Index of Species Information

SPECIES:  Rubus spectabilis


SPECIES: Rubus spectabilis
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION : Tirmenstein, D. A. 1989. Rubus spectabilis. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: []. ABBREVIATION : RUBSPE SYNONYMS : NO-ENTRY SCS PLANT CODE : RUSP RUSPF RUSPS COMMON NAMES : salmonberry salmon berry TAXONOMY : The currently accepted scientific name of salmonberry is Rubus spectabilis Pursh [37]. Salmonberry naturally hybridizes with dwarf raspberry (R. arcticus) to produce the Alaska blackberry (R. alaskensis Bailey) [66]. Widely recognized varieties are as follows [37]: Rubus spectabilis var. franciscanus (Rydb.) J.T. Howell Rubus spectabilis var. spectabilis Two forms of salmonberry, distinguished primarily on the basis of fruit color, have also been described [5]. LIFE FORM : Shrub FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS : No special status OTHER STATUS : USDA Forest Service, Northern Region lists Rubus spectabilis as a watch plant species in northern Idaho. Its Natural Heritage Program state rank is SH: "Historically known in the state; may be rediscovered." It is secure globally [72].


SPECIES: Rubus spectabilis
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION : Salmonberry grows mostly west of the Cascades in Washington and Oregon southward to northwestern California [29,53]. It occurs along the Pacific Coast northward to Alaska [5,34] and may extend as far east as Idaho [5,25]. The variety franciscanus occurs from the Santa Cruz Mountains to Sonoma County, California [5]. A variety of salmonberry (not specified in the literature) grows on the islands of Hokkaido and Honshu in Japan [5]. ECOSYSTEMS : FRES20 Douglas-fir FRES23 Fir - spruce FRES24 Hemlock - Sitka spruce FRES25 Larch FRES27 Redwood FRES28 Western hardwoods STATES : AK CA ID MT OR WA BC BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS : 1 Northern Pacific Border 2 Cascade 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 K006 Redwood forests K012 Douglas-fir forest K014 Grand fir - Douglas-fir forest K029 California mixed evergreen forest SAF COVER TYPES : 210 Interior Douglas-fir 211 White fir 213 Grand fir 221 Red alder 222 Black cottonwood - willow 223 Sitka spruce 224 Western hemlock 225 Western hemlock - Sitka spruce 226 Coastal true fir - hemlock 227 Western redcedar - western hemlock 228 Western redcedar 230 Douglas-fir - western hemlock 232 Redwood 234 Douglas-fir - tanoak - Pacific madrone SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES : NO-ENTRY HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES : This shade-tolerant shrub is also well represented in many Northwestern coniferous forests dominated by western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), western redcedar (Thuja plicata), Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis), redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), grand fir (Abies grandis), and Pacific silver fir (A. amabilis) [17,18,45,71]. Salmonberry often forms dense patches within the understory of Douglas-fir and western hemlock forests [61]. Dense continuous stands develop under red alder (Alnus rubra) on upland or riparian sites [21]. Continuous stands may reach up to 32.8 feet (100 m) or more in diameter [5]. Salmonberry also grows in mixed evergreen and hardwood forests [5,48,68] and in riparian forests dominated by black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), Sitka alder (A. viridis spp. sinuata), and other hardwoods [19]. It is a common constituent of northern California shrub communities dominated by baccharis (Baccharis spp.), thimbleberry (Rubus parviflorus), and trailing blackberry (R. ursinus) [31]. Associated species: Species which commonly occur with salmonberry include false lily-of-the-valley (Maianthemum dilatatum), thimbleberry, trailing blackberry, tall Oregon grape (Berberis aquifolium), salal (Gaultheria shallon), red huckleberry (Vaccinium parvifolium), gooseberry (Ribes spp.), deer fern (Blechnum spicant), evergreen huckleberry, bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), bitter cherry (Prunus emarginata), western swordfern (Polystichum munitum), bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum), lupine (Lupinus spp.), common velvetgrass (Holcus lanatus), elderberry (Sambucus spp.), sweetscented bedstraw (Galium triflorum), and Oregon oxalis (Oxalis oregana) [2,3,4,17,21,61]. Salmonberry has been identified as a codominant with western swordfern (Polystichum munitum), stink currant (Ribes bracteosum), Sitka spruce, red alder, Sitka alder, thimbleberry, trailing blackberry, sea watch (Angelica lucida), evergreen huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum), devil's club (Oplopanax horridus), and mycelis (Mycelis spp.). Salmonberry is listed as an indicator or dominant in the following publications: Riparian vegetation in Oregon's western Cascade Mountains: composition, biomass, and autumn phenology [10] Synecological features of a natural headland prairie on the Oregon coast [13] Vegetation and habitats [20] Natural vegetation of Oregon and Washington [21] Ecoclass coding system for the Pacific Northwest plant associations [28] Plant succession in the Alnus rubra/Rubus spectabilis habitat type in western Oregon [32]


SPECIES: Rubus spectabilis
