|
Wildlife, Animals, and Plants
|
|
Introductory
SPECIES: Acacia greggii | Catclaw Acacia
ABBREVIATION :
ACAGRE
SYNONYMS :
Senegalia greggii
SCS PLANT CODE :
ACGR
COMMON NAMES :
catclaw acacia
catclaw
cat's claw acacia
Gregg acacia
Gregg catclaw
devils-claw
devils-claw acacia
paradise flower
long-flowered catclaw
Texas mimosa
una de gato (claw of cat)
TAXONOMY :
The currently accepted scientific name of catclaw acacia is Acacia
greggii Gray [10,27,29,62]. Recognized varieties include:
var. greggii - glabrous leaflets - Texas
var. arizonica - pubescent leaflets - sw New Mexico to California
Catclaw acacia hybridizes with guajillo (A. berlandieri) [34].
LIFE FORM :
Tree, Shrub
FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS :
No special status
OTHER STATUS :
NO-ENTRY
COMPILED BY AND DATE :
Ronald Uchytil/July 1990
LAST REVISED BY AND DATE :
NO-ENTRY
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION :
Uchytil, Ronald J. 1990. Acacia greggii. In: Remainder of Citation
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Acacia greggii | Catclaw Acacia
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION :
Catclaw acacia is common over much of the northern Chihuahuan, Sonoran,
and southern Mojave deserts. It occurs in southern and western Texas,
southern New Mexico, southern and central Arizona, southern Nevada,
extreme southwestern Utah, southeastern California, and northern Mexico
[33].
ECOSYSTEMS :
FRES30 Desert shrub
FRES31 Shinnery
FRES32 Texas savanna
FRES33 Southwestern shrubsteppe
FRES34 Chaparral - mountain shrub
FRES35 Pinyon - juniper
FRES38 Plains grasslands
FRES40 Desert grasslands
STATES :
AZ CA NV NM TX UT MEXICO
ADMINISTRATIVE UNITS :
BIBE CACA CORO FOBO GRCA GUMO
JOTR LAME MOCA ORPI SAGU
BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :
7 Lower Basin and Range
12 Colorado Plateau
13 Rocky Mountain Piedmont
14 Great Plains
KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :
K023 Juniper - pinyon woodland
K027 Mesquite bosque
K031 Oak - juniper woodlands
K032 Transition between K031 and K037
K041 Creosote bush
K042 Creosote bush - bursage
K043 Paloverde - cactus shrub
K044 Creosote bush - tarbush
K045 Ceniza shrub
K054 Grama - tobosa prairie
K058 Grama - tobosa shrubsteppe
K059 Trans-Pecos shrub savanna
K060 Mesquite savanna
K061 Mesquite - acacia savanna
K062 Mesquite - live oak savanna
K065 Grama - buffalograss
K071 Shinnery
K085 Mesquite - buffalograss
K086 Juniper - oak savanna
SAF COVER TYPES :
66 Ash juniper - redberry (Pinchot) juniper
67 Mohrs ("shin") oak
68 Mesquite
239 Pinyon - juniper
241 Western live oak
242 Mesquite
SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES :
NO-ENTRY
HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES :
Catclaw acacia is generally not a dominant plant but occurs as scattered
individuals in many plant communities. It attains its highest densities
in desert washes where it may codominate. Catclaw acacia has not been
listed as a dominant plant or habitat type indicator in any published
classifications.
VALUE AND USE
SPECIES: Acacia greggii | Catclaw Acacia
WOOD PRODUCTS VALUE :
Catclaw acacia wood is very strong. It is used locally for small
household items, saddle frames, and occasionally as firewood [30,60].
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE :
Livestock: Catclaw acacia is a poor forage for livestock. It may be
browsed in the early spring when twigs are green but is otherwise seldom
eaten [24].
Wildlife browse: Catclaw acacia is a preferred mule deer forage [50,51].
Seasonal consumption of catclaw acacia by mule deer near Tuscon, Arizona
has been reported as follows [51]:
Spring = 17.9 percent of diet (leaves)
Summer = 1.9 percent of diet (leaves and fruit)
Autumn = 11.2 percent of diet (leaves)
Winter = 3.9 percent of diet (leaves)
White-tailed deer eat small amounts of catclaw acacia browse [1,37].
Jackrabbits and cottontails regularly eat the leaves, bark, and twigs
[20,61]. White-throated woodrats eat the leaves [20].
