Index of Species Information
SPECIES: Bromus inermis
SPECIES: Bromus inermis
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION :
Howard, Janet L. 1996. Bromus inermis. 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/ .
SCS PLANT CODE :
COMMON NAMES :
The currently accepted scientific name of smooth brome is Bromus inermis
Leyss. Infrataxa are [54,61,68]:
B. inermis ssp. inermis Leyss
B. inermis ssp. inermis var. divaricatus Rohlena
B. inermis ssp. inermis var. inermis Leyss
Kartesz  recognizes Pumpelly brome as a subspecies of B. inermis, B.
inermis ssp. pumpellianus (Scribn.) Wagnon. FEIS follows the treatment
of other authorities in recognizing Pumpelly brome as a separate
species, B. pumpellianus Scribn. [54,58,61,67,115,121]. (A literature
summary of B. pumpellianus is available in FEIS.) Considerable
hybridization and introgression have occurred between smooth brome, an
introduced species, and Pumpelly brome, a native species [5,53,121].
Smooth brome does not hybridize with other North American species .
LIFE FORM :
FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS :
No special status
OTHER STATUS :
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Bromus inermis
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION :
Smooth brome is native to Eurasia. In North America it occurs from
Alaska and all the Canadian provinces and territories south to southern
California and New Mexico, northern Oklahoma, and North Carolina
Smooth brome occurs in most FRES ecosystems.
AK CA CO CT DE HI ID IL IN IA
KS KY ME MD MA MI MN MO MT NE
NV NH NJ NM NY NC ND OH OK OR
PA RI TN TX UT VT WA WV WI WY
DC AB BC MB NB NF NT NS ON PE
PQ SK YT
BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :
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
10 Wyoming Basin
11 Southern Rocky Mountains
12 Colorado Plateau
13 Rocky Mountain Piedmont
14 Great Plains
15 Black Hills Uplift
16 Upper Missouri Basin and Broken Lands
KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :
SAF COVER TYPES :
Smooth brome occurs in most SAF Cover Types.
SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES :
Smooth brome occurs in most SRM Cover Types.
HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES :
SPECIES: Bromus inermis
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE :
Livestock: Smooth brome cultivars have been bred for nutritional
quality and adaptation to selected climates. This has made smooth brome
one of the most important exotic forage grasses in the United States and
Canada. It is widely planted in pastures and rangelands from Texas to
Alaska and Yukon Territory [87,88,110].
Wildlife: Grazing wildlife utilize smooth brome to varying degrees,
depending upon wildlife species and smooth brome quality. Elk use it as
a winter food . Mule deer in central Utah were found to use it only
lightly , but deer utilization of smooth brome is generally
considered good [40,110]. Geese  and small rodents such as pocket
gophers  also graze smooth brome. The seeds may not be preferred by
granivores. Everett and others  found that when offered the seed of
18 herbaceous species, deer mouse selected smooth brome seed the least.
Smooth brome provides cover for birds and small mammals . Ducks,
[33,78], gray partridge , American bittern, northern harrier, and
short-eared owl  use it as nesting cover.
Early growth of smooth brome is highly palatable. Palatability and
nutritional quality drop rapidly after flowering. Fall green-up
provides palatable forage later in the year .
The palatability of smooth brome has been rated as follows :
UT CO WY MT ND
cattle good good good good good
domestic sheep good good good good good
horses good good good good good
NUTRITIONAL VALUE :
The National Academy of Sciences  found the nutritional content of
fresh, flowering smooth brome in the United States was as follows:
dry matter (%) 27.1
ash (%) 1.9
crude fiber (%) 8.3
ether extract (%) 0.9
N-free extract(%) 13.2
protein (%, N x 6.25) 2.8
digestible energy (Mcal/kg)
domestic sheep 0.78
Nutritional content of fresh smooth brome in immature, early bloom,
milk, dough, overripe, and weathered stages, and of cured smooth brome
in each stage, is also available .
The nutritional value of smooth brome for wildlife has been rated as
UT CO WY MT ND
elk good good ---- poor ----
mule deer good fair ---- ---- poor
white-tailed deer ---- ---- ---- ---- poor
upland game birds good ---- ---- ---- poor
small nongame birds fair ---- ---- ---- ----
waterfowl fair ---- ---- fair ----
small mammals good good ---- ---- ----
COVER VALUE :
The cover value of smooth brome has been rated as follows :
UT CO WY MT ND
upland game birds fair ---- ---- good good
waterfowl fair ---- ---- ---- fair
small nongame birds good fair ---- fair fair
small mammals good fair ---- good ----
VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES :
Smooth brome has been extensively used for rehabilitation. It is cold
hardy and fairly resistant to saline soils and drought . The
ability of most cultivars to spread rhizomatously makes smooth brome a
good soil binder [56,103,104]. It is recommended for erosion control
and streambank and stream bottom stabilization in all areas of the
United States except the Southeast [104,118]. Southern cultivars tend
to be more strongly rhizomatous than northern cultivars, and generally
give the best erosion control . Some southern cultivars will grow
in northern latitudes of the United States . Smooth brome has also
been successful in rehabilitating mined lands [38,43], game ranges
[51,65], roadsides , and ski areas . Smooth brome establishes
on high-elevation sites . It can be an aggressive colonizer on many
sites, however, and may crowd out native species .
Smooth brome showed poor survivorship on semiarid canyonland in
northwestern Idaho that was disked and seeded with several grass species
to remove yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis) .
OTHER USES AND VALUES :
OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Range: Smooth brome's tolerance to grazing is generally rated as high
. It is highly adaptable, having persisted in many of the habitats
where it was planted to increase forage production including
pinyon-juniper (Pinus-Juniperus spp.) , quaking aspen (Populus
tremuloides) , and subalpine and alpine ranges [56,102]. It has
persisted on old saltgrass (Distichlis spicata) meadows with saline
soils once the saltgrass was removed [84,85].
Smooth brome may not tolerate grazing on all habitat or site types.
