SPECIES: Potentilla newberryi
Table of Contents

INTRODUCTORY


Photo credit: Modoc National Forest


AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION:
Reeves, Sonja L. 2007. Potentilla newberryi. 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:
POTNEW

NRCS PLANT CODE [19]:
PONE7

COMMON NAMES:
Newberry's cinquefoil

TAXONOMY:
The scientific name of Newberry's cinquefoil is Potentilla newberryi Gray (Rosaceae) [2,4,5,6].

SYNONYMS:
None

LIFE FORM:
Forb

FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS:
No special status

OTHER STATUS:
Information on state-level protected status of plants in the United States is available at NatureServe.

INFORMATION AVAILABLE:
In March of 2008 an extensive search was done to locate information on Newberry's cinquefoil with little success (see FEIS's list of source literature). The following paragraphs provide details of the information that was available.


GENERAL INFORMATION ON DISTRIBUTION


GENERAL DISTRIBUTION:
Newberry's cinquefoil occurs from south-central Washington, south through eastern Oregon to northeast California and northwest Nevada [2]. NatureServe provides a distributional map of Newberry's cinquefoil.

HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES:
Newberry's cinquefoil is most commonly found in sagebrush (Artemisia spp.) and juniper (Juniperus spp.) woodland communities [11,14,15].

Newberry's cinquefoil is a community dominant in the following vegetation types in Oregon:


GENERAL INFORMATION ON BIOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND FIRE


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 in these sources: [2,4,5,7].

Newberry's cinquefoil is a biennial or short-lived perennial forb. Numerous, leafy stems grow from a slender taproot and branched root crown. Stems are prostrate to decumbent and generally 2 to 16 inches (5-40 cm) in length. Leaves are pinnately dissected and mostly cauline. The entire plant has a hirsute pubescence. The inflorescence is a many-flowered cyme. Newberry's cinquefoil produces "many" achenes [1,2,4,5,17,20].

Newberry's cinquefoil is not rhizomatous [5].

RAUNKIAER [16] LIFE FORM:
Chamaephyte
Hemicryptophyte

REGENERATION:
Newberry's cinquefoil regenerates primarily from seed. Most cinquefoil species produce large numbers of viable seeds [18].

SITE CHARACTERISTICS:
Newberry's cinquefoil almost always occurs in wetlands where there is some seasonal drying, such as dry lakeshores, vernal pools, waterholes, and river shorelines [1,2,4,5,7,15,20].
 

Elevation range for Newberry's cinquefoil by state or region
State or region Elevation
California 4,300 to 7,200 feet (1,300-2,200 m) [4,15]
Nevada 4,500 to 5,000 feet (1,400-1,500 m) [7]
Intermountain West 4,300 to 5,900 feet (1,300-1,800 m) [2]

SUCCESSIONAL STATUS:
Newberry's cinquefoil is a community dominant in several late-seral vegetation types in Oregon (see Habitat Types and Plant Communities).

Newberry's cinquefoil is generally abundant or increases after lengthy spring flooding in the silver sagebrush communities in Oregon [13].

SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT:

Flowering period for Newberry's cinquefoil
State or region Anthesis period
California May to July [15]
Nevada April to July [7]
Washington April to July [20]
Intermountain West June to July [2]
Pacific Northwest April to July [5]

FIRE ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT:
Newberry's cinquefoil may establish from seed or sprout from the root crown after fire; however, as of this writing (2008), no information is available regarding fire adaptations or fire effects on Newberry's cinquefoil.

More information is needed on the basic biology and ecology of Newberry's cinquefoil before management recommendations are possible. The following table provides fire regime information that may be relevant to Newberry's cinquefoil.

Fire regime information for vegetation communities where Newberry's cinquefoil may occur. Fire regime characteristics are taken from the LANDFIRE Rapid Assessment Vegetation Model [10]. This vegetation model was developed by local experts using available literature, local data, and/or expert opinion as documented in the PDF file linked from the Potential Natural Vegetation Group listed below. Cells are blank where information is not available in the Rapid Assessment Vegetation Model.
Pacific Northwest Great Basin Northern Rockies
Pacific Northwest
Vegetation Community (Potential Natural Vegetation Group) Fire severity* Fire regime characteristics
Percent of fires Mean interval
(years)
Minimum interval
(years)
Maximum interval
(years)
Northwest Shrubland
Low sagebrush Replacement 41% 180    
Mixed 59% 125    
Northwest Woodland
Western juniper (pumice) Replacement 33% >1,000    
Mixed 67% 500    
Great Basin
Vegetation Community (Potential Natural Vegetation Group) Fire severity* Fire regime characteristics
Percent of fires Mean interval
(years)
Minimum interval
(years)
Maximum interval
(years)
Great Basin Shrubland
Juniper and pinyon-juniper steppe woodland Replacement 20% 333 100 >1,000
Mixed 31% 217 100 >1,000
Surface or low 49% 135 100  
Northern Rockies
Vegetation Community (Potential Natural Vegetation Group) Fire severity* Fire regime characteristics
Percent of fires Mean interval
(years)
Minimum interval
(years)
Maximum interval
(years)
Northern Rockies Shrubland
Low sagebrush shrubland Replacement 100% 125 60 150
*Fire Severities:
Replacement=Any fire that causes greater than 75% top removal of a vegetation-fuel type, resulting in general replacement of existing vegetation; may or may not cause a lethal effect on the plants.
Mixed=Any fire burning more than 5% of an area that does not qualify as a replacement, surface, or low-severity fire; includes mosaic and other fires that are intermediate in effects
Surface or low=Any fire that causes less than 25% upper layer replacement and/or removal in a vegetation-fuel class but burns 5% or more of the area. [3,9].

