeping lovegrass nutritional value can be optimized by
using it with other seasonal forages and native rangelands [56].
Cattle can be grazed productively on weeping lovegrass, even without
irrigation [12,16]. Cattle gain relatively well on weeping lovegrass
without rotation during spring but do poorly the remainder of the
growing season [12]. Fall grazing is detrimental because grazing
initiates plant growth, which reduces carbohydrate reserves and
predisposes weeping lovegrass to freeze damage. Dormant winter
lovegrass leaves make excellent winter forage when supplemented with
protein [12].
In 1951, weeping lovegrass was aerially seeded after wildfire in the
Pinal Mountain area of east-central Arizona. Annual use by cattle of 50
to 70 percent of current growth resulted in a decrease in weeping
lovegrass cover [41].
Weeping lovegrass can be successfully established on rangelands in
chaparral and some pinyon (Pinus spp.)-juniper (Juniperus spp.) types in
the Southwest. However, stands in these areas may be short lived [55].
Long-term establishment is restricted to irrigated sites, moist sites
such as swales, and areas where annual rainfall exceeds about 15 inches
(381 mm) [12].
Establishment of weeping lovegrass depends on moisture availability and
winter temperatures. In the southeastern part of the southern High
Plains of New Mexico, weeping lovegrass is favored for ease of
germination during the hot, dry summers. However, in the extreme
temperatures of the Chihuahuan Desert, supplemental irrigation or
mulching is necessary for successful seedling establishment [20].
Stands of weeping lovegrass have been established in southern Arizona,
eastern New Mexico, and West Texas during atypically wet summers; they
have persisted for 10 or more years. Weeping lovegrass will persist in
western Oklahoma and northwestern and north-central Texas if not
fertilized or defoliated prior to freezing winter temperatures. It will
not persist in southern Kansas and southeastern Colorado [10].
Plant and animal populations were sampled between June 1984 and August
1985 in semidesert grasslands on mesas in Santa Cruz County, Arizona.
Some areas had been seeded to weeping lovegrass and Lehmann lovegrass
(Eragrostis lehmanniana); other areas had native grasses, forbs, and
shrubs. The stands of exotic grasses differed consistently from native
grasslands in terms of indigenous plants and animals. The exotic
African lovegrasses covered more than 50 percent of the ground where
they had been planted; they grew in tall, nearly monospecific stands.
At these sites the native grass cover was reduced by nearly 60 percent
compared to unseeded stands. Total native herb canopy, herb species
richness, shrub density, and shrub canopy were significantly reduced on
plots dominated by weeping lovegrass and Lehmann lovegrass. The hispid
cotton rat was more abundant in stands of African lovegrasses than in
native grasslands. Ten native plant species, five bird species, three
rodent species, and eight grasshopper species were significantly more
common in native grasslands [4].
Grasshoppers, leafhoppers, and other forage-eating insects, even in
light populations, are very destructive to weeping lovegrass seedlings.
Rabbits and rodents are sometimes damaging [56].
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Eragrostis curvula | Weeping Lovegrass
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
Weeping lovegrass is an introduced, perennial, warm-season, densely
tufted bunchgrass [2,30,36]. It is a C-4 carbon fixer [56]. Culms can
be pith-filled to hollow; they are erect [23] and 24 to 60 inches
(60-150 cm) tall [29,30,50]. Leaves are primarily basal [42] and
abundant [56]. Culm leaves are 8 to 12 inches (20-30 cm) long [27,50];
basal leaves can be much longer [23,27,30,42, 50]. The inflorescence is
a panicle 4 to 16 inches (10-40 cm) long [23,42]. Spikelets are five-
to twelve-flowered [22,50]; the lemma is unawned [50,56]. The fruit is
a caryopsis [23]. Weeping lovegrass has an extensive fibrous root
system [56].
RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :
Hemicryptophyte
REGENERATION PROCESSES :
Weeping lovegrass reproduces by seeds; it does not have rhizomes or
stolons [2]. Apomixis is facultative [55]. The seedstalks produce
approximately 300 to 1,000 seeds per head [39]. Rate of spread by seeds
is slow under the best conditions [2]. In most places weeping lovegrass
does not actively colonize adjacent nonplanted sites [10].
