Index of Species Information

SPECIES:  Hymenoclea salsola


SPECIES: Hymenoclea salsola
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION : Tesky, Julie L. 1993. Hymenoclea salsola. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: []. ABBREVIATION : HYMSAL SYNONYMS : NO-ENTRY SCS PLANT CODE : HYSA COMMON NAMES : white burrobrush cheesebush desert pearl pearlbush TAXONOMY : The currently accepted scientific name for white burrobrush is Hymenoclea salsola Tor. & Gray. There are three recognized varieties [2,21,22,27]: H. salsola var. salsola H. salsola var. patula (Nelsen) Peterson & Payne H. pentalepis (Rydb.) L. Benson. LIFE FORM : Shrub FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS : No special status OTHER STATUS : NO-ENTRY


SPECIES: Hymenoclea salsola
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION : White burrobrush is found in the Sonoran, Mojave, and Colorado deserts of Baja California, southern California, southern Nevada, extreme southwest Utah, Arizona, and northwest Mexico [18,22,27,46].  A small, relict population occurs in the southern end of the Central Valley of California [12]. ECOSYSTEMS :    FRES29  Sagebrush    FRES30  Desert shrub    FRES35  Pinyon - juniper STATES :      AZ  CA  NV  UT  MEXICO BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :     7  Lower Basin and Range    12  Colorado Plateau KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :    K023  Juniper - pinyon woodland    K024  Juniper steppe woodland    K040  Saltbush - greasewood    K041  Creosotebush    K042  Creosotebush - bursage    K043  Paloverde - cactus shrub    K044  Creosotebush - tarbush SAF COVER TYPES :    238  Western juniper    239  Pinyon - juniper SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES : NO-ENTRY HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES : White burrobrush is commonly found in creosotebush (Larrea tridentata), shadscale (Atriplex confertifolia), and saltbush (Atriplex spp.) scrub, Joshua tree (Yucca brevifolia) woodlands, and pinyon-juniper woodlands [27,36,30].  Johnson [15] describes a white burrobrush community type in the desert washes of the Mojave Desert characterized by white burrobrush, desert saltbush (Atriplex polycarpa), desert rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus paniculatus), and catclaw acacia (Acacia greggii).  Hanley and Brady [14] describe a paloverde (Cercidium spp.)-white burrobrush community type in Sonoran Desert washes. In addition to the above mentioned species, white burrobrush is commonly associated with smoke tree (Dalea spinosa), white bursage (Ambrosia dumosa), brittle bush (Encelia farinosa), jojoba (Simmondsia chinensis), sweetbush (Bebbia juncea), desert agave (Agave deserti), ocotillo (Fouquieria splendens), range ratany (Kramerica parvifolia), teddybear cholla (Opuntia bigelovii), desert willow (Chilopsis linearis), and rubber rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus nauseosus) [42,44,45]. A publication listing white burrobrush as a codominant species in desert wash communities is listed below: Vegetation and plant communities of southern California deserts-- a    functional view [15].


SPECIES: Hymenoclea salsola
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE : NO-ENTRY PALATABILITY : NO-ENTRY NUTRITIONAL VALUE : NO-ENTRY COVER VALUE : Some arroyo habitats where white burrobrush occurs provide den sites for the desert tortoise [43]. VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES : NO-ENTRY OTHER USES AND VALUES : The Seri Indians of Sonora, Mexico, use white burrobrush twigs and stems in several remedies.  The twigs or leaves are mixed with all-thorn (Koeberlinia spinosa) twigs, boiled, and the tea taken to treat skin rashes.  Seri also drank the tea to relieve pain in the lungs and trachea, and to reduce swelling.  Additionally, they use white burrobrush as a remedy for rheumatism [10]. OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : White burrobrush causes hay fever [3,22].


