|
Wildlife, Animals, and Plants
|
|
Introductory
SPECIES: Rubus spectabilis | Salmonberry
ABBREVIATION :
RUBSPE
SYNONYMS :
NO-ENTRY
SCS PLANT CODE :
RUSP
RUSPF
RUSPS
COMMON NAMES :
salmonberry
salmon berry
TAXONOMY :
The currently accepted scientific name of salmonberry is Rubus
spectabilis Pursh [37]. Salmonberry naturally hybridizes with
nagoon-berry (R. arcticus) to produce the Alaska bramble (R. X
alaskensis Bailey) [66].
Widely recognized varieties are as follows [37]:
R. s. var. franciscanus (Rydb.) J.T. Howell
R. s. var. spectabilis
Two forms of salmonberry, distinguished primarily on the basis of fruit
color, have also been described [5].
LIFE FORM :
Shrub
FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS :
No special status
OTHER STATUS :
USDA Forest Service, Northern Region lists Rubus spectabilis as a watch
plant species in northern Idaho. Its Natural Heritage Program state
rank is SH: "Historically known in the state; may be rediscovered." It
is secure globally [72].
COMPILED BY AND DATE :
D. Tirmenstein, October 1989.
LAST REVISED BY AND DATE :
NO-ENTRY
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION :
Tirmenstein, D. A. 1989. Rubus spectabilis. In: Remainder of Citation
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Rubus spectabilis | Salmonberry
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION :
Salmonberry grows mostly west of the Cascades in Washington and Oregon
southward to northwestern California [29,53]. It occurs along the
Pacific Coast northward to Alaska [5,34] and may extend as far east as
Idaho [5,25]. The variety franciscanus occurs from the Santa Cruz
Mountains to Sonoma County, California [5]. A variety of salmonberry
(not specified in the literature) grows on the islands of Hokkaido and
Honshu in Japan [5].
ECOSYSTEMS :
FRES20 Douglas-fir
FRES23 Fir - spruce
FRES24 Hemlock - Sitka spruce
FRES25 Larch
FRES27 Redwood
FRES28 Western hardwoods
STATES :
AK CA ID MT OR WA BC
ADMINISTRATIVE UNITS :
DENA GLBA LACL NOCA OLYM PORE
REDW SAJH
BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :
1 Northern Pacific Border
2 Cascade Mountains
5 Columbia Plateau
8 Northern Rocky Mountains
KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :
K001 Spruce - cedar - hemlock forest
K002 Cedar - hemlock - Douglas-fir forest
K003 Silver fir - Douglas-fir forest
K006 Redwood forests
K012 Douglas-fir forest
K014 Grand fir - Douglas-fir forest
K029 California mixed evergreen forest
SAF COVER TYPES :
210 Interior Douglas-fir
211 White fir
213 Grand fir
221 Red alder
222 Black cottonwood - willow
223 Sitka spruce
224 Western hemlock
225 Western hemlock - Sitka spruce
226 Coastal true fir - hemlock
227 Western redcedar - western hemlock
228 Western redcedar
230 Douglas-fir - western hemlock
232 Redwood
234 Douglas-fir - tanoak - Pacific madrone
SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES :
NO-ENTRY
HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES :
This shade-tolerant shrub is also well represented in many Northwestern
coniferous forests dominated by western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla),
Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menseisii), western redcedar (Thuja plicata),
Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis), redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), grand
fir (Abies grandis), and Pacific silver fir (A. amabilis) [17,18,45,71].
Salmonberry often forms dense patches within the understory of
Douglas-fir and western hemlock forests [61]. Dense continuous stands
develop under red alder (Alnus rubra) on upland or riparian sites [21].
Continuous stands may reach up to 32.8 feet (100 m) or more in diameter
[5]. Salmonberry also grows in mixed evergreen and hardwood forests
[5,48,68] and in riparian forests dominated by black cottonwood (Populus
trichocarpa), Sitka alder (A. viridis spp. sinuata), and other hardwoods
[19]. It is a common constituent of northern California shrub
communities dominated by baccharis (Baccharis spp.), thimbleberry (Rubus
parviflorus), and trailing blackberry (R. ursinus) [31].
Associated species: Species which commonly occur with salmonberry
include false lily-of-the-valley (Maianthemum dilatatum), thimbleberry,
trailing blackberry, tall Oregon grape (Berberis aquifolium), salal
(Gautheria shallon), red huckleberry (Vaccinium parvifolium), gooseberry
(Ribes spp.), deer fern (Blechnum spicant), evergreen huckleberry,
bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), bitter cherry (Prunus emarginata),
western swordfern (Polystichum munitum), bracken fern (Pteridium
aquilinum), lupine (Lupinus spp.), common velvetgrass (Holcus lanatus),
elderberry (Sambucus spp.), sweetscented bedstraw (Galium triflorum),
and Oregon oxalis (Oxalis oregana) [2,3,4,17,21,61].
Salmonberry has been identified as a codominant with western swordfern
(Polystichum munitum), stink currant (Ribes bracteosum), Sitka spruce,
red alder, Sitka alder, thimbleberry, trailing blackberry, sea watch
(Angelica lucida), evergreen huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum), devil's
club (Oplopanax horridis), and mycelis (Mycelis spp.). Salmonberry is
listed as an indicator or dominant in the following publications:
Riparian vegetation in Oregon's western Cascade Mountains: composition,
biomass, and autumn phenology [10]
Synecological features of a natural headland prairie on the Oregon coast [13]
Vegetation and habitats [20]
Natural vegetation of Oregon and Washington [21]
Ecoclass coding system for the Pacific Northwest plant associations [28]
Plant succession in the Alnus rubra/Rubus spectabilis habitat type in
western Oregon [32]
VALUE AND USE
SPECIES: Rubus spectabilis | Salmonberry
WOOD PRODUCTS VALUE :
NO-ENTRY
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE :
Wildlife: Salmonberry provides important food and cover for a wide
variety of birds and mammals [5]. Tender, leafy new growth is a
preferred deer food in many areas [38]. In Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga
menziesii) forests in Oregon's Coast Ranges, deer use is often
particularly heavy during the summer, although these ungulates continue
to feed on the leaves until they drop from the plants in autumn [29].
