Index of Species Information

SPECIES:  Sambucus nigra subsp. cerulea


Introductory

SPECIES: Sambucus nigra subsp. cerulea
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION : Crane, M. F. 1989. Sambucus nigra subsp. cerulea. 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 : SAMNIGC SAMNIG SYNONYMS : Sambucus glauca Sambucus cerulea var. glauca Sambucus caerulea Sambucus coerulea Sambucus coerulea var. glauca Sambucus decipiens Sambucus ferax Sambucus fimbriata Sambucus vestita Sambucus arizonica Sambucus neomexicana Sambucus neomexicana var. vestita Sambucus velutina SCS PLANT CODE : SACE3 SACEC SACEN SACEV COMMON NAMES : blue elderberry blueberry elder blue elder Arizona elderberry New Mexican elderberry velvet-leaf elder hairy blue elderberry TAXONOMY : The currently accepted scientific name of blue elderberry is Sambucus nigra subsp. cerulea (Raf.) R. Balli [97]. The taxonomy of blue elderberry is confusing because of the profusion of synonyms including alternate spellings of cerulea as coerulea [23] and caerulea [60,93]. LIFE FORM : Tree, Shrub FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS : No special status OTHER STATUS : NO-ENTRY

DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE

SPECIES: Sambucus nigra subsp. cerulea
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION : Blue elderberry's range in western North America is from southern British Columbia and western Alberta to California, Arizona, and New Mexico [6,9,27,48].  It extends east into western Montana [6,27], western Colorado [23], and Trans-Pecos Texas and south into northwest Mexico [40,60]. ECOSYSTEMS :    FRES20  Douglas-fir    FRES21  Ponderosa pine    FRES22  Western white pine    FRES23  Fir - spruce    FRES24  Hemlock - Sitka spruce    FRES25  Larch    FRES26  Lodgepole pine    FRES27  Redwood    FRES28  Western hardwoods    FRES34  Chaparral - mountain shrub    FRES35  Pinyon - juniper STATES :      AZ  CA  CO  ID  MT  NV  NM  OR  UT  WA      WY  AB  BC  MEXICO BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :    Northern Pacific Border    Cascade Mountains    Southern Pacific Border    Sierra Mountains    Columbia Plateau    Upper Basin and Range    Lower Basin and Range    Northern Rocky Mountains    Middle Rocky Mountains    Colorado Plateau KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :    K001  Spruce - cedar - hemlock forest    K002  Cedar - hemlock - Douglas-fir forest    K003  Silver fir - Douglas-dir 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    K019  Arizona pine forest    K020  Spruce - fir - Douglas-fir forest    K021  Southwestern spruce - fir forest    K022  Great Basin pine forest    K023  Juniper - pinyon woodland    K024  Juniper steppe woodland    K025  Alder - ash forest    K026  Oregon oakwoods    K028  Mosaic of K002 and K026    K029  California mixed evergreen forest    K030  California oakwoods    K031  Oak - juniper woodlands    K032  Transition between K031 and K037    K034  Montane chaparral    K035  Coastal sagebrush    K036  Mosaic of K030 and K035    K037  Mountain mahogany - oak scrub    K051  Wheatgrass - bluegrass    K059  Trans-Pecos shrub savanna SAF COVER TYPES :    205  Mountain hemlock    206  Engelmann spruce - subalpine fir    207  Red fir    208  Whitebark pine    256  California mixed subalpine    210  Interior Douglas-fir    211  White fir    212  Western larch    213  Grand fir    215  Western white pine    216  Blue spruce    217  Aspen    218  Lodgepole pine    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    229  Pacific Douglas-fir    230  Douglas-fir - western hemlock    232  Redwood    233  Oregon white oak    234  Douglas-fir - tanoak - Pacific madrone    235  Cottonwood - willow    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    246  California black oak    247  Jeffrey pine    248  Knobcone pine    249  Canyon live oak    250  Blue oak - Digger pine    255  California coast live oak SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES : NO-ENTRY HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES : Blue elderberry usually occurs in early seral communities or in openings in moist forest habitats and in moist areas within drier, more open habitats.  It is part of the riparian communities of the Central Valley of California, and it is frequently associated with alder (Alnus spp.) and quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) communities.  Blue elderberry is not often used as an indicator species.  In Mueggler [51] and Mueggler and Campbell [53], either S. racemosa or S. cerulea (blue elderberry) are indicators for the Populus tremuloides/Sambucus racemosa community type. Published classification schemes listing blue elderberry as an indicator species in community types or plant associations are presented below: Ecoclass coding system for the Pacific Northwest plant associations [21] A taxomonmy for classification of seral vegetation of selected habitat   types in Montana [22] Aspen community types of the Intermountain Region [51] Aspen community types of Utah [53] Associated Species:  Blue elderberry tends to grow as individual plants among other woody plants [44,87].  Some common associates are serviceberry (Amelanchier spp.), chokecherry (Prunus virginiana), rose (Rosa spp.), gooseberries (Ribes spp.), big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata), bromegrass (Bromus spp.), and wheatgrass (Agropyron spp.) [9,86].

MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS

SPECIES: Sambucus nigra subsp. cerulea
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE : Many wildlife species use Sambucus spp. for food [41,64].  It provides valuable cover, perching, and nesting sites; its fruit provides food for many species of birds including bluebirds, magpies, warbling vireo, western tanager, house finch, green-tailed towhee, woodpeckers, grosbeaks, Townsend solitaire, grouse, quail, pheasant, and hummingbirds who visit flowers for nectar [19,25,41,75,90].  It also provides cover and food for other wildlife including rabbits, squirrels, foxes, woodchucks, chipmunks, ground squirrels, woodrats, mice [41], and ring-tailed cats in California riparian zones [2].  Early in the year blue elderberry is less palatable and thus unimportant as browse for domestic livestock [9,65].  Mule deer also show seasonal preferences for blue elderberry [37].  When fed to captive mule deer in Utah from May 1 to September 30, it was a preferred food [73].  It was used throughout the period, but with highest use early in May and again in August and September.  Captive mule deer used blue elderberry lightly in the winter [71,74].  Elk use blue elderberry both summer and fall [77,95]. Seasonal mule deer use varies by community type with highest use in October in the aspen (Populus tremuloides) and spruce-fir (Picea engelmanni-Abies concolor) types and in July in the shrub-browse type [72].  Blue elderberry is a more important deer browse than red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa) [73]. PALATABILITY : Blue elderberry is a palatable browse plant that is sought and consumed in excess of its relative importance in the vegetative community by elk [37,95] and deer [72].  In the spring the foliage of blue elderberry may be strongly scented when bruised and less palatable.  By fall, especially following frost, it sweetens and becomes more palatable [9,58].  The highly palatable buds and dried fruit are used in winter by big game animals [58]. The degree of use shown by livestock and wildlife species for blue elderberry in several western states is rated as follows [10,65,77]:                   ID        CO      MT      UT      WY         CA Cattle         mod-good    fair    fair    fair    ----       fair Sheep          mod-good    fair    good    good    ----     good-fair Horses           ----      fair    poor    poor    ----       ---- Goats            ----      ----    ----    ----    ----       good Pronghorn        ----      ----    ----    poor    poor       ---- Elk              good      ----    ----    good    fair       ---- Mule deer        ----      ----    ----    good    good       ---- White-tailed deer             ----      ----    ----    ----    good       ---- Deer             ----      ----    ----    ----    ----     good-poor Small mammals    ----      ----    fair    good    fair       ---- Small nongame birds            ----      good    fair    good    good       ---- Upland game birds            ----      ----    fair    good    good       ---- Waterfowl        ----      ----    ----    poor    poor       ---- Black bear     mod-poor    ----    ----    ----    ----       ---- NUTRITIONAL VALUE : Blue elderberry's energy value is rated as fair and its protein value as poor [10].  Gordon and Sampson [17] list specific values for total ash, silica, silica-free ash, calcium, phosphorus, potassium, crude protein, and crude fiber for plant parts sampled during two growing seasons. Protein values are high in the early leaf stage and decrease with maturity.  Potassium and phosphorus contents also decrease with maturity, while ash and calcium contents increase.  Blue elderberry is important as late season browse because of a fairly high level of protein and essential inorganics when herbaceous plants are at their lowest nutritional ebb. COVER VALUE : Blue elderberry provides nesting habitat for a number of bird species in Arizona including the Dusky flycatcher, MacGillivary warbler, orange-crowned warbler, broad-tailed hummingbird, white-crowned sparrow, and Lincoln sparrow [4].  It also provides nest cover and nest support for the Least Bell's Vireo [18]. The degree to which blue elderberry provides environmental protection during one or more seasons for wildlife species is as follows [10].                         MT        UT        WY Pronghorn              ----      poor      poor Elk                    ----      fair      fair Mule deer              ----      good      good White-tailed deer      ----      ----      good Small mammals          poor      good      fair Small nongame birds    poor      good      good Upland game birds      poor      good      fair Waterfowl              ----      poor      poor VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES : Blue elderberry has been selected for planting in the Intermountain West because of its forage and cover value, productivity, adaptability, and ease of establishment [58,59].  