1Up Info - A Portal with a Difference

1Up Travel - A Travel Portal with a Difference.    
1Up Info
   

Earth & EnvironmentHistoryLiterature & ArtsHealth & MedicinePeoplePlacesPlants & Animals  • Philosophy & Religion  • Science & TechnologySocial Science & LawSports & Everyday Life Wildlife, Animals, & PlantsCountry Study Encyclopedia A -Z
North America Gazetteer


You are here >1Up Info > Wildlife, Animals, and Plants > Plant Species > Shrub > Species: Artemisia nova | Black Sagebrush
 

Wildlife, Animals, and Plants

 


Wildlife, Animals, and Plants

 

Wildlife Species

  Amphibians

  Birds

  Mammals

  Reptiles

 

Kuchler

 

Plants

  Bryophyte

  Cactus

  Fern or Fern Ally

  Forb

  Graminoid

  Lichen

  Shrub

  Tree

  Vine


Introductory

SPECIES: Artemisia nova | Black Sagebrush
ABBREVIATION : ARTNOV SYNONYMS : Artemisia tridentata ssp. nova Artemisia tridentata var. nova Artemisia arbuscula ssp. nova SCS PLANT CODE : NO-ENTRY COMMON NAMES : black sagebrush little black sagebrush small sagebrush TAXONOMY : The fully documented scientific name of black sagebrush is Artemisia nova A. Nelson. The taxonomy presented here follows that of Beetle [5], who recognized black sagebrush as a separate species. Other authorities have placed both black sagebrush and low sagebrush (A. arbuscula) as variants of big sagebrush (A. tridentata). The ability of both of these species to hybridize with big sagebrush accounts for such placement. Ward [57] designated black sagebrush as a subspecies of low sagebrush. Black sagebrush occurs in diploid and polyploid forms. Hybrids with basin big sagebrush (A. tridentata ssp. tridentata) are relatively common where these two species occur together. Crosses with bigelow sagebrush (A. bigelovii) and mountain big sagebrush (A. tridentata ssp. vaseyana) have been documented but are rare [40]. Although no black sagebrush subspecies are currently recognized, there are two color forms which may occur in either pure or mixed stands. The darker form has dark-green, glossy leaves, while the lighter, gray-green form may be as light in color as low sagebrush or big sagebrush. LIFE FORM : Shrub FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS : NO-ENTRY OTHER STATUS : NO-ENTRY COMPILED BY AND DATE : N. McMurray, September 1986 LAST REVISED BY AND DATE : N. McMurray, July 1988 AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION : McMurray, Nancy. 1986. Artemisia nova. In: Remainder of Citation

DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE

SPECIES: Artemisia nova | Black Sagebrush
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION : Primarily a Great Basin species, black sagebrush has a scattered distribution throughout much of the western United States. Its range extends from Montana south through Wyoming and Colorado to northern New Mexico and westward through the southern third of Idaho. This species occurs most commonly in Utah and Nevada but occurs in scattered locations in California, Arizona, and Oregon [5,6,62]. ECOSYSTEMS : FRES20 Douglas-fir FRES21 Ponderosa pine FRES23 Fir - spruce FRES29 Sagebrush FRES30 Desert shrub FRES34 Chaparral - mountain shrub FRES35 Pinyon - juniper FRES36 Mountain grasslands FRES38 Plains grasslands FRES40 Desert grasslands STATES : AZ CA CO ID MT NV NM OR UT WY ADMINISTRATIVE UNITS : BICA BLCA BRCA CHCU COLM DEVA DINO GRCA GRBA MEVE ZION BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS : 4 Sierra Mountains 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 KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS : K016 Eastern ponderosa forest K023 Juniper - pinyon woodland K037 Mountain mahogany - oak scrub K038 Great Basin sagebrush K039 Blackbrush K040 Saltbush - greasewood K051 Wheatgrass - bluegrass K055 Sagebrush steppe K056 Wheatgrass - needlegrass shrubsteppe K057 Galleta - three-awn shrubsteppe K063 Foothills prairie K066 Grama - needlegrass - wheatgrass Disturbed SAF COVER TYPES : 210 Interior Douglas-fir 216 Blue spruce 217 Aspen 220 Rocky Mountain juniper 237 Interior ponderosa pine 238 Western juniper 239 Pinyon - juniper SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES : NO-ENTRY HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES : Black sagebrush is considered a climax species and has been used as an indicator in a number of habitat-typing systems within the sagebrush-grass region. It also occurs as an understory dominant within forested communities. Forested habitat types using black sagebrush as an indicator have been identified within ponderosa pine, juniper, and pinyon-juniper series [1]. Published classifications listing black sagebrush as a dominant or indicator species include: Presettlement vegetation of part of northwestern Moffat County, Colorado, described from remnants [2] Vegetation and soils of the Crane Springs Watershed [11] Vegetation and soils of the Rock Springs Watershed [12] Vegetation and soils of the Churchill Canyon Watershed [14] Habitat types of the Curlew National Grassland, Idaho [20] A classification of forest habitat types of northern New Mexico and southern Colorado [23] Phyto-edaphic communities of the Upper Rio Puerco Watershed, New Mexico [27] Preliminary habitat types of a semiarid grassland [28] Grassland, shrubland, and forestland habitat types of the White River-Arapaho National Forest [30] Sagebrush-grass habitat types of southern Idaho [31] Plant associations of Region Two: Potential plant communities of Wyoming, South Dakota, Nebraska, Colorado, and Kansas [35] Grassland and shrubland habitat types of western Montana [43] Grassland and shrubland habitat types of the Shoshone National Forest [54] Coniferous forest habitat types of central and southern Utah [66] Artemisia arbuscula, A. longiloba, and A. nova habitat types in northern Nevada [67]