Seed dormancy is broken after 5 to 6 months in storage [56]. Time to
initial germination in a laboratory test was 50 to 52 hours [19]. Best
field germination occurs with year-old seed; most seeds germinate in 7
days under favorable conditions [56]. Rainfall pattern is important for
successful weeping lovegrass seedling emergence. Less than 20 percent
of germinated weeping lovegrass seeds survived 1 day of desiccation
after germination. No weeping lovegrass seeds survived 3 days of
desiccation [19]. If the soil is dry, adequate moisture within 4 to 7
days after emergence is necessary for seedling survival [12]. Seedlings
are vigorous under favorable conditions [47]. Weeping lovegrass can
make good cover the first year after seeding. With good moisture
conditions some plants head out the first year [56].
Weeping lovegrass produces tillers which grow outward from the edge of
the clump. Dead stems prevent production of new tillers to the inside.
After a few years without grazing or burning, the only live shoots in
the decadent plant are in an outside ring enclosing dead material [12].
SITE CHARACTERISTICS :
Weeping lovegrass grows on dry to moist sites [15] in pastures [50],
fields [42], roadsides [23,27], and disturbed areas [23,50,61].
Weeping lovegrass grows and produces well on a wide variety of soils.
It grows well on low fertility soils, but it does best on fertile soils
[12]. It is best adapted to and most persistent on sandy and sandy loam
soils [2,10,12]. It is not well adapted to clayey, salty, or wet soils
[1,12]. Silty loam, clay, and clayey loam soils reduce or inhibit
germination, seedling emergence, shoot growth, and root growth [10].
Weeping lovegrass was tested on the High Plains of western Texas on
three soil types. Growth was rated good on sandy soil, fair on silty
soil, and poor on clayey soil [13]. In the Santa Cruz Basin in
southeastern Arizona, weeping lovegrass established poorly on silty clay
loam. However, weeping lovegrass seeds sown in sandy to sandy loam
upland soils germinated and produced plants that persisted for at least
15 years [11]. Weeping lovegrass requires a 150- to 180-day summer
growing season to spread on sandy soils [10].
Weeping lovegrass does well on acid soils in the southeastern United
States [12,18]. Lower pH limit is usually considered to be 4.0, but it
has grown well on some minesoils with pH 3.8 [54]. Weeping lovegrass
also grows on highly basic soils. It will grow on soils of pH 8.0, but
severe chlorosis usually occurs as the growing season progresses [12].
Weeping lovegrass is adapted to summer rainfall [12]. Established
stands persist where annual rainfall varies from 15.7 to 39.4 inches
(400-1,000 mm) [10]. In critical rainfall areas occasional prolonged
droughts may kill well-established stands [12]. Plant production
declines where summer rainfall exceeds 29.5 inches (750 mm) because of
fungal infections, mites, nematodes, and interference from forbs and
other grasses [10].
Established stands of weeping lovegrass persist where mean minimum and
maximum temperatures vary annually from 32 to 86 degrees Fahrenheit (0-
30 deg C) [10]. Weeping lovegrass does not tolerate extended periods of
temperatures below 14 degrees Fahrenheit (-10 deg C) [50].
Weeping lovegrass has been reported at the following elevations:
Feet Meters
Arizona 4,921-6,500 1,500-1,981 [4,32,38]
Colorado 5,000 1,524 [15]
Oklahoma 1,975-2,300 602-701 [47]
Texas 3,281 1,000 [44]
West Virginia below 3,000 below 914 [54]
Weeping lovegrass persistence in western Oklahoma and northwestern and
north-central Texas is limited to elevations from 984 to 3,281 feet
(300-1,000 m) [10].
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS :
Facultative Seral Species
Weeping lovegrass can establish in disturbed areas and also persist in
open grasslands.
During the 1940's and 1950's, upland mesas at the Appleton-Whittell
Research Sanctuary in Santa Cruz County, Arizona, were seeded with
weeping lovegrass and Lehmann lovegrass. In 1984, these mesas remained
dominated by the exotic lovegrasses. Nearby unseeded areas supported
native perennial grasses, forbs, and shrubs [4].
Basal cover and production of seeded weeping lovegrass in east-central
Arizona tended to be inversely proportional to turbinella oak cover.
