Lupinus latifolius



INTRODUCTORY


  USDA Forest Service; Kurt Parker
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION:
Reeves, Sonja L. 2006. Lupinus latifolius. 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/ [].

FEIS ABBREVIATION:
LUPLAT

SYNONYMS:
Lupinus latifolius spp. dudleyi (Rydb.) Kenney & D. Dunn
Lupinus latifolius spp. latifolius
Lupinus latifolius spp. leucanthus (Rydb.) Kenney & D. Dunn [49]
Lupinus latifolius spp. longipes (Greene) Kenney & D. Dunn [49,50]
Lupinus latifolius spp. parishii (C.P. Sm.) Kenney & D. Dunn
Lupinus latifolius spp. viridifolius (Heller) Kenney & D. Dunn [49]

NRCS PLANT CODE [79]:
LULA4
LULAL8
LULAB
LULAC2
LULAD2
LULAP3
LULAV2

COMMON NAMES:
broadleaf lupine
broad-leaved lupine

TAXONOMY:
The scientific name of broadleaf lupine is Lupinus latifolius Agardh (Fabaceae) [11,45,46,47,50,80]. Accepted varieties are:

Lupinus latifolius var. latifolius Agardh [45,47,60]
Lupinus latifolius var. barbatus (L. Henderson) Munz [45]
Lupinus latifolius var. columbianus (Heller) C.P. Smith [11,45,80]
Lupinus latifolius var. dudleyi C.P. Smith
Lupinus latifolius var. parishii C.P. Smith
Lupinus latifolius var. viridifolius (Heller) C.P. Smith [45]

LIFE FORM:
Forb

FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS:
No special status

OTHER STATUS:
None

DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE

SPECIES: Lupinus latifolius
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION:
In the United States, broadleaf lupine distribution extends from Washington south to California and east to Utah, Nevada, and New Mexico. In Canada, it is only found in British Columbia. Plants Database provides a distributional map of broadleaf lupine.

Varieties: Lupinus latifolius var. latifolius occurs from British Columbia south to California [45,47,60]. Lupinus latifolius var. barbatus, L. l. var. dudleyi, L. l. var. parishii, and L. l. var. viridifolius occur in California [45]. Lupinus latifolius var. columbianus is found throughout the Intermountain West [11,45,80].

ECOSYSTEMS [33]:
FRES20 Douglas-fir
FRES22 Western white pine
FRES23 Fir-spruce
FRES24 Hemlock-Sitka spruce
FRES25 Larch
FRES26 Lodgepole pine
FRES36 Mountain grasslands
FRES37 Mountain meadows
FRES44 Alpine

STATES/PROVINCES: (key to state/province abbreviations)
UNITED STATES

AZ CA NV NM OR UT WA

CANADA
BC


BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS [16]:
1 Northern Pacific Border
2 Cascade Mountains
3 Southern Pacific Border
4 Sierra Mountains
5 Columbia Plateau
6 Upper Basin and Range
7 Lower Basin and Range
8 Northern Rocky Mountains
9 Middle Rocky Mountains
11 Southern Rocky Mountains
12 Colorado Plateau

KUCHLER [52] PLANT ASSOCIATIONS:
K001 Spruce-cedar-hemlock forest
K002 Cedar-hemlock-Douglas-fir forest
K003 Silver fir-Douglas-fir forest
K004 Fir-hemlock forest
K005 Mixed conifer 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
K020 Spruce-fir-Douglas-fir forest
K021 Southwestern spruce-fir forest
K025 Alder-ash forest
K026 Oregon oakwoods
K028 Mosaic of K002 and K026
K029 California mixed evergreen forest
K047 Fescue-oatgrass
K052 Alpine meadows and barren

SAF COVER TYPES [30]:
205 Mountain hemlock
206 Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir
207 Red fir
208 Whitebark pine
210 Interior Douglas-fir
211 White fir
212 Western larch
213 Grand fir
215 Western white pine
217 Aspen
218 Lodgepole pine
224 Western hemlock
226 Coastal true fir-hemlock
229 Pacific Douglas-fir
230 Douglas-fir-western hemlock
233 Oregon white oak
243 Sierra Nevada mixed conifer
246 California black oak
256 California mixed subalpine

SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES [74]:
103 Green fescue
108 Alpine Idaho fescue
203 Riparian woodland
216 Montane meadows
410 Alpine rangeland
411 Aspen woodland
413 Gambel oak
418 Bigtooth maple
422 Riparian


HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES:
In addition to the plant communities listed above, broadleaf lupine is known to occur in a variety of other communities. Communities where broadleaf lupine is dominant include:

Mount Rainier National Park, Washington
broadleaf lupine/American bistort (Polygonum bistortoides)
Sitka valerian (Valeriana sitchensis)/broadleaf lupine
greenleaf fescue (Festuca viridula)/broadleaf lupine
pink mountainheath (Phyllodoce empetriformis)/broadleaf lupine [32,44]

Eastern Washington national forests
broadleaf lupine [51]

Olympic National Forest, Washington
subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa)/broadleaf lupine [43].

