|
Wildlife, Animals, and Plants
|
|
Introductory
SPECIES: Robinia neomexicana | New Mexico Locust
ABBREVIATION :
ROBNEO
SYNONYMS :
Robinia luxurians (Dieck) Schneid.
Robinia subvelutina Rydb.
Robinia breviloba Rydb.
Robinia neomexicana var. subvelutina (Rydb.) Kearney & Peebles
SCS PLANT CODE :
RONE
COMMON NAMES :
New Mexico locust
New Mexican locust
southwestern locust
hojalito
Una de Gato
TAXONOMY :
The currently accepted scientific name of New Mexico locust is Robinia
neomexicana Gray. It is a member of the pea family (Fabaceae). Several
varieties may be encountered in the literature; however, the maintenance
of varieties is questionable due to intergradation of all forms [3,36].
LIFE FORM :
Tree, Shrub
FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS :
No special status
OTHER STATUS :
NO-ENTRY
COMPILED BY AND DATE :
Diane S. Pavek, March 1993
LAST REVISED BY AND DATE :
NO-ENTRY
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION :
Pavek, Diane, S. 1993. Robinia neomexicana. In: Remainder of Citation
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Robinia neomexicana | New Mexico Locust
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION :
New Mexico locust is found from the mountains of Trans-Pecos Texas north
to southern Colorado and west to southern Nevada [29,36,42]. Its range
extends from southeastern California to New Mexico and northern Mexico
[3,11,53,56].
ECOSYSTEMS :
FRES21 Ponderosa pine
FRES23 Fir - spruce
FRES34 Chaparral - mountain shrub
FRES35 Pinyon - juniper
STATES :
AZ CA CO NV NM TX UT MEXICO
ADMINISTRATIVE UNITS :
CACA CHIR CORO FOBO GRCA GUMO
LAME SAGU WACA ZION
BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :
6 Upper Basin and Range
7 Lower Basin and Range
11 Southern Rocky Mountains
12 Colorado Plateau
13 Rocky Mountain Piedmont
KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :
K018 Pine - Douglas-fir forest
K019 Arizona pine forest
K020 Spruce - fir - Douglas-fir forest
K021 Southwestern spruce - fir forest
K023 Juniper - pinyon woodland
K031 Oak - juniper woodlands
K032 Transition between K031 and K037
SAF COVER TYPES :
206 Engelmann spruce - subalpine fir
211 White fir
216 Blue spruce
217 Aspen
237 Interior ponderosa pine
238 Western juniper
239 Pinyon - juniper
240 Arizona cypress
241 Western live oak
SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES :
NO-ENTRY
HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES :
New Mexico locust grows in pure stands or as an understory species [26].
New Mexico locust is an understory dominant or codominant with Gambel
oak (Quercus gambelii) under spruce-fir (Picea engelmannii-Abies
lasiocarpa), white fir (A. concolor), and mixed-conifer forests
[1,16,20,24,37,40]. It is a minor component in most riparian forest and
scrubland community types within its range, and in one chaparral
association (Arizona oak-yellowleaf silktassel-Emory oak [Q.
arizonica-Garrya flavescens-Q. emoryi]) [8,51,52].
New Mexico locust is an indicator for habitat types or plant
associations in the following publications:
(1) Classification of the forest vegetation on the National Forests of
Arizona and New Mexico [2]
(2) A vegetation classification system for New Mexico, U.S.A. [19]
(3) Forest habitat types in the Apache, Gila, and part of the Cibola
National Forests, Arizona and New Mexico [24]
(4) Forest and woodland habitat types (plant associations) of northern
New Mexico and northern Arizona [39]
(5) A classification of spruce-fir and mixed conifer habitat types of
Arizona and New Mexico [40].
VALUE AND USE
SPECIES: Robinia neomexicana | New Mexico Locust
WOOD PRODUCTS VALUE :
New Mexico locust wood is hard, heavy, and durable. It has been used
for fence posts and fuel [34,36]. It is of little use as lumber due to
its small size and limited distribution [34].
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE :
On disturbed sites, New Mexico locust offers good forage and cover for
livestock and wildlife [39,45]. New Mexico locust is eaten by mule
deer, bighorn sheep, Gambel's quail, chipmunk, and porcupine [56].