VALUE AND USE

SPECIES: Artemisia nova | Black Sagebrush
WOOD PRODUCTS VALUE : NO-ENTRY IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE : Black sagebrush is a significant browse species within the Intermountain region. It is especially important on low elevation winter ranges in the southern Great Basin where extended snowfree periods allow animals access to plants throughout most of the winter [32]. In these areas it is heavily utilized by pronghorn and mule deer [3,19,39] and is highly preferred by domestic sheep [18]. Stands are often contiguous with salt desert communities in the southern Great Basin. Relative to the surrounding vegetation, good condition winter ranges are productive and also offer a good selection of associated species. Many of these ranges have been seriously depleted by past overgrazing. Black sagebrush may be lethal to sheep if it comprises the bulk of the diet for even a short time. This situation is most likely to occur when animals are concentrated on winter ranges [33]. On spring and transitional ranges, this sagebrush is thought to cause abortion in sheep. Recent studies have shown black sagebrush to be a preconditioning plant responsible for horsebrush-related photosensitization in sheep [33]. Apparently small amounts of black sagebrush, when consumed in combination with horsebrush species (Tetradymia canescens and particularly Tetradymia glabrata), can cause liver damage. As a result, photosensitizing compounds are able to reach the skin where they absorb large amounts of ultraviolet light. Acute cases can result in severe facial swelling (a condition known as "bighead"), blindness, wool sluffing, abortion, and death [34]. PALATABILITY : Black sagebrush is a highly palatable forage throughout much of the Great Basin. Plants are heavily utilized by sheep and big game on winter ranges in Utah. The lighter gray-green form is usually more heavily browsed [17]. Some accessions are more highly preferred by mule deer than others, often with dramatic contrasts in utilization [8,58]. Recent uniform garden studies indicate differences in mule deer preference for black sagebrush accessions are not related to monoterpenoid content [9]. One particular accession located on the Desert Experimental Range near Pine Valley, Utah is highly preferred by domestic sheep, pronghorn, and mule deer [8,19], and this accession is presently being tested for cultivar release [9]. Numerous studies have cited highly variable results when comparing animal preference for black sagebrush and big sagebrush (A. tridentata ssp.) [44,47,49,51,58]. McArthur and Stevens [41] suggest that infraspecific as well as interspecific variations probably account for such inconsistencies. The relish and degree of use shown by livestock and wildlife species for black sagebrush in several western states is rated as follows [25,62]: CO MT OR UT WY Cattle ---- ---- ---- Fair Fair Sheep ---- ---- Fair Good Good Horses ---- ---- ---- Poor Fair Antelope ---- Poor Good Good Good Elk ---- ---- ---- Good Fair Mule deer ---- Poor Poor Good Good White-tailed deer Poor ---- ---- ---- ---- Small mammals ---- ---- ---- Fair Fair Small nongame birds ---- ---- ---- Fair Fair Upland game birds ---- Fair ---- Good Good Waterfowl ---- ---- ---- Poor Poor NUTRITIONAL VALUE : Black sagebrush is a highly nutritious winter forage. Although not as productive as many other forage species, its winter nutritive quality is second only to big sagebrush [9,21]. Data from uniform garden studies indicate that nutritional content, unlike preference, is not significantly different among accessions [9]. Black sagebrush ranks high in winter levels of crude protein when compared to other browse species; mean winter crude protein levels of seven accessions equalled 6.8 percent (5.8 to 7.3 percent). Furthermore, digestable dry matter values are very high; mean winter in vitro digestibility equalled 54.8 percent (51.9 to 57.2 percent) of dry matter digested. Black sagebrush is also a good source of vitamin A and an above-average source of phosphorus. Dittberner and Olson [25] rate this species as fair in both energy and protein value. COVER VALUE : Black sagebrush provides valuable ground cover in areas where few other species are adapted. The degree to which black sagebrush provides environmental protection during one or more seasons for wildlife species is as follows [25]: CO MT UT WY Pronghorn Poor Poor Poor Fair Elk Poor ---- Poor Poor Mule deer Poor Poor Poor Poor White-tailed deer Poor ---- ---- ---- Small mammals Fair Poor Good Good Small nongame birds Fair Poor Fair Good Upland game birds Good Fair Fair Good Waterfowl ---- ---- Poor Poor VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES : Black sagebrush is an excellent species to establish on sites where management objectives include restoration or improvement of domestic sheep, pronghorn, or mule deer winter range. Although not as productive as other winter forages such a big sagebrush, mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus montanus), antelope bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata), or fourwing saltbush (Atriplex canescens), plants are adapted to sites where these species do not grow. McArthur and others [42] recommend using black sagebrush on sites having less than 6.9 inches (17.5 cm) of rainfall. Black sagebrush is adapted to big sagebrush, pinyon-juniper, mountain brush, and shadscale-sagebrush vegetation types. This species spreads aggressively from seed on favorable sites and is a good conservation plant for dry, shallow, stony soils and mine spoils. It establishes better from direct seeding than big sagebrush [45]. A highly preferred black sagebrush accession from Pine Valley, Utah is currently being studied for release as a superior cultivar [42]. Survival of transplants in several new locations indicates a high potential for wider planting. OTHER USES AND VALUES : NO-ENTRY MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : Decreases in black sagebrush indicate a downward trend in grazing condition. Poor condition black sagebrush stands are characterized by bare ground in the shrub interspaces and are slow to recover. Moderate mid-winter or alternate year grazing systems are recommended for maintenance of black sagebrush [15,18,32]. Utilization levels of up to 70 percent of the current annual growth are considered acceptable [32]. Clary and Beale [19] report moderate sheep grazing (1ha/sheep month) of black sagebrush winter ranges in Utah caused sites to be avoided by pronghorn; apparently competitive impacts of sheep grazing on pronghorn can be reduced by interspersing grazed and ungrazed units.

BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS

SPECIES: Artemisia nova | Black Sagebrush
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS : Black sagebrush is a small, spreading, native, aromatic, evergreen shrub. Heights usually range from 6 to 18 inches (1.5 to 4.5 dm) but occasionally reach up to 30 inches (76 cm) on productive sites [41]. Although plants may have an upright habit, typically the branches are decumbent and arise from a spreading base. Black sagebrush has a shallower, more fibrous root system than big sagebrush [37]. As a result, annual growth depends largely on soil moisture content near the ground surface. Distinguishing black sagebrush from low sagebrush (Artemisia arbuscula), basin big sagebrush (A. tridentata ssp. tridentata), and Wyoming big sagebrush (A. tridentata ssp. wyomingensis) is often difficult [7,24,61]. Leaf gland visibility is a morphological character useful in eliminating taxonomic confusion in the field [36]. Black sagebrush exhibits tiny, black leaf glands which protrude well beyond the leaf hairs when viewed with a 10X hand lens [17]; apparently these glands are inconspicuous in low sagebrush and the three subspecies of big sagebrush. RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM : Phanerophyte Chamaephyte REGENERATION PROCESSES : Black sagebrush regenerates almost exclusively from seed. Although layering has been documented on a road cut in Utah [41], vegetative reproduction is quite rare. Numerous, wind-dispersed achenes are typically shed in October. Abundant seed is produced annually, but production is directly related to site characteristics and may be highly variable from year to year [5]. Seeds require no dormancy breaking treatment and usually germinate the spring following dispersal. Bare mineral soil is needed for successful germination. Establishment can occur even on fairly severe sites during good years. Seeds will remain viable up to 2 years under proper storage conditions [50]. SITE CHARACTERISTICS : Black sagebrush is usually associated with areas with little soil profile development in desert valleys and on west and south exposures along the lower slopes of the high desert foothills. Typical sites consist of the dry, shallow, gravelly, well-drained soils of alluvial fans, sills, mountain slopes, and wind-blown ridges. It occurs most abundantly at elevations between 4,900 to 7,000 feet (1,470 to 2,100 m) where annual precipitation ranges between 7 and 18 inches (18 and 46 cm). Many of the soils supporting black sagebrush are derived from limestone, particularly along the edges of its range [16]. Shultz [48] reports this species occurring on shallow lithosols overlying bedrock. Plants may form dense stands and dominate large areas or may be associated with a large variety of both grasses and shrubs. In communities where black and low sagebrush species occur together, black sagebrush occupies the warmer, more xeric and more calcareous sites; more mesic sites with deeper soils support basin big sagebrush (A. tridentata ssp. tridentata) and Wyoming big sagebrush (A. tridentata ssp. wyomingensis). With the exception of bud sage (A. spinescens), black sagebrush is more closely associated with salt desert habitats than any other Artemisia species. In the southern Great Basin stands of black sagebrush are surrounded by salt desert vegetation and are replaced by shadscale and other salt desert shrubs when sites become too saline or dry [13,40]. Elevational ranges for several western states are as follows [2,23,25,28,31,59,62,67]: from 2,050 to 9,800 feet (625 to 2,988 m) in CO 5,000 to 7,000 feet (1,524 to 2,134 m) in ID 4,000 to 6,600 feet (1,220 to 2,012 m) in MT 5,904 to 7,544 feet (1,800 to 2,300 m) in NV 7,200 to 8,200 feet (2,195 to 2,500 m) in NM 4,000 to 4,000 feet (1,220 to 1,220 m) in OR 4,592 to 8,987 feet (1,400 to 2,740 m) in UT 5,000 to 7,000 feet (1,524 to 2,134 m) in WY SUCCESSIONAL STATUS : Mature, self-perpetuating stands of black sagebrush are considered to be indicators of climax conditions. Seedlings are present during early seral stages and plants coexist with later arriving species. Long-established, black sagebrush stands in Nevada have recently undergone invasion by both Utah juniper (Juniperus osteosperma) and singleleaf pinyon (Pinus monophylla). This invasion, which accelerated around 1921, has been attributed to the combined effects of overgrazing, fire suppression, and climatic change [13]. SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT : The phenology of black sagebrush is similar to low sagebrush (A. arbuscula) but earlier. The general pattern in Wyoming is described by Beetle [5]. Growth is initiated in April, with new leaves being produced from May throughout most of the summer. Flower heads first appear in July, but blooming does not occur until September; they may be numerous one year and particularly sparse in another. Seed dispersal takes place in October. Late spring leaves and summer leaves persist through the winter. Decreases in soil moisture and amounts of precipitation have a significant impact on the phenology of this species. Moisture rapidly infiltrates the coarse, shallow soils of most sites and is either immediately utilized by the plant or lost through evaporation [37]. The carbohydrate reserve cycle in black sagebrush shows no pronounced trend [22]. Generally there is a gradual buildup of root reserves from a seasonal low in March to floral bud development in August. Immediately afterwards a prolonged decline occurs which lasts until September. Data is inconsistent on the buildup of reserves through initial flower opening and fruit set. Over the winter, approximately one-half of the root reserves and one-quarter of the crown reserves are lost; twigs appear to be significant carbohydrate storage areas. Average dates for the phenological development of black sagebrush on similar sites in Wyoming have been documented by Kleinman [37] and are presented below. He indicates that dates for full bloom and seed dissemination are somewhat predicatable. Growth initiation May 20 Full bloom September 15 Seed dissemination November 5

