Index of Species Information

SPECIES:  Actaea rubra

Introductory

SPECIES: Actaea rubra
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION : Crane, M. F. 1990. Actaea rubra. 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 : ACTRUB SYNONYMS : NO-ENTRY SCS PLANT CODE : ACRU2 COMMON NAMES : red baneberry cohosh red cohosh necklaceweed snakeberry poison de couleuvre TAXONOMY : The currently accepted scientific name of red baneberry is Actaea rubra (Aiton) Willd. [32,38,40,57,67]. In the past there has been disagreement over how the closely related members of this genus should be recognized. Within the species, two subspecies, ssp. arguta and ssp. rubra, are sometimes defined [40]. Many authors do not consider subspecies designation necessary [32,38,57,67]. Subspecies will not be considered separately here. LIFE FORM : Forb FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS : No special status OTHER STATUS : NO-ENTRY


DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE

SPECIES: Actaea rubra
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION : Red baneberry is found in moist woods in the Northern Temperate Zone of North America and Eurasia [57,59].  Its range in western North America extends from Alaska south through the Coast Ranges and the Sierra Nevada in California through the Rocky Mountains to Arizona and New Mexico.  It is distributed transcontinentally across northern North America from the West Coast to New England and Labrador.  In the East and Midwest, it reaches its southern limits in New Jersey, Indiana, Iowa, and Kansas [32,38,57,72]. ECOSYSTEMS :    FRES11  Spruce - fir    FRES18  Maple - beech - birch    FRES19  Aspen - birch    FRES20  Douglas-fir    FRES21  Ponderosa pine    FRES22  Western white pine    FRES23  Fir - spruce    FRES25  Larch    FRES26  Lodgepole pine    FRES27  Redwood STATES :      AK  AZ  CA  CO  CT  HI  ID  IN  IA  KS      ME  MA  MI  MN  MT  NE  NH  NJ  NM  NY      ND  OH  OR  PA  RI  SD  UT  VT  WA  WV      WI  WY  AB  BC  LB  MB  NB  NF  NS  ON      PE  PQ  KS BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :     1  Northern Pacific Border     2  Cascade Mountains     3  Southern Pacific Border     4  Sierra Mountains     5  Columbia Plateau     8  Northern Rocky Mountains     9  Middle Rocky Mountains    11  Southern Rocky Mountains    12  Colorado Plateau    14  Great Plains    15  Black Hills Uplift    16  Upper Missouri Basin and Broken Lands KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :    K002  Cedar - hemlock - Douglas-fir forest    K003  Silver fir - Douglas-fir forest    K005  Mixed conifer forest    K006  Redwood forest    K007  Red fir forest    K008  Lodgepole pine - subalpine forest    K012  Douglas-fir forest    K013  Cedar - hemlock - pine forest    K014  Grand fir - Douglas-fir forest    K015  Western spruce - fir forest    K018  Pine - Douglas-fir forest    K020  Spruce - fir - Douglas-fir forest    K021  Southwestern spruce - fir forest    K093  Great Lakes spruce - fir forest    K095  Great Lakes pine forest    K106  Northern hardwoods    K107  Northern hardwoods - fir forest SAF COVER TYPES :      5  Balsam fir     16  Aspen     18  Paper birch     21  Eastern white pine     25  Sugar maple - beech - yellow birch     26  Sugar maple - basswood    107  White spruce    204  Black spruce    205  Mountain hemlock    206  Engelmann spruce - subalpine fir    210  Interior Douglas-fir    211  White fir    212  Western larch    213  Grand fir    215  Western white pine    216  Blue spruce    217  Aspen    219  Limber pine    221  Red alder    222  Black cottonwood - willow    224  Western hemlock    226  Coastal true fir - hemlock    228  Western redcedar    229  Pacific Douglas-fir    230  Douglas-fir - western hemlock    232  Redwood    235  Cottonwood - willow SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES : NO-ENTRY HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES : Presence of red baneberry frequently indicates moist sites [35,75].  In British Columbia's subboreal spruce (Picea glauca x engelmannii) zone, its presence may differentiate seral stages of the spruce/devil's club (Oplopanax horridus) ecosystem from other seral, mesic spruce ecosystems [33].  Publications listing red baneberry as an indicator or dominant part of vegetation in community types (cts), habitat types (hts), plant associations (pas), forest ecosystem associations (eas), or riparian site types (rst) are listed below: Coniferous forest habitat types of northern Utah [51]. Forest habitat types of eastern Idaho-western Wyoming [70]. Forest habitat types of Montana [60].

MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS

SPECIES: Actaea rubra
WOOD PRODUCTS VALUE : IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE : Red baneberry's overall importance to livestock and wildlife is low, since it is not normally abundant.  In Montana, elk utilize red baneberry foliage in the fall because it remains green after early frosts.  Elk use in summer is more limited [46,82].  In Utah mule deer use of red baneberry was moderate; it was eaten most frequently in the fall [47,68].  White-tailed deer consume a moderate amount of red baneberry.  Its value to pronghorn is poor [35]. Livestock use of red baneberry is low [21,71].  There are reports of horses eating it in Montana and sheep eating it in Idaho.  However, it is not normally grazed unless other forage is scarce [20]. Red baneberry fruit is consumed by several bird species including the yellow-bellied sapsucker, American robin, wood thrush, gray-cheeked thrush, brown thrasher, gray catbird, and grouse [50,81].  Some small mammals also eat the berries including deer mice, white-footed mice, red squirrel, eastern chipmunks, and red-backed voles [50,81].  Several species of birds that use baneberry eat the fruit but void the seeds, while some of the small mammals remove and eat the seeds leaving the the pulp [81]. PALATABILITY : Palatability to elk in Montana and to mule deer in Utah is highest in the fall [68,82].  Red baneberry has low palatability to domestic sheep and cattle [71].  The relish and degree of use shown by livestock and wildlife species for red baneberry in two western states is rated as follows [21]:                         CO         UT       Cattle                 poor       poor     Sheep                  poor       fair     Horses                 poor       poor     Pronghorn              ----       poor     Elk                    ----       fair     Mule deer              ----       fair     Small mammals          ----       fair     Small nongame birds    ----       good     Upland game birds      ----       fair     Waterfowl              ----       poor     NUTRITIONAL VALUE : Red baneberry's energy and protein value are rated as poor [21].  Red baneberry's name comes from a poisonous essential oil or glycoside (protoanemonin) found in all parts of the plant but most concentrated in the berries and root [43,72].  Symptoms of poisoning include gastroenteritis, stomach cramps, headache, dizziness, vomiting, diarrhea and circulatory failure [72]. COVER VALUE : Red baneberry provides fair cover for small nongame birds and mammals in Utah but poor cover for upland game birds and big game mammals [21]. VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES : In some western states red baneberry is listed as having low to moderate value for erosion control and revegetation potential, with moderate biomass production [21].  Growth is listed as good on gentle slopes and fair on moderate and steep slopes [21].  The plant is easily grown from seed [44].  Stratification and a very moist seeding mixture are necessary for germination [24,86].  The rootstock or caudex is easy to transplant in the fall or spring when the plant is dormant [87]. OTHER USES AND VALUES : Red baneberry has attractive foliage and brilliantly beautiful berries. The berries are unpalatable and can cause illness to people eating them [7,37].  With due caution for its poisonous attributes, red baneberry is easily grown in woodland gardens and very attractive when interspersed with ferns [7,44,48,54]. Native Americans in Alberta and British Columbia used a weak decoction made from the roots as a stimulant in treating colds, arthritis, syphilis, rheumatism, and emaciation.  They also chewed leaves and put them on boils and wounds to stimulate blood flow into the area [88]. OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : Red baneberry does not appear to compete seriously with young conifers [62].  Following various logging treatments in northwestern Montana, red baneberry's presence decreased, but it maintained or very slightly increased its cover [29,30].  The limited information on the effects of various treatments seems to indicate that mechanical site preparation may uproot plants and decrease the cover of red baneberry [33,56].

BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS

SPECIES: Actaea rubra
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS : Red baneberry is a deciduous, perennial herb, usually from 1 to 3 feet (4-10 dm) tall with one to several branched stems [37,38].  Perennating tissue appears to be a vertical caudex just under the soil surface [Stickney, P., pers. comm. 1990] but has also been described as a rootstock [37,38] or a rhizome [72].  The leaves are alternate, two to three times compound, sharply toothed and lobed. The flowers have small white petals, showy stamens, and a roselike fragrance [59].  Flowers are borne in a terminal or axillary raceme and pollinated by a variety of insects [59].  These flowers can be self-fertile, although they are not capable of apomixis [59].  In Michigan the most common pollinator is an introduced beetle (Phyllobius oblongus), which uses the inflorescences as mating sites and does not ingest the pollen.  Fruit set is normally close to 100 percent [59]. The fruits are showy, poisonous, red or occasionally white berries [38,58].  Each berry contains 9 to 16 red-brown, sector-shaped seeds 0.1 to 1.5 inches (3-4 mm) long [32,72]. RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :       Geophyte REGENERATION PROCESSES : The seed of red baneberry requires a dormant period and usually takes 2 years to germinate [86].  During a laboratory study of seed collected in the fall, germination began 243 days following sowing.  Only 8.8 percent of the seeds germinated; survival was 50 percent in the sun and 64.3 percent in the shade [61].  Seedling growth was good in both sun and shade.  While survival was better in the shade, seedlings in the sun were slightly larger and had more biomass allocated to roots [61]. Seedlings begin to bloom in their third year [86]. The fruit appears to be adapted to bird dispersal, although in the only recent study of fruit use, insect and small mammal predation of seeds was higher than use of the pulp by birds.  Fruit color did not seem to be related to the amount of insect predation, fruit weight, number of fruits per stem, or seeds per fruit; however, nocturnal use of white fruit was higher [81].  Chipmunks may bury the seed [87]. SITE CHARACTERISTICS : Red baneberry grows best on cool, moist, nutrient-rich sites [6,13,20,34,51,62].  Along the West Coast, these sites are moister and richer than mesic and mesotrophic [62,77].  In the dense forest areas of southeastern Alaska red baneberry grows on open streambanks and in meadows [74].  In British Columbia it grows under spruce, spruce and black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), or spruce, subalpine fir, and aspen (Populus tremuloides) forests with black twinberry (Lonicera involucrata), thimbleberry (Rubus parviflorus), bluejoint reedgrass (Calamagrostis canadensis), and horsetails (Equisetum spp.) [36,62].  On the west slope of the Rocky Mountains in Washington, it grows with ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) and Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) in river canyons extending out into the grasslands [78].  In Oregon it is identified as an indicator of moist sites with cold soil temperatures [28,52].  In the South Umpqua River Basin of southwestern Oregon, it is found only on such sites [52].  In Oregon it may also be found in seepage, marshy, and other moist areas with red alder (Alnus rubra), bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), vine maple (A. circinatum), and sedges (Carex spp.) [4].  In the Siskiyou Mountains of Oregon and California, it occurs at middle elevations, from 3,950 to 5,950 feet (1,200-1,800 m) on diorite soils under relatively open stands dominated by Douglas-fir and white fir (Abies concolor) [80].  It also extends to high-elevation sites dominated by red fir (A. magnifica) [6].  It is tolerant of low light intensity in the coastal redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) region [77]. In the northern Rocky Mountains it is an understory species in moist and very moist subalpine forests and riparian areas [8,26,64,71,76,83,84]. It appears to grow equally well on north and south exposures [55].  In the Rocky Mountain subalpine fir forests of eastern Washington and Idaho it is only found with the moist-site shrubs and herbs that Daubenmire and Daubenmire [19] called the "Pachistima union" [28].  In Alberta it grows under climax white spruce (Picea glauca) in valleys and lower slopes [53].  