|
Wildlife, Animals, and Plants
|
|
Introductory
SPECIES: Arctostaphylos uva-ursi | Bearberry
ABBREVIATION :
ARCUVA
SYNONYMS :
NO-ENTRY
SCS PLANT CODE :
ARUV
COMMON NAMES :
bearberry
kinnikinnick
TAXONOMY :
The currently accepted scientific name of bearberry is Arctostaphylos
uva-ursi (L.) Spreng [59,67]. The following forms are recognized
[117,149]:
A. u. forma adenotricha (Fern. & Macbr.) Wells
A. u. forma coactilis (Fern. & Macbr.) Wells
A. u. forma longipilosa (Packer & Denford) Wells
A. u. forma stipitata (Packer & Denford) Wells
A. u. forma uva-ursi
Bearberry hybridizes with hairy manzanita (A. columbiana) to produce A.
Xmedia Greene [59,73]. It occasionally hybridizes with greenleaf
manzanita (A. patula) [150].
LIFE FORM :
Shrub
FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS :
No special status
OTHER STATUS :
NO-ENTRY
COMPILED BY AND DATE :
M. F. Crane, February 1991
LAST REVISED BY AND DATE :
NO-ENTRY
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION :
Crane, M. F. 1991. Arctostaphylos uva-ursi. In: Remainder of Citation
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Arctostaphylos uva-ursi | Bearberry
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION :
Bearberry is a widespread, circumpolar species [111]. In North America,
it grows from the northern half of California north to Alaska and across
Canada and the northern United States to New England and Newfoundland.
Its range extends south in the Rocky Mountains to New Mexico. In
eastern North America, it extends south along the Atlantic Coast to New
Jersey and in the Appalachian Mountains to Virginia. Rare, disjunct
populations occur in Georgia [59,117,152].
Most infrataxa occur in the Rocky Mountains and are widespread.
Distribution of the forms is as follows:
Forma adenotricha is common in the Rocky Mountains but absent in the
Appalachian Mountain region and both Coasts. A closely related taxa is
found in the Sierra Nevada [117,149].
Forma coactilis may not be present in Alaska; it is most abundant
on both Coasts. It is found farther south along the Pacific Coast and
in the Appalachian Mountains than the other forms [117,149]. It is the
primary form in Ohio and New England [15,125].
Forma longipilosa is absent from the Appalachian Mountains and very
rare on both Coasts [117,149].
Forma stipitata grows only in the Rocky Mountains and far West
[117,149].
Forma uva-ursi extends the farthest north in the Arctic and is
circumboreal through Eurasia [117,149].
ECOSYSTEMS :
FRES10 White - red - jack pine
FRES11 Spruce - fir
FRES13 Loblolly - shortleaf pine
FRES19 Aspen - birch
FRES20 Douglas-fir
FRES21 Ponderosa pine
FRES22 Western white pine
FRES23 Fir - spruce
FRES25 Larch
FRES26 Lodgepole pine
FRES28 Western hardwoods
FRES29 Sagebrush
FRES34 Chaparral - mountain shrub
FRES36 Mountain grasslands
FRES38 Plains grasslands
FRES44 Alpine
STATES :
AK CA CO CT GA ID IL ME MA MI
MN MT NV NH NJ NM ND OH OR PA
SD UT VT VA WA WI WY AB BC LB
MB NB NF NT NS ON PE PQ SK YT
ADMINISTRATIVE UNITS :
ACAD APIS BAND BIHO BRCA CACO
CODA CUVA DEWA DENA DETO DINO
FIIS FOBU GATE GLBA GLAC GRTE
ISRO JECA LACL MORA MORU NOCA
OLYM PIRO PORE REDW ROMO SLBE
THRO VOYA WICA YELL WRST YUCH
BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :
1 Northern Pacific Border
2 Cascade Mountains
4 Sierra Mountains
5 Columbia Plateau
6 Upper Basin and Range
8 Northern Rocky Mountains
9 Middle Rocky Mountains
10 Wyoming Basin
11 Southern Rocky Mountains
12 Colorado Plateau
13 Rocky Mountain Piedmont
15 Black Hills Uplift
16 Upper Missouri Basin and Broken Lands
KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :
K005 Mixed conifer forest
K011 Western ponderosa forest
K012 Douglas-fir forest
K013 Cedar - hemlock - pine forest
K014 Grand fir - Douglas-fir forest
K015 Western spruce - fir forest
K016 Eastern ponderosa forest
K017 Black Hills pine forest
K018 Pine - Douglas-fir forest
K019 Arizona pine forest
K020 Spruce - fir - Douglas-fir forest
K021 Southwestern spruce - fir forest
K022 Great Basin pine forest
K026 Oregon oakwoods
K037 Mountain mahogany - oak scrub
K050 Fescue - wheatgrass
K052 Alpine meadows and barren
K056 Wheatgrass - needlegrass shrubsteppe
K063 Foothills prairie
K064 Grama - needlegrass - wheatgrass
K066 Wheatgrass - needlegrass
K067 Wheatgrass - bluestem - needlegrass
K081 Oak savanna
K093 Great Lakes spruce - fir forest
K095 Great Lakes pine forest
K110 Northeastern oak - pine forest
SAF COVER TYPES :
1 Jack pine
12 Black spruce
15 Red pine
18 Paper birch
45 Pitch pine
107 White spruce
202 White spruce - paper birch
206 Engelmann spruce - subalpine fir
208 Whitebark pine
210 Interior Douglas-fir
211 White fir
212 Western larch
213 Grand fir
215 Western white pine
216 Blue spruce
217 Aspen
218 Lodgepole pine
219 Limber pine
229 Pacific Douglas-fir
237 Interior ponderosa pine
251 White spruce - aspen
SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES :
NO-ENTRY
HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES :
In British Columbia bearberry indicates sites that are moisture
deficient because of rapid drainage [70]. Published classification
schemes listing bearberry as an indicator species or a dominant part of
vegetation include:
The Alaska vegetation classification [141]
A classification of spruce-fir and mixed conifer habitat types of
Arizona and New Mexico [94]
Forest habitat types in the Apache, Gila, and part of the Cibola
National Forests, Arizona and New Mexico [40]
A preliminary classification of the natural vegetation of Colorado [7]
Forest habitat types of Montana [107]
Forest and woodland habitat types (plant associations) of northern New
Mexico and northern Arizona [77]
Climax forest series of northern New Mexico and southern Colorado [28]
A classification of forest habitat types of northern New Mexico and
southern Colorado [29]
Riparian zone associations: Deschutes, Ochoco, Fremont, and Winema
National Forests [72]
Plant association and management guide: Willamette National Forest [57]
Plant associations of south Chiloquin and Klamath Ranger
Districts--Winema National Forest [64]
Plant associations of the central Oregon Pumice Zone [145]
Coniferous forest habitat types of northern Utah [90]
Forested plant associations of the Okanogan National Forest [151]
The forest communities of Mount Rainier National Park [43]
Forest types of the North Cascades National Park Service Complex [3]
Alpine and high subalpine plant communities of the North Cascades Range,
Washington and British Columbia [33]
Forest vegetation of eastern Washington and northern Idaho [26]
Field guide to forest habitat types of northern Wisconsin [71]
Forest vegetation of the Bighorn Mountains, Wyoming: a habitat type
classification [61]
Forest vegetation of the Medicine Bow National Forest in southeastern
Wyoming [5]
The Pinus contorta forests of Banff and Jasper National Parks: a study
in comparative synecology and syntaxonomy [76]
Field guide to forest ecosystems of west-central Alberta [20]
VALUE AND USE
SPECIES: Arctostaphylos uva-ursi | Bearberry
WOOD PRODUCTS VALUE :
NO-ENTRY
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE :
Bearberry browse is of moderate importance to bighorn sheep, mountain
goat, black-tailed deer, and white-tailed deer [9,142]. Bearberry is
important to moderately important browse for Rocky Mountain mule deer
[9,24,75]. Elk browse it on winter ranges in Alberta [148]. During
early spring in Montana, moose browse bearberry in snowfree areas near
trees on south and west aspects [133].