Gifford Pinchot National Forest, Washington
coast Douglas-fir/vine maple/western fescue (Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii/Acer circinatum/Festuca occidentalis) [78].

Blue Mountains, eastern Oregon and southeastern Washington
poke knotweed (Polygonum phytolaccifolium) [35]

Broadleaf lupine is a component of the vegetation in the following communities:

California
quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) riparian forest [48]
giant sequoia (Sequoiadendron giganteum) [42,71]

Eastern Washington national forests
timber oatgrass (Danthonia intermedia)
black alpine sedge (Carex nigrans)
saw-leaved sedge (Carex scopulorum var. prionophylla)
subalpine fir/cascade azalea (Rhododendron albiflorum)/arrowleaf ragwort (Senecio triangularis)
subalpine fir/false bugbane (Trautvettaria caroliniensis)
subalpine fir/globeflower (Trollius laxus)
subalpine fir/mountain arnica (Arnica latifolia)-skunkleaf polemonium (Polemonium pulcherrimum)
subalpine fir/Labrador tea (Ledum glandulosum)-grouse huckleberry (Vaccinium scoparium)
subalpine fir/twinflower (Linnaea borealis var. longiflora) [51]

Crater Lake National Park, Oregon
gray alder/blue wildrye (Alnus incana/Elymus glaucus) [54]

Pacific Northwest
western moss heather (Cassiope mertensiana)-pink mountainheath
Sitka valerian-green false hellebore (Veratrum viride)
showy sedge (Carex spectabilis)
American saw-wort (Saussurea americana)
purple monkeyflower (Mimulus lewisii) [31,32]

Broadleaf lupine is rare along riparian areas of Zion National Park, Utah [41].

BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS

SPECIES: Lupinus latifolius

 

  2001 Steven Thorsted

GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS:
This description provides characteristics that may be relevant to fire ecology, and is not meant for identification. Keys for identification are available [11,38,46,47,50,59,60,80].

Broadleaf lupine is a native perennial forb. It has a bushy, densely branched growth habit originating from a woody caudex and an extensive root system [39]. Plant heights range from 1 to 4 feet (0.3-1.2 m) on erect stems that are subglabrous to minutely strigose [59,60,80]. The leaves are palmately compound with 5 to 10 leaflets. The leaflets are elliptic to lance-shaped, 1 to 3 inches (2.5-7.6 cm) long, glabrous above, and minutely strigose beneath. The inflorescence is a showy raceme from 4 to12 inches (10-30 cm) long with numerous whorled or scattered pea-like flowers. The fruit is a legume that is 0.8 to 1.8 inches (2-4.5 cm) long and densely hairy. The legume pod contains 6 to 10 dark brown seeds [11,38,45,53,59,80].

Physiology: Broadleaf lupine is a nitrogen-fixing legume [17,61]. Seventeen years after thinning on a coast Douglas-fir site, broadleaf lupine was 1 of 2 species that accounted for only 1% of understory biomass, yet contributed 1/3rd of the nitrogen annually cycled [57].

RAUNKIAER [66] LIFE FORM:
Geophyte

REGENERATION PROCESSES:
Broadleaf lupine regenerates by seed and vegetative means. The deep, lateral root system can spread vegetatively from root sprouts [3]. Broadleaf lupine regenerated from root fragments that had been transported by the debris avalanche during the eruption of Mount St. Helens [24,25,77]. Vegetative growth also emanates from the perennating buds on the woody caudex [4].

Pollination: Broadleaf lupine is insect pollinated [29]. Bees pollinate broadleaf lupine on the Olympic National Forest, Washington [53].

Breeding system: There is considerable genetic variation within local populations of broadleaf lupine. Both diploid and tetraploid forms occur in some populations [29].

Seed production: Six to ten large seeds are produced per seed pod [39,45]. One terminal cluster can produce as many as 35 pods [80].

Seed dispersal: The pod splits at maturity, releasing several seeds [53]. The seeds are large and are not dispersed widely [81]. Dispersal is mainly by gravity and water. Seedlings generally establish within a few meters of the parent plant [24].

Seed banking: Some Lupinus species form a seed bank [37], but information is lacking for broadleaf lupine. Further research is needed in this area.

Germination: The optimal temperature for the germination of broadleaf lupine seeds in alpine tundra is 68 F (20 C) [14]. The greatest percentage (~40%) of germination of broadleaf lupine seeds in a greenhouse environment occurred about 168 hours after imbibition [39].