SPECIES: Hymenoclea salsola
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS : White burrobrush is a native, short-lived, drought-deciduous, perennial shrub 3 to 8 feet (1-2.5 m) tall and two- or three-fold as wide [2,4,22,27].  It is rounded and often straggly with slender, puberulent branches and narrow, often threadlike or needlelike leaves to 0.7 to 3 inches (2-7.5 cm) long [7,18,21,27].  The flower heads are small and numerous [2,7,22].  White burrobrush has a shallow root system consisting of a relatively short taproot with prominent laterals [20]. RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :       Phanerophyte REGENERATION PROCESSES : White burrobrush reproduces mostly by seed but can also reproduce by sprouting [13,29,41].  Flowers are borne on 2-year-old branches which, following fruit development, die back to the ground.  Flowers are wind pollinated [21].  White burrobrush fruits contain only one seed and are disseminated by wind or water [19,21,37]. The seeds have high viability and germination rates compared to other desert shrubs [26,41].  In a 16-day germination study, they had one of the highest rates of germination (57 percent) of seven species of desert shrubs.  White burrobrush seedlings emerged well from 0.39- and 0.79-inch (1- and 2-cm) plantings but not from depths of 1.5 inches (4 cm) or more [41].  Stratification has been shown to have no effect on germination rate.  Seed treatments used to increase white burrobrush germination in the laboratory, and their results, have been described by Graves and others [13]. SITE CHARACTERISTICS : White burrobrush is commonly found in sandy washes, alluvial fans, and rocky slopes [2,18,21].  It generally grows on well-drained, sandy, alkaline soils [22,33], and is found at elevations between 2,200 and 2,950 feet (670-900 m) [39]. SUCCESSIONAL STATUS : Obligate Initial Community Species White burrobrush is a short-lived pioneer or invader species.  It is common and often very abundant on disturbed sites [24,34,35].  White burrobrush is often the primary short-lived pioneer species found in small desert washes [36].  It may be present in very low numbers in stable, old creosotebush communities [36].  The life span of white burrobrush is not known but is estimated at only a few decades [34]. White burrobrush was the most abundant pioneer shrub on a disturbed pipeline construction site in creosotebush scrub vegetation of the Mojave Desert.  In some disturbed areas white burrobrush made up as much as 85 percent of the vegetative cover 12 years after the original vegetation had been removed [35].  Another Mojave Desert study of disturbed creosotebush scrub, at three military camps abandoned for 40 years, found that white burrobrush was dominant in the majority of disturbed sites.  It also had percentage cover values similar to or greater than controls in most areas where substrate alterations were significant [24]. SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT : White burrobrush flowers from March through June [1,18,20,22].  New leaf and twig growth is initiated after summer and winter rains.  Both leaf and twig tissues are thus present during the periods of peak seasonal productivity [6].  At one site in southern Nye County, Nevada, the range of beginning dates of phenophases over a 6-year period was as follows [1]:      leaf- March through April      flower bud- mid-March through mid-April      flower- early April through early May.


SPECIES: Hymenoclea salsola
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS : Fires are infrequent in communities where white burrobrush occurs because of low productivity and discontinuous fuels [23]; nevertheless, fire is a natural component of these communities [16,42].  White burrobrush establishes after fire via off-site seeds and sprouting (sprout origin unspecified) [29,38].  Because it seeds prolifically, white burrobrush can quickly colonize burned sites [38]. POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY :    Small shrub, adventitious-bud root crown    Initial-offsite colonizer (off-site, initial community)


SPECIES: Hymenoclea salsola
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT : White burrobrush is often top-killed by fire.  Most white burrobrush plants were burned to ground level by a severe summer fire in the Snow Creek area of Riverside County, California [23].  In a canyon in the San Ysidro Mountains, California, a July wildfire in the chaparral-desert ecotone top-killed nearly all white burrobrush plants.  Occasional small pockets of plants in protected areas were not harmed [29]. DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT : NO-ENTRY PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE : White burrobrush populations recover quickly after fire via off-site seeds and sprouting [23,29].  Five years after the Snow Creek fire, white burrobrush frequency and cover were greater on burned than unburned sites [23].  Following the July fire in the San Ysidro Mountains, more than 90 percent of white burrobrush plants survived by sprouting.  Some white burrobrush started sprouting within 2 months after the fire.  Regrowth is summarized below [29]:                 # of resprouting     Mean # of        Mean length of                    plants/ha        sprouts/plant      sprouts (cm) 2 months after      5                     1                     3.8 fire (Sept) 4 months after    114                     9                    14.5 fire (Nov) 7 months after    247                     6                    10.4 fire (Feb) 10 months after    79                    12                    33.3 fire (June) DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE : The Research Project Summary Nonnative annual grass fuels and fire in California's Mojave Desert provides information on prescribed fire and postfire response of plant community species, including white burrobrush, that was not available when this species review was written. FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : NO-ENTRY


