|
Wildlife, Animals, and Plants
|
|
Introductory
SPECIES: Quercus havardii | Sand Shinnery Oak
ABBREVIATION :
QUEHAV
SYNONYMS :
NO-ENTRY
SCS PLANT CODE :
QUHA3
QUHAH
QUHAT
COMMON NAMES :
sand shinnery oak
Havard's oak
Tucker's oak
shinnery oak
shin oak
sand shin oak
TAXONOMY :
The currently accepted scientific name of sand shinnery oak is Quercus
havardii Rydb. [20]. It is a member of the white oak subgenus
(Lepidobalanus), within the order Fagales [2,32]. Accepted varieties
are [20]:
Q. h. var. havardii Havard's oak
Q. h. var. tuckeri Welsh Tucker's oak
Sand shinnery oak hybridizes with several sympatric oaks including shin
oak (Q. mohriana) and post oak (Q. stellata) [28]. Introgression and
backcrossing between sand shinnery oak and post oak are widespread [28].
These species have distinct ecological requirements but may occur
together on certain limestone ridges. Muller [28] notes that the
separation of sand shinnery and post oak is maintained as a result of
ecological differences which "are themselves sufficient basis for
specific distinction." Sand shinnery oak may also hybridize with Gambel
oak (Q. gambelii) in some locations [39].
LIFE FORM :
Tree, Shrub
FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS :
No special status
OTHER STATUS :
NO-ENTRY
COMPILED BY AND DATE :
D. Tirmenstein, April 1991
LAST REVISED BY AND DATE :
NO-ENTRY
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION :
Tirmenstein, D. A. 1991. Quercus havardii. In: Remainder of Citation
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Quercus havardii | Sand Shinnery Oak
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION :
Sand shinnery oak grows from the Texas Panhandle and western Oklahoma to
northeastern New Mexico and Arizona, northward to southeastern Utah
[14]. It is a dominant plant throughout much of the southern Great
Plains [51] and grows on more than 3.4 million acres (1.4 million ha) in
north and west Texas [47]. Sand shinnery oak occurs as a dominant on an
estimated 5.7 million acres (2.3 million ha) in the Southwest [47].
ECOSYSTEMS :
FRES15 Oak - hickory
FRES31 Shinnery
FRES32 Texas savanna
FRES35 Pinyon - juniper
FRES38 Plains grasslands
FRES39 Prairie
STATES :
AZ NM OK TX UT
ADMINISTRATIVE UNITS :
LAMR
BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :
13 Rocky Mountain Piedmont
14 Great Plains
KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :
K023 Juniper - pinyon woodland
K037 Mountain mahogany - oak scrub
K070 Sandsage - bluestem prairie
K071 Shinnery
K087 Mesquite - oak savanna
SAF COVER TYPES :
66 Ashe juniper - redberry (Pinchot) juniper
67 Mohrs ("shin") oak
SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES :
NO-ENTRY
HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES :
Sand shinnery oak grows as a dominant in xeric, shrubby oak communities
in Texas, Oklahoma, and the Southwest. It occurs in a variety of other
communities including mesquite (Prosopis spp.)-buffalograss (Buchloe
dactyloides) prairie [26], shortgrass prairie [53], and in parts of
certain southwestern pinyon-juniper (Pinus-Juniperus spp.) woodlands east
of the Continental Divide [48]. It also occurs as a codominant with
sand sagebrush (Artemisia filifolia) on many sandy sites throughout the
southern Great Plains.