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE : Wildlife: Salmonberry provides important food and cover for a wide variety of birds and mammals [5]. Tender, leafy new growth is a preferred deer food in many areas [38]. In Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) forests in Oregon's Coast Ranges, deer use is often particularly heavy during the summer, although these ungulates continue to feed on the leaves until they drop from the plants in autumn [29]. In many areas, including the Olympic Peninsula, salmonberry is also an important elk browse [5]. Elk utilize the leaves and twigs to some extend year-round [55], but use tends to be particularly heavy during the spring and summer [21,29,30,55]. Mountain goats and moose browse the young stem tips early in the season [5,66]. The mountain beaver also consumes salmonberry foliage [29]. The stem, foliage, cambium, and bark of species within the Rubus genus provide food for small mammals such as rabbits, porcupine, and beaver [11,64]. Numerous species mammal consume salmonberry fruit including the coyote, black bear, and grizzly bear [5,66]. The common opossum, Townsend's chipmunk, pika, golden-mantled ground squirrel, raccoon, red fox, gray fox, and several species of skunks and tree squirrels also feed on the fruits of Rubus [11,64]. In many locations, fruits are eaten by a variety of birds including the ruffed grouse, northern bobwhite, sharp-tailed grouse, California quail, ring-necked pheasant, blue grouse, gray (Hungarian) partridge, band-tailed pigeon, yellow-breasted chat, pine grosbeak, and various thrushes and towhees [11,64]. The American robin and gray catbird readily feed on salmonberry fruit [5]. Mice and other small rodents consume salmonberry seeds [5]. Nectar from the flowers provides food for bees and other insects, as well as for the rufous hummingbird [5,49]. Livestock: Salmonberry is seldom grazed by cattle but is considered fair sheep browse in parts of west-central Washington [14]. In some areas, salmonberry is a preferred summer sheep browse [44]. PALATABILITY : The leafy new growth of salmonberry appears to be more palatable to most wild ungulates than the tougher mature foliage [14,3,66]. Salmonberry leaves and twigs are reportedly highly palatable to elk from spring through fall [55]. However, dormant twigs are rarely utilized [33] and are presumably somewhat less palatable than those of many shrub associates. The fruit of salmonberry is highly palatable to many species of birds and mammals [5]. The rufous hummingbird and many species of insects seek out the nectar of the showy salmonberry flowers [5,49]. NUTRITIONAL VALUE : The food value of salmonberry browse varies both seasonally and annually. Evidence suggests that crude protein values tend to be higher in the spring or early summer than in winter [15]. Crude protein values in Oregon varied from 9.42 percent in June to 7.32 percent in December [15]. The following crude protein values of salmonberry foliage were recorded during two seasons in the Coast Ranges of Oregon [51]: crude protein content (%) during two seasons grazed plots ungrazed plots October 9.0 8.3 October 8.6 6.9 COVER VALUE : Salmonberry provides good cover for a variety of birds and mammals [29]. In many locations, rodents utilize dense salmonberry thickets as hiding cover [5]. Salmonberry-dominated brushfields in Coastal Oregon furnish excellent habitat for small mammals such as deer mice, voles, shrews, hares, and mountain beaver [36]. Species within the genus Rubus provide hiding or resting cover for the pika, red squirrel, black bear, beaver, and rabbits [64]. Thickets of Rubus serve as favorable nesting sites for many species of small birds [11]. VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES : The deep root system of salmonberry can help prevent soil erosion on steep slopes [5]. Brinkman [8] observed that cold treatment is not required for fall plantings. Good establishment can occur when seeds of species within the genus Rubus are scarified and planted after late summer or early fall. Seeds which have been scarified and stratified can be planted in the spring. Rubus seed can be planted with a drill and should be covered with 1/8 to 3/16 inch (0.3-0.5 cm) of soil [8]. Cleaned salmonberry seed averages approximately 143,000 per pound (314,978/kg) [8]. Seedlings and cuttings can be transplanted onto disturbed sites with good results. Barber [5] reported that various types of asexual cuttings exhibited good survival in laboratory experiments. Specific results were as follows [5]: type of cutting percent survival leaf bud cuttings 63 stem cuttings 82 root cuttings > 82 OTHER USES AND VALUES : Salmonberries are described as deliciously flavored, although somewhat variable in taste, and may be eaten fresh or preserved [14,29,65]. The fruits make good jelly but are reportedly too seedy for jam [65]. Harvest times are comparable with those of other wild berries and approximately 0.27 quarts (250 ml) of fruit can be picked within 5 minutes [45]. Salmonberry fruit was traditionally an important food of many Native American peoples of Alaska and the Pacific Northwest [5,45]. Salmonberries were eaten fresh and preserved for winter use [45]. Sprouts of salmonberries were eaten in the spring [5,29], and the bark and leaves were used to make various medicinal preparations [29]. Salmonberry bark is reportedly an excellent remedy for ailments associated with excess salmon consumption [5]. Many species within the genus Rubus have been grown as ornamentals or as berry-producing shrubs in gardens. Salmonberry was first cultivated in 1827 [8]. OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : Competition: Dense stands of salmonberry often develop after clearcutting and other types of timber treatment that significantly reduce the overstory canopy [3,53,57,66,73]. Portions of both belowground and aboveground stems damaged during logging can sprout and form new colonies [5]. Brushfields dominated by salmonberry and other shrubs are particularly common at low to middle elevations on moist slopes in the Coast Ranges of Washington and Oregon [24,25,37,43] and on moist valley bottoms in Alaska [66]. Salmonberry brushfields provide formidable competition for conifer seedlings [1,44,54,57,66]. In hemlock (Tsuga spp.)