FIRE ECOLOGY

SPECIES: Artemisia nova | Black Sagebrush
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS : Black sagebrush is highly susceptible to fire-caused mortality; plants are readily killed by all fire intensities. Following burning, reestablishment occurs through off-site seed sources [53,64,65]. POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY : Initial-offsite colonizer (off-site, initial community)

FIRE EFFECTS

SPECIES: Artemisia nova | Black Sagebrush
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT : Historically fire has had little or no influence in communities dominated by black sagebrush [63]. When exposed to fire, plants are easily killed and do not sprout [56,64]. DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT : Typically the sparse vegetation of most black sagebrush stands precludes the occurrence of fire. In fact, dwarf sagebrush species are commonly recognized as potential natural fire breaks. Beardall and Sylvester [4] found that low sagebrush communities in Nevada did not burn on a hot day in mid-August despite wind speeds of up to 25 miles per hour (40.3 km per hour). Use of prescribed burning is not usually feasible where black sagebrush forms dense stands. Since plants are nonsprouters, fire is not recommended on winter ranges where this species constitutes an important forage plant. PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE : Apparently black sagebrush reestablishes from off-site seed following fire. Information concerning reestablishment after burning is lacking. Effective soil moisture and patterns of burning have an influence upon the rate of site recovery. DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE : Since stands of black sagebrush do not readily burn, existing response data involves information obtained from study sites where this species is not a dominant component of the vegetation. In Utah, West and Hassan [60] found no evidence of black sagebrush reestablishment up to 2 years following a late July fire. Most black sagebrush seeds are dispersed close to the parent plant; therefore, mosaic burning patterns which leave unburned patches speed recovery. Favorable precipitation following burning also aids in seedling establishment. FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : NO-ENTRY