Red baneberry is a dominant herb in very moist aspen stands in the Black Hills [66].  In Utah it can be found in mountain brush, willow-birch (Betula spp.), aspen, Douglas-fir, limber pine (Pinus flexilis), subalpine fir, and Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii) communities [79].  In the southern Rocky Mountains of New Mexico, red baneberry grows in corkbark fir (A. lasiocarpa var arizonica) and Engelmann spruce forests with Senecio sanguisorboides, twinberry, wolf currant (Ribes wolfii), and gooseberry currant (R. montigenum) [22].  Other plants frequently associated with it in the Rocky Mountains include pachistima (Pachistima myrsinites), baldhip rose (Rosa gymnocarpa), woods rose (R. woodsii), narrowleaf cottonwood (Populus angustifolia), aspen, blue spruce (Picea pungens), grand fir (Abies grandis), blue huckleberry (Vaccinium globulare), thinleaf alder (Alnus incana ssp. tenuifolia), willows (Salix spp.), redosier dogwood (Cornus sericea), black twinberry, Drummond willow (Salix drummondiana), sweetscented bedstraw (Galium triflorum), western meadowrue (Thalictrum occidentale), starry solomon plume (Smilacina stellata), and mountain bluebells (Mertensia ciliata). In Minnesota baneberry (Actaea spp.) grows on a wide range of sites but prefers partial to full shade and moderately moist, nutrient-rich soils [9].  Red baneberry is not one of the most important herbs, but it is scattered throughout red and white pine (Pinus resinosa and P. strobus) forests and forests dominated by sugar maple (Acer saccharum) and other hardwoods from Minnesota to New England [11,17,18,69].  In Wisconsin where its range overlaps that of white baneberry (Actaea pachypoda), red baneberry's presence is highest in boreal forest, while white baneberry is more common in mesic, northern Wisconsin, mixed-hardwood forests [15].  In the Saint Lawrence Valley it is normally restricted to climax or near climax forest [16].  In northeastern Saskatchewan it is found near lake and stream margins with willows, sedges, and reedgrass (Calamagrostis spp.) [5]. In Colorado and Utah red baneberry's growth is fair to good on sandy loam, loam and clay loam soils and poor to fair on gravel, sand, clay, and dense clay [21].  Its growth is best on organic and acidic soils that are at least 20 inches (51 cm) deep and poor on saline or sodic soils [21]. Elevational ranges in some western regions are [13,21,37,57]:                      Minimum                   Maximum                    feet       meters         feet      meters Alberta            1,650        500           4,900     1,500 California         sea level                 10,000     3,048 Colorado           7,000      2,134          11,500     3,505 Montana            4,500      1,372           6,600     2,012 New Mexico         8,000      2,438           9,500     2,896 Utah               4,500      1,372          10,000     3,048 Wyoming            4,500      1,372          12,300     3,750 SUCCESSIONAL STATUS : Facultative Seral Species Throughout its range, red baneberry is found in both early seral and mature forests [11,15,16,18,36,53,62,69,77].  Results of a study in southwestern Oregon indicated that red baneberry cover was similar at light levels ranging from full sunlight to less than 3.5 percent of full sunlight [23].  In northern Idaho the amount of tree cover does not appear to affect the frequency of red baneberry [55].  Red baneberry plants generally are scattered so that changes in population size over time are difficult to measure.  Results of a north-central Idaho study in a grand fir/pachistima habitat type indicated that red baneberry had higher cover values in early succession, although it was still present in near-climax stands [85]. SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT : In Minnesota forests, the leaves and flowers of red baneberry appear in the first 3 weeks of the growing season, and the leaves begin to wither and die by midsummer [17].  Across its range, red baneberry blooms from May to July and fruits from August to October [27].  In Michigan, flowering began between the May 20 and 30 and lasted 10 to 20 days. Where red baneberry grows with white baneberry (A. pachypoda), it always begins blooming 3 to 5 days earlier [59].  In New England flowering is from May 9 to June 10 [67].  In northern Idaho flowering is from May to July [58,76].  In Utah and North Dakota flowering begins in May and ends by late June or early July, while in Colorado, Montana, and Wyoming, bloom begins in June and ends in August [21].