In many areas, including the Olympic Peninsula, salmonberry is also an
important elk browse [5]. Elk utilize the leaves and twigs to some
extend year-round [55], but use tends to be particularly heavy during
the spring and summer [21,29,30,55]. Mountain goats and moose browse
the young stem tips early in the season [5,66]. The mountain beaver
also consumes salmonberry foliage [29]. The stem, foliage, cambium, and
bark of species within the Rubus genus provide food for small mammals
such as rabbits, porcupine, and beaver [11,64].
Numerous species mammal consume salmonberry fruit including the coyote,
black bear, and grizzly bear [5,66]. The common opossum, Townsend's
chipmunk, pika, golden-mantled ground squirrel, raccoon, red fox, gray
fox, and several species of skunks and tree squirrels also feed on the
fruits of Rubus [11,64]. In many locations, fruits are eaten by a
variety of birds including the ruffed grouse, northern bobwhite,
sharp-tailed grouse, California quail, ring-necked pheasant, blue
grouse, gray (Hungarian) partridge, band-tailed pigeon, yellow-breasted
chat, pine grosbeak, and various thrushes and towhees [11,64]. The
American robin and gray catbird readily feed on salmonberry fruit [5].
Mice and other small rodents consume salmonberry seeds [5]. Nectar from
the flowers provides food for bees and other insects, as well as for the
rufous hummingbird [5,49].
Livestock: Salmonberry is seldom grazed by cattle but is considered
fair sheep browse in parts of west-central Washington [14]. In some
areas, salmonberry is a preferred summer sheep browse [44].
PALATABILITY :
The leafy new growth of salmonberry appears to be more palatable to most
wild ungulates than the tougher mature foliage [14,3,66]. Salmonberry
leaves and twigs are reportedly highly palatable to elk from spring
through fall [55]. However, dormant twigs are rarely utilized [33] and
are presumably somewhat less palatable than those of many shrub
associates.
The fruit of salmonberry is highly palatable to many species of birds
and mammals [5]. The rufous hummingbird and many species of insects
seek out the nectar of the showy salmonberry flowers [5,49].
NUTRITIONAL VALUE :
The food value of salmonberry browse varies both seasonally and
annually. Evidence suggests that crude protein values tend to be higher
in the spring or early summer than in winter [15]. Crude protein values
in Oregon varied from 9.42 percent in June to 7.32 percent in December
[15].
The following crude protein values of salmonberry foliage were recorded
during two seasons in the Coast Ranges of Oregon [51]:
crude protein content (%) during two seasons
grazed plots ungrazed plots
October 9.0 8.3
October 8.6 6.9
COVER VALUE :
Salmonberry provides good cover for a variety of birds and mammals [29].
In many locations, rodents utilize dense salmonberry thickets as hiding
cover [5]. Salmonberry-dominated brushfields in Coastal Oregon furnish
excellent habitat for small mammals such as deer mice, voles, shrews,
hares, and mountain beaver [36]. Species within the genus Rubus provide
hiding or resting cover for the pika, red squirrel, black bear, beaver,
and rabbits [64]. Thickets of Rubus serve as favorable nesting sites
for many species of small birds [11].
VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES :
The deep root system of salmonberry can help prevent soil erosion on
steep slopes [5]. Brinkman [8] observed that cold treatment is not
required for fall plantings. Good establishment can occur when seeds of
species within the genus Rubus are scarified and planted after late
summer or early fall. Seeds which have been scarified and stratified
can be planted in the spring. Rubus seed can be planted with a drill
and should be covered with 1/8 to 3/16 inch (0.3-0.5 cm) of soil [8].
Cleaned salmonberry seed averages approximately 143,000 per pound
(314,978/kg) [8].
Seedlings and cuttings can be transplanted onto disturbed sites with
good results. Barber [5] reported that various types of asexual
cuttings exhibited good survival in laboratory experiments. Specific
results were as follows [5]:
type of cutting percent survival
leaf bud cuttings 63
stem cuttings 82
root cuttings > 82
OTHER USES AND VALUES :
Salmonberries are described as deliciously flavored, although somewhat
variable in taste, and may be eaten fresh or preserved [14,29,65]. The
fruits make good jelly but are reportedly too seedy for jam [65].
Harvest times are comparable with those of other wild berries and
approximately 0.27 quarts (250 ml) of fruit can be picked within 5
minutes [45].
Salmonberry fruit was traditionally an important food of many Native
American peoples of Alaska and the Pacific Northwest [5,45].
Salmonberries were eaten fresh and preserved for winter use [45].
Sprouts of salmonberries were eaten in the spring [5,29], and the bark
and leaves were used to make various medicinal preparations [29].
Salmonberry bark is reportedly an excellent remedy for ailments
associated with excess salmon consumption [5]. Many species within the
genus Rubus have been grown as ornamentals or as berry-producing shrubs
in gardens. Salmonberry was first cultivated in 1827 [8].
MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Competition: Dense stands of salmonberry often develop after
clearcutting and other types of timber treatment that significantly
reduce the overstory canopy [3,53,57,66,73]. Portions of both
belowground and aboveground stems damaged during logging can sprout and
form new colonies [5]. Brushfields dominated by salmonberry and other
shrubs are particularly common at low to middle elevations on moist
slopes in the Coast Ranges of Washington and Oregon [24,25,37,43] and on
moist valley bottoms in Alaska [66].