Since bearberry's low-quality fruit spoils slowly, it lasts through
winter and is available when other fruits are gone [134]. The fruits of
bearberry are eaten by songbirds, gamebirds, including five species of
grouse and wild turkey, deer, elk, and small mammals [49,89,134,148].
Black bear and grizzly bear eat bearberry fruits in the autumn, but
fruits are especially important to bears in the early spring
[55,83,84,148]. In Montana, grouse may be attracted to very recent
burns by fire-exposed bearberry fruit [68].
Hummingbirds take nectar from the flowers of bearberry and have been
observed to alight momentarily to probe low flowers [108].
PALATABILITY :
Bearberry is unpalatable to domestic livestock but relished by wildlife
[49]. It is palatable to white-tailed deer in the Black Hills of South
Dakota from fall to late spring [58]. Bearberry fruits are relished and
highly important to black bear in the Yukon [84]. The fruit is of
moderate importance to grizzly bear in Montana [83]. The degree of use
shown by livestock and wildlife species for bearberry is rated as
follows [30]:
CO MT UT WY ND
Cattle poor poor poor poor poor
Sheep poor poor poor poor poor
Horses poor poor poor poor poor
Pronghorn ---- ---- poor poor poor
Elk fair poor poor poor ----
Mule deer fair fair poor fair fair
White-tailed deer ---- fair ---- fair fair
Small mammals good fair good good
Small nongame birds good fair fair fair
Upland game birds good fair good good
Waterfowl ---- ---- poor poor
NUTRITIONAL VALUE :
The energy and protein values of bearberry browse are low [30]. Results
of a nutrient study in stands of sapling and pole-sized ponderosa pine
in the Black Hills of South Dakota showed no trends in the nutrients
sampled relative to stocking (shade) levels that ranged from 0 (0 m2/ha
basal area) to unthinned (40 m2/ha basal area) [124]. Production
decreases when crown cover exceeds 40 percent [105]. Average
percentages of the six nutrients studied for bearberry forage are given
below [124]:
Attribute Pole Stands Sapling Stands
Mean Standard Error Mean Standard Error
Crude Protein 5.5 0.1 5.7 0.1
Acid Detergent Fiber 25.8 0.6 26.8 0.1
Acid Detergent Lignin 12.6 0.3 13.3 0.2
Ash 3.15 0.55 3.08 0.09
Calcium 0.63 0.01 0.60 0.01
Phosphorus 0.14 0.01 0.14 0.01
A similar nutrient study done previously in the Black Hills gave the
percent composition by season [45]:
Attribute Oct. 1 Jan. 1 April 1 July 1
Carotene (micrograms
per gram) 18.67 10.86 31.97 38.10
Moisture 47.54 49.11 36.65 60.81
Ash 1.93 2.01 2.27 1.66
Crude Fat 5.97 4.88 8.28 4.72
Crude Fiber 9.00 8.29 9.18 6.22
Crude Protein 2.70 2.55 2.98 3.30
N-Free Extract 32.86 33.16 40.63 23.29
Phosphorus 0.064 0.067 0.09 0.08
Calcium 0.39 0.60 0.52 0.22
Iron (ppm) 270.75 309.28 236.51 173.70
Manganese (ppm) 12.38 13.36 20.91 16.29
COVER VALUE :
Bearberry has little or no cover value for most game animals but may
have fair cover value for upland game birds in Colorado and Utah. It
offers fair to good cover for small mammals and small nongame birds
[30].
VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES :
Bearberry is very useful in erosion control plantings and attractive
along highway embankments [11,73,118,148]. It is recommended for
revegetation projects on well-drained soils in Alaska and moist to dry
sites in most of Alberta. It is well suited to coarse-textured soils
that are low in nutrients. Bearberry can be agressive on open sites and
may invade disturbed sites vegetatively [148]. Its potential is better
as a long-term revegetative species than as a short-term revegatative
species because its growth rate is moderate [30,148]. Growth is good on
gentle to steep sites [30].
Stem cuttings taken in the fall are described as the best method of
establishment [11,63,148]. Bearberry roots normally form
ectendomycorrhizae, but cuttings can be inoculated with endomycorrhizal
fungi prior to rooting [99]. Propagation by root cuttings has been done
successfully [63]. Good seed crops occur at 1- to 5-year intervals.
Seedling establishment is difficult and time consuming
[11,30,46,146,148]. Details on seed cleaning, stratification,
scarification, and germination as well as culture are well known and
described [11,46,142,146,148]. Seed is available commercially [148].
OTHER USES AND VALUES :
Smoking the leaves as a tobacco substitute is the most widely mentioned
human use of bearberry. However, medical uses of bearberry leaves were
recognized by early Romans, Native Americans, and settlers [54,95,142].
At the present, bearberry leaves are used medicinally in Poland and many
other countries [46]. The most important medical use of the leaves is
for treating urinary tract disease. They can also be used to make a
highly astringent wash and as a vasoconstrictor for the endometrium of
the uterus [46,54,79,95]. Some Native American tribes powdered the
leaves and applied them to sores [54]. For medical use the leaves are
best collected in the fall [46].
The berrylike drupes have dry, insipid, and tasteless flesh when raw but
are useful emergency food [53,54,142]. Native Americans fried them or
dried them and used them in pemmican [54]. The fruit is also used in
jelly, jam, and sauces [53]. In Scandinavia, bearberry is used
commercially to tan leather [79].
Bearberry is an attractive and excellent garden ground cover on sunny,
sandy banks, along roadways, rock walls, rockeries, parking strips, and
other sunny places in urban areas [73,128]. It withstands low summer
moisture; some forms will withstand salt spray, grow very slowly, or
grow under semishady conditions [73,128]. Branches with fruit are used
for fall and Christmas decorations [53]. Bearberry plants are available
in nurseries [11,119]. Propagation by layering or rooted cuttings is
easy and well described [46,73,128].
MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Bearberry increases following moderate disturbances [151]. In western
Montana, it increased strongly after clearcutting with no further
treatment but showed little change after clearcutting with broadcast
burning or mechanical scarification [6]. It is easily killed by
scraping or fire but is able to regenerate from surviving parts or seed
[6]. In north-central Washington it is often the only species growing
on abandoned stock driveways [151]. Bearberry is moderately resistant
to trampling and has low short-term and long-term resilience [19]. In
northern Idaho, its cover was sharply reduced in grazed stands, and it
was considered to be less resistant to trampling due to its small size
and shallow rhizomes (buried stems) [153]. In the Wind River Range of
Wyoming, bearberry increases in response to heavy livestock grazing and
trampling and becomes characteristic of disturbed aspen (Populus
tremuloides) stands [110].