It has been listed as a dominant in the following community type
classification:
Soil characteristics of two desert plant community types that occur in
the Los Medanos area of southeastern New Mexico [37]
Plant associates: In the southern Great Plains, sand shinnery oak
commonly grows with sand sagebrush, sideoats grama (Bouteloua
curtipendula), little bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium), buffalograss,
skunkbush sumac (Rhus trilobata), and honey mesquite (Prosopis
glandulosa) [26,35,50]. Little bluestem, big bluestem (Andropogon
gerardi var. gerardi), sand sagebrush, and sideoats grama are common
where grazing has not been too severe [3]. Sand sagebrush, soapweed
yucca (Yucca glauca), honey mesquite, and sand shinnery oak often
dominate on severely grazed sites. In parts of west Texas and eastern
New Mexico, sand bluestem (Andropogon gerardi var. paucipilus), little
bluestem, sand dropseed (Sporobolus cryptandrus), pricklypear (Opuntia
spp.), soapweed yucca, honey mesquite, broom snakeweed (Gutierrezia
sarothrae), and threeawn (Aristida spp.) are common associates
[7,11,33,47].
VALUE AND USE
SPECIES: Quercus havardii | Sand Shinnery Oak
WOOD PRODUCTS VALUE :
NO-ENTRY
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE :
Browse: Sand shinnery oak browse is a valuable wildlife food [33]. It
is readily eaten by deer throughout much of the Texas plains [4,6]. In
some areas it is an important livestock forage [8], but in most it is
primarily used as an emergency food during droughts [32]. Sand shinnery
oak browse has caused some livestock poisoning [33]. It is generally
most toxic during spring when new foliage is sprouting [21]. Browse is
particularly poisonous to cattle and can cause damage to the kidneys and
the digestive tract [32]. Sand shinnery oak browse is occasionally
toxic to domestic sheep and goats, especially in drought years [21].
However, domestic goats can consume it with impunity where it grows
interspersed with other forage [32], and in some areas it contributes
significantly to overall goat nutrition [45]. In west Texas, goat
consumption has reached 31 percent in June, 45 percent in July, and 51
percent in August [47].
Acorns: Sand shinnery acorns are readily eaten by many wildlife
species, including prairie chickens, bobwhites, and the collared
peccary, and by livestock[43]. Sites dominated by sand shinnery oak are
prime summer foraging areas for the prairie chickens [29]. In New
Mexico, small amounts of sand shinnery acorns are eaten by the scaled
quail during the summer [7].
Acorns of many oaks are eaten by the wild turkey, grackle, starling,
common crow, ruffed grouse, and sharp-tailed grouse, ring-necked
pheasant, northern flicker, brown thrasher, jays, woodpeckers, titmice,
chickadees, and nuthatches [25,44]. The red squirrel, fox squirrel,
gray squirrel, rock squirrel, eastern chipmunk, white-footed mouse,
flying squirrels, and numerous other rodents feed on acorns [25,44].
The black bear, raccoon, opossum, deer, cottontails, and foxes also seek
out acorns [25,44].
PALATABILITY :
Sand shinnery oak browse is at least somewhat palatable to deer and to
domestic goats. It is relatively unpalatable to cattle [47]. The high
tannin levels present in oak browse presumably reduce palatability to
many species.
The large, sweet acorns are highly palatable to a variety of wildlife
species [8] and to domestic livestock [43].
NUTRITIONAL VALUE :
Browse: Crude protein values of sand shinnery oak browse are relatively
low, averaging 8 to 9 percent [46,47]. Tannin levels remain relatively
constant from June through September but vary throughout the rest of the
year. Twigs typically exhibit slightly higher tannin levels than do
leaves. In several studies, condensed tannin ranged from 34 to 38
milligrams per gram [47]. Percent seasonal tannin values were
documented as follows in west Texas [47]:
April May August October
15.1 8.7 7.7 4.2
In west Texas, the following nutritional values were recorded for
current season growth [45]:
crude protein 7.6%
neutral detergent fiber 48.7%
lignin 15%
in-vitro organic matter
digestibility 35.7%
Acorns: Most acorns are nutritious [15] and relatively high in
carbohydrates [16]. Acorns of the white oak group are relatively low in
tannins (0.5 to 2.5 percent) and lipids (5 to 10 percent) [38]. Protein
content of white oak acorns averages approximately 8 percent [56].