Seed and fruit: Catclaw acacia seeds are important in the diet of
numerous birds. When available, seeds may comprise 25 to 50 percent of
the scaled quail's diet in southwestern Texas [36]. Gambel's quail and
white-winged doves also eat large amounts of the seeds [20]. Seeds and
pods are eaten by ground squirrels and woodrats [20,36]. Collared
peccaries eat large amounts of the freshly ripened fruit [13]. In
southern Arizona, catclaw acacia fruits made up 2 percent of the
white-tailed deer's summer diet, and 14 percent of the mule deer's
summer diet [37]. When the highly palatable velvet mesquite (Prosopis
velutina) fruits are abundant, mule deer eat less catclaw acacia fruit
[51].
Plants infested with mistletoe (Phoradendron californicum) often attract
frugivorous birds because mistletoe produces a large fruit crop. A
study in southern Nevada found that 67 percent of all catclaw acacia
plants at the study area were infected with mistletoe [4].
PALATABILITY :
The palatability of catclaw acacia browse for livestock is poor. The
fruits are highly palatable to big game animals such as deer and
peccaries.
The palatability of catclaw acacia for livestock and wildlife species in
Arizona and Texas is rated as follows [8,25,37,51]:
AZ TX
Cattle poor poor
Sheep ---- poor
Pronghorn ---- fair
Mule deer (browse) good ----
(fruit) good ----
White-tailed deer (browse) fair ----
(fruit) fair ----
Small mammals fair ----
Upland game birds (fruit) good good
NUTRITIONAL VALUE :
Catclaw acacia browse is a moderately good source of protein for hooved
browsers [26,31,37,48]. Fruits provide a good source of phosphorus
during summer when other forages are deficient in this element [37].
Nutritional composition of leaves, flowers, and new growth of catclaw
acacia plants from southern Arizona is presented below [31]:
% dry matter % protein % lignin % ash % cellulose
Jan-Feb 52.07 13.19 10.51 5.78 27.02
Mar-April 45.21 12.29 9.67 5.98 32.16
May-June 47.12 13.81 10.42 6.43 27.93
July-Aug 59.32 11.29 9.75 9.3 36.63
Sept-Oct 51.9 14.43 10.25 5.98 32.45
Nov-Dec 47.55 13.45 11.48 5.55 32.64
Nutritional information for catclaw acacia leaves and twigs from
southwestern Texas plants is presented below [26]:
% water % ash % cell wall % phos % protein % DOM
leaves (4/13) 69 4 ---- .41 30 83
leaves (5/24) 61 4 25 .27 21 78
leaves&twigs (6/28) 50 5 36 .13 19 62
leaves (7/27) 48 5 33 .15 17 62
Nutritional composition of catclaw acacia seeds from southwestern Texas
is presented below [16]:
% crude protein % P % Ca % Mg % K % Na
20.7 .35 .50 .24 1.24 .02
COVER VALUE :
Songbirds nest within the branches of catclaw acacia [2,11]. Catclaw
acacia sometimes forms thickets which provide hiding places for numerous
small- to medium-sized mammals [60]. Quail use the plants for roosts
[58]. Plants provide shade for domestic and wild animals.
VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES :
Catclaw acacia has shown varying success when transplanted onto
disturbed sites. Near Globe, Arizona, survival of 90-day-old
nursery-grown seedlings transplanted onto asbestos mill waste tailings
capped with 2 feet (0.6 m) of topsoil was 100 percent after 3 years
[45]. Conversely, when catclaw acacia seedlings were transplanted onto
either copper mine tailings or overburden near Tucson, Arizona, they
sufferred 100 percent mortality within 2 years [43].
Commercial catclaw acacia seed is not available. In California, seed
collected in the field exhibited good germination without any special
treatment and germinated readily in fall or spring [15]. Seedlings
should be grown in tall containers because they rapidly develop a deep
root system. Nursery grown seedlings attained a height of 4 to 15
inches (10-38 cm) in 16 months [15]. Seed collection methods have been
detailed [63].
OTHER USES AND VALUES :
Catclaw acacia flowers provide an important source of nectar for honey
bees [30]. This plant is used for low maintenance landscaping [52].
Native peoples ground the beans into a flour to make mush, breads, and
cakes [60].
MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Catclaw acacia is an invader of semidesert grasslands and has increased
in density on grazing lands. It is considered a range pest because it
reduces forage for livestock and makes moving and handling cattle more
difficult. Numerous herbicides are used for brush control in the
Southwest. In general, catclaw acacia is moderately resistant to
phenoxy herbicides and refoliates or resprouts from the base [23]. In
southwestern Texas, combinations of picloram and dicambia severely
defoliated catclaw acacia plants, but most resprouted within 30 months
[28]. Its susceptibility to numerous herbicides has been summarized
[5]. Mechanical brush control measures have also been described
[39,57].