FIRE ECOLOGY

SPECIES: Actaea rubra
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS : Red baneberry is a perennial herb with a thick caudex that is buried in the soil [14,42,85].  It frequently grows in moist microsites where fire severity and frequency may be lower [14,42]. POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY :    Caudex, growing points in soil    Secondary colonizer - off-site seed

FIRE EFFECTS

SPECIES: Actaea rubra
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT : Fire generally kills aboveground portions of red baneberry.  The caudex appears to survive many fires, although information on the effects of differing fire severities is lacking. DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT : NO-ENTRY PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE : During a study of early postfire recovery using the same plots over time, red baneberry sprouted, grew vigorously, and produced fruit the first year after fire.  However, no seedlings were observed during the next 5 years [14,42].  Permanent plots were used to follow recovery after the Sundance fire in northern Idaho [73]; here seedlings of red baneberry were found in the fifteenth postfire growing season [Peter Stickney, pers. comm. 1990].  In British Columbia's subboreal spruce zone, cover of red baneberry increased in first year plots following either fire or mechanical site preparation [33].  Following clearcutting and burning in north-central Idaho, red baneberry had higher cover values in first and third year plots [85].  A northern Idaho study found little difference between red baneberry cover on undisturbed sites, piled and burned sites, and sites with single or multiple broadcast burns [56]. DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE : Hamilton's Research Papers (Hamilton 2006a, Hamilton 2006b) provide information on many plant species, including red baneberry, that was not available when this species review was originally written. FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : NO-ENTRY