-spruce (Picea spp.) forests of central Oregon, salmonberry can dominate a site within 6 months after thinning [3]. In many areas this shrub quickly overtops Douglas-fir seedlings, which become weak and spindly when suppressed [4,38,62]. Terminal bud growth of overtopped Douglas-fir regeneration may be much reduced [38]. Salmonberry also competes with Sitka spruce and western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla) regeneration [52]. Evidence suggests that severe soil disturbances associated with timber harvest may be most conducive to the growth and establishment of salmonberry [3]. Establishment is also favored by overstory removal. Response of salmonberry by intensity of thinning was documented as follows [3]: harvest intensity control light medium heavy extreme (habitat) (percent mean cover) spruce --- 0.063 --- --- 19.188 hemlock --- --- 1.063 10.875 7.250 In many areas, the elimination of salmonberry has proven to be difficult, if not impossible [34]. The rhizome network is so extensive that severe soil disturbance or an extremely hot slash fire generally damages only a small portion of these underground regenerative structures [70]. Limited evidence suggests that in some instances it may be useful to treat salmonberry before trees are harvested [70]. Cutting salmonberry prior to timber removal may benefit conifer seedlings in riparian areas where trees are to be underplanted [70]. Chemical control: Salmonberry has been variously described as resistant or moderately susceptible to herbicides [5,25,60]. Even when top-killed, plants frequently survive and sprout from the root and stems the following year [56,59]. Repeated applications of 2,4,5-T, glyphosate, or picloram + 2,4-D have produced good results [9,24,25,38]. Some herbicides, such as amitrol-T, have proven effective in controlling salmonberry but have resulted in the release of thimbleberry, a common and highly competitive shrub associate [60]. Detailed information is available on the relative effectiveness of various herbicides and on preferred application procedures [9,24,25,38,42,56,58,60,62]. Grazing: Domestic sheep have been used to help control salmonberry in some particularly troublesome brushfields. Salmonberry was significantly reduced after two summers of sheep grazing in the Coast Ranges of Oregon [44]. Mechanical removal: Preliminary evidence suggests that the sprouting ability of salmonberry may decline after many successive cuts [70]. In controlled experiments, plants exhibited reduced sprouting ability after numerous successive monthly treatments [70].


SPECIES: Rubus spectabilis
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS : Salmonberry is a branching, glandless, large to small, deciduous shrub which grows 7 to 13 feet (2-4 m) in height [48,66]. This rhizomatous clonal species frequently forms large, dense thickets [29,61,66]. Stems of most species within the genus Rubus are biennial. Young twigs are light brown and glabrous to pilose [48,66]. As twigs age, bark becomes light brown to yellowish, hairless, and shreddy [48,66]. Leaves are three foliate to simple [48]. The perfect flowers of salmonberry occur singly or in groups of two to four on slender lateral stalks [48,66]. The showy, mildly sweet-smelling flowers are pink to reddish purple [48,66]. The salmon-colored or yellowish fruit, commonly referred to as a "berry", is made up of many small glabrous drupelets [34,58,66]. Fruit is round to ovoid or conic and 0.6 to 0.8 inch (1.5-2 cm) in length [48]. RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM : Phanerophyte REGENERATION PROCESSES : Salmonberry can reproduce sexually or vegetatively. Reproductive versatility is common in the Rubus genus; sexual reproduction, parthenogenesis (development of the egg without fertilization), pseudogamy (a form of apomixis in which pollination is required), and parthenocarpy (production of fruit without fertilization) occur widely [12]. The following types of reproduction have been documented within the genus: (1) sexual reproduction, (2) nonreduction at meiosis on the female, male, or both sides, (3) apomixis with segregation, (4) apomixis without segregation, and (5) haploid parthenogenesis [12]. The various modes of asexual reproduction contribute to the vigorous, aggressive spread of species within the Rubus genus. Vegetative regeneration: The mostly biennial stems typically develop from perennial root stocks or aboveground creeping stems [26]. Salmonberry is known for its prolific sprouting ability. It can sprout vigorously from the stump, root crown, stem base or root stock, and from a dense network of rhizomes [5,61,70]. Regeneration through rooting aerial stem tips has also been reported [5]. Salmonberry exhibits vigorous vegetative response to fire, mechanical removal, and other types of disturbance but spreads vegetatively even in the absence of disturbance. Vegetative regeneration is largely responsible for the clonal spread of this species and is particularly important in perpetuating colonies in shaded understory habitats [5]. Stand dynamics are primarily related to mortality and the rate at which new individual ramets develop [61]. As older ramets die they are replaced by new ramets, and the population tends to remain relatively stable [61]. Under ordinary circumstances, recruitment of new genets through seedling establishment is relatively rare [61].. Stump-sprouting: Once aboveground foliage has been damaged or removed, buds present on the stump exhibit the greatest immediate potential for regrowth [70]. These sprouts soon establish apical dominance and inhibit other less active buds located at or below the ground surface [70]. The number of these buds which are capable of sprouting is largely determined by the height of the remaining stump [70]. Stem base, root stock, or root crown: The second portion of the salmonberry bud bank, which is activated after removal of the stump, is the stem base or root crown. These buds, located at or below the soil surface, are afforded greater protection than those on the stump. However, these buds tend to develop more slowly than stump buds because of the cooler environment in which they occur [70]. In general, the deeper the bud, the slower the sprouting response [70]. Buds located on the stem base or root crown can ordinarily be eliminated only through extreme soil disturbance [7]. Rhizomes: Rhizomes represent the most complex and largest segment of the salmonberry bud bank [70]. These structures are capable of relatively rapid production of aerial stems [61] and are responsible for local increases in stem density [5]. Ramets are