|
Wildlife, Animals, and Plants
|
|
Introductory
SPECIES: Zuckia brandegeei | Silt Bush
ABBREVIATION :
ZUCBRA
SYNONYMS :
Zuckia brandegei (Gray) Welsh & Stutz [18]
Atriplex brandegei (Gray) Collotzi [25]
Grayia brandegei Gray [16]
SCS PLANT CODE :
ZUBR
ZUBRA
ZUBRB
ZUBRP
COMMON NAMES :
silt bush
spineless hopsage
TAXONOMY :
The currently accepted scientific name of silt bush is Zuckia brandegeei
(Gray) Welsh & Stutz ex Welsh [20]. Varieties are:
Z. b. var. arizonica (Standl.) Welsh [20] Arizona silt bush
Z. b. var. brandegei [20] Brandegee's silt bush
Z. b. var. plummeri (Stutz & Sanderson) Dorn [20,26] Plummer's silt bush
LIFE FORM :
Shrub
FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS :
No special status
OTHER STATUS :
NO-ENTRY
COMPILED BY AND DATE :
J. L. Holifield, April 1987
LAST REVISED BY AND DATE :
NO-ENTRY
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION :
Holifield, J. L. 1987. Zuckia brandegeei. In: Remainder of Citation
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Zuckia brandegeei | Silt Bush
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION :
Silt bush is mostly restricted to the Colorado River drainage in
south-central Wyoming, western Colorado, eastern Utah, northeastern
Arizona, and northwestern New Mexico [16]. The only known population
outside of the Colorado River drainage system is in the Great Basin,
just northwest of Sterling, Utah [10,16].
The chromosomal populations of silt bush reportedly differ in
geographical distribution. Diploid populations occur mostly in
south-central Utah and northeastern Arizona [16]. Tetraploids tend to
grow in isolated populations or in more continuous bands wherever 2:1
clay substrates are exposed in northeastern Utah, south-central Wyoming,
eastern Colorado, and northwestern New Mexico [(Pendleton, pers. comm.
1987), 16].
ECOSYSTEMS :
FRES30 Desert shrub
FRES34 Chaparral - mountain shrub
FRES35 Pinyon - juniper
FRES40 Desert grasslands
STATES :
AZ CO NM UT WY
ADMINISTRATIVE UNITS :
ARCH CANY CARE COLM DINO GLCA
NABR PEFO
BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :
7 Lower Basin and Range
10 Wyoming Basin
11 Southern Rocky Mountains
12 Colorado Plateau
KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :
K023 Juniper - pinyon woodland
K031 Oak - juniper woodland
K037 Mountain-mahogany - oak scrub
K039 Blackbrush
K040 Saltbush - greasewood
K053 Gramma - galleta steppe
SAF COVER TYPES :
239 Pinyon - juniper
SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES :
212 Blackbush
315 Big sagebrush-Idaho fescue
401 Basin big sagebrush
414 Salt desert shrub
HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES :
Silt bush can be found growing near Stansbury cliffrose (Purshia
mexicana var. stansburiana) communities, pinyon-juniper and juniper-oak
woodlands, and salt desert shrublands [2,9,10,11]. Where silt bush
grows with other species it is more commonly found in saltbush
communities that are in a very early seral stage [Pendleton pers. comm.,
1987]. It may also occur as a pioneer plant restricted by competition
to steep 2:1 clay slopes where other plants cannot survive [Pendleton
pers. comm., 1987].
VALUE AND USE
SPECIES: Zuckia brandegeei | Silt Bush
WOOD PRODUCTS VALUE :
NO-ENTRY
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE :
Silt bush has good tolerance to grazing and is a valuable winter forage
[11,13]. It is browsed by livestock and big game, especially in the
spring when it is in full leaf [1,9].
PALATABILITY :
The early spring and summer growth of silt bush is reported to be good
to very good in palatability, but the foliage retained over the fall and
winter is only fair in palatability [11]. The degree of use shown by
livestock and wildlife species for silt bush is rated as follows [3]:
UT WY
Cattle Fair Fair
Sheep Good Fair
Horses Poor Fair
Pronghorn Fair ____
Elk Poor ____
Mule deer Fair ____
Small mammals Good ____
Small nongame birds Poor ____
Upland game birds Fair ____
Waterfowl Poor ____
NUTRITIONAL VALUE :
Silt bush is rated fair in energy and protein value [3].
COVER VALUE :
The degree to which silt bush provides environmental protection during
one or more seasons for wildlife species in Utah is as follows [3]:
Pronghorn Poor
Elk Poor
Small mammals Fair
Small nongame birds Fair
Upland game birds Fair
Waterfowl Poor
VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES :
Silt bush is rated as having low to medium potential for both erosion
control and short-term revegetation, and medium potential for long-term
revegetation projects [3]. It provides good surface soil stabilization
[7,11].