PALATABILITY :
Both the flowers and foliage are preferred by cattle and deer [33,36].
Palatability of New Mexico locust in Utah is fair for cattle and horses
and good for sheep [18].
NUTRITIONAL VALUE :
New Mexico locust has fair energy value but usually has poor protein
value (however, see below) [18]. New Mexico locust leaves comprised 0.8
percent of the total diet of mule deer in Arizona in June [54]. Protein
and acid-detergent fiber were each 25 percent of the leafy material.
Digestible dry matter was 39 percent of the leaves.
COVER VALUE :
In Arizona, New Mexico locust as a minor species with Gambel oak
noticeably contributed to elk summer thermal cover in a ponderosa pine
(Pinus ponderosa)-white fir overstory [7]. The cover value of New
Mexico locust in Utah is rated as poor for pronghorn, elk, and
waterfowl; fair for mule deer and upland game birds; and good for small
mammals and small nongame birds [18].
VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES :
New Mexico locust is cultivated for erosion control [32,34,36,45,56].
Caution is advised when using New Mexico locust in recreation areas
because of its stout spines [32].
In San Dimas Experimental Forest, California, at an elevation of 500
feet (152 m), New Mexico locust bareroot stock was planted on road
fills. Survival was 52 percent. New Mexico locust made the most rapid
growth compared to all other species planted. It has been fully tested
and is recommended for erosion control on sites at 500 to 6,000 feet
(152-1,829 m) in elevation with deep soil and in full sun[32].
OTHER USES AND VALUES :
New Mexico locust is cultivated as an ornamental [34,36,56].
The Hopi Indians have used it as an emetic and for treating rheumatism
[36,56].
MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
New Mexico locust competes with conifer seedlings and saplings for
moisture and light [26]. Because of its rapid growth and prolific
sprouting, efforts are made to suppress New Mexico locust, especially
after timber harvest [13,14,39]. Brush competition is usually
detrimental to seedling or juvenile tree growth [10,26,30]. However,
Coffman [10] showed that under adverse planting conditions, the highest
establishment rates of planted Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii)
seedlings occurred under moderate or heavy cover of New Mexico locust
and Gambel oak.
Mechanical methods alone do not successfully control New Mexico locust
[26]. Gottfried [26] tested combinations of mechanical and chemical
control methods on New Mexico locust in central Arizona. There was no
significant difference among the various treatments after 1 year.
However, 4 years after the combination treatment of (1) cutting stems
during dormancy, (2) painting stumps with 2,4-D, and (3) spraying
sprouts with 2,4,5-T, stems were reduced from 104 to 9.
Within 8 years of an 80-acre (32.4 ha) harvest of mixed-conifer forest
in Arizona, 20 acres (8.1 ha) were covered by New Mexico locust. The
New Mexico locust plants were treated with picloram; 86 percent of the
plants were dead after 2 years [13]. Single applications of soil
herbicides may not elminate New Mexico locust due to delayed recovery of
plants and establishment of seedlings. Therefore, follow-up spot
treatment is recommended [13].
In open ponderosa pine stands in northern Arizona, production values for
New Mexico locust were 3 pounds per acre (3.4 kg/ha) [9]. Ffolliott
[22] has developed models for predicting understory production in
ponderosa pine or mixed conifer forests of which New Mexico locust is a
component.
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Robinia neomexicana | New Mexico Locust
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
New Mexico locust is a native rhizomatous, small tree or shrub that
grows from 3 to 26 feet (4-8 m) tall with a diameter of 4 to 8 inches
(10-20 cm) [29,34,45,53,58]. It has a dense crown and thin bark
[32,34]. New Mexico locust has many stout spiny branches with pinnately
compound leaves that are 6 to 8 inches (15-20 cm) long [11,34]. Flowers
hang in dense clusters [36]. The fruit is a hairy legume about 3 inches
(7.6 cm) long containing several seeds [36,45].
RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :
Phanerophyte
Geophyte
REGENERATION PROCESSES :
New Mexico locust reproduces asexually and sexually. It sprouts from
stumps and root crowns [36,56]. New Mexico locust spreads by rhizomes,
forming dense thickets [49].