connected by a complicated network of rhizomes which average 0.2 to 2.0 inches (5-50 mm) in diameter and generally lie 1 to 2 inches (2-5 cm) below mineral soil [61]. Rhizomes often extend to depths of 3.9 to 7.9 inches (10-20 cm) and although usually restricted to the top foot (31 cm) of soil, can extend to depths of 6 feet (1.8 m) or more [70]. Rhizome development is often extensive. In some clearcuts, total rhizome length averages up to 42 miles (68 km) per stand [70]. Averages of 20 to 30 miles (32-48 km) per stand are common in areas which have been logged [70]. Rhizome growth and development is related to basal area of the stand, age of the parent plant, and site characteristics. Greater basal areas are generally correlated with more extensive rhizome growth [70]. However, large, old rhizomes generally possess fewer buds and exhibit somewhat reduced sprouting abilities compared with young rhizomes [70]. Young rhizomes are generally capable of rapid and active growth. One to two-year-old rhizomes typically exhibit high bud densities (1 to 2 per inch (2-5 cm)) [70]. Rhizome growth has been found to vary by site as shown below [61]: annual growth site (m) 1.9 clearcuts 0.7 red alder 0.4 conifer 0.1 riparian On extremely rocky sites, rhizomes may be uncommon or even absent [61]. Layering: Salmonberry can spread as downward arching aerial canes which become buried by litter, subsequently root, and produce new aerial shoots [5]. Aboveground portions of the cane can also root and produce new clones when damaged mechanically [5]. Seed: Species within the genus Rubus grow from perennial root stocks or creeping aboveground stems during their first year of development and produce sterile vegetative shoots known as primocanes [26]. Lateral branches, or floricanes, develop in the axils of the primocanes during the second year and produce both leaves and flowers [26]. The showy flowers of salmonberry are pollinated by insects and hummingbirds [5,49]. Salmonberry generally produces large numbers of seed annually [5]. Immature fruit is pink and hard [8]. Ripe "berries" are red, yellow, or orange and are made up of an aggregate of many small drupelets [5,8,66]. "Berries" average 30 per shrub [45]. Germination: Salmonberry seeds have a hard, impermeable coat and a dormant embryo [5,8]. Consequently, germination is often slow, and generally requires some form of mechanical or chemical scarification [5]. Most Rubus seeds require, as a minimum, warm stratification at 68 to 86 degrees F (20 to 30 degrees C) for 90 days, followed by cold stratification at 36 to 41 degrees F (2 to 5 degrees C) for an additional 90 days [8]. Stratification occurs naturally as seeds mature in summer and remain in the soil throughout the cold winter months. Laboratory tests indicate that exposure to sulfuric acid solutions or sodium hyperchlorite prior to cold stratification can enhance germination [8]. Light is not required for germination; germination can proceed despite relatively low temperatures [5]. Most germination occurs during the first growing season after disturbance. Ruth [53] observed that second season germination represented only 6 percent of that which occurred during the first growing season. Seed banking: Salmonberry seed is typically long-lived when buried in the soil or duff [5]. Large numbers of seed are present in the topsoil of many coastal forest stands [36]. Seed dispersal: Salmonberry seed is readily dispersed by many birds and mammals [5,8]. After they mature, the highly sought-after fruits rarely remain on the plant for long [8]. Evidence suggests that the action of avian gizzards and exposure to mammalian digestive acids provide beneficial scarification which enhances germination [5]. A relatively long period of fruiting in salmonberry (2 months) increases the probability of seed dispersal as flocks of migrating birds move through an area [5]. Seedling establishment: Salmonberry seedlings require mineral soil for good early development, and establishment is generally poor unless the soil has been disturbed [5]. Scarification following timber harvest generally creates an excellent seedbed for salmonberry. Large numbers of seedlings can readily establish on sites which have been logged and then scarified [53]. Researchers have observed up to 500,000 seedlings per acre (1,234,568/ha) in some scarified cutting units [53]. The presence of a thick leaf mat can inhibit seedling establishment [5]. SITE CHARACTERISTICS : Salmonberry grows on a wide range of sites. It is particularly prevalent on mesic sites in forest openings, along waterways, on river terraces, gravel bars and avalanche chutes, or in seeps and swamps [10,17,29,34,66]. Salmonberry is abundant along roadsides, fencerows, and on many types of disturbed sites [5]. Soils: Species within the Rubus genus typically grow well on a variety of barren, infertile soils [8]. Salmonberry tolerates a wide range of soil types and grows well on rich loam, loamy clays, pure peat, and excessively drained gravel [5]. Soils tend to be acidic and of relatively low fertility [5]. Soils supporting salmonberry are often saturated for much of the year [29]. Good growth has been reported on rocky alluvium with a high percentage of fines and a well-developed humus layer [10]. In the Siskiyou Mountains of southern Oregon and northern California, soils are frequently derived from diorite or gabbro [68]. Elevation: Salmonberry typically grows at low to middle elevations [34]. In western Washington, it is particularly abundant under forest canopies at lower elevations but is largely restricted to stream and lake margins at higher elevation [5]. Generalized elevational ranges in California and Washington are as follows [5,48]: < 1,000 feet (305 m) in CA from 0 to 4,500 feet (0-1,400 m) in WA SUCCESSIONAL STATUS : Salmonberry is a pioneer or early seral species noted for its ability to spread aggressively on disturbed sites [5]. A certain amount of soil disturbance is essential for good seedling establishment. Seedlings generally appear in abundance after fire, timber harvest, or other types