|
Wildlife, Animals, and Plants
|
|
REFERENCES
SPECIES: Pinus muricata | Bishop Pine
REFERENCES :
1. Ades, P. K.; Simpson, J. A.; Eldridge, K. G.; Eldridge, R. H. 1992.
Genetic variation in susceptibility to Dothistroma needle blight among
provenance and families of Pinus muricata. Canadian Journal of Forest
Research. 22: 1111-1117. [20210]
2. Agee, James K. 1974. Environmental impacts from fire management
alternatives. Final Report on Purchase Order PX 8000 3 0644. San
Francisco, CA: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service,
Western Regional Office. 92 p. On file with: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Fire
Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT. [12404]
3. Anderson, Catherine L. 1983. Geobotany: An aid to geologic mapping.
California Geology. 36(2): 35-43. [20654]
4. Baker, Frederick S. 1949. A revised tolerance table. Journal of
Forestry. 47: 179-181. [20404]
5. 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]
6. Brown, David E. 1982. Relict conifer forests and woodlands. In: Brown,
David E., ed. Biotic communities of the American Southwest--United
States and Mexico. Desert Plants. 4(1-4): 70-71. [8888]
7. Brumbaugh, Robert S.; Renwick, William H.; Loeher, Larry L. 1982.
Effects of vegetation change on shallow landsliding: Santa Cruz Island,
California. In: Conrad, C. Eugene; Oechel, Walter C., technical
coordinators. Proceedings of the symposium on dynamics and management of
Mediterranean-type ecosystems; 1981 June 22-26; San Diego, CA. Gen.
Tech. Rep. PSW-58. Berkeley, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station: 397-402.
[6043]
8. Critchfield, William B.; Little, Elbert L., Jr. 1966. Geographic
distribution of the pines of the world. Misc. Publ. 991. Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 97 p. [20314]
9. D'Antonio, Carla M.; Howald, Ann M. 1990. Evaluating the effectiveness
of hydroseed mixes, topsoil conservation & other reveg techniques: a
case study in Santa Barbara Co., California. In: Hughes, H. Glenn;
Bonnicksen, Thomas M., eds. Restoration `89: the new management
challange: Proceedings, 1st annual meeting of the Society for Ecological
Restoration; 1989 January 16-20; Oakland, CA. Madison, WI: The
University of Wisconsin Arboretum, Society for Ecological Restoration:
338-348. [14710]
10. Duffield, J. W. 1953. Pine pollen collection dates--annual and
geographic variation. For. Res. Notes No. 85. Berkeley, CA: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, California Forest and Range
Experiment Station. 9 p. [17970]
11. Evarts, Bill. 1986. Torrey pines: resurrection or remission. Environment
Southwest. 514: 3-8. [5602]
12. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and
Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
13. Finney, Mark A.; Martin, Robert E. 1989. Fire history in a Sequoia
sempervirens forest at Salt Point State Park, California. Canadian
Journal of Forest Research. 19: 1451-1457. [9845]
14. 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]
15. Holland, Robert F. 1986. Preliminary descriptions of the terrestrial
natural communities of California. Sacramento, CA: California Department
of Fish and Game. 156 p. [12756]
16. Howald, Ann M.; D'Antonio, Carla. 1990. Designing a monitoring program
for a native plant community revegetation project. In: Hughes, H. Glenn;
Bonnicksen, Thomas M., eds. Restoration '89: the new management
challenge: Proceedings, 1st annual meeting of the Society for Ecological
Restoration; 1989 January 16-20; Oakland, CA. Madison, WI: The
University of Wisconsin Arboretum, Society for Ecological Restoration:
182-193. [14694]
17. Jenny, H.; Arkley, R. J.; Schultz, A. M. 1969. The pygmy forest-podsol
ecosystem and its dune associates of the Mendocino Coast. Madrono. 20:
60-74. [10726]
18. Keeley, Jon E.; Keeley, Sterling C. 1988. Chaparral. In: Barbour,
Michael G.; Billings, William Dwight, eds. North American terrestrial
vegetation. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press: 165-207.