Turbinella oak in chapparal was burned by wildfire in 1952. Where
turbinella oak canopy was reduced less than 50 percent, weeping
lovegrass cover remained approximately the same over 3 postfire years.
Where turbinella oak cover was reduced more than 50 percent, basal cover
of weeping lovegrass increased "markedly" over the 3 years observed [40].
SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT :
An established weeping lovegrass plant begins growth in spring when mean
minimum temperatures rise above 50 degrees Fahrenheit (10 deg C).
Productivity peaks when mean minimum and maximum temperatures range
between 59 and 86 degrees Fahrenheit (15 and 30 deg C). Growth declines
in mid-summer when mean maximum temperatures exceed 86 degrees
Fahrenheit (30 deg C) and soils dry [10]. Weeping lovegrass growing
season in northwest Oklahoma is March to November [47].
Tillering begins 4 to 6 weeks after a seed germinates. Under favorable
conditions several hundred closely packed culms are produced the first
year [39].
Weeping lovegrass susceptibility to frost increases if there is a rapid
temperature drop when the grass is growing. Injury is also likely
during severe cold coupled with dry soil. Fall growth initiated by
rainfall, irrigation, fertilization, or grazing seems to predispose
weeping lovegrass to freeze damage [12].
Weeping lovegrass flowering times are:
California August-October [36]
Florida April-May [8]
South Carolina May-June [42]
Great Plains May-August [23]
Southern Great Plains late spring and [56]
late summer
FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Eragrostis curvula | Weeping Lovegrass
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS :
The deep roots and dense crown of weeping lovegrass provide protection
from fire damage [39].
POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY :
Tussock graminoid
FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Eragrostis curvula | Weeping Lovegrass
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT :
Weeping lovegrass culms and blades are probably killed by fire. Burned
clumps tend to retain about 2 inches of densely packed, unburned stems
at the soil surface [12].
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT :
NO-ENTRY
PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE :
Weeping lovegrass numbers generally increase [59] or remain stable after
burning. Weeping lovegrass does not decrease after fire in sandy areas
in Oklahoma shortgrass prairie [60]. In western Texas, neither high nor
low fireline intensities caused a negative impact on weeping lovegrass
burned in both headfires and backfires during late winter in 1982 and
1983. Vegetation response was not correlated with fireline intensity or
any of the environmental parameters measured [44].
A central Arizona chaparral watershed was burned by wildfire in June
1959. The watershed was seeded with weeping lovegrass in May 1960, and
herbicides were used to remove shrubs to increase forage and water
yields, reduce fire hazard, and "improve" wildlife habitat. The
watershed was prescribed burned in the winter of 1971 to kill returning
shrubs; weeping lovegrass frequency increased slightly on burned plots
and decreased on unburned plots. In other areas in central Arizona,
weeping lovegrass in mixed bunchgrass stands and in pinyon-juniper areas
converted to grassland decreased when protected from grazing and fire.
Pase and Kruse [37] hypothesized that weeping lovegrass decreases would
continue due to the "smothering" effect of old growth on new growth.
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE :
From February 2 to April 15, 1982, and from March 14 to April 28, 1983,
17 plots were burned in headfires and 10 plots were burned in backfires
in western Texas. Plots were located in a relatively homogeneous,
ungrazed, decadent weeping lovegrass stand established in 1976. Fires
were ignited at different times and under a variety of weather
conditions to obtain a wide range of fireline intensities. Headfires
generated from 67 kW/m to 12,603 kW/m; backfires generated from 117 kW/m
to 474 kW/m. Weeping lovegrass plant yield, plant height, and number of
seedstalks were measured after one growing season to evaluate the
effects of different fireline intensities. There was no significant
relationship between fireline intensity and subsequent plant response
[44,45].
In June 1956, a wildfire burned over rough mountainland in central
Arizona chaparral between 5,000 and 6,500 feet (1,524-1,981 m)
elevation. The area was aerially seeded with weeping lovegrass after
the fire. Below 6,000 feet (1,830 m) weeping lovegrass quadrat
frequency increased from 3.7 percent in 1956 to 12.1 percent in 1961.