COVER VALUE :
Sand shinnery oak provides valuable cover for many species of birds and
mammals [33]. Thickets provide good summer thermal cover for mule deer
on the hot, sunny Texas plains [4]. However, this short oak may have
relatively poor concealment value for deer [6]. Sand shinnery oak
provides shade for pronghorn, and prairie chickens and other birds
[5,29]. The stems and foliage offer vertical screening and excellent
nesting cover for prairie chickens [17].
VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES :
Sand shinnery oak can grow on some harsh, sandy, erosion-prone sites.
Potential value for rehabilitation has not been documented. It can be
propagated by means of acorns or by separating rootstocks [42,43].
Methods of propagating oaks (Quercus spp.) have been described [2,31].
OTHER USES AND VALUES :
The acorns of many oaks were traditionally an important staple of some
Native American peoples [43]. Acorns of sand shinnery oak are large and
sweet [8] and may have been utilized as a food source.
MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Competition: Sand shinnery oak has an extensive underground root system
and competes vigorously with palatable grasses and other forage species
[29,42]. Under dense stands of sand shinnery oak, forage production can
be reduced by as much as 90 percent [35]. Sand shinnery oak contributes
to increased brush development on some heavily grazed sites and is
considered a management problem in parts of Texas [32,54].
Consequently, management objectives have often focused on reducing sand
shinnery oak through the use of herbicides, fire, or mechanical
treatment.
Chemical control: Many herbicides have been used to control sand
shinnery oak. Tebuthiuron, 2,4,5-T, and various phenoxy herbicides have
proven effective when properly applied [18,32,35,42]. In southeastern
New Mexico, best results have been obtained after spring applications
[19]. A single application can kill 20 to 30 percent of the roots and
70 to 92 percent of the top growth. Multiple applications increase
mortality. Up to 90 percent of the plants can be killed after two or
three consecutive annual applications of 2,4,5-T [42]. Grass yields can
be increased three to nine times within two growing seasons after
treatment [35]. Despite the rapid increase in forage growth, managers
recommend resting pastures for at least one growing season after
treatment [32].
Mechanical treatment: Experiments suggest that it may be difficult to
root-kill sand shinnery oak by mechanical shredding. Plants typically
sprout from surviving portions of the stem base after treatment, thereby
actually increasing stem density [32].
Biotic controls: In some areas, sand shinnery oak can be effectively
controlled by 3 consecutive years of goat browsing [32].
Insects: Sand shinnery oak is susceptible to various insects, such as
galls and grasshoppers [9].
Biomass: An estimated 90 percent of the total biomass of sand shinnery
oak is located belowground [10]. Carbohydrate allocation to biomass
varies seasonally and with chemical treatment. Biomass characteristics
have been examined [35].
Wildlife: Sand shinnery oak thickets serve as important deer habitat in
some areas. Where management aims include preserving wildlife habitat
value, selected clumps or motts of oak should be left when treating sand
shinnery oak range. Some brushy areas adjacent to treated oak range
should also be left intact [6].
Removal of sand shinnery oak can prove detrimental to prairie chickens
[17,29]. During a summer survey, Olawsky [29] reported an average
density of 1.3 prairie chickens per acre (0.51/ha) on chemically treated
plots and 1.0 per acre (0.41/ha) on untreated plots. During winter, an
average density of 1.3 birds per acre (0.53/ha) was observed on
chemically treated sites and 0.8 birds per acre (0.41/ha) on nearby
untreated sites. Although there were slight increases in density on the
treated sites, birds on the untreated sites were in better physical
condition [29]. The distributional range of the lesser prairie chicken
has decreased dramatically since 1800's due to destruction of habitat
[17]. Lesser prairie chicken habitat value can often be maintained by
interspersing treated and untreated blocks of sand shinnery oak. Herbel
and others [19] reported that the lesser prairie chicken prefers a
mosaic composed of grassland and sand shinnery oak motts.
