|
Wildlife, Animals, and Plants
|
|
Introductory
SPECIES: Acer grandidentatum | Bigtooth Maple
ABBREVIATION :
ACEGRA
SYNONYMS :
Acer saccharum var. grandidentatum
Acer saccharum ssp. grandidentatum
Acer saccharum ssp. sinuousum
SCS PLANT CODE :
ACSAG2
COMMON NAMES :
bigtooth maple
bigtoothed maple
big-tooth maple
canyon maple
sugar maple
dwarf sugar maple
Uvalde bigtooth maple
southwestern bigtooth maple
Palo de Azucar
scrub maple
TAXONOMY :
Bigtooth maple (Acer grandidentatum) is closely related taxonomically to
sugar maple (A. saccharum). Some populations in Oklahoma and Texas
where the range of these two taxa overlap exhibit varying degrees of
morphological intermediacy [24,37], making identification at the species
level difficult. Morphological similarities have caused some botanists
to question whether bigtooth maple should be considered a separate
species or a variety of sugar maple (Acer saccharum var. grandidentatum)
(Nutt.) Sarg. [4,24]. Numerous authorities, however, recognize these
maples as separate entities. In general, bigleaf maple is a much
smaller tree and has smaller leaves than sugar maple [35]. The
currently accepted scientific name of bigleaf maple is Acer
grandidentatum Nutt. [28,29,30,39,68]. Recognized varieties include:
var. grandidentatum
var. sinuousum (Rehd.) Little
LIFE FORM :
Tree, Shrub
FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS :
No special status
OTHER STATUS :
NO-ENTRY
COMPILED BY AND DATE :
Ronald Uchytil, February 1990
LAST REVISED BY AND DATE :
NO-ENTRY
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION :
Uchytil, Ronald J. 1990. Acer grandidentatum. In: Remainder of Citation
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Acer grandidentatum | Bigtooth Maple
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION :
Bigtooth maple has a spotty distribution, occurring in mountainous areas
from southeastern Idaho and western Wyoming south to Arizona, New
Mexico, western Texas, and northern Mexico [38,39]. It is most common
along a north-south axis from southeastern Idaho to central Utah, where
it may form nearly solid stands. Farther south, bigtooth maple occurs
as isolated populations in numerous isolated mountain ranges.
ECOSYSTEMS :
FRES20 Douglas-fir
FRES21 Ponderosa pine
FRES23 Fir - spruce
FRES28 Western hardwoods
FRES29 Sagebrush
FRES34 Chaparral - mountain shrub
FRES35 Pinyon - juniper
STATES :
AZ CO ID MT NM OK TX UT WY MEXICO
ADMINISTRATIVE UNITS :
BIBE BRCA CHIR GRCA GUMO MEVE
ZION
BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :
5 Columbia Plateau
6 Upper Basin and Range
7 Lower Basin and Range
9 Middle Rocky Mountains
10 Wyoming Basin
12 Colorado Plateau
13 Rocky Mountain Piedmont
14 Great Plains
KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :
K011 Western ponderosa forest
K012 Douglas-fir forest
K018 Pine - Douglas-fir forest
K020 Spruce - Fir - Douglas-fir forest
K021 Southwestern spruce - fir forest
K023 Juniper - pinyon woodland
K031 Oak - juniper woodlands
K032 transition between K031 and K037
K037 Mountain mahogany - oak scrub
K055 Sagebrush steppe
K098 Northern floodplain forest
SAF COVER TYPES :
206 Englemann spruce - subalpine fir
210 Interior Douglas-fir
211 White fir
217 Aspen
235 Cottonwood - willow
237 Interior ponderosa pine
239 Pinyon - juniper
240 Arizona cypress
SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES :
NO-ENTRY
HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES :
Bigtooth maple and Gambel oak (Quercus gambelii) often codominate
montane chaparral in Utah. These maple-oak brushlands are quite
extensive, generally forming a belt between lower elevation sagebrush or
pinyon-juniper and higher elevation Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii),
white fir (Abies concolor), or aspen (Populus tremuloides) communities
[9]. In northern Utah and on some sites in central Utah, bigtooth maple
appears to be the climax dominant in this zone. Unfortunately no
habitat type classifications have been completed for these sites.
Above the mountain-brush zone in northern Utah and southeastern Idaho,
bigtooth maple generally occurs as scattered plants within Douglas-fir,
subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa), or white fir habitat types [44,62].