Silt bush has a fair to medium natural rate of spread [11]. It
reproduces well from seed and spreads effectively on disturbed sites
such as roadcuts and roadfills [9]. Silt bush apparently increases
after soil disturbances [9]. It was given a higher suitability rating
for restoring big game ranges than was spiny hopsage [11].
Silt bush germinates and produces seedlings readily, but unless
protected, seeds and seedlings are often eaten by small mammals and
birds [1,9].
Seed can be stored up to 5 years, but only 2 years is recommended to
ensure good viability [11,14]. Cold stratification or dry storage
improves germination [7]. Winged fruits average 189,950 to 190,000 per
pound (86,142-86,165 kg) [11,13].
Poor results have been obtained from rooting of stem cuttings [7].
OTHER USES AND VALUES :
NO-ENTRY
MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
NO-ENTRY
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Zuckia brandegeei | Silt Bush
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
Silt bush is a native, perennial shrub or subshrub that grows from 0.5
to 1.6 feet (10-50 cm) in height [18]. The slender, erect or ascending
annual stems are branched from a persistant woody base 2 to 8 inches
(5-20 cm) tall [2,18]. The branches lack spines [6]. Leaves are
alternate with linear-oblanceolate to obovate blades and reach 0.6 to
1.8 inches (1.5-4.5 cm) in length [1,6].
Identification between the chromosomal races proposed by Stutz and
others [16] is possible due to variations in stature and leaf size.
Diploid populations (Z. brandegeei var. brandegeei) grow 0.8 to 1.3 feet
(2-4 dm) tall and have narrow linear leaves, while the larger statured
tetraploids (Z. brandegeei var. plummeri) reach 0.10 to 1.6 feet (3-5 dm)
in height and have wider, more oval-shaped leaves [10,16].
Silt bush has been desbribed as dioecious or less commonly monoecious
[2,6,17]. Pendleton [10] has, however, shown silt bush to be
monoecious. The only exceptions were found on plants where the second
sexual function failed to mature [10]. Silt bush is heterodichogamous;
separation of sexual functions is complete [10]. Environmentaly induced
sex changes have been reported [9].
Silt bush has a spreading root system that provides good resistance to
drought [7]. It often grows on saline and seleniferous soils [17] and
has been listed as a possible secondary or facultative selenium absorber
[1].
RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :
Hemicryptophyte
REGENERATION PROCESSES :
Silt bush reproduces by winged seed which is produced annually [13]. It
is reported to germinate and produce seedlings readily [1]. Germination
is improved by cold stratification or dry storage [7].
Silt bush also regenerates vegetatively.
SITE CHARACTERISTICS :
Silt bush is generally restricted to the drier plains and foothills in
the Upper Colorado River drainage [7]. One isolated population occurs
in the Great Basin [16]. Stutz [15] found silt bush grew almost
exclusively on talus and steep mud slopes. These steeper sites show
little soil development [10]. Growth is reported to be good on gentle
to moderate slopes and fair on steep [3].
Silt bush occurs on a variety of soils that range from sandy, loamy,
silty clay loam, to clayey in texture [3,7]. It is typically found on
heavy clay substrates derived from shale, but it will occur on flatter,
sandier sites in the southern extension of its range [10]. Soils are
often saline and seleniferous [17].
The chromosomal races of silt bush are reported to grow in soils with
slight differences in mineral content. Stutz and others [16] found
diploid populations occupied soils higher in iron and manganese, while
soils occupied by tetraploids had consistently higher contents of
potassium and zinc [16].
Silt bush is adapted to juniper-oak woodlands, pinyon-juniper sites, and
salt desert shrublands [2,9,11]. It may occur in pure stands but is
often found growing in association with Stansbury cliffrose, shadscale
(Atriplex confertifolia), big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata), and
blackbrush (Coleogyne ramosissima) [10,11]. Silt bush occurs from 3,000
to 7,000 feet (900-2,100 m) in elevation [7]. Elevational ranges for
several western states are as follows [3]:
from 5,000 to 6,000 feet (1,524-1,982 m) in CO
4,800 to 8,000 feet (1,463-2,439 m) in UT
6,800 to 7,300 feet (2,073-2,225 m) in WY
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS :
Silt bush is reported to increase after disturbance [9].
SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT :
Information on the phenological development of silt bush is scant. It
can be in full leaf by early to late May [9]. The leaves appear in
early April and dehisce in late summer [16]. The flowering period
varies from mid-June to mid-August [1]. Pendleton [10] reported that
flowering begins sometime in May and fruit set is complete by early
July. The leaves continue to develop after fruit set and become thick
and leathery [10]. Generalized flowering dates for silt bush in several
western stated are as follows [3]:
State Beginning of Flowering Flowering End of Flowering
CO July July August
UT June July August
WY July July August
Seed ripens in late September to early October, but the utricles remain
on the plant until January [1]. Smith [13] reported fruit ripening
begins in September and lasts until mid-December. Fruits may persist on
the plant through the winter but are often eaten by small mammals and
birds [1].
FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Zuckia brandegeei | Silt Bush
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS :
Silt bush adaptations to fire are not reported in the literature.
POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY :
NO-ENTRY
FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Zuckia brandegeei | Silt Bush
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT :
NO-ENTRY
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT :
NO-ENTRY
PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE :
NO-ENTRY
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE :
NO-ENTRY
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
NO-ENTRY
REFERENCES
SPECIES: Zuckia brandegeei | Silt Bush
REFERENCES :
1. Blauer, A. Clyde; Plummer, A. Perry; McArthur, E. Durant; [and others].
1976. Characteristics and hybridization of important Intermountain
shrubs. II. Chenopod family. Res. Pap. INT-177. Ogden, UT: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and
Range Experiment Station. 49 p. [473]
2. Collotzi, Albert William. 1966. Investigations in the genus Grayia,
based on chromatographic, morphological, and embryological criteria.
Logan, UT: Utah State University. 65 p. Thesis. [667]
3. 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]
4. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and
Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
5. 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]
6. Harrington, H. D. 1964. Manual of the plants of Colorado. 2d ed.
Chicago: The Swallow Press Inc. 666 p. [6851]
7. Institute for Land Rehabilitation. 1979. Selection, propagation, & field
establishment of native plant species on disturbed arid lands. Bulletin
500. Logan, UT: Utah State University, Agricultural Experiment Station.
49 p. [1237]
8. 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]
9. McArthur, E. Durant; Plummer, A. Perry; Davis, James N. 1978.
Rehabilitation of game range in the salt desert. In: Johnson, Kendall
L., ed. Wyoming shrublands: Proceedings of the 7th Wyomingshrub ecology
workshop; 1978 May 31-June 1; Rock Springs, WY. Laramie, WY: University
of Wyoming, Range Management Division, Wyoming Shrub Ecology Workshop:
23-50. [1575]
10. Pendleton, Rosemary Laycock. 1986. Studies in plant population biology:
Grayia brandegei and Quercus gambelii. Detroit, MI: Wayne State
University. 64 p. Dissertation. [1871]
11. Plummer, A. Perry; Christensen, Donald R.; Monsen, Stephen B. 1968.
Restoring big-game range in Utah. Publ. No. 68-3. Ephraim, UT: Utah
Division of Fish and Game. 183 p. [4554]
12. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant
geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
13. Smith, Justin G. 1974. Grayia H.& A. hopsage. 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:
434-436. [7675]
14. Stevens, Richard; Jorgensen, Kent R.; Davis, James N. 1981. Viability of
seed from thirty-two shrub and forb species through fifteen years of
warehouse storage. Great Basin Naturalist. 41(3): 274-277. [2244]
15. Stutz, Howard C. 1983. Some promising chenopods for use on disturbed
lands. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Shaw, Nancy, compilers. Managing
Intermountain rangelands--improvement of range and wildlife habitats:
Proceedings of symposia; 1981 September 15-17; Twin Falls, ID; 1982 June
22-24; Elko, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-157. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment
Station: 132-135. [2283]
16. Stutz, Howard C.; Sanderson, Stewart C.; McArthur, E. Durant; Ge-Lin,
Chu. 1987. Chromosome races of Grayia brandegei (Chenopodiaceae).
Madrono. 34(2): 142-149. [2819]
17. Welsh, Stanley L. 1984. Utah flora: Chenopodiaceae. Great Basin
Naturalist. 44(2): 183-209. [12726]
18. 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]
19. 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]
20. Kartesz, John T.; Meacham, Christopher A. 1999. Synthesis of the North
American flora (Windows Version 1.0), [CD-ROM]. Available: North Carolina
Botanical Garden. In cooperation with the Nature Conservancy, Natural
Resources Conservation Service, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [2001,
January 16]. [38380]
21. Shiflet, Thomas N., ed. 1994. Rangeland cover types of the United
States. Denver, CO: Society for Range Management. 152 p. [23362]
22. 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]
23. 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]
24. 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]
25. Weber, William A. 1987. Colorado flora: western slope. Boulder, CO:
Colorado Associated University Press. 530 p. [7706]
26. Welsh, Stanley L. 1993. New taxa and new nomenclatural combinations in
the Utah Flora. Rhodora. 95: 392-421. [23464]
Index
Related categories for Species: Zuckia brandegeei
| Silt Bush
|
 |