Currie and Smith  reported that smooth brome planted on
low-fertility ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) forest soils in Colorado
declined under even light-intensity cattle grazing. They speculated
that smooth brome is more likely to persist under cattle grazing on
Laycock and Conrad  used cattle to test several grazing systems on
rangeland seeded to crested wheatgrasses (Agropyron cristatum and A.
desertorum) and smooth brome in mountain big sagebrush (Artemisia
tridentata spp. vaseyana) habitat in Utah. They found that average
cattle weight gain was the same under all systems, but heavy June
grazing in alternate years best promoted grass production.
Ungulates in Yellowstone National Park utilized smooth brome growing in
association with other graminoids and forbs, but did not graze smooth
brome where it grew in a monoculture .
Forestry: In British Columbia, height and biomass of lodgepole pine
(Pinus contorta var. latifolia) seedlings established from a mix of
lodgepole pine seed and smooth brome and other grass seed were less
than height and biomass of lodgepole pine seedlings established from
lodgepole pine seed sown alone .
Native grassland restoration: Smooth brome dominates many native
grasslands and old fields . Masters and Vogel  stated that on
tallgrass prairie, it is usually found in areas with a history of
overgrazing and/or fire exclusion. Grassland restoration efforts often
include controlling smooth brome with cool-season grass herbicides such
as atrazine and glyphosate, mowing, and/or prescribed fire .
Anderson  found that near Lincoln, Nebraska, fall application of
glyphosate helped control smooth brome. Atrazine may not be as
effective; other studies [83,96] have reported that while atrazine
controlled other exotic cool-season grasses, it did not significantly
reduce smooth brome.
Establishment and maintenance: Seed handling and planting guidelines
for smooth brome are available [49,116,117]. Cultivars adapted to
selected environments and/or regions are sold commercially
Smooth brome requires fertile soil in order to maintain nutritional
quality. On infertile soils it needs periodic fertilization or a
companion nitrogen fixer. On rangelands smooth brome is usually planted
in a mix with alfalfa (Medicago sativa), yellow sweet clover (Melilotus
officinalis), or other legume species. Fertilization affects growth
allocation: Watkins  found that fertilizers increased leaf and
shoot growth but reduced rhizome and root growth.
Rhizomatous cultivars become sod-bound after several years unless litter
is removed by grazing and/or fire [56,110].
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Bromus inermis
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
Smooth brome is an exotic, cool-season grass from 1.3 to 3.2 feet
(0.4-1.0 m) tall. Blades are flat. The inflorescence is an open
panicle from 2.4 to 6.8 inches (6-17 cm) long bearing 6 to 11-flowered
spikelets. Lemmas have short awns (<2 mm) or are unawned [53,54,61].
Two principle types of smooth brome are recognized, the northern and
southern. The northern type is weakly rhizomatous, with leaves well up
on the stem and short glumes. A few northern cultivars are actually
bunchgrasses. The southern type is strongly rhizomatous, with leaves
near the base of the stem and long glumes. Other notable differences
are earlier spring growth of the southern type and more even growth of
the northern type through the growing season .
In a meadow in West Virginia on shallow silty loam, smooth brome roots
grew to a depth of 18 inches (46 cm), with most of the root biomass
occurring in the first 3 inches (7.6) of soil. (Average root
productivity was 717.7 lbs/acre inch at 0-3 inches below ground .)
Witte  found roots as long as 9.4 feet (2.87 m).
Due to cloning, smooth brome is a long-lived species. Plantings have
persisted for at least 60 years .
RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :
REGENERATION PROCESSES :
Smooth brome reproduces by seed, rhizomes, and tillers. Spread by seed
has been rated moderate, and vegetative spread has been rated good .
Smooth brome is usually cross-pollinated [72,86], although it may
self-fertilize from different spikelets of the same plant . McKone
 found that seed set was significantly lower in smooth brome than in
other brome species. Insect herbivory has been cited as a factor
reducing seed set in smooth brome [86,91]. Seed yield of smooth brome
broadcast-planted in Michigan 174 pounds per acre when grown with
alfalfa and 121 pounds per acre when grown alone . Seed has
remained viable for 22 months to over 14 years [49,55]. Seed stored in
a shed for 19 years showed 20 percent germination . Seed requires
stratification to germinate. Germinative capacity of fresh, stratified
seed has varied from 83 to above 95 percent in the laboratory .
Optimal temperatures for germination in the greenhouse were from 68 to
86 degrees Fahrenheit (20-30 deg C) . Like all cool-season species,
however, smooth brome can germinate at lower temperatures. Bleak 
reported that smooth brome seed sown in late fall to early winter in
central Utah germinated and produced roots and shoots under deep snow
cover. Light enhances germination but is not required .
Seedling growth is rapid [56,59]. Knobloch , who described
germination and seedling development in detail, reported that 54 days
after sowing, greenhouse-grown seedlings had 150-millimeter-long roots,
five leaves, and had begun tillering. Baker and Jung  found that
under greenhouse conditions, the optimal day temperature for growth was
between 64.9 and 76.8 degrees Fahrenheit (18.3-24.9 deg C), and that food
reserves were depleted less with low night temperatures than with warm
night temperatures. Cultivars differ in rate of growth and drought
SITE CHARACTERISTICS :
Smooth brome is widely adapted to a variety of sites. It is common in
riparian zones, valley bottoms, and dryland sites. [48,56,119]. It is
adapted to all soil textures [49,55,90], although it may not thrive on
sand or heavy clay . Smooth brome tolerates acid soils; it
comprised the dominant cover on a coal spoil of pH 4.5 in British
Columbia . It does not grow on soils that are more than moderately
alkaline . It is fairly saline tolerant . Smooth brome grows
best on moist, well-drained soils , but tolerates poorly drained
soils . Smooth brome is best adapted to regions receiving more than
15 inches (380 mm) of annual precipitation [98,119]. Eleven inches (280
mm) of annual precipitation is the minimum that will support smooth
brome without irrigation .
