1Up Info - A Portal with a Difference

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

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


You are here >1Up Info > Wildlife, Animals, and Plants > Plant Species > Shrub > Species: Tetradymia spinosa | Spiny Horsebrush
 

Wildlife, Animals, and Plants

 


Wildlife, Animals, and Plants

 

Wildlife Species

  Amphibians

  Birds

  Mammals

  Reptiles

 

Kuchler

 

Plants

  Bryophyte

  Cactus

  Fern or Fern Ally

  Forb

  Graminoid

  Lichen

  Shrub

  Tree

  Vine


Introductory

SPECIES: Tetradymia spinosa | Spiny Horsebrush
ABBREVIATION : TETSPI SYNONYMS : Lagothamnus ambiguus Nutt. Lagothamnus microphyllus Nutt. SCS PLANT CODE : TETSP2 COMMON NAMES : spiny horsebrush catclaw horsebrush cottonthorn horsebrush TAXONOMY : Strother's 1974 revision of the genus Tetradymia recognizes spiny horsebrush as Tetradymia spinosa Hook. & Arn. This work puts Lagothamnus ambiguus Nutt. and L. micriphyllus Nutt. in synonymy with T. spinosa [11]. LIFE FORM : Shrub FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS : No special status OTHER STATUS : NO-ENTRY COMPILED BY AND DATE : Kathy Ahlenslager May 1986 LAST REVISED BY AND DATE : Kathy Ahlenslager December 1987 AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION : Ahlenslager, Kathleen E. 1987. Tetradymia spinosa. In: Remainder of Citation

DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE

SPECIES: Tetradymia spinosa | Spiny Horsebrush
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION : Spiny horsebrush is widespread throughout the Great Basin and adjacent mountains. It occurs from southeastern Oregon to southwestern Montana and western Wyoming, south to northwestern New Mexico (San Juan County), south-central Utah, Nevada, and eastern California (Lassen and Mono counties). ECOSYSTEMS : FRES21 Ponderosa pine FRES26 Lodgepole pine FRES29 Sagebrush FRES30 Desert shrub FRES35 Pinyon - juniper FRES36 Mountain grasslands STATES : CA CO MT NV NM OR UT WY ADMINISTRATIVE UNITS : ARCH BICA COLM DINO FOBU BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS : 3 Southern Pacific Border 4 Sierra Mountains 5 Columbia Plateau 6 Upper Basin and Range 7 Lower Basin and Range 8 Northern Rocky Mountains 9 Middle Rocky Mountains 10 Wyoming Basin 11 Southern Rocky Mountains 12 Colorado Plateau 16 Upper Missouri Basin and Broken Lands KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS : K022 Great Basin pine forest K023 Juniper - pinyon woodland K024 Juniper steppe woodland K038 Great Basin sagebrush K039 Blackbrush K040 Saltbush - greasewood K041 Creosotebush K051 Wheatgrass - bluegrass K053 Grama - galleta steppe K055 Sagebrush steppe K056 Wheatgrass - needlegrass shrubsteppe SAF COVER TYPES : 220 Rocky Mountain juniper 238 Western juniper 239 Pinyon - juniper SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES : NO-ENTRY HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES : Spiny horsebrush is a seral species and is not found as a dominant, codominant, or indicator in any habitat types. Throughout its range it is associated with shadscale, sagebrush, cresote, ponderosa pine, and pinyon-juniper vegetation types [11].

VALUE AND USE

SPECIES: Tetradymia spinosa | Spiny Horsebrush
WOOD PRODUCTS VALUE : NO-ENTRY IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE : Due to its spiny growth habit and toxicity, this species is of little direct use to animals. However, it does provide cover for smaller animals and is useful as a soil stabilizer [9]. PALATABILITY : The degree of use shown by livestock and wildlife species for this toxic plant in several western states has been rated as follows [6]: .NS CO MT UT WY Cattle ---- Poor Poor Poor Sheep ---- Poor Fair Poor Horses ---- Poor Poor Poor Pronghorn ---- ---- Poor ---- Elk Poor ---- Poor ---- Mule deer Poor ---- Poor ---- Small mammals ---- ---- Fair ---- Small nongame birds ---- ---- Fair ---- Upland game birds ---- ---- Poor ---- Waterfowl ---- ---- Poor ---- NUTRITIONAL VALUE : Spiny horsebrush is rated poor in energy and protein value [6]. COVER VALUE : The degree to which spiny horsebrush provides environmental protection during one or more seasons for wildlife species has been rated as follows [6]: CO UT Pronghorn ---- Poor Elk ---- Poor Mule deer ---- Poor Small mammals Fair Good Small nongame birds Poor Fair Upland game birds ---- Fair Waterfowl ---- Poor VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES : The growth of spiny horsebrush on gentle to moderate slopes is good and on steep slopes is poor. This species' potential for erosion control and revegetation is low [1]. OTHER USES AND VALUES : NO-ENTRY MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : NO-ENTRY

BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS

SPECIES: Tetradymia spinosa | Spiny Horsebrush
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS : Spiny horsebrush is a native, perennial, compact or spreading, much-branched, rhizomatous shrub up to 4 feet (12 dm) in height [5,9,11]. RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM : Phanerophyte REGENERATION PROCESSES : Spiny horsebrush regenerates vegetatively through rhizomes and root bud sprouting, as well as sexually via wind-dispersed seeds [11,12, (Young pers. comm. 1987)]. SITE CHARACTERISTICS : Spiny horsebrush occurs in dry, open places in foothills and plains in sandy soils, as well as in alkali sinks [5,9,11]. In Lahontan Basin, Nevada, this species is important on Lahontan sands and characteristically grows on top of stable sand dunes. Its occurrence is almost always associated with cultural artifacts [Young pers. comm. 1987]. Elevational ranges vary as follows [6]: from 4,500 to 7,000 feet (1,372-2,134 m) in CO 3,000 to 3,000 feet (915-915 m) in MT 4,300 to 7,000 feet (1,311-2,134 m) in UT 4,100 to 8,000 feet (1,250-2,439 m) in WY SUCCESSIONAL STATUS : Spiny horsebrush is a seral species and has the ability to increase in abundance during secondary succession through vigorously sprouting roots and rhizomes. Although flowers are highly fertile, seedlings are rarely observed in nature. This is probably due to the harsh environment in which the species occurs and a high rate of paratization by insects on the flowers [11,(Young pers. comm. 1987)]. SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT : Spiny horsebrush is dormant most of the year and resumes growth later in the spring than most species in the western Colorado and eastern Utah desert shrub communities [4]. In the Intermountain region blooming occurs in May and June but may extend into August [9,11]. Flowering dates in various states are as follows [6]: State Earliest date observed Latest date observed CO May July MT May July UT May June WY May June As typical with many xerophytes, the occurrence of flowering in spiny horsebrush is correlated with temporal distribution and rainfall. In very dry years some individual plants or entire colonies do not bloom at all, or bloom but fail to mature fruits, probably due to decreases in water availability. Vegetative reproduction of plants from rhizomes contributes to colony uniformity [11]. One way xerophytic species, such as spiny horsebrush, cope with a short growing season is to flower simultaneously. Often plants of whole colonies bloom at once or bloom within a few days of each other [11].

FIRE ECOLOGY

SPECIES: Tetradymia spinosa | Spiny Horsebrush
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS : Plants of spiny horsebrush are dormant throughout most of the year on the dry ranges where they occur. During a fire this shrub burns rapidly with little heat transferred downward into the roots. Fire stimulates root buds of the species to sprout [12]. A low-intensity fire may stimulate this species to initiate new shoots from rhizomes. POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY : Small shrub, adventitious-bud root crown Rhizomatous shrub, rhizome in soil Ground residual colonizer (on-site, initial community)

FIRE EFFECTS

SPECIES: Tetradymia spinosa | Spiny Horsebrush
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT : Spiny horsebrush occurs on dry sites where fuels are usually insufficient to carry a fire [9,14]. The effect of fire on shrubs is more damaging than that on forbs and grasses. Fire not only destroys herbage but also the stored reserves of shrubs [3]. Spiny horsebrush is considered a fire-resistant species, as there is a 65 percent or greater chance that at least 50 percent of a population will survive or reestablish after a fire [12,14]. DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT : NO-ENTRY PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE : Spiny horsebrush, which is capable of resprouting and rapid regrowth after fire, is favored over other plants that reestablish only by seed [2]. Postfire regeneration response is considered rapid, with 2 to 5 years required to approximate preburn frequency or cover [12]. Plants quickly regain and surpass their original size. The amount of sprouting is affected by season and soil moisture, as these are factors which contribute to burning intensity [3]. After a fire, crown-sprouting spiny horsebrush may initially dominate sagebrush ranges. Postfire sprouting from rhizomes may result in a one to one replacement ratio at best, whereas sprouting from root buds may result in more than one replacement plant [Young pers. comm. 1987]. In addition to the vigorous postburn production of root crown sprouts, spiny horsebrush also exhibits dynamic postfire seedling establishment [7]. DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE : NO-ENTRY FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : NO-ENTRY

REFERENCES

SPECIES: Tetradymia spinosa | Spiny Horsebrush
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. Blaisdell, James P. 1953. Ecological effects of planned burning of sagebrush-grass range on the upper Snake River Plains. Tech. Bull. 1975. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 39 p. [462] 3. Blaisdell, James P.; Murray, Robert B.; McArthur, E. Durant. 1982. Managing Intermountain rangelands--sagebrush-grass ranges. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-134. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 41 p. [467] 4. Branson, Farrel A.; Miller, Reuben F.; McQueen, I. S. 1976. Moisture relationships in twelve northern desert shrub communities near Grand Junction, Colorado. Ecology. 57(6): 1104-1124. [510] 5. Cronquist, Arthur. 1955. Vascular plants of the Pacific Northwest: Part 5: Compositae. Seattle: University of Washington Press. 343 p. [716] 6. 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] 7. 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] 8. 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] 9. McArthur, E. Durant; Blauer, A. Clyde; Plummer, A. Perry; Stevens, Richard. 1979. Characteristics and hybridization of important Intermountain shrubs. III. Sunflower family. Res. Pap. INT-220. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 82 p. [1571] 10. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843] 11. Strother, John L. 1974. Taxonomy of Tetradymia (Compositae: Senecioneae). Brittonia. 26: 177-202. [2268] 12. 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] 13. Wright, Henry A. 1972. Shrub response to fire. In: McKell, Cyrus M.; Blaisdell, James P.; Goodin, Joe R., eds. Wildland shrubs--their biology and utilization: Proceedings of a symposium; 1971 July; Logan, UT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-1. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 204-217. [2611] 14. Young, Richard P. 1983. Fire as a vegetation management tool in rangelands of the Intermountain Region. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Shaw, Nancy, compilers. Managing Intermountain rangelands--improvement of range and wildlife habitats: Proceedings; 1981 September 15-17; Twin Falls, ID; 1982 June 22-24; Elko, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-157. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 18-31. [2681]

Index

Related categories for Species: Tetradymia spinosa | Spiny Horsebrush

Send this page to a friend
Print this Page

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

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

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

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