|
Wildlife, Animals, and Plants
|
|
Introductory
SPECIES: Artemisia frigida | Fringed Sagebrush
ABBREVIATION :
ARTFRI
SYNONYMS :
NO-ENTRY
SCS PLANT CODE :
ARFR4
COMMON NAMES :
fringed sagebrush
pasture sagebrush
prairie sagewort
fringed sagewort
estafiata
fringed wormwood
arctic sagebrush
mountain sagebrush
wild sagebrush
worm sagebrush
pasture sage
TAXONOMY :
The fully documented scientific name of fringed sagebrush is Artemisia
frigida Willd. Both diploid and tetraploid cytotypes have been
identified, but no morphological distinctions have been noted between
the two races [67]. Numerous ecotypes of fringed sagebrush have also
been reported [46]. Fringed sagebrush is not known to hybridize with
any other species in the genus Artemisia.
LIFE FORM :
Shrub
FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS :
No special status
OTHER STATUS :
NO-ENTRY
COMPILED BY AND DATE :
D. Tirmenstein, September 1986
LAST REVISED BY AND DATE :
D. Tirmenstein, November 1988
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION :
Tirmenstein, D. 1986. Artemisia frigida. In: Remainder of Citation
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Artemisia frigida | Fringed Sagebrush
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION :
Fringed sagebrush is one of the most widely distributed species in the
genus Artemisia [14]. It occurs on dry open sites in foothills,
mountains, and plains from Mexico northward to Canada and Alaska, and
into Eurasia [14,34]. This species reaches its greatest abundance in
the high plains of the United States and Canada, and extends from
eastern Washington east to Wisconsin and Kansas [21]. Fringed sagebrush
also grows as an introduced species along the Atlantic Coast of North
America [21].
ECOSYSTEMS :
FRES15 Oak - hickory
FRES17 Elm - ash - cottonwood
FRES20 Douglas-fir
FRES21 Ponderosa pine
FRES23 Fir - spruce
FRES26 Lodgepole pine
FRES29 Sagebrush
FRES30 Desert shrub
FRES34 Chaparral - mountain shrub
FRES35 Pinyon - juniper
FRES36 Mountain grasslands
FRES39 Prairie
FRES44 Alpine
STATES :
AK AZ CO ID IA KS MI MN MO MT
NE NV NM ND OK OR SD TX UT WA
WI WY AB BC MB SK NT YT
ADMINISTRATIVE UNITS :
AGFO BADL BIHO BICA BLCA BRCA
CANY CARE CHCU COLM DENA DETO
DINO FLFO FOBU GLBA GLAC GRCA
GRTE GRKO GRSA LAME MEVE PEFO
PIPE ROMO THRO WACA WICA WUPA
YELL YUCH
BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :
5 Columbia Plateau
6 Upper Basin and Range
7 Lower 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
14 Great Plains
15 Black Hills Uplift
16 Upper Missouri Basin and Broken Lands
KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :
K011 Western ponderosa forest
K012 Douglas-fir forest
K015 Western spruce - fir forest
K016 Eastern ponderosa forest
K017 Black Hills pine forest
K018 Pine - Dougals-fir forest
K019 Arizona pine forest
K021 Southwestern spruce - fir forest
K023 Juniper - pinyon woodland
K037 Mountain mahogany - oak scrub
K038 Great Basin sagebrush
K040 Saltbush - greasewood
K051 Wheatgrass - bluegrass
K052 Alpine meadows and barren
K055 Sagebrush steppe
K056 Wheatgrass - needlegrass shrubsteppe
K063 Foothills prairie
K064 Grama - needlegrass - wheatgrass
K065 Grama - buffalo grass
K066 Wheatgrass - needlegrass
K067 Wheatgrass - bluestem - needlegrass
K068 Wheatgrass - grama - buffalo grass
K070 Sandsage - bluestem prairie
K074 Bluestem prairie
K075 Nebraska Sand Hills prairie
K081 Oak savanna
SAF COVER TYPES :
210 Interior Douglas-fir
219 Limber pine
237 Interior ponderosa pine
238 Western juniper
239 Pinyon - juniper
SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES :
NO-ENTRY
HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES :
Fringed sagebrush is a common constituent of a number of grassland,
shrubland, and drier coniferous habitat types [53,57]. In the
Intermountain region, fringed sagebrush occurs as a dominant in dense
stands along shallow depressions which collect moisture and spring
runoff [14,74]. It also grows as an understory dominant in some
ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) communities and in open parks
interspersed with ponderosa pine stands [46,74]. Fringed sagebrush is a
common constituent of many big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata),
Douglas-fir (Psedudotsuga menziesii), white fir (Abies concolor), and
spruce-fir (Picea spp.-Abies spp.) communities [48]. Fringed sagebrush
commonly occurs with the following species: blue grama (Bouteloua
gracilis), needle-and-thread (Stipa comata), mountain muhly
(Muhlenbergia montana), buffalograss (Buchloe dactyloides), prairie
junegrass (Koeleria cristata), rough fescue (Festuca scabrella), aster
(Aster spp.), ragweed (Ambrosia spp.), sunflower (Helianthus annuus),
fleabane (Erigeron spp.), Hood phlox (Phlox hoodii), pricklypear
(Opuntia spp.), potentilla (Potentilla spp.), big sagebrush (Artemisia
tridentata), skunkbrush sumac (Rhus trilobata), and rabbitbrush
(Chrysothamnus spp.).
Published classifications listing fringed sagebrush as a dominant or
indicator species include:
Sagebrush-steppe habitat types in northern Colorado: a first
approximation [28]
Forest vegetation of the Gunnison and parts of the Uncompahgre National
Forests: a preliminary habitat type classification [42]
Plant communities and vegetation pattern as affected by various
treatments in shortgrass prairies of northeastern Colorado [51]
Shrub-steppe habitat types of Middle Park, Colorado [71]
VALUE AND USE
SPECIES: Artemisia frigida | Fringed Sagebrush
WOOD PRODUCTS VALUE :
NO-ENTRY
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE :
The value of fringed sagebrush to wildlife and livestock varies
seasonally and geographically. For many wildlife species it is a
preferred forage during spring, fall, and winter but is of little value
during summer. Winter use may be limited in some areas, as deep snows
cover this low-growing shrub [14].