of disturbance [1,2,5,53,69]. Rhizomes enable salmonberry to spread vigorously and form dense patches where it was prevalent in predisturbance communities [5,61]. In many areas dense stands may form within 2 to 3 years after disturbance [61]. Salmonberry communities commonly develop early in succession in Sitka spruce and Pacific silver fir zones of Oregon and Washington [20], in Sitka spruce-western hemlock forests of Alaska, and in many Douglas-fir forests of the Pacific Northwest [18]. In northern California, salmonberry was abundant during the first 5 to 10 years after disturbance in grand fir-Douglas-fir-Sitka spruce communities and in early seral redwood-grand fir communities where it persisted, although in reduced abundance, for 30 years or more [71]. In many areas, the cover of salmonberry, a nitrogen-demanding species, begins to decline 2 to 5 years after clearcutting as available nutrients decline [39]. Salmonberry has been described as shade tolerant [5,53] and relatively intolerant of shade [22,27]. In some locations this shrub persists in climax forest communities; elsewhere it is gradually eliminated as the canopy closes. Although most common in early seral stages, salmonberry has also been reported in early immature, second growth, mature, and old growth forests in British Columbia [39,45]. Alaback [2] noted that salmonberry is gradually eliminated in Sitka spruce-western hemlock forests of Alaska as the forest overstory develops. However, other researchers have reported salmonberry in climax western hemlock or western hemlock-Douglas-fir forests of British Columbia [27,39,45] and in climax coastal forests to the south [53]. Salmonberry commonly persists within the understory of various hardwood communities [5]. It can reportedly persist almost indefinitely in the understory of alder or mixed hardwood-conifer stands [5]. Salmonberry is more likely to be eliminated in coniferous forests where light levels are lower. However, in many coniferous stands, parts of salmonberry clones senesce, die, and decay as the overstory canopy closes, but then the clone slowly expands as self-thinning of the conifers occurs [61]. Tappeiner and others [61] noted that "the natural success of salmonberry communities may result in relatively permanent pure shrub communities." Salmonberry is present in red alder communities of the Northwest, which on certain upland sites appear to be early seral stages of western hemlock forests [32]. However, where these communities occur along streambanks, periodic flooding can maintain species such as salmonberry, red alder, and stink currant in long-lived disclimax situations [10,32]. SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT : The leaves of salmonberry begin to appear early in the spring, often when the ground is still covered with snow [5]. Researchers in western Washington have observed the first leaves by March 21, at which time initial annual rhizome growth was also noted [5]. Flowering dates depend on geographic and climatic factors, but flowering usually occurs from early to late spring. In many areas along the Pacific Coast, the time of flowering appears to be correlated with the arrival of the migrating rufous hummingbird, which may serve as an important pollinator [49]. Generalized flowering and fruiting dates by location are as follows [5,8,45,66]: location flowering fruit-ripening AK May-June June-August AK April-June early July (Aug. at higher elev.) CA March-June ----- w WA April May 16-July 26 BC -------- May-July Seed dispersal coincides with the time of fruit availability. In many areas, seed is dispersed from June through August [8]. The tips of the terminal buds remain active and continue elongating until August, when dormancy generally begins [5]. Leaves typically fall by late October or November [10,33]. Campbell and Franklin [10] observed maximum leaf drop in the western Cascades during the fourth week of October; 56 percent of the leaves dropped during the first 3 weeks after frost.


SPECIES: Rubus spectabilis
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS : Salmonberry is well adapted to survive fire through sprouting or seedling establishment. It is capable of vigorous sprouting through buds present on the stump, stem base or root crown, and rhizomes buried beneath the soil surface [70]. The tips of downward arching aerial canes are also capable of rooting and forming new plants where portions of the aboveground stem remain undamaged by fire [5]. Salmonberry produces an abundance of seed annually, which accumulates in the soil or duff. Seed is noted for long-viability and germinates in large numbers after fire [5]. Mineral soil serves as a favorable seedbed enhancing germination and establishment. Salmonberry commonly invades recently burned sites throughout much of the Pacific Northwest [69]. POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY : Tall shrub, adventitious-bud root crown Rhizomatous shrub, rhizome in soil Geophyte, growing points deep in soil Ground residual colonizer (on-site, initial community) Initial-offsite colonizer (off-site, initial community)


SPECIES: Rubus spectabilis
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT : Salmonberry is extremely resistant to fire [5,67]. Underground regenerative structures generally survive when aboveground foliage is totally destroyed. Actual postfire plant mortality is presumably low. Most seed stored on-site in the soil or duff is probably unharmed by fire. DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT : NO-ENTRY PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE : Salmonberry has the ability to recover rapidly after fire through sprouting and seedling establishment. Dense stands can develop within 2 to 3 years after disturbance [61]. In most communities, salmonberry generally remains abundant until the canopy closes [61]. Vegetative response: Salmonberry possesses a vast bud bank which is capable of vigorous sprouting after fire [70]. The specific type of vegetative response exhibited by this shrub depends on such factors as the intensity of