Populations of small songbirds, such as meadowlarks, may also be reduced
by the elimination or reduction of sand shinnery oak. Olawsky and
others [30] studied meadowlark densities in four areas in eastern New
Mexico and west Texas; two plots previously treated with tebuthiuron
were compared with adjacent untreated plots. Meadowlark densities were
greater on the untreated sand shinnery oak plots than on the treated
plots. Summer surveys revealed an average density of 0.22 meadowlarks
per acre (0.08/ha) on untreated sites and 0.09 per acre (0.04/ha) on
treated sites. In winter, densities were estimated at 0.10 per acre
(0.04/ha) on untreated sites and only 0.05 per acre (0.02/ha) on treated
sites.
Grazing: Long-term goat browsing can produce a shift toward more
grasses on sand shinnery oak range [45]. Because of the toxicity of
new growth [see Importance to Livestock and Wildlife], cattle should be
removed from sand shinnery oak range during leaf development [19].
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Quercus havardii | Sand Shinnery Oak
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
Sand shinnery oak is a freely branched, clonal, thicket-forming shrub or
small tree [23,27]. Plants generally grow from less than 3 feet to 6
feet (< 1-2 m) in height; they may occasionally reach heights of 13 feet
(4 m) [33]. Individual stems rarely grow to more than 0.8 inch (2 cm)
in diameter [27]. Clones may extend from 9 to more than 49 feet (3-> 15
m) in diameter [27]. Individual stems typically live for 11 to 15
years, although the age of the clone itself may be much older [32].
Clones are continually rejuvenated through new sprouting as aerial stems
senesce [27].
The thick, leathery leaves have toothed or lobed margins [14,33].
Leaves vary in shape from oblong to elliptic, lanceolate to
oblanceolate, or ovate to obovate [14]. The upper surface is lustrous,
grayish or yellowish green, and the lower surface a felty lime green
[32,33].
The fruit is an acorn which varies in size and shape [14]. The broad
cup (up to to 1 inch [2.5 cm] in length) [33] encloses one-third to
one-half of the nut [14].
RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :
Phanerophyte
REGENERATION PROCESSES :
Seed: Sand shinnery oak produces good acorn crops an average of 3 out
of every 10 years [32]. Acorns are often damaged or destroyed by late
season frost [32] or by insects. Seeds are dispersed by gravity, and
birds and mammals. Seeds of most species within the white oak group
germinate soon after falling to the ground [38]. Root elongation of
sand shinnery oak is generally rapid [32]. Embryological development
has been examined [2].
Seedling establishment: Seedling establishment of sand shinnery oak is
rare [27,32]. Establishment is generally limited to disturbed sites
that lack competing grasses [27]. Seeds will germinate and seedlings
survive only in years when precipitation from late July to early August
is abundant [32].
Vegetative regeneration: Sand shinnery oak spreads laterally through
rhizome expansion [33,39]. Rhizomes range from 4 to 39 inches long
(1-10 dm) and elongate vertically toward the soil surface [27]. More
than 60 stems may arise from the same rhizome [32]. Rhizome expansion
and growth is often rapid where competition is slight [28]. Rhizomes
allow sand shinnery oak to expand in areas where conditions are too
severe for seedling establishment [27].
Several sources have also reported that sand shinnery oak sprouts from
roots [37] and underground stems [19,42]. It also spreads slow by
tillers. In Oklahoma it spread 30 feet (9 m) in 50 years by tillering.
Following disturbance, sand shinnery oak can sprout vigorously from the
stem base [32].
SITE CHARACTERISTICS :
Sand shinnery oak grows on sandy plains and sand dunes [14] where it
commonly forms dense thickets or shinnery [35]. It grows as a dominant
throughout much of the rolling sandhills of the Great Plains [27]. Sand
shinnery oak is typically associated with dry, sunny sites [43].
Soil: Sand shinnery oak grows on shallow to deep sands and, more
rarely, on gypsum [33]. Cover generally declines as soil clay content
increases [32]. Sand shinnery oak forms clumps on sandy loam and dense
stands on deep sand [32].
