AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION : Pavek, Diane S. 1993. Carnegiea gigantea. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/ . ABBREVIATION : CARGIG SYNONYMS : Cerceus giganteus Engelm. SCS PLANT CODE : CEGI COMMON NAMES : saguaro sahuaro giant cactus pitahaya TAXONOMY : The currently accepted scientific name for saguaro is Carnegiea gigantea (Engelm.) Britt. & Rose . It is a member of the cactus family (Cactaceae). Carnegiea is a monotypic genus. There are no subspecies, varieties, or forms. LIFE FORM : Cactus FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS : No special status OTHER STATUS : NO-ENTRY
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCESPECIES: Carnegiea gigantea
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION : Saguaro occurs throughout most of the Sonoran Desert in Arizona, California, and Mexico [65,68]. The northern limits of its distribution are on the edge of the Hualapait Mountains in Arizona and along the Colorado River in southeastern California [30,32,40,65]. The range of saguaro extends southward; the largest populations of this species occur in Sonora, Mexico . ECOSYSTEMS : FRES30 Desert shrub STATES : AZ CA MEXICO BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS : 7 Lower Basin and Range KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS : K027 Mesquite bosque K041 Creosotebush K042 Creosotebush - bursage K043 Paloverde - cactus shrub K044 Creosotebush - tarbush SAF COVER TYPES : 241 Western live oak 242 Mesquite SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES : NO-ENTRY HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES : Saguaro is a dominant or codominant member of the paloverde (Cercidium spp.)/saguaro (also known as the spinose suffrutescent community) and the paloverde/bursage (Ambrosia spp.) desertscrub community types on bajadas (i.e., eroded outwash fans) [35,46,74,75,78]. Infrequently, on the southwestern edge of its range, saguaro occurs in creosotebush (Larrea spp.) communities as a xeroriparian species in arroyos and washes [3,5,11,46]. Saguaro is a community type indicator species in the following publication: Vegetation of the Santa Catalina Mountains: Community types and dynamics .
MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONSSPECIES: Carnegiea gigantea
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE : The flowers, fruits, and seeds of the saguaro are important food sources for wildlife, such as collared peccary, long-nosed bats, heteromyid rodents, western white-winged doves, woodpeckers, and insects [2,19,39,50,56]. Saguaro fruits comprised a small amount (e.g., 1 to 5 percent of collected rumen contents) of mule deer summer diets [38,60,63,79,80]. The fruits were also utilized by desert bighorn sheep; they were present in 10 percent of bighorn fecal pellets analyzed [44,83]. Saguaro provides nesting habitat for birds and small mammals . Saguaro mortality can have a high negative impact on bird species that use it for cover and nesting . PALATABILITY : Saguaro is highly palatable to rodents and jackrabbits; however, saguaro tissue contains oxalates that deter some herbivory [47,68]. NUTRITIONAL VALUE : The nutritional value of saguaro fruits is variable throughout the season and among studies. Saguaro fruits are moderately digestible . The amount of protein reported varied from 10 to 26 percent [33,80]. Acid detergent fiber amounts in the fruits varied from 26 to 62 percent, and dry matter was 11 to 35 percent [33,80]. COVER VALUE : Saguaro is considered a softwood snag . Cavity-nesting birds, especially woodpeckers, and sometimes woodrats nest in saguaro [12,31,43,49,50]. VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES : NO-ENTRY OTHER USES AND VALUES : Saguaro fruits were a major food staple of the Papago and Pima Indians; the fruits were processed (i.e., dried, fermented, canned) and stored for year-round use [18,21,32]. Seeds, rich in fat, were ground for use as flour and in porridges . Fruits were used for trade and in religious practices by the Papago Indians [21,57]. The internal heavy, woody ribs were used for firewood and building houses and fences [1,6,10]. Saguaro is grown in desert gardens as an ornamental . It is the state flower of Arizona and is used in commercial advertisements of Southwestern living . OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : Intensive grazing can prevent recruitment of saguaro seedlings . Various areas in the Sonoran Desert have been protected from domestic livestock grazing for 50 years or more. One early study showed that there was no significant (p>0.05) difference between saguaro abundance on protected and unprotected plots . More recent studies, however, have shown that saguaro increased by 33 to 200 percent in protected areas [27,77]. Saguaro seedlings may be impacted negatively when nurse plants are browsed . Models to predict saguaro age from growth parameters (for example, height-age equivalents) have been developed [28,69]. In transplant experiments, mortality was 100 percent for unshaded saguaro seedlings compared to 65 percent for shaded seedlings . Saguaro are susceptible to few diseases . Healthy saguaro often wall off larvae tunnels, woodpecker holes, or other wounds . Some necroses may occur, however, after mechanical damage to saguaro from breakage, frost, or lightning . Insects, saprophytic yeasts, molds, and bacteria readily inhabit and breed in saguaro necroses [24,66,72]. Temperatures below 23 degrees Fahrenheit (-5 deg C) will damage saguaro. Death will occur after exposure to below freezing temperatures for 29 or more consecutive hours . Fluctuations in saguaro numbers often are due to recurring catastrophic freezes [37,46,69]. Saguaro is protected under the Arizona Native Plant Law. Cactus poaching is of concern around Saguaro National Monument and urban centers . Natural environmental extremes in temperature and drought, however, are more of a threat to the survival of this species .