Above 6,000 feet weeping lovegrass frequency increased from 0.5 percent
in 1956 to 6.0 percent in 1961. Weeping lovegrass herbage production
also increased over that time [38].
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Weeping lovegrass production is stimulated by periodic burning. Winter
burning can be used to maintain dominance by weeping lovegrass in
chaparral [37]. A fast-moving fire with long flame lengths will not
damage weeping lovegrass any more than a slow moving fire with short
flame lengths. A prescribed fire can be conducted under conditions
favorable for a variety of intended effects without reducing weeping
lovegrass yield or vigor [44].
Weeping lovegrass should probably not be seeded after fire if management
objectives include establishing or maintaining native grasses. Weeping
lovegrass declines in palatability if not grazed or burned, but it does
not usually disappear from a site. As it becomes less palatable,
livestock shift grazing pressure to other species, which then decline.
Increases in weeping lovegrass after fire can be impeded under very
careful management of grazing allotments, however [63].
In the Pinal Mountain area, weeping lovegrass was aerially seeded
following a 1951 wildfire that killed aboveground vegetation. A
relatively vigorous stand of lovegrass grew among the sprouting shrubs
during the first summer; seed was produced, germinated the following
year, and thickened the stand. An exclosure was constructed in the
stand in 1952; grazing occurred around the exclosure. Percent basal
area of weeping lovegrass was as follows [41]:
1952 1956 1958
Grazed 0.51 0.46 0.08
Ungrazed 0.68 1.25 0.39
To renovate a decadent weeping lovegrass stand, the plants can be burned
just prior to spring green-up to remove most of the old material. If
the plants are shredded before being burned, burning is more effective
in removing dead plant centers [12]. Weeping lovegrass in Oklahoma
showed consistently improved forage yields when burned annually with
damp to wet soil conditions just before spring green-up between February
26 and March 10 [24].
Weeping lovegrass was planted on the Tonto National Forest in central
Arizona after the Boulder Mountain Fire of June 1959, in which wildfire
swept over steep, broken chaparral habitat. Weeping lovegrass was
broadcast planted with a hand seeder on the fresh burn before loose
surface ash had been disturbed by rain. Weeping lovegrass maintained a
fair stand with good to excellent vigor during the 1959 and 1960 growing
seasons. However, drought in 1961 killed many of the plants, and vigor
of those remaining was listed as fair [34].
Weeping lovegrass cover is actually many times the basal area of the
plant because of its long, spreading leaves. Five years following the
1956 Pinal Mountains wildfire, weeping lovegrass made up 97.6 percent of
the vegetation cover on the burn [7]. Weeping lovegrass cover was
decreasing on grazed areas by then, but still increasing in exclosures.
By 1958, basal area on both sites had dropped below that of 1952 and
many of the weeping lovegrass plants were dead. Weeping lovegrass died
out in ungrazed areas as chaparral crown cover approached that of
unburned areas [41].
A wildfire in 1987 in southeastern Arizona completely burned 11 native
grass plots and 11 plots seeded to weeping lovegrass and Lehmann
lovegrass. The fire reduced grass and shrub cover, and increased forb
cover, for 2 postfire years in both plot types. Bird numbers increased
greatly on burned plots in both habitats for 2 autumns, probably in
response to increased seed production and availability. Fire improved
weeping lovegrass areas for some summer birds in the short run by
reducing otherwise heavy accumulations of litter. There was no evidence
that fire can permanently restore the diverse native flora to
species-poor plantations of weeping lovegrass [5].
REFERENCES
SPECIES: Eragrostis curvula | Weeping Lovegrass
REFERENCES :
1. Allison, Chris. 1988. Seeding New Mexico rangeland. Circular 525. Las
Cruces, NM: New Mexico State University, College of Agriculture and Home
Economics, Cooperative Extension Service. 15 p. [11830]
2. Atkins, M. D.; Smith, James E., Jr. 1967. Grass seed production and
harvest in the Great Plains. Farmers' Bulletin 2226. Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 30 p. [5535]
3. 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]
4. Sorenson, Frank C.; Adams, W. T. 1993. Self fertility and natural
selfing in three Oregon Cascade populations of lodgepole pine. In:
Lindgren, D., ed. Pinus contorta--from untamed forest to domesticated
crop; Proceedings of a meeting with IUFRO working party S2.02-06: Pinus
contorta provenances and breeding and Frans Kempe symposium; 1992 August
24-28; Umea, Sweden. Umea, Sweden: Swedish University of Agricultural
Sciences, Department of Forest Genetics and Plant Physiology: [Report
11]: 358-374. [8790]
5. Bock, J. H.; Bock, C. E. 1992. Vegetation responses to wildfire in
native versus exotic Arizona grassland. Journal of Vegetation Science.