New Mexico locust fruits open rapidly when mature [42]. Locust (Robinia
spp.) seeds have impermeable seed coats and must be scarified [42,56].
Olson [42] and Vines [56] outline nursery methods for New Mexico locust
propagation. Seed stored in a cool dry place remained viable 1 to 4
years, which indicates that a short-lived seedbank could exist [56].
SITE CHARACTERISTICS :
New Mexico locust is common in canyons, along streams or arroyos, on
terraces, talus slopes, and in coniferous forest understories
[35,36,45,58]. It is found on gentle to relatively steep slopes on all
aspects [24,28,57]. New Mexico locust occurs on a wide variety of
soils, ranging from clays to sandy loams derived from volcanic or
limestone parent materials [5,8,12,23,31]. Across its range, New Mexico
locust is found between 4,000 and 9,150 feet (1,219-2,789 m) in
elevation [23,28,39,48,56].
New Mexico locust occurs in semiarid continental climates with dry warm
springs, hot moist summers, and cold moist winters [14,44]. Across its
range, two major precipitation seasons exist, with 35 to 42 percent of
precipitation falling as rain in July and August [28]. Average annual
precipitation ranges from 15 to 30 inches (381-762 mm) [12,23,28,31,46].
Associated species not mentioned in Distribution and Occurrence are
listed below. Associated trees are southwestern white pine (Pinus
strobiformis), Chihuahua pine (Pinus leiophylla var. chihuahuana), and
quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) [17,24,43,57]. Common shrub
associates are Fendler ceanothus (Ceanothus fenderi), manzanita
(Arctostaphylos spp.), silverleaf oak (Quercus hypoleucoides), mountain
snowberry (Symphoricarpos oreophilus), and mountain-mahogany
(Cercocarpus spp.) [6,9,28,52]. Other associated species are Arizona
fescue (Festuca arizonica), mutton bluegrass (Poa fendleriana), and
western yarrow (Achillea lanulosa) [12,23].
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS :
Facultative Seral Species
New Mexico locust is a seral species after overstory removal in
southwestern coniferous forests [28]. After disturbance in
mixed-conifer stands, New Mexico locust became dominant after 1 to 3
years of forb dominance [28]. New Mexico locust is shaded out when the
conifers overtop it in 15 to 20 years [27,28].
SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT :
New leaves of New Mexico locust begin growing in the spring. Flowers
form April to July in the new leaf axils [36,56]. Fruits ripen
September to October, and seeds disperse from September to December
[42,56]. Leaves abscise in autumn [42].
FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Robinia neomexicana | New Mexico Locust
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS :
Thin bark and moderate litter production probably make New Mexico locust
susceptible to fire [32]. Horton [32] stated that the succulent foliage
during the summer decreases the severity of fires in New Mexico locust
communities. Postburn regeneration probably occurs via root crown and
rhizome sprouting.
POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY :
Tree with adventitious-bud root crown/root sucker
FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Robinia neomexicana | New Mexico Locust
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT :
Fire probably kills New Mexico locust aerial stems and seedlings.
However, the root crown can survive low- to moderate-severity fires
[44].
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT :
NO-ENTRY
PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE :
Surviving New Mexico locust root crowns and rhizomes sprout following
fire [8]. From information about the rate of growth, it is probable
that postfire recovery via sprouting is good [32]. Two years after a
fire in north-central New Mexico, New Mexico locust, at a density of 240
plants per acre (593 plants/ha), had 295 sprouts per acre (729
sprouts/ha) with an average height of 15 inches (38 cm) [44].
Hanks and Dick-Peddie [28] evaluated the effects of elevation and
exposure on 11 burns aged 3 to 80 years in south-central New Mexico.
There was no trend in size or number of trees for New Mexico locust.
New Mexico locust was nearly ubiquitous on burned sites below 10,000
feet (3,048 m) by postfire year 2 or 3.
Potter and Foxx [44] looked at sprouting on a low-severity burn at
postfire year 2; a moderate-severity burn at postfire year 17; and a
high-severity burn at postfire year 100. New Mexico locust had the
greatest number of sprouts per acre on the moderate-severity burn area
at postfire year 17.