SPECIES: Hymenoclea salsola
REFERENCES :  1.  Ackerman, T. L.; Romney, E. M.; Wallace, A.; Kinnear, J. E. 1980.        Phenology of desert shrubs in southern Nye County, Nevada. In: Great        Basin Naturalist Memoirs No. 4. Nevada desert ecology. Provo, UT:        Brigham Young University: 4-23.  [3197]  2.  Benson, Lyman; Darrow, Robert A. 1981. The trees and shrubs of the        Southwestern deserts. Tucson, AZ: The University of Arizona Press.        [18066]  3.  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]  4.  Burk, Jack H. 1977. Sonoran Desert. In: Barbour, M. G.; Major, J., eds.        Terrestrial vegetation of California. New York: John Wiley and Sons:        869-899.  [3731]  5.  Cody, M. L. 1986. Spacing patterns in Mojave Desert plant communities:        near-neighbor analyses. Journal of Arid Environments. 11: 199-217.        [4411]  6.  Comstock, Jonathan P.; Ehleringer, James R. 1988. Contrasting        photosynthetic behavior in leaves and twigs of Hymenoclea salsola, a        green-twigged warm desert shrub. American Journal of Botany. j75(9):        1360-1370.  [22115]  7.  Daniel, Thomas F.; Butterwick, Mary L. 1992. Flora of the South        Mountains of south-central Arizona. Desert Plants. 10(3): 99-119.        [19896]  8.  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]  9.  Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and        Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p.  [905] 10.  Felger, Richard S.; Moser, Mary Beck. 1974. Seri Indian pharmacopoeia.        Economic Botany. 28: 414-436.  [2767] 11.  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] 12.  Goeden, Richard D.; Ricker, Donald W. 1986. Phytophagous insect fauna of        the desert shrub Hymenoclea salsola in southern California. Annals of        the Entomological Society of America. 79(1): 39-47.  [22116] 13.  Graves, Walter L.; Kay, Burgess L.; Williams, William A. 1975. Seed        treatment of Mojave Desert shrubs. Agronomy Journal. 67(6): 773-777.        [4192] 14.  Hanley, Thomas A.; Brady, Ward W. 1977. Feral burro impact on a Sonoran        Desert range. Journal of Range Management. 30(5): 374-377.  [4337] 15.  Johnson, Hyrum B. 1976. Vegetation and plant communities of southern        California deserts--a functional view. In: Latting, June, ed. Symposium        proceedings: plant communities of southern California; 1974 May 4;        Fullerton, CA. Special Publication No. 2. Berkeley, CA: California        Native Plant Society: 125-164.  [1278] 16.  Knapp, Paul A. 1992. Secondary plant succession and vegetation recovery        in two western Great Basin Desert ghost towns. Biological Conservation.        60: 81-89.  [19273] 17.  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] 18.  MacMahon, James A. 1985. The Audubon Society nature guides: Deserts. New        York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. 638 p.  [4956] 19.  Maddox, Jay C.; Carlquist, Sherwin. 1985. Wind dispersal in Californian        desert plants: experimental studies and conceptual considerations.        Aliso. 11(1): 77-96.  [3256] 20.  Manning, Sara J.; Groeneveld, David P. 1990. Shrub rooting        characteristics and water acquisition on xeric sites in the western        Great Basin. In: McArthur, E. Durant; Romney, Evan M.; Smith, Stanley        D.; Tueller, Paul T., compilers. Proceedings--symposium on cheatgrass        invasion, shrub die-off, and other aspects of shrub biology and        management; 1989 April 5-7; Las Vegas, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-276.        Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain        Research Station: 238-244.  [12856] 21.  Mozingo, Hugh N. 1987. Shrubs of the Great Basin: A natural history.        Reno, NV: University of Nevada Press. 342 p.  [1702] 22.  Munz, Philip A. 1974. A flora of southern California. Berkeley, CA:        University of California Press. 1086 p.  [4924] 23.  O'Leary, John F.; Minnich, Richard A. 1981. Postfire recovery of        creosote bush scrub vegetation in the western Colorado Desert. Madrono.        28(2): 61-66.  [3973] 24.  Prose, D. V.; Metzger, Susan K.; Wilshire, H. G. 1987. Effects of        substrate disturbance on secondary plant succession; Mojave Desert,        California. Journal of Applied Ecology. 24: 305-313.  [4590] 25.  Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant        geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p.  [2843] 26.  Rowlands, Peter G. 1980. Recovery, succession, and revegetation in the        Mojave Desert. In: Rowlands, Peter G., ed. The effects of disturbance on        desert soils, vegetation & community processes with emphasis on off road        vehicles: a critical review. Special Publication, Desert Plan Staff.        