Index of Species Information

SPECIES:  Rosa gymnocarpa


SPECIES: Rosa gymnocarpa
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION : Reed, William R. 1993. Rosa gymnocarpa. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: [].

ABBREVIATION : ROSGYM SYNONYMS : NO-ENTRY SCS PLANT CODE : ROGY ROGYP COMMON NAMES : baldhip rose wood rose little wild rose dwarf wild rose TAXONOMY : The currently accepted scientific name for baldhip rose is Rosa gymnocarpa Nutt. Recognized varieties are as follows [16,28]: R. gymnocarpa var. gymnocarpa R. gymnocarpa var. pubescens Wats. LIFE FORM : Shrub FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS : No special status OTHER STATUS : NO-ENTRY


SPECIES: Rosa gymnocarpa
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION : Baldhip rose has a range extending from southern British Columbia south to the Sierra Nevada in California and east to western Montana and Idaho [11,14,16]. ECOSYSTEMS : FRES 20 Douglas-fir FRES 21 Ponderosa pine FRES 22 Western white pine FRES 23 Fir - spruce FRES 24 Hemlock - Sitka spruce FRES 25 Larch FRES 26 Lodgepole pine FRES 27 Redwood FRES 29 Sagebrush FRES 34 Chaparral - mountain shrub FRES 35 Pinyon - juniper FRES 36 Mountain grasslands STATES : BC CA ID MT OR WA BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS : 1 Northern Pacific Border 2 Cascade Mountains 4 Sierra Mountains 5 Columbia Plateau 8 Northern Rocky Mountains KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS : K001 Spruce - cedar - hemlock forest K002 Cedar - hemlock - Douglas-fir forest K003 Silver fir - Douglas-fir forest K004 Fir - hemlock forest K005 Mixed conifer forest K006 Redwood forest K007 Red fir forest K008 Lodgepole pine - subalpine forest K010 Ponderosa shrub forest K011 Western ponderosa forest K012 Douglas-fir forest K013 Cedar - hemlock - pine forest K014 Grand fir - Douglas-fir forest K015 Western spruce - fir forest K024 Juniper steppe woodland K029 California mixed evergreen forest K034 Montane chaparral SAF COVER TYPES : 205 Mountain hemlock 206 Engelmann spruce - subalpine fir 207 Red fir 210 Interior Douglas-fir 211 White fir 212 Western larch 213 Grand fir 215 Western white pine 218 Lodgepole pine 219 Limber pine 223 Sitka spruce 224 Western hemlock 225 Western hemlock - Sitka spruce 226 Coastal true fir - hemlock 227 Western redcedar - western hemlock 228 Western redcedar 229 Pacific Douglas-fir 230 Douglas-fir - western hemlock 231 Port-Orford-cedar 232 Redwood 234 Douglas-fir - tanoak - Pacific madrone 237 Interior ponderosa pine 238 Western juniper 239 Pinyon - juniper 243 Sierra Nevada mixed conifer 244 Pacific ponderosa pine - Douglas-fir 245 Pacific ponderosa pine 247 Jeffrey pine SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES : NO-ENTRY HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES : Baldhip rose is not listed as a dominant or subdominant species in published classifications. Common associates include dwarf Oregon grape (Mahonia nervosa), salal (Gaultheria shallon), ninebark (Physocarpus malvaceus), oceanspray (Holodiscus discolor), creeping Oregon grape (Mahonia repens), big huckleberry (Vaccinium membranaceum), and thimbleberry (Rubus parviflorus) [3,15,20,22].


SPECIES: Rosa gymnocarpa
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE : Baldhip rose serves as an important year-round food source for mammals, birds, and insects. Livestock will browse baldhip rose when available [37]. Baldhip rose is considered poor wildlife browse in parts of California [4], but in British Columbia and the Pacific Northwest, white-tailed deer and mule deer use of baldhip rose has been noted, particularly in burned areas [6,11,21,35]. The fruits (hips) persist throughout the winter, and are eaten by small mammals, birds, and insects [4]. In northern Idaho, ruffed grouse utilized the hips, but infrequently [18]. PALATABILITY : NO-ENTRY NUTRITIONAL VALUE : NO-ENTRY COVER VALUE : NO-ENTRY VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES : NO-ENTRY OTHER USES AND VALUES : Native Americans utilized the hips and flowers of baldhip rose. The hips are high in vitamin C and are also a source of calcium, phosphorous, and iron [4]. Leaves were often chewed and applied to reduce pain and swelling, and were also used to make tea [14]. Baldhip rose is still used as a food source by the Nuxalk of British Columbia. The wild hips are harvested for food each year from August to October [24]. OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : Baldhip rose is highly tolerant to browsing by wildlife. Livestock browsing, however, retards the spread of baldhip rose, possibly through rhizome damage from trampling [36,37]. Baldhip rose appears to be little affected by disturbances such as logging or burning [27]. Baldhip rose is not tolerant of excessive frost or harsh winters [7].