Bearberry is a host to yellow witch's broom, which also affects three
species of spruce (Picea spp.) in Alberta [148]. Bearberry's
sensitivity to herbicides varies from susceptible to intermediate
resistance, depending on both the type of treatment and the life stage
treated [9,13]. Resprouts following disturbance are easily killed by
herbicides, while old-growth is more difficult to kill [13]. Detailed
treatment information is available [13,104].
Bearberry is relatively insensitive to the effects of sulfur dioxide gas
[60]. Concentrations of heavy metals due to air pollution have been
determined for fruit, stems, and leaves [126].
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Arctostaphylos uva-ursi | Bearberry
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
Bearberry is a prostrate, evergreen shrub that produces extensive
trailing stems [92]. The bark is thin and exfoliates in largish flakes
[142]. The leathery, dark green leaves are about 0.5 to 1 inch
(1.27-2.54 cm) long. The flowers are borne in terminal racemes [59] and
are followed by bright red berrylike drupes, 0.25 to 0.4 inch (6-10 mm)
broad. Each drupe contains five (sometimes four) single-seeded nutlets
[50,59].
In western Montana, bearberry roots were found to extend to a depth of
36 inches (91 cm) on one site and 72 inches (183 cm) on a drier site
with the same soil type [100]. In two jack pine stands in central
Alberta, bearberry roots extended from 43.3 to 53.1 inches deep (110-135
cm) [135].
The forms (sometimes classed as varieties) of bearberry are primarily
distinguished by the types of pubescence. These have been described in
detail [15,117,142].
RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :
Chamaephyte
REGENERATION PROCESSES :
Vegetative: Regeneration is primarily asexual [129]. After the second
year, the stems (stolons) produce adventitious, feeding roots at the
nodes which seldom grow deeper than the duff layer [92]. If a stem is
severed from the original plant, roots develop which penetrate into
mineral soil [92]. When plants are growing in sandy soil or loose duff,
the creeping stems often grow under the surface [14,111,129]. After 7
or 8 years, small nodules may appear at intervals along buried stems.
These nodules resemble nitrogen-fixing root nodules but examination has
shown these nodules to be composed of latent buds that have no ability
to fix nitrogen [38,136]. In eastern North America and Scotland, plants
subjected to physical damage or fire appear to have more of these
structures [136]. On 10-year-old or older stems, there may be as many
as 100 buds surrounding the lignotuber [111]. Bearberry's clonal
pattern is generally compact. Recruitment of new seedlings into
established clones has been reported [36]. A growth model based on a
detailed study of the morphology and growth of bearberry is available
[111,112].
Seed: The berrylike drupes persist on the plants through winter and are
dispersed by animals and gravity [114,134]. Seeds have hard seedcoats
and dormant embryos, and may be stored in the soil [11,81]. Soil-stored
seed has been found near the surface [87]. Study results indicate that
removing the surface litter increases seedling establishment, although
the total number of germinants in this study was very small [87]. In a
natural environment, seedling growth is slow for the first 3 years, then
increases. During the first year, root growth exceeds shoot growth
[111]. Bearberry plants which originated naturally as seedlings appear
to be rare [111].
SITE CHARACTERISTICS :
Habitat: Bearberry is most often a dominant understory species in open
pine forests under jack pine (Pinus banksiana), lodgepole pine (P.
contorta), limber pine (P. flexilis), ponderosa pine (P. ponderosa) or
pitch pine (P. rigida) [47,96,113,138,148]. It is also found in the
understories of Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), subalpine fir
(Abies lasiocarpa), white spruce (Picea glauca), black spruce (P.
mariana), paper birch (Betula papyrifera), aspen, and some eastern
deciduous forests [6,30,96,134]. In the Pacific Northwest and Rocky
Mountains, it grows on steep, sunny, dry slopes [41,131]. In the
southern boreal forests of Saskatchewan and Manitoba, bearberry is
characteristic of dry and very dry forests [113]. It is common in
heathland communities but grows in a variety of boreal forest sites,
including eroded banks and peat bogs. It also grows in sand-dune areas
of subboreal regions [111]. Bearberry is fairly abundant in the alpine
zone of the Northwest and northern Rocky Mountains and may be dominant
on stable, well drained, south-facing sites [10,27,31,32,33]. It grows
under Oregon white oak (Quercus garryana) in Washington woodlands [42].
Bearberry is conspicuous in the Badlands of eastern Alberta [96]. In
the foothills of the northern Great Plains, it grows in the rough fescue
(Festuca scabrella) prairie [21,80]. In the Alaskan taiga, bearberry
occupies warmer sites [140].
In Michigan and Wisconsin, bearberry is found on dry sand plains, and in
Wisconsin it grows in bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum)-grasslands
[18,25]. In Ohio it grows on the beaches and dunes along Lake Erie
[15]. In Ontario, it frequently grows on the shores of lakes and rivers
and in semiopen coniferous woods [127]. In New England it grows in dry
sandy open woods [125]. Bearberry is one of the most abundant low
understory species in the fire-prone, pygmy pine forests of the New
Jersey Pine Barrens [91].
Habitat variation by form: Collections of North American bearberry
plants exhibit form differences between sites. In the Rocky Mountains
these ecological differences between forms are less pronounced
[116,117]. Forma coactilis grows best on the driest sites and is
generally more common on acidic and drier substrates. It is the only
form found along the Coasts (pH of most sites <6.6) and on the
relatively moist substrates of the Appalachian Mountains (pH of most
sites 3.7-5.5). Forma coactilis grows most frequently in full sunlight
and is relatively uncommon on shaded sites [116,117]. Forma adenotricha
is most common on basic substrates and seldom occurs on very acidic
soils. It seems to grow better on relatively moist sites. In the Great
Lakes area, it is the most shade-tolerant form [116,117]. Forma
stipitata is more frequent on relatively basic sites; forma longpilosa
grows well on acidic soils. Both grow well on sites with intermediate
moisture status. Forma stipitata is most common on open sites in the
Rocky Mountains; forma longipilosa grows in intermediate light
conditions [116,117].
Soils: Bearberry grows on a wide range of soil textures, although it is
commonly found on well-drained soils that have relatively low amounts of
clay and silt [8,76,142,147,148]. It frequently occurs on sandy soils,
shallow soils, soils on rock outcrops, and rapidly drained
coarse-skeletal soils [70,127]. Along both Coasts and in conifer
forests, bearberry occurs on dry, acidic substrates [117]. In the
Appalachian Mountains, it usually grows on moist, acidic soils. The
sandy to rocky soils on which bearberry grows in the Great Lakes region
are neutral to basic [117]. In Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, Utah,
and Wyoming, bearberry growth is fair to good on acidic soils; poor to
fair on organic soils and poor on saline, sodic and sodic-saline soils.
Optimum soil depth in this area is 10 to 20 inches (25.4-50.8 cm) [30].