REFERENCES

SPECIES: Actaea rubra
REFERENCES :  1.  Alexander, Robert R. 1985. Major habitat types, community types and        plant communities in the Rocky Mountains. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-123. Fort        Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky        Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 105 p.  [303]  2.  Alexander, Robert R. 1986. Classification of the forest vegetation of        Wyoming. Res. Note RM-466. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of        Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment        Station. 10 p.  [304]  3.  Alexander, Robert R. 1988. Forest vegetation on National Forests in the        Rocky Mountain and Intermountain Regions: habitat and community types.        Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-162. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of        Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment        Station. 47 p.  [5903]  4.  Aller, Alvin R. 1956. A taxonomic and ecological study of the flora of        Monument Peak, Oregon. American Midland Naturalist. 56(2): 454-472.        [6385]  5.  Argus, George W. 1966. Botanical investigations in northeastern        Saskatchewan: the subarctic Patterson-Hasbala Lakes region. Canadian        Field-Naturalist. 80(3): 119-143.  [8406]  6.  Atzet, Thomas. 1979. Description and classification of the forests of        the upper Illinois River drainage of southwestern Oregon. Corvallis, OR:        Oregon State University. 211 p. Dissertation.  [6452]  7.  Bacon, A. E. 1903. An experiment with the fruit of red baneberry.        Rhodora - Journal of the New England Botanical Club. 5(51): 77-79.        [10394]  8.  Baker, William L. 1989. Classification of the riparian vegetation of the        montane and subalpine zones in western Colorado. Great Basin Naturalist.        49(2): 214-228.  [7985]  9.  Bakuzis, E. V; Hansen, H. L. 1962. Ecographs of herb species of        Minnesota forest communities. Minnesota Forestry Notes. 118: 1-2.        [10317] 10.  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] 11.  Bormann, F. H.; Buell, M. F. 1964. Old-age stand of hemlock-northern        hardwood forest in central Vermont. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical        Club. 91(6): 451-465.  [8856] 12.  Chesnut, V. K.; Wilcox, E. V. 1901. The Stock-poisoning Plants of        Montana. Bulletin No. 26. Washington: U. S. Department of Agriculture,        Division of Botany. 131-3 p.  [10690] 13.  Corns, I. G. W.; Annas, R. M. 1986. Field guide to forest ecosystems of        west-central Alberta. Edmonton, AB: Canadian Forestry Service, Northern        Forestry Centre. 251 p.  [8998] 14.  Crane, M. F.; Habeck, James R.; Fischer, William C. 1983. Early postfire        revegetation in a western Montana Douglas-fir forest. Res. Pap. INT-319.        Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain        Forest and Range Experiment Station. 29 p. plus chart.  [710] 15.  Curtis, John T. 1959. The vegetation of Wisconsin. Madison, WI: The        University of Wisconsin Press. 657 p.  [7116] 16.  Dansereau, Pierre. 1959. The principal plant associations of the Saint        Lawrence Valley. No. 75. Montreal, Canada: Contrib. Inst. Bot. Univ.        Montreal. 147 p.  [8925] 17.  Daubenmire, Rexford F. 1936. The "big woods" of Minnesota: its        structure, and relation to climate, fire, and soils. Ecological        Monographs. 6(2): 233-268.  [2697] 18.  Daubenmire, Rexford. 1978. Plant geography--with special reference to        North America. Physiological Ecology. New York: Academic Press. 338 p.        [8949] 19.  Daubenmire, Rexford F.; Daubenmire, Jean B. 1968. Forest vegetation of        eastern Washington and northern Idaho. Technical Bulletin 60. Pullman,        WA: Washington State University, Agricultural Experiment Station. 104 p.        [749] 20.  Dayton, William A. 1960. Notes on western range forbs: Equisetaceae        through Fumariaceae. Agric. Handb. 161. Washington, DC: U.S. Department        of Agriculture, Forest Service. 254 p.  [767] 21.  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] 22.  Dye, A. J.; Moir, W. H. 1977. Spruce-fir forest at its southern        distribution in the Rocky Mountains, New Mexico. American Midland        Naturalist. 97(1): 133-146.  [7476] 23.  Emmingham, W. H. 1972. Conifer growth and plant distribution under        different light environments in the Siskiyou Mountains of southwestern        Oregon. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University. 50 p. Thesis.  [9651] 24.  Everett, Percy C. 1957. A summary of the culture of California plants at        the Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden 1927-1950. Claremont, CA: The Rancho        Santa Ana Botanic Garden. 223 p.  [7191] 25.  Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and        Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p.  [905] 26.  Fechner, Gilbert H. 1985. Silvical characteristics of blue spruce. Gen.        Tech. Rep. RM-117. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture,        Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 19        p.  [7478] 27.  Fernald, Merritt Lyndon. 1950. Gray's manual of botany. [Corrections        supplied by R. C. Rollins]. Portland, OR: Dioscorides Press. 1632 p.        (Dudley, Theodore R., gen. ed.; Biosystematics, Floristic & Phylogeny        Series; vol. 2).  [14935] 28.  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] 29.  Freedman, June D. 1983. The historical relationship between fire and        plant succession within the Swan Valley white-tailed deer winter range,        western Montana. Missoula, MT: University of Montana. 139 p.        Dissertation.  [6486] 30.  