3: 439-446. [20082]
6. Brown, C. Mark; Phillips, Sherman A., Jr. 1989. Weeping lovegrass as an
overwintering habitat for the boll weevil (Coleoptera: Curculionidae).
Journal of Economic Entomology. 82(3): 799-802. [23559]
7. Cable, Dwight R. 1957. Recovery of chaparral following burning and
seeding in central Arizona. Res. Note. No. 28. Fort Collins, CO: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and
Range Experiment Station. 6 p. [6342]
8. Clewell, Andre F. 1985. Guide to the vascular plants of the Florida
Panhandle. Tallahassee, FL: Florida State University Press. 605 p.
[13124]
9. Cox, J. R.; Madrigal, R. M. 1988. Establishing perennial grasses on
abandoned farmland in southeastern Arizona. Applied Agricultural
Research. 3(1): 36-43. [11177]
10. Cox, J. R.; Martin-R., M. H.; Ibarra-F., F. A.; [and others]. 1987.
Effects of climate and soils on the distribution of four African
grasses. In: Frasier, Gary W.; Evans, Raymond A., eds. "Seed and seedbed
ecology of rangeland plants": Proceedings of symposium; 1987 April
21-23; Tucson, AZ. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Agricultural Research Service: 225-241. [15297]
11. Cox, Jerry R.; Madrigal, Reynaldo D.; Frasier, Gary W. 1987. Survival of
perennial grass transplants in the Sonoran Desert of the Southwestern
U.S.A. Arid Soil Research and Rehabilitation. 1: 77-87. [705]
12. Dahl, B. E.; Cotter, P. F. 1984. Management of weeping lovegrass in west
Texas. Management Note 5. Lubbock, TX: Texas Tech University, College of
Agricultural Sciences, Department of Range and Wildlife Management. 4 p.
[2699]
13. Dahl, Bill E.; Cotter, Paul F.; Wester, David B.; Britton, Carlton M.
1986. Grass seeding in west Texas. In: Smith, Loren M.; Britton, Carlton
M., eds. Research highlights--1986 Noxious brush and weed control; range
and wildlife management. Volume 17. Lubbock, TX: Texas Tech University:
8-15. [3659]
14. Davis, E. A. 1989. Prescribed fire in Arizona chaparral: effects on
stream water quality. Forest Ecology and Management. 26: 189-206.
[6409]
15. 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]
16. Ethridge, D. E.; Nance, J. D.; Dahl, B. E. 1987. Integration of cattle
production and marketing strategies with improved pastures and native
range. Journal of Range Management. 40(3): 199-202. [4157]
17. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and
Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
18. Foy, C. D.; Berg, W. A.; Dewald, C. L. 1987. Tolerances of old world
bluestems to an acid soil high in exchangeable aluminum. Plant and Soil.
99(4): 39-46. [3702]
19. Frasier, Gary W. 1987. Soil moisture availability effects on seed
germination and germinated seed survival of selected warm season
grasses. In: Frasier, Gary W.; Evans, Raymond A., eds. Proceedings of
symposium: "Seed and seedbed ecology of rangeland plants"; 1987 April
21-23; Tucson, AZ. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Agricultural Research Service: 192-198. [3703]
20. Garcia, Herman B. 1993. Sea of grass in New Mexico: A perspective on
CRP. Rangelands. 15(1): 18-21. [20511]
21. 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]
22. Gleason, Henry A.; Cronquist, Arthur. 1991. Manual of vascular plants of
northeastern United States and adjacent Canada. 2nd ed. New York: New
York Botanical Garden. 910 p. [20329]
23. Great Plains Flora Association. 1986. Flora of the Great Plains.
Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. 1392 p. [1603]
24. Hamilton, Wayne T. 1980. Prescribed burning of improved pastures. In:
Hanselka, C. Wayne, ed. Prescribed range burning in the coastal prairie
and eastern Rio Grande Plains of Texas: Proceedings of a symposium; 1980
October 16; Kingsville, TX. College Station, TX: The Texas A&M
University System, Texas Agricultural Extension Service: 114-128.