Wildlife: Elk, pronghorn, mule deer, white-tailed deer, bison, bighorn
sheep, Dall sheep, and mountain goats feed on fringed sagebrush
[14,33,43,55]. In Wind Cave National Park, South Dakota, fringed
sagebrush is an important late summer, fall, and winter food for elk and
pronghorn [R. Klukas, pers. comm.], and on some western rangelands,
fringed sagebrush is the most important food of pronghorn. Fringed
sagebrush has comprised 35 to 63 percent of the winter diet of bighorn
in parts of British Columbia. In some areas, it is the single most
important forage plant of Dall sheep from December through April. In
parts of the shortgrass prairie, bison use may be significant (more than
20 percent of the diet) during March [14]. Bison often frequent
disturbed sites such as black-tailed prairie dog colonies, which are
commonly dominated by fringed sagebrush [4,15]. Smaller mammals, such
as the black-tailed prairie dog and desert cottontail, may also utilize
this plant [14,31]. A number of bird species consume fringed sagebrush
wherever available. It is the most important sage grouse food in
central Montana, where it is readily eaten from March though November
[76].
Livestock: Fringed sagebrush is used to some degree by cattle and by
domestic sheep and goats. It is considered good cattle forage in some
areas [14], but in other locations it is not utilized until more
preferred species become scarce or unavailable [35]. In many areas,
fringed sagebrush is considered very good forage for domestic sheep and
goats, particularly during the spring, fall, and winter. In parts of
Montana, it comprised up to 60 percent of sheep diets during February
and March, even though cover amounted to less than 1 percent [14].
PALATABILITY :
Palatability varies geographically and seasonally. Ecotypic variants
apparently differ in palatability [14], with overall preference highest
in the Southwest [74]. The volatile oil content of fringed sagebrush
peaks in summer, rendering the plant unpalatable to many ungulates
during this season [14,54]. Seasonal palatability to white-tailed deer
of the Black Hills was rated as follows [33]:
Season Palatability
January - March medium
April - June low
July - September unpalatable
October - December low
Palatability to livestock and wildlife by geographic location has been
rated as follows [14,24]:
.NS
CO MT ND UT WY
Cattle Poor Poor Poor Fair Poor
Sheep Good Fair Fair Good Good
Horses Fair Poor Poor Fair Fair
Pronghorn Good Good Fair Good Good
Bighorn Good ---- ---- ---- ----
Elk Good Good ---- Good Fair
Mountain goat Good ---- ---- ---- ----
Mule deer Good Fair Fair Good Good
White-tailed deer ---- Poor ---- ---- Fair
Small mammals ---- Fair ---- Good Fair
Small nongame birds ---- Fair ---- Fair Fair
Upland game birds ---- Fair Poor Good Fair
Waterfowl ---- ---- ---- Poor Poor
NUTRITIONAL VALUE :
Fringed sagebrush provides at least fair energy and protein value. This
species rates relatively high in dry matter digestibility, digestible
energy, and digestible protein. Fringed sagebrush provides up to 2,275
kcal/kg of digestible energy in winter and 3,473 kcal/kg in spring [14].
It met or exceeded crude protein and phosphorus requirements for
wintering deer in South Dakota. Fringed sagebrush can provide up to 45
percent of digestible dry matter content in spring, and 59.5 percent in
winter. The overall average crude protein level is 9.3 percent, which
equates to approximately 2.20 pounds per acre. In South Dakota, gross
energy content of fringed sagebrush averages 5.068 kcal per gram, or
54,530 kcal per acre [23].
The food value of fringed sagebush varies according to phenological
development and perhaps ecotype as well. Nutritive information for
fringed sagebrush at different phenological stages is provided below
[14,35].
month/stage ash crude EE CF NFE
protein
June/vegetative 17.4 21.3 2.4 14.6 34.3
July/floral shoots
forming 7.4 11.9 3.2 32.3 45.2
Sept/full bloom 8.7 10.1 3.6 35.7 41.9
Oct/dormant 7.7 8.8 4.9 39.0 39.6
North Dakota -
maturity moisture% ash% crude ether crude N-free
protein% extract% fiber% extract%
max. growth July 10 15.00 6.75 11.92 4.42 31.06 30.85
full bloom Sept 2 15.00 5.46 7.99 1.69 28.25 41.61
COVER VALUE :
The low-growing fringed sagebrush has minimal cover value for larger
wildlife species, but it does provide some cover for smaller birds and
mammals. The degree to which fringed sagebrush provides environmental
protection during one or more seasons for wildlife species is as follows
[24]:
CO MT ND UT WY
Pronghorn ---- ---- Poor Poor Poor
Elk ---- ---- ---- Poor Poor
Mule deer ---- ---- ---- Poor Poor
White-tailed deer Poor ---- ---- ---- ----
Small mammals ---- Poor ---- Good Poor
Small nongame birds ---- Poor ---- Fair Poor
Upland game birds ---- Poor Poor Poor Poor
VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES :
Fringed sagebrush is tolerant of drought and salt and can grow well on a
variety of sites [14]. Its rapid growth and wide distribution make it a
useful rehabilitation species [58]. Fringed sagebrush has a relatively
deep and extensive root system which enables it to stabilize soils and
minimize erosion [38,74]. It is well adapted for rehabilitation
projects on many arid lands in the subalpine zone of the Wasatch Plateau
of Utah and on depleted rangelands of southwestern Idaho [38,58,63].
Fringed sagebrush is generally rated as having a high to moderate value
for long-term revegetation and moderate value for short-term
revegetation projects [24].
Fringed sagebrush can be seeded onto a variety of disturbed sites,
although direct seeding is sometimes erratic [58]. Seeds are generally
planted in the spring [68] at a rate of 0.2 to 0.3 pounds per acre [63].
Hay from native grasslands which contains fringed sagebrush seed has
been successsfully used on disturbed sites both as a mulch and as a seed
source [62]. Good establishment of fringed sagebrush has been achieved
through this method. Seedling establishment tends to be greater after
hay is stored for a year [61]. Seedling establishment varies in
different years, depending on seed production. Ries and Hoffman [61]
reported from 35 to 283 seedlings established annually per kg of hay.