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Acacia greggii | Catclaw Acacia
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
Catclaw acacia frequently occurs as a 3 to 10 foot (0.9-3 m) tall shrub
but may develop into an upright tree 25 to 30 feet (7.6-9.1 m) tall
[55]. It is often thicket forming and has numerous spreading, slender,
thorny branches [60]. The brown, stout, "clawlike" thorns are about
0.25 inch (0.63 cm) long. The bark is gray to black and about 0.125
inch (0.32 cm) thick. Numerous creamy-yellow flowers occur in 1.25 to
2.5 inch (3.1-6.3 cm) long spikes. The stiff and papery, gray-brown,
legume-type fruits are 2 to 5.5 inches (5-14 cm) long, 0.5 to 0.75 inch
(1.2-1.9 cm) wide, curved or contorted, flattened and constricted
between the seeds [10,55].
RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :
Undisturbed State: Phanerophyte (microphanerophyte)
Burned or Clipped State: Hemicryptophyte
REGENERATION PROCESSES :
Catclaw acacia reproduces sexually by producing an abundance of seeds.
Vegetative regeneration (sprouting) occurs following damage to the
aboveground portion of the plant.
Catclaw acacia flowers are pollinated by insects. In general, Acacias
begin to produce seed between 2 and 4 years of age [63]. Several,
nearly circular, 0.2 to 0.35 inch (5-9 mm) diameter, dark brown seeds
are encased within a legume-type fruit [42,62]. Catclaw acacia seeds
are principally dispersed by wild animals which eat them [44]. The
seeds have a hard seed coat and can probably remain viable for several
years [63]. Germination has been reported at 60 percent [60].
SITE CHARACTERISTICS :
Catclaw acacia occurs primarily in semidesert grasslands, brushy
rangelands, Arizona chaparral dominated by turbinella oak (Quercus
turbinella), and desert shrub communities. In the Sonoran and Mojave
Deserts, it is largely confined to runnels and washes [21,54]. Away
from the washes catclaw acacia occurs as scattered individuals. When
found on the slopes of a bajada, it is often restricted to the upper
bajada where available moisture is more abundant compared to middle or
lower bajada situations [7]. Catclaw acacia was found to have the
highest water requirements of several desert shrubs tested [37]. This
may partially explain why catclaw acacia, although living in arid
regions, is often confined to dry washes or stream bottoms with
relatively shallow water tables. In the Chihuahuan Desert, catclaw
acacia is more common outside of desert washes. It is common in
canyons, on mountain slopes, and in desert shrub communities [12,46].
Associated species: Along washes in the Sonoran and Mojave Deserts,
associated shrubs include mesquites (Prosopis spp.), whitethorn acacia
(Acacia constricta), blue paloverde (Cercidium floridum), ironwood
(Olneya tesota), desert willow (Chilopsis linearis), and canyon ragweed
(Franseria ambrosioides) [27,54]. In Texas, catclaw acacia often grows
with honey mesquite (Prosopis glandulosa var. glandulosa) [27].
Elevation: Catclaw acacia is generally found at elevations between
1,000 and 5,000 feet (305-1,524 m) [60].
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS :
Catclaw acacia is an invader of desert grasslands. Its density has
increased over the past 100 years probably as a result of overgrazing
and reduced fire frequencies [21].
In the Mojave Desert of southern California, catclaw acacia was found to
be a long-lived shrub characteristic of mature, undisturbed desert shrub
communities [59]. However, in low elevation desert shrub communities in
the Sonoran Desert near Tucson, Arizona, it was found to be short-lived.
No plants older than 50 years were found, and most lived for only 20 to
32 years [19]. In the Chihuahuan Desert, following the erosion of
surface soils which overlie very weather-tolerant Tornilla Clay, catclaw
acacia is a midseral species, eventually giving way to climax vegetation
dominated by creosotebush (Larrea divaricata) and tarbush (Flourensia
cernua) [41].
SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT :
In general, catclaw acacia flowers in May or June, and pods mature
between July and September [55].
FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Acacia greggii | Catclaw Acacia
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS :
Catclaw acacia is able to sprout from the root crown following top-kill
by fire [9]. Hibbert and others [23] report that catclaw acacia is
fire-tolerant and can rapidly recover by sprouting even after repeated
burns.
POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY :
survivor species; on-site surviving root crown or caudex
FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Acacia greggii | Catclaw Acacia
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT :
Fires generally top-kill catclaw acacia. In southern California, a July
wildfire in a chaparral-desert ecotone resulted in nearly all catclaw
acacia plants being charred and defoliated, but less than 10 percent of
the plants were killed [53].
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT :
NO-ENTRY
PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE :
Following top-kill by fire, catclaw acacia survives by producing
numerous sprouts from the root crown [25,49,53]. Following a July fire
in a chaparral-desert ecotone in southern California, more than 90
percent of catclaw acacia plants survived by sprouting [53]. Similarly,
a high percentage of plants resprouted following a fire in south-central
Arizona [49]. Plants started sprouting within 2 months after the
California fire. Regrowth following this southern California wildfire
is summarized below [53]:
Average length of sprouts
Average # Mesic canyon Xeric ridge
sprouts/plant (inches) (cm) (inches) (cm)
2 months after
fire (Sept) 30 1.7 4.3 --- ---
4 months after
fire (Nov) 90 8.6 21.8 5.7 14.6
7 months after
fire (Feb) 89 10.1 25.7 7.0 17.8
10 months after
fire (June) 166 13.0 33.0 4.8 12.1
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE :
NO-ENTRY
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
NO-ENTRY
REFERENCES
SPECIES: Acacia greggii | Catclaw Acacia
REFERENCES :
1. Anthony, Robert G.; Smith, Norman S. 1977. Ecological relationships
between mule deer and white-tailed deer in southeastern Arizona.
Ecological Monographs. 47: 255-277. [9890]
2. Austin, George T. 1970. Breeding birds of desert riparian habitat in
southern Nevada. Condor. 72: 431-436. [10874]
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. Blake, John G. 1984. A seasonal analysis of bird communities in southern
Nevada. Southwestern Naturalist. 29(4): 463-474. [5849]
5. Bovey, Rodney W. 1977. Response of selected woody plants in the United
States to herbicides. Agric. Handb. 493. Washington, DC: U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 101 p. [8899]
6. Bowers, Janice E.; McLaughlin, Steven P. 1987. Flora and vegetation of
the Rincon Mountains, Pima County, Arizona. Desert Plants. 8(2): 50-94.
[495]
7. Bowers, Michael A. 1988. Plant associations on a Sonoran Desert bajada:
geographical correlates and evolutionary source pools. Vegetatio. 74:
107-112. [4408]
8. Buechner, Helmut K. 1950. Life history, ecology, and range use of the
pronghorn antelope in Trans-Pecos Texas. American Midland Naturalist.
43(2): 257-354. [4084]
9. Carmichael, R. S.; Knipe, O. D.; Pase, C. P.; Brady, W. W. 1978. Arizona
chaparral: plant associations and ecology. Res. Pap. RM-202. Fort
Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky
Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 16 p. [3038]
10. Barneby, Rupert C. 1989. Intermountain flora: Vascular plants of the
Intermountain West, U.S.A. Vol. 3, Part B: Fabales. Bronx, NY: The New
York Botanical Garden. 279 p. [18596]
11. Davis, C. A.; Sawyer, P. E.; Griffing, J. P.; Borden, B. D. 1974. Bird
populations in a shrub-grassland area, southeastern New Mexico. Bulletin
619. Las Cruces, NM: New Mexico State University, Agricultural
Experiment Station. 29 p. [4548]
12. Denyes, H. Arliss. 1956. Natural terrestrial communities of Brewster
County, Texas, with special reference to the distribution of the
mammals. American Midland Naturalist. 55(2): 289-320. [10862]
13. Eddy, Thomas A. 1961. Foods and feeding patterns of the collared peccary
in southern Arizona. Journal of Wildlife Management. 25: 248-257.
[9888]
14. England, A. Sidney; Foreman, Larry D.; Laudenslayer, William F., Jr.
1984. Composition and abundance of bird populations in riparian systems
of the California deserts. In: Warner, Richard E.; Hendrix, Kathleen M.,
eds. California riparian systems: Ecology, conservation, and productive
management. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press: 694-705.
[5870]
15. Everett, Percy C. 1957. A summary of the culture of California plants at
the Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden 1927-1950. Claremont, CA: The Rancho
Santa Ana Botanic Garden. 223 p. [7191]
16. Everitt, James H. 1986. Nutritive value of fruits or seeds of 14 shrub
and herb species from south Texas. Southwestern Naturalist. 31(1):
101-137. [5273]
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. 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]
19. Goldberg, Deborah E.; Turner, Raymond M. 1986. Vegetation change and
plant demography in permanent plots in the Sonoran Desert. Ecology.