Salmonberry brushfields provide formidable competition for conifer
seedlings [1,44,54,57,66]. In hemlock (Tsuga spp.)-spruce (Picea
spp.) forests of central Oregon, salmonberry can dominate a site within
6 months after thinning [3]. In many areas this shrub quickly overtops
Douglas-fir seedlings, which become weak and spindly when suppressed
[4,38,62]. Terminal bud growth of overtopped Douglas-fir regeneration
may be much reduced [38]. Salmonberry also competes with Sitka spruce
and western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla) regeneration [52]. Evidence
suggests that severe soil disturbances associated with timber harvest
may be most conducive to the growth and establishment of salmonberry
[3]. Establishment is also favored by overstory removal. Response of
salmonberry by intensity of thinning was documented as follows [3]:
harvest intensity control light medium heavy extreme
(habitat) (percent mean cover)
spruce --- 0.063 --- --- 19.188
hemlock --- --- 1.063 10.875 7.250
In many areas, the elimination of salmonberry has proven to be
difficult, if not impossible [34]. The rhizome network is so extensive
that severe soil disturbance or an extremely hot slash fire generally
damages only a small portion of these underground regenerative
structures [70]. Limited evidence suggests that in some instances it
may be useful to treat salmonberry before trees are harvested [70].
Cutting salmonberry prior to timber removal may benefit conifer
seedlings in riparian areas where trees are to be underplanted [70].
Chemical control: Salmonberry has been variously described as resistant
or moderately susceptible to herbicides [5,25,60]. Even when
top-killed, plants frequently survive and sprout from the root and stems
the following year [56,59]. Repeated applications of 2,4,5-T,
glyphosate, or picloram + 2,4-D have produced good results [9,24,25,38].
Some herbicides, such as amitrol-T, have proven effective in controlling
salmonberry but have resulted in the release of thimbleberry, a common
and highly competitive shrub associate [60]. Detailed information is
available on the relative effectiveness of various herbicides and on
preferred application procedures [9,24,25,38,42,56,58,60,62].
Grazing: Domestic sheep have been used to help control salmonberry in
some particularly troublesome brushfields. Salmonberry was
significantly reduced after two summers of sheep grazing in the Coast
Ranges of Oregon [44].
Mechanical removal: Preliminary evidence suggests that the sprouting
ability of salmonberry may decline after many successive cuts [70]. In
controlled experiments, plants exhibited reduced sprouting ability after
numerous successive monthly treatments [70].
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Rubus spectabilis | Salmonberry
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
Salmonberry is a branching, glandless, large to small, deciduous shrub
which grows 7 to 13 feet (2-4 m) in height [48,66]. This rhizomatous
clonal species frequently forms large, dense thickets [29,61,66]. Stems
of most species within the genus Rubus are biennial. Young twigs are
light brown and glabrous to pilose [48,66]. As twigs age, bark becomes
light brown to yellowish, hairless, and shreddy [48,66]. Leaves are
three foliate to simple [48].
The perfect flowers of salmonberry occur singly or in groups of two to
four on slender lateral stalks [48,66]. The showy, mildly
sweet-smelling flowers are pink to reddish purple [48,66]. The
salmon-colored or yellowish fruit, commonly referred to as a "berry", is
made up of many small glabrous drupelets [34,58,66]. Fruit is round to
ovoid or conic and 0.6 to 0.8 inch (1.5-2 cm) in length [48].
RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :
Phanerophyte
REGENERATION PROCESSES :
Salmonberry can reproduce sexually or vegetatively. Reproductive
versatility is common in the Rubus genus; sexual reproduction,
parthenogenesis (development of the egg without fertilization),
pseudogamy (a form of apomixis in which pollination is required), and
parthenocarpy (production of fruit without fertilization) occur widely
[12]. The following types of reproduction have been documented within
the genus: (1) sexual reproduction, (2) nonreduction at meiosis on the
female, male, or both sides, (3) apomixis with segregation, (4) apomixis
without segregation, and (5) haploid parthenogenesis [12]. The various
modes of asexual reproduction contribute to the vigorous, aggressive
spread of species within the Rubus genus.
Vegetative regeneration: The mostly biennial stems typically develop
from perennial root stocks or aboveground creeping stems [26].
Salmonberry is known for its prolific sprouting ability. It can sprout
vigorously from the stump, root crown, stem base or root stock, and from a
dense network of rhizomes [5,61,70]. Regeneration through rooting
aerial stem tips has also been reported [5]. Salmonberry exhibits
vigorous vegetative response to fire, mechanical removal, and other
types of disturbance but spreads vegetatively even in the absence of
disturbance. Vegetative regeneration is largely responsible for the
clonal spread of this species and is particularly important in
perpetuating colonies in shaded understory habitats [5]. Stand dynamics
are primarily related to mortality and the rate at which new individual
ramets develop [61]. As older ramets die they are replaced by new
ramets, and the population tends to remain relatively stable [61].
Under ordinary circumstances, recruitment of new genets through seedling
establishment is relatively rare [61]..
Stump-sprouting: Once aboveground foliage has been damaged or removed,
buds present on the stump exhibit the greatest immediate potential for
regrowth [70]. These sprouts soon establish apical dominance and
inhibit other less active buds located at or below the ground surface
[70]. The number of these buds which are capable of sprouting is
largely determined by the height of the remaining stump [70].
Stem base, root stock, or root crown: The second portion of the
salmonberry bud bank, which is activated after removal of the stump,
is the stem base or root crown. These buds, located at or below the soil
surface, are afforded greater protection than those on the stump.
However, these buds tend to develop more slowly than stump buds because
of the cooler environment in which they occur [70]. In general, the
deeper the bud, the slower the sprouting response [70]. Buds located on
the stem base or root crown can ordinarily be eliminated only through
extreme soil disturbance [7].