Fringed sagebrush can also be propagated vegetatively. Successful
results have been obtained from cuttings taken in February through May
and then treated wilth 0.1 percent IBA powder [38]. Natural spread
through vegetative means is moderate compared with other native species
[58].
OTHER USES AND VALUES :
Fringed sagebrush is potentially valuable as a biogeochemical indicator
of mineral deposits. In a Colorado study, Lovering and Hedal [44] found
that levels of silver, copper, and lead present in ashed samples of
fringed sagebrush leaves, stems, and blossoms were closely correlated
with the degree of mineralization in the area in which the plant grew.
Evidence suggests that fringed sagebrush may be a good indicator of
metallic ore deposits in the Basin and Range and possibly of uranium in
the Uravan mineral belt of Colorado and Utah [44]. Researchers have
observed traces of the following elements in fringed sagebrush tissues:
iron, magnesium, silver, boron, barium, cadmium, copper, lanthamum,
molybdenum, nickel, lead, strontium, vanadium, zinc, zirconium, sodium,
beryllium, bismuth, cobolt, cromium, niobium, tin, yttrium and anomalous
amounts of silver, bismuth, copper, lead, tin, yttrium, zinc, and
zirconium [44]. Generally, both the number and intensity of the
anomolies are related to the amount of mineralization. Higher anomalies
are typically observed in fringed sagebrush plants growing on bedrock
rather than on alluvium [44]. Fringed sagebrush may be valuable as a
biogeochemical indicator both because of its tendency to accumulate
anomalous amounts of a number of elements and because of its extremely
wide distribution.
The attractive foliage of fringed sagebrush makes it a potentially
useful landscaping plant [38]. It is well suited for use in borders, as
gravel cover, or for a colorful accent [70].
Fringed sagebrush was historically considered to have certain medicinal
values [69].
MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Fringed sagebrush typically increases in response to livestock grazing
[12,17,18,35,37,53] and may replace more desirable forage species such
as rough fescue (Festuca scabrella) and other native perennial
bunchgrasses [13,52]. Fringed sagebrush can be an important indicator
of overgrazing [35,64].
In the northern Great Plains, fringed sagebrush increased rapidly during
the first 10 years after heavy grazing and then decreased during the
next 15 years. Within 25 years, the density of fringed sagebrush
approximated the density on lightly grazed ranges [14]. In a Colorado
study, summer cattle grazing had little effect on fringed sagebrush
cover or percent composition [14]. However, Houston and Woodward [37]
observed that in the northern Great Plains, fringed sagebrush cover was
greatest under moderate cattle grazing on summer ranges and on heavily
or moderately grazed winter ranges.
Although little evidence is available, fringed sagebrush may respond
somewhat differently to sheep utilization. A study of vegetative
response to sheep utilization on needlegrass (Stipa spp.) and blue grama
range revealed a general decrease in fringed sagebrush over time [66].
Although populations of fringed sagebrush often increase following heavy
grazing, individual plants may be harmed. Fringed sagebrush produces
increased amounts of seed and more but smaller plants in response to
heavy grazing pressure. Individual plants are relatively slow to
recover [14]. The short stature of fringed sagebrush presumably
provides some protection for this plant.
A number of clipping studies have concentrated on the effects of
defoliation on fringed sagebrush. Two defoliations during the later
part of the growing season are most injurious to the plant [11]. Damage
is typically most severe when plants are defoliated during rapid growth
and when plants are near maturity, or by two heavy defoliations during
quiescence and rapid growth. Moderate defoliation during quiescence and
rapid growth stages is apparently less damaging [11]. Grazing damage
may be particularly severe when carbohydrate reserves are low [49].
Typically, defoliation reduces herbage yield, with a single heavy
defoliation producing reductions of 50 percent or more, and multiple
defoliations reducing plant height by 75 percent or more [11,73].
Overall vigor, live crown cover, height, live crown diameter, and total
nonstructural carbohydrate (TNC) reserves were also much reduced by
multiple defoliation [11,14]. Clipping studies suggest that complete
rest in late phenological stages during some years may be required to
maintain the health of fringed sgebrush [11]. A rest period of even 14
to 24 months may be insufficient for fringed sagebrush to recover vigor,
herbage yield, and carbohydrate reserves [73].
Results from a northeastern Wyoming suggest that summer cattle grazing
may cause fringed sagebrush to respond as an increaser, but heavy winter
elk use may cause populations to decrease [40]. Fringed sagebrush has
been found to increase in response to black-tailed prairie dog
colonization of mixed-grass prairie communities in South Dakota [16].
Removal or reduction of fringed sagebrush could potentially increase
forage production on some degraded ranges. However, control is
extremely difficult due to the prolific seeding capabilities of this
species. Limited evidence suggests that sheep or goat utilization
during the winter months may be more effective in eliminating fringed
sagebrush than herbicides or mechanical removal. Fringed sagebrush
removal may be extremely deterimental to wildlife species. Therefore,
caution should be used where wildife utilization occurs in early spring,
fall, or winter [14].
Efforts have been made to increase herbage yields in native grasslands
of the northern Great Plains by the application of nitrogen fertilizers.
The plant density of fringed sagebrush was found to increase
significantly each year with the application of greater amounts of
nitrogen in a North Dakota study [30].
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Artemisia frigida | Fringed Sagebrush
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
Fringed sagebrush is a low, mat-forming suffrutescent perennial subshrub
with physiological characteristics typically found in both cool and warm
season plants [4,14,34]. It typically reaches 4 to 16 inches (10-40 cm)
in height and rarely exceeds 24 inches (60 cm) [34,74]. A woody base
gives rise to semiherbaceous annual stems [74]. Leaves are finely
dissected and numerous [21]. Flowers are yellow and discoid [78]. The
gray to brown achenes are flattened with rounded edges [78].