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICSSPECIES: Carnegiea gigantea
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS : Saguaro is a native, arborescent, stem succulent that grows from 9.8 to 52.5 feet (3-16 m) tall and 5.9 to 29.5 inches (5-75 cm) in diameter [6,10,64,65]. It is the largest of the columnar cacti growing in the United States . Saguaro has a deep anchoring taproot (up to 3.2 feet [1 m] deep) and extensive lateral roots (13 to 98 feet [4-30 m] long) [14,65]. The stems are simple with one to five (rarely up to 49) lateral, erect branches [6,10]. Saguaro trunks have many prominent ribs, armed with dense, stout spines that are up to 2.8 inches (7 cm) long [6,10,32]. Flowers are 3.4 to 4.9 inches (8.7-12.5 cm) long and occur at the ends of branches [6,32,45]. Fruits are oblong and contain up to 2,500 seeds [1,10]. RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM : Stem succulent REGENERATION PROCESSES : Saguaro reproduce sexually and are self-incompatible . Reproduction begins when a plant is approximately 7.2 feet (2.2 m) tall [29,68]. Growth is extremely slow [47,68]. At the end of 2 years, seedlings will be about 0.25 inch (0.6 cm) tall . At 3.2 feet (1 m), plants may be 20 to 50 years old . Flowers only develop at branch and main stem tips. An increase in branch number increases the reproductive potential of an individual . Many different animals pollinate the nocturnally blooming saguaro flowers and are detailed elsewhere [2,39,40]. Flowers are open for less than 24 hours . A plant averages four open flowers per day for about 30 days . Plants commonly have more than 100 fruits [47,68]. Seeds germinate readily . Conditions for germination are detailed elsewhere [1,89,91]. Saguaro seeds are short-lived; seed reserves are not maintained in the soil [58,76]. In random soil samples, relative densities of saguaro seeds were between 0.3 and 2.0 percent . Less than 1 percent of the annual seed production germinates due to predation or moisture stress [15,48]. Heavy seedfall can occur during the summer rains . Drought during the 12 to 14 months following germination is the most critical factor threatening seedling survival [48,67]. Perennial shrubs, such as foothills paloverde (Cercidium microphyllum), are important as nurse plants for facilitating saguaro establishment [22,29,36,62]. Seed dispersal by frugivorous birds is a primary factor in saguaro establishment beneath shrub canopies . Saguaro seedling density significantly (p<0.05) decreased from the center to the outer edges of nurse plant canopies . On the margins of its range, recruitment has not kept pace with mortality caused by freezing temperatures and drought [52,76]. Saguaro has lower fruit production at the drier western edge of its range . In some areas where cattle grazing has not occurred, recruitment appeared to occur in pulses correlated with above-normal precipitation . SITE CHARACTERISTICS : Compared to other columnar cacti, saguaro occurs over the broadest range of habitats from gently sloping alluvial flats of the lower bajadas to steep, rocky, high-elevation volcanic slopes [51,53,74]. The greatest densities of saguaro are found in the more mesic eastern parts of its range . Saguaro occurs on shallow soils that are light, coarse-textured, and rocky. The soils are underlain at 3.2 to 9.6 feet (1-3 m) depths by an impervious caliche layer [8,88]. There is usually no differentiation of the soil into horizons [87,88]. Saguaro is found at elevations from 1,640 to 5,000 feet (500-1,525 m) [35,50,56,86]. Saguaro has been reported on all aspects [77,88]. However, most individuals occur on open east- and west-facing slopes, and the fewest occur on north-facing slopes [6,77,86]. The Sonoran Desert is a warm desert with a semiarid to arid continental or an arid subtropical climate [27,67,82]. Precipitation is bimodal, falling December to February and July to August, and amounts vary from year to year [19,42,51]. Average amounts of rain per year are 6 to 15 inches (152-400 mm) [3,14,42,84]. Common arborescent associated species are Organ Pipe Cactus (Lemierocereus thurberi), barrelcactus (Ferocactus wislizeni), cholla (Opuntia spp.), ocotillo (Fouqueria splendens), catclaw acacia (Acacia greggii), ironwood (Olneya tesota), and jojoba (Simmondsia chinensis) [8,13,26,50]. Other associated species are littleleaf krameria (Krameria parvifolia), fluffgrass (Erioneuron pulchellum), tobosa (Hilaria mutica), Indian-wheat (Plantago insularis), and thelypody (Thelypodium lasiophyllum) [13,23,61]. SUCCESSIONAL STATUS : Obligate Climax Series Succession in desert systems is difficult to define . Saguaro may be considered a climax species. Establishing in the shade of perennial shrubs, saguaro usually outlives and surpasses the nurse plants. Regeneration of saguaro continues in suitable areas of its range. SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT : Saguaro flowers from late April to June [1,32,39,45]. Fruits mature during June and July before the summer rains [6,65]. Most growth of saguaro occurs during the summer rainy season .
FIRE ECOLOGYSPECIES: Carnegiea gigantea
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS : Saguaro is not truly adapted to fire because there is no postfire stimulation of flowering or seed production . It has several prominent morphological characteristics, however, that may aid its survival when burned. The apex is protected to some degree by tissue folds and spines. Vascular tissue is protected by a thick cortex that has a high thermal capacity close to that of water. As saguaro ages, ribs at the base of a plant may develop a woody bark which is more resistant to burning than young tissue . Although mortally injured by fire, death may be delayed if the saguaro can live off of its reserves, which may enable a plant to flower for 1 to 6 years more . Singed saguaro have been observed to flower from unburned branches. However, scorched plants may die due to reduced vigor . Fire may remove spines from a saguaro, making it vulnerable to herbivory . Nurse plant species influence saguaro fire survival. Although desert fire temperatures are variable, fire temperatures beneath foothills paloverde were lower than under triangleleaf bursage (Ambrosia deltoidea) . Fire-free periods in the Sonoran Desert are greater than 250 years . Saguaro would be eliminated under a fire frequency of less than 30 years . Fires that do occur are usually of low intensity due to small fuel loads . POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY : Tree without adventitious-bud root crown Secondary colonizer - off-site seed
FIRE EFFECTSSPECIES: Carnegiea gigantea
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT : Fire top-kills saguaro, and it may kill existing seedlings . Because there is a lag time between time of injury by fire and time of death, postfire mortality may be underestimated . Small saguaro, less than 6.6 to 13 feet (2-4 m) tall, with large amounts of fuel at the plant base do not survive. Larger saguaro may survive with limited damage [16,41]. DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT : NO-ENTRY PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE : Postfire recovery is dependent upon individual plant recovery and seed dispersal from unburned plants . Surviving saguaro with little or no injury will resume growth . Absorption of rain following fire-caused injuries can result in fire scars splitting, which opens the plant to insects and infections . Vegetation surveys done the third and fourth years following an early summer fire found no sprouting of saguaro and no seedlings . Two studies that compared burn and adjacent wildfire areas 2 years after prescribed burning found that 100 percent of saguaro present in plots had died. Plots were read before and after fire. There were no sprouts or seedlings [16,17]. DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE : NO-ENTRY FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : Fire would be an effective tool to control saguaro invasion or density [68,73]. Along major highways in Arizona, motorist-caused fires have completely eliminated the saguaro over large areas .