Rhizomes: Rhizomes represent the most complex and largest segment of
the salmonberry bud bank [70]. These structures are capable of
relatively rapid production of aerial stems [61] and are responsible for
local increases in stem density [5]. Ramets are connected by a
complicated network of rhizomes which average 0.2 to 2.0 inches (5-50
mm) in diameter and generally lie 1 to 2 inches (2-5 cm) below mineral
soil [61]. Rhizomes often extend to depths of 3.9 to 7.9 inches (10-20
cm) and although usually restricted to the top foot (31 cm) of soil, can
extend to depths of 6 feet (1.8 m) or more [70]. Rhizome development is
often extensive. In some clearcuts, total rhizome length averages up to
42 miles (68 km) per stand [70]. Averages of 20 to 30 miles (32-48 km)
per stand are common in areas which have been logged [70].
Rhizome growth and development is related to basal area of the stand,
age of the parent plant, and site characteristics. Greater basal areas
are generally correlated with more extensive rhizome growth [70].
However, large, old rhizomes generally possess fewer buds and exhibit
somewhat reduced sprouting abilities compared with young rhizomes [70].
Young rhizomes are generally capable of rapid and active growth. Oneto
two-year-old rhizomes typically exhibit high bud densities (1 to 2 per
inch (2-5 cm)) [70]. Rhizome growth has been found to vary by site as
shown below [61]:
annual growth site
(m)
1.9 clearcuts
0.7 red alder
0.4 conifer
0.1 riparian
On extremely rocky sites, rhizomes may be uncommon or even absent [61].
Layering: Salmonberry can spread as downward arching aerial canes which
become buried by litter, subsequently root, and produce new aerial
shoots [5]. Aboveground portions of the cane can also root and produce
new clones when damaged mechanically [5].
Seed: Species within the genus Rubus grow from perennial root stocks or
creeping aboveground stems during their first year of development and
produce sterile vegetative shoots known as primocanes [26]. Lateral
branches, or floricanes, develop in the axils of the primocanes during
the second year and produce both leaves and flowers [26]. The showy
flowers of salmonberry are pollinated by insects and hummingbirds
[5,49]. Salmonberry generally produces large numbers of seed annually
[5]. Immature fruit is pink and hard [8]. Ripe "berries" are red,
yellow, or orange and are made up of an aggregate of many small
drupelets [5,8,66]. "Berries" average 30 per shrub [45].
Germination: Salmonberry seeds have a hard, impermeable coat and a
dormant embryo [5,8]. Consequently, germination is often slow, and
generally requires some form of mechanical or chemical scarification
[5]. Most Rubus seeds require, as a minimum, warm stratification at 68
to 86 degrees F (20 to 30 degrees C) for 90 days, followed by cold
stratification at 36 to 41 degrees F (2 to 5 degrees C) for an
additional 90 days [8]. Stratification occurs naturally as seeds mature
in summer and remain in the soil throughout the cold winter months.
Laboratory tests indicate that exposure to sulfuric acid solutions or
sodium hyperchlorite prior to cold stratification can enhance
germination [8]. Light is not required for germination; germination can
proceed despite relatively low temperatures [5]. Most germination
occurs during the first growing season after disturbance. Ruth [53]
observed that second season germination represented only 6 percent of
that which occurred during the first growing season.
Seed banking: Salmonberry seed is typically long-lived when buried in
the soil or duff [5]. Large numbers of seed are present in the topsoil
of many coastal forest stands [36].
Seed dispersal: Salmonberry seed is readily dispersed by many birds and
mammals [5,8]. After they mature, the highly sought-after fruits rarely
remain on the plant for long [8]. Evidence suggests that the action of
avian gizzards and exposure to mammalian digestive acids provide
beneficial scarification which enhances germination [5]. A relatively
long period of fruiting in salmonberry (2 months) increases the
probability of seed dispersal as flocks of migrating birds move through
an area [5].
Seedling establishment: Salmonberry seedlings require mineral soil for
good early development, and establishment is generally poor unless the
soil has been disturbed [5]. Scarification following timber harvest
generally creates an excellent seedbed for salmonberry. Large numbers
of seedlings can readily establish on sites which have been logged and
then scarified [53]. Researchers have observed up to 500,000 seedlings
per acre (1,234,568/ha) in some scarified cutting units [53]. The
presence of a thick leaf mat can inhibit seedling establishment [5].
SITE CHARACTERISTICS :
Salmonberry grows on a wide range of sites. It is particularly
prevalent on mesic sites in forest openings, along waterways, on river
terraces, gravel bars and avalanche chutes, or in seeps and swamps
[10,17,29,34,66]. Salmonberry is abundant along roadsides, fencerows,
and on many types of disturbed sites [5].
Soils: Species within the Rubus genus typically grow well on a variety
of barren, infertile soils [8]. Salmonberry tolerates a wide range of
soil types and grows well on rich loam, loamy clays, pure peat, and
excessively drained gravel [5]. Soils tend to be acidic and of
relatively low fertility [5]. Soils supporting salmonberry are often
saturated for much of the year [29]. Good growth has been reported on
rocky alluvium with a high percentage of fines and a well-developed
humus layer [10]. In the Siskiyou Mountains of southern Oregon and
northern California, soils are frequently derived from diorite or gabbro
[68].