In a pinyon-Utah juniper (Juniperus osteosperma) woodland in
northwestern Arizona, shrubs were assessed at postfire year 20. The
area had been seeded to introduced grasses. New Mexico locust occurred
infrequently; the plants were assumed to be on-site survivors that had
sprouted [15].
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE :
NO-ENTRY
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
The use of fire to control New Mexico locust and improve conifer
regeneration has not been tested [26]. Potentially, fires occurring
more frequently than every 10 years would favor sprouting shrubs, such
as New Mexico locust, over nonsprouting shrubs [59].
REFERENCES
SPECIES: Robinia neomexicana | New Mexico Locust
REFERENCES :
1. Alexander, Billy G., Jr.; Ronco, Frank, Jr.; White, Alan S.; Ludwig,
John A. 1984. Douglas-fir habitat types of northern Arizona. Gen. Tech.
Rep. RM-108. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 13 p.
[301]
2. Alexander, Robert R.; Ronco, Frank, Jr. 1987. Classification of the
forest vegetation on the National Forests of Arizona and New Mexico.
Res. Note RM-469. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 10
p. [3515]
3. Barneby, Rupert C. 1989. Intermountain flora: Vascular plants of the
Intermountain West, U.S.A. Vol. 3, Part B: Fabales. Bronx, NY: The New
York Botanical Garden. 279 p. [18596]
4. 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]
5. Bojorquez Tapia, Luis A.; Ffolliott, Peter F.; Guertin, D. Phillip.
1990. Herbage production-forest overstory relationships in two Arizona
ponderosa pine forests. Journal of Range Management. 43(1): 25-28.
[11509]
6. Brown, David E. 1982. Great Basin montane scrubland. In: Brown, David
E., ed. Biotic communities of the American Southwest--United States and
Mexico. Desert Plants. 4(1-4): 83-84. [8890]
7. Brown, Richard L. 1989. Effect of timber management practices on elk.
In: Tecle, Aregai; Covington, W. Wallace; Hamre, R. H., technical
coordinators. Multiresource management of ponderosa pine forests:
Proceedings of the symposium; 1989 November 14-16; Flagstaff, AZ. Gen.
Tech. Rep. RM-185. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station:
160-164. [11314]
8. Carmichael, R. S.; Knipe, O. D.; Pase, C. P.; Brady, W. W. 1978. Arizona
chaparral: plant associations and ecology. Res. Pap. RM-202. Fort
Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky
Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 16 p. [3038]
9. Clary, Warren P. 1975. Range management and its ecological basis in the
ponderosa pine type of Arizona: the status of our knowledge. Res. Pap.
RM-158. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 35 p.
[4688]
10. Coffman, Michael S. 1975. Shade from brush increases survival of planted
Douglas-fir. Journal of Forestry. 73: 726-728. [20417]
11. Correll, Donovan S.; Johnston, Marshall C. 1970. Manual of the vascular
plants of Texas. Renner, TX: Texas Research Foundation. 1881 p. [4003]
12. Covington, W. W.; Moore, M. M. 1992. Postsettlement changes in natural
fire regimes: implications for restoration of old-growth ponderosa pine
forests. In: Kaufmann, Merrill R.; Moir, W. H.; Bassett, Richard L.,
technical coordinators. Old-growth forests in the southwest and Rocky
Mountain regions: Proceedings of a workshop; 1992 March 9-13; Portal,
AZ. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-213. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment
Station: 81-99. [19045]
13. Davis, E. A.; Gottfried, G. J. 1981. Response of New Mexico locust and
Gambel oak to picloram pellets. In: Western Society of Weed Science:
1981 Research Progress Report; 1981 March 17-19; San Diego. [Place of
publication unknown]. [Publisher unknown]. 54-55. [7866]
14. Davis, E. A.; Gottfried, G. J. 1983. Picloram pellets control New Mexico
locust sprouts on a cleared forest site in Arizona. Down to Earth.
39(1): 18-21. [6827]
15. Despain, Del W. 1987. History and results of prescribed burning of
pinyon-juniper woodland on the Hualapai Indian Reservation in Arizona.
In: Everett, Richard L., compiler. Proceedings--pinyon-juniper
conference; 1986 January 13-16; Reno, NV. Gen. Tech. Tep. INT-215.
Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain
Research Station: 145-151. [4754]
16. Dick-Peddie, W. A.; Moir, W. H. 1970. Vegetation of the Organ Mountains,
New Mexico. Science Series No. 4. Fort Collins, CO: Colorado State
University, Range Science Department. 28 p. [6699]
17. Diem, Kenneth L.; Zeveloff, Samuel I. 1980. Ponderosa pine bird
communities. In: DeGraaf, Richard M., technical coordinator. Management
of western forests and grasslands for nongame birds: Workshop
proceedings; 1980 February 11-14; Salt Lake City, UT. Gen. Tech. Rep.
INT-86. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 170-197. [17904]
18. 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]
19. Donart, Gary B.; Sylvester, Donell; Hickey, Wayne. 1978. A vegetation
classification system for New Mexico, U.S.A. In: Hyder, Donald N., ed.
Proceedings, 1st international rangeland congress; 1978 August 14-18;
Denver, CO. Denver, CO: Society for Range Management: 488-490. [4094]
20. Dye, A. J.; Moir, W. H. 1977. Spruce-fir forest at its southern
distribution in the Rocky Mountains, New Mexico. American Midland
Naturalist. 97(1): 133-146. [7476]
21. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and
Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
22. Ffolliott, Peter F. 1983. Overstory-understory relationships:
Southwestern ponderosa pine forests. In: Bartlett, E. T.; Betters, David
R., eds. Overstory-understory relationships in western forests. Western
Regional Research Publication No. 1. Fort Collins, CO: Colorado State
University Experiment Station: 13-18. [3311]
23. Ffolliott, Peter F.; Gottfried, Gerald J. 1989. Production and
utilization of herbaceous plants in small clearcuts in an Arizona mixed
conifer forest. Res. Note RM-494. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment
Station. 5 p. [10543]
24. Fitzhugh, E. Lee; Moir, William H.; Ludwig, John A.; Ronco, Frank, Jr.
1987. Forest habitat types in the Apache, Gila, and part of the Cibola
National Forests, Arizona and New Mexico. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-145. Fort
Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky
Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 116 p. [4206]
25. 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]
26. Gottfried, Gerald J. 1980. Control of New Mexican locust and the effect
on planted ponderosa pine in central Arizona. Res. Note RM-386. Fort
Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky
Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 6 p. [7182]
27. Hanks, Jess Paul. 1966. Vegetation of the mixed conifer zone; White
Mountains, New Mexico. University Park, NM: New Mexico State University.
39 p. Thesis. [4632]
28. Hanks, Jess P.; Dick-Peddie, W. A. 1974. Vegetation patterns of the
White Mountians, New Mexico. Southwestern Naturalist. 18(4): 371-382.
[4635]
29. Harrington, H. D. 1964. Manual of the plants of Colorado. 2d ed.
Chicago: The Swallow Press Inc. 666 p. [6851]
30. Heidmann, L. J. 1988. Regeneration strategies for ponderosa pine. In:
Baumgartner, David M.; Lotan, James E., compilers. Ponderosa pine: The
species and its management: Symposium proceedings; 1987 September 29 -
October 1; Spokane, WA. Pullman, WA: Washington State University,
Cooperative Extension: 227-233. [9422]
31. Heidmann, L. J.; Larson, Frederic R.; Rietveld, W. J. 1977. Evaluation
of ponderosa pine reforestation techniques in central Arizona. Res. Pap.
RM-190. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 10 p.
[15883]
32. Horton, Jerome S. 1949. Trees and shrubs for erosion control of southern
California mountains. Berkeley, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, California [Pacific Southwest] Forest and Range
Experiment Station; California Department of Natural Resources, Division
of Forestry. 72 p. [10689]
33. Hungerford, C. R. 1970. Response of Kaibab mule deer to management of
summer range. Journal of Wildlife Management. 34(40): 852-862. [1219]
34. Johnson, Carl M. 1970. Common native trees of Utah. Special Report 22.
Logan, UT: Utah State University, College of Natural Resources,
Agricultural Experiment Station. 109 p. [9785]
35. Johnston, Marshall C. 1979. The Guadalupe Mountains--a chink in the
mosaic of the Chihuahuan Desert?. In: Genoways, Hugh H.; Baker, Robert
J., eds. Biological investigations in the Guadalupe Mountains National
Park: Proceedings of a symposium; 1975 April 4-5; Lubbock, TX.