Fringed sagebrush is noted for its relatively deep and extensive root
system. The composition of the root system is highly variable, which
enables this species to survive on many types of sites. Well-developed
taproots are produced where deep moisture penetration occurs, but where
surface moisture is greater or where water penetration is prevented by
runoff, no well-developed tap root is formed [19]. A fine network of
fibrous roots, which arises adventitiously from the horizontal stem, is
frequently concentrated near the soil surface [19]. Rooting depths vary
considerably depending on soil type, associated vegetation, and water
availability. Ecotypic variation may also occur. Rooting depths of 18
to 65 inches (45-165 cm) have been reported [19]. Rooting is generally
deep and extensive throughout much of the Great Plains, enabling fringed
sagebrush to survive drought periods which commonly occur there [19].
In mountainous regions, the root system tends to be fibrous and
relatively shallow [19]. Even in the same geographic location,
topographic factors may influence rooting depths. Average maximum
rooting depths within the same soil zones in Saskatchewan ranged from 16
inches (46 cm) on upper slopes to 50 inches (127 cm) on lower slopes
[19].
RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :
Phanerophyte
Chamaephyte
REGENERATION PROCESSES :
Fringed sagebrush has tremendous reproductive potential which enables it
to spread, reseed, and invade new sites. Seeds average over 3,875,000
per pound (8,545/g) and are produced in abundance [46]. Germination of
fresh seed tends to be rather poor, but viability of seed increases with
age up to several years [74]. Large numbers of seeds remain viable in
in the soil for many years until conditions become favorable for
germination [14].
In laboratory tests 50 percent of fringed sagebrush seed germinated
within 5 to 12 days, with most of the remainder germinating slowly
within 30 days [77]. Optimum germination of seed collected in New
Mexico occurred at a constant temperature of 63 degreees Fahrenreit (17
deg C), or for 8-hour periods alternating with 16-hour periods at 56 to
63 degrees Fahrenreit (13.5-17 deg C) [64]. Mean germination time under
these two regimes were 5.4 and 5.3 days respectively [64]. Seed
collected in Montana germinated best at 50 degrees Fahrenreit (10 deg C)
[77]. Temperatures above 93 degrees Fahrenriet (34 deg C) generally
cause a decline in gemination [64]. Germination rates are not
significantly affected by light but are drastically reduced by moisture
stress [64]. Natural spread by seed is described as "good" [58].
Annual seed production appears to be somewhat eratic. In the prairies
of Saskatchewan and Alberta, fringed sagebrush produces no seed at all
in dry years [17]. Typically less than 50 percent of the plants form
seed even in favorable years. The light seeds are readily dispersed by
wind. Dispersal distance of fringed sagebrush seed is reportedly
greater than for many other species of sagebrush [32].
Fringed sagebrush can regenerate vegetatively through rootstock
spreading or stump sprouting [1,13,74]. Adventitous rooting commonly
occurs where stems contact the soil surface [46]. Natural spread
through vegetative means is described as "moderate" [58]. Cuttings
collected from February through May can be propagated vegetatively when
treated with 0.1 percent IBA powder [38].
SITE CHARACTERISTICS :
Fringed sagebrush is widely distributed over a range of habitats. It is
common on the high plains along the east slope of the Rocky Mountains,
and in the low semidesert valleys, mesas, foothills, and mountainsides
of the Rocky Mountain and Intermountain regions [74].
Fringed sagebrush is best adapted to dry, rocky sites in full sunlight
on porous, coarse, gravelly, sandy, or shallow loam soils [14,74].
Soils may be deep or relatively shallow [38]. Fringed sagebrush is
tolerant of weakly acidic to moderately basic, and weakly saline soils
[77]. Fringed sagebrush favors open, exposed, disturbed sites but is
fairly tolerant of shade and grows in partially shaded woodlands [77].
Elevational ranges are as follows:
from: 7,500 to 10,000 ft (2,286-3,048 m) in CO
2,400 to 7,500 ft (731-2,286 m) in MT
5,000 to 10,000 ft (1,524-3,048 m) in UT
3,600 to 10,000 ft (1,097-3,048 m) in WY
Fringed sagebrush grows in a variety of topographic positions including
summit, backslope, footslope, rolling uplands, ridges, upper slopes,
breaks, benches, and bottoms [10,60]. In parts of Alberta and
Saskatchewan, fringed sagebrush appears to grow best on warmer dry,
upper, south-facing slopes [7,20]. Average annual precipitation ranges
from 8 to 12 inches (20-30 cm) or more [38].
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS :
Fringed sagebrush is well represented in both seral and climax
communities. In many portions of the Northern Great Plains, it is
subdominant in climax grassland communities [17,72,82]. Francis [28]
reported that it forms topographic climax communities with bluebunch
wheatgrass in portions of the Southwest. Researchers in British
Columbia noted that fringed sagebrush occurred in both seral and climax
vegetation [56]. Cawker [13] reported that in portions of southern
British Columbia, seral fringed sagebrush communities may be favored by
frequent fire, whereas climax big sagebrush communities are favored by
the absence of fire.
Fringed sagebrush is often described as a pioneer or early seral species
on disturbed sites [39,63,68]. Fringed sagebrush is successionally
"transitional" in the sandhills of southern North Dakota, occurring
after the initial community has established. Initial community memebers
on the harsh, sandy sites include sand bluestem (Andropogon gerardii
var. paucipilis), prairie dropseed (Sporobolus heterolepis), blowout
grass (Redfieldia flexuosa), sandbur (Cenchrus longispinus), hairy
prairie clover (Petalostemum villosum), sand sunflower (Helianthus
petiolaris), grooved flax (Linum sulcatum), and bugseed (Corispermum
villosum). These species are extremely tolerant of fluctuating, adverse
environmental conditions. The transitional fringed sagebrush community
replaces this earliest successional stage. Vegetation in the
transitional community includes fringed sagebrush, prairie junegrass,
sand dropseed (Sporobolus cryptandrus), Canada wildrye (Elymus
canadensis), heath aster (Aster ericoides), spiderwort (Tradescantia
occidentalis), white sweetclover (Melilotus alba), daisy fleabane
(Erigeron strigosus), and little bluestem. These plants are
sufficiently tolerant of drought and other environmental extremes to
reproduce under harsh conditions. Major climax species on these
sandhill sites include big bluestem, prairie sandreed, Leiberg's
panicgrass (Panicum leibergii), and Kentucky bluegrass [9].
SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT :
In cold-temperate climates fringed sagebrush begins its annual growth in
late winter or early spring [77]. Flowering generally occurs from
summer to late fall [24]:
beginning of flowering end of flowering
June October CO
July October MT
July September ND
July September UT
May September WY
The time of flowering may be influenced by elevation and precipitation
[22,47]. McArthur and Stevens [47] reported flowering in July at higher
elevation sites and as late as November at lower elevations. Flowering
is typically delayed by dry weather [22]. Seed shatter may occur from
early August [11] through November [49] or December [47]. During a
4-year study in Saskatchewan, fringed sagebrush first flowered from July
23 to August 22, with a mean flowering date of August 8 and latest
flowering date of September 30 [8]. The mean period of flowering was 36
days [8]. Goetz [30] reported average earliest bloom on August 27.
Quiescence generally begins in late October to November or December
[11,49]. A period of fall regrowth may occur during August or September
[49]. However, most annual growth is attained by July or August [30].
Annual phenological variation according to precipitation and temperature
has been widely observed as has general variation by geographic
location. Listed below are average dates of phenological development
for fringed sagebrush at various locations in Colorado and Canada:
- northern Colorado [73]
Quiescence November 5-20
Early growth April 15-20
Rapid growth June 1-10
Near maturity August 1-15
- northeastern Colorado [22]
first visible growth April 1
first floral buds July
mature floral buds August
floral buds and open flowers September
floral buds, open flowers, and ripening fruit September
buds, flowers, green and ripe fruit October
buds, flowers, green and ripe fruit and dispersing seed late October
green and ripe fruit and dispersing seed November
dispersing seeds and senescence November
Canada - Saskatchewan/Alberta [17]
renews growth mid-April
flower stalks end of June
flower buds 1st week of August
full bloom 3rd week of August
seed ripens, foliage drys
soon after mid-September
FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Artemisia frigida | Fringed Sagebrush
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS :
Fringed sagebrush produces an abundance of small, wind-dispersed seed
[14] which can readily reoccupy a burned site. Seed can reportedly
remain viable in the soil for many years [14], and presumably, seed
stored on-site in the soil can germinate quickly if not killed or
damaged by fire.
Fringed sagebrush is able to resprout after fire and quickly reoccupy a
site. Cawker [13] reported that fringed sagebrush is capable of stump
sprouting after fire in southern British Columbia. Vegetative
regeneration from suckers has also been noted after fire in Alberta [1].
Fringed sagebrush has frequently been described as a "weak sprouter"
after fire [79].
Although research is lacking, it is probable that fringed sagebrush can
quickly reestablish a site through vegetative means following fires of
low intensity or severity. More research is needed on the precise
influence of certain site characteristics, the effects of drought, and
differential response by season of burn. Some evidence suggests that
fringed sagebrush may be reduced by spring burns in the mixed-grass
prairies of the northern Great Plains [79].
POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY :
Small shrub, adventitious-bud root crown
Ground residual colonizer (on-site, initial community)
Initial-offsite colonizer (off-site, initial community)
FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Artemisia frigida | Fringed Sagebrush
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT :
Limited evidence suggests that specific fire effects may vary according
to fire intensity and severity or season of burn. Ecotypic differences
may also exist. Fringed sagebrush may be killed or seriously damaged by
fire when aboveground foliage is consumed [4]. In southern British
Columbia, fringed sagebrush growing in big sagebrush stands was killed
when these stands were burned prior to spring greenup.
In some locations, individual plants can survive even when aboveground
vegetation is removed. Sprouting has been reported in southern British
Columbia, east-central Alberta, and elsewhere [1,13]. Effects of fire
are minimized where fringed sagebrush sprouts readily.
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT :
NO-ENTRY
PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE :
The response of fringed sagebrush to fire is highly variable. Community
composition, site characteristics, prior grazing history, fire
intensity, and timing of burn influence response. Little is known about
the time required for fringed sagebrush to reoccupy a site. Fringed
sagebrush typically reestablishes a burned site either from on-site
surviving seed stored in the soil or seed dispersed from off-site.
Plants grown from seed may require up to 3 years to reach sexual
maturity on particularly harsh sites. Specific recovery time from seed
following fire in fringed sagebrush communities has not been documented.
Under some circumstances, fringed sagebrush can regenerate vegetatively
and quickly reoccupy a site [1,13]. Stump sprouting or suckering has
been observed in British Columbia and in Alberta [1,13]. Wright and
others [88] describe fringed sagebrush as a "weak sprouter." Sprouting
is probably much more likely following burns of low intensity and
severity.
General trends following fire in a particular season have been difficult
to discern, indicating that other factors must also be considered when
projecting the fire response of fringed sagebrush. Dix [25] reported an
increased frequency of fringed sagebrush after summer fires in western
North Dakota grasslands, whereas Mitchell [50] reported decreases after
a July fire in a western Montana grassland. Decreases in frequency or
cover were noted following spring and fall fires in North Dakota and
Canada [5,25] and after a spring fire in western Montana [2]. Wright
and Bailey [79] reported that fringed sagebrush is generally reduced by
spring fires in mixed-grass prairies in the northern Great Plains.
However, Anderson and Bailey [1] observed increases in fringed sagebrush
following annual early spring fires of low intensity in east-central
Alberta. Increases in both the density and biomass of fringed sagebrush
were noted after a spring fire in Wind Cave National Park, South Dakota
[27]. Other researchers in the northern Great Plains report little
change in fringed sagebrush cover after fire [41]. Clearly, more
research is needed to fully document the response of fringed sagebrush
to fire and to account for the different responses noted.