REFERENCESSPECIES: Carnegiea gigantea
1. Alcorn, Stanley M.; Martin, S. Clark. 1974. Cereus giganteus Engelm. saguaro. 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: 313-314.  2. Alcorn, Stanley M.; McGregor, S. E.; Olin, George. 1961. Pollination of saguaro cactus by doves, nectar-feeding bats, and honey bees. Science. 133: 1594-1595.  3. Asplund, Kenneth K.; Gooch, Michael T. 1988. Geomorphology and the distributional ecology of Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii) in a desert riparian canyon. Desert Plants. 9(1): 17-27.  4. Baisan, Christopher H.; Swetnam, Thomas W. 1990. Fire history on a desert mountain range: Rincon Mountain Wilderness, Arizona, U.S.A. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 20: 1559-1569.  5. Bennett, Peter S.; Kunzmann, Michael R.; Johnson, R. Roy. 1989. Relative nature of wetlands: riparian and vegetational considerations. In: Abell, Dana L., technical coordinator. Protection, management, and restoration for the 1990's: Proceedings of the California riparian systems conference; 1988 September 22-24; Davis, CA. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-110. Berkeley, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station: 140-142.  6. Benson, Lyman. 1982. The cacti of the United States and Canada. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. 1044 p.  7. 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.  8. Blydenstein, John; Hungerford, C. Roger; Day, Gerald I.; Humphrey, R. 1957. Effect of domestic livestock exclusion on vegetation in the Sonoran Desert. Ecology. 38(3): 522-526.  9. Bock, Carl E.; Bock, Jane H. 1990. Effects of fire on wildlife in southwestern lowland habitats. In: Krammes, J. S., technical coordinator. Effects of fire management of Southwestern natural resources: Proceedings of the symposium; 1988 November 15-17; Tucson, AZ. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-191. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 50-64.  10. Britton, N. L.; Rose, J. N. 1920. The cactaceae. New York: Dover Publications, Inc. 4 vols.  11. Brown, David E.; Lowe, Charles H.; Hausler, Janet F. 1977. Southwestern riparian communities: their biotic importance and management in Arizona. In: Johnson, R. Roy; Jones, Dale A., tech. coords. Importance, preservation and management of riparian habitat: a symposium: Proceedings; 1977 July 9; Tucson, AZ. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-43. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment 201-211.  12. Brush, Timothy; Anderson, Bertin W.; Ohmart, Robert D. 1983. Habitat selection related to resource availability among cavity- nesting birds. In: Davis, Jerry W.; Goodwin, Gregory A.; Ockenfeis, Richard A., technical coordinators. Snag habitat management: proceedings of the symposium; 1983 June 7-9; Flagstaff, AZ. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-99. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 88-98.  13. Buchmann, Stephen L. 1987. Floral biology of jojoba (Simmondsia chinensis), an anemophilous plant. Desert Plants. 8(3): 111-124.  14. Cannon, William Austin. 1911. The root habits of desert plants. Washington, DC: The Carnegie Institution of Washington. 96 p.  15. Castellanos, A. E.; Molina, F. E. 1990. Differential survivorship and establishment in Simmondsia chinensis (jojoba). Journal of Arid Environments. 19: 65-76.  16. Cave, George Harold, III. 1982. Ecological effects of fire in the upper Sonoran Desert. Tempe, AZ: Arizona State University. 124 p. Thesis.  17. Cave, George H.; Patten, Duncan T. 1984. Short-term vegetation responses to fire in the upper Sonoran Desert. Journal of Range Management. 37(6): 491-496.  18. Cornejo, Dennis O.; Leigh, Linda S.; Felger, Richard S.; Hutchinson, Charles F. 1982. Utilization of mesquite in the Sonoran Desert: past and future. In: Parker, Harry W., editor. Mesquite utilization 1982: Proceedings of the symposium; 1982 October 29-30; Lubbock, TX. Lubbock, TX: Texas Tech University, College of Agricultural Sciences: Q-1-Q-20.  19. Eddy, Thomas A. 1961. Foods and feeding patterns of the collared peccary in southern Arizona. Journal of Wildlife Management. 25: 248-257.  20. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p.  21. Felger, R. S. 1977. Mesquite in Indian cultures of southwestern North America. In: Simpson, B. B., ed. Mesquite: Its biology in two desert ecosystems. US/IBP Synthesis 4. Stroudsburg, PA: Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, Inc: 150-176.  22. Franco, A. C.; Nobel, P. S. 1989. Effect of nurse plants on the microhabit and growth of cacti. Journal of Ecology. 77: 870-886.  23. Frost, William E.; Smith, E. Lamar. 1991. Biomass productivity and range condition on range sites in southern Arizona. Journal of Range Management. 44(1): 64-67.  24. Ganter, Philip F.; Starmer, William T.; Lachance, Marc-Andre; Phaff, Herman J. 1986. Yeast comm. from host plants & associated Drosophila in s. AZ: new isolations & analy. of the rela. imp. of hosts & vectors on comm. comp. Oecologia. 70: 386-392.  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.  26. Gentry, Howard Scott. 1958. The natural history of jojoba (Simmondsia chinensis) and its cultural aspects. Economic Botany. 12(3): 261-295.  27. Goldberg, Deborah E.; Turner, Raymond M. 1986. Vegetation change and plant demography in permanent plots in the Sonoran Desert. Ecology. 67(3): 695-712.  28. Hastings, James Rodney; Alcorn, Stanley M. 1961. Physical determinations of growth and age in the giant cactus. Journal of the Arizona Academy of Science. 2: 32-39.  29. Hutto, Richard L.; McAuliffe, Joseph R.; Hogan, Lynee. 1986. Distributional associates of the saguaro (Carnegiea gigantea). Southwestern Naturalist. 31(4): 469-476.  30. Johnson, Hyrum B. 1976. Vegetation and plant communities of southern California deserts--a functional view. 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: 125-164.  31. Johnson, R. Roy; Haight, Lois T.; Riffey, Meribeth M.; Simpson, James M. 1980. Brushland/steppe bird populations. 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: 98-112.  32. Kearney, Thomas H.; Peebles, Robert H.; Howell, John Thomas; McClintock, Elizabeth. 1960. Arizona flora. 2d ed. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1085 p.  33. Krausman, Paul R.; Ordway, Leonard L.; Whiting, Frank M.; Brown, William H. 1990. Nutritional compostition of desert mule deer forage in the Picacho Mountains, Arizona. Desert Plants. 10(1): 32-34.  34. 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.  35. Lowe, Charles H.; Holm, Peter A. 1991. The amphibians and reptiles at Saguaro National Monument, Arizona. Technical Report No. 37. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona, School of Renewable Natural Resources, Cooperative National Park Resources Study Unit. 20 p.  36. McAuliffe, Joseph R. 1988. Markovian dynamics of simple and complex desert plant communities. American Naturalist. 131(4): 459-490.  37. McAuliffe, Joseph R.; Janzen, Fredric J. 1986. Effects of intraspecific crowding on water uptake, water storage, apical growth, and reprod. potential in the Sahuaro cactus, Carnegiea gigantea. Botanical Gazette. 147(3): 334-341.  38. McCulloch, Clay Y. 1973. Part I: Seasonal diets of mule and white-tailed deer. In: Deer nutrition in Arizona chaparral and desert habitats. Special Report No. 3. Phoenix, AZ: Arizona Game and Fish Department: 1-37.  39. McGregor, S. E.; Alcorn, Stanley M.; Kurtz, Edwin B., Jr.; Butler, George D., Jr. 1959. Bee visitors to Saguaro flowers. Journal of Economic Entomology. 52(5): 1002-1004.  40. McGregor, S. E.; Alcorn, Stanley M.; Olin, George. 1962. Pollination and pollinating agents of the saguaro. Ecology. 43(2): 259-267.  41. McLaughlin, Steven P.; Bowers, Janice E. 1982. Effects of wildfire on a Sonoran Desert plant community. Ecology. 63(1): 246-248.  42. McLaughlin, Steven P.; Bowers, Janice E. 1990. A floristic analysis and checklist for the northern Santa Rita Mountains, Pima Co., Arizona. Southwestern Naturalist. 35(1): 61-75.  43. Meents, Julie K.; Anderson, Bertin W.; Ohmart, Robert D. 1984. Sensitivity of riparian birds to habitat loss. In: Warner, Richard E.; Hendrix, Kathleen M., eds. California riparian systems: Ecology, conservation, and productive management: Proceedings of a conference; 1981 September 17-19; Davis, CA. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press: 619-625.  44. Miller, Gary D.; Gaud, William S. 1989. Composition and variability of desert bighorn sheep diets. Journal of Wildlife Management. 