[11456]
25. Hauser, Victor L. 1987. Methods for establishing grass seedlings. In:
Frasier, Gary W.; Evans, Raymond, eds. Proceedings of symposium: "Seed
and seedbed ecology of rangeland plants"; 1987 April 21-23; Tucson, AZ.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research
Service: 265-272. [3275]
26. Hibbert, A. R.; Davis, E. A.; Knipe, O. D. 1982. Water yield changes
resulting from treatment of Arizona chaparral. In: Conrad, C. Eugene;
Oechel, Walter C., technical coordinators. Proceedings of the symposium
on dynamics and management of Mediterranean-type ecosystems; 1981 June
22-26; San Diego, CA. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-58. Berkeley, CA: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and
Range Experiment Station: 382-389. [6042]
27. Hickman, James C., ed. 1993. The Jepson manual: Higher plants of
California. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1400 p.
[21992]
28. Hitchcock, A. S. 1951. Manual of the grasses of the United States. Misc.
Publ. No. 200. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Agricultural Research Administration. 1051 p. [2nd edition revised by
Agnes Chase in two volumes. New York: Dover Publications, Inc.]. [1165]
29. Hoover, Max M.; Hein, M. A.; Dayton, William A.; Erlanson, C. O. 1948.
The main grasses for farm and home. In: Grass: The yearbook of
agriculture 1948. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture:
639-700. [1190]
30. Humphrey, Robert R. 1970. Arizona range grasses: Their description,
forage value and management. Tucson, AZ: The University of Arizona
Press. 159 p. [5567]
31. 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]
32. Knipe, O. D. 1982. Angora goats for conversion of Arizona chaparral:
early results. In: Conrad, C. Eugene; Oechel, Walter C., technical
coordinators. Proceedings of the symposium on dynamics and management of
Mediterranean-type ecosystems; 1981 June 22-26; San Diego, CA. Gen.
Tech. Rep. PSW-58. Berkeley, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station: 264-269.
[6028]
33. 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]
34. Lavin, Fred; Pase, Charles P. 1963. A comparison of 16 grasses and forbs
for seeding chaparral burns. Res. Note RM-6. Fort Collins, CO: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and
Range Experiment Station. 4 p. [16928]
35. Marietta, Kay L.; Britton, Carlton M.; Cotter, Paul F. 1990. Nutritional
parameters of seven improved grasses on the Texas high plains. Texas
Journal of Agriculture and Natural Resources. 4: 23-30. [18186]
36. Munz, Philip A. 1973. A California flora and supplement. Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press. 1905 p. [6155]
37. Pase, Charles P.; Knipe, O. D. 1977. Effect of winter burning on
herbaceous cover on a converted chaparral watershed. Journal of Range
Management. 30(5): 346-348. [1828]
38. Pase, Charles P.; Pond, Floyd W. 1964. Vegetation changes following the
Mingus Mountain burn. Res. Note RM-18. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range
Experiment Station. 8 p. [5700]
