|
Wildlife, Animals, and Plants
|
|
Introductory
SPECIES: Prunus andersonii | Desert Peach
ABBREVIATION :
PRUAND
SYNONYMS :
NO-ENTRY
SCS PLANT CODE :
PRAN2
COMMON NAMES :
desert peach
Anderson peachbrush
Anderson almond
Nevada wild almond
wild peach
desert wild almond
TAXONOMY :
The fully documented scientific name of desert peach is Prunus
andersonii Gray. There are no recognized varieties or forms.
LIFE FORM :
Shrub
FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS :
No special status
OTHER STATUS :
NO-ENTRY
COMPILED BY AND DATE :
N. McMurray/ July 1987
LAST REVISED BY AND DATE :
NO-ENTRY
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION :
McMurray, Nancy E. 1987. Prunus andersonii. In: Remainder of Citation
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Prunus andersonii | Desert Peach
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION :
The range of desert peach is restricted to the western edge of the Great
Basin; plants are local in distribution on sagebrush steppe sites along
the east slope of the Sierra Nevada in California and Nevada [2,12].
Its range extends from extreme northeastern California to Kern County in
the south, then east through western Nevada to Churchill County [11].
ECOSYSTEMS :
FRES29 Sagebrush
FRES30 Desert shrub
FRES35 Pinyon - juniper
STATES :
CA NV
ADMINISTRATIVE UNITS :
DEVA
BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :
4 Sierra Mountains
5 Columbia Plateau
6 Upper Basin and Range
7 Lower Basin and Range
KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :
K023 Juniper - pinyon woodland
K038 Great Basin sagebrush
K040 Saltbush - greasewood
SAF COVER TYPES :
239 Pinyon - juniper
SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES :
NO-ENTRY
HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES :
Desert peach is a seral component of sagebrush-grassland and
pinyon-juniper communities situated along the western edge of the Great
Basin. Desert peach occurs in the following habitat types: basin big
sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata ssp. tridentata)/desert needlegrass
(Stipa speciosa), basin big sagebrush/big galleta (Hilaria jamesii),
basin big sagebrush/Thurber needlegrass (S. thurberiana), basin big
sagebrush/western needlegrass (S. occidentalis), and basin big
sagebrush/Indian ricegrass (Oryzopsis hymenoides) [21].
VALUE AND USE
SPECIES: Prunus andersonii | Desert Peach
WOOD PRODUCTS VALUE :
NO-ENTRY
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE :
Desert peach is probably a seasonally important forage species on the
dry ranges where it grows. Although plants are not highly productive,
the foliage is moderately palatable. Leaf clusters are generally easily
accessible due to the low, open growth habit characteristic of most
plants [2]. Livestock consume the foliage primarily in the spring and
immediately after rainy periods. It is moderately palatable to sheep
and goats during intervals of increased moisture availability [2].
PALATABILITY :
NO-ENTRY
NUTRITIONAL VALUE :
NO-ENTRY
COVER VALUE :
NO-ENTRY
VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES :
Desert peach appears to be an excellent candidate for use in
rehabilitation projects within its range. Recent studies involving
roadside revegetation along the east slope of the Sierra Nevada indicate
that desert peach transplants are extremely hardy and able to survive
with little care or maintenance following initial planting efforts [15].
Smith and others specifically recommended this shrub for planting on
granitic soils within the sagebrush-grassland communities of eastern
California [15].
Currently, the rearing of containerized stock is the most effective
means of propagating desert peach. Seeds of this shrub do not germinate
readily; only 44 percent of seeds germinated following a 4-week
stratification period at 35.6 degrees Fahrenheit (2 deg C) [11].
Apparently plants are also difficult to propagate via stem cuttings [3].
Monsen and Davis [10] reported that a morphologically similar ally,
desert peachbrush (Prunus fasciculata), is being evaluated for potential
cultivar development. As with other species within the Prunus genus,
consistent seedling establishment is difficult to achieve in desert
peachbrush; apparently ecotypes do not exhibit a wide range of
adaptability [13].
OTHER USES AND VALUES :
Desert peach is a useful shrub for revegetating desert roadsides because
of the ornamental value of its abundant, pale pink to rose-colored
flowers, which typically appear much earlier than those of most
associated shrub species [15]. The Pauites made a medicinal tea from
the leaves and twigs of this shrub that was used to treat colds and
rheumatism [11].
MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
NO-ENTRY
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Prunus andersonii | Desert Peach
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
Desert peach is a native, deciduous, spreading, low shrub. It is
diffusely branched and thorny [11]. Although heights can range from 1
to 6 feet (0.3-1.8 m), the majority of plants grow approximately 3 feet
(1 m) tall [12]. Branches are short, rigid, and sometimes spinescent.
The small, somewhat narrow leaves are grouped in clusters and fascicled
on short, lateral, thorny branchlets [2]. The fruit is 10 to 18 mm
long, covered with a dark brown tumentulose, and generally resembles a
small, fuzzy peach. A thin, dryish pulp surrounds a roughened stone.
RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :
Phanerophyte
REGENERATION PROCESSES :
Little detailed information is available concerning reproductive
strategies in desert peach. Vegetative regeneration is apparently the
primary mode of reproduction. This species is clonal and often forms
expansive, dense thickets that may represent one individual. Stems
arise in clumps from lignotubers; these lignotubers are connected by an
extensive system of underground runners [16,17]. Although individual
stems are relatively short-lived (six to eight annual rings), clones
often persist into late seral stages in sagebrush-grass and
pinyon-juniper communities. Localized site occupancy is so complete
that green rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus) and other woody
species are typically excluded from thickets.
The fruit of this shrub resembles a small peach. A thin, inedible pulp
surrounds the pit. The majority of seeds probably fall beneath the
parent plants. Seedling establishment is apparently quite rare in
nature. Almost all seeds of this genus require an afterripening period
in the presence of moisture and oxygen to overcome seed dormancy [7].
Studies indicate that seeds exhibit relatively low germination; only 44
percent germinated following stratification at 35.6 degrees Fahrenheit
(2 deg C) for 4 weeks [11].
Seedlings were observed on late successional sites in both the
sagebrush-grassland and pinyon-juniper zones after the removal of
associated woody species [16,17]. On both of these sites desert peach
was recorded as a component of the predistuburbance vegetation. No
seedling establishment was recorded for up to 4 years following a
wildfire on big sagebrush/Thurber needlegrass sites in Nevada. Although
mammal and bird utilization of the small, peachlike fruits has not been
documented, these animals may possibly function as long-distance
dispersal agents.
SITE CHARACTERISTICS :
Desert peach is adapted to harsh, arid sites thoughout the sagebrush
steppe portions of eastern California and western Nevada but is not
really capable of withstanding the very arid and saline environment of
the true desert. Typical sites include dry, warm foothills, mountain
slopes, mesas, alluvial terraces, and canyons. Most plants occur at
elevations ranging from 5,000 to 6,500 feet (1,524-1,982 m). Within the
pinyon-juniper zone, desert peach is often associated with eastern
aspects [8] and can grow on sites as high as 6,986 feet (2,130 m) [16].
This species characteristically occupies sites overlying decomposing
granite; soils are coarse sandy, gravelly, or rocky in texture and
exhibit little profile development [2,15]. Common associates include
green rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus), green ephedra (Ephedra
viridis), desert gooseberry (Ribes velutinum), spineless horsebrush
(Tetradymia canescens), needlegrasses (Stipa spp.), and Indian ricegrass
(Oryzopsis hymenoides).
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS :
Desert peach is a seral species in sagebrush-grass and pinyon-juniper
communities along the western edge of the Great Basin. Due to its
clonal nature, this species is relatively long-lived and is able to
persist until late seral stages on many sites. Plants typically become
locally abundant on disturbed sites [8,21].
SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT :
Desert peach is known as a prolific, early bloomer [15]. It typically
flowers in April or May, whereas most associated shrubs bloom sometime
between July and October [21]. Individual clones exhibit considerable
differences in the abundance and timing of flowering; blooming of clones
in close proximity can vary by as much as a month on some sites [11].
Leaves appear with the flowers [2].
FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Prunus andersonii | Desert Peach
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS :
Desert peach is probably quite resistant to fire mortality. Although
easily top-killed, the majority of plants resprout vigorously from
surviving buds located on lignotubers and along an extensive system of
underground stems [19]. Postburn regeneration from seed is apparently
quite rare in sagebrush-grass communities. Recovery rates of desert
peach following fire have not been studied in detail because of its
restricted distribution and local occurrence.
POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY :
Rhizomatous shrub, rhizome in soil
FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Prunus andersonii | Desert Peach
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT :
Due to its diffusely branched nature, desert peach is readily top-killed
by fire.
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT :
NO-ENTRY
PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE :
Vegetative reproduction is the primary means of postburn regeneration in
desert peach. Plants sprout via perennnating buds located on an
extensive system of underground stems; perennating organs include both
lignotubers and rhizomes [19]. Apparently the majority of sprouts
originate from ligotubers, as sprouts tend to be characterized by a
clumpy distribution pattern that may represent individual or multiple
clones. Clones can occupy several acres on some sites [19]. A network
of underground runners connects the lignotubers. Little information is
available concerning rhizome depth or the degree to which rhizome
sprouting occurs after fire. If rhizomes are located deeper than 1 inch
(2.5 cm) below the soil surface, desert peach would be better adapted to
survive high-severity fires than if perennating buds were located only
on more shallowly buried lignotubers. Fire severity within desert peach
thickets is probably high; thickets are often characterized by
persistent dead stems which add to fuel buildups.