In Arizona and New Mexico, a white fir/bigtooth maple habitat type has
been identified in numerous national forests [1,17,23,46]. This habitat
type occurs infrequently and is almost always found along canyon bottoms
or some type of concave drainage [1,23,69]. In Arizona and New Mexico,
bigtooth maple also occurs with cottonwoods (Populus spp.), ashes
(Fraxinus spp.), alders (Alnus spp.), and willows (Salix spp.), forming
riparian deciduous woodlands [10,36].
In Texas, bigtooth maple is restricted to canyons or streambanks within
the mountains. These riparian locations are usually within oak (Quercus
gravesii, Q. emoryi, Q.grisea)-juniper (Juniperus deppeana, J.
pinchotti)-pinyon (Pinus remota, P.cembroides, P. edulus) woodlands or
Douglas-fir-Arizona cypress (Cupressus arizonica) forests [45,53].
Published classification schemes listing bigtooth maple as a dominant
part of the vegetation in habitat types (hts) or community types (cts)
are listed below.
Area Classification Authority
AZ, NM spruce-fir and Moir & Ludwig 1979
mixed conifer hts
AZ, NM forest veg. hts Fitzhugh & others 1987
AZ, NM forest veg. hts DeVelice & Ludwig 1983
AZ,NM riparian cts Szaro 1990a
AZ: Tonta NF mixed broadleaf Laurenzi & others 1983
riparian forest cts
NM: Lincoln NF forest veg. hts Alexander & others 1984
UT aspen cts Mueggler & Campbell 1986
UT: Wasatch Mtns general veg. cts Allan 1962
TX: Big Bend NP forest and woodland hts Moir 1982
VALUE AND USE
SPECIES: Acer grandidentatum | Bigtooth Maple
WOOD PRODUCTS VALUE :
Bigtooth maple is cut for firewood. The wood is heavy and hot burning
[35,67].
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE :
Bigtooth maple provides browse for big game and livestock species but is
normally only consumed in small or moderate amounts [16,32,59]. The
U.S. Department of Agriculture [66] reports that where bigtooth maple is
a minor part of the vegetation, it is browsed heavily by game and
livestock. In Texas, it is browsed only occasionally by cattle [67].
Bigtooth maple is an important food source for moose in southeastern
Idaho and considered a key browse species [56]. Lower elevation Gambel
oak-bigtooth maple communities are regularly used by big game for winter
range [33]. The seeds, buds, and flowers of maples (Acer spp.) provide
food for numerous species of birds and small mammals. Squirrels and
chipmunks eat the seeds, frequently storing them in caches after
removing the hull and wing [43].
In the mountain-brush zone of Utah, Gambel oak-bigtooth maple
communities provide good habitat for numerous species of birds which
nest there [27,42]. Numerous species of birds use maple leaves and seed
stalks for nest building [43]. Ruffed and blue grouse often breed and
rear their young in bigtooth maple stands in southeastern Idaho [60,61].
In Arizona and New Mexico, the white fir/bigtooth maple habitat type
typically occurs along stream courses. These riparian areas are
considered high quality fish and wildlife habitat [23]. Many species of
wildlife including the Arizona gray squirrel, river otter, zone-tailed
hawk, common black-hawk, American dipper, summer tanager, Bullock's
oriole, yellow warbler, Arizona alligator lizard, Sonoran mud turtle,
and canyon tree frog are largely or totally dependent upon broadleaf
riparian woodlands in Arizona [10]. Bigtooth maple is often a component
of such woodlands.
PALATABILITY :
The palatability of bigtooth maple to livestock and most big game
species appears to be poor to fair. However, it is more palatable to
mule deer than is Gambel oak [52,58] and is therefore important on
Gambel oak-bigtooth maple winter range.
The relish and degree of use shown by livestock and wildlife species for
bigtooth maple in some western states is rated as follows [20,52,56]:
CO ID UT
Cattle ---- ---- poor
Sheep ---- ---- fair
Horses ---- ---- poor
Pronghorn ---- ---- poor
Elk fair ---- poor
Moose ---- good ----
Mule deer ---- ---- fair-good
Small mammals good ---- fair
Small nongame birds ---- ---- poor
Upland game birds ---- ---- ----
Waterfowl ---- ---- poor
NUTRITIONAL VALUE :
The crude protein content of bigtooth maple leaves was 9.5 percent when
collected in mid-September after tissue growth ceased but prior to the
first frost [70].
In vitro organic matter digestibility of leaves decreases as the growing
season advances. Freeze-dried extrusa from esophogeal-fistulated sheep
fed maple leaves showed the following changes in digestibility
throughout the summer [11]. Freeze drying extrusa prior to analysis
results in more accurate nutritional values than either air or oven
drying [11].