In the subalpine zone of western Montana, bearberry grows on soils
derived from granite and quartzite parent materials but not on soils
developed on limestone [48]. However, it grows on soils formed from
calcareous parent materials in the alpine zone [10]. It is found on
basaltic lava flows, mudflow deposits, serpentine outcrops, and coarse
glacial outwash in the Pacific Northwest [42].
Bearberry is common on dry, nutrient-poor soils [8,76,148]. Information
relating bearberry growth habits to specific soil nutrient levels is
available for British Columbia [147]. Results of one study indicate
that leaves are retained longer on plants growing on a sandy,
nutrient-poor substrate than on plants growing on a site with better
nutrient availability [111].
Elevation: Elevational ranges in some western regions are
[20,30,142,150]:
Minimum Maximum
feet meters feet meters
Alberta 500 150 2000 610
Colorado 6000 1829 11700 3566
Montana 2900 884 7700 2347
New Mexico 5000 1524 10000 3048
Utah 7021 2140 11516 3510
Wyoming 4000 1219 9700 2957
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS :
Bearberry is a seral, shade-intolerant species often found in seral,
open pine forests [47,69,96,113,114,148]. It grows best in high light
situations and becomes very rare when shade becomes intense [8,41,123].
In the open, bearberry forms a compact and intricate mat; under a
canopy, long, thin trailing stems creep along the forest floor. Shoots
are more upright under partial shade than in the open [111]. Pubescence
of cuttings from the same plant may vary with light intensity and
substrate [117]. Results of a Rocky Mountain study of postdisturbance
vegetation cover indicate that the primary variables governing early
seral bearberry cover are overtopping cover of other shrubs and site
variables such as elevation [78].
Bearberry pioneers on dry rock outcrops in the Pacific Northwest [42].
It is an integral part of succession on dry, stable, sand dunes in the
Great Lakes and along both the Atlantic and Pacific coasts [34,42]. On
Lake Michigan sand dunes, it invades bunchgrass communities and thrives
under slow burial by drifting sand that covers part of the plant [103].
On drier sites in Yukon Territory and the Alaskan taiga, bearberry is
part of secondary succession in communities with aspen and willows
(Salix spp.) [56,140]. Bearberry enters seral communities on glacial
outwash in the pioneer stage, reaches its highest cover early in the
meadow stage, and continues declining in the early shrub stage [139].
Bearberry succeeds lichens in northern Manitoba when the lichens are
damaged by caribou use [93].
SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT :
Fruit dispersal in eastern deciduous forests occurs between August and
March [134]. In California, flowering primarily occurs between March
and May, fruit ripening between June and August, and seed dispersal from
August to March [11]. In Ontario, bloom is in May and June, and fruit
is ripe by August or September [127]. In the northern Great Plains,
flowering is in June, and fruit develops by September [132]. In New
England, flowering is from May 1 to June 10 [125]. Virginia and
disjunct Georgia populations bloom in May and June [152]. In the Black
Hills of South Dakota, growth begins in May and ends in September, but
over half the season's total growth occurs during June [123].
Phenological observations of bearberry made over an 8-year period east
of the Continental Divide in Montana and in Yellowstone National Park
are summarized below [121]:
Earliest Average Latest
Date Date Date
Leaf buds burst May 27 June 6 June 22
Leaves full grown July 21 August 2 August 15
Flowers start May 15 May 30 June 20
Flowers end May 31 June 11 June 30
Fruits ripe May 25 August 23 September 25
Seed fall starts (2
observations) October 16 October 16 October 16
FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Arctostaphylos uva-ursi | Bearberry
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS :
Bearberry is a sprouting species that is best suited to short fire
cycles with low fuel buildup and low fire intensities [65,76,114,122].
It possesses latent buds on the horizontal stems and dormant buds on the
stembase or root crown that allow sprouting of surviving plants or
rooted stems [22,23,39,85]. In northern Saskatchewan, it is a strong
sprouter from golfball-sized lignotubers located in mineral soil [114].
The crown of bearberry plants may lie just below the top of mineral
soil, but as duff increases it migrates into the duff layer and becomes
susceptible to fire [14,92,114]. Bearberry's main roots extend into
mineral soil, but it has been considered to be incapable of regeneration
from the roots if the crown is killed [81,92]. Since it can be
propagated from root cuttings [63], it might be capable of regeneration
from the roots under some circumstances. Bearberry may be a
seedbanking species with fire resistant seed [81,114].
POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY :
Prostrate woody plant, stem growing on organic mantle
Small shrub, adventitious-bud root crown
Ground residual colonizer (on-site, initial community)
Initial-offsite colonizer (off-site, initial community)
Secondary colonizer - off-site seed
FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Arctostaphylos uva-ursi | Bearberry
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT :
Fire effects vary with the season, severity and intensity of the fire,
site and surface soil characteristics, and the age, location, and vigor
of the plants. When bearberry is rooted in mineral soil, it can survive
moderate fire [114]. However, when bearberry is rooted in organic soil
horizons, a fire that removes those horizons will kill bearberry
[6,14,39]. If the duff and soil are moist and not completely consumed
by fire, some bearberry root crowns may survive [23]. Rooted stolons
under rocks, moist logs, or in other protected microsites may also
survive [22]. Bearberry plants are sufficiently resistant to ignition
to inhibit fire spread in light, flashy fuels [46,68].
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT :
In a controlled experiment, five bearberry plants were burned at
different temperatures. Heat treatments lasted about 2 minutes apiece.
Bearberry response was strongest at the middle temperature of 1112
degrees F (600 degrees C). The number of postfire sprouts after 3
months, and the amount of cover, height of the sprouts, and oven-dry
biomass after 17 months were recorded [86]:
Temperature in degrees F (degrees C)
752 (400) 1112 (600) 1472 (800)
mean S.E. mean S.E. mean S.E.
Sprout numbers 44 20 48 13 26 7
Percent cover 42 15 78 19 45 19
Height (in) 2.4 3.5 2.4 0.4 1.6 0.4
(cm) 6 9 6 1 4 1
Biomass (oz) 1.1 0.4 1.9 0.5 0.9 0.4
(g) 30 11 54 15 26 10
PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE :
Bearberry sprouts from the root crown and establishes from
seedbank-stored seed after fire [85,114,115,129]. Bearberry seeds have
been reported to survive fire in the upper soil and be stimulated to
germinate by heat from the fire [114]. Rowe [114] suggests that
bearberry may be a shade-intolerant species that stores seed in the
soil.
After fire in heathland, bearberry sprouts vigorously and expands
rapidly [85]. Bearberry reinvades burned sites from adjacent, unburned
vegetation and/or from seed [6,23,39,81,148].
In boreal forest, bearberry has regenerated from surviving basal sprouts
following fire [115,129]. Full recovery in many areas has been slow
[17,32,120].
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE :
Bearberry's response is variable and dependent upon survival of shallow
regenerative organs and seed sources. Several studies seem to indicate
a slow postfire response with a definite increase in early succession.
Immediate postfire results of a study in Scotland heath were variable.