Some cultivars of smooth brome are adapted to northern latitudes and
high elevations [60,102]. Smooth brome persists to about 9,000 feet
(2,743 m) elevation in the northern Rocky Mountains [24,119] and to
about 11,000 feet (3,300 m) in the central and southern Rocky Mountains
. General elevational ranges in several states are:
from 7,000 to 10,000 feet (2,134-3,048 m) in Arizona 
below 8,900 feet (2,700 m) in California 
from 4,500 to 10,000 feet (1,372-3,048 m) in Colorado 
from 4,096 to 10,352 feet (1,280-3,235 m) in Utah 
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS :
Smooth brome generally invades after disturbance and persists
[19,20,37]. It is a common invader of disturbed prairie throughout the
Great Plains [112,125,126]. In Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming,
smooth brome cover was similar in young eastern cottonwood (Populus
deltoides), mature eastern cottonwood, and grassland areas . Boggs
and Weaver  reported that along the Yellowstone River, moderate
grazing increased the occurrence of shrubs in mature eastern cottonwood,
and severe grazing converted the area to smooth brome, timothy (Phleum
pratense), and Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis).
Smooth brome tolerates moderate shade to full sun [49,56]
SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT :
Smooth brome undergoes fall green-up. Inflorescences are initiated
during cool, short fall days . In colder climates, smooth brome is
dormant in winter. It may remain green year-round in southern climates
. Spring growth begins early in the season [110,107]. Lengthening
culms expose the panicles in late spring to early summer , and
smooth brome flowers in summer. In Minnesota, flowering occurred from
early to late June [80,86]. It occurred in late May or early June in
Ames, Iowa, with later, sporadic flowering . Phenology is delayed
in northern latitudes and high elevations. Smooth brome on the Wasatch
Plateau of Utah flowers 85 to 102 days after snowmelt . Seed
matures in early to late summer . Smooth brome grows throughout the
growing season when soil water is adequate. Under dry soil conditions
it becomes dormant, but it resumes growth when soils moisten .
SPECIES: Bromus inermis
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS :
Most smooth brome cultivars are rhizomatous [56,110], and survive fire
by sprouting from rhizomes. Weakly rhizomatous or bunchgrass types
probably regenerate after fire primarily by tillering. Rates of
postfire recovery probably differ between cultivars, with rhizomatous
types recovering more quickly than bunchgrass types, but such
differences have not been documented in the literature.
Periodic early spring or fall fire promotes rhizomatous smooth brome by
removing litter from sod-bound plants [56,110].
FIRE REGIMES :
Find fire regime information for the plant communities in which this
species may occur by entering the species name in the FEIS home page under
"Find Fire Regimes".
POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY :
Rhizomatous herb, rhizome in soil
SPECIES: Bromus inermis
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT :
Smooth brome is probably top-killed by fire.
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT :
PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE :
Early spring (late March-April) or late-season (late summer-fall) fire
can increase smooth brome productivity [62,65], especially when smooth
brome has become sod-bound. Late spring fire generally damages
cool-season grasses such as smooth brome [8,82]. Old , Kirsch and
Kruse , and Blankespoor  have reported reductions in smooth
brome with late spring burning.
Old  attributed decreases in smooth brome after late April fire to
the advanced stage of development of smooth brome. Rate of smooth brome
regrowth after fire cannot always be predicted based solely upon season
of burning and attendant phenological stage, however. Blankenspoor and
Larson  cited soil moisture and nutrient levels and soil texture as
factors other than phenological stage that may affect smooth brome rate
In order to determine at which stage of growth smooth brome is most
susceptible to fire, Willson  prescribe-burned smooth brome at
tiller emergence (late March at the Mead, Nebraska, study site), tiller
elongation (mid-May), and heading (late May). Late March fire had no
significant effect on smooth brome. Mid-May or late May fire reduced
fall tiller density approximately 50 percent when compared to controls.
Examples of late spring fire: Short- and mid-grass prairie of Pipestone
National Monument, Minnesota, was spring-burned (mid- to late April)
annually from 1983 to 1987. The prairie had been severely degraded by
invasion of cool-season exotic grasses including smooth brome,
quackgrass (Elytrigia repens), and Kentucky bluegrass. Fire severity
was low to moderate except in 1984, when high fuel levels were present.
Smooth brome postfire coverage was :
1984 1985 1987
---- ---- ----
season spring spring summer
cover (%) 21.3 22.4 26.4(a)
a = data pooled with quackgrass
Lack of flower and seed production was noted in the cool-season grasses
including smooth brome, while native warm-season grasses increased
height growth and seed production. Height (cm) of smooth brome was
as follows :
1983 1984 1985 1987
--------------- --------------- ------ ------
spring summer spring summer spring summer
60 50 60 60 50 40
Smooth brome flowering was inhibited by a 2 May, 1972, prescribed fire in
Minnesota prairie .
Examples of fire in seasons other than late spring: On the Rathbun
Wildlife Area in southern Iowa, smooth brome is managed as ring-necked
pheasant cover. Smooth brome showed a significant (P<0.05) increase in
percent coverage following September or April prescribed burning.
February burning resulted in a nonsignificant decrease in smooth brome
coverage, with significant declines in smooth brome frequency in some
A 22 April, 1983, prescribed fire on the Hillendale Game Farm of central
Pennsylvania increased smooth brome production. On 5 October, 1983,
production was 69 kilograms per hectare on the unburned control and 612
kilograms per hectare on the burn .
In Iowa, three consecutive early spring (23-28 March, 1986; 11-12 April,
1987; 13-20 April, 1988) prescribed fires in pastureland excluded from
grazing had no significant effect on smooth brome. On some plots,
atrazine was applied 7 to 10 days after burning; the fire plus atrazine
treatments had no significant effect on smooth brome .
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE :
Late spring burning has sometimes been only marginally effective in
controlling smooth brome [23,93]. Kirsh  reported that smooth brome
was actually stimulated by an early May prescribed fire. This variable
response may be due, in part, to the fact that control effects have been
targeted against several cool-season exotic grasses rather than smooth
brome alone. Since phenologies of cool-season grasses differ, timing of
a particular fire may reduce other cool-season species but not smooth
In a defoliation experiment, Harrison and Romo  found that smooth
brome regrowth was related to both growth stage and soil moisture
conditions. After defoliation in the vegetative stage, smooth brome
resumed growth in 45 to 75 growing days when soil moisture was
favorable. Smooth brome did not resume growth until the next growing
season after clipping in dry years. When plants were defoliated during
reproduction, new tillers did not emerge until the next fall regardless
of soil moisture conditions.