Riverside, CA: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land        Management: 75-119.  [20680] 27.  Shreve, F.; Wiggins, I. L. 1964. Vegetation and flora of the Sonoran        Desert. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. 2 vols.  [21016] 28.  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] 29.  Tratz, Wallace Michael. 1978. Postfire vegetational recovery,        productivity, and herbivore utilization of a chaparral-desert ecotone.        Los Angeles, CA: California State University. 133 p. Thesis.  [5495] 30.  Turner, Raymond M. 1982. Mohave desertscrub. In: Brown, David E., ed.        Biotic communities of the American Southwest--United States and Mexico.        Desert Plants. 4(1-4): 157-168.  [2374] 31.  Turner, Raymond M.; Brown, David E. 1982. Sonoran desertscrub. In:        Brown, David E., ed. Biotic communities of the American        Southwest--United States and Mexico. Desert Plants. 4(1-4): 181-221.        [2375] 32.  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] 33.  Van Dersal, William R. 1938. Native woody plants of the United States,        their erosion-control and wildlife values. Washington, DC: U.S.        Department of Agriculture. 362 p.  [4240] 34.  Vasek, Frank C. 1979. Early successional stages in Mojave Desert scrub        vegetation. Israel Journal of Botany. 28: 133-148.  [4579] 35.  Vasek, F. C.; Johnson, H. B.; Eslinger, D. H. 1975. Effects of pipeline        construction on creosote bush scrub vegetation of the Mojave Desert.        Madrono. 23(1): 1-13.  [3429] 36.  Vasek, Frank C.; Barbour, Michael G. 1977. Mojave desert scrub        vegetation. In: Barbour, M. G.; Major, J., eds. Terestrial vegetation of        California. New York: John Wiley and Sons: 835-867.  [3730] 37.  Vogl, Richard J.; McHargue, Lawrence T. 1966. Vegetation of California        fan palm oases on the San Andreas Fault. Ecology. 47(4): 532-540.        [3044] 38.  Webb, Robert H.; Steiger, John W.; Newman, Evelyn B. 1988. The response        of vegetation to disturbance in Death Valley National Monument,        California. U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1793. Washington, DC: U.S.        Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey. 69 p.  [8915] 39.  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] 40.  Went, F. W.; Westergaard, M. 1949. Ecology of desert plants. III.        Development of plants in the Death Valley National Monument, California.        Ecology. 30(1): 26-38.  [11102] 41.  Williams, W. A.; Cook, O. D.; Kay, B. L. 1974. Germination of native        desert shrubs. California Agriculture. 28(8): 13.  [4194] 42.  Zedler, Paul H. 1981. Vegetation change in chaparral and desert        communities in San Diego County, California. In: West, D. C.; Shugart,        H. H.; Botkin, D. B., eds. Forest succession: Concepts and application.        New York: Springer-Verlag: 406-430.  [4241] 43.  McArthur, E. Durant; Sanderson, Stewart C. 1992. A comparison between        xeroriparian and upland vegetation of Beaver Dam Slope, Utah, as desert        tortoise habitat. 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: 25-31.  [19091] 44.  Sharifi, M. R.; Meinzer, F. C.; Rundel, P. W.; Nilsen, E. T. 1990.        Effect of manipulating soil water and nitrogen regimes on clipping        production and water relations of creosote bush. In: McArthur, E.        Durant; Romney, Evan M.; Smith, Stanley D.; Tueller, Paul T., compilers.        Proceedings--symposium on cheatgrass invasion, shrub die-off, and other        aspects of shrub biology and management; 1989 April 5-7; Las Vegas, NV.        Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-276. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture,        Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 245-249.  [12857] 45.  Smith, Stanley D.; Bradney, David J. M. 1990. Mojave Desert field trip.        In: McArthur, E. Durant; Romney, Evan M.; Smith, Stanley D.; Tueller,        Paul T., compilers. Proceedings--symposium on cheatgrass invasion, shrub        die-off, and other aspects of shrub biology and management; 1989 April        5-7; Las Vegas, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-276. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department        of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 350-351.        [12871] 46.  Hickman, James C., ed. 1993. The Jepson manual: Higher plants of        California. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1400 p.        [21992]

FEIS Home Page