In one set of plots, seedling establishment during the first 3 years
after a March fire was good [87]. A second set of plots monitored
following the same fire had good vegetative recovery but no seedlings
[88]. Results of a northwestern Montana study showed the following
average percent cover of bearberry 3 years after fire on plots burned at
different intensities [130]:
Unburned Light burn Medium burn Hot burn
3.27 1.80 0.89 none
Following spring burning in a Montana shrubfield created 35 years
previously by wildfire, bearberry volume decreased the first two
seasons, but bearberry appeared to be recovering well [101]. Bearberry
had an average of 0.6 percent frequency in samples from sites where
slash pile fires occurred 2 to 15 years previously and was considered to
be a retreater on hotly burned sites [144]. Following fire in Colorado
lodgepole pine forest stands, bearberry was one of the major shrub
dominants during the first century of succession [17]. However, data
from this study do not show any bearberry in the first few years after
fire [17]. Ten or 11 years after fire on the Tillamook Burn in Oregon,
bearberry had 11 percent frequency on burned areas and was not present
in or near plots in adjacent unburned forest [98]. Following fire in
British Columbia, bearberry cover is weakly correlated with
environmental factors. Evidently, bearberry is able to grow on a
variety of sites under postfire conditions [41]. Twenty-nine years
after an alpine wildfire in British Columbia, bearberry cover and
frequency were slightly higher in burned areas of both krummholz and
heath than in unburned areas [32].
During the first 3 years after prescribed fire on jack pine clearcuts in
Michigan, bearberry cover and frequency were very low when compared to
similar clearcuts that were not burned or undisturbed forest [1].
Another Michigan study found the highest postfire frequency of bearberry
occured 31 years after fire [120]. Results of a paired plot study in
the northern Wisconsin pine barrens indicated that bearberry frequency
decreases after a single fire or repeated fires [143].
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Equations have been developed for estimating the fuel loading of
bearberry from cover and plant height values in the northern and central
Rocky Mountains [4,16].
REFERENCES
SPECIES: Arctostaphylos uva-ursi | Bearberry
REFERENCES :
1. Abrams, Marc D.; Dickmann, Donald I. 1984. Floristic composition before
and after prescribed fire on a jack pine clear-cut site in northern
lower Michigan. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 14: 746-749.
[7236]
2. Acsai, Jan; Largent, David L. 1983. Mycorrhizae of Arbutus menziesii
Pursh. and Arctostaphylos manzanita Parry in northern California.
Mycotaxon. 16(2): 519-536. [12209]
3. Agee, James K.; Kertis, Jane. 1987. Forest types of the North Cascades
National Park Service Complex. Canadian Journal of Botany. 65:
1520-1530. [6327]
4. Alexander, Martin E. 1978. Estimating fuel weights of two common shrubs
in Colorado lodgepole pine stands. Res. Note RM-354. Fort Collins, CO:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest
and Range Experiment Station. 4 p. [302]
5. Alexander, Robert R.; Hoffman, George R.; Wirsing, John M. 1986. Forest
vegetation of the Medicine Bow National Forest in southeastern Wyoming:
a habitat type classification. Res. Pap. RM-271. Fort Collins, CO: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and
Range Experiment Station. 39 p. [307]
6. Arno, Stephen F.; Simmerman, Dennis G.; Keane, Robert E. 1985. Forest
succession on four habitat types in western Montana. Gen. Tech. Rep.
INT-177. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 74 p. [349]
7. Baker, William L. 1984. A preliminary classification of the natural
vegetation of Colorado. Great Basin Naturalist. 44(4): 647-676. [380]
8. Bakuzis, E. V.; Hansen, H. L. 1962. Ecographs of shrubs and other
undergrowth species of Minnesota forest communities. Minnesota Forestry
Notes. 117: 1-2. [10316]
9. Balfour, Patty M. 1989. Effects of forest herbicides on some important
wildlife forage species. Victoria, BC: British Columbia Ministry of
Forests, Research Branch. 58 p. [12148]
10. Bamberg, Samuel A.; Major, Jack. 1968. Ecology of the vegetation and
soils associated with calcareous parent materials in three alpine
regions of Montana. Ecological Monographs. 38(2): 127-167. [12554]
11. Berg, Arthur R. 1974. Arctostaphylos Adans. manzanita. 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: 228-231. [7428]
12. 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]
13. 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]
14. Bradley, Anne Foster. 1984. Rhizome morphology, soil distribution, and
the potential fire survival of eight woody understory species in western
Montana. Missoula, MT: University of Montana. 183 p. Thesis. [502]
15. Braun, E. Lucy. 1961. The woody plants of Ohio. Columbus, OH: Ohio State
University Press. 362 p. [12914]
16. Brown, James K.; Marsden, Michael A. 1976. Estimating fuel weights of
grasses, forbs, and small woody plants. Res. Note INT-210. Ogden, UT:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest &
Range Experiment Station. 11 p. [5030]
17. Clagg, Harry B. 1975. Fire ecology in high-elevation forests in
Colorado. Fort Collins, CO: Colorado State University. 137 p. Thesis.
[113]
18. Coffman, Michael S.; Alyanak, Edward; Resovsky, Richard. 1980. Field
guide habitat classification system: For Upper Peninsula of Michigan and
northeast Wisconsin. [Place of publication unknown]: Cooperative
Research on Forest Soils. 112 p. [8997]
19. Cole, David N. 1988. Disturbance and recovery of trampled montane
grassland and forests in Montana. Res. Pap. INT-389. Ogden, UT: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research
Station. 37 p. [3622]
20. Corns, I. G. W.; Annas, R. M. 1986. Field guide to forest ecosystems of
west-central Alberta. Edmonton, AB: Canadian Forestry Service, Northern
Forestry Centre. 251 p. [8998]
21. Coupland, Robert T. 1961. A reconsideration of grassland classification
in the northern Great Plains of North America. Journal of Ecology. 49:
135-167. [12588]
22. Crane, Marilyn F. 1982. Fire ecology of Rocky Mountain Region forest
habitat types. Final Report Contract No. 43-83X9-1-884. Missoula, MT:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Region 1. 272 p. On file
with: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain
Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT. [5292]
23. 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]
24. Currie, P. O.; Reichert, D. W.; Malechek, J. C.; Wallmo, O. C. 1977.
Forage selection comparisons for mule deer and cattle under managed
ponderosa pine. Journal of Range Management. 30(5): 352-356. [4697]
25. Curtis, John T. 1959. The vegetation of Wisconsin. Madison, WI: The
University of Wisconsin Press. 657 p. [7116]
26. Daubenmire, Rexford F.; Daubenmire, Jean B. 1968. Forest vegetation of
eastern Washington and northern Idaho. Technical Bulletin 60. Pullman,
WA: Washington State University, Agricultural Experiment Station. 104 p.
[749]
27. del Moral, Roger; Wood, David M. 1988. The high elevation flora of Mount
St. Helens, Washington. Madrono. 35(4): 309-319. [6412]
28. DeVelice, Robert L.; Ludwig, John A. 1983. Climax forest series of
northern New Mexico and southern Colorado. In: Moir, W. H.; Hendzel,
Leonard, tech. coords. 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: 45-53.