Proceedings and Transactions Series No. 4. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of the Interior, National Park Service: 45-49. [16016]
36. Kearney, Thomas H.; Peebles, Robert H.; Howell, John Thomas; McClintock,
Elizabeth. 1960. Arizona flora. 2d ed. Berkeley, CA: University of
California Press. 1085 p. [6563]
37. Krauch, Hermann. 1956. Management of Douglas-fir timberland in the
Southwest. Station Paper No. 21. Fort Collins, CO: U.S Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment
Station. 59 p. [8219]
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. Larson, Milo; Moir, W. H. 1987. Forest and woodland habitat types (plant
associations) of northern New Mexico and northern Arizona. 2d ed.
Albuquerque, NM: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Southwestern Region. 90 p. [8947]
40. Moir, William H.; Ludwig, John A. 1979. A classification of spruce-fir
and mixed conifer habitat types of Arizona and New Mexico. Res. Pap.
RM-207. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 47 p.
[1677]
41. Northington, David K.; Burgess, Tony L. 1979. Status of rare and
endangered plant species of the Guadalupe Mountains National Park,
Texas. In: Genoways, Hugh H.; Baker, Robert J., eds. Biological
investigations in the Guadalupe Mountains National Park: Proceedings of
a symposium; 1975 April 4-5; Lubbock, TX. Proceedings and Transactions
Series No. 4. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, National
Park Service: 59-77. [16018]
42. Olson, David F., Jr. 1974. Robinia L. locust. 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: 728-731.
[7741]
43. Pase, Charles P.; Brown, David E. 1982. Rocky Mountain (Petran) and
Madrean montane conifer forests. In: Brown, David E., ed. Biotic
communities of the American Southwest--United States and Mexico. Desert
Plants. 4(1-4): 43-48. [8885]
44. Potter, Loren D.; Foxx, Teralene. 1979. Recovery and delayed mortality
of ponderosa pine after wildfire. Final Report (Part I), Contract No.
16-608-GR, EC-291. Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico, Biology
Department. 33 p. [11748]
45. 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]
46. Ramotnik, Cynthia A.; Scott, Norman J., Jr. 1988. Habitat requirements
of New Mexico's endangered salamanders. In: Szaro, Robert C.; Severson,
Kieth E.; Patton, David R., technical coordinators. Management of
amphibians, reptiles, and small mammals in North America: Proceedings of
the symposium; 1988 July 19-21; Flagstaff, AZ. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-166.
Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky
Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 54-63. [7108]
47. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant
geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
48. Reynolds, Hudson G. 1969. Improvement of deer habitat on southwestern
forest lands. Journal of Forestry. 67(11): 803-805. [16544]
49. Simpson, Benny J. 1988. A field guide to Texas trees. Austin, TX: Texas
Monthly Press. 372 p. [11708]
50. 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]
51. Szaro, Robert C. 1989. Riparian forest and scrubland community types of
Arizona and New Mexico. Desert Plants. 9(3-4): 70-138. [604]
52. Szaro, Robert C.; King, Rudy M. 1990. Sampling intensity and species
richness: effects on delineating Southwestern riparian plant
communities. Forest Ecology and Management. 33/34: 335-349. [13783]
53. Tidestrom, I.; Kittell, T. 1941. A flora of Arizona and New Mexico.
Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press. 897 p.
[18145]
54. Urness, P. J.; Neff, D. J.; Watkins, R. K. 1975. Nutritive value of mule
deer forages on ponderosa pine summer range in Arizona. Res. Note
RM-304. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 6 p.
[15854]
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. Vines, Robert A. 1960. Trees, shrubs, and woody vines of the Southwest.
Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. 1104 p. [7707]
57. Wagle, R. F. 1981. Fire: its effects on plant succession and wildlife in
the Southwest. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona. 82 p. [4031]
58. 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]
59. Wright, Henry A.; Bailey, Arthur W. 1982. Fire ecology: United States
and southern Canada. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 501 p. [2620]
Index
Related categories for Species: Robinia neomexicana
| New Mexico Locust
|
 |
