Introductory
SPECIES: Luzula hitchcockii | Smooth Woodrush 



ABBREVIATION : 
LUZHIT

SYNONYMS : 
   Luzula glabrata (Hoppe) Desv.
   Luzula piperi (Coville) M.E. Jones


SCS PLANT CODE : 
   LUHI4


COMMON NAMES : 
   smooth woodrush
   woodrush


TAXONOMY : 
The currently accepted scientific name of smooth woodrush is Luzula
hitchcockii Hamet-Ahti [15].  There are no recognized subspecies,
varieties, or forms.


LIFE FORM : 
Graminoid

FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS : 
No special status

OTHER STATUS : 
NO-ENTRY


COMPILED BY AND DATE : 
R. J. Habeck, February 1992


LAST REVISED BY AND DATE : 
NO-ENTRY


AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION : 
Habeck, R. J. 1992.  Luzula hitchcockii.  In: Remainder of Citation

DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Luzula hitchcockii | Smooth Woodrush 



GENERAL DISTRIBUTION : 
Smooth woodrush can be found from southern British Columbia south to
southern Oregon, and east to southwestern Alberta, Idaho, Montana, 
and northern Wyoming [15].


ECOSYSTEMS : 
   FRES22  Western white pine
   FRES23  Fir - spruce
   FRES24  Hemlock - Sitka spruce
   FRES26  Lodgepole pine


STATES : 
     ID  MT  OR  WA  AB  BC


ADMINISTRATIVE UNITS : 
     CRLA  GLAC  GRTE  MORA  NOCA  OLYM


BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS : 
   2  Cascade Mountains
   8  Northern Rocky Mountains
   9  Middle Rocky Mountains


KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS : 
   K001  Spruce - cedar - hemlock forest
   K002  Cedar - hemlock - Douglas-fir forest
   K004  Fir - hemlock forest
   K013  Cedar - hemlock - pine forest
   K014  Grand fir - Douglas-fir forest
   K015  Western spruce - fir forest


SAF COVER TYPES : 
   205  Mountain hemlock
   206  Engelmann spruce - subalpine fir
   208  Whitebark pine
   224  Western hemlock


SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES : 
NO-ENTRY


HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES : 
Smooth woodrush generally occurs with subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa)
and mountain hemlock (Tsuga mertensiana).  It also occupies 20 to 25
percent ground cover of subalpine larch (Larix lyallii) communities in
the Pacific Northwest [3].  Associated tree species include Douglas-fir
(Pseudotsuga menziesii), western larch (Larix occidentalis), western
white pine (Pinus monticola), lodgepole pine (P. contorta), whitebark
pine (P. albicaulis), and Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii).
Understory associates include grouse whortleberry (Vaccinum scoparium),
Sitka valerian (Valeriana sitchensis), mountain arnica (Arnica
latifolia), and menziesia (Menziesia ferruginea) [1,10,21,24,25].

Publications listing smooth woodrush as an indicator or dominant species in
habitat types are as follows:

Forest habitat types of northern Idaho: a sencond approximation [10]
Forest habitat types of Montana [21]
Forest habitat types of eastern Idaho-western Wyoming [24]
Forest habitat types of central Idaho [25].

VALUE AND USE
SPECIES: Luzula hitchcockii | Smooth Woodrush 



WOOD PRODUCTS VALUE : 
NO-ENTRY


IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE : 
Smooth woodrush sites are generally important to wildlife species
inhabiting high elevations.  Thirteen plant species were identified as
being important grizzly bear food on a smooth woodrush habitat site in
northern Idaho and Montana [19].  Elk in central Idaho find smooth
woodrush sites to have medium forage value in both summer and fall [9].
Caribou use smooth woodrush sites in northern Idaho for calving habitat
during June to mid-July [28].


PALATABILITY : 
Not much information is available concerning the palatability of smooth 
woodrush.  Grizzly bears in northern Idaho, however, comsume all plant
parts of smooth woodrush which include the flowers, leaves, roots, and
stems [2].


NUTRITIONAL VALUE : 
NO-ENTRY


COVER VALUE : 
NO-ENTRY


VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES : 
NO-ENTRY


OTHER USES AND VALUES : 
NO-ENTRY


MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : 
Many of the sites that include smooth woodrush are outside commercial
timber production areas, and timber management activities are not
anticipated.  Therefore, management of smooth woodrush is generally not
part of a timber management plan.  Those sites occupied largely by
subalpine fir and mountain hemlock (SEE HABITAT TYPES) are generally
managed using partial thinnings, long rotations (60 to 80 years), and at
times are artificially regenerated [28].

BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Luzula hitchcockii | Smooth Woodrush 



GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS : 
Smooth woodrush is a short, rhizomatous perennial graminoid, 6 to 20 inches
(15-50 cm) tall, with round, hollow culms.  The leaves are shiny, 1 to 2
inches (2-6 cm) long, with flattened reddish-brown tips; often becoming
mottled rusty red in midsummer.  Smooth woodrush has a solitary
inflorescence containing small flowers.  Fruits are reddish-brown
capsules containing three seeds [20].


RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM : 
   Phanerophyte


REGENERATION PROCESSES : 
Smooth woodrush has been widely cited as being rhizomatous, and usually
regenerates into extensive colonies.  It also reproduces via seed.

Seeds:  Specific information relating to smooth woodrush is not
available.  Information on alpine rush (Luzula spicata), however, a
species which occupies a similiar environment, is available.  Seed
germination was experimentally induced in L. spicata by random
scarification, which was achieved by repeated freeze-thaw cycles,
followed by stratification for 2 to 3 months.  This germination
requirement may represent an adaptation to fall freeze-thaw cycles
followed by extended chilling under heavy snowpack [7].  In areas with
heavy snowpack, smooth woodrush has exhibited nearly full-sized growth
of etiolated shoots under the snow [12].

Seed dispersal:  Seeds of smooth woodrush are primarily dispersed by the
splash cup method.  Heavy raindrops falling directly, or from a tree
drip edge, throw seeds out from the flared lip of the open capsule.  In
higher elevations where heavy snowpacks restrict smooth woodrush height,
seed dispersal relies upon vibrations from wind or passing animals.


SITE CHARACTERISTICS : 
Smooth woodrush is found in high elevations, generally ranging from
5,700 to 8,200 feet (1,737-2,500 m), with deep, late-melting snowpacks
[20].  It occupies a variety of sites from montane forests to subalpine
and alpine slopes, ridges, meadows, and cirque floors [17].

Soils:  Smooth woodrush is found on soils derived from granitics to
noncalcareous parent materials.  Surface soils tend to be very acidic
(pH 4.2 to 4.8).  Soil textures range from sandy loam to gravelly loam
[10,21,25].


SUCCESSIONAL STATUS : 
Smooth woodrush is onsidered an indicator of cold environments where
snow lies late [17].  Once smooth woodrush becomes established, it often
forms a heavy mat which excludes other understory plants from
establishing.  It was listed as a mesic site indicator within the
subalpine larch habitat type in the Pacific Northwest [3].


SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT : 
Seasonal records for smooth woodrush are scarce.  The phenological
stages for alpine rush, however, were observed near Boulder, Colorado,
and are as follows [6]:

                            Apparent end            Spring bud  
                         of autumn die-back            break
                        -------------------         ----------
                        
Luzula spicata              20 September        30 March - 15 April


Herbarium specimens of smooth woodrush collected in western Montana
show a flowering period that ranges from June 28 to August 13 for plants at 6,000 to 7,100
feet (1,829-2,164 m).  At high elevations (8,000 to 8,700 feet
(2,438-2,652 m)), flowering occurs from July 15th to September 1 [26].

     

FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Luzula hitchcockii | Smooth Woodrush 



FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS : 
Following fire, smooth woodrush sprouts from surviving rhizomes [5,11].
In western Montana, mean fire intervals for smooth woodrush sites range
from 30 to 41 years [4].


POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY : 
   Rhizomatous herb, rhizome in soil

FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Luzula hitchcockii | Smooth Woodrush 



IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT : 
Fire will consume all aboveground parts of smooth woodrush.


DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT : 
NO-ENTRY


PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE : 
Smooth woodrush often shows an increase in biomass following fire [11].
Following a fire in a whitebark pine community in the Bob Marshall
Wilderness, Monatana, smooth woodrush increased by 252 pounds/acre (92
kg/ha) from postfire year 1 to postfire year 3, while the cover percent
remained constant.  This biomass increase was attributed to vegetative
sprouting from the surviving plants [5].


DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE : 
NO-ENTRY


FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : 
NO-ENTRY

References for species: Luzula hitchcockii

1. Alexander, Robert R.; Shearer, Raymond C.; Shepperd, Wayne D. 1990. Abies lasiocarpa (Hook.) Nutt. subalpine fir. In: Burns, Russell M.; Honkala, Barbara H., technical coordinators. Silvics of North America. Volume 1. Conifers. Agric. Handb. 654. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 60-70. [13369]

2. Almack, Jon. 1986. Grizzly bear habitat use, food habits, and movements in the Selkirk Mountains, northern Idaho. In: Contreras, Glen P.; Evans, Keith E., compilers. Proceedings--grizzly bear habitat symposium; 1985 April 30 - May 2; Missoula, MT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-207. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 150-157. [10815]

3. Arno, Stephen F.; Habeck, James R. 1972. Ecology of alpine larch (Larix lyallii Parl.) in the Pacific Northwest. Ecological Monographs. 42: 417-450. [16451]

4. Arno, Stephen F. 1976. The historical role of fire on the Bitterroot National Forest. Res. Pap. INT-187. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 29 p. [15225]

5. Ash, Maria; Lasko, Richard J. 1990. Postfire vegetative response in a whitebark pine community, Bob Marshall Wilderness, Montana. In: Schmidt, Wyman C.; McDonald, Kathy J., compilers. Proceedings--symposium on whitebark pine ecosystems: ecology and management of a high-mountain resource; 1989 March 29-31; Bozeman, MT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-270. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 360-361. [11705]

6. Bell, Katherine L. 1974. Autumn, winter and spring phenology of some Colorado alpine plants. The American Midland Naturalist. 91(2): 460-464. [233]

7. Bell, Katherine L.; Amen, Ralph D. 1970. Seed dormancy in Luzula spicata and L. parviflora. Ecology. 51(3): 492-496. [17447]

8. 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]

9. Bills, Jack E.; Hauff, Richard T.; Barker, Paul; [and others], approved by. 1981. Elk habitat relationships of central Idaho. Unpublished report compiled by: U.S. Forest Service, Idaho Department of Fish and Game, and University of Idaho. 57 p. [16521]

10. Cooper, Stephen V.; Neiman, Kenneth E.; Roberts, David W. 1991. (Rev.) Forest habitat types of northern Idaho: a second approximation. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-236. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 143 p. [14792]

11. Crane, M. F.; Fischer, William C. 1986. Fire ecology of the forest habitat types of central Idaho. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-218. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 85 p. [5297]

12. Daubenmire, Rexford. 1981. Subalpine parks associated with snow transfer in the mountains of northern Idaho and eastern Washington. Northwest Science. 55(2): 124-135. [8273]

13. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]

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. Hitchcock, C. Leo; Cronquist, Arthur. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press. 730 p. [1168]

16. 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]

17. Lackschewitz, Klaus. 1991. Vascular plants of west-central Montana--identification guidebook. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-227. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 648 p. [13798]

18. Lyon, L. Jack; Stickney, Peter F. 1976. Early vegetal succession following large northern Rocky Mountain wildfires. In: Proceedings, Tall Timbers fire ecology conference and Intermountain Fire Research Council fire and land management symposium; 1974 October 8-10; Missoula, MT. No. 14. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station: 355-373. [1496]

19. Mealey, Stephen P.; Jonkel, Charles J.; Demarchi, Ray. 1977. Habitat criteria for grizzly bear management. In: Peterie, T., ed. Proceedings, 13th international congress of game biologists; 1977 March 11-15; Atlanta, GA. No. 13. [Place of publication unknown]. [Publisher unknown]. 276-289. [17030]

20. Patterson, Patricia A.; Neiman, Kenneth E.; Tonn, Jonalea. 1985. Field guide to forest plants of northern Idaho. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-180. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 246 p. [1839]

21. Pfister, Robert D.; Kovalchik, Bernard L.; Arno, Stephen F.; Presby, Richard C. 1977. Forest habitat types of Montana. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-34. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 174 p. [1878]

22. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]

23. Simpson, Michael L. 1990. The subalpine fir/beargrass habitat type: Succession and management. Moscow, ID: University of Idaho. 134 p. Thesis. [13464]

24. Steele, Robert; Cooper, Stephen V.; Ondov, David M.; [and others]. 1983. Forest habitat types of eastern Idaho-western Wyoming. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-144. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 122 p. [2230]

25. Steele, Robert; Pfister, Robert D.; Ryker, Russell A.; Kittams, Jay A. 1981. Forest habitat types of central Idaho. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-114. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 138 p. [2231]

26. Habeck, R. J. 1992. [Personal communication].February 13. Missoula, MT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Fire Sciences Laboratory. personal observation at Univ. of MT Herbarium. [30260]

27. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1982. National list of scientific plant names. Vol. 1. List of plant names. SCS-TP-159. Washington, DC. 416 p. [11573]

28. Zack, Arthur C. 1989. Interdisciplinary development of caribou habitat management guidelines: the role of the silviculturist. In: Silviculture for all resources: Proceedings of the National Silviculture Workshop; 1987 May 11-14; Sacramento, CA. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Timber Management: 25-47. [14742]

29. 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. 10 p. [20090]

Related categories for Species: Luzula hitchcockii | Smooth Woodrush