[779]
29. DeVelice, Robert L.; Ludwig, John A.; Moir, William H.; Ronco, Frank,
Jr. 1986. A classification of forest habitat types of northern New
Mexico and southern Colorado. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-131. Fort Collins, CO:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest
and Range Experiment Station. 59 p. [781]
30. 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]
31. Douglas, George Wayne. 1970. A vegetation study in the subalpine zone of
the western North Cascades, Washington. Seattle, WA: University of
Washington. 293 p. Thesis. [8560]
32. Douglas, George W.; Ballard, T. M. 1971. Effects of fire on alpine plant
communities in the North Cascades, Washington. Ecology. 52(6):
1058-1064. [6738]
33. Douglas, George W.; Bliss, L. C. 1977. Alpine and high subalpine plant
communities of the North Cascades Range, Washington and British
Columbia. Ecological Monographs. 47: 113-150. [9487]
34. Duncan, Wilbur H.; Duncan, Marion B. 1987. The Smithsonian guide to
seaside plants of the Gulf and Atlantic Coasts from Louisiana to
Massachusetts, exclusive of lower peninsular Florida. Washington, DC:
Smithsonian Institution Press. 409 p. [12906]
35. Eastwood, Alice. 1934. A revision of Arctostaphylos with key and
descriptions. Leaflets of Western Botany. 1(11): 105-127. [12207]
36. Eriksson, O. 1989. Seedling dynamics and life histories in clonal
plants. Oikos. 55: 231-238. [10322]
37. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and
Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
38. Farnsworth, Raymond B. 1975. Nitrogen fixation in shrubs. In: Stutz,
Howard C., ed. Wildland shrubs: Proceedings--symposium and workshop;
1975 November 5-7; Provo, UT. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University:
32-71. [909]
39. Fischer, William C.; Bradley, Anne F. 1987. Fire ecology of western
Montana forest habitat types. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-223. Ogden, UT: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research
Station. 95 p. [633]
40. 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]
41. Forsythe, Warren Louis. 1975. Site influence on the post-fire
composition of a Rocky Mountain forest. Missoula, MT: University of
Montana. 173 p. Dissertation. [6723]
42. Franklin, Jerry F.; Dyrness, C. T. 1973. Natural vegetation of Oregon
and Washington. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-8. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range
Experiment Station. 417 p. [961]
43. Franklin, Jerry F.; Moir, William H.; Hemstrom, Miles A.; [and others].
1988. The forest communities of Mount Rainier National Park. Scientific
Monograph Series No 19. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior,
National Park Service. 194 p. [12393]
44. 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]
45. Gastler, George F.; Moxon, Alvin L.; McKean, William T. 1951.
Composition of some plants eaten by deer in the Black Hills of South
Dakota. Journal of Wildlife Management. 15(4): 352-357. [3996]
46. Gawlowska, Jadwiga. 1969. Seminatural cultivation of economically
important plant species growing in the wild state. Biological
Conservation. 1: 151-155. [13013]
47. Givnish, Thomas J. 1981. Serotiny, geography, and fire in the pine
barrens of New Jersey. Evolution. 35(1): 101-123. [8634]
48. Goldin, A.; Nimlos, T. J. 1977. Vegetation patterns on limestone and
acid parent materials in the Garnet Mountains of western Montana.
Northwest Science. 51(3): 149-160. [10675]
49. Gullion, Gordon W. 1964. Wildlife uses of Nevada plants. Contributions
toward a flora of Nevada No. 49. Beltsville, MD: U. S. Department of
Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, National Arboretum Crops
Research Division. 170 p. [6729]
50. Great Plains Flora Association. 1986. Flora of the Great Plains.
Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. 1392 p. [1603]
51. Hall, Frederick C. 1984. Ecoclass coding system for the Pacific
Northwest plant associations. R6 Ecol 173-1984. Portland, OR: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 83
p. [7650]
52. Harrington, H. D. 1964. Manual of the plants of Colorado. 2d ed.
Chicago: The Swallow Press Inc. 666 p. [6851]
53. Harrington, H. D. 1976. Edible native plants of the Rocky Mountains.
Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico Press. 392 p. [12903]
54. Hart, J. 1976. Montana--native plants and early peoples. Helena, MT:
Montana Historical Society. 75 p. [9979]
55. Hatler, David F. 1972. Food habits of black bears in interior Alaska.
Canadian Field-Naturalist. 86(1): 17-31. [10389]
56. Hawkes, Brad C. 1982. Fire history and ecology of forest ecosystems in
Kluane National Park. In: Wein, Ross W.; Riewe, Roderick R.; Methven,
Ian R., eds. Resources and dynamics of the Boreal Zone; [Date of
conference unknown]; Thunder Bay, ON. [Place of publication unknown].
Association of Canadian Universities for Northern Studies: 266-280.
[7444]
57. Hemstrom, Miles A.; Logan, Sheila E.; Pavlat, Warren. 1987. Plant
association and management guide: Willamette National Forest. R6-Ecol
257-B-86. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Pacific Northwest Region. 312 p. [13402]
58. Hill, Ralph R. 1946. Palatability ratings of Black Hills plants for
white-tailed deer. Journal of Wildlife Management. 10(1): 47-54. [3270]
59. Hitchcock, C. Leo; Cronquist, Arthur; Ownbey, Marion. 1959. Vascular
plants of the Pacific Northwest. Part 4: Ericaceae through
Campanulaceae. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press. 510 p.
[1170]
60. Hocking, Drake. 1975. Effects on the forest of sulphur dioxide from a
sulphur fire near Edson, Alberta. Information Report NOR-X-139.
Edmonton, AB: Environment Canada, Canadian Forestry Service, Northern
Forest Research Center. 8 p. [7610]
61. Hoffman, George R.; Alexander, Robert R. 1976. Forest vegetation of the
Bighorn Mountains, Wyoming: a habitat type classification. Res. Pap.
RM-170. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 38 p.
[1180]
62. Hoffman, George R.; Alexander, Robert R. 1987. Forest vegetation of the
Black Hills National Forest of South Dakota and Wyoming: a habitat type
classification. Res. Pap. RM-276. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment
Station. 48 p. [1181]
63. Holloway, Patricia; Zasada, John. 1979. Vegetative propagation of 11
common Alaska woody plants. Res. Note PNW-334. Portland, OR: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and
Range Experiment Station. 12 p. [1183]
64. Hopkins, William E. 1979. Plant associations of south Chiloquin and
Klamath Ranger Districts-- Winema National Forest. R6-Ecol-79-005.
Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific
Northwest Region. 96 p. [7339]
65. Johnson, E. A. 1975. Buried seed populations in the subarctic forest
east of Great Slave Lake, Northwest Territories. Canadian Journal of
Botany. 53: 2933-2941. [6466]
66. Johnston, Barry C. 1987. Plant associations of Region Two: Potential
plant communities of Wyoming, South Dakota, Nebraska, Colorado, and
Kansas. 4th ed. R2-ECOL-87-2. Lakewood, CO: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. 429 p. [3519]
67. 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]
68. Keown, L. D. 1977. Interim report: Black Tail Hills Prescribed Fire
Project: implementation and results. Great Falls, MT: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Lewis and Clark National Forest. 9 p.
[12233]
69. Kittredge, J., Jr. 1934. Evidence of the rate of forest succession on
Star Island, Minnesota. Ecology. 15(1): 24-35. [10102]
70. Klinka, K.; Krajina, V. J.; Ceska, A.; Scagel, A. M. 1989. Indicator
plants of coastal British Columbia. Vancouver, BC: University of British
Columbia Press. 288 p. [10703]
71. Kotar, John; Kovach, Joseph A.; Locey, Craig T. 1988. Field guide to
forest habitat types of northern Wisconsin. Madison, WI: University of
Wisconsin, Department of Forestry; Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources. 217 p. [11510]
72. Kovalchik, Bernard L. 1987. Riparian zone associations: Deschutes,
Ochoco, Fremont, and Winema National Forests. R6 ECOL TP-279-87.
Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific
Northwest Region. 171 p. [9632]
73. Kruckeberg, A. R. 1982. Gardening with native plants of the Pacific
Northwest. Seattle: University of Washington Press. 252 p. [9980]
74. 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]
75. 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]
76. La Roi, George H.; Hnatiuk, Roger J. 1980. The Pinus contorta forests of
Banff and Jasper National Parks: a study in comparative synecology and
syntaxonomy. Ecological Monographs. 50(1): 1-29. [8347]
77. Larson, Milo; Moir, W. H. 1987. Forest and woodland habitat types (plant
associations) of northern New Mexico and northern Arizona. 2d ed.
Albuquerque, NM: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Southwestern Region. 90 p. [8947]
78. Laursen, Steven B. 1984. Predicting shrub community composition and
structure following management disturbance in forest ecosystems of the
Intermountain West. Moscow, ID: University of Idaho. 261 p.
Dissertation. [6717]
79. Lewin, Renate. 1989. Vanishing resources; Protecting medicinal plants of
the forest. Forest World. 5(2): 15-20. [11058]
80. Looman, J. 1969. The fescue grasslands of western Canada. Vegetatio. 19:
128-145. [1471]
81. Lutz, H. J. 1956. Ecological effects of forest fires in the interior of
Alaska. Tech. Bull. No. 1133. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service. 121 p. [7653]
82. 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]
83. Mace, Richard D. 1986. Analysis of grizzly bear habitat in the Bob
Marshall Wilderness, Montana. 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: 136-149.
[10814]
84. MacHutchon, A. Grant. 1989. Spring and summer food habits of black bears
in the Pelly River Valley, Yukon. Northwest Science. 63(3): 116-118.
[12249]
85. Mallik, A. U.; Gimingham, C. H. 1983. Regeneration of heathland plants
following burning. Vegetatio. 53: 45-58. [6337]
86. Mallik, A. U.; Gimingham, C. H. 1985. Ecological effects of heather
burning. II. Effects on seed germination and vegetative regeneration.
Journal of Ecology. 73: 633-644. [6338]
87. McClaran, Mitchel P.; Bartolome, James W. 1989. Fire-related recruitment
in stagnant Quercus douglasii populations. Canadian Journal of Forest
Research. 19: 580-585. [7416]
88. Mallik, A. U.; Hobbs, R. J.; Rahman, A. A. 1988. Seed-bed substrates and
revegetation of Calluna heathlands following burning. Journal of
Environmental Management. 27: 379-397. [6594]
89. Martin, Alexander C.; Zim, Herbert S.; Nelson, Arnold L. 1951. American
wildlife and plants. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc. 500 p.
[4021]
90. 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]
91. McCormick, Jack; Buell, Murray F. 1968. The Plains: pigmy forests of the
New Jersey Pine Barrens, a review and annotated bibliography. New Jersey
Academy of Sciences Bulletin. 13: 20-34. [11611]
92. McLean, Alastair. 1968. Fire resistance of forest species as influenced
by root systems. Journal of Range Management. 22: 120-122. [1621]
93. Miller, Donald R. 1976. Taiga winter range relationships and diet.
Canadian Wildlife Service Rep. Series No. 36. Ottawa, ON: Environment
Canada, Wildlife Service. 42 p. (Biology of the Kaminuriak population of
barren-ground caribou; pt 3). [13007]
94. 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]
95. Moore, Michael. 1979. Medicinal plants of the Mountain West. Santa Fe,
NM: Museum of New Mexico Press. 200 p. [12905]
96. Moss, E. H. 1955. The vegetation of Alberta. Botanical Review. 21(9):
493-567. [6878]
97. Munz, Philip A. 1973. A California flora and supplement. Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press. 1905 p. [6155]
98. Neiland, Bonita J. 1958. Forest and adjacent burn in the Tillamook Burn
area of northwestern Oregon. Ecology. 39(4): 660-671. [8879]
99. Nelson, S. D. 1987. Rooting and subsequent growth of woody ornamental
softwood cuttings treated with endomycorrhizal inoculum. Journal of the
American Society of Horticultural Science. 112(2): 263-266. [8377]
100. Nimlos, Thomas J.; Van Meter, Wayne P.; Daniels, Lewis A. 1968. Rooting
patterns of forest understory species as determined by radioiodine
absorption. Ecology. 49(6): 1145-1151. [4120]
101. Noste, Nonan V. 1982. Vegetation response to spring and fall burning for
wildlife habitat improvement. In: Baumgartner, David M., compiler &
editor. Site preparation and fuels management on steep terrain:
Proceedings of a symposium; 1982 February 15-17; Spokane, WA. Pullman,
WA: Washington State University, Cooperative Extension: 125-132. [1784]
102. Noste, Nonan V.; Bushey, Charles L. 1987. Fire response of shrubs of dry
forest habitat types in Montana and Idaho. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-239.
Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain
Research Station. 22 p. [255]
103. Olson, Jerry S. 1958. Rates of succession and soil changes on southern
Lake Michigan sand dunes. Botanical Gazette. 119(3): 125-170. [10557]
104. Parker, Robert, compiler. 1982. Reaction of various plants to 2,4-D,
MCPA, 2,4,5-T, silvex and 2,4-DB. Pullman, WA: Washington State
University, College of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension. 61 p. In
cooperation with: U.S. Department of Agriculture. [1817]
105. Pase, Charles P. 1958. Herbage production and composition under immature
ponderosa pine stands in the Black Hills. Journal of Range Management.
11: 238-243. [1823]
106. Peck, Morton E. 1941. A manual of the higher plants of Oregon. Portland,
OR: Binfords & Mort. 800 p. [12444]
107. 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]
108. Pojar, Jim. 1975. Hummingbird flowers of British Columbia. Syesis. 8:
25-28. [6537]
109. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant
geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
110. Reed, Robert M. 1971. Aspen forests of the Wind River Mountains,
Wyoming. American Midland Naturalist. 86(2): 327-343. [1951]
111. Remphrey, W. R.; Steeves, T. A.; Neal, B. R. 1983. The morphology and
growth of Arctostaphylos uva-ursi (bearberry): an architectural
analysis. Canadian Journal of Botany. 61: 2430-2450. [2963]
112. Remphrey, W. R.; Neal, B. R.; Steeves, T. A. 1983. The morphology and
growth of Arctostaphylos uva-ursi (bearberry): an architectural model
simulating colonizing growth. Canadian Journal of Botany. 61( 451):
2451-2457. [2964]
113. Rowe, J. S. 1956. Uses of undergrowth plant species in forestry.
Ecology. 37(3): 461-473. [8862]
114. Rowe, J. S. 1983. Concepts of fire effects on plant individuals and
species. In: Wein, Ross W.; MacLean, David A., eds. SCOPE 18: The role
of fire in northern circumpolar ecosystems. Chichester; New York: John
Wiley & Sons: 135-154. [2038]
115. Rowe, J. S.; Scotter, G. W. 1973. Fire in the boreal forest. Quaternary
Research. 3: 444-464. [72]
116. Rosatti, Thomas J. 1982. Trichome variation and the ecology of
Arctostaphylos in Michigan. Michigan Botanist. 21: 171-180. [13059]
117. Rosatti, Thomas J. 1987. Field and garden studies of Arctostaphylos
uva-ursi (Ericaceae) in North America. Systematic Botany. 12(1): 61-77.