39. Phillips, Sherman A., Jr.; Brown, C. Mark; Cole, Charles L. 1991.
Weeping lovegrass, Eragrostis curvula (Schrader) Nees Von Esenbeck, as a
harborage of arthropods on the Texas high plains. Southwestern
Naturalist. 36(1): 49-53. [16159]
40. Pond, Floyd W. 1961. Basal cover and production of weeping lovegrass
under varying amounts of shrub live oak crown cover. Journal of Range
Management. 14: 335-337. [259]
41. Pond, Floyd W.; Cable, Dwight R. 1962. Recovery of vegetation following
wildfire on a chaparral area in Arizona. Research Note RM-72. Fort
Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky
Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 4 p. [12059]
42. Radford, Albert E.; Ahles, Harry E.; Bell, C. Ritchie. 1968. Manual of
the vascular flora of the Carolinas. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of
North Carolina Press. 1183 p. [7606]
43. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant
geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
44. Roberts, Fred H.; Britton, Carlton M.; Wester, David B.; Clark, Robert
G. 1988. Fire effects on tobosagrass and weeping lovegrass. Journal of
Range Management. 41(5): 407-409. [5504]
45. Roberts, Fred H.; Clark, Robert G.; Britton, Carlton M. 1983. Effect of
fire intensity on three west Texas grasses. In: Britton, Carlton M.;
Guthery, Fred S., eds. Research Highlights--1983: Noxious brush and weed
control; range and wildlife management. Vol. 14. Lubbock, TX: Texas Tech
University: 20-21. [4370]
46. Sajjadi, A.; Zartman, R. E. 1990. Wind stripcropping using weeping
lovegrass in the southern High Plains. Journal of Soil and Water
Conservation. 45(3): 397-399. [11939]
47. Savage, D. A.; Heller V. G. 1947. Nutritional qualities of range forage
plants in relation to grazing with beef cattle on the Southern Plains
Expermental Range. Tech. Bull. No. 943. Washington, DC: U.S. Department
of Agriculture. 61 p. [5680]
48. 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]
49. Strausbaugh, P. D.; Core, Earl L. 1977. Flora of West Virginia. 2nd ed.
Morgantown, WV: Seneca Books, Inc. 1079 p. [23213]
50. Stubbendieck, J.; Hatch, Stephan L.; Hirsch, Kathie J. 1986. North
American range plants. 3rd ed. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska
Press. 465 p. [2270]
51. 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]
52. 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]
53. Vogel, Willis G. 1973. The effect of herbaceous vegetation on survival
and growth of trees planted on coal-mine spoils. In: Research and
applied technology symposium on mined-land reclamation: Proceedings;
[Date of conference unknown]; [Location of conference unknown].
Monroeville, PA: Bituminous Coal Research, Inc.: 197-207. [21268]
54. Vogel, Willis G. 1981. A guide for revegetating coal minesoils in the
eastern United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-68. Broomall, PA: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest
Experiment Station. 190 p. [15575]
55. Voigt, P. W.; Oaks, Wendall. 1985. Lovegrasses, dropseeds, and other
desert and subtropical grasses. In: Range plant improvement in western
North America: Proceedings of a symposium at the annual meeting of the
Society for Range Management; 1985 February 14; Salt Lake City, UT.
Denver, CO: Society for Range Management: 70-79. [4387]
56. Wasser, Clinton H. 1982. Ecology and culture of selected species useful
in revegetating disturbed lands in the West. FWS/OBS-82/56. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Office
of Biological Services, Western Energy and Land Use Team. 347 p.
Available from NTIS, Springfield, VA 22161; PB-83-167023. [2458]
57. 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]
58. Wolf, D. D.; Parrish, D. J.; Daniels, W. L.; McKenna, J. R. 1989.
No-till establishment of perennial, warm-season grasses for biomass
production. Biomass. 20: 209-217. [16251]
59. Wright, Henry A.; Bailey, Arthur W.; Thompson, Rita P. 1978. The role
and use of fire in the Great Plains: A-state-of-the-art-review. In:
Prairie prescribed burning symposium and workshop: Proceedings; 1978
April 25-28; Jamestown, ND. [Place of publication unknown]: The Wildlife
Society, North Dakota Chapter: VIII-1 to VIII-29. On file with: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research
Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT. [13614]
60. Wright, Henry A.; Thompson, Rita. 1978. Fire effects. In: Fire
management: Prairie plant communities: Proceedings of a symposium and
workshop; 1978 April 25-28; Jamestown, ND. [Place of publication
unknown]: [Publisher unknown]: V-1 to V-12. On file with: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research
Station, Fire Sciences Lab, Missoula, MT. [3249]
61. Wunderlin, Richard P. 1982. Guide to the vascular plants of central
Florida. Tampa, FL: University Presses of Florida, University of South
Florida. 472 p. [13125]
62. Cox, Jerry R. 1992. Maria Wilman--an outstanding contributor to
rangeland improvement. Rangelands. 14(5): 276-278. [19459]
63. Kruse, W. H. 1994 [pers. com.]
Index
Related categories for Species: Eragrostis curvula
| Weeping Lovegrass
|
 |