Blankenspoor and Larson  used a prescribed fire and watering
treatment to determine smooth brome's response to late spring (9 May,
1989) fire under low and high soil moisture levels. They found the
following changes in percent smooth brome biomass after treatment:
high-water -17.0 +10.5
low-water -8.2 +11.7
Decreases in the two burned treatments were significantly different
(p=0.05), but increases in the unburned treatments were not. Apparently
when soil moisture is high, warm-season grasses are able to outcompete
fire-injured smooth brome for water. With less soil moisture available,
warm-season grasses may be less able to take competitive advantage of
fire-injured smooth brome .
In the same study, Blankespoor and Larson  found that on unburned
plots, increases in smooth brome biomass were greatest on plots with low
initial smooth brome biomass. This relationship approached significance
(p=0.06) for unburned, high-water plots and was strongly significant
(p=0.001) for unburned, low-water plots. As a cool-season species with
substantial growth occurring early in the growing season, smooth brome
apparently encounters little competition from water-stressed,
warm-season plants in the absence of fire.
Lyon's Research Paper (Lyon 1971) provides further information on
prescribed fire use and postfire response of plant species including
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
If smooth brome is growing in association with a legume and an
increase in smooth brome productivity is desired, early spring rather
than late summer or early fall fire is generally recommended.
Late-season fire harms many legume species [62,74,94].
Fire control: An important management goal in remnant prairie is to
maintain or increase diversity of native species and depress growth and
production of exotic invaders such as smooth brome. Becker 
concluded that annual spring burning on Pipestone National Monument
prairie helped control smooth brome and other cool-season exotic
grasses, and that the structure, composition, and diversity of the
severely degraded native prairie was improved by annual burning.
Similarly, two consecutive spring fires on portions of an eastern South
Dakota tallgrass prairie where smooth brome was dominant reduced smooth
brome and Kentucky bluegrass coverage .
Blankespoor and Larson's  prescribed fire-water treatment study
suggests that prescribed late spring fire will most effectively control
smooth brome in wet years. They recommend continuing a program of
prescribed burning through drier years, however. Since they found that
smooth brome increased in importance without burning, and that increases
were greatest when initial smooth brome biomass was low, they concluded
that failing to burn smooth brome in dry years is likely to accelerate
For control, Willson  recommended burning smooth brome in late
spring after it has produced five or more green leaves per tiller;
unelongated tillers, which are not greatly damaged by fire, generally
have fewer than five green leaves per tiller.
Postfire plantings: Smooth brome has been extensively planted to
increase forage and/or reduce erosion in burned areas
[14,29,34,35,61,79,106]. This practice has been questioned because
native species appear to be at least equally effective in reducing
erosion, and exotic grasses such as smooth brome may interfere with the
growth of native forbs and grasses .
Postfire plantings of smooth brome have been successful across a wide
range of habitats and climates. For example, big sagebrush-threetip
sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata-A. tripartita) rangeland in Idaho was
burned in summer 1937 and seeded with one of six grasses to reduce
sagebrush cover and increase forage production. On plots seeded to
smooth brome, smooth brome yield increased from 57 pounds per acre in
1940 to 148 pounds per acre in 1948. Sagebrush coverage was lower on
smooth brome plots than on plots of any of the five other grasses
In Montana smooth brome seeded in after stand-replacing fire in
lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) showed "fair" vigor (density of 4.4
plants/sq ft) on slopes with a southwestern exposure and "good" vigor
(density of 8.2 plants/sq ft) on slopes with a northeastern exposure
Litter accumulation: Bleak  reported a 39 percent average rate of
decay of bagged smooth brome litter in direct contact with snow cover
over two consecutive winters.
SPECIES: Bromus inermis
1. Abouguendia, Koheir M.; Whitman, Warren C. 1979. Disappearance of dead
plant material in a mixed grass prairie. Oecologia. 42: 23-29. 
2. Anderson, Bruce. 1994. Converting smooth brome pasture to warm-season
grasses. In: Wickett, Robert G.; Lewis, Patricia Dolan; Woodliffe,
Allen; Pratt, Paul, eds. Spirit of the land, our prairie legacy:
Proceedings, 13th North American prairie conference; 1992 August 6-9;
Windsor, ON. Windsor, ON: Department of Parks and Recreation: 157-160.
3. Anderson, Roger C. 1990. The historic role of fire in the North American
grassland. In: Collins, Scott L.; Wallace, Linda L., eds. Fire in North
American tallgrass prairies. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press:
4. Armstrong, K. C. 1981. The evolution of Bromus inermis and related
species of Bromus sect. Pnigma. Botanische Jahrbucher Syst. 102(1-4):
5. Armstrong, K. C. 1982. Hybrids between the tetraploids of Bromus inermis
and B. pumpellianus. Canadian Journal of Botany. 60(4): 476-482.
6. Atkins, M. D.; Smith, James E., Jr. 1967. Grass seed production and
harvest in the Great Plains. Farmers' Bulletin 2226. Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 30 p. 
7. Austin, Dennis D.; Stevens, Richard; Jorgensen, Kent R.; Urness, Philip
J. 1994. Preferences of mule deer for 16 grasses found on Intermountain
winter ranges. Journal of Range Management. 47(4): 308-311. 
8. Bailey, Arthur W. 1978. Use of fire to manage grasslands of the Great
Plains: Northern Great Plains and adjacent forests. In: Hyder, Donald
N., ed. Proceedings, 1st international rangeland congress; 1978 August
14-18; Denver, CO. Denver, CO: Society for Range Management: 691-693.
9. Baker, Barton S.; Jung, G. A. 1968. Effect of environmental conditions
on the growth of four perennial grasses. I. Response to controlled
temperature. Agronomy Journal. 60: 155-158. 