Phenological
Date Fed Description %IVOMD
June 1 young leaves, 71.5
fully developed
July 2 mature leaves 61.4
August 27 mature leaves 63.1
September 25 leaves senescent 61.3
October 3 fallen leaves 59.0
COVER VALUE :
In general, maple thickets provide good hiding cover for big game
animals. Mule deer favor such areas for bedding and hiding [35].
The mountain-brush zone provides nesting and protective cover for many
smaller wildlife species. Several species of birds nest in bigtooth
maple-Gambel oak communities. In the Wasatch Mountains of Utah, the
California quail, ring-necked pheasant, scrub jay, black-billed magpie,
black-capped chickadee, and rufous-sided towhee are all permanent
residents of these communities [42]. Black-billed magpies often nest in
maple thickets [35].
The degree to which bigtooth maple provides environmental protection
during one or more seasons for wildlife species is as follows [20]:
CO UT
Pronghorn ---- poor
Elk ---- good
Mule deer ---- good
Small mammals good good
Small nongame birds good good
Upland game birds ---- good
Waterfowl ---- poor
VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES :
Bigtooth maple is recommended for use in revegetating disturbed riparian
sites in the Intermountain region [47]. It is also suitable for
planting for wildlife cover and roadside stabilization in the aspen,
mountain-brush, and pinyon-juniper zones [52,66]. It has been proposed
for use in rehabilitating strip-mined lands and for planting on denuded
recreation sites [5]. It is best to transplant 2-year-old bare root
stock or container-grown seedlings in the early spring when dormant
[47]. Bigtooth maple can also be established from seed planted to a
depth of 0.5 inch (1.25 cm) in sunny areas if straw mulch is added [66].
OTHER USES AND VALUES :
Although not produced commercially, maple syrup can be made from the sap
of bigtooth maple. It takes about 43 gallons of sap to produce 1 gallon
of syrup [7]. The syrup produced from bigtooth maple has a somewhat
milder flavor than sugar maple syrup [5]. In a human palatability test,
57 percent preferred sugar maple and 43 percent bigtooth maple syrup
[7].
Bigtooth maple is used in landscape plantings and is highly prized for
its autumn colors [7,66].
MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
In Arizona and New Mexico, bigtooth maple generally increases after
logging in white fir forests; however, even strong dominance by bigtooth
maple does not seem to inhibit conifer establishment [46].
Since mule deer prefer bigtooth maple over Gambel oak, managers may wish
to maintain maple stands in wintering areas [33]. Maintaining a
diversity of stand ages will benefit wildlife by providing a balance of
forage and cover. Firewood cutting is probably the best method to
reduce bigtooth maple density in mature stands [9].
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Acer grandidentatum | Bigtooth Maple
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
Bigtooth maple is a deciduous shrub or small tree of variable size. On
dry sites it is often a shrub, with numerous stems reaching 20 feet (6.1
m) in height. On moist locations it often occurs as a single- or
multiple-trunked tree growing to 40 or 50 feet (12.2-15.2 m) tall
[5,66]. Mature maple stands in the Wasatch Mountains of southeastern
Idaho and northern Utah are typically 10 to 30 feet (3-9 m) tall with a
relatively closed canopy [55,60]. A 16-year-old bigtooth maple from
Provo Canyon, Utah growing on a north-facing slope at 5,100 feet (1,554
m) in elevation was 43 inches (107 m) tall [13]. Tree-sized bigtooth
maple may attain diameters of 12 inches (30 cm) [30]. Bigtooth maple
and Gambel oak have similar growth rates for their first 15 to 20 years,
but after 20 years, bigtooth maple grows faster in stem and crown
diameter [12].
Bigtooth maple has thin bark [30,67]. The root system is shallow but
wide spreading [63]. The leaves are palmately three- to five-lobed and
mostly 1 to 4 inches (2.5-10 cm) wide [68]. The fruit is a
double-winged samara. The wings are about 0.75 to 1.25 inches (1.9-3.2
cm) long.
RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :
Undisturbed State: Phanerophyte (microphanerophyte)
Undisturbed State: Hemicryptophyte
Burned or Clipped State: Hemicryptophyte
REGENERATION PROCESSES :
Bigtooth maple reproduces sexually and vegetatively. Reproduction by
seed is important in establishing bigtooth maple in new areas. Layering
is very common in older plants, however, and is the most effective
method of reproduction in Gambel oak-bigleaf maple communities
[13,15,21].