Seedling establishment/growth: Seedlings have pronounced taproots, but lateral root development is limited, and only small rosettes of leaves are initially formed [3].

Asexual regeneration: Broadleaf lupine reproduces from root sprouts, root fragments, and from the caudex [3,4,24,25,77].

After the 1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens, studies were done on the plants that had tephra (coarse, airborne material) deposited on top of them. Broadleaf lupine's perennating buds remained on the woody caudex at the soil surface, but the stems easily penetrated up through the deposit. Subsequent seed production was substantial, and broadleaf lupine seedlings established in the tephra [4].

SITE CHARACTERISTICS:
The following table describes site characteristics for broadleaf lupine throughout its distribution.

State/Region Site Characteristics
California Moist areas in shady to open woods below 11,000 feet (3,500 m) [45,59,60]
Nevada Moist soils on streambanks, mountain ridges, and meadows, 5,000 to 9,000 feet (1,500-2,700 m) [50]
Utah, Zion National Park Oakbrush (Quercus spp.) and streamside communities at 4,000 feet (1,200 m) [80]
Washington (eastern) Lowland prairies to alpine ridges, also found in moist, well-drained riparian and wetland zones [51]
Washington (northwest) Open, subalpine ridges to wooded slopes and natural openings [36]
Olympic National Forest, Washington High elevation, drier environmental zones and moist subalpine meadows [53]
Olympic National Park, Washington Subalpine meadow and mesic grass communities with late snowmelt [20,64]
Oregon (western) and southwestern Washington Open sites, dry to moist, lowlands to upper elevations [38]
Pacific Northwest Open, subalpine ridges to wooded slopes, occasionally on low-elevation grasslands [46]

Soils: Broadleaf lupine can persist in low-fertility soils because of its ability to fix nitrogen [40]. It may increase soil fertility. On sites in the Olympic Mountains, the soils directly surrounding the nitrogen-fixing broadleaf lupine plants had twice the nitrogen, more organic matter, and more phosphorus than adjacent soils [15].

The 1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens provided a unique opportunity to study the growth response of broadleaf lupine on the newly deposited volcanic substrates. A greenhouse study on 4 soil samples taken from the site during the summers of 1980 and 1981 revealed that broadleaf lupine exhibited the greatest growth response on tephra and the least growth on the pyroclastics (volcanic rock fragments). Subsequent soil samples collected from 1982 and 1983 revealed a large growth response on 3 substrates (pyroclastics, mud, and tephra) [27].

The soil descriptions for 2 plant communities where broadleaf lupine is dominant follow.

Olympic National Forest, subalpine fir/broadleaf lupine association: Soils are shallow, coarse-textured, and very rocky. They have high permeability and low water holding capacity. Soils are cold in winter and warm in summer; the mean soil temperature for August is 54 F (12 C). The soil temperature regime is frigid, and the soil moisture regime is xeric. Stands in this type have burned frequently in the past, which may have contributed to the apparently low fertility of these sites. Other associations in which broadleaf lupine was a minor component have shallow, rocky soils [43].

Mount Rainier National Park, green fescue meadows: Soils are relatively dry, well-drained loams that are primarily derived from geologically young deposits of glacial till and volcanic ash [73].

SUCCESSIONAL STATUS:
Broadleaf lupine was a common colonizing species on many of the primary successional habitats after the eruption of Mount St. Helens [18,21,28,40,77]. On debris avalanche sites at Mount St. Helens, broadleaf lupine altered local soil moisture conditions by shading, and altered soil nutrient status by nitrogen fixation [24].

There was an abundance of broadleaf lupine on a pioneer community dominated by red alder (Alnus rubra) and Sitka willow (Salix sitchensis) on Bald Mountain, Vancouver Island, British Columbia [23]. In Mount Rainier National Park, Washington, broadleaf lupine is associated with young and developing communities but is most characteristic of the "best developed" and "most mature" meadow communities [44]. Broadleaf lupine is a dominant species in both early seral and old-growth stands of Olympic National Forest [43].

The rapid development of an extensive lateral root system should allow broadleaf lupine to exploit resources effectively and thus succeed in competing for water, light, and space later in succession. The presence of broadleaf lupine plants in canopy gaps of old-growth forests of coast Douglas-fir, mountain hemlock (Tsuga mertensiana), and western redcedar (Thuja plicata) confirms its ability to succeed in a strongly competitive environment [3].

SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT:
The following table provides flowering dates for broadleaf lupine throughout its distribution.