Elevation: Salmonberry typically grows at low to middle elevations
[34]. In western Washington, it is particularly abundant under forest
canopies at lower elevations but is largely restricted to stream and
lake margins at higher elevation [5]. Generalized elevational ranges in
California and Washington are as follows [5,48]:
< 1,000 feet (305 m) in CA
from 0 to 4,500 feet (0-1,400 m) in WA
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS :
Salmonberry is a pioneer or early seral species noted for its ability to
spread aggressively on disturbed sites [5]. A certain amount of soil
disturbance is essential for good seedling establishment. Seedlings
generally appear in abundance after fire, timber harvest, or other types
of disturbance [1,2,5,53,69]. Rhizomes enable salmonberry to spread
vigorously and form dense patches where it was prevalent in
predisturbance communities [5,61]. In many areas dense stands may form
within 2 to 3 years after disturbance [61]. Salmonberry communities
commonly develop early in succession in Sitka spruce and Pacific silver
fir zones of Oregon and Washington [20], in Sitka spruce-western hemlock
forests of Alaska, and in many Douglas-fir forests of the Pacific
Northwest [18]. In northern California, salmonberry was abundant during
the first 5 to 10 years after disturbance in grand fir-Douglas-fir-Sitka
spruce communities and in early seral redwood-grand fir communities
where it persisted, although in reduced abundance, for 30 years or more
[71]. In many areas, the cover of salmonberry, a nitrogen-demanding
species, begins to decline 2 to 5 years after clearcutting as available
nutrients decline [39].
Salmonberry has been described as shade tolerant [5,53] and relatively
intolerant of shade [22,27]. In some locations this shrub persists in
climax forest communities; elsewhere it is gradually eliminated as the
canopy closes. Although most common in early seral stages, salmonberry
has also been reported in early immature, second growth, mature, and old
growth forests in British Columbia [39,45]. Alaback [2] noted that
salmonberry is gradually eliminated in Sitka spruce-western hemlock
forests of Alaska as the forest overstory develops. However, other
researchers have reported salmonberry in climax western hemlock or
western hemlock-Douglas-fir forests of British Columbia [27,39,45] and
in climax coastal forests to the south [53].
Salmonberry commonly persists within the understory of various hardwood
communities [5]. It can reportedly persist almost indefinitely in the
understory of alder or mixed hardwood-conifer stands [5]. Salmonberry
is more likely to be eliminated in coniferous forests where light levels
are lower. However, in many coniferous stands, parts of salmonberry
clones senesce, die, and decay as the overstory canopy closes, but then
the clone slowly expands as self-thinning of the conifers occurs [61].
Tappeiner and others [61] noted that "the natural success of salmonberry
communities may result in relatively permanent pure shrub communities."
Salmonberry is present in red alder communities of the Northwest, which
on certain upland sites appear to be early seral stages of western
hemlock forests [32]. However, where these communities occur along
streambanks, periodic flooding can maintain species such as salmonberry,
red alder, and stink currant in long-lived disclimax situations [10,32].
SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT :
The leaves of salmonberry begin to appear early in the spring, often
when the ground is still covered with snow [5]. Researchers in western
Washington have observed the first leaves by March 21, at which time
initial annual rhizome growth was also noted [5].
Flowering dates depend on geographic and climatic factors, but flowering
usually occurs from early to late spring. In many areas along the
Pacific Coast, the time of flowering appears to be correlated with the
arrival of the migrating rufous hummingbird, which may serve as an
important pollinator [49]. Generalized flowering and fruiting dates by
location are as follows [5,8,45,66]:
location flowering fruit-ripening
AK May-June June-August
AK April-June early July (Aug. at higher elev.)
CA March-June -----
w WA April May 16-July 26
BC -------- May-July
Seed dispersal coincides with the time of fruit availability. In many
areas, seed is dispersed from June through August [8].
The tips of the terminal buds remain active and continue elongating
until August, when dormancy generally begins [5]. Leaves typically fall
by late October or November [10,33]. Campbell and Franklin [10]
observed maximum leaf drop in the western Cascades during the fourth
week of October; 56 percent of the leaves dropped during the first 3
weeks after frost.
FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Rubus spectabilis | Salmonberry
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS :
Salmonberry is well adapted to survive fire through sprouting or
seedling establishment. It is capable of vigorous sprouting through
buds present on the stump, stem base or root crown, and rhizomes buried
beneath the soil surface [70]. The tips of downward arching aerial
canes are also capable of rooting and forming new plants where portions
of the aboveground stem remain undamaged by fire [5].
Salmonberry produces an abundance of seed annually, which accumulates in
the soil or duff. Seed is noted for long-viability and germinates in
large numbers after fire [5]. Mineral soil serves as a favorable
seedbed enhancing germination and establishment. Salmonberry commonly
invades recently burned sites throughout much of the Pacific Northwest
[69].
POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY :
Tall shrub, adventitious-bud root crown
Rhizomatous shrub, rhizome in soil
Geophyte, growing points deep in soil
Ground residual colonizer (on-site, initial community)
Initial-offsite colonizer (off-site, initial community)
FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Rubus spectabilis | Salmonberry
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT :
Salmonberry is extremely resistant to fire [5,67]. Underground
regenerative structures generally survive when aboveground foliage is
totally destroyed. Actual postfire plant mortality is presumably low.
Most seed stored on-site in the soil or duff is probably unharmed by
fire.
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT :
NO-ENTRY
PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE :
Salmonberry has the ability to recover rapidly after fire through
sprouting and seedling establishment. Dense stands can develop within 2
to 3 years after disturbance [61]. In most communities, salmonberry
generally remains abundant until the canopy closes [61].
Vegetative response: Salmonberry possesses a vast bud bank which is
capable of vigorous sprouting after fire [70]. The specific type of
vegetative response exhibited by this shrub depends on such factors as
the intensity of the fire, age and density of the plant, and site
characteristics. Where portions of the stump survive intact,
stump-sprouting is the predominant mode of postfire regeneration [70].