10. Bechard, Marc J. 1982. Effect of vegetative cover on foraging site
selection by Swainson's hawk. Condor. 84(2): 153-159. 
11. Becker, Donald A. 1989. Five years of annual prairie burns. In: Bragg,
Thomas A.; Stubbendieck, James, eds. Prairie pioneers: ecology, history
and culture: Proceedings, 11th North American prairie conference; 1988
August 7-11; Lincoln, NE. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska: 163-168.
12. Behan, Mark J. 1983. The suitability of commercially available grass
species for revegetation of Montana ski area. Journal of Range
Management. 36(5): 565-567. 
13. 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.
14. Blaisdell, James P. 1949. Competition between sagebrush seedlings and
reseeded grasses. Ecology. 30(4): 512-519. 
15. Blankespoor, Gilbert W. 1987. The effects of prescribed burning on a
tall-grass prairie remnant in eastern South Dakota. Prairie Naturalist.
19(3): 177-188. 
16. Blankespoor, Gilbert W.; Larson, Eric A. 1994. Response of smooth brome
(Bromus inermis Leyss.) to burning under varying soil moisture
conditions. American Midland Naturalist. 131: 266-272. 
17. Bleak, A. T. 1959. Germinative characteristics of grass seed under snow.
Journal of Range Management. 12: 298-302. 
18. Bleak, Alvin T. 1970. Disappearance of plant material under a winter
snow cover. Ecology. 51(5): 915-917. 
19. Boggs, Keith Webster. 1984. Succession in riparian communities of the
lower Yellowstone River, Montana. Bozeman, MT: Montana State University.
107 p. Thesis. 
20. Boggs, Keith; Weaver, T. 1992. Response of riparian shrubs to declining
water availability. 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: 48-51. 
21. Bowes, Garry. 1981. Improving aspen poplar and prickly rose-covered
rangeland with herbicide and fertilizer. Canadian Journal of Plant
Science. 61: 401-405. 
22. Bragg, Thomas B. 1991. Implications for long-term prairie management
from seasonal burning of loess hill and tallgrass prairie. In: Nodvin,
Stephen C.; Waldrop, Thomas A., eds. Fire and the environment:
ecological and cultural perspectives: Proceedings of an international
symposium; 1990 March 20-24; Knoxville, TN. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-69.
Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Southeastern Forest Experiment Station: 34-44. 
23. Branhagen, Alan J. 1990. Gravel prairie, sedge meadow and fen
restoration underway at Kieselberg Forest Preserve. Restoration &
Management Notes. 8(2): 102-103. 
24. Brown, Ray W. 1973. Transpiration of native and introduced grasses on a
high-elevation harsh site. In: Ecology and reclamation of devestated
land. London: Gordon & Breach Science Publ., L.T.D.: 467-481. 
25. Bultsma, Paul M.; Haas, Russell J. 1989. Grass varieties for North
Dakota. R-794 (Revised). Fargo, ND: North Dakota State University, North
Dakota State University Extension Service. 7 p. 
26. Burgess, Harold H. 1969. Habitat management on a mid-continent waterfowl
refuge. Journal of Wildlife Management. 33(4): 843-847. 
27. Carroll, John P.; Crawford, Richard D. 1991. Roadside nesting by gray
partridge in north-central North Dakota. Wildlife Society Bulletin.
19(3): 286-291. 
28. Clark, M. B.; McLean, A. 1979. Growth of lodgepole pine seedlings in
competition with grass. Res. Note No. 86. Victoria, BC: Province of
British Columbia, Ministry of Forests, Research Branch. 12 p. 
29. Clary, Warren P. 1988. Plant density and cover response to several
seeding techniques following wildfire. Res. Note INT-384. Ogden, UT:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research
Station. 6 p. 
30. Cook, C. W. 1943. A study of the roots of Bromus inermis in relation to
drought resistance. Ecology. 24(2): 169-182. 
31. Cooper, H. W.; Smith, James E., Jr.; Atkins, M. D. 1957. Producing and
harvesting grass seed in the Great Plains. Farmers' Bulletin 2112.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 30 p. 
32. Coulman, B. E. 1987. Yield and composition of monocultures and mixtures
of bromegrass, orchardgrass and timothy. Canadian Journal of Plant
Science. 67: 203-213. 
33. Cowardin, Lewis M.; Gilmer, David S.; Shaiffer, Charles W. 1985. Mallard
recruitment in the agricultural environment of North Dakota. Wildlife
Monographs No. 92. Washington, DC: The Wildlife Society. 37 p. 
34. Crane, M. F.; Habeck, J. R. 1982. Vegetative responses after a severe
wildfire on a Douglas-fir/ninebark habitat type. In: Baumgartner, David
M., compiler. Site preparation and fuels management on steep terrain:
Proceedings of a symposium; 1982 February 15-17; Spokane, WA. Pullman,
WA: Washington State University, Cooperative Extension: 133-138.
35. 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. 
36. Currie, Pat O.; Smith, Dwight R. 1970. Response of seeded ranges to
different grazing intensities in the ponderosa pine zone of Colorado.
Prod. Rep. No. 112. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service. 41 p. 
37. D'Antonio, Carla M.; Vitousek, Peter M. 1992. Biological invasions by
exotic grasses, the grass/fire cycle, and global change. Annual Review
of Ecological Systems. 23: 63-87. 
38. DePuit, Edward J. [n.d.]. Cool-season perennial grass establishment on
Northern Great Plains mined lands: status of current technology. In:
Symposium on surface coal mining and reclamation in the Northern Great
Plains: Proceedings; [Date of conference unknown]; [Location of
conference unknown]. [Place of publication unknown]. [Publisher
unknown]. 1-24. 
39. Despain, Del W. 1987. History and results of prescribed burning of
pinyon-juniper woodland on the Hualapai Indian Reservation in Arizona.
In: Everett, Richard L., compiler. Proceedings--pinyon-juniper
conference; 1986 January 13-16; Reno, NV. Gen. Tech. Tep. INT-215.
Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain
Research Station: 145-151. 
40. 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. 