IMPORTANCE TO WILDLIFE:
Newberry's cinquefoil is utilized "heavily" during the winter and spring and "moderately" during the fall by Rocky Mountain mule deer [8]. It is also utilized by mule deer in Oregon [12,13].

Further research is needed on all aspects of Newberry's cinquefoil ecology.


REFERENCES


1. Aitken, Marti; Parks, Katherine Gray. 2004. Guide to the common Potentilla species of the Blue Mountains ecoregion. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-603. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 50 p. [49296]
2. Cronquist, Arthur; Holmgren, Noel H.; Holmgren, Patricia K. 1997. Intermountain flora: Vascular plants of the Intermountain West, U.S.A. Vol. 3, Part A: Subclass Rosidae (except Fabales). New York: The New York Botanical Garden. 446 p. [28652]
3. Hann, Wendel; Havlina, Doug; Shlisky, Ayn; [and others]. 2005. Interagency fire regime condition class guidebook. Version 1.2, [Online]. In: Interagency fire regime condition class website. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; U.S. Department of the Interior; The Nature Conservancy; Systems for Environmental Management (Producer). Variously paginated [+ appendices]. Available: http://www.frcc.gov/docs/1.2.2.2/Complete_Guidebook_V1.2.pdf [2007, May 23]. [66734]
4. Hickman, James C., ed. 1993. The Jepson manual: Higher plants of California. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1400 p. [21992]
5. Hitchcock, C. Leo; Cronquist, Arthur; Ownbey, Marion; Thompson, J. W. 1961. Vascular plants of the Pacific Northwest. Part 3: Saxifragaceae to Ericaceae. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press. 614 p. [1167]
6. Kartesz, John T. 1999. A synonymized checklist and atlas with biological attributes for the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. 1st ed. In: Kartesz, John T.; Meacham, Christopher A. Synthesis of the North American flora (Windows Version 1.0), [CD-ROM]. Chapel Hill, NC: North Carolina Botanical Garden (Producer). In cooperation with: The Nature Conservancy; U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. [36715]
7. Kartesz, John Thomas. 1988. A flora of Nevada. Reno, NV: University of Nevada. 1729 p. [In 2 volumes]. Dissertation. [42426]
8. 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]
9. LANDFIRE Rapid Assessment. 2005. Reference condition modeling manual (Version 2.1), [Online]. In: LANDFIRE. Cooperative Agreement 04-CA-11132543-189. Boulder, CO: The Nature Conservancy; U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; U.S. Department of the Interior (Producers). 72 p. Available: http://www.landfire.gov/downloadfile.php?file=RA_Modeling_Manual_v2_1.pdf [2007, May 24]. [66741]
10. LANDFIRE Rapid Assessment. 2007. Rapid assessment reference condition models, [Online]. In: LANDFIRE. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Lab; U.S. Geological Survey; The Nature Conservancy (Producers). Available: http://www.landfire.gov/models_EW.php [2008, April 18] [66533]
11. Leckenby, Donavin A. 1978. Mule deer occupancy of plant communities on a south-central Oregon winter range. Job Final Report. Research Project Number: W-70-R. July 1, 1965 to June 30, 1976. Portland, OR: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. 81 p. [12496]
12. Leckenby, Donavin A.; Adams, Arthur W. 1969. Ecological study of mule deer. Project No. W-53-R-11. Job Progress Report No. 1: July 1, 1968 to June 30, 1969. Portland, OR: Oregon Game Commission, Research Division. 51 p. [16754]
13. Leckenby, Donavin A.; Sheehy, Dennis P.; Nellis, Carl H.; [and others]. 1982. Wildlife habitats in managed rangelands--the Great Basin of southeastern Oregon: mule deer. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-139. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 40 p. [1432]
14. Leckenby, Donavin A.; Toweill, Dale E. 1983. Response of selected plant species seeded on mule deer winter range. Journal of Range Management. 36(3): 312-316. [68486]
15. Munz, Philip A.; Keck, David D. 1973. A California flora and supplement. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1905 p. [6155]
16. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
17. Tiehm, Arnold; Ertter, Barbara. 1984. Potentilla basaltica (Rosaceae), a new species from Nevada. Brittonia. 36(3): 228-231. [68485]
18. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1937. Range plant handbook. Washington, DC. 532 p. [2387]
19. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2008. PLANTS Database, [Online]. Available: http://plants.usda.gov/. [34262]
20. Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Washington Natural Heritage Program. 2005. Potentilla newberryi Gray, [Online]. In: Field guide to selected rare plants of Washington. Olympia, WA: Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Washington Natural Heritage Program; Spokane, WA: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (Producers). Available: http://www1.dnr.wa.gov/nhp/refdesk/fguide/pdf/potnew.pdf [2008, June 10]. [70605]

FEIS Home Page