Climate: Sand shinnery oak grows under a climatic regime described as
warm temperate and semiarid [47]. Semiarid portions of west Texas and
eastern New Mexico dominated by sand shinnery oak receive an average of
16 inches (41 cm) of annual rainfall [11]. The growing season averages
200 days [11].
Elevation: Sand shinnery oak grows from 2,300 to 3,400 feet (701-1,036
m) in Trans-Pecos Texas [33] and from 3,634 to 6,896 feet (1,125-2,135
m) in Utah [57].
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS :
Sand shinnery oak is a constituent of "postclimax" bluestem communities
in the high plains of Texas [35]. It sprouts readily after disturbance
and can rapidly assume prominence in many early seral communities.
SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT :
In west Texas, vegetative buds of sandy shinnery oak begin to swell in
mid-March [32]. Both male and female flowers begin to form after the
buds develop. Flowering generally occurs during April in the Great
Plains [14].
FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Quercus havardii | Sand Shinnery Oak
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS :
Wright and others [52] reported that the interaction of fire, climate,
insects, rodents, and competition from grasses may have restricted shrub
and tree growth in portions of the southern Great Plains. Thus, a fire
every 15 to 30 years could significantly reduce distribution and density
of shrubs in the southern mixed prairie [52].
Sand shinnery oak is well adapted to fire. Plants typically sprout
vigorously from underground stems or rhizomes after aboveground
vegetation is damaged or removed by fire.
POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY :
Tree with adventitious-bud root crown/soboliferous species root sucker
Geophyte, growing points deep in soil
Initial-offsite colonizer (off-site, initial community)
FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Quercus havardii | Sand Shinnery Oak
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT :
Sand shinnery oak is very fire tolerant [52,53]. Underground
regenerative structures often survive after aboveground vegetation is
consumed by fire [51].
Most acorns are characterized by a relatively high water content. When
heated by fire, the moisture within the acorn causes the seed to expand
and burst [55]. Thus, fire generally destroys acorns present on-site.
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT :
NO-ENTRY
PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE :
Sand shinnery oak generally sprouts vigorously after fire [51]. When
the aboveground stem is killed, buds located near the soil surface on
rhizomes or underground stems sprout and give rise to new plants [32].
After fire in southeastern New Mexico, stem densities increased more
than 15 percent during the first postfire year. However, no acorns were
produced during this year [52].
Limited seedling establishment may occur on good sites in unusually
favorable years from seed transported on-site by various birds and
mammals.
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE :
NO-ENTRY
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Fuels and flammability: Sand shinnery oak range is described as
moderately volatile. Sufficient grasses are generally present so that
fire can back through stands under cool conditions with relative
humidity of 50 to 60 percent, air temperature of 60 degrees F (16
degrees C), and winds of 5 to 10 miles per hour (8-16 km/hr). However,
fires may occasionally go out under these conditions as they back
through sand shinnery oak. Oak leaves serve as effective firebrands but
do not generally carry more than 50 feet (15 m) [50].
Prescribed fire: Prescribed fire has been used effectively in sand
shinnery oak on sandy sites in eastern New Mexico, west Texas, and
western Oklahoma [49]. Wright reported that a 200-foot (61 m) fireline
is generally adequate for burning sand shinnery oak when relative
humidity is between 25 and 40 percent, air temperatures are 70 to 75
degrees F (21-24 degrees C), and wind speed is 5 to 10 miles per hour
(8-16 km/hr). Where fine fuels average 2,000 to 4,000 pounds per acre
(367-735 kg/ha), satisfactory burns can be conducted under cooler
conditions. Firelines should be burned when the relative humidity is
less than 50 percent, wind speed is less than 8 miles per hour (13
km/hr), and temperature is 45 to 65 degrees F (7-18 degrees C). It is
important to burn at relatively high humidity to minimize danger from
oak leaf firebrands [50].