State/Region Anthesis Period
California April to July [59,60]
Nevada June to August [50]
Olympic National Forest June to August [53]
Pacific Northwest June to August [46]

In some years, broadleaf lupine on high-elevation sites may not set seed. In subalpine meadows of Olympic National Park broadleaf lupine requires 27 to 33 days to reach full bloom, which it cannot always do. The onset of broadleaf lupine seed dispersal in subalpine meadows is influenced by the date of snow release. Plants that are not released until mid-summer often do not reach the stage of seed dispersal. Completion of phenology depends on the onset of the following winter [20].

FIRE ECOLOGY

SPECIES: Lupinus latifolius
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS:
Fire adaptations: Broadleaf lupine has a deep, lateral root system and is capable of spreading vegetatively from root sprouts [3]. It is likely that these characteristics provide for regeneration following fire. Depending on the severity of top-kill by fire, sprouting from the caudex would also be a possibility. Information is lacking on the regeneration of broadleaf lupine seed after fire. Further research is needed in this area.

Fire regimes for the mesic communities where broadleaf lupine occurs most often are mostly mixed- to high-severity with fire return intervals ranging from 35 to 200 years. In some cases, fire return intervals may be >200 years [19].

The following table provides fire return intervals for plant communities and ecosystems where broadleaf lupine is important. For further information, see the FEIS review of the dominant species listed below.

Community or Ecosystem Dominant Species Fire Return Interval Range (years)
silver fir-Douglas-fir Abies amabilis-Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii >200
grand fir Abies grandis 35-200 [7]
tamarack Larix laricina 35-200 [63]
western larch Larix occidentalis 25-350 [8,13,26]
Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir Picea engelmannii-Abies lasiocarpa 35 to >200 [7]
whitebark pine* Pinus albicaulis 50-200 [1,5]
Rocky Mountain lodgepole pine* Pinus contorta var. latifolia 25-340 [12,13,76]
Sierra lodgepole pine* Pinus contorta var. murrayana 35-200
western white pine* Pinus monticola 50-200 [7]
quaking aspen (west of the Great Plains) Populus tremuloides 7-120 [7,34,56]
mountain grasslands Pseudoroegneria spicata 3-40 (x=10) [6,7]
Rocky Mountain Douglas-fir* Pseudotsuga menziesii var. glauca 25-100 [7,9,10]
coastal Douglas-fir* Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii 40-240 [7,58,67]
California mixed evergreen Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii-Lithocarpus densiflorus-Arbutus menziesii <35 [7]
California oakwoods Quercus spp. <35
Oregon white oak Quercus garryana <35
western redcedar-western hemlock Thuja plicata-Tsuga heterophylla >200
western hemlock-Sitka spruce Tsuga heterophylla-Picea sitchensis >200
mountain hemlock* Tsuga mertensiana 35 to >200 [7]
*fire return interval varies widely; trends in variation are noted in the species review

POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY [75]:
Caudex/herbaceous root crown, growing points in soil
Geophyte, growing points deep in soil

FIRE EFFECTS

SPECIES: Lupinus latifolius
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT:
Broadleaf lupine is likely top-killed by fire. Established plants are probably resistant to fire-induced mortality because of perennating buds on the deep, lateral root system.

DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT:
No additional information is available on this topic.

PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE:
Research to date (2006) suggests that broadleaf lupine responds favorably to fire. It was reportedly common or abundant after fire in many locations.

DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE:
The presence of broadleaf lupine was recorded on 3-, 55-, and 81-year old burns on a mountain hemlock-subalpine fir forest of the Olympic Mountains in Washington [2]. The percent cover of broadleaf lupine in mature coast Douglas-fir/Pacific rhododendron (Rhododendron macrophyllum) stands (230 to 320 years old) of the eastern Cascade Range in Washington was <1%, while the percent cover increased to 10% with a 60% frequency in the same plant community type 4 years following a slash burn that escaped into the adjacent mature forest [62]. In the Sierra Nevada, Lupinus latifolius spp. latifolius commonly appears in great numbers following fires, particularly on mesic sites including giant sequoia groves and mixed-conifer stands dominated by white fir [69,70]. Broadleaf lupine was dominant after a controlled burn on a dwarf fireweed-woodland ragwort (Epilobium minutum-Senecio sylvaticus) community on Goldstream Summit, Vancouver Island, British Columbia [23]. For further information on that study, see Other Management Considerations.

FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS:
The current body of research provides no clear direction for using fire as a management tool for broadleaf lupine populations. The research discussed above does, however, indicate that fire has a positive influence on broadleaf lupine. Further research is need on the fire ecology of broadleaf lupine.


MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS

SPECIES: Lupinus latifolius
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE:
Hall [36] states that broadleaf lupine seeds are poisonous to animals because of the alkaloids they contain. Further research is needed on this topic [55]. The teratogenic alkaloid anagyrine has been found in broadleaf lupine and can cause "crooked calf disease" if a pregnant cow consumes the flowers or seed pods between the 40th and 70th days of gestation [65].