[19545]
19. Krugman, Stanley L.; Jenkinson, James L. 1974. Pinaceae--pine family.
In: Schopmeyer, C. S., technical coordinator. Seeds of woody plants in
the United States. Agric. Handb. 450. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service: 598-637. [1380]
20. 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]
21. Little, Elbert L., Jr. 1975. Rare and local conifers in the United
States. Conservation Research Rep. No. 19. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 25 p. [15691]
22. Little, Elbert L., Jr. 1979. Checklist of United States trees (native
and naturalized). Agric. Handb. 541. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service. 375 p. [2952]
23. Linhart, Yan B. 1978. Maintenance of variation in cone morphology in
California closed-cone pines: the roles of fire, squirrels, and seed
output. Southwestern Naturalist. 23(1): 29-40. [19166]
24. Mason, Herbert L. 1927. Fossil records of some West American conifers.
Publications of the Carnegie Institute. 346: 139-159. [10707]
25. McCune, Bruce. 1988. Ecological diversity in North American pines.
American Journal of Botany. 75(3): 353-368. [5651]
26. McMillan, Calvin. 1956. The edaphic restriction of Cupressus and Pinus
in the Coast Ranges of central California. Ecological Monographs. 26:
177-212. [11884]
27. Menke, John W.; Villasenor, Ricardo. 1977. The California Mediterranean
ecosystem and its management. In: Mooney, Harold A.; Conrad, C. Eugene,
technical coordinators. Proc. of the symp. on the environmental
consequences of fire and fuel management in Mediterranean ecosystems;
1977 August 1-5; Palo Alto, CA. Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-3. Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 257-270. [4847]
28. Metcalf, Woodbridge. 1921. Notes on the bishop pine (Pinus muricata).
Journal of Forestry. 19(8): 886-902. [21352]
29. Millar, Constance I. 1986. The Californian closed cone pines (subsection
Oocarpae Little and Critchfield): a taxonomic history and review. Taxon.
35(4): 657-670. [5972]
30. Millar, Constance I. 1989. Allozyme variation of bishop pine associated
with pygmy-forest soils in northern California. Canadian Journal of
Forest Research. 19: 870-879. [8912]
31. Millar, Constance I.; Libby, William J. 1989. Disneyland or native
ecosystem: genetics and the restorationist. Restoration and Management
Notes. 7(1): 18-24. [8071]
32. Millar, Constance I.; Strauss, Steven H.; Conkle, M. Thompson; Westfall,
Robert D. 1988. Allozyme differentiation and biosystematics of the
California closed- cone pines (Pinus subsect. Oocarpae). Systematic
Biology. 13(3): 351-370. [5674]
33. Minnich, Richard A. 1987. The distribution of forest trees in northern
Baja California, Mexico. Madrono. 34(2): 98-127. [6985]
34. Jaynes, Richard A. 1971. Seed germination of six Kalmia species. Journal
of the American Society of Horticultural Science. 96(5): 668-672.
[14606]
35. Munz, Philip A. 1973. A California flora and supplement. Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press. 1905 p. [6155]
36. Paysen, Timothy E.; Derby, Jeanine A.; Black, Hugh, Jr.; [and others].
1980. A vegetation classification system applied to southern California.
Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-45. Berkeley, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station.
33 p. [1849]
37. Philbrick, Ralph N., Haller, J. R. 1977. The southern California
islands. In: Barbour, Michael G.; Malor, Jack, eds. Terrestrial
vegetation of California. New York: John Wiley and Sons: 893-906.
[7210]
38. Pinchot, Gifford. 1908. California swamp pine. Silvical Leaflet 30.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2 p.
[21354]
39. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant
geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
40. Shelbourne, C. J. A. 1974. Recent investigations of wood properties and
growth performance in Pinus muricata. New Zealand Journal of Forestry.
19(1): 13-45. [21355]
41. 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]
42. Thorne, Robert F. 1976. The vascular plant communities of California.
In: Latting, June, ed. Symposium proceedings: plant communities of
southern California; 1974 May 4; Fullerton, CA. Special Publication No.
2. Berkeley, CA: California Native Plant Society: 1-31. [3289]
43. 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]
44. Vogl, Richard J.; Armstrong, Wayne P.; White, Keith L.; Cole, Kenneth L.
1977. The closed-cone pines and cypress. In: Barbour, Michael G.; Major,
Jack, eds. Terrestrial vegetation of California. New York: John Wiley
and Sons: 295-358. [7219]
45. Wells, Philip V. 1962. Vegetation in relation to geological substratum
and fire in the San Luis Obispo Quadrangle, California. Ecological
Monographs. 32(1): 79-103. [14183]
46. Westman, W. E.; Whittaker, R. H. 1975. The pygmy forest region of
northern California: studies on biomass and primary productivity.
Journal of Ecology. 63: 493-520. [8186]
47. Zedler, Paul H. 1986. Closed-cone conifers of the chaparral. Fremontia.
14(3): 14-17. [18648]
Related categories for Species: Pinus muricata
| Bishop Pine
|
 |