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE :
Season of burn, fire intensity, site characteristics, plant
associations, and geographic and climatic factors all influence the way
in which fringed sagebrush responds to fire. Both increases and
decreases in fringed sagebrush cover or frequency has been noted after
spring and summer fires. The following research results demonstrate the
variable response of fringed sagebrush to fire (Study locations, general
habitat, and fire intensity are given when such information was noted):
- western North Dakota grasslands [25]
frequency index values
summer burn fall burn spring burn
unburned burned unburned burned unburned burned
15 25 17 7 42 10
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
- western Montana grasslands - spring burn 1977 [2]
average % cover on burned and unburned stands
autumn 1977 spring 1978 summer 1978
unburned burned unburned burned unburned burned
0.1 + 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
- east-central Alberta - aspen parkland - low intensity spring burn [1]
frequency (%) canopy cover (%)
unburned burned unburned burned
3 7 0.2 0.3
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
- British Columbia - mountain rangelands (% cover fringed sagebrush) [65]
burned subalpine unburned subalpine spruce-willow alpine
slopes clearings birch
3 0 0 0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wind Cave National Park, South Dakota - grasslands - spring burn [27]
ground cover (%) -
control 1981 burn
1980 1981 1982 1983 1980 1981 1982 1983
site1 1.8 2.5 4.5 5.3 2.8 1.8 2.2 7.6
site2 1.1 1.1 3.0 5.3 1.1 0.3 0.3 0.4
frequency (%) -
site1 27.4 28.2 21.4 37.3 30.6 21.0 21.4 53.2
site2 18.3 12.7 10.3 21.4 16.3 5.6 3.2 3.2
density (avg. # of stems per quadrat)
biomass (grams)
control 1981 burn
density biomass density biomass
1982 1983 1982 1983 1982 1983 1982 1983
site1 1.5 2.2 3.80 3.28 1.1 2.4 2.98 3.00
site2 0.7 0.9 2.79 2.06 0.1 0.1 0.32 0.12
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
western Montana -grasslands [50]
burned area unburned area
cover frequency cover frequency
1st year 0.4 3 4.2 33
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
NO-ENTRY
REFERENCES
SPECIES: Artemisia frigida | Fringed Sagebrush
REFERENCES :
1. Anderson, Howard G.; Bailey, Arthur W. 1980. Effects of annual burning
on grassland in the aspen parkland of east-central Alberta. Canadian
Journal of Botany. 58: 985-996. [3499]
2. Antos, Joseph A.; McCune, Bruce; Bara, Cliff. 1983. The effect of fire
on an ungrazed western Montana grassland. American Midland Naturalist.
110(2): 354-364. [337]
3. Archer, Steve; Garrett, M. G.; Detling, James K. 1987. Rates of
vegetation change associated with prairie dog (Cynomys ludovicianus)
grazing in North American mixed-grass prairie. Vegetatio. 72: 159-166.
[2864]
4. Bailey, Arthur W. 1978. Use of fire to manage grasslands of the Great
Plains: Northern Great Plains and adjacent forests. In: Hyder, Donald
N., ed. Proceedings, 1st international rangeland congress; 1978 August
14-18; Denver, CO. Denver, CO: Society for Range Management: 691-693.
[372]
5. Bailey, Arthur W.; Anderson, Murray L. 1978. Prescribed burning of a
Festuca-Stipa grassland. Journal of Range Management. 31: 446-449.
[373]
6. 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]
7. Blinn, Dean W.; Habeck, James R. 1967. An analysis of morainal
vegetation in the upper Blackfoot Valley, Montana. Northwest Science.
41(3): 126-140. [4008]
8. Budd, A. C.; Campbell, J. B. 1959. Flowering sequence of a local flora.
Journal of Range Management. 12: 127-132. [552]
9. Burgess, Robert L. 1965. A study of plant succession in the sandhills of
southeastern North Dakota. In: Annual proceedings of the North Dakota
Academy of Science; 1965 May 7-8; Fargo, ND. Fargo, ND: North Dakota
State University of Agriculture and Applied Science: 62-80. [4471]
10. Butler, Jack; Goetz, Harold. 1986. Vegetation and soil--landscape
relationships in the North Dakota Badlands. American Midland Naturalist.
116(2): 378-386; 1986. [573]
11. Buwai, M.; Trlica, M. J. 1977. Multiple defoliation effects on herbage
yield, vigor, and total nonstructural carbohydrates of five range
species. Journal of Range Management. 30(3): 164-171. [576]
12. Campbell, J. B.; Lodge, R. W.; Johnston, A.; Smoliak, S. 1962. Range
management of grasslands and adjacent parklands in the prairie
provinces. Publ. 1133. Ottawa, ON: Canada Department of Agriculture,
Research Branch. 32 p. [595]
13. Cawker, K. B. 1983. Fire history and grassland vegetation change: three
pollen diagrams from southern British Columbia. Canadian Journal of
Botany. 61: 1126-1139. [611]
14. Cooperrider, Allen Y.; Bailey, James A. 1986. Fringed sagebrush
(Artemisia frigida)--a neglected forage species of western ranges. In:
McArthur, E. Durant; Welch, Bruce L., compilers. Proceedings--symposium
on the biology of Artemisia and Chrysothamnus; 1984 July 9-13; Provo,
UT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-200. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 46-54. [686]
15. Coppock, D. Layne; Detling, James K. 1986. Alteration of bison and
black-tailed prairie dog grazing interaction by prescribed burning.
Journal of Wildlife Management. 50(3): 452-455. [689]
16. Coppock, D. L.; Detling, J. K.; Ellis, J. E.; Dyer, M. I. 1983.
Plant-herbivore interactions on a North American mixed-grass praire.
Oecologia. 56: 1-9. [687]
17. Coupland, Robert T. 1950. Ecology of mixed prairie in Canada. Ecological
Monographs. 20(4): 271-315. [700]
18. Coupland, Robert T.; Brayshaw, T. Christopher. 1953. The fescue
grassland in Saskatchewan. Ecology. 34(2): 386-405. [701]
19. Coupland, Robert T.; Johnson, R. E. 1965. Rooting characteristics of
native grassland species of Saskatchewan. Journal of Ecology. 53:
475-507. [702]
20. Coxson, Darwyn S.; Looney, John Henry H. 1986. Vegetation patterns
within southern Alberta coulees. Canadian Journal of Botany. 64:
2464-2475. [1957]
21. Cronquist, Arthur. 1955. Vascular plants of the Pacific Northwest: Part
5: Compositae. Seattle: University of Washington Press. 343 p. [716]
22. Dickinson, C. E.; Dodd, Jerrold L. 1976. Phenological pattern in the
shortgrass prairie. American Midland Naturalist. 96(2): 367-378. [799]
23. Dietz, Donald R. 1972. Nutritive value of shrubs. In: McKell, Cyrus M.;
Blaisdell, James P.; Goodin, Joe R., tech. eds. Wildland shrubs--their
biology and utilization: An international symposium; Proceedings; 1971
July; Logan, UT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-1. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment
Station: 289-302. [801]
24. 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]
25. Dix, Ralph L. 1960. The effects of burning on the mulch structure and
species composition of grasslands in western North Dakota. Ecology.