67(3): 695-712. [4410]
20. Graham, Edward H. 1941. Legumes for erosion control and wildlife. Misc.
Publ. 412. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 153 p.
[10234]
21. Hastings, James R.; Turner, Raymond M. 1965. The changing mile: An
ecological study of vegetation change with time in the lower mile of an
arid and semiarid region. Tuscon, AZ: University of Arizona Press. 317
p. [10533]
22. Hastings, James R.; Turner, Raymond M.; Warren, Douglas K. 1972. An
atlas of some plant distributions in the Sonoran Desert. Technical
Reports on the Meteorology and Climatology of Arid Regions No. 21.
Tuscon, AZ: University of Arizona, Institute of Atmospheric Physics. 255
p. [10534]
23. Hibbert, Alden R.; Davis, Edwin A.; Scholl, David G. 1974. Chaparral
conversion potential in Arizona: Part I: water yield response and
effects on other resources. Res. Pap. RM-126. Fort Collins, CO: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and
Range Experiment Station. 36 p. [1144]
24. Humphrey, R. R. 1950. Arizona range resources. II. Yavapai County. Bull.
229. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona, Agricultural Experiment Station.
55 p. [5088]
25. Humphrey, Robert R. 1953. Forage production on Arizona ranges. III.
Mohave County: A study in range condition. Bulletin 244. Tucson, AZ:
University of Arizona, Agricultural Experiment Station. 79 p. [4440]
26. Huston, J. E.; Rector, B. S.; Merrill, L. B.; Engdahl, B. S. 1981.
Nutritional value of range plants in the Edwards Plateau region of
Texas. Report B-1375. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University System,
Texas Agricultural Experiment Station. 16 p. [4565]
27. Isely, D. 1973. Acacia. Memoirs of the New York Botanical Garden. 25(1):
10-74. [12229]
28. Jacoby, P. W.; Meadors, C. H.; Foster, M. A.; Hartmann, F. S. 1982.
Honey mesquite control and forage response in Crane County, Texas.
Journal of Range Management. 35: 424-426. [5465]
29. Kartesz, John T.; Kartesz, Rosemarie. 1980. A synonymized checklist of
the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. Volume
II: The biota of North America. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North
Carolina Press; in confederation with Anne H. Lindsey and C. Richie
Bell, North Carolina Botanical Garden. 500 p. [6954]
30. 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]
31. Krausman, Paul R.; Ordway, Leonard L.; Whiting, Frank M.; Brown, William
H. 1990. Nutritional compostition of desert mule deer forage in the
Picacho Mountains, Arizona. Desert Plants. 10(1): 32-34. [7259]
32. 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]
33. Little, Elbert L., Jr. 1976. Atlas of United States trees. Volume 3.
Minor western hardwoods. Misc. Publ. 1314. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 13 p. 290 maps. [10430]
34. Little, Elbert L., Jr. 1979. Checklist of United States trees (native
and naturalized). Agric. Handb. 541. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service. 375 p. [2952]
35. 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]
36. Martin, Alexander C.; Zim, Herbert S.; Nelson, Arnold L. 1951. American
wildlife and plants. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc. 500 p.
[4021]
37. McCulloch, Clay Y. 1973. Part I: Seasonal diets of mule and white-tailed
deer. In: Deer nutrition in Arizona chaparral and desert habitats.
Special Report No. 3. Phoenix, AZ: Arizona Game and Fish Department:
1-37. [9894]
38. McGinnies, W. G.; Arnold, Joseph F. 1939. Relative water requirement of
Arizona range plants. Technical Bulletin No. 80. Tucson, AZ: University
of Arizona, Agricultural Experiment Station: 167-246. [4441]
39. Meadors, C. H.; Fisher, C. E.; Haas, R. H.; Hoffman, G. O. 1973.
Combinations of methods and maintenance control of mesquite. In:
Mesquite: Growth and development, management, economics, control, uses.
Research Monograph 1. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University, The
Texas Agricultural Experiment Station: 53-59. [4685]
40. Morton, Howard, L.; Metto, Paul; Ogden, Phil R. 1971. Catclaw control in
southern Arizona. Proceedings of the Western Society of Weed Science.