Wildlife considerations: Acorns are generally not produced during the
first year after fire. Fire can thus adversely affect the lesser
prairie chicken and wild turkey populations in the short-term [53]. For
best manipulation of mule deer habitat, burned patches of sand shinnery
oak should be widely distributed at distances more than 0.25 miles (0.4
km) apart. Patches to be burned should be less than 5 acres (2 ha) and
allowed to grow for 10 to 12 years before being reburned. Good results
have also been obtained by burning 50- to 100-acre (20-41 ha) patches
during December. These patches should be reburned no oftener than every
4 years [4].
Forage production: Increases in total grass yields of 300 pounds per
acre (55 kg/ha) have been reported on sand shinnery oak range after the
first postfire growing season [51].
REFERENCES
SPECIES: Quercus havardii | Sand Shinnery Oak
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. Bonner, F. T.; Vozzo, J. A. 1987. Seed biology and technology of
Quercus. Gen. Tech. Rep. SO-66. New Orleans, LA: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. 21 p.
[3248]
3. Brown, David E. 1982. Plains and Great Basin grasslands. In: Brown,
David E., ed. Biotic communities of the American Southwest--United
States and Mexico. Desert Plants. 4(1-4): 115-121. [536]
4. Bryant, Fred C.; Morrison, Bruce. 1985. Managing plains mule deer in
Texas and eastern New Mexico. Management Note 7. Lubbock, TX: Texas Tech
University, College of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Range and
Wildlife Management. 5 p. [187]
5. Buechner, Helmut K. 1950. Life history, ecology, and range use of the
pronghorn antelope in Trans-Pecos Texas. American Midland Naturalist.
43(2): 257-354. [4084]
6. Darr, Gene W.; Klebenow, Donald A. 1975. Deer, brush control, and
livestock on the Texas Rolling Plains. Journal of Range Management.
28(2): 115-119. [10071]
7. Davis, Charles A.; Barkley, Robert C.; Haussamen, Walter C. 1975. Scaled
quail foods in southeastern New Mexico. Journal of Wildlife Management.
39(3): 496-502. [10491]
8. Dayton, William A. 1931. Important western browse plants. Misc. Publ.
101. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 214 p. [768]
9. Dodson, Gary. 1987. Xanthoteras sp. (Hymenoptera: Cunipidae) gall
abundance on shinnery oak (Quercus havardii) in New Mexico: an indicator
of plant stress?. Southwestern Naturalist. 32(4): 463-468. [2971]
10. Engle, D. M.; Bonham, C. D.; Bartel, L. E. 1983. Ecological
characteristics and control of Gambel oak. Journal of Range Management.
36(3): 363-365. [3361]
11. Ethridge, D. E.; Pettit, R. D.; Suddeth, R. G.; Stoecker, A. L. 1987.
Optimal economic timing of range improvement alternatives: Southern High
Plains. Journal of Range Management. 40(6): 555-559. [3795]
12. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and
Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
13. 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]
14. Great Plains Flora Association. 1986. Flora of the Great Plains.
Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. 1392 p. [1603]
15. Hannah, Peter R. 1987. Regeneration methods for oaks. Northern Journal
of Applied Forestry. 4: 97-101. [3728]
16. Harlow, Richard F.; Whelan, James B.; Crawford, Hewlette S.; Skeen, John
E. 1975. Deer foods during years of oak mast abundance and scarcity.
Journal of Wildlife Management. 39(2): 330-336. [10088]
17. Haukos, D. A.; Smith, L. M. 1989. Lesser prairie chicken nest site
selection and vegetation characteristics in tebuthiuron-treated and
untreated shinnery oak in TX. Great Basin Naturalist. 49(4): 624-626.
[10509]
18. Herbel, Carlton H. 1979. Utilization of grass- and shrublands of the
south-western United States. In: Walker, B. H., ed. Management of
semi-arid ecosystems. Volume 7. Developments in agriculture and
managed-forest ecology. Amsterdam: Elsevier Scientific Publishing
Company: 161-203. [1134]
19. Herbel, C. H.; Steger, R.; Gould, W. L. 1974. Managing semidesert ranges
of the Southwest. Circular 456. Las Cruces, NM: New Mexico State
University, Cooperative Extension Service. 48 p. [4564]
20. Kartesz, John T. 1994. A synonymized checklist of the vascular flora of
the United States, Canada, and Greenland. Volume II--thesaurus. 2nd ed.