Freedman, June D.; Habeck, James R. 1985. Fire, logging, and        white-tailed deer interrelationships in the Swan Valley, northwestern        Montana. In: Lotan, James E.; Brown, James K., compilers. Fire's effects        on wildlife habitat--symposium proceedings; 1984 March 21; Missoula, MT.        Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-186. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture,        Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 23-35.  [8319] 31.  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] 32.  Great Plains Flora Association. 1986. Flora of the Great Plains.        Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. 1392 p.  [1603] 33.  Hamilton, Evelyn H.; Yearsley, H. Karen. 1988. Vegetation development        after clearcutting and site preparation in the SBS zone. Economic and        Regional Development Agreement: FRDA Report 018. Victoria, BC: Canadian        Forestry Service, Pacific Forestry Centre; British Columbia Ministry of        Forests and Lands. 66 p.  [8760] 34.  Hansen, H. L.; Krefting, L. W.; Kurmis, V. 1973. The forest of Isle        Royale in relation to fire history and wildlife. Tech. Bull. 294;        Forestry Series 13. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota,        Agricultural Experiment Station. 44 p.  [8120] 35.  Hansen, Paul; Pfister, Robert; Boggs, Keith; [and others]. 1989.        Classification and management of riparian sites in central and eastern        Montana. Missoula, MT: University of Montana, School of Forestry,        Montana Riparian Association. 368 p. Draft Version 1.  [8934] 36.  Harcombe, Andrew; Pendergast, Bruce; Petch, Bruce; Janz, Doug. 1983. Elk        habitat management: Salmon River Valley. MOE Working Report 1. 83-05-10.        Victoria, BC: Ministry of the Environment. 83 p.  [9984] 37.  Harrington, H. D. 1964. Manual of the plants of Colorado. 2d ed.        Chicago: The Swallow Press Inc. 666 p.  [6851] 38.  Hitchcock, C. Leo; Cronquist, Arthur. 1964. Vascular plants of the        Pacific Northwest. Part 2: Salicaceae to Saxifragaceae. Seattle, WA:        University of Washington Press. 597 p.  [1166] 39.  Johnston, Barry C. 1987. Plant associations of Region Two: Potential        plant communities of Wyoming, South Dakota, Nebraska, Colorado, and        Kansas. 4th ed. R2-ECOL-87-2. Lakewood, CO: U.S. Department of        Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. 429 p.  [3519] 40.  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] 41.  Kawano, S.;Kane, J. M.;Iltis, H. H. 1966. Chromosome morphology of the        North American species of Actaea (Ranuncula (Ranunculaceae). Canadian        Journal of Botany. 44(10): 1231-1234.  [10604] 42.  Keller, Marilyn Crane. 1980. Post-fire recovery within ravine forest        communities of Pattee Canyon, Missoula, Montana. Missoula, MT:        University of Montana. 136 p. Thesis.  [6725] 43.  Kruckeberg, A. R. 1982. Gardening with native plants of the Pacific        Northwest. Seattle: University of Washington Press. 252 p.  [9980] 44.  Kruckeberg, A. R. 1982. Gardening with native plants of the Pacific        Northwest. Seattle: University of Washington Press. 252 p.  [9980] 45.  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] 46.  Kufeld, Roland C. 1973. Foods eaten by the Rocky Mountain elk. Journal        of Range Management. 26(2): 106-113.  [1385] 47.  Kufeld, Roland C.; Wallmo, O. C.; Feddema, Charles. 1973. Foods of the        Rocky Mountain mule deer. Res. Pap. RM-111. Fort Collins, CO: U.S.        Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and        Range Experiment Station. 31 p.  [1387] 48.  Layser, Earle F. 1980. Flora of Pend Oreille County, Washington.        Pullman, WA: Washington State University, Cooperative Extension; 1980.        146 p.  [1427] 49.  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] 50.  Martin, Alexander C.; Zim, Herbert S.; Nelson, Arnold L. 1951. American        wildlife and plants. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc. 500 p.        [4021] 51.  Mauk, Ronald L.; Henderson, Jan A. 1984. Coniferous forest habitat types        of northern Utah. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-170. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of        Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment        Station. 89 p.  [1553] 52.  Minore, Don. 1972. A classification of forest environments in the South        Umpqua Basin. Res. Pap. PNW-129. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of        Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range        Experiment Station. 28 p.  [1660] 53.  Moss, E. H. 1955. The vegetation of Alberta. Botanical Review. 21(9):        493-567.  [6878] 54.  Moss, E. H. 1959. Flora of Alberta. Toronto: University of Toronto        Press. 546 p.  [8948] 55.  Mueggler, W. F. 1961. Ecology of seral shrub communities in the        cedar-hemlock zone of northern Idaho. Durham, NC: Duke University. 126        p. Thesis.  [9981] 56.  Mueggler, Walter F. 1965. Ecology of seral shrub communities in the        cedar-hemlock zone of northern Idaho. Ecological Monographs. 35:        165-185.  [4016] 57.  Munz, Philip A. 1973. A California flora and supplement. Berkeley, CA:        University of California Press. 1905 p.  [6155] 58.  Patterson, Patricia A.; Neiman, Kenneth E.; Tonn, Jonalea. 1985. Field        guide to forest plants of northern Idaho. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-180.        Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain        Research Station. 246 p.  [1839] 59.  Pellmyr, Olle. 1985. The pollination biology of Actaea pachypoda and A.        rubra (including A. erythrocarpa) in northern Michigan and Finland.        Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club. 112(3): 265-273.  [10393] 60.  Pfister, Robert D.; Kovalchik, Bernard L.; Arno, Stephen F.; Presby,        Richard C. 1977. Forest habitat types of Montana. Gen. Tech. Rep.        