Seed production and dispersal: Bigtooth maple flowers are wind
pollinated. Plants may bear male flowers only or produce both male and
female flowers on the same inflorescence. Three flowering phenotpyes
exist and include plants which are (1) bisexual each year, (2) bisexual
one year and unisexual with male flowers the other years, or (3)
unisexual with male flowers each year [6]. Trees which change their sex
expression from year to year tend to be unisexual, with only male
flowers in dry years and bisexual in wetter years. Trees with only male
flowers are also more common on xeric versus mesic sites [6]. Plants
usually flower every 2 or 3 years. In northern Utah during the 1970's,
bigtooth maple flowered heavily in 1972, 1975, 1977, and 1979, while
only a few plants flowered in other years [6]. The double-winged
samaras are wind dispersed during the fall and early winter. There are
about 6,350 seeds per pound (13,995/kg) [50].
Seed viability and germination: Germination generally occurs in April
or May. Normally only one of the fused double samaras contains a
developed seed [15]. The seeds are susceptible to infestation by
Eucalyptus weevil larvae [4]. Germination tests show that only about 16
to 30 percent of single samaras will germinate and produce normal
seedlings [15,50]. Most maple seed can be stored for 1 to 2 years in
sealed containers without appreciable loss of viability [50].
Seedling establishment: Bigtooth maple seedling mortality under Gambel
oak-bigtooth maple canopies is very high. In a Utah study, only 184 out
of 39,070 (0.47%) bigtooth maple seedlings per acre, originating from an
exceptional seed crop year, survived five growing seasons [15]. Only
one new seedling appeared during the 5-year period. Nevertheless,
bigtooth maple produces more seeds than Gambel oak. The wind-dispersed
samaras exhibit better establishment in new areas than under parent
trees where layering is common [15,21]. Herbaceous vegetation beneath
Gambel oak is often less dense than under bigtooth maple, which allows
for easier establishment of bigtooth maple seedlings [49].
Vegetative reproduction: Layering is the predominant method of bigtooth
maple reproduction under Gambel oak-bigtooth maple canopies [15,21]. In
a Utah study, bigtooth maple vegetative growth from layering made up
78.5 percent of the total understory canopy coverage of a Gambel
oak-bigtooth maple community [21]. In this study, all reproduction by
maple was vegetative. No new seedlings were observed.
SITE CHARACTERISTICS :
Bigtooth maple is chiefly a tree of mountain terrain. It occupies a
wide range of sites, occurring on many soil types, different aspects,
and in both moist and dry locations [4]. However, it is most often
located in canyons or ravines, on lower slope bases, or on north or east
exposures [2,4,40]. Because it is often associated with canyons or
ravines, bigtooth maple is often locally referred to as "canyon maple."
In the mountain-brush zone of Utah, bigtooth maple is often codominant
with Gambel oak. Bigtooth maple-Gambel oak brushlands generally occur
between 5,500 and 7,800 feet (1,676-2,377 m) and form a belt between
lower elevation, drier sagebrush or pinyon-juniper types and higher
elevation moister Douglas-fir, aspen, or white fir forests [9,40].
Bigtooth maple tends to occupy the more mesic canyons, while Gambel oak
occupies the slopes [2,25,35,55]. However, in central and northern
Utah, especially in the Wasatch Mountains, bigtooth maple is not as
restricted to mesic sites as in other areas of the mountain-brush zone.
In these northern Utah mountain brushlands, especially north of the
northern distributional limit of Gambel oak near Logan, Utah, bigtooth
maple dominates both ravines and slopes [25,66] and may occur in nearly
solid stands [60,66]. Bigtooth maple occurs abundantly in white fir
forests which adjoin the mountain-brush zone at the same or at higher
elevations in northern Utah and southeastern Idaho [44,55]. In northern
Utah and southeastern Idaho, bigtooth maple is also found in Douglas-fir
and subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) forests [44,62].
South of central Utah, bigtooth maple occurs primarily in mountain
canyons. Throughout Arizona and New Mexico, it appears restricted to
mesic locations, and has been classified as an obligate riparian species
in New Mexico [18]. It is mostly restricted to white fir or Douglas-fir
habitat types at comparatively low elevations (about 7,000 feet [2,134
m]), where it is often the understory dominant, typically reaching 60 to
90 percent cover [1,46]. Such sites are cool, shady and moist, and
generally along the lower portions of slopes, steep-sided canyons, or
gentle drainages [23,46].
Soils: In northern and central Utah, solid maple stands are often found
on soils high in calcium [66]. Soil pH values from Utah stands range
from about 6.0 to 8.0 [4,63]. Plants are often found on medium to rocky
soil textures but may be found on many other types [63].