REFERENCES

SPECIES: Artemisia nova | Black Sagebrush
REFERENCES : 1. Alexander, Robert R. 1985. Major habitat types, community types and plant communities in the Rocky Mountains. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-123. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 105 p. [303] 2. Baker, William L.; Kennedy, Susan C. 1985. Presettlement vegetation of part of northwestern Moffat County, Colorado, described from remnants. Great Basin Naturalist. 45(4): 747-783. [384] 3. Beale, Donald M.; Smith, Arthur D. 1970. Forage use, water consumption, and productivity of pronghorn antelope in western Utah. Journal of Wildlife Management. 34(3): 570-582. [6911] 4. Beardall, Louis E.; Sylvester, Vern E. 1976. Spring burning for removal of sagebrush competition in Nevada. In: Proceedings, Tall Timbers fire ecology conference and fire and land management symposium; 1974 October 8-10; Missoula, MT. No. 14. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station: 539-547. [406] 5. Beetle, A. A. 1960. A study of sagebrush: The section Tridentatae of Artemisia. Bulletin 368. Laramie, WY: University of Wyoming, Agricultural Experiment Station. 83 p. [416] 6. Beetle, Alan A.; Johnson, Kendall L. 1982. Sagebrush in Wyoming. Bull. 779. Laramie, WY: University of Wyoming, Agricultural Experiment Station. 68 p. [421] 7. Beetle, Alan A.; Young, Alvin. 1965. A third subspecies in the Artemisia tridentata complex. Rhodora. 67: 405-406. [422] 8. Behan, Barbara; Welch, Bruce L. 1985. Black sagebrush: mule deer winter preference and monoterpenoid content. Journal of Range Management. 38(3): 278-279. [423] 9. Behan, Barbara; Welch, Bruce L. 1986. Winter nutritive content of black sagebrush (Artemisia nova) grown in a uniform garden. Great Basin Naturalist. 46(1): 161-165. [424] 10. 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] 11. Blackburn, Wilbert H.; Eckert, Richard E., Jr.; Tueller, Paul T. 1969. Vegetation and soils of the Crane Springs Watershed. R-55. Reno, NV: University of Nevada, Agricultural Experiment Station. 65 p. In cooperation with: U.S. Department of the Interior, Burearu of Land Management. [456] 12. Blackburn, Wilbert H.; Eckert, Richard E., Jr.; Tueller, Paul T. 1971. Vegetation and soils of the Rock Springs Watershed. R-83. Reno, NV: University of Nevada, Agricultural Experiment Station. 116 p. In cooperation with: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. [457] 13. Blackburn, Wilbert H.; Tueller, Paul T. 1970. Pinyon and juniper invasion in black sagebrush communities in east-central Nevada. Ecology. 51(5): 841-848. [459] 14. Blackburn, Wilbert H.; Tueller, Paul T.; Eckert, Richard E., Jr. 1969. Vegetation and soils of the Churchill Canyon Watershed. R-45. Reno, NV: University of Nevada, Agricultural Experiment Station. 155 p. In cooperation with: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. [460] 15. Blaisdell, James P.; Holmgren, Ralph C. 1984. Managing Intermountain rangelands--salt-desert shrub ranges. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-163. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 52 p. [464] 16. Blaisdell, James P.; Murray, Robert B.; McArthur, E. Durant. 1982. Managing Intermountain rangelands--sagebrush-grass ranges. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-134. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 41 p. [467] 17. Brunner, James R. 1972. Observations on Artemisia in Nevada. Journal of Range Management. 25: 205-298. [550] 18. Clary, Warren P. 1986. Black sagebrush response to grazing in the east-central Great Basin. 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: 181-185. [639] 19. Clary, Warren P.; Beale, Donald M. 1983. Pronghorn reactions to winter sheep grazing, plant communities, and topography in the Great Basin. Journal of Range Management. 36(6): 749-752. [641] 20. Collins, P. D.; Harper, K. T. 1982. Habitat types of the Curlew National Grassland, Idaho. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University, Department of Botany and Range Science. 46 p. [editorial draft]. [663] 21. Cook, C. Wayne; Stoddart, L. A. 1953. The halogeton problem in Utah. Bulletin 364. Logan, UT: Utah State Agricultural College, Agricultural Experiment Station. 44 p. In cooperation with:U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. [4597] 22. Coyne, Patrick I.; Cook, C. Wayne. 1970. Seasonal carbohydrate reserve cycles in eight desert range species. Journal of Range Management. 