SPECIES: Rosa gymnocarpa
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS : Baldhip rose is a native, long-lived, deciduous shrub generally 3 feet (1 m) or less in height; however, heights of 3 to 9 feet (1-3 m) have been reported [11]. The stems are slender with straight prickles. The compound leaves have five to seven leaflets that are 0.5 to 1 inch (1-2.5 cm) long and 0.25 to 0.5 inch (0.6-1.2 cm) wide [4,7,9]. Baldhip rose is rhizomatous and has a shallow root structure [25,26,29,37]. RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM : Phanerophyte Chamaephyte Geophyte REGENERATION PROCESSES : Sexual reproduction: Baldhip rose attains sexual maturity at 3 to 5 years [18]. The seeds are eaten and dispersed by birds and mammals [13,14]. Information on seed viability and germination is lacking. Vegetative reproduction: Baldhip rose sprouts from the root crown and rhizomes [17,25,26,29,36]. SITE CHARACTERISTICS : Baldhip rose occurs predominantly in the low-shrub layer of moist, shaded forests of British Columbia and the Pacific Northwest. It is generally found at elevations of 5,000 feet (1,500 m) or less. It is well adapted to mesic-coniferous understories and grows best on eastern and southern exposures [20,27,31]. It is found in both mountainous and riparian areas [5]. Baldhip rose is adapted to a variety of moisture conditions but fares better on slightly dry sites [22]. It is adapted to a short growing season. Baldhip rose is found on coarse-textured, well-drained soils such as sandy loams, loamy sands, and cobbly loams [1,3,15,22]. SUCCESSIONAL STATUS : Facultative Seral Species Baldhip rose is shade tolerant; it persists from the initial plant community to climax. It flourishes initially with thinning and opening of the canopy, but then slows in growth [12,19]. Baldhip rose grows in full sunlight but has a higher overall survival rate in the shade [31]. SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT : Baldhip rose flowers in the late spring and early summer [4]. Hips appear at the end of July and remain on the plant throughout the winter [11,24].


SPECIES: Rosa gymnocarpa
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS : Baldhip rose is well adapted to low- to medium-severity fires. It sprouts from both root crowns and rhizomes. It is also an off-site colonizer [17,19,26]. 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 : Small shrub, adventitious-bud root crown Rhizomatous shrub, rhizome in soil Secondary colonizer - off-site seed


SPECIES: Rosa gymnocarpa
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT : Aboveground portions of the plant are killed by fire. Root crowns and underground rhizomes typically survive low- to moderate-severity fires [17,19,26,27,29,33]. Severe fires can cause damage to root crowns, decreasing potential regrowth [13]. DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT : NO-ENTRY PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE : Baldhip rose rapidly recovers following low- to medium-severity fires. Top-killed plants typically sprout vigorously from the root crown or rhizomes [17,19,25,27,29,33]. Seedlings are rarely observed in a burn area [25,29]. No seedlings were present on clearcut 2-year-old burns in a western redcedar/queencup beadlily (Thuja plicata/Clintonia uniflora) habitat type in northern Idaho [26]. DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE : The Research Project Summary Understory recovery after low- and high-intensity fires in northern Idaho ponderosa pine forests provides information on prescribed fire and postfire response of plant community species including baldhip rose. FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : NO-ENTRY