41. Duebbert, Harold F.; Lokemoen, John T. 1977. Upland nesting of American
bitterns, marsh hawks, and short-eared owls. Prairie Naturalist. 9(3/4):
42. Ehley, Alan M. 1992. Integrated roadside vegetation management (IRVM): a
county approach to roadside management in Iowa. In: Smith, Daryl D.;
Jacobs, Carol A., eds. Recapturing a vanishing heritage: Proceedings,
12th North American prairie conference; 1990 August 5-9; Cedar Falls,
IA. Cedar Falls, IA: University of Northern Iowa: 159-160. 
43. Elliott, Charles L.; McKendrick, Jay D.; Helm, D. 1987. Plant biomass,
cover, and survival of species used for stripmine reclamation in
south-central Alaska, U.S.A. Arctic and Alpine Research. 19(4): 572-577.
44. Ellison, Lincoln. 1954. Subalpine vegetation of the Wasatch Plateau,
Utah. Ecological Monographs. 24: 89-184. 
45. Evanko, Anthony B. 1953. Performance of several forage species on newly
burned lodgepole pine sites. Res. Note. 133. Missoula, MT: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Rocky Mountain
Forest and Range Experiment Station. 6 p. 
46. Everett, Richard L.; Meeuwig, Richard O.; Stevens, Richard. 1978. Deer
mouse preference for seed of commonly planted species, indigenous weed
seed, and sacrifice foods. Journal of Range Management. 31(1): 70-73.
47. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and
Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. 
48. Frank, Douglas A.; McNaughton, Samuel J. 1992. The ecology of plants,
large mammalian herbivores, and drought in Yellowstone National Park.
Ecology. 73(6): 2043-2058. 
49. Fulbright, Timothy E.; Redente, Edward F.; Hargis, Norman E. 1982.
Growing Colorado plants from seed: a state of the art: Volume II:
Grasses and grasslike plants. FWS/OBS-82/29. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 113 p. 
50. 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. 
51. George, Ronnie R.; Farris, Allen L.; Schwartz, Charles C.; [and others].
1978. Effects of controlled burning on selected upland habitats in
southern Iowa. Iowa Wildlife Research Bulletin No. 25. Des Moines, IA:
Iowa Conservation Commission Wildlife Section. 38 p. 
52. Gist, George R.; Smith, R. M. 1948. Root development of several common
forage grasses to a depth of eighteen inches. Journal of the American
Society of Agronomy. 40: 1036-1042. 
53. Gleason, Henry A.; Cronquist, Arthur. 1991. Manual of vascular plants of
northeastern United States and adjacent Canada. 2nd ed. New York: New
York Botanical Garden. 910 p. 
54. Great Plains Flora Association. 1986. Flora of the Great Plains.
Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. 1392 p. 
55. Hafenrichter, A. L.; Schwendiman, John L.; Harris, Harold L.; [and
others]. 1968. Grasses and legumes for soil conservation in the Pacific
Northwest and Great Basin states. Agric. Handb. 339. Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 69 p.
56. Hardy BBT Limited. 1989. Manual of plant species suitability for
reclamation in Alberta. 2d ed. Report No. RRTAC 89-4. Edmonton, AB:
Alberta Land Conservation and Reclamation Council. 436 p. 
57. Harrington, H. D. 1964. Manual of the plants of Colorado. 2d ed.
Chicago: The Swallow Press Inc. 666 p. 
58. Harrison, T.; Romo, J. T. 1994. Regrowth of smooth bromegrass (Bromus
inermis Leyss.) following defoliation. Canadian Journal of Plant
Science. 74: 531-537. 
59. Hassell, Wendell G.; Carlson, Jack; Doughty, Jim. 1983. Grasses for
revegetation of mountain sites. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Shaw, Nancy,
compilers. Managing Intermountain rangelands--improvement of range &
wildlife habitats: Proceedings of symposia; 1981 September 15-17; Twin
Falls, ID; 1982 June 22-24; Elko, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-157. Ogden,
UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest
and Range Experiment Station: 95-101. 
60. Heide, O. M.; Hay, R. K. M.; Baugerod, H. 1985. Specific daylength
effects on leaf growth and dry-matter production in high-latitude
grasses. Annals of Botany. 55: 579-586. 
61. Hickman, James C., ed. 1993. The Jepson manual: Higher plants of
California. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1400 p.
62. Higgins, Kenneth F.; Kruse, Arnold D.; Piehl, James L. 1989. Prescribed
burning guidelines in the Northern Great Plains. Ext. Circ. EC-760.
Brookings, SD: South Dakota State University, Cooperative Extension
Service, South Dakota Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit. 36 p.
63. Hobbs, N. Thompson; Baker, Dan L.; Ellis, James E.; Swift, David M.
1981. Composition and quality of elk winter diets in Colorado. Journal
of Wildlife Management. 45(1): 156-171. 
64. Holzworth, Larry; Lacey, John. 1993. Species selection criteria for
seeding dryland pastures in Montana. Extension Bulletin 19. Bozeman, MT:
Montana State Univeristy, Extension Service. 12 p. 
65. Hughes, H. Glenn. 1985. Vegetation responses to spring burning in an
improved pasture in central Pennsylvania. In: Long, James N., ed. Fire
management: the challenge of protection and use: Proceedings of a
symposium; 1985 April 17-19; Logan, UT. [Place of publication unknown].
[Publisher unknown]. 3-9. 
66. Hull, A. C., Jr. 1974. Species for seeding arid rangeland in southern
Idaho. Journal of Range Management. 27(3): 216-218. 
67. Hulten, Eric. 1968. Flora of Alaska and neighboring territories.
Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. 1008 p. 
68. Kartesz, John T. 1994. A synonymized checklist of the vascular flora of
the United States, Canada, and Greenland. Volume II--thesaurus. 2nd ed.
Portland, OR: Timber Press. 816 p. 
69. Kearney, Thomas H.; Peebles, Robert H.; Howell, John Thomas; McClintock,
Elizabeth. 1960. Arizona flora. 2d ed. Berkeley, CA: University of
California Press. 1085 p. 