The importance of broadleaf lupine to Columbian black-tailed deer is relatively low [23].

Palatability/nutritional value: Columbian black-tailed deer on Vancouver Island, British Columbia, eat broadleaf lupine leaves casually or when under stress [23]. Birds eat the seeds [51].

Cover value: No information is available on this topic.

VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES:
Broadleaf lupine is a valuable tool for rehabilitation of disturbed sites because it grows well on droughty and low-fertility sites, colonizes disturbed areas, has a deep root system for stabilizing soil, and forms associations with nitrogen-fixing bacteria [29]. It is commonly used for erosion control [29,38].

Broadleaf lupine seedlings grown in a greenhouse were used for rehabilitation of Paradise Meadow in Mount Rainier National Park. The survival rate for all forbs planted in the revegetation plots averaged 94%. Broadleaf lupine and other forb species spread faster than sedges (Carex spp.). Seeding with broadleaf lupine seeds was successful on these plots [68]. Survival of outplanted broadleaf lupine seedlings, also grown in the greenhouse, was successful after 2 years on a native plant garden (Biscuit scabland restoration) in the Columbia River Gorge, Oregon [82,83].

OTHER USES:
Native Americans used to make tea from broadleaf lupine seeds to aid urination [35].

OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS:
The number of flowering stems can be severely diminished with intensive grazing by wild herbivores (76, 62, 36, and 74 were the number of flowering stems for 25%, 50%, 75% defoliation, and control, respectively) [73]. Where broadleaf lupine is not selected for grazing, it is considered an increaser [64]. It is an important increaser on disturbed sites at higher elevations in western Oregon and southwestern Washington [38].

Broadleaf lupine is not resistant to trampling, but it tolerates some trampling because of its upright growth habit and because plants regenerate rapidly from subsurface adventitious buds [22].

Disturbance from postharvest slash treatments had little effect on broadleaf lupine cover. Six different slash treatments were done after clearcutting on a high-elevation lodgepole pine/subalpine fir forest of the Cascade Range in Washington. Treatments included a spring broadcast burn, a fall broadcast burn, piled slash burned with clear areas (high-severity burn), piled unmerchantable material, chipped slash, and no treatment. With the exception of the piled unmerchantable material, from which broadleaf lupine was absent, broadleaf lupine cover was around 4 dm/15 m on all treatment plots and the adjacent forest that was not harvested [72,84].