the fire, age and density of the plant, and site characteristics. Where portions of the stump survive intact, stump-sprouting is the predominant mode of postfire regeneration [70]. Apical dominance suppresses sprouting from other lower regenerative structures, such as root crowns and rhizomes [70]. Where portions of the aboveground foliage is undamaged, downward-arching aerial canes buried by litter occasionally root and produce shoots [5]. The stem base or root crown, located at or below the soil surface, is afforded some protection from the direct effects of fire. These structures sprout if the aboveground foliage has been consumed by fire [70]. Buds located on the root crown are generally eliminated only by extreme soil disturbance [70]. If the root crown is destroyed, underground rhizomes typically sprout prolifically [70]. Rhizomes are protected from fire by the depth of overlying soil and by their extensiveness. The probability that even an extremely hot fire will eliminate the entire network of well-protected rhizomes is low [70]. Seedling establishment: Salmonberry is noted for seed which can retain good viability for years while buried in the soil or duff [5]. Seedlings require mineral soil for best establishment and growth, and seedbanking represents an important mode of postfire reestablishment. Some seedling establishment can also occur through seed transported from off-site. Small groups of seedlings have been observed to germinate from fairly well-protected rodent caches [47]. Although small mammals generally play only a local role in dispersal [47], birds and larger mammals occasionally carry seeds for longer distances. DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE : Fire intensity and severity can significantly influence the speed of postfire recovery. Plants frequently sprout from aerial stems, stumps, or root crowns following fires of low to moderate intensity. However, sprouting most commonly occurs from underground rhizomes following high intensity fires. Recovery through rhizomes tends to be somewhat slower because of the cool underground environment in which these sprouts develop [70]. Younger rhizomes tend to grow more actively and sprout more vigorously than larger, older rhizomes which typically have lower bud densities [70]. Rhizomes tend to be better developed on relatively mesic sites with deep soils [61]. Rhizomes may be poorly developed or even lacking on dry, rocky sites [61]. Postfire sprouting could presumably be reduced on sites with shallow or rocky soils, or where the prefire stand was primarily made up of older plants lacking vigor. FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : Wildlife: Fire generally benefits animals that consume the fruits of Rubus spp. [41]. Competition: Slash burning in coastal Douglas-fir forests can sometimes reduce the rate of salmonberry invasion for a period of several years. However, response is variable and depends on such factors as fire intensity and severity, and the density and vigor of salmonberry prior to treatment [70]. In some instances, particularly where extremely abundant in prefire communities, salmonberry grows rapidly and soon retards the development of conifers despite hot slash burns [70]. Hot slash fires often damage only a small portion of the extensive rhizome network [70]. Salmonberry responded as follows after broadcast burning in a coastal Oregon clearcut [59]: # per acre before burn 1 yr. after burn aspect orig. stems seedlings orig. stems + sprouts seedlings north 10,700 6,150 7,880 5,680 south 10,920 2,120 10,520 3,920 On logged and burned sites, stem growth of salmonberry was rapid and pretreatment height was reached by mid to late summer following mechanical removal of foliage in February, March, and April [70]. On logged, unburned plots, pretreatment height was not reached until the end of the growing season [70]. Treatment of salmonberry prior to timber harvest may reduce subsequent cover and favor the establishment of conifer seedlings [70].


SPECIES: Rubus spectabilis
REFERENCES : 1. Ahlgren, I. F.; Ahlgren, C. E. 1960. Ecological effects of forest fires. Botanical Review. 26: 458-533. [205] 2. Alaback, Paul B. 1982. Dynamics of understory biomass in Sitka spruce-western hemlock forests of southeast Alaska. Ecology. 63(6): 1932-1948. [7305] 3. Alaback, Paul B.; Herman, F. R. 1988. Long-term response of understory vegetation to stand density in Picea-Tsuga forests. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 18: 1522-1530. [6227] 4. Allen, Hollis Howard. 1969. The inter-relationship of salmonberry and Douglas-fir in cutover areas. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University. 56 p. Thesis. [7140] 5. Barber, William Hollis, Jr. 1976. An autecological study of salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis, Pursh) in western Washington. Seattle, WA: University of Washington. 154 p. Thesis. [7189] 6. 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] 7. Bolsinger, Charles L. 1988. The hardwoods of California's timberlands, woodlands, and savannas. Resour. Bull. PNW-RB-148. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 148 p. [5291] 8. Brinkman, Kenneth A. 1974. Rubus L. blackberry, raspberry. In: Schopmeyer, C. S., ed. Seeds of woody plants in the United States. Agriculture Handbook No. 450. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 738-743. [7743] 9. Burrill, Larry C.; Braunworth, William S., Jr.; William, Ray D.; [and others], compilers. 1989. Pacific Northwest weed control handbook. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University, Extension Service, Agricultural Communications. 276 p. [6235] 10. Campbell, Alsie Gilbert; Franklin, Jerry F. 1979. Riparian vegetation in Oregon's western Cascade Mountains: composition, biomass, and autumn phenology. Bull. No. 14. Seattle, WA: U.S./International Biological Program, University of Washington, Ecosystem Analysis Studies, Coniferous Forest Biome. 90 p. [8433] 11. Core, Earl L. 1974. Brambles. In: Gill, John D.; Healy, William M., compilers. Shrubs and vines for Northeastern wildlife. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-9. Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 16-19. [8923] 12. Crane, M. B. 1940. Reproductive versatility in Rubus. I. Morphology and inheritance. Journal of Genetics. 40: 109-118. [8443] 13. Davidson, Eric Duncan. 1967. Synecological features of a natural headland prairie on the Oregon coast. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University. 78 p. M.S. thesis. [8901] 14. Dayton, William A. 1931. Important western browse plants. Misc. Publ. 101. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 214 p. [768] 15. Einarsen, Arthur S. 1946. Crude protein determination of deer food as an applied management technique. Transactions, 11th North American Wildlife Conference. 11: 309-312. [17031] 16. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905] 17. Fonda, R. W. 1979. Ecology of alpine timberline in Olympic National Park. In: Linn, Robert M., ed. Proceedings, 1st conference on scientific research in the National Parks; 1976 November 9-12; New Orleans, LA. National Park Serv. Trans. & Proceedings Series No. 5. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service: 209-212. [6683] 18. Fonda, R. W. 1979. Fire resilient forests of Douglas-fir in Olympic National Park: a hypothesis. In: Linn, Robert M., ed. Proceedings, 1st conference on scientific research in the National Parks, Vol. 2; 1976 November 9-12; New Orleans, LA. NPS Transactions and Proceedings No. 5. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service: 1239-1242. [6698] 19. Fowells, H. A., compiler. 1965. Silvics of forest trees of the United States. Agric. Handb. 271. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 762 p. [12442] 20. Franklin, Jerry F. 1981. Vegetation and habitats. In: Maser, Chris; Mate, Bruce R.; Franklin, Jerry F.; Dyrness, C. T., compilers. Natural history of Oregon Coast mammals. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-133. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station: 17-34. [6219] 21. Franklin, Jerry F.; Dyrness, C. T. 1973. Natural vegetation of Oregon and Washington. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-8. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 417 p. [961] 22. Franklin, Jerry F.; Pechanec, Anna A. 1968. Comparison of vegetation in adjacent alder, conifer, and mixed alder-conifer communities. I. Understory vegetation and stand structure. In: Trappe, J. M.; Franklin, J. F.; Tarrant, R. F.; Hansen, G. M., eds. Biology of alder: Proceedings of a symposium: 40th annual meeting of the Northwest Scientific Association; 1967 April 14-15; Pullman, WA. Portland, OR: U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station: 37-43. [6188] 23. 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] 24. Gratkowski, H. 1971. Midsummer foliage sprays on salmonberry and thimbleberry. PNW-171. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 5 p. [6540] 25. Gratkowski, H. 1978. Herbicides for shrub and weed control in western Oregon. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-77. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 48 p. [6539] 26. Great Plains Flora Association. 1986. Flora of the Great Plains. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. 1392 p. [1603] 27. Haeussler, S.; Pojar, J.; Geisler, B. M.; [and others]. 1985. A guide to the interior cedar-hemlock zone, northwestern transitional subzone (ICHg), in the Prince Rupert Forest Region, British Columbia. Land Management Report Number 26; ISSN 0702-9861. Victoria, BC: British Columbia, Ministry of Forests. 263 p. [6930] 28. Hall, Frederick C. 1984. Ecoclass coding system for the Pacific Northwest plant associations. R6 Ecol 173-1984. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 83 p. [7650] 29. 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] 30. Harper, James A. 1962. Daytime feeding habits of Roosevelt elk on Boyes Prairie, California. Journal of Wildlife Management. 26(1): 97-100. [8876] 31. Heady, Harold F.; Foin, Theodore C.; Hektner, Mary M.; [and others]. 1977. Coastal prairie and northern coastal scrub. In: Barbour, Michael G.; Major, Jack, eds. Terrestrial vegetation of California. New York: John Wiley and Sons: 733-760. [7211] 32. Henderson, Jan A. 1978. Plant succession on the Alnus rubra/Rubus spectabilis habitat type in western Oregon. Northwest Science. 52(3): 156-167. [6393] 33. Hines, William W.; Land, Charles E. 1974. Black-tailed deer and Douglas-fir regeneration in the Coast Range of Oregon. In: Black, Hugh C., ed. Wildlife and forest management in the Pacific Northwest: Proceedings of a symposium; 1973 September 11-12; Corvallis, OR. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University, School of Forestry, Forest Research Laboratory: 121-132. [7999] 34. Hitchcock, C. Leo; Cronquist, Arthur. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press. 730 p. [1168] 35. Hogdon, A. R.; Steele, Frederic. 1966. Rubus subgenus Eubatus in New England: a conspectus. Rhodora. 68: 474-513. [6213] 36. Hooven, Edward F.; Black, Hugh C. 1978. Prescribed burning aids reforestation of Oregon Coast Range brushlands. Research Paper 38. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University, School of Forestry. 14 p. [4132] 37. Kartesz, John T.; Kartesz, Rosemarie. 1980. A synonymized checklist of the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. Volume II: The biota of North America. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press; in confederation with Anne H. Lindsey and C. Richie Bell, North Carolina Botanical Garden. 500 p. [6954] 38. Kelpsas, B. R. 1978. Comparative effects of chemical, fire, and machine site preparation in an Oregon coastal brushfield. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University. 97 p. Thesis. [6986] 39. Klinka, K.; Scagel, A. M.; Courtin, P. J. 1985. Vegetation relationships among some seral ecosystems in southwestern British Columbia. Canadian Journal of Forestry. 15: 561-569. [5985] 40. 