70. Kirsch, Leo M. 1974. Habitat management considerations for prairie
chickens. Wildlife Society Bulletin. 2(3): 124-129. 
71. Kirsch, Leo M.; Kruse, Arnold D. 1973. Prairie fires and wildlife. In:
Proceedings, annual Tall Timbers fire ecology conference; 1972 June 8-9;
Lubbock, TX. Number 12. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station:
72. Knobloch, Irving William. 1944. Development and structure of Bromus
inermis Leyss. Iowa State College Journal of Science. 19: 67-98. 
73. Knoop, Paul E., Jr. 1983. Tallgrass prairie management at the Aullwood
Audubon Center and Farm--Dayton, Ohio. In: Kucera, Clair L., ed.
Proceedings, 7th North American prairie conference; 1980 August 4-6;
Springfield, MO. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri: 253-254. 
74. Kruse, Arnold D.; Higgins, Kenneth F. 1990. Effects of prescribed fire
upon wildlife habitat in northern mixed-grass prairie. In: Alexander, M.
E.; Bisgrove, G. F., technical coordinators. The art and science of fire
management: Proceedings, 1st Interior West Fire Council annual meeting
and workshop; 1988 October 24-27; Kananaskis Village, AB. Inf. Rep.
NOR-X-309. Edmonton, AB: Forestry Canada, Northwest Region, Northern
Forestry Centre: 182-193. 
75. Kuchler, A. W. 1964. United States [Potential natural vegetation of the
conterminous United States]. Special Publication No. 36. New York:
American Geographical Society. 1:3,168,000; colored. 
76. Lamson-Scribner, F. 1900. Economic grasses. Bulletin No. 14. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Division of Agrostology. 85 p.
77. Laycock, W. A.; Conrad, P. W. 1981. Responses of vegetation and cattle
to various systems of grazing on seeded and native mountain rangelands
in eastern Utah. Journal of Range Management. 34(1): 52-58. 
78. Lokemoen, John T.; Duebbert, Harold F.; Sharp, David E. 1990. Homing and
reproductive habits of mallards, gadwalls, and blue-winged teal.
Wildlife Monographs. 106: 1-28. 
79. Lyon, L. Jack. 1984. The Sleeping Child Burn--21 years of postfire
change. Res. Pap. INT-330. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 17 p.
80. Marten, G. C.; Sheaffer, C. C.; Wyse, D. L. 1987. Forage nutritive value
and palatability of perennial weeds. Agronomy Journal. 79: 980-986.
81. Martinsen, Gregory D.; Cushman, J. Hall; Whitham, Thomas G. 1990. Impact
of pocket gopher disturbance on plant species diversity in a shortgrass
prairie community. Oecologia. 83: 132-138. 
82. Masters, Robert A.; Vogel, Kenneth P. 1989. Remnant and restored prairie
response to fire, fertilization, and atrazine. In: Bragg, Thomas B.;
Stubbendieck, James, eds. Prairie pioneers: ecology, history and
culture: Proceedings, 11th North American prairie conference; 1988
August 7-11; Lincoln, NE. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska: 135-138.
83. Masters, Robert A.; Vogel, Kenneth P.; Mitchell, Robert B. 1992.
Response of central plains tallgrass prairies to fire, fertilizer, and
atrazine. Journal of Range Management. 45(3): 291-295. 
84. McGinnies, William J. 1960. Effects of moisture stress and temperature
on germination of six range grasses. Agronomy Journal. 52(3): 159-162.
85. McGinnies, W. J. 1975. Renovating saltgrass meadows. Agricultural
Research. 23(10): 7. 
86. McKone, Mark J. 1985. Reproductive biology of several bromegrasses
(Bromus): breeding system, pattern of fruit maturation, and seed set.
American Journal of Botany. 72(9): 1334-1339. 
87. Mitchell, W. W. 1982. Forage yield and quality of indigenous and
introduced grasses at Palmer, Alaska. Agronomy Journal. 74: 899-905.
88. Mitchell, William W. 1987. Notice of release of 'Kenai' polargrass.
Agroborealis. 19(1): 5. 
89. National Academy of Sciences. 1971. Atlas of nutritional data on United
States and Canadian feeds. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
772 p. 
90. Newell, L. C. 1973. Smooth bromegrass. In: Heath, M. E.; Metcalfe, D.
S.; Barnes, R. F., eds. Forage grasses and legumes. Ames, IA: Iowa State
University Press: 254-262. 
91. Nielson, E. L.; Burks, B. D. 1958. Insect infestation as a factor
influencing seed set in smooth bromegrass. Agronomy Journal. 50:
92. Northam, F. E.; Callihan, R. H. 1990. Grass adaptation to semi-arid,
yellow starthistle infested canyonland. Research Progress Report. [Place
of publication unknown]: Western Society of Weed Science: 79-82. On file
with: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain
Research Station, Fire Sciences Labortory, Missoula, MT. 
93. Old, Sylvia M. 1969. Microclimate, fire, and plant production in an
Illinois prairie. Ecological Monographs. 39(4): 355-384. 
94. Olson, Wendell W. 1975. Effects of controlled burning on grassland
within the Tewaukon National Wildlife Refuge. Fargo, ND: North Dakota
University of Agriculture and Applied Science. 137 p. Thesis. 
95. Pemble, R. H.; Van Amburg, G. L.; Mattson, Lyle. 1981. Intraspecific
variation in flowering activity following a spring burn on a
northwestern Minnesota prairie. In: Stuckey, Ronald L.; Reese, Karen J.,
eds. The prairie peninsula--in the "shadow" of Transeau: Proceedings,
6th North American prairie conference; 1978 August 12-17; Columbus, OH.
Ohio Biological Survey: Biological Notes No. 15. Columbus, OH: Ohio
State University, College of Biological Sciences: 235-240. 
96. Plumb, Glenn. 1988. Atrazine of little value on a native grassland
reseeding (South Dakota). Restoration and Management Notes. 6(2): 90-91.
97. Plummer, A. Perry. 1977. Revegetation of disturbed Intermountain area
sites. In: Thames, J. C., ed. Reclamation and use of disturbed lands of
the Southwest. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press: 302-337. 
