Index of Species Information

SPECIES:  Chamaebatiaria millefolium


Introductory

SPECIES: Chamaebatiaria millefolium
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION : Matthews, Robin F. 1994. Chamaebatiaria millefolium. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/ [].

ABBREVIATION : CHAMIL SYNONYMS : Spiraea millefolium Torr. [20] SCS PLANT CODE : CHMI2 COMMON NAMES : desert sweet fernbush tansy bush TAXONOMY : The currently accepted scientific name of desert sweet is Chamaebatiaria millefolium (Torr.) Maxim. [7,8,13,20]. It is in the family Rosaceae. There are no recognized subspecies, varieties, or forms. LIFE FORM : Shrub FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS : No special status OTHER STATUS : NO-ENTRY


DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE

SPECIES: Chamaebatiaria millefolium
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION : Desert sweet is distributed from Oregon, Idaho, and Wyoming, south through eastern California, Nevada, Utah, and northern Arizona [7,8,12,13,20]. ECOSYSTEMS : FRES26 Lodgepole pine FRES28 Western hardwoods FRES29 Sagebrush FRES34 Chaparral - mountain shrub FRES35 Pinyon - juniper STATES : AZ CA ID NV OR UT WY BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS : 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 12 Colorado Plateau KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS : K008 Lodgepole pine - subalpine forest K022 Great Basin pine forest K023 Juniper - pinyon woodland K024 Juniper steppe woodland K037 Mountain-mahogany - oak scrub K038 Great Basin sagebrush K055 Sagebrush steppe SAF COVER TYPES : 209 Bristlecone pine 217 Aspen 219 Limber pine 220 Rocky Mountain juniper 238 Western juniper 239 Pinyon - juniper SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES : NO-ENTRY HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES : Desert sweet and purple Dorr's sage (Salvia dorrii ssp. carnosa)-desert sweet habitat types at Lava Beds National Monument, California, occur on rocky basalt lava flows where disturbance by man, fire, and grazing are very low [3]. Desert sweet occurs in pinyon (Pinus spp.)-juniper (Juniperus spp.) woodlands in Arizona with true pinyon (P. edulis), singleleaf pinyon (P. monophylla), Utah juniper (J. osteosperma), and oneseed juniper (J. monosperma). Other associated species include broom snakeweed (Gutierrezia sarothrae), scrub oak (Quercus turbinella), cliffrose (Cowania mexicana), dwarf rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus depressus), rubber rabbitbrush (C. nauseosus), antelope bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata), Fremont barberry (Berberis fremontii), green ephedra (Ephedra viridis), Saskatoon serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia), banana yucca (Yucca baccata), cholla or prickly pear (Opuntia spp.), blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis), Arizona fescue (Festuca arizonica), and prairie junegrass (Koeleria cristata) [10,11,14]. At upper elevations of the singleleaf pinyon (P. ,omophylla)-Utah juniper (J. osteosperma) zone in the White Mountains of California, desert sweet is associated with Great Basin bristlecone pine (Pinus longaeva), limber pine (P. flexilis), wax currant (Ribes cereum), green ephedra, desert bitterbrush (Purshia glandulosa), oceanspray (Holodiscus spp.), and low rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus) [16].

MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS

SPECIES: Chamaebatiaria millefolium
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE : Desert sweet is browsed by sheep, goats, and deer, but is not abundant enough to be considered an important browse species [6,8,12]. PALATABILITY : Desert sweet is not palatable to cattle or horses [2]. NUTRITIONAL VALUE : NO-ENTRY COVER VALUE : Desert sweet provides fair cover for antelope, upland game birds, small nongame birds, and small mammals [2]. VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES : Desert sweet may be moderately useful for erosion control in Utah [2]. OTHER USES AND VALUES : Native Americans in the Great Basin area made a tea from desert sweet leaves for use in the alleviation of cramps and stomachaches [12]. OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : NO-ENTRY

BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS

SPECIES: Chamaebatiaria millefolium
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS : Desert sweet is a densely branched, aromatic shrub 3.3 to 6.6 feet (1-3 m) tall. The stems and herbage are glandular and stellate-pubescent when young. Desert sweet leaves are 0.4 to 3.2 inches (1-8 cm) long and are twice-pinnately compound. They resemble minute fern fronds. The inflorescence is a panicle or raceme and the fruit is a follicle with few seeds [7,8,12,13,20]. RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM : Phanerophyte REGENERATION PROCESSES : Little information concerning reproduction in desert sweet is available in the literature. No pregermination treatment is required for fresh seeds, although stored seeds require 3 months of cold-moist stratification prior to planting [21]. SITE CHARACTERISTICS : Desert sweet is generally found in dry, rocky habitats [7,12,13] from 4,500 to 8,000 feet (1,360-2,400 m) elevation in Arizona [8], and from about 3,000 to 11,000 feet (900-3,300 m) elevation in California [7,13]. In eastern Nevada desert sweet is found in mountain brush communities at intermediate elevations on xeric, rocky sites, usually on soils of limestone parent materials [18]. Desert sweet grows well on gravel, sandy loam, loam, and clay loam soils [2]. SUCCESSIONAL STATUS : NO-ENTRY SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT : Desert sweet flowers from July to November in Arizona [8] and from June to August in California [13].

FIRE ECOLOGY

SPECIES: Chamaebatiaria millefolium
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS : No information on fire ecology or related topics (conditions for regeneration, sprouting ability, or successional role) was found in the literature. POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY : NO-ENTRY

FIRE EFFECTS

SPECIES: Chamaebatiaria millefolium
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT : NO-ENTRY DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT : NO-ENTRY PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE : NO-ENTRY DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE : NO-ENTRY FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : NO-ENTRY

REFERENCES

SPECIES: Chamaebatiaria millefolium
REFERENCES : 1. 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] 2. Dittberner, Phillip L.; Olson, Michael R. 1983. The plant information network (PIN) data base: Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming. FWS/OBS-83/86. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 786 p. [806] 3. Erhard, Dean H. 1979. Plant communities and habitat types in the Lava Beds National Monument, California. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University. 173 p. Thesis. [869] 4. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905] 5. Garrison, George A.; Bjugstad, Ardell J.; Duncan, Don A.; [and others]. 1977. Vegetation and environmental features of forest and range ecosystems. Agric. Handb. 475. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 68 p. [998] 6. Hayes, Doris W.; Garrison, George A. 1960. Key to important woody plants of eastern Oregon and Washington. Agric. Handb. 148. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 227 p. [1109] 7. Hickman, James C., ed. 1993. The Jepson manual: Higher plants of California. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1400 p. [21992] 8. Kearney, Thomas H.; Peebles, Robert H.; Howell, John Thomas; McClintock, Elizabeth. 1960. Arizona flora. 2d ed. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1085 p. [6563] 9. 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] 10. Lowe, Charles H. 1964. Arizona's natural environment: Landscapes and habitats. Tucson, AZ: The University of Arizona Press. 136 p. [20736] 11. Merkle, John. 1952. An analysis of a pinyon-juniper community at Grand Canyon, Arizona. Ecology. 33: 375-384. [1640] 12. Mozingo, Hugh N. 1987. Shrubs of the Great Basin: A natural history. Reno, NV: University of Nevada Press. 342 p. [1702] 13. Munz, Philip A. 1973. A California flora and supplement. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1905 p. [6155] 14. Nichol, A. A. [revisions by Phillips, W. S.]. 1952. The natural vegetation of Arizona. Tech. Bull. 68 [revision]. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona, Agricultural Experiment Station: 189-230. [3928] 15. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843] 16. St. Andre, G.; Mooney, H. A.; Wright, R. D. 1965. The pinyon woodland zone in the White Mountains of California. American Midland Naturalist. 73(1): 225-239. [2217] 17. Stickney, Peter F. 1989. Seral origin of species originating in northern Rocky Mountain forests. Unpublished draft on file at: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT; RWU 4403 files. 7 p. [20090] 18. Tueller, Paul T. 1989. Vegetation and land use in Nevada. Rangelands. 11(5): 204-210. [9295] 19. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1982. National list of scientific plant names. Vol. 1. List of plant names. SCS-TP-159. Washington, DC. 416 p. [11573] 20. Welsh, Stanley L.; Atwood, N. Duane; Goodrich, Sherel; Higgins, Larry C., eds. 1987. A Utah flora. Great Basin Naturalist Memoir No. 9. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University. 894 p. [2944] 21. Young, James A.; Young, Cheryl G. 1986. Collecting, processing and germinating seeds of wildland plants. Portland, OR: Timber Press. 236 p. [12232]


FEIS Home Page