24: 12-13. [12164]
41. Muller, Cornelius H. 1940. Plant succession in the Larrea-Flourensia
climax. Ecology. 21: 206-212. [4244]
42. Munz, Philip A. 1974. A flora of southern California. Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press. 1086 p. [4924]
43. Norem, M. A.; Day, A. D.; Ludeke, K. L. 1982. An evaluation of shrub and
tree species used for revegetating copper mine wastes in the
south-western United States. Journal of Arid Environments. 5: 99-304.
[1776]
44. Pendleton, Rosemary L.; Pendleton, Burton K.; Harper, Kimball T. 1989.
Breeding systems of woody plant species in Utah. In: Wallace, Arthur;
McArthur, E. Durant; Haferkamp, Marshall R., compilers.
Proceedings--symposium on shrub ecophysiology and biotechnology; 1987
June 30 - July 2; Logan, UT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-256. Ogden, UT: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research
Station: 5-22. [5918]
45. Perry, Hazel M.; Aldon, Earl F.; Brock, John H. 1987. Reclamation of an
asbestos mill waste site in the southwestern United States. Reclamation
and Revegetation Research. 6: 187-196. [2918]
46. Powell, A. Michael. 1988. Trees & shrubs of Trans-Pecos Texas including
Big Bend and Guadalupe Mountains National Parks. Big Bend National Park,
TX: Big Bend Natural History Association. 536 p. [6130]
47. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant
geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
48. Rautenstrauch, Kurt R.; Krausman, Paul R.; Whiting, Frank M.; Brown,
William H. 1988. Nutritional quality of desert mule deer forage in King
Valley, Arizona. Desert Plants. 8(4): 172-174. [2768]
49. Rogers, Garry F.; Steele, Jeff. 1980. Sonoran Desert fire ecology. In:
Stokes, Marvin A.; Dieterich, John H., technical coordinators.
Proceedings of the fire history workshop; 1980 October 20-24; Tucson,
AZ. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-81. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment
Station: 15-19. [16036]
50. Severson, Kieth E.; Medina, Alvin L. 1983. Deer and elk habitat
management in the Southwest. Journal of Range Management Monograph No.
2. Denver: Society for Range Management. 64 p. [2110]
51. Short, Henry L. 1977. Food habits of mule deer in a semi-desert
grass-shrub habitat. Journal of Range Management. 30: 206-209. [9895]
52. Thornburg, Ashley A. 1982. Plant materials for use on surface-mined
lands. SCS-TP-157. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil
Conservation Service. 88 p. [3769]
53. Tratz, Wallace Michael. 1978. Postfire vegetational recovery,
productivity, and herbivore utilization of a chaparral-desert ecotone.
Los Angeles, CA: California State University. 133 p. Thesis. [5495]
54. Turner, Raymond M.; Brown, David E. 1982. Sonoran desertscrub. In:
Brown, David E., ed. Biotic communities of the American
Southwest--United States and Mexico. Desert Plants. 4(1-4): 181-221.
[2375]
55. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1937. Range plant
handbook. Washington, DC. 532 p. [2387]
56. Urness, Philip J. 1973. Part II: Chemical analyses and in vitro
digestibility of seasonal deer forages. In: Deer nutrition in Arizona
chaparral and desert habitats. Special Report 3. Phoenix, AZ: Arizona
Game and Fish Department: 39-52. [93]
57. Vallentine, John F. 1961. Important Utah range grasses. Extension
Circular 281. Logan, UT: Utah State University. 48 p. [2937]
58. Van Dersal, William R. 1938. Native woody plants of the United States,
their erosion-control and wildlife values. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Agriculture. 362 p. [4240]
59. Vasek, Frank C. 1979. Early successional stages in Mojave Desert scrub
vegetation. Israel Journal of Botany. 28: 133-148. [4579]
60. Vines, Robert A. 1960. Trees, shrubs, and woody vines of the Southwest.
Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. 1104 p. [7707]
61. Vorhies, Charles T.; Taylor, Walter P. 1933. The life histories and
ecology of jack rabbits, Lepus alleni and Lepus californicus ssp., in
relation to grazing in Arizona. Technical Bulletin No. 49. Tucson, AZ:
University of Arizona, Agricultural Experiment Station. 117 p. [9933]
62. 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]
63. Whitesell, Craig D. 1974. Acacia Mill. acacia. In: Schopmeyer, C. S.,
technical coordinator. Seeds of woody plants in the United States.
Agric. Handb. 450. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service: 184-186. [66]
Index
Related categories for Species: Acacia greggii
| Catclaw Acacia
|
 |