53(3): 597-606.  45. Munz, Philip A. 1973. A California flora and supplement. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1905 p.  46. Niering, William A.; Lowe, Charles H. 1984. Vegetation of the Santa Catalina Mountains: community types and dynamics. Vegetatio. 58: 3-28.  47. Niering, W. A.; Whittaker, R. H.; Lowe, C. H. 1963. The saguaro: a population in relation to environment. Science. 142(3588): 15-23.  48. Nobel, Park S. 1988. Environmental biology of agaves and cacti. New York: Cambridge University Press. 270 p.  49. Olsen, Ronald W. 1973. Shelter-site selection in the white-throated woodrat, Neotoma albigula. Journal of Mammalogy. 54: 594-610.  50. Parker, Kathleen C. 1986. Partitioning of foraging space and nest sites in a desert shrubland bird community. American Midland Naturalist. 115(2): 255-267.  51. Parker, Kathleen C. 1988. Environmental relationships and vegetation associates of columnar cacti in the northern Sonoran Desert. Vegetatio. 78: 125-140.  52. Parker, Kathleen C. 1989. Height structure and reproductive characteristics of senita, Lophocereus schottii (Cactaceae), in southern Arizona. Southwestern Naturalist. 34(3): 392-401.  53. Parker, Kathleen C. 1991. Topography, substrate, and vegetation patterns in the northern Sonoran Desert. Journal of Biogeography. 18: 151-163.  54. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p.  55. Rea, Amadeo M. 1991. Gila River Pima dietary reconstruction. Arid Lands Newsletter. 31: 3-10.  56. Reichman, O. J. 1975. Relation of desert rodent diets to available resources. Journal of Mammalogy. 56(4): 731-751.  57. Robinett, Dan. 1990. Tohono O'odham range history. Rangelands. 12(6): 296-300.  58. Rogers, Garry F. 1985. Mortality of burned Cereus giganteus. Ecology. 66(2): 630-631.  59. Rogers, Garry F.; Steele, Jeff. 1980. Sonoran Desert fire ecology. In: Stokes, Marvin A.; Dieterich, John H., technical coordinators. Proceedings of the fire history workshop; 1980 October 20-24; Tucson, AZ. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-81. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 15-19.  60. Scarbrough, David L.; Krausman, Paul R. 1988. Sexual segregation by desert mule deer. Southwestern Naturalist. 33(2): 157-165.  61. Shantz, H. L.; Piemeisel, R. L. 1924. Indicator significance of the natural vegetation of the Southwestern desert region. Journal of Agricultural Research. 28(8): 721-803.  62. Sherbrooke, Wade C. 1989. Seedling survival and growth of a Sonoran Desert shrub, jojoba (Simmondsia chinensis), during the first 10 years. Southwestern Naturalist. 34(3): 421-424.  63. Short, Henry L. 1979. Deer in Arizona and New Mexico: their ecology and a theory explaining recent population decreases. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-70. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 25 p.  64. Shreve, Forrest. 1942. The desert vegetation of North America. Botanical Review. 8(4): 195-246.  65. Shreve, F.; Wiggins, I. L. 1964. Vegetation and flora of the Sonoran Desert. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. 2 vols.  66. Starmer, William T.; Phaff, Herman J.; Bowles, Jane M.; Lachance, Marc-Andre. 1988. Yeasts vectored by insects feeding on decaying saguaro cactus. Southwestern Naturalist. 33(3): 362-363.  67. Steenbergh, Warren F.; Lowe, Charles H. 1976. Ecology of the saguaro: I. The role of freezing weather in a warm-desert plant population. In: Research in the Parks: Transactions of the National Park Centennial symposium; 1971 December 28-29. National Park Service Symposium Series No. 1. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior: 49-92.  68. Steenbergh, Warren F.; Lowe, Charles H. 1977. Ecology of the saguaro: II. Reproduction, germination, establishment, and survival of the young plant. National Park Service Scientific Monograph Series Number 8. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 242 p.  69. Kettle, W. Dean; Fitch, Henry S. 1983. Field research and prairie investigations at the University of Kansas. In: Kucera, Clair L., ed. Proceedings of the 7th North American prairie conference; 1980 August 4-6; Springfield, MO. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri: 107-112.  70. 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.  