Apical dominance suppresses sprouting from other lower regenerative
structures, such as rootcrowns and rhizomes [70]. Where portions of the
aboveground foliage is undamaged, downward-arching aerial canes buried
by litter occasionally root and produce shoots [5]. The stem base or
root crown, located at or below the soil surface, is afforded some
protection from the direct effects of fire. These structures sprout if
the aboveground foliage has been consumed by fire [70]. Buds located on
the root crown are generally eliminated only by extreme soil disturbance
[70]. If the root crown is destroyed, underground rhizomes typically
sprout prolifically [70]. Rhizomes are protected from fire by the depth
of overlying soil and by their extensiveness. The probability that even
an extremely hot fire will eliminate the entire network of
well-protected rhizomes is low [70].
Seedling establishment: Salmonberry is noted for seed which can retain
good viability for years while buried in the soil or duff [5].
Seedlings require mineral soil for best establishment and growth, and
seedbanking represents an important mode of postfire reestablishment.
Some seedling establishment can also occur through seed transported from
off-site. Small groups of seedlings have been observed to germinate
from fairly well-protected rodent caches [47]. Although small mammals
generally play only a local role in dispersal [47], birds and larger
mammals occasionally carry seeds for longer distances.
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE :
Fire intensity and severity can significantly influence the speed of
postfire recovery. Plants frequently sprout from aerial stems, stumps,
or root crowns following fires of low to moderate intensity. However,
sprouting most commonly occurs from underground rhizomes following high
intensity fires. Recovery through rhizomes tends to be somewhat slower
because of the cool underground environment in which these sprouts
develop [70].
Younger rhizomes tend to grow more actively and sprout more vigorously
than larger, older rhizomes which typically have lower bud densities
[70]. Rhizomes tend to be better developed on relatively mesic sites
with deep soils [61]. Rhizomes may be poorly developed or even lacking
on dry, rocky sites [61]. Postfire sprouting could presumably be
reduced on sites with shallow or rocky soils, or where the preburn stand
was primarily made up of older plants lacking vigor.
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Wildlife: Fire generally benefits animals that consume the fruits of
Rubus spp. [41].
Competition: Slash burning in coastal Douglas-fir forests can sometimes
reduce the rate of salmonberry invasion for a period of several years.
However, response is variable and depends on such factors as fire
intensity and severity, and the density and vigor of salmonberry prior
to treatment [70]. In some instances, particularly where extremely
abundant in preburn communities, salmonberry grows rapidly and soon
retards the development of conifers despite hot slash burns [70]. Hot
slash fires often damage only a small portion of the extensive rhizome
network [70]. Salmonberry responded as follows after broadcast burning
in a coastal Oregon clearcut [59]:
# per acre
before burn 1 yr. after burn
aspect orig. stems seedlings orig. stems + sprouts seedlings
north 10,700 6,150 7,880 5,680
south 10,920 2,120 10,520 3,920
On logged and burned sites, stem growth of salmonberry was rapid and
pretreatment height was reached by mid to late summer following
mechanical removal of foliage in February, March, and April [70]. On
logged, unburned plots, pretreatment height was not reached until the
end of the growing season [70]. Treatment of salmonberry prior to
timber harvest may reduce subsequent cover and favor the establishment
of conifer seedlings [70].
REFERENCES
SPECIES: Rubus spectabilis | Salmonberry
REFERENCES :
1. Ahlgren, I. F.; Ahlgren, C. E. 1960. Ecological effects of forest fires.
Botanical Review. 26: 458-533. [205]
2. Alaback, Paul B. 1982. Dynamics of understory biomass in Sitka
spruce-western hemlock forests of southeast Alaska. Ecology. 63(6):
1932-1948. [7305]
3. Alaback, Paul B.; Herman, F. R. 1988. Long-term response of understory
vegetation to stand density in Picea-Tsuga forests. Canadian Journal of
Forest Research. 18: 1522-1530. [6227]
4. Allen, Hollis Howard. 1969. The inter-relationship of salmonberry and
Douglas-fir in cutover areas. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University. 56
p. Thesis. [7140]
5. Barber, William Hollis, Jr. 1976. An autecological study of salmonberry
(Rubus spectabilis, Pursh) in western Washington. Seattle, WA:
University of Washington. 154 p. Thesis. [7189]
6. Bernard, Stephen R.; Brown, Kenneth F. 1977. Distribution of mammals,
reptiles, and amphibians by BLM physiographic regions and A.W. Kuchler's
associations for the eleven western states. Tech. Note 301. Denver, CO:
U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 169 p.
[434]
7. Bolsinger, Charles L. 1988. The hardwoods of California's timberlands,
woodlands, and savannas. Resour. Bull. PNW-RB-148. Portland, OR: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research
Station. 148 p. [5291]
8. Brinkman, Kenneth A. 1974. Rubus L. blackberry, raspberry. In:
Schopmeyer, C. S., ed. Seeds of woody plants in the United States.
Agriculture Handbook No. 450. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service: 738-743. [7743]
9. Burrill, Larry C.; Braunworth, William S., Jr.; William, Ray D.; [and
others], compilers. 1989. Pacific Northwest weed control handbook.
Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University, Extension Service, Agricultural
Communications. 276 p. [6235]
10. Campbell, Alsie Gilbert; Franklin, Jerry F. 1979. Riparian vegetation in
Oregon's western Cascade Mountains: composition, biomass, and autumn
phenology. Bull. No. 14. Seattle, WA: U.S./International Biological
Program, University of Washington, Ecosystem Analysis Studies,
Coniferous Forest Biome. 90 p. [8433]
11. Core, Earl L. 1974. Brambles. In: Gill, John D.; Healy, William M.,
compilers. Shrubs and vines for Northeastern wildlife. Gen. Tech. Rep.