23: 438-444. [707] 23. 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] 24. Dean, Sheila; Burkhardt, J. Wayne; Meeuwig, Richard O. 1981. Estimating twig and foliage biomass of sagebrush, bitterbrush, and rabbitbrush in the Great Basin. Journal of Range Management. 34(3): 224-227. [787] 25. 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] 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. Francis, Richard E. 1986. Phyto-edaphic communities of the Upper Rio Puerco Watershed, New Mexico. Res. Pap. RM-272. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 73 p. [954] 28. Francis, Richard E.; Aldon, Earl F. 1983. Preliminary habitat types of a semiarid grassland. 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: 62-66. [956] 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. Hess, Karl; Wasser, Clinton H. 1982. Grassland, shrubland, and forestland habitat types of the White River-Arapaho National Forest. Final Report. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 335 p. [1142] 31. Hironaka, M.; Fosberg, M. A.; Winward, A. H. 1983. Sagebrush-grass habitat types of southern Idaho. Bulletin Number 35. Moscow, ID: University of Idaho, Forest, Wildlife and Range Experiment Station. 44 p. [1152] 32. Hutchings, Selar S.; Stewart, George. 1953. Increasing forage yields and sheep production on Intermountain winter ranges. Circular No. 925. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 63 p. [1227] 33. Johnson, A. Earl. 1978. Tetradymia toxicity - a new look at an old problem. In: Effects of poisonous plants on livestock: Joint U.S.-Australia symposium: 209-215. [7800] 34. Johnson, A. Earl. 1987. The relationship of Tetradymia species and Artemisia nova to photosensitization in sheep. In: Provenza, Frederick D.; Flinders, Jerran T.; McArthur, E. Durant, compilers. Proceedings--symposium on plant- herbivore interactions; 1985 August 7-9; Snowbird, UT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-222. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 113-117. [1270] 35. 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] 36. Kelsey, Rick G. 1984. Using glandular trichomes as a taxonomic characteristic for black sagebrush (Artemisia nova). Abstracts: The 37th annual meeting of the Society for Range Management, 1984 February 12-17; Rapid City, SD. Denver, CO: Society for Range Management: 201. Abstract. [1325] 37. Kleinman, Larry H. 1976. Phenodynamics and ecology of sagebrush-grass rangelands. Laramie, WY: University of Wyoming. 143 p. Ph.D. dissertation. [1350] 38. 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] 39. McAdoo, J. Kent; Klebenow, Donald A. 1979. Native faunal relationships in sagebrush ecosystems. In: The sagebrush ecosystem: a symposium: Proceedings; 1978 April; Logan, UT. Logan, UT: Utah State University, College of Natural Resources: 50-61. [1562] 40. 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] 41. 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] 42. McArthur, E. Durant; Welch, Bruce L.; Nelson, David L. 1985. Developing improved cultivars of sagebrushes and other composite shrubs. In: Carlson, Jack R.; McArthur, E. Durant, chairmen. Range plant improvement in western North America: Proceedings of a symposium at the annual meeting of the Society for Range Management; 1985 February 14; Salt Lake City, UT. Denver, CO: Society for Range Management: 80-88. [1581] 43. Mueggler, W. F.; Stewart, W. L. 1980. Grassland and shrubland habitat types of western Montana. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-66. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 154 p. [1717] 44. Nagy, Julius G.; Tengerdy, Robert P. 1968. Antibacterial action of essential oils of Artemisia as an ecological factor. II. Antibacterial action of the volatile oils of Artemisisa. tridentata (big sagebrush) on bacteria from the rumen of mule deer. Applied Microbiology. 16(3): 441-444. [11986] 45. Plummer, A. Perry; Christensen, Donald R.; Monsen, Stephen B. 1968. Restoring big-game range in Utah. Publ. No. 68-3. Ephraim, UT: Utah Division of Fish and Game. 183 p. [4554] 46. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843] 47. Sheehy, Dennis P.; Winward, A. H. 1981. Relative palatability of seven Artemisia taxa to mule deer and sheep. Journal of Range Management. 34(5): 397-399. [2128] 48. Shultz, Leila M. 1986. Taxonomic and geographic limits of Artemisia subgenus tridentatae (Beetle). 