Lupinus latifolius: REFERENCES


1. Agee, James K. 1994. Fire and weather disturbances in terrestrial ecosystems of the eastern Cascades. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-320. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 52 p. (Everett, Richard L., assessment team leader; Eastside forest ecosystem health assessment; Hessburg, Paul F., science team leader and tech. ed., Volume III: assessment). [23656]
2. Agee, James K.; Smith, Larry. 1984. Subalpine tree reestablishment after fire in the Olympic Mountains, Washington. Ecology. 65(3): 810-819. [6102]
3. Antos, Joseph A.; Halpern, Charles B. 1997. Root system differences among species: implications for early successional changes in forests of western Oregon. The American Midland Naturalist. 138(1): 97-108. [27600]
4. Antos, Joseph A.; Zobel, Donald B. 1985. Plant form, developmental plasticity and survival following burial by volcanic tephra. Canadian Journal of Botany. 63: 2083-2090. [12553]
5. Arno, Stephen F. 1976. The historical role of fire on the Bitterroot National Forest. Res. Pap. INT-187. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 29 p. [15225]
6. Arno, Stephen F. 1980. Forest fire history in the Northern Rockies. Journal of Forestry. 78(8): 460-465. [11990]
7. Arno, Stephen F. 2000. Fire in western forest ecosystems. In: Brown, James K.; Smith, Jane Kapler, eds. Wildland fire in ecosystems: Effects of fire on flora. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-42-vol. 2. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 97-120. [36984]
8. Arno, Stephen F.; Fischer, William C. 1995. Larix occidentalis--fire ecology and fire management. In: Schmidt, Wyman C.; McDonald, Kathy J., compilers. Ecology and management of Larix forests: a look ahead: Proceedings of an international symposium; 1992 October 5-9; Whitefish, MT. Gen. Tech. Rep. GTR-INT-319. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 130-135. [25293]
9. Arno, Stephen F.; Gruell, George E. 1983. Fire history at the forest-grassland ecotone in southwestern Montana. Journal of Range Management. 36(3): 332-336. [342]
10. Arno, Stephen F.; Scott, Joe H.; Hartwell, Michael G. 1995. Age-class structure of old growth ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir stands and its relationship to fire history. Res. Pap. INT-RP-481. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 25 p. [25928]
11. Barneby, Rupert C. 1989. Intermountain flora: Vascular plants of the Intermountain West, U.S.A. Vol. 3, Part B: Fabales. Bronx, NY: The New York Botanical Garden. 279 p. [18596]
12. Barrett, Stephen W. 1993. Fire regimes on the Clearwater and Nez Perce National Forests north-central Idaho. Final Report: Order No. 43-0276-3-0112. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory. 21 p. Unpublished report on file with: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT. [41883]
13. Barrett, Stephen W.; Arno, Stephen F.; Key, Carl H. 1991. Fire regimes of western larch - lodgepole pine forests in Glacier National Park, Montana. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 21: 1711-1720. [17290]
14. Baskin, Carol C.; Baskin, Jerry M. 2001. Seeds: ecology, biogeography, and evolution of dormancy and germination. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. 666 p. [60775]
15. Belsky, J.; Del Moral, R. 1982. Ecology of an alpine-subalpine meadow complex in the Olympic Mountains, Washington. Canadian Journal of Botany. 60: 779-788. [6740]
16. 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]
17. Bormann, Bernard T. 1988. A masterful scheme: Symbiotic nitrogen-fixing plants of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Arboretum Bulletin. 51(2): 10-14. [6796]
18. Braatne, J. H.; Bliss, L. C. 1999. Comparative physiological ecology of lupines colonizing early successional habitats on Mount St. Helens. Ecology. 80(3): 891-907. [62865]
19. Brown, James K.; Smith, Jane Kapler, eds. 2000. Wildland fire in ecosystems: Effects of fire on flora. Gen. Tech Rep. RMRS-GRT-42-vol. 2. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 257 p. [36581]
20. Canaday, B. B.; Fonda, R. W. 1974. The Influence of subalpine snowbanks on vegetation pattern, production, and phenology. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club. 101(6): 340-350. [62879]
21. Chapin, David M. 1995. Physiological and morphological attributes of two colonizing plant species on Mount St. Helens. The American Midland Naturalist. 133(1): 76-87. [62903]
22. Cole, David N.; Trull, Susan J. 1992. Quantifying vegetation response to recreational disturbance in the North Cascades, Washington. The American Midland Naturalist. 66(4): 229-236. [19965]
23. Cowan, Ian McTaggart. 1945. The ecological relationships of the food of the Columbian black-tailed deer, Odocoileus hemionus columbianus (Richardson), in the coast forest region of southern Vancouver Island, British Columbia. Ecological Monographs. 15(2): 110-139. [16006]
24. Dale, Virginia H. 1989. Wind dispersed seeds and plant recovery on the Mount St. Helens debris avalanche. Canadian Journal of Botany. 67: 1434-1441. [12670]
25. Dale, Virginia H.; Campbell, Daniel R.; Adams, Wendy M.; Crisafulli, Charles M.; Dains, Virginia I.; Frenzen, Peter M.; Holland, Robert F. 2005. Plant succession on the Mount St. Helens debris-avalanche deposit. In: Dale, V. H.; Swanson, F. J.; Crisafulli, C. M., eds. Ecological responses to the 1980 eruptions of Mount St. Helens. Springer: New York: 59-74. [61208]