NE-9. Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service:
16-19. [8923]
12. Crane, M. B. 1940. Reproductive versatility in Rubus. I. Morphology and
inheritance. Journal of Genetics. 40: 109-118. [8443]
13. Davidson, Eric Duncan. 1967. Synecological features of a natural
headland prairie on the Oregon coast. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State
University. 78 p. M.S. thesis. [8901]
14. Dayton, William A. 1931. Important western browse plants. Misc. Publ.
101. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 214 p. [768]
15. Einarsen, Arthur S. 1946. Crude protein determination of deer food as an
applied management technique. Transactions, 11th North American Wildlife
Conference. 11: 309-312. [17031]
16. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and
Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
17. Fonda, R. W. 1979. Ecology of alpine timberline in Olympic National
Park. In: Linn, Robert M., ed. Proceedings, 1st conference on scientific
research in the National Parks; 1976 November 9-12; New Orleans, LA.
National Park Serv. Trans. & Proceedings Series No. 5. Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service: 209-212. [6683]
18. Fonda, R. W. 1979. Fire resilient forests of Douglas-fir in Olympic
National Park: a hypothesis. In: Linn, Robert M., ed. Proceedings, 1st
conference on scientific research in the National Parks, Vol. 2; 1976
November 9-12; New Orleans, LA. NPS Transactions and Proceedings No. 5.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service:
1239-1242. [6698]
19. Fowells, H. A., compiler. 1965. Silvics of forest trees of the United
States. Agric. Handb. 271. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service. 762 p. [12442]
20. Franklin, Jerry F. 1981. Vegetation and habitats. In: Maser, Chris;
Mate, Bruce R.; Franklin, Jerry F.; Dyrness, C. T., compilers. Natural
history of Oregon Coast mammals. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-133. Portland, OR:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest
and Range Experiment Station: 17-34. [6219]
21. Franklin, Jerry F.; Dyrness, C. T. 1973. Natural vegetation of Oregon
and Washington. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-8. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range
Experiment Station. 417 p. [961]
22. Franklin, Jerry F.; Pechanec, Anna A. 1968. Comparison of vegetation in
adjacent alder, conifer, and mixed alder-conifer communities. I.
Understory vegetation and stand structure. In: Trappe, J. M.; Franklin,
J. F.; Tarrant, R. F.; Hansen, G. M., eds. Biology of alder: Proceedings
of a symposium: 40th annual meeting of the Northwest Scientific
Association; 1967 April 14-15; Pullman, WA. Portland, OR: U. S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and
Range Experiment Station: 37-43. [6188]
23. 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]
24. Gratkowski, H. 1971. Midsummer foliage sprays on salmonberry and
thimbleberry. PNW-171. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 5
p. [6540]
25. Gratkowski, H. 1978. Herbicides for shrub and weed control in western
Oregon. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-77. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range
Experiment Station. 48 p. [6539]
26. Great Plains Flora Association. 1986. Flora of the Great Plains.
Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. 1392 p. [1603]
27. Haeussler, S.; Pojar, J.; Geisler, B. M.; [and others]. 1985. A guide to
the interior cedar-hemlock zone, northwestern transitional subzone
(ICHg), in the Prince Rupert Forest Region, British Columbia. Land
Management Report Number 26; ISSN 0702-9861. Victoria, BC: British
Columbia, Ministry of Forests. 263 p. [6930]
28. Hall, Frederick C. 1984. Ecoclass coding system for the Pacific
Northwest plant associations. R6 Ecol 173-1984. Portland, OR: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 83
p. [7650]
29. Halverson, Nancy M., compiler. 1986. Major indicator shrubs and herbs on
National Forests of western Oregon and southwestern Washington.
R6-TM-229. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Pacific Northwest Region. 180 p. [3233]
30. Harper, James A. 1962. Daytime feeding habits of Roosevelt elk on Boyes
Prairie, California. Journal of Wildlife Management. 26(1): 97-100.
[8876]
31. Heady, Harold F.; Foin, Theodore C.; Hektner, Mary M.; [and others].
1977. Coastal prairie and northern coastal scrub. In: Barbour, Michael
G.; Major, Jack, eds. Terrestrial vegetation of California. New York:
John Wiley and Sons: 733-760. [7211]
32. Henderson, Jan A. 1978. Plant succession on the Alnus rubra/Rubus
spectabilis habitat type in western Oregon. Northwest Science. 52(3):
156-167. [6393]
33. Hines, William W.; Land, Charles E. 1974. Black-tailed deer and
Douglas-fir regeneration in the Coast Range of Oregon. In: Black, Hugh
C., ed. Wildlife and forest management in the Pacific Northwest:
Proceedings of a symposium; 1973 September 11-12; Corvallis, OR.
Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University, School of Forestry, Forest
Research Laboratory: 121-132. [7999]
34. Hitchcock, C. Leo; Cronquist, Arthur. 1973. Flora of the Pacific
Northwest. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press. 730 p. [1168]
35. Hogdon, A. R.; Steele, Frederic. 1966. Rubus subgenus Eubatus in New
England: a conspectus. Rhodora. 68: 474-513. [6213]
36. Hooven, Edward F.; Black, Hugh C. 1978. Prescribed burning aids
reforestation of Oregon Coast Range brushlands. Research Paper 38.
Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University, School of Forestry. 14 p.
[4132]
37. Kartesz, John T.; Kartesz, Rosemarie. 1980. A synonymized checklist of
the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. Volume
II: The biota of North America. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North
Carolina Press; in confederation with Anne H. Lindsey and C. Richie
Bell, North Carolina Botanical Garden. 500 p. [6954]
38. Kelpsas, B. R. 1978. Comparative effects of chemical, fire, and machine
site preparation in an Oregon coastal brushfield. Corvallis, OR: Oregon
State University. 97 p. Thesis. [6986]
39. Klinka, K.; Scagel, A. M.; Courtin, P. J. 1985. Vegetation relationships
among some seral ecosystems in southwestern British Columbia. Canadian
Journal of Forestry. 15: 561-569. [5985]
40. Klinka, K.; Carter, R. E.; Feller, M. C.; Wang, Q. 1989. Relations
between site index, salal, plant communities, and sites in coastal
Douglas-fir ecosystems. Northwest Science. 63(1): 19-28. [6276]
41. Kramp, Betty A.; Patton, David R.; Brady, Ward W. 1983. The effects of
fire on wildlife habitat and species. RUN WILD: Wildlife/ habitat
relationships. Albuerque, NM: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Southwestern Region, Wildlife Unit Technical Report. 29 p.