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] 41. Kramp, Betty A.; Patton, David R.; Brady, Ward W. 1983. The effects of fire on wildlife habitat and species. RUN WILD: Wildlife/ habitat relationships. Albuquerque, NM: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southwestern Region, Wildlife Unit Technical Report. 29 p. [152] 42. Krygier, James T.; Ruth, Robert H. 1961. Effects of herbicides on salmonberry and on Sitka spruce and western hemlock seedlings. Weeds. 9(3): 416-422. [6608] 43. 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] 44. Leininger, Wayne C.; Sharrow, Steven H. 1987. Seasonal diets of herded sheep grazing Douglas-fir plantations. Journal of Range Management. 40(6): 551-555. [8398] 45. 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] 46. Lyon, L. Jack; Stickney, Peter F. 1976. Early vegetal succession following large northern Rocky Mountain wildfires. In: Proceedings, Tall Timbers fire ecology conference and Intermountain Fire Research Council fire and land management symposium; 1974 October 8-10; Missoula, MT. No. 14. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station: 355-373. [1496] 47. Morgan, Penelope; Neuenschwander, Leon F. 1988. Shrub response to high and low severity burns following clearcutting in northern Idaho. Western Journal of Applied Forestry. 3(1): 5-9. [3895] 48. Munz, Philip A. 1973. A California flora and supplement. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1905 p. [6155] 49. Pojar, Jim. 1975. Hummingbird flowers of British Columbia. Syesis. 8: 25-28. [6537] 50. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843] 51. Rhodes, B. D.; Sharrow, S. H. 1983. Effect of sheep grazing on big game habitat in Oregon's Coast Range. In: 1983 Progress report--research in rangeland management. Special Report 682. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University, Agricultural Experiment Station: In cooperation with: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. [3610] 52. Ruth, Robert H. 1956. Plantation survival and growth in two brush-threat areas in coastal Oregon. Res. Pap. 17. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 14 p. [6722] 53. Ruth, Robert H. 1970. Effect of shade on germination and growth of salmonberry. Res. Pap. PNW-96. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 10 p. [6543] 54. Ruth, Robert H. 1974. Regeneration and growth of west-side mixed conifers. In: Camer, Owen P., ed. Environmental effects of forest residues in the Pacific Northwest: A state-of-knowledge compendium. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-24. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station: K-1 to K-21. [6381] 55. Schwartz, John E., II; Mitchell, Glen E. 1945. The Roosevelt elk on the Olympic Peninsula, Washington. Journal of Wildlife Management. 9(4): 295-319. [8878] 56. Stewart, R. E. 1974. Repeated spraying to control four coastal brush species. Res. Note PNW-238. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 5 p. [5636] 57. Stewart, R. E. 1977. Ammonium thiocyanate does not increase herbicidal control of salmonberry. Res. Note PNW-308. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 5 p. [6542] 58. Stewart, R. E. 1978. Site preparation. In: Cleary, Brian D.; Greaves, Robert D.; Hermann, Richard K., eds. Regenerating Oregon's forests: A guide for the regeneration forester. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University Extension Service: 99-129. [7205] 59. Stewart, R. E. 1978. Origin and development of vegetation after spraying and burning in a coastal Oregon clearcut. Res. Note PNW-317. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 11 p. [6541] 60. Strothmann, R. O.; Roy, Douglass F. 1984. Regeneration of Douglas-fir in the Klamath Mountains Region, California and Oregon. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-81. Berkeley, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 35 p. [5640] 61. Tappeiner, John; Zasada, John; Ryan, Peter. 1988. Structure of salmonberry clones and understories in western coastal Oregon forests: the basis for stable shrub communities. Unpublished paper on file at: College of Forestry, Oregon State University, U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Corvallis, OR: 27 p. [7061] 62. Turpin, Thomas C. 1989. Successful silvicultural operations without herbicides in a multiple use environment. In: Proceedings of the National Silviculture Workshop: Silviculture for all resources; 1987 May 11-14; Sacramento. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 176-183. [6402] 63. 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. [23104] 64. 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] 65. Viereck, L. A.; Dyrness, C. T. 1979. Ecological effects of the Wickersham Dome Fire near Fairbanks, Alaska. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-90. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 71 p. [6392] 66. Viereck, Leslie A.; Little, Elbert L., Jr. 1972. Alaska trees and shrubs. Agric. Handb. 410. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 265 p. [6884] 67. Volland, Leonard A.; Dell, John D. 1981. Fire effects on Pacific Northwest forest and range vegetation. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region, Range Management and Aviation and Fire Management. 23 p. [2434] 68. Whittaker, R. H. 1960. Vegetation of the Siskiyou Mountains, Oregon and California. Ecological Monographs. 30(3): 279-338. [6836] 69. Yerkes, Vern P. 1960. Occurrence of shrubs and herbaceous vegetation after clear cutting old-growth Douglas-fir. Res. Pap. PNW-34. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 12 p. [8937] 70. Zasada, John; Tappeiner, John; Maxwell, Bruce. 1989. Manual treatment of Salmonberry or which bud's for you?. Cope Report, Coastal Oregon Productivity Enhancement Program. 2(2): 7-9. [7060] 71. Zinke, Paul J. 1977. The redwood forest and associated north coast forests. In: Barbour, Michael G.; Major, Jack, eds. Terrestrial vegetation of California. New York: John Wiley and Sons: 679-698. [7212] 72. 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] 73. 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. [23119]

FEIS Home Page