Portland, OR: Timber Press. 816 p. [23878]
21. Kingsbury, John M. 1964. Poisonous plants of the United States and
Canada. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc. 626 p. [122]
22. 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]
23. Little, Elbert L., Jr. 1979. Checklist of United States trees (native
and naturalized). Agric. Handb. 541. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service. 375 p. [2952]
24. 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]
25. Martin, Alexander C.; Zim, Herbert S.; Nelson, Arnold L. 1951. American
wildlife and plants. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc. 500 p.
[4021]
26. McKell, Cyrus M.; Garcia-Moya, Edmundo. 1989. North American shrublands.
In: McKell, Cyrus M., ed. The biology and utilization of shrubs. San
Diego, CA: Academic Press, Inc: 3-23. [7194]
27. Muller, Cornelius H. 1951. The significance of vegetative reproduction
in Quercus. Madrono. 2: 129-137. [1718]
28. Muller, Cornelius H. 1952. Ecological control of hybridization in
Quercus: a factor in the mechanism of evolution. Evolution. 6(2):
147-161. [10666]
29. Olawsky, Craig Donald. 1987. Effects of shinnery oak control with
tebuthiuron on lesser prairie-chicken populations. Lubbock, TX: Texas
Tech. University. 83 p. Thesis. [10409]
30. Olawsky, Craig D.; Smith, Loren M.; Pettit, Russell D. 1986. Effects of
sand shinnery oak control on meadowlark densities. In: Smith, Loren M.;
Britton, Carlton M., eds. Research highlights--1986 Noxious brush and
weed control; range and wildlife management. Volume 17. Lubbock, TX:
Texas Tech University: 37. [3670]
31. Olson, David F., Jr. 1974. Quercus L. oak. In: Schopmeyer, C. S., ed.
Seeds of woody plants in the United States. Agric. Handb. 450.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 692-703.
[7737]
32. Pettit, Russell D. 1986. Sand shinnery oak: control and management.
Management Note 8. Lubbock, TX: Texas Tech University, College of
Agricultural Sciences, Department of Range and Wildlife Management. 5 p.
[2882]
33. Powell, A. Michael. 1988. Trees & shrubs of Trans-Pecos Texas including
Big Bend and Guadalupe Mountains National Parks. Big Bend National Park,
TX: Big Bend Natural History Association. 536 p. [6130]
34. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant
geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
35. Sears, W. E.; Britton, C. M.; Wester, D. B.; Pettit, R. D. 1986.
Herbicide conversion of a sand shinnery oak (Quercus havardii)
community: effects on biomass. Journal of Range Management. 39(5):
399-403. [10406]
36. Sears, W. E.; Britton, C. M.; Wester, D. B.; Pettit, R. D. 1986.
Herbicide conversion of a sand shinnery oak (Quercus havardii) community
effects on nitrogen. Journal of Range Management. 39(5): 403-407.
[10405]
37. Secor, Jack B.; Shamash, Saied; Smeal, Daniel; Gennaro, Antonio L. 1983.
Soil characteristics of two desert plant community types that occur in
the Los Medanos area of southeastern New Mexico. Soil Science. 136(3):
133-144. [2103]
38. Smallwood, Peter D.; Peters, W. David. 1986. Grey squirrel food
preferences: the effects of tannin and fat concentration. Ecology.
67(1): 168-175. [10519]
39. Tucker, John M. 1961. Studies in the Quercus undulata complex. I. A
preliminary statement. American Journal of Botany. 48(3): 202-208.