98. Plummer, A. Perry; Christensen, Donald R.; Monsen, Stephen B. 1968.
Restoring big-game range in Utah. Publ. No. 68-3. Ephraim, UT: Utah
Division of Fish and Game. 183 p. 
99. Radford, Albert E.; Ahles, Harry E.; Bell, C. Ritchie. 1968. Manual of
the vascular flora of the Carolinas. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of
North Carolina Press. 1183 p. 
100. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant
geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. 
101. Rosburg, Thomas R.; Glenn-Lewin, David C. 1992. Effects of fire and
atrazine on pasture and remnant prairie plant species in southern Iowa.
In: Smith, Daryl D.; Jacobs, Carol A., eds. Recapturing a vanishing
heritage: Proceedings, 12th North American prairie conference; 1990
August 5-9; Cedar Falls, IA. Cedar Falls, IA: University of Northern
Iowa: 107-112. 
102. Sampson, Arthur W.; Chase, Agnes; Hedrick, Donald W. 1951. California
grasslands and range forage grasses. Bull. 724. Berkeley, CA: University
of California College of Agriculture, California Agricultural Experiment
Station. 125 p. 
103. Sharp Bros. Seed Co. 1988. Select native grasses. Establishment and
management of warm-season grasses. Amarillo, TX: Sharp Bros. Seed Co. 11
104. Sharp Bros. Seed Co. 1989. Grasses and forbs for erosion control. Fact
Sheet. Amarillo, TX: Sharp Bros. Seed Co. 2 p. 
105. Shiflet, Thomas N., ed. 1994. Rangeland cover types of the United
States. Denver, CO: Society for Range Management. 152 p. 
106. Slinkard, A. E.; Nurmi, E. O.; Schwendiman, J. L. 1970. Seeding
burned-over lands in northern Idaho. Current Information Series No. 139.
Moscow, ID: University of Idaho, College of Agriculture, Cooperative
Extension Service, Agricultural Experiment Station. 4 p. 
107. Smoliak, S.; Penney, D.; Harper, A. M.; Horricks, J. S. 1981. Alberta
forage manual. Edmonton, AB: Alberta Agriculture, Print Media Branch. 87
108. Sours, John M. 1983. Characteristics and uses of important grasses for
arid western rangelands. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Shaw, Nancy, compilers.
Managing Intermountain rangelands--improvement of range and wildlife
habitats: Proceedings of a symposia; 1981 September 15-17; Twin Falls,
ID; 1982 June 22-24; Elko, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-157. Ogden, UT: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and
Range Experiment Station: 90-94. 
109. 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. 
110. Stubbendieck, James; Hatch, Stephan L.; Butterfield, Charles H. 1992.
North American range plants. 4th ed. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska
Press. 493 p. 
111. Svejcar, Tony; Vavra, Martin. 1985. Seasonal forage production and
quality on four native and improved plant communities in eastern Oregon.
Technical Bulletin 149. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University,
Agricultural Experiment Station. 24 p. 
112. Tilman, David. 1987. Secondary succession and the pattern of plant
dominance along experim experimental nitrogen gradients. Ecological
Monographs. 57(3): 189-214. 
113. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1994. Plants
of the U.S.--alphabetical listing. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 954 p. 
114. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Biological Survey. [n.d.]. NP
Flora [Data base]. Davis, CA: U.S. Department of the Interior, National
Biological Survey. 
115. Voss, Edward G. 1972. Michigan flora. Part I. Gymnosperms and monocots.
Bloomfield Hills, MI: Cranbrook Institute of Science; Ann Arbor, MI:
University of Michigan Herbarium. 488 p. 
116. Waddington, John; Dyck, F. Ben; Bowes, Garry G.; McCartney, Duane H.
1994. Drill seeding in western Canada. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Kitchen,
Stanley G., compilers. Proceedings--ecology and management of annual
rangelands; 1992 May 18-22; Boise, ID. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-313.
Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain
Research Station: 307-310. 
117. Wambolt, Carl. 1976. Montana range seeding guide. Bulletin 347. Bozeman,
MT: Montana State University, Cooperative Extension Service. 23 p. 
118. Ward, Don; Thompson, Robert; Kelly, Dennis. 1986. Willow planting guide.
R-4 Hydrograph No. 54. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Range and Watershed Management. 12 p. 
119. Wasser, Clinton H. 1982. Ecology and culture of selected species useful
in revegetating disturbed lands in the West. FWS/OBS-82/56. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Office
of Biological Services, Western Energy and Land Use Team. 347 p.
Available from NTIS, Springfield, VA 22161; PB-83-167023. 
120. Watkins, James M. 1940. The growth habits and chemical composition of
bromegrass, Bromus inermis Lyess, as affected by different environmental
conditions. Journal of the American Society of Agronomy. 32: 527-538.
121. 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. 
122. Wheeler, W. A.; Hill, D. D. 1957. Grassland seeds. The Grassland Farm
Series. Princeton, NJ: D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc. 734 p. 
123. Wheeler, W. A.; Hill, D. D. 1957. Grassland seeds. Princeton, NJ: D. Van
Nostrand Company, Inc. 628 p. 
124. Willson, Gary D. 1992. Morphological characteristics of smooth brome
used to determine a prescribed burn date. In: Smith, Daryl D.; Jacobs,
Carol A., eds. Recapturing a vanishing heritage: Proceedings, 12th North
American prairie conference; 1990 August 5-9; Cedar Falls, IA. Cedar
Falls, IA: University of Northern Iowa: 113-116. 
125. Wilson, Scott D. 1989. The suppression of native prairie by alien
species introduced for revegetation. Landscape and Urban Planning. 17:
126. Wilson, Scott D.; Belcher, Joyce W. 1989. Plant and bird communities of
native prairie and introduced Eurasian vegetation in Manitoba, Canada.
Conservation Biology. 3(1): 39-44. 
127. Witte, K. 1929. Beitrag zu den Grundlagen des Grasbaus. Landw. Jahrb.
69: 253-310.