Common associates: Trees and shrubs associated with bigtooth maple in
the mountain-brush zone include white fir, Gambel oak, aspen,
serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia), ninebark (Physocarpus malvaceous),
snowberry (Symphoricarpos oreophilus), Wood's rose (Rosa woodsii),
Oregon grape (Berberis repens), myrtle pachystima (Pachystima
myrsinites), curlleaf mountain-mahogany (Cercocarpus ledifolius),
juniper (Juniperus spp.), big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata), and
chokecherry (Prunus virginiana) [9,21,60]. Herbaceous plants often
associated with bigtooth maple in this zone include bedstraw (Galium
spp.), sedges (Carex spp.), Utah peavine (Lathyrus pauciflorus),
American vetch (Vicia americana), feather Solomon-plume (Smilacina
racemosa), cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum), biscuitroot (Lomatium
dissectum), Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis), and many wheatgrasses
(Agropyron spp.) [2,9,21].
Elevational ranges for several western states are as follows
[20,30,53,68,69]:
from 4,500 to 8,000 feet (1,372-2,438 m) in Arizona
7,000 to 8,000 feet (2,134-2,438 m) in Colorado
4,000 to 6,500 feet (1,219-1,981 m) in Texas
4,200 to 7,300 feet (1,280-2,810 m) in Utah
5,800 to 7,300 feet (1,767-2,225 m) in Wyoming
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS :
Due to widespread disturbances such as logging, intensive livestock
grazing, mining, and fire suppression, the successional role of bigtooth
maple is unclear in the mountain-brush zone of Utah. The extent of
oak-maple brushlands before settlement is unknown. Bigtooth maple or
Gambel oak appears to be the dominant or codominant climax or long-term
seral species. On most sites from Brigham City, Utah southward, Gambel
oak appears to be the climax dominant. In the Wasatch Range from
north-central Utah to southeastern Idaho and on some sites in central
Utah, bigtooth maple becomes more prominent and appears to be dominant
at climax [9].
Bigtooth maple is currently invading many Gambel oak stands. On many
sites, maples and oaks are segregated by topography, with bigtooth maple
occupying canyons, ravines, and slope bases, and Gambel oak occupying
the slopes [2,25,35,55]. Slope bases and ravines serve as sites from
which bigtooth maple can invade Gambel oak stands [26,57]. In the past
30 years, bigtooth maple has invaded many central and northern Utah oak
stands from such sites and has spread throughout the oaks to dominate
both ravines and slopes between drainages [21,26,49]. Some cooler sites
in this zone are capable of supporting white fir. On such sites,
bigtooth maple may be replacing Gambel oak, but further succession could
lead to dominance by white fir [21,26].
Early ecological descriptions of the Gambel oak zone in Utah make no
mention of oak-maple communities and generally describe bigtooth maple
as occurring along water courses or streambanks [26]. The recent
invasion of bigtooth maple into oak stands shows that it has a much
broader ecological amplitude than previously thought. Physiological
research shows that bigtooth maple can grow with oaks on the drier open
slopes because it is relatively tolerant of low water potentials [19].
If bigtooth maple is physiologically able to grow with Gambel oak under
the more xeric conditions of the open slopes, why has it only recently
invaded? Harper and others [26] hypothesize that prior to fire
suppression, fire frequency would have been much greater on the drier
open slopes than in the ravines, and thus kept the vigorously sprouting
Gambel oak dominant. With fire suppression, bigtooth maple has been
able to invade oak stands. However, there have been no comparative
observations regarding fire frequency along drainages versus open
slopes, nor have there been any studies documenting the sprouting
response of bigtooth maple on these contrasting sites [26]. Research is
needed in this area. Rogers [57] believes that increases in Gambel oak
and bigtooth maple over the past century are largely due to a
combination of fire suppression, cessation of livestock grazing, and
climatic changes.
Above the mountain-brush zone in Utah and Idaho, bigtooth maple occurs
as a seral understory tree or shrub in Douglas-fir, white fir, and
subalpine fir habitat types [44,62].
In Arizona and New Mexico, bigtooth maple occurs as a shade-tolerant,
climax understory shrub in white fir and Douglas-fir habitat types
adjacent to drainages [17,23].
SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT :
Bigtooth maple is deciduous. The flowers and leaves generally expand at
the same time in late April or May, about 2 weeks before Gambel oak
[21]. Seeds in central Utah mature between late July and mid-August,
with seedfall beginning in mid-August [21]. The leaves turn various
shades of red and orange before being shed in September or October [35].