Generalized fire response information indicates that although initially
damaged by burning, plant recovery is relatively rapid on the majority
of sites. Within sagebrush communities, desert peach is widely cited as
a vigorous postburn sprouter [16,17,22]. Young and Evans [19] reported
100 percent survival of desert peach one growing season after a late
summer wildfire on sagebrush-grassland site in Nevada; average sprout
density was 0.09 stems per 10 square meter. Reseach involving
successional patterns following wildfire in the pinyon-juniper woodland
of Nevada indicated that this shrub had a significantly lower occurrence
on 1-year-old burns that in adjacent mature woodlands. Occurrences
increased gradually during early seral stages (4- to 8-year-old burns),
apparently in response to the release from competition; maximum
occurrences were recorded on mid-successional sites (15- to 17-year-old
burns) [8]. Koniak [8] suggests that desert peach does not persist in
later seral stages because of poor seed regeneration.
Limited data indicate that seedling establishment does not contribute
significantly to the postburn reestablishment of this shrub. No desert
peach seedlings were observed for up to 4 years following late summer
wildfires on big sagebrush/Thurber needlegrass communities in Nevada
[19]. Seedlings are reported to be quite rare on undisturbed sites,
presumablly due to poor germination characteristics [11]. However,
Young and Evans [16] reported the occurrence of both seed- and
sprout-derived plants on sites where brush species were completely
removed via hand cutting.
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE :
NO-ENTRY
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
NO-ENTRY
REFERENCES
SPECIES: Prunus andersonii | Desert Peach
REFERENCES :
1. 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]
2. Dayton, William A. 1931. Important western browse plants. Misc. Publ.
101. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 214 p. [768]
3. Everett, Richard L.; Meeuwig, Richard O.; Robertson, Joseph H. 1978.
Propagation of Nevada shrubs by stem cutting. Journal of Range
Management. 31(6): 426-429. [894]
4. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and
Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
5. Ferguson, Robert B. 1983. Use of rosaceous shrubs for wildland plantings
in the Intermountain West. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Shaw, Nancy,
compilers. Managing Intermountain rangelands--improvement of range and
wildlife habitats; Proceedings of symposia; 1981 September 15-17; Twin
Falls, ID; 1982 June 22-24; Elko, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-157. Ogden,
UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest
and Range Experiment Station: 136-149. [915]
7. Grisez, Ted J. 1974. Prunus L. cherry, peach, and plum. In: Schopmeyer,
C. S., technical coordinator. Seeds of woody plants in the United
States. Agriculture Handbook No. 450. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service: 658-673. [6975]
8. Koniak, Susan. 1985. Succession in pinyon-juniper woodlands following
wildfire in the Great Basin. Great Basin Naturalist. 45(3): 556-566.
[1371]
9. 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]
10. Monsen, Stephen B.; Davis, James N. 1985. Progress in the improvement of
selected western North American rosaceous 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: 93-101. [1681]
11. Mozingo, Hugh N. 1987. Shrubs of the Great Basin: A natural history.
Reno, NV: University of Nevada Press. 342 p. [1702]
12. Munz, Philip A. 1973. A California flora and supplement. Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press. 1905 p. [6155]
13. 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]
14. Schier, George A. 1983. Vegetative regeneration of Gambel oak and
chokecherry from excised rhizomes. Forest Science. 29(30): 499-502.
[2075]
15. Smith, P. Dean; Edell, Jack; Jurak, Frank; Young, James. 1978.
Rehabilitation of eastern Nevada roadsides. California Agriculture.
April: 4-5. [2177]
16. Young, James A.; Evans, Raymond A. 1973. Downy brome--intruder in the
plant succession of big sagebrush communities in the Great Basin.
Journal of Range Management. 26(6): 410-415. [2651]
17. Young, James A.; Evans, Raymond A. 1975. Germinability of seed reserves
in a big sagebrush community. Weed Science. 23(5): 358-364. [2654]
18. Young, James A.; Evans, Raymond A. 1975. Germinability of seed reserves
in a big sagebrush community. Weed Science. 23(5): 358-364. [2654]
19. Young, James A.; Evans, Raymond A. 1978. Population dynamics after
wildfires in sagebrush grasslands. Journal of Range Management. 31(4):
283-289. [2657]
20. Young, James A.; Evans, Raymond A.; Major, J. 1972. Alien plants in the
Great Basin. Journal of Range Management. 25: 194-201. [2674]
21. Young, James A.; Evans, Raymond A.; Major, Jack. 1977. Sagebrush steppe.
In: Barbour, Michael G.; Major, Jack, eds. Terrestrial vegetation of
California. New York: John Wiley & Sons: 763-796. [4300]
22. Young, J. A.; Evans, R. A.; Tueller, P. T. 1976. Great Basin plant
communities--pristine and grazed. In: Elston, Robert, ed. Holocene
environmental change in the Great Basin. Res. Pap. No. 6. Reno, NV:
University of Nevada, Nevada Archeological Society: 187-216. [2676]
Index
Related categories for Species: Prunus andersonii
| Desert Peach
|
 |