[2361]
40. Tucker, John M. 1970. Studies in the Quercus undulata complex. IV. the
contribution of Quercus havardii. American Journal of Botany. 57(1):
71-84. [2363]
41. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1994. Plants
of the U.S.--alphabetical listing. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 954 p. [23104]
42. U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Department of the Interior; Range
Seeding Equipment Committee. 1959. Handbook: Chemical control of range
weeds. Washington, DC: [Publisher unknown]. 93 p. [12129]
43. Van Dersal, William R. 1938. Native woody plants of the United States,
their erosion-control and wildlife values. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Agriculture. 362 p. [4240]
44. Van Dersal, William R. 1940. Utilization of oaks by birds and mammals.
Journal of Wildlife Management. 4(4): 404-428. [11983]
45. Villena, Francis; Pfister, James A. 1990. Sand shinnery oak as forage
for Angora and Spanish goats. Journal of Range Management. 43(2):
116-122. [10408]
46. Villena, Francis; Pfister, James A.; Villena, Carolina; [and others].
1987. Diet quality and composition, forage intake, and palatability of
sand shinnery oak for goats. In: Smith, Loren M.; Britton, Carlton M.,
eds. Research highlights--1987 noxious brush and weed control; range and
wildlife and management. Vol. 18. Lubbock, TX: Texas Tech University:
18-19. [6435]
47. Villena-Rodriguez, Francis. 1987. Nutrition of goats grazing sand
shinnery oak (Quercus havardii) ranges in west Texas. Lubbock, TX: Texas
Tech University. 102 p. Thesis. [11416]
48. Woodin, Howard E.; Lindsey, Alton A. 1954. Juniper-pinyon east of the
Continental Divide, as analyzed by the line-strip method. Ecology. 35:
473-489. [285]
49. Wright, Henry A. 1978. Use of fire to manage grasslands of the Great
Plains: central and southern Great Plains. In: Hyder, Donald N., ed.
Proceedings, 1st international rangelands congress; 1978 August 14-18;
Denver, CO. Denver, CO: Society for Range Management: 694-696. [2615]
50. Wright, Henry A. 1978. The effect of fire on vegetation in ponderosa
pine forests: A state-of-the-art review. Lubbock, TX: Texas Tech
University, Department of Range and Wildlife Management. 21 p. In
cooperation with: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. [4425]
51. Wright, Henry A.; Bailey, Arthur W. 1982. Fire ecology: United States
and southern Canada. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 501 p. [2620]
52. Wright, Henry A.; Bailey, Arthur W.; Thompson, Rita P. 1978. The role
and use of fire in the Great Plains: A-state-of-the-art-review. In:
Prairie prescribed burning symposium and workshop: Proceedings; 1978
April 25-28; Jamestown, ND. [Place of publication unknown]: The Wildlife
Society, North Dakota Chapter: VIII-1 to VIII-29. On file with: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research
Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT. [13614]
53. Wright, Henry A.; Thompson, Rita. 1978. Fire effects. In: Fire
management: Prairie plant communities: Proceedings of a symposium and
workshop; 1978 April 25-28; Jamestown, ND. [Place of publication
unknown]: [Publisher unknown]: V-1 to V-12. On file with: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research
Station, Fire Sciences Lab, Missoula, MT. [3249]
54. Young, Vernon A.; Anderwald, Frank R.; McCully, Wayne G. 1948. Brush
problems on Texas ranges. Miscellaneous Publication 21. College Station,
TX: Texas Agricultural Experiment Station. 19 p. [5996]
55. Rouse, Cary. 1986. Fire effects in northeastern forests: oak. Gen. Tech.
Rep. NC-105. St. Paul, MN: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station. 7 p. [3884]
56. Stapanian, Martin A.; Smith, Christopher C. 1984. Density-dependent
survival of scatterhoarded nuts: an experimental approach. Ecology.
65(5): 1387-1396. [10380]
57. 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]
58. 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]
59. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Biological Survey. [n.d.]. NP
Flora [Data base]. Davis, CA: U.S. Department of the Interior, National
Biological Survey. [23119]
Index
Related categories for Species: Quercus havardii
| Sand Shinnery Oak
|
 |