Flowering times for some western states are as follows [20,21,30,67]:
Location Begining of Flowering End of Flowering
AZ April ----
TX April May
UT April May
WY May July
FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Acer grandidentatum | Bigtooth Maple
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS :
Understory fuels are often sparse under mature maple stands because
shading reduces understory vegetation and maple foliage decomposes
rapidly [26]. Fire spread is, consequently, difficult in bigtooth maple
stands. Hence, bigtooth maple stands burn less frequently than stands
of Gambel oak, conifers, or other vegetation types that adjoin bigtooth
maple stands in the mountain-brush zone.
In Arizona and New Mexico bigtooth maple is primarily restricted to
moist and shady coniferous habitat types along drainages. These moist
sites burn less frequently than nearby uplands [23,45].
Following crown destruction by fire, some bigtooth maple plants resprout
from the root crown, but sprouting vigor is generally thought to be low
[9,26].
POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY :
survivor species; on-site surviving root crown or caudex
FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Acer grandidentatum | Bigtooth Maple
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT :
Limited information regarding fire effects on bigtooth maple indicates
that most plants would be killed or top-killed by fire.
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT :
NO-ENTRY
PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE :
Limited information suggests that bigtooth maple is a poor sprouter.
Research conducted with the closely related and ecologically similar
sugar maple of eastern forests showed it to be a poor sprouter following
burning. Following bole-killing fires, sugar maple trees produced only
a few sprouts of low vigor or failed to sprout altogether [51,64].
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE :
NO-ENTRY
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Managers wishing to prevent the spread of bigtooth maple could probably
do so with prescribed burns. Burning should take place before maple
clones become large, because mature stands often have reduced
understories (reduced fuel loads to carry a fire) [9].
REFERENCES
SPECIES: Acer grandidentatum | Bigtooth Maple
REFERENCES :
1. Alexander, Billy G., Jr.; Ronco, Frank, Jr.; Fitzhugh, E. Lee; Ludwig,
John A. 1984. A classification of forest habitat types of the Lincoln
National Forest, New Mexico. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-104. Fort Collins, CO:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest
and Range Experiment Station. 29 p. [300]
2. Allan, John S. 1962. The plant communities of the big cottonwood canyon
drainage. Salt Lake City: University of Utah. 108 p. Thesis. [9104]
3. Allman, Verl Phillips. 1953. A preliminary study of the vegetation in an
exclosoure in the chaparral of the Wasatch Mountains, Utah. Utah Academy
Proceedings. 30: 63-78. [9096]
4. Barker, Philip A. 1975. Acer grandidentatum and its propagation.
International Plant Propagators' Society, Proceedings. 25: 33-38.
[9252]
5. Barker, Philip A. 1977. Canyon maple - a colorful mountaineer. American
Forests. 83(12): 22-25. [9058]
6. Barker, Philip A.; Freeman, D. Carl; Harper, Kimball T. 1982. Variation
in the breeding system of Acer grandidentatum. Forest Science. 28(3):
563-572. [9060]
7. Barker, Phillip A.; Salunkhe, D. K. 1974. Maple syrup from bigtooth
maple. Journal of Forestry. 72(8): 491-492. [9065]
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. Bradley, Anne F.; Noste, Nonan V.; Fischer, William C. 1991. Fire
ecology of forests and woodlands in Utah. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-287.
Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain
Research Station. 128 p. [18211]
10. Brown, David E.; Lowe, Charles H.; Hausler, Janet F. 1977. Southwestern
riparian communities: their biotic importance and management in Arizona.
In: Johnson, R. Roy; Jones, Dale A., tech. coords. Importance,
preservation and management of riparian habitat: a symposium:
Proceedings; 1977 July 9; Tucson, AZ. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-43. Fort
Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky
Mountain Forest and Range Experiment 201-211. [5348]
11. Burritt, E. A.; Pfister, J. A.; Malechek, J. C. 1988. Effect of drying
method on the nutritive composition of esophageal fistula forage
samples: influence of maturity. Journal of Range Management. 41(4):
346-349. [5239]
12. Christensen, Earl M. 1958. Growth rates and vegetation change in the
oak-maple brush in lower Provo Canyon, Utah. Proceedings of Utah Academy
of Sciences, Arts, and Letters. 35: 167-168. [9635]
13. Christensen, Earl M. 1962. The root system of bigtooth maple. Great
Basin Naturalist. 22: 114-115. [9972]
14. Christensen, Earl M. 1964. Succession in a mountain brush community in
central Utah. Utah Academy Proceedings. 41(1): 10-13. [6913]
15. Christensen, Earl M.; Nixon, Elray S. 1964. Observations on reproduction
of bigtooth maple. Leaflets of Western Botany. 10(7): 97-99. [9200]