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: 20-28. [2141] 49. Smith, Arthur D. 1950. Sagebrush as a winter feed for deer. Journal of Wildlife Management. 14(3): 285-289. [2159] 50. Stevens, Richard; Jorgensen, Kent R.; Davis, James N. 1981. Viability of seed from thirty-two shrub and forb species through fifteen years of warehouse storage. Great Basin Naturalist. 41(3): 274-277. [2244] 51. Stevens, Richard; McArthur, E. Durant. 1974. A simple field technique for identification of some sagebrush taxa. Journal of Range Management. 27(4): 325-326. [2245] 52. 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] 53. Tisdale, E. W.; Hironaka, M. 1981. The sagebrush-grass region: a review of the ecological literature. Bull. 33. Moscow, ID: University of Idaho, Forest, Wildlife and Range Experiment Station. 31 p. [2344] 54. Tweit, Susan J.; Houston, Kent E. 1980. Grassland and shrubland habitat types of the Shoshone National Forest. Cody, WY: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Shoshone National Forest. 143 p. [2377] 55. 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] 56. Volland, Leonard A.; Dell, John D. 1981. Fire effects on Pacific Northwest forest and range vegetation. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region, Range Management and Aviation and Fire Management. 23 p. [2434] 57. Ward, George H. 1953. Artemisia, section Seriphidium, in North America: a cytotaxonomic study. Contributions from the Dudley Herberium. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, Natural History Museum; 4(6): 155-205. [2454] 58. Welch, Bruce L.; McArthur, E. Durant; Davis, James N. 1981. Differential preference of wintering mule deer for accessions of big sagebrush and for black sagebrush. Journal of Range Management. 34(5): 409-411. [7801] 59. 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] 60. West, Neil E.; Hassan, M. A. 1985. Recovery of sagebrush-grass vegetation following wildfire. Journal of Range Management. 38(2): 131-134. [2513] 61. West, Neil E.; Rea, Kenneth H.; Tausch, Robin J.; Tueller, Paul T. 1975. Distribution and indicator values of Artemisia within the juniper-pinyon woodlands of the Great Basin. In: Stutz, Howard C., ed. Wildland shrubs: Proceedings-- symposium and workshop; 1975 November 5-7; Provo, Utah. Provo, Utah: Brigham Young University: 166-167. [2516] 62. Winward, Alma H. 1980. Taxonomy and ecology of sagebrush in Oregon. Station Bulletin 642. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University, Agricultural Experiment Station. 15 p. [2585] 63. Winward, Alma H. 1985. Fire in the sagebrush-grass ecosystem--the ecological setting. In: Sanders, Ken; Durham, Jack, eds. Rangeland fire effects: a symposium: Proceedings of the symposium; 1984 November 27-29; Boise, ID. Boise, ID: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Idaho State Office: 2-6. [2587] 64. 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] 65. Young, Richard P. 1983. Fire as a vegetation management tool in rangelands of the Intermountain Region. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Shaw, Nancy, compilers. Managing Intermountain rangelands--improvement of range and wildlife habitats: Proceedings; 1981 September 15-17; Twin Falls, ID; 1982 June 22-24; Elko, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-157. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 18-31. [2681] 66. Youngblood, Andrew P.; Mauk, Ronald L. 1985. Coniferous forest habitat types of central and southern Utah. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-187. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 89 p. [2684] 67. Zamora, B.; Tueller, Paul T. 1973. Artemisia arbuscula, A. longiloba, and A. nova habitat types in northern Nevada. Great Basin Naturalist. 33(4): 225-242. [2688]

Index

Related categories for Species: Artemisia nova | Black Sagebrush

Send this page to a friend
Print this Page

Content on this web site is provided for informational purposes only. We accept no responsibility for any loss, injury or inconvenience sustained by any person resulting from information published on this site. We encourage you to verify any critical information with the relevant authorities.

Information Courtesy: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory. Fire Effects Information System

About Us | Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy | Links Directory
Link to 1Up Info | Add 1Up Info Search to your site

1Up Info All Rights reserved. Site best viewed in 800 x 600 resolution.