26. Davis, Kathleen M. 1980. Fire history of a western larch/Douglas-fir forest type in northwestern Montana. In: Stokes, Marvin A.; Dieterich, John H., tech. coords. 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: 69-74. [12813]
27. del Moral, Roger; Clampitt, Christopher A. 1985. Growth of native plant species on recent volcanic substrates from Mount St. Helens. The American Midland Naturalist. 114(2): 374-383. [62875]
28. del Moral, Roger; Wood, David M. 1993. Early primary succession on the volcano Mount St. Helens. Journal of Vegetation Science. 4(2): 223-234. [62895]
29. Doede, David L. 2005. Genetic variation in broadleaf lupine Lupinus latifolius on the Mt Hood National Forest and implications for seed collection and deployment. Native Plants. 6(1): 36-48. [62866]
30. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
31. Franklin, Jerry F. 1988. Pacific Northwest forests. In: Barbour, Michael G.; Billings, William Dwight, eds. North American terrestrial vegetation. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press: 103-130. [13879]
32. 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]
33. Garrison, George A.; Bjugstad, Ardell J.; Duncan, Don A.; Lewis, Mont E.; Smith, Dixie R. 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]
34. Gruell, G. E.; Loope, L. L. 1974. Relationships among aspen, fire, and ungulate browsing in Jackson Hole, Wyoming. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 33 p. In cooperation with: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Rocky Mountain Region. [3862]
35. Hall, Frederick C. 1973. Plant communities of the Blue Mountains in eastern Oregon and southeastern Washington. R6-Area Guide 3-1. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 82 p. [1059]
36. Hall, Frederick C. 1974. Key to some common forest-zone plants of northwestern Washington. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 34 p. [3235]
37. Halpern, Stacey L. 2005. Sources and consequences of seed size variation in Lupinus perennis (Fabaceae): adaptive and non-adaptive hypotheses. American Journal of Botany. 92(2): 205-213. [52937]
38. Halverson, Nancy M., comp. 1986. Major indicator shrubs and herbs on national forests of western Oregon and southwestern Washington. R6-TM-229. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 180 p. [3233]
39. Halvorson, J. J.; Black, R. A.; Smith, J. L.; Franz, E. H. 1991. Nitrogenase activity, growth and carbon and nitrogen allocation in wintergreen and deciduous lupine seedlings. Functional Ecology. 5(4): 554-561. [62869]
40. Halvorson, Jonathan J.; Franz, Eldon H.; Smith, Jeffrey L.; Black, R. Alan. 1992. Nitrogenase activity, nitrogen fixation, and nitrogen inputs by lupines at Mount St. Helens. Ecology. 73(1): 87-98. [62868]
41. Harper, K. T.; Sanderson, S. C.; McArthur, E. D. 1992. Riparian ecology in Zion National Park, Utah. In: Clary, Warren P.; McArthur, E. Durant; Bedunah, Don; Wambolt, Carl L., compilers. Proceedings--symposium on ecology and management of riparian shrub communities; 1991 May 29-31; Sun Valley, ID. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-289. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 32-42. [19092]
42. Hartesveldt, Richard J.; Harvey, H. Thomas; Shellhammer, Howard S.; Stecker, Ronald E. 1975. The giant sequoia of the Sierra Nevada. NPS 120. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 180 p. [4233]
43. Henderson, Jan A.; Peter, David H.; Lesher, Robin D.; Shaw, David C. 1989. Forested plant associations of the Olympic National Forest. R6-ECOL-TP 001-88. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 502 p. [23405]
44. Henderson, Jan Alan. 1974. Composition, distribution, and succession of subalpine meadows in Mount Rainier National Park, Washington. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University. 150 p. Dissertation. [63713]
45. Hickman, James C., ed. 1993. The Jepson manual: Higher plants of California. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1400 p. [21992]
46. Hitchcock, C. Leo; Cronquist, Arthur. 1961. Vascular plants of the Pacific Northwest. Part 3: Saxifragaceae to Ericaceae. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press. 614 p. [1167]
47. Hitchcock, C. Leo; Cronquist, Arthur. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press. 730 p. [1168]
48. Holland, Robert F. 1986. Preliminary descriptions of the terrestrial natural communities of California. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Fish and Game. 156 p. [12756]
49. 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]. [36715]
50. Kartesz, John Thomas. 1988. A flora of Nevada. Reno, NV: University of Nevada. 1729 p. [In 2 volumes]. Dissertation. [42426]
51. Kovalchik, Bernard L.; Clausnitzer, Rodrick R. 2004. Classification and management of aquatic, riparian, and wetland sites on the national forests of eastern Washington: series description. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-593. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 354 p. [53329]
52. 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]
53. Lesher, Robin D.; Henderson, Jan A. 1989. Indicator species of the Olympic National Forest. R6-ECOL-TP003-88. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 79 p. [15376]
54. McNeil, Robert Curlan. 1975. Vegetation and fire history of a ponderosa pine - white fir forest in Crater Lake National Park. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University. 171 p. Thesis. [5737]
55. Meeker, James E.; Kilgore, Wendel W. 1987. Identification and quantification of the alkaloids of Lupinus latifolius. Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry. 35(3): 431-433. [62872]