16. Dayton, William A. 1931. Important western browse plants. Misc. Publ.
101. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 214 p. [768]
17. DeVelice, Robert L.; Ludwig, John A. 1983. Forest habitat types south of
the Mogollon Rim, Arizona and New Mexico. Final Report. Cooperative
Agreement No. 28-K2-240 between U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station and New
Mexico State University. Las Cruces, NM: New Mexico State University. 47
p. [780]
18. Dick-Peddie, William A.; Hubbard, John P. 1977. Classification of
riparian vegetation. In: Johnson, R. Roy; Jones, Dale A., technical
coordinators. Importance, preservation and management of riparian
habitat: a symposium: Proceedings; 1977 July 9; Tucson, AZ. Gen. Tech.
Rep. RM-43. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 85-90.
Available from: NTIS, Springfield, VA 22151; PB-274 582. [5338]
19. Dina, Stephen J.; Klikoff, Lionel G. 1973. Carbon dioxide exchange by
several streamside and scrub oak community species of Red Butte.
American Midland Naturalist. 89(1): 70-80. [9102]
20. 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]
21. Eastmond, Robert J. 1968. Vegetational changes in a mountain brush
community of Utah during eighteen years. Provo, UT: Brigham Young
University. 64 p. Thesis. [9097]
22. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and
Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
23. Fitzhugh, E. Lee; Moir, William H.; Ludwig, John A.; Ronco, Frank, Jr.
1987. Forest habitat types in the Apache, Gila, and part of the Cibola
National Forests, Arizona and New Mexico. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-145. Fort
Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky
Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 116 p. [4206]
24. Gehlbach, Frederick R.; Gardner, Robert C. 1983. Relationships of sugar
maples (Acer saccharum and A. grandidentatum) in Texas and Oklahoma with
special reference to relict populations. Texas Journal of Science.
35(3): 231-237. [9103]
25. Harper, K. T.; Freeman, D. Carl; Ostler, W. Kent; Klikoff, Lionel G.
1978. The flora of Great Basin mountain ranges: diversity, sources, and
dispersal ecology. In: Harper, Kimball T.; Reveal, F. L., eds.
Intermountain biogeography: a symposium. Great Basin Naturalist Memoirs
No. 2. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University: 81-103. [15100]
26. Harper, Kimball T.; Wagstaff, Fred J.; Kunzler, Lynn M. 1985. Biology
management of the Gambel oak vegetative type: a literature review. Gen.
Tech. Rep. INT-179. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 31 p.
[3286]
27. Hayward, C. Lynn. 1948. Biotic communities of the Wasatch Chaparral,
Utah. Ecological Monographs. 18: 473-506. [9633]
28. Hitchcock, C. Leo; Cronquist, Arthur. 1973. Flora of the Pacific
Northwest. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press. 730 p. [1168]
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. 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]
32. Kufeld, Roland C.; Wallmo, O. C.; Feddema, Charles. 1973. Foods of the
Rocky Mountain mule deer. Res. Pap. RM-111. Fort Collins, CO: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and
Range Experiment Station. 31 p. [1387]
33. Kunzler, L. M. [n.d.]. Oakbrush management plan: Herber, Pleasant Grove,
and Spanish Forks Ranger Districts, Uinta National Forest. Unpublished
report. Provo, UT: Brigham Young Univeristy, Department of Botany and
Range Science. 5 p. On file at: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Intermountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory,
Missoula, MT. [9640]
34. Kunzler, L. M.; Harper, K. T.; Kunzler, D. B. 1981. Compositional
similarity within the oakbrush type in central and northern Utah. Great
Basin Naturalist. 41(1): 147-153. [1390]
35. Lanner, Ronald M. 1983. Trees of the Great Basin: A natural history.
Reno, NV: University of Nevada Press. 215 p. [1401]
36. Laurenzi, Andrew W.; Ohmart, Robert D.; Hink, Valerie C. 1983.
Classification of mixed broadleaf riparian forest in Tonto National
Forest. In: Moir, W. H.; Hendzel, Leonard, technical coordinators.
Proceedings of the workshop on southwestern habitat types; 1983 April
6-8; Albuquerque, NM. Albuquerque, NM: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Southwestern Region: 72-81. [21639]
37. Little, Elbert L. 1944. Acer grandidentatum in Oklahoma. Rhodora. 46:
445450. [9100]
38. 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]
39. 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]
40. Lull, Howard W.; Ellison, Lincoln. 1950. Precipitation in relation to
altitude in central Utah. Ecology. 31(3): 479-484. [1486]
41. 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]
42. Marti, Carl D. 1977. Avian use of an oakbrush community in northern
Utah. Southwestern Naturalist. 22(3): 367-374. [1530]
43. Martin, Alexander C.; Zim, Herbert S.; Nelson, Arnold L. 1951. American
wildlife and plants. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc. 500 p.