SPECIES: Rosa gymnocarpa
REFERENCES : 1. Atzet, Thomas; Wheeler, David L. 1984. Preliminary plant associations of the Siskiyou Mountain Province. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 278 p. [9351] 2. 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] 3. Cholewa, Anita F.; Johnson, Frederic D. 1983. Secondary succession in the Pseudotsuga menziesii/Phyaocarpus malvaceus association. Northwest Science. 57(4): 273-282. [11402] 4. Conrad, C. Eugene. 1987. Common shrubs of chaparral and associated ecosystems of southern California. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-99. Berkeley, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 86 p. [4209] 5. Crane, M. F.; Fischer, William C. 1986. Fire ecology of the forest habitat types of central Idaho. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-218. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 85 p. [5297] 6. Crouch, Glenn L. 1968. Forage availability in relation to browsing of Douglas-fir seedlings by black-tailed deer. Journal of Wildlife Management. 32(3): 542-553. [16105] 7. Erlanson, Eileen Whitehead. 1934. Experimental data for a revision of the North American wild roses. Botanical Gazette. 96(2): 197-259. [12434] 8. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905] 9. Ferguson, Robert B. 1983. Use of rosaceous shrubs for wildland plantings in the Intermountain West. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Shaw, Nancy, compilers. Managing Intermountain rangelands--improvement of range and 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: 136-149. [915] 10. 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] 11. Gill, John D.; Pogge, Franz L. 1974. Rosa L. Rose. In: Schopmeyer, C. S., ed. Seeds of woody plants in the United States. Agriculture Handbook No. 450. Washington: U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 732-737. [7742] 12. Habeck, James R. 1968. Forest succession in the Glacier Park cedar-hemlock forests. Ecology. 49(5): 872-880. [6479] 13. Haeussler, S.; Coates, D.; Mather J. 1990. Autecology of common plants in British Columbia: A literature review. Economic and Regional Development Agreement FRDA Rep. 158. Victoria, BC: Forestry Canada, Pacific Forestry Centre; British Columbia Ministry of Forests, Research Branch. 272 p. [18034] 14. Halverson, Nancy M., compiler. 1986. Major indicator shrubs and herbs on National Forests of western Oregon and southwestern Washington. R6-TM-229. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 180 p. [3233] 15. Hawk, G. M.; Zobel, D. B. 1974. Forest succession on alluvial landforms of the McKenzie River Valley, Oregon. Northwest Science. 48(4): 245-265. [9686] 16. Hitchcock, C. Leo; Cronquist, Arthur. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press. 730 p. [1168] 17. Hooker, Larry L.; Tisdale, E. W. 1974. Effects of prescribed burning on a seral brush community in northern Idaho. Station Paper No. 14. Moscow, ID: University of Idaho, Forest, Wildlife and Range Experiment Station. 11 p. [4131] 18. Hungerford, Kenneth E. 1957. Evaluating ruffed grouse foods for habitat improvement. Transactions, 22nd North American Wildlife Conference. [Volume unknown]: 380-395. [15905] 19. Hungerford, Roger D. 1986. Vegetation response to stand cultural operations on small stem lodgepole pine stands in Montana. In: Weed control for forest productivity in the interior West; 1985 February 5-7; Spokane, WA. Pullman, WA: Washington State University, Cooperative Extension: 63-71. [5896] 20. Irwin, Larry L.; Peek, James M. 1979. Shrub production and biomass trends following five logging treatments within the cedar-hemlock zone of northern Idaho. Forest Science. 25(3): 415-426. [16511] 21. Keay, Jeffrey A. 1977. Relationship of habitat use patterns and forage preferences of white-tailed and mule deer to post-fire vegetation, Upper Selway River. Moscow, ID: University of Idaho. 76 p. Thesis. [1316] 22. Klinka, K.; Carter, R. E.; Feller, M. C.; Wang, Q. 1989. Relations between site index, salal, plant communities, and sites in coastal Douglas-fir ecosystems. Northwest Science. 63(1): 19-28. [6276] 23. 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] 24. Lepofsky, Dana; Turner, Nancy J.; Kuhnlein, Harriet V. 1985. Determining the availability of traditional wild plant foods: an example of Nuxalk foods, Bella Coola, British Columbia. Ecology of Food and Nutrition. 16: 223-241. [7002] 25. Morgan, Penelope. 1984. Modeling shrub succession following clearcutiing and burning. Moscow, ID: University of Idaho. [Pages unknown]. Dissertation. [17213] 26. Morgan, P.; Neuenschwander, L. F. 1988. Seed-bank contributions to regeneration of shrub species after clear-cutting and burning. Canadian Journal of Botany. 66: 169-172. [3262] 27. Mueggler, Walter F. 1965. Ecology of seral shrub communities in the cedar-hemlock zone of northern Idaho. Ecological Monographs. 35: 165-185. [4016] 28. Munz, Philip A. 1973. A California flora and supplement. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1905 p. [6155] 29. Neuenschwander, L. F. [n.d.]. The fire induced autecology of selected shrubs of the cold desert and surrounding forests: A-state-of-the-art-review. Moscow, ID: University of Idaho, College of Forestry, Wildlife and Range Sciences. In cooperation with: Fire in Multiple Use Management, Research, Development, and Applications Program, Northern Forest Fire Laboratory, Missoula, MT. 30 p. Unpublished manuscript on file at: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT. [1747] 30. Piper, Jon K. 1986. Germination and growth of bird-dispersed plants: effects of seed size and light on seedling vigor and biomass allocation. American Journal of Botany. 73(7): 959-965. [5033] 31. Piper, Jon K. 1989. Distribution of dry mass between shoot and root in nine understory species. American Midland Naturalist. 122: 114-119. [8905] 32. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843] 33. Stickney, Peter F. 1986. First decade plant succession following the Sundance Forest Fire, northern Idaho. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-197. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 26 p. [2255] 34. 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] 35. Sullivan, Thomas P. 1979. Virgin Douglas-fir forest on Saturna Island, British Columbia. Canadian Field-Naturalist. 93(2): 126-131. [10155] 36. Zimmerman, Gordon Thomas. 1979. Livestock grazing, fire, and their interactions within the Douglas-fir/ ninebark habitat type of northern Idaho. Moscow, ID: University of Idaho. 145 p. Thesis. [6724] 37. Zimmerman, G. T.; Neuenschwander, L. F. 1984. Livestock grazing influences on community structure, fire intensity, and fire frequency within the Douglas-fir/ninebark habitat type. Journal of Range Management. 37(2): 104-110. [10103]