56. Meinecke, E. P. 1929. Quaking aspen: A study in applied forest pathology. Tech. Bull. No. 155. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 34 p. [26669]
57. Miller, Richard E.; Lavender, Denis P.; Grier, Charles C. 1976. Nutrient cycling in the Douglas-fir type--silvicultural implications. In: America's renewable resource potential--1975: The turning point; 1975 Society of American Foresters national convention; 1975 September 28 - October 2; Washington, DC. [Bethesda, MD]: Society of American Foresters: 359-390. [8514]
58. Morrison, Peter H.; Swanson, Frederick J. 1990. Fire history and pattern in a Cascade Range landscape. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-254. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 77 p. [13074]
59. Munz, Philip A. 1973. A California flora and supplement. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1905 p. [6155]
60. Munz, Philip A. 1974. A flora of southern California. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1086 p. [4924]
61. O'Dell, T. E.; Massicotte, H. B.; Trappe, J. M. 1993. Root colonization of Lupinus latifolius Agardh. and Pinus contorta Dougl. by Phialocephala fortinii Wang & Wilcox. New Phytologist. 124(1): 93-100. [62873]
62. Ossinger, Mary C. 1983. The Pseudotsuga-Tsuga/Rhododendron community in the northeast Olympic Mountains. Bellingham, WA: Western Washington University. 50 p. Thesis. [11435]
63. Paysen, Timothy E.; Ansley, R. James; Brown, James K.; Gottfried, Gerald J.; Haase, Sally M.; Harrington, Michael G.; Narog, Marcia G.; Sackett, Stephen S.; Wilson, Ruth C. 2000. Fire in western shrubland, woodland, and grassland ecosystems. In: Brown, James K.; Smith, Jane Kapler, eds. Wildland fire in ecosystems: Effects of fire on flora. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-42-volume 2. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 121-159. [36978]
64. Pfitsch, W. A.; Bliss, L. C. 1985. Seasonal forage availability and potential vegetation limitations to a mountain goat population, Olympic National Park. The American Midland Naturalist. 113(1): 109-121. [62887]
65. Ralphs, Michael H. 2002. Ecological relationships between poisonous plants and rangeland condition: a review. Journal of Range Management. 55(3): 285-290. [49787]
66. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
67. Ripple, William J. 1994. Historic spatial patterns of old forests in western Oregon. Journal of Forestry. 92(11): 45-49. [33881]
68. Rochefort, Regina M.; Gibbons, Stephen T. 1992. Mending the meadow. Restoration & Management Notes. 10(2): 120-126. [20158]
69. Rundel, Philip W. 1971. Community structure and stability in the giant sequoia groves of the Sierra Nevada, California. The American Midland Naturalist. 85(2): 478-492. [10504]
70. Rundel, Philip W.; Parsons, David J.; Gordon, Donald T. 1977. Montane and subalpine vegetation of the Sierra Nevada and Cascade Ranges. In: Barbour, Michael G.; Major, Jack, eds. Terrestrial vegetation of California. New York: John Wiley & Sons: 559-599. [4235]
71. Rundel, Philip Wilson. 1969. The distribution and ecology of the giant sequoia ecosystem in the Sierra Nevada, California. Durham, NC: Duke University. 205 p. Dissertation. [37436]
72. Scherer, G.; Zabowski, D.; Java, B.; Everett, R. 2000. Timber harvesting residue treatment. Part II. Understory vegetation response. Forest Ecology and Management. 126(1): 35-50. [37010]
73. Sharrow, Steven H.; Kuntz, David E. 1999. Plant response to defoliation in a subalpine green fescue community. Journal of Range Management. 52(2): 174-180. [62874]
74. Shiflet, Thomas N., ed. 1994. Rangeland cover types of the United States. Denver, CO: Society for Range Management. 152 p. [23362]
75. Stickney, Peter F. 1989. FEIS postfire regeneration workshop--April 12: Seral origin of species comprising secondary plant succession in Northern Rocky Mountain forests. 10 p. Unpublished draft on file at: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT. [20090]
76. Tande, Gerald F. 1979. Fire history and vegetation pattern of coniferous forests in Jasper National Park, Alberta. Canadian Journal of Botany. 57: 1912-1931. [18676]
77. Titus, Jonathan H.; Moore, Scott; Arnot, Mildred; Titus, Priscilla J. 1998. Inventory of the vascular flora of the blast zone, Mount St. Helens, Washington. Madrono. 45(2): 146-161. [30322]
78. Topik, Christopher. 1989. Plant association and management guide for the grand fir zone, Gifford Pinchot National Forest. R6-Ecol-TP-006-88. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 110 p. [11361]
79. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. PLANTS database (2006), [Online]. Available: http://plants.usda.gov/. [34262]
80. Welsh, Stanley L.; Atwood, N. Duane; Goodrich, Sherel; Higgins, Larry C., eds. 1987. A Utah flora. The Great Basin Naturalist Memoir No. 9. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University. 894 p. [2944]
81. Wood, David M.; del Moral, Roger. 1987. Mechanisms of early primary succession in subalpine habitats on Mount St. Helens. Ecology. 68(4): 780-790. [62886]
82. Youtie, Berta A. 1992. Biscuit scabland restoration includes propagation studies. Restoration & Management Notes. 10(1): 79-80. [19425]
83. Youtie, Berta. 1991. Native plants delight visitors at Columbia Gorge plot. Park Science. 11(4): 4-5. [18183]
84. Zabowski, D.; Java, B.; Scherer, G.; Everett, R. L.; Ottmar, R. 2000. Timber harvesting residue treatment: Part 1. Responses of conifer seedlings, soils, and microclimate. Forest Ecology and Management. 126(1): 25-34. [36486]

FEIS Home Page