[4021]
44. Mauk, Ronald L.; Henderson, Jan A. 1984. Coniferous forest habitat types
of northern Utah. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-170. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment
Station. 89 p. [1553]
45. Moir, William H. 1982. A fire history of the high Chisos, Big Bend
National Park, Texas. Southwestern Naturalist. 27(1): 87-98. [5916]
46. Moir, William H.; Ludwig, John A. 1979. A classification of spruce-fir
and mixed conifer habitat types of Arizona and New Mexico. Res. Pap.
RM-207. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 47 p.
[1677]
47. Monsen, Stephen B. 1983. Plants for revegetation of riparian sites
within the Intermountain region. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Shaw, Nancy,
compilers. Managing Intermountain rangelands--improvement of range and
wildlife habitats: Proceedings of symposia; 1981 September 15-17; Twin
Falls, ID; 1982 June 22-24; Elko, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-157. Ogden,
UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest
and Range Experiment Station: 83-89. [9652]
48. Mueggler, Walter F.; Campbell, Robert B., Jr. 1986. Aspen community
types of Utah. Res. Pap. INT-362. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 69 p.
[1714]
49. Nixon, Elray S. 1967. A comparative study of the mountain brush
vegetation in Utah. Great Basin Naturalist. 27(2): 59-66. [9099]
50. Olson, David F., Jr.; Gabriel, W. J. 1974. Acer L. maple. 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: 187-194. [7462]
51. Perala, Donald A. 1974. Growth and survival of northern hardwood sprouts
after burning. Res. Note NC-176. St. Paul, MN: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station. 4
p. [7349]
52. Plummer, A. Perry; Christensen, Donald R.; Monsen, Stephen B. 1968.
Restoring big-game range in Utah. Publ. No. 68-3. Ephraim, UT: Utah
Division of Fish and Game. 183 p. [4554]
53. 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]
54. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant
geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
55. Ream, Robert Ray. 1964. The vegetation of the Wasatch Mountains, Utah
and Idaho. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin. 178 p. Ph.D. thesis.
[5506]
56. Ritchie, Brent W. 1978. Ecology of moose in Fremont County, Idaho.
Wildlife Bulletin No. 7. Boise, ID: Idaho Department of Fish and Game.
33 p. [4482]
57. Rogers, Garry F. 1982. Then and now: a photographic history of
vegetation change in the central Great Basin Desert. Salt Lake, UT:
University of Utah Press. 152 p. [9932]
58. Smith, Arthur D. 1950. Feeding deer on browse species during winter.
Journal of Range Management. 3(2): 130-132. [68]
59. Smith, Arthur D. 1953. Consumption of native forage species by captive
mule deer during summer. Journal of Range Management. 6: 30-37. [2161]
60. Stauffer, Dean F.; Peterson, Steven R. 1985. Ruffed and blue grouse
habitat use in southeastern Idaho. Journal of Wildlife Management.
49(2): 459-466. [9639]
61. Stauffer, Dean F.; Peterson, Steven R. 1986. Seasonal microhabitat
relationships of blue grouse in southeastern Idaho. Great Basin
Naturalist. 46(1): 117-122. [9638]
62. 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]
63. Sutton, Richard F.; Johnson, Craig W. 1974. Landscape plants from Utah's
mountains. EC-368. Logan, UT: Utah State University, Cooperative
Extension Service. 135 p. [49]
64. Swan, Frederick R., Jr. 1970. Post-fire response of four plant
communities in south-central New York state. Ecology. 51(6): 1074-1082.
[3446]
65. Szaro, Robert C. 1989. Riparian forest and scrubland community types of
Arizona and New Mexico. Desert Plants. 9(3-4): 70-138. [604]
66. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and
Range Experiment Station. 1976. Some important native shrubs of the
west. Ogden, UT. 16 p. [2388]
67. Vines, Robert A. 1960. Trees, shrubs, and woody vines of the Southwest.
Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. 1104 p. [7707]
68. 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]
69. Whittaker, R. H.; Niering, W. A. 1965. Vegetation of the Santa Catalina
Mountains, Arizona: a gradient analysis of the south slope. Ecology. 46:
429-452. [9637]
70. 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]
Index
Related categories for Species: Acer grandidentatum
| Bigtooth Maple
|
 |