71. Taylor, Alan R. 1974. Ecological aspects of lightning in forests. In: Proceedings, annual Tall Timbers fire ecology conference; 1973 March 22-23; Tallahassee, FL. No. 13. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station: 455-482.  72. Taylor, Alan R. 1974. Forest fire. In: McGraw-Hill Yearbook of Science and Technology. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc: ?.  73. Thomas, P. A. 1991. Response of succulents to fire: a review. International Journal of Wildland Fire. 1(1): 11-22.  74. Tomoff, Carl S. 1974. Avian species diversity in desert scrub. Ecology. 55: 396-403.  75. Turner, Raymond M. 1982. Mohave desertscrub. In: Brown, David E., ed. Biotic communities of the American Southwest--United States and Mexico. Desert Plants. 4(1-4): 157-168.  76. Turner, Raymond M. 1990. Long-term vegetation change at a fully protected Sonoran Desert site. Ecology. 7(2): 464-477.  77. Turner, Raymond M.; Bowers, Janice E. 1988. Long-term changes in populations of Carnegiea gigantea, exotic plant spp. & Cercidium floridum at the Desert Lab, Tumamoc, Tucson, Arizona. In: Whitehead, E. E.; [and others], eds. Arid lands: Proceedings of the conference; 1985; Tucson, AZ. [Place of publication unknown]: Westview Press: 445-455.  78. Turner, Raymond M.; Brown, David E. 1982. Sonoran desertscrub. In: Brown, David E., ed. Biotic communities of the American Southwest--United States and Mexico. Desert Plants. 4(1-4): 181-221.  79. Urness, Philip J. 1973. Part II: Chemical analyses and in vitro digestibility of seasonal deer forages. In: Deer nutrition in Arizona chaparral and desert habitats. Special Report 3. Phoenix, AZ: Arizona Game and Fish Department: 39-52.  80. Urness, P. J.; McCulloch, C. Y. 1973. Part III: Nutritional value of seasonal deer diets. In: Special Report 3. Deer nutrition in Arizona chaparral and desert habitats. Phoenix, AZ: Arizona Game and Fish Department: 53-68.  81. 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.  82. Villa-Salas, Avelino B.; Manon-Garibay, A. Cecilia. 1980. Multiresource management research in northern Sonora. In: IUFRO/MAB conference: research on multiple use of forest resources: Proceedings; 1980 May 18-23; Flagstaff, AZ. Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-25. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 20-25.  83. Wallmo, Olof C. 1975. Important game animals and related recreation in arid shrublands of the United States. In: Hyder, D. N., ed. Arid shrublands: Proceedings, 3rd workshop of the United States/Australia Rangelands Panel; 1973 March 26-April 5; Tuscon, AZ. Denver, CO: Society for Range Management: 98-107.  84. Warren, Peter L.; Anderson, L. Susan. 1985. Gradient analysis of a Sonoran Desert wash. In: Johnson, R. Roy; [and others], technical coordinators. Riparian ecosystems & their mgmt: reconciling conflicting issues: Proceedings, 1st North American riparian conference; 1985 April 16-18; Tucson, AZ. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-120. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 150-155.  85. Wells, Philip V. 1974. Post-glacial origin of the present Chihuahuan Desert less than 11,500 years ago. In: Wauer, Roland H.; Riskind, David H., eds. Transactions of the symposium on the biological resources of the Chihuahuan Desert region, United States and Mexico; 1974 October 17-18; Alpine, TX. Transactions and Proceedings Series No. 3. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service: 67-83.  86. Whittaker, R. H.; Niering, W. A. 1965. Vegetation of the Santa Catalina Mountains, Arizona: a gradient analysis of the south slope. Ecology. 46: 429-452.  87. Yang, Tien Wei; Lowe, Charles H., Jr. 1955. Correlation of major vegetation climaxes with soil characteristics in the Sonoran Desert. Science. 123: 542.  88. Yeaton, Richard I.; Travis, J.; Gilinsky, Ellen. 1977. Competition and spacing in plant communities: the Arizona upland association. Journal of Ecology. 65: 587-595.  89. Young, James A.; Young, Cheryl G. 1986. Collecting, processing and germinating seeds of wildland plants. Portland, OR: Timber Press. 236 p.  90. Anon. 1992. King of cactuses. National Geographic. 182(5): [Pages unknown].  91. Heit, C. E. 1970. Laboratory germination of barrel and saguaro cactus seed. Ass. Off. Seed Anal. News Letter. 44(4): 11-15.