It is also a useful ground cover for stabilizing eroding sites [58].  It is adapted for use in the forested, northern desert shrub, pinyon-juniper (Pinus edulis-Juniperus spp.), and mountain brush zones [43,58,76].  In Oregon and California it is being used for riparian plantings [5,15] and streambank stabilization plantings [39]. Seeding blue elderberry may improve forage production in some disturbed Gambel oak (Quercus gambelii) communities in Utah [81]. Blue elderberry seeds may be planted directly, or seedlings and 1- to 2-year old stock may be transplanted.  It also grows from cuttings and rootstocks [58,75].  Best establishment in Utah has been obtained by direct seeding [58], but establishment can be erratic [59].  Ratings of suitability include [58]:                                 Very            Medium           Very                                 Good    Good    or Fair   Poor   Poor Initial establishment                                      X Growth rate                      X Final establishment              X Persistence                      X Germination                                                       X Seed production and    handling                                       X Planting ease                            X Natural spread                                    X Herbage yield                    X Availability of    current growth                        X Soil stability                           X Range of adaptation                      X Resistance to disease    and insects                   X Compatibility with    other plants                  X Ease of transplanting                    X                  Studies of reclaimed mining sites give specific information about planting methods and survival.  In a Utah coal field at Alton it had a survival rate of 68 percent, but only reached 18 inches (46 cm) 6 years after planting [13].  Blue elderberry had difficulty on untreated acid spoils in the Sierra Nevada Mountains of California with survival rates of 23 percent for the first year and 10 percent by the third year.  In competition with seeded grass no blue elderberry survived.  On mine spoils the shade of blue elderberry may aid the establishment of other species [43].  Initial survival was good on Montana roadcuts, but decreased to 30 percent after 4 years and to one plant after 9 years [29].  Factors that influenced this mortality appeared to be the hot, dry slopes and infertile, rocky soil. OTHER USES AND VALUES : The fruit of blue elderberry is frequently gathered for wine, jellies, candy, pies, and sauces [49,60] and it is cultivated commercially in Oregon.  Native Americans gathered the fruit to cook, dry, or to eat raw.  They used a liquid made from the flowers and leaves for medicinal purposes [86].  In the spring the young vegetative sprouts can be cooked and eaten; however, some caution should be used in eating elderberries since other species in the genus contain a cyanogenetic glycoside and an alkaloid that can cause nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and gastrointestinal pain [33,80].  The berries contain very little of these substances, while the roots contain enough to cause death in hogs, and intermediate amounts are found in the stems.  A dye can be made from the bark and an insecticide from the dried leaves of elderberry [60].  The name Sambucus is derived from the Greek sambuca which was a stringed instrument supposed to be made from elder wood.  The hollow stems have been fashioned into flutes and blowguns.  The wood is hard and has been used for combs, spindles, and pegs [49]. OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : Browsing:  Blue elderberry is persistant and recovers well from heavy grazing in the Great Basin [43,58].  In Oregon grasslands grazing pressure may cause it to decrease, and in the mountains of northern New Mexico blue elderberry may increase from 5 percent to 20 percent under grazing pressure on various sites [91]. Competition:  In the Douglas-fir/twinflower-pinegrass (Pseudotsuga menziesii/Linnaea borealis-Calamagrostis rubescens) habitat type, clear-cutting or seed tree cutting with high soil surface disturbance caused by dozer scarification and slash removal favors blue elderberry and leads to a blue elderberry-prickly currant/elk sedge (Sambucus cerulea-Ribes lacustre/Carex geyeri) seral community type [22]. Chemical control:  Picloram pellets are moderately effective on blue elderberry [8].

BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS

SPECIES: Sambucus nigra subsp. cerulea
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS : Blue elderberry is a short lived, shade intolerant (or slightly tolerant [58]) shrub or small tree [50,61], usually between 6.5 to 13