[2025]
118. Rudolf, Paul O. 1950. Forest plantations in the Lake States. Tech. Bull.
1010. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 171 p. [13463]
119. Sampson, Arthur W.; Jespersen, Beryl S. 1963. California range
brushlands and browse plants. Berkeley, CA: University of California,
Division of Agricultural Sciences, California Agricultural Experiment
Station, Extension Service. 162 p. [3240]
120. Scheiner, Samuel M.; Teeri, James A. 1981. A 53-year record of forest
succession following fire in northern lower Michigan. Michigan Botanist.
20(1): 3-14. [5022]
121. Schmidt, Wyman C.; Lotan, James E. 1980. Phenology of common forest
flora of the northern Rockies--1928 to 1937. Res. Pap. INT-259. Ogden,
UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest
and Range Experiment Station. 20 p. [2082]
122. Scotter, George W. 1972. Chemical composition of forage plants from the
Reindeer Preserve, Northwest Territories. Arctic. 25(1): 21-27. [16563]
123. Severson, Kieth E.; Garrett, E. Chester. 1974. Growth characteristics of
bearberry in the Black Hills. Res. Note. RM-254. Fort Collins, CO: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and
Range Experiment Station. 3 p. [5408]
124. Severson, Kieth E.; Uresk, Daniel W. 1988. Influence of ponderosa pine
overstory on forage quality in the Black Hills, South Dakota. Great
Basin Naturalist. 48(1): 78-82. [2807]
125. Seymour, Frank Conkling. 1982. The flora of New England. 2d ed.
Phytologia Memoirs 5. Plainfield, NJ: Harold N. Moldenke and Alma L.
Moldenke. 611 p. [7604]
126. Shaw, George. 1981. Concentrations of twenty-eight elements in fruiting
shrubs downwind of the smelter at Flin Flon, Manitoba. Environmental
Pollution (Series A). 25(3): 197-209. [10794]
127. Soper, James H.; Heimburger, Margaret L. 1982. Shrubs of Ontario. Life
Sciences Misc. Publ. Toronto, ON: Royal Ontario Museum. 495 p. [12907]
128. Sperka, Marie. 1973. Growing wildflowers: A gardener's guide. New York:
Harper & Row. 277 p. [10578]
129. Stallard, Harvey. 1929. Secondary succession in the climax forest
formations of northern Minnesota. Ecology. 10(4): 476-547. [3808]
130. Stark, N.; Steele, R. 1977. Nutrient content of forest shrubs following
burning. American Journal of Botany. 64(10): 1218-1224. [2224]
131. Stelfox, John G. 1976. Range ecology of Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep in
Canadian national parks. Report Series Number 39. Ottawa, ON: Canadian
Wildlife Service. 50 p. [13851]
132. Stephens, H. A. 1973. Woody plants of the North Central Plains.
Lawrence, KS: The University Press of Kansas. 530 p. [3804]
133. Stevens, David R. 1970. Winter ecology of moose in the Gallatin
Mountains, Montana. Journal of Wildlife Management. 34(1): 37-46.
[7932]
134. Stiles, Edmund W. 1980. Patterns of fruit presentation and seed
dispersal in bird-disseminated woody plants in the Eastern deciduous
forest. American Naturalist. 116(5): 670-688. [6508]
135. Strong, W. L.; LaRoi, G. H. 1986. A strategy for concurrently monitoring
the plant water potentials of spatially separate forest ecosystems.
Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 16(2): 346-351. [10805]
136. Tiffney, W. N., Jr.; Benson, D. R.; Eveleigh, D. E. 1978. Does
Arctostaphylos uva-ursi (bearberry) have nitrogen-fixing root nodules?.
American Journal of Botany. 65(6): 625-628. [13495]
137. 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]
138. Uresk, Daniel W.; Severson, Kieth E. 1989. Understory-overstory
relationships in ponderosa pine forests, Black Hills, South Dakota.
Journal of Range Management. 42(3): 203-208. [6705]
139. Viereck, Leslie A. 1966. Plant succession and soil development on gravel
outwash of the Muldrow Glacier, Alaska. Ecological Monographs. 36(3):
181-199. [12484]
140. Viereck, Leslie A. 1975. Forest ecology of the Alaska taiga. In:
Proceedings of the circumpolar conference on northern ecology; 1975
September 15-18; Ottawa, ON. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service: 1-22. [7315]
141. Viereck, L. A.; Dyrness, C. T.; Batten, A. R.; Wenzlick, K. J. 1992. The
Alaska vegetation classification. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-286. Portland,
OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest
Research Station. 278 p. [2431]
142. Vines, Robert A. 1960. Trees, shrubs, and woody vines of the Southwest.
Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. 1104 p. [7707]
143. Vogl, Richard J. 1971. Fire and the northern Wisconsin pine barrens. In:
Proceedings, annual Tall Timbers Fire ecology conference; 1970 August
20-21; New Brunsick, Canada. No. 10. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers
Research Station: 175-209. [2432]
144. Vogl, Richard J.; Ryder, Calvin. 1969. Effects of slash burning on
conifer reproduction in Montana's Mission Range. Northwest Science.
43(3): 135-147. [8546]
145. Volland, Leonard A. 1985. Plant associations of the central Oregon
Pumice Zone. Rt-ECOL-104-1985. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 138 p. [7341]
146. Vories, Kimery C. 1981. Growing Colorado plants from seed: a state of
the art. Volume I. Shrubs. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-103. Ogden, UT: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and
Range Experiment Station. 80 p. [3426]
147. Wali, M. K.; Krajina, V. J. 1973. Vegetation-environment relationships
of some sub-boreal spruce zone ecosystems in British Columbia.
Vegetatio. 26: 237-381. [9856]
148. Watson, L. E.; Parker, R. W.; Polster, D. F. 1980. Manual of plant
species suitablity for reclamation in Alberta. Vol. 2. Forbs, shrubs and
trees. Edmonton, AB: Land Conservation and Reclamation Council. 537 p.
[8855]
149. Wells, Philip V. 1988. New combinations in Arctostaphylos (Ericaceae):
Annotated list of changes in status. Madrono. 35(4): 330-341. [6448]
150. 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]
151. Williams, Clinton K.; Lillybridge, Terry R. 1983. Forested plant
associations of the Okanogan National Forest. R6-Ecol-132b. Portland,
OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest
Region. 116 p. [2566]
152. Wofford, B. Eugene. 1989. Guide to the vascular plants of the Blue
Ridge. Athens, GA: The University of Georgia Press. 384 p. [12908]
153. Zimmerman, G. T.; Neuenschwander, L. F. 1984. Livestock grazing
influences on community structure, fire intensity, and fire frequency
within the Douglas-fir/ninebark habitat type. Journal of Range
Management. 37(2): 104-110. [10103]
154. 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: Arctostaphylos uva-ursi
| Bearberry
|
 |