[152]
42. Krygier, James T.; Ruth, Robert H. 1961. Effects of herbicides on
salmonberry and on Sitka spruce and western hemlock seedlings. Weeds.
9(3): 416-422. [6608]
43. 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]
44. Leininger, Wayne C.; Sharrow, Steven H. 1987. Seasonal diets of herded
sheep grazing Douglas-fir plantations. Journal of Range Management.
40(6): 551-555. [8398]
45. Lepofsky, Dana; Turner, Nancy J.; Kuhnlein, Harriet V. 1985. Determining
the availability of traditional wild plant foods: an example of Nuxalk
foods, Bella Coola, British Columbia. Ecology of Food and Nutrition. 16:
223-241. [7002]
46. 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]
47. Morgan, Penelope; Neuenschwander, Leon F. 1988. Shrub response to high
and low severity burns following clearcutting in northern Idaho. Western
Journal of Applied Forestry. 3(1): 5-9. [3895]
48. Munz, Philip A. 1973. A California flora and supplement. Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press. 1905 p. [6155]
49. Pojar, Jim. 1975. Hummingbird flowers of British Columbia. Syesis. 8:
25-28. [6537]
50. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant
geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
51. Rhodes, B. D.; Sharrow, S. H. 1983. Effect of sheep grazing on big game
habitat in Oregon's Coast Range. In: 1983 Progress report--research in
rangeland management. Special Report 682. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State
University, Agricultural Experiment Station: In cooperation with: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. [3610]
52. Ruth, Robert H. 1956. Plantation survival and growth in two brush-threat
areas in coastal Oregon. Res. Pap. 17. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range
Experiment Station. 14 p. [6722]
53. Ruth, Robert H. 1970. Effect of shade on germination and growth of
salmonberry. Res. Pap. PNW-96. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range
Experiment Station. 10 p. [6543]
54. Ruth, Robert H. 1974. Regeneration and growth of west-side mixed
conifers. In: Camer, Owen P., ed. Environmental effects of forest
residues in the Pacific Northwest: A state-of-knowledge compendium. Gen.
Tech. Rep. PNW-24. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Pacific NorthwestForest and Range Experiment Station: K-1 to
K-21. [6381]
55. Schwartz, John E., II; Mitchell, Glen E. 1945. The Roosevelt elk on the
Olympic Peninsula, Washington. Journal of Wildlife Management. 9(4):
295-319. [8878]
56. Stewart, R. E. 1974. Repeated spraying to control four coastal brush
species. Res. Note PNW-238. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range
Experiment Station. 5 p. [5636]
57. Stewart, R. E. 1977. Ammonium thiocyanate does not increase herbicidal
control of salmonberry. Res. Note PNW-308. Portland, OR: U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range
Experiment Station. 5 p. [6542]
58. Stewart, R. E. 1978. Site preparation. In: Cleary, Brian D.; Greaves,
Robert D.; Hermann, Richard K., eds. Regenerating Oregon's forests: A
guide for the regeneration forester. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State
University Extension Service: 99-129. [7205]
59. Stewart, R. E. 1978. Origin and development of vegetation after spraying
and burning in a coastal Oregon clearcut. Res. Note PNW-317. Portland,
OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest
Forest and Range Experiment Station. 11 p. [6541]
60. Strothmann, R. O.; Roy, Douglass F. 1984. Regeneration of Douglas-fir in
the Klamath Mountains Region, California and Oregon. Gen. Tech. Rep.
PSW-81. Berkeley, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 35 p. [5640]
61. Tappeiner, John; Zasada, John; Ryan, Peter. 1988. Structure of
salmonberry clones and understories in western coastal Oregon forests:
the basis for stable shrub communities. Unpublished paper on file at:
College of Forestry, Oregon State University, U.S. Department of
Agriculture Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station,
Corvallis, OR: 27 p. [7061]
62. Turpin, Thomas C. 1989. Successful silvicultural operations without
herbicides in a multiple use environment. In: Proceedings of the
National Silviculture Workshop: Silviculture for all resources; 1987 May
11-14; Sacramento. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service: 176-183. [6402]
63. 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]
64. 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]
65. Viereck, L. A.; Dyrness, C. T. 1979. Ecological effects of the
Wickersham Dome Fire near Fairbanks, Alaska. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-90.
Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific
Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 71 p. [6392]
66. Viereck, Leslie A.; Little, Elbert L., Jr. 1972. Alaska trees and
shrubs. Agric. Handb. 410. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service. 265 p. [6884]
67. 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]
68. Whittaker, R. H. 1960. Vegetation of the Siskiyou Mountains, Oregon and
California. Ecological Monographs. 30(3): 279-338. [6836]
69. Yerkes, Vern P. 1960. Occurrence of shrubs and herbaceous vegetation
after clear cutting old-growth Douglas-fir. Res. Pap. PNW-34. Portland,
OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest
Forest and Range Experiment Station. 12 p. [8937]
70. Zasada, John; Tappeiner, John; Maxwell, Bruce. 1989. Manual treatment of
Salmonberry or which bud's for you?. Cope Report, Coastal Oregon
Productivity Enhancement Program. 2(2): 7-9. [7060]
71. Zinke, Paul J. 1977. The redwood forest and associated north coast
forests. In: Barbour, Michael G.; Major, Jack, eds. Terrestrial
vegetation of California. New York: John Wiley and Sons: 679-698.
[7212]
72. 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]
73. 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: Rubus spectabilis
| Salmonberry
|
 |