INT-34. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,        Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 174 p.  [1878] 61.  Piper, Jon K. 1986. Germination and growth of bird-dispersed plants:        effects of seed size and light on seedling vigor and biomass allocation.        American Journal of Botany. 73(7): 959-965.  [5033] 62.  Pojar, J.; Trowbridge, R.; Coates, D. 1984. Ecosystem classification and        interpretation of the sub-boreal spruce zone, Prince Rupert Forest        Region, British Columbia. Land Management Report No. 17. Victoria, BC:        Province of British Columbia, Ministry of Forests. 319 p.  [6929] 63.  Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant        geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p.  [2843] 64.  Reed, John F. 1952. The vegetation of the Jackson Hole Wildlife Park,        Wyoming. American Midland Naturalist. 48(3): 700-729.  [1949] 65.  Schoonmaker, Peter; McKee, Arthur. 1988. Species composition and        diversity during secondary succession of coniferous forests in the        western Cascade Mountains of Oregon. Forest Science. 34(4): 960-979.        [6214] 66.  Severson, Kieth E.; Thilenius, John F. 1976. Classification of quaking        aspen stands in the Black Hills and Bear Lodge Mountains. Res. Pap.        RM-166. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest        Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 24 p.        [2111] 67.  Seymour, Frank Conkling. 1982. The flora of New England. 2d ed.        Phytologia Memoirs 5. Plainfield, NJ: Harold N. Moldenke and Alma L.        Moldenke. 611 p.  [7604] 68.  Smith, Justin G. 1952. Food habits of mule deer in Utah. Journal of        Wildlife Management. 16(2): 148-154.  [2174] 69.  Stallard, Harvey. 1929. Secondary succession in the climax forest        formations of northern Minnesota. Ecology. 10(4): 476-547.  [3808] 70.  Steele, Robert; Cooper, Stephen V.; Ondov, David M.; [and others]. 1983.        Forest habitat types of eastern Idaho-western Wyoming. Gen. Tech. Rep.        INT-144. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,        Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 122 p.  [2230] 71.  Steele, Robert; Geier-Hayes, Kathleen. 1987. The grand fir/blue        huckleberry habitat type in central Idaho: succession and management.        Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-228. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture,        Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 66 p.  [8133] 72.  Stephens, H. A. 1980. Poisonous plants of the central United States.        Lawrence, KS: The Regents Press of Kansas. 165 p.  [3803] 73.  Taylor, Alan R. 1964. Lightning damage to forest trees in Montana.        Weatherwise. 17(2): 60-65.  [7273] 74.  Taylor, R. F. 1932. The successional trend and its relation to        second-growth forests in southeastern Alaska. Ecology. 13(4): 381-391.        [10007] 75.  Topik, Christopher; Halverson, Nancy M.; Brockway, Dale G. 1986. Plant        association and management guide for the western hemlock zone: Gifford        Pichot National Forest. R6-ECOL-230A. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of        Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 132 p.  [2351] 76.  Topik, Christopher; Hemstrom, Miles A., compilers. 1982. Guide to common        forest-zone plants: Willamette, Mt. Hood, and Siuslaw National Forests.        Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific        Northwest Region. 95 p.  [3234] 77.  Waring, R. H.; Major, J. 1964. Some vegetation of the California coastal        redwood region in relation to gradients of moisture, nutrients, light,        and temperature. Ecological Monographs. 34: 167-215.  [8924] 78.  Weaver, J. E. 1917. A study of the vegetation of southeastern Washington        and adjacent Idaho. Nebraska University Studies. 17(1): 1-133.  [7153] 79.  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] 80.  Whittaker, R. H. 1960. Vegetation of the Siskiyou Mountains, Oregon and        California. Ecological Monographs. 30(3): 279-338.  [6836] 81.  Willson, M. F. 1983. Natural history of Actaea rubra: fruit dimorphism        and fruit/seed predation. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club. 110(3):        298-303.  [10320] 82.  Young, Vernon A.; Robinette, W. Leslie. 1939. A study of the range        habits of elk on the Selway Game Preserve. Bull. No. 9. Moscow, ID:        University of Idaho, School of Forestry. 47 p.  [6831] 83.  Youngblood, Andrew P.; Padgett, Wayne G.; Winward, Alma H. 1985.        Riparian community type classification of eastern Idaho - western        Wyoming. R4-Ecol-85-01. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture,        Forest Service, Intermountain Region. 78 p.  [2686] 84.  Youngblood, Andrew P.; Padgett, Wayne G.; Winward, Alma H. 1985.        Riparian community type classification of northern Utah and adjacent        Idaho. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,        Intermountain Region, Ecology and Classification Program. 104 p.        [Preliminary draft].  [3054] 85.  Zamora, Benjamin Abel. 1975. Secondary succession on broadcast-burned        clearcuts of the Abies grandis - Pachistima myrsinites habitat type in        northcentral Idaho. Pullman, WA: Washington State University. 127 p.        Dissertation.  [5154] 86.  Aiken, George D. 1968. Pioneering with Wildflowers. Englewood Cliffs:        Prentice-Hall, Inc. 208 p.  [10577] 87.  Sperka, Marie. 1973. Growing wildflowers: A gardener's guide. New York:        Harper & Row. 277 p.  [10578] 88.  Turner, N. J. 1984. Counter-irritant and other medicinal uses of plants        in Ranunculaceae by native peoples in British Columbia and neighbouring        areas. Journal of Ethnopharmacology. 11: 181-201.  [10579]


FEIS Home Page