41(1): 49-56. [808]
26. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and
Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
27. Forde, Jon D. 1983. The effect of fire on bird and small mammal
communities in the grasslands of Wind Cave National Park. Houghton, MI:
Michigan Technological University. 140 p. Thesis. [937]
28. Francis, Richard E. 1983. Sagebrush-steppe habitat types in northern
Colorado: a first approximation. In: Moir, W. H.; Hendzel, Leonard,
tech. coords. Proceedings of the workshop on Southwestern habitat types;
1983 April 6-8; Albuquerque, NM. Abluquerque, NM: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Southwestern Region: 67-71. [955]
29. 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]
30. Goetz, Harold. 1969. Composition and yields of native grassland sites
fertilized at different rates of nitrogen. Journal of Range Management.
22(6): 384-390. [1029]
31. Hansen, Richard M.; Gold, Ilyse K. 1977. Blacktail prairie dogs, desert
cottontails and cattle trophic relations on shortgrass range. Journal of
Range Management. 30(3): 210-214. [4644]
32. Harvey, Stephen John. 1981. Life history and reproductive strategies in
Artemisia. Bozeman, MT: Montana State University. 132 p. M.S. thesis.
[1102]
33. Hill, Ralph R. 1946. Palatability ratings of Black Hills plants for
white-tailed deer. Journal of Wildlife Management. 10(1): 47-54. [3270]
34. Hitchcock, C. Leo; Cronquist, Arthur. 1973. Flora of the Pacific
Northwest. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press. 730 p. [1168]
35. Hopper, T. H.; Nesbitt, L. L. 1930. The chemical composition of some
North Dakota pasture and hay grasses. Bull. 236. Fargo, ND: North Dakota
Agricultural College, Agricultural Experiment Station. 39 p. [3265]
36. Houston, Walter R. 1961. Some interrelations of sagebrush, soils, and
grazing intensity in the Northern Great Plains. Ecology. 42(1): 31-38.
[1196]
37. Houston, Walter R.; Woodward, R. R. 1966. Effects of stocking rates on
range vegetation and beef cattle production in the Northern Great
Plains. Technical Bulletin No. 1357. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 58 p. In cooperation with:
Montana Agricultural Experiment Station. [4285]
38. Institute for Land Rehabilitation. 1979. Selection, propagation, & field
establishment of native plant species on disturbed arid lands. Bulletin
500. Logan, UT: Utah State University, Agricultural Experiment Station.
49 p. [1237]
39. Johnson, Kendall L. 1987. Sagebrush types as ecological indicators to
integrated pest management (IPM) in the sagebrush ecosystem of western
North America. In: Onsager, Jerome A., ed. Integrated pest management on
rangeland: State of the art in the sagebrush ecosystem. ARS-50.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research
Service: 1-10. [2841]
40. Jones, Webster B. 1965. Response of major plant species to elk and
cattle grazing in northwestern Wyoming. Journal of Range Management. 18:
218-220. [1299]
41. Kirsch, Leo M.; Kruse, Arnold D. 1973. Prairie fires and wildlife. In:
Proceedings, annual Tall Timbers fire ecology conference; 1972 June 8-9;
Lubbock, TX. Number 12. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station:
289-303. [8472]
42. Komarkova, Vera; Alexander, Robert R.; Johnston, Barry C. 1988. Forest
vegetation of the Gunnison and parts of the Uncompahgre National
Forests: a preliminary habitat type classification. Gen. Tech. Rep.
RM-163. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 65 p.
[5798]
43. 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]
44. Lovering, T. G.; Hedal, J. A. 1983. The use of sagebrush (Artemisia) as
a biogeochemical indicator of base-metal deposits in Precambrian rocks
of west-central Colorado. Journal of Geochemical Exploration. 18:
205-230. [1479]
45. 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]
46. McArthur, E. Durant; Blauer, A. Clyde; Plummer, A. Perry; Stevens,
Richard. 1979. Characteristics and hybridization of important
Intermountain shrubs. III. Sunflower family. Res. Pap. INT-220. Ogden,
UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest
and Range Experiment Station. 82 p. [1571]
47. McArthur, E. Durant; Stevens, Richard. 1986. Composite shrubs.
Unpublished manuscript on file at: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Labortory,
Missoula, MT. 155 p. [7342]
48. McKell, Cyrus M.; Goodin, J. R. 1975. United States arid shrublands in
perspective. In: Hyder, Donald N., ed. Arid shrublands--proceedings,
3rd workshop of the United States/Australia rangelands panel; 1973 March
26 - April 15; Tucson, AZ. Denver, CO: Society for Range Management:
12-18. [1614]
49. Menke, John W.; Trlica, M. J. 1981. Carbohydrate reserve, phenology, and
growth cycles of nine Colorado range species. Journal of Range
Management. 34(4): 269-277. [1639]
50. Mitchell, William W. 1957. An ecological study of the grasslands in the
region of Missoula, Montana. Missoula, MT: University of Montana. 111 p.
Thesis. [1665]
51. Moir, W. H.; Trlica, M. J. 1976. Plant communities and vegetation
pattern as affected by various treatments in shortgrass prairies of
northeastern Colorado. Southwestern Naturalist. 21(3): 359-371. [2803]
52. Moss, E. H.; Campbell, J. A. 1947. The fescue grassland of Alberta.
Canadian Journal of Research. 25: 209-227. [1700]
53. Mueggler, W. F.; Stewart, W. L. 1981. Forage production on important
rangeland habitat types in western Montana. Journal of Range Management.
34(5): 347-353. [1716]
54. Nagy, Julius G. 1979. Wildlife nutrition and the sagebrush ecosystem.
In: The sagebrush ecosystem: a symposium: Proceedings; 1978 April;
Logan, UT. Logan, UT: Utah State University, College of Natural
Resources: 164-168. [1729]
55. Peden, D. G.; Van Dyne, G. M.; Rice, R. W.; Hansen, R. M. 1974. The
trophic ecology of Bison bison L. on shortgrass plains. Journal of
Applied Ecology. 11: 489-497. [1861]
56. Peek, James, M.; Demarchi, Dennis A.; Demarchi, Raymond A.; [and
others]. 1985. Bighorn sheep and fire: seven case histories. In: Lotan,
James E.; Brown, James K., compilers. Fire's effect on wildlife
habitat--symposium proceedings; 1984 March 21; Missoula, MT. Gen. Tech.
Rep. INT-186. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 36-43.
[1864]
57. 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]
58. Plummer, A. Perry. 1976. Shrubs for the subalpine zone of the Wasatch
Plateau. In: Zuck, R. H.; Brown, L. F., eds. High altitude revegetation
workshop: No. 2: Proceedings; 1976; Fort Collins, CO. Fort Collins, CO:
Colorado State University: 33-40. [1899]
59. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant
geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
60. Reed, Merton J.; Peterson, Roald A. 1961. Vegetation, soil, and cattle
responses to grazing on Northern Great Plains range. Tech. Bull. 1252.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 79 p.
[4286]
61. Ries, R. E.; Hofmann, L. 1983. Number of seedlings established from
stored prairie hay. In: Brewer, Richard, ed. Proceedings, 8th North
American prairie conference; 1982 August 1-4; Kalamazoo, MI. Kalamazoo,
MI: Western Michigan University, Department of Biology: 3-4. [3112]
62. Rogler, George A.; Haas, Howard J. 1947. Range production as related to
soil moisture and precipitation on the Northern Great Plains. Journal of
the American Society of Agronomy. 39: 378-389. [4054]
63. Rosentreter, Roger; Jorgensen, Ray. 1986. Restoring winter game ranges
in southern Idaho. Tech. Bull. 86-3. Boise, ID: U.S. Department of the
Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Idaho State Office. 26 p. [5295]
64. Sabo, David G.; Johnson, Gordon V.; Martin, William C.; Aldon, Earl F.
1979. Germination requirements of 19 species of arid land plants. Res.
Pap. RM-210. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 26 p.
[2047]
65. Seip, Dale R.; Bunnell, Fred L. 1985. Species composition and herbage
production of mountain rangelands in northern British Columbia. Canadian
Journal of Botany. 63: 2077-2080. [2104]
66. Smoliak, S. 1974. Range vegetation and sheep production at three
stocking rates on Stipa-Bouteloua prairie. Journal of Range Management.
27(1): 23-26. [2181]
67. Stahevitch, A. E.; Wojtas, W. A. 1988. Chromosome numbers of some North
American species of Artemisia (Asteraceae). Canadian Journal of Botany.
66: 672-676. [4515]
68. Stark, N. 1966. Review of highway planting information appropriate to
Nevada. Bull. No. B-7. Reno, NV: University of Nevada, College of
Agriculture, Desert Research Institute. 209 p. In cooperation with:
Nevada State Highway Department. [47]
69. Stubbendieck, J.; Hatch, Stephan L.; Hirsch, Kathie J. 1986. North
American range plants. 3rd ed. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska
Press. 465 p. [2270]
70. 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]
71. Tiedeman, James A.; Francis, Richard E.; Terwilliger, Charles, Jr.;
Carpenter, Len H. 1987. Shrub-steppe habitat types of Middle Park,
Colorado. Res. Pap. RM-273. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment
Station. 20 p. [2329]
72. Tisdale, E. W. 1947. The grasslands of the southern interior of British
Columbia. Ecology. 28(4): 346-382. [2340]
73. Trlica, M. J.; Buwai, M.; Menke, J. W. 1977. Effects of rest following
defoliations on the recovery of several range species. Journal of Range
Management. 30(1): 21-27. [2360]
74. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1937. Range plant
handbook. Washington, DC. 532 p. [2387]
75. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1982.
National list of scientific plant names. Vol. 1. List of plant names.
SCS-TP-159. Washington, DC. 416 p. [11573]
76. Wallestad, Richard; Peterson, Joel G.; Eng, Robert L. 1975. Foods of
adult sage grouse in central Montana. Journal of Wildlife Management.
39(3): 628-630. [2444]
77. Wasser, Clinton H. 1982. Ecology and culture of selected species useful
in revegetating disturbed lands in the West. FWS/OBS-82/56. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 347 p.
[4837]
78. Whitson, Tom D., ed. 1987. Weeds and poisonous plants of Wyoming and
Utah. Res. Rep. 116-USU. Laramie, WY: University of Wyoming, College of
Agriculture, Cooperative Extension Service. 281 p. [2939]
79. Wright, Henry A.; Bailey, Arthur W. 1982. Fire ecology: United States
and southern Canada. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 501 p. [2620]
80. Wright, Henry A.; Neuenschwander, Leon F.; Britton, Carlton M. 1979. The
role and use of fire in sagebrush-grass and pinyon-juniper plant
communities: A state-of-the-art review. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-58. Ogden,
UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest
and Range Experiment Statio. 48 p. [2625]
81. Yoakum, Jim. 1986. Use of Artemisia and Chrysothamnus by pronghorns. In:
McArthur, E. Durant; Welch, Bruce L., compilers. Proceedings--symposium
on the biology of Artemisia and Chrysothamnus; 1984 July 9-13; Provo,
UT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-200. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 176-180. [2638]
82. Youds, John A.; Hebert, Daryll M. 1988. Prescribed burning for wildlife
in the Cariboo. In: Feller, M. C.; Thomson, S. M., eds. Wildlife and
range prescribed burning workshop proceedings; 1987 October 27-28;
Richmond, BC. Vancouver, BC: The University of British Columbia, Faculty
of Forestry: 73-83. [3102]
83. 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]
84. 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: Artemisia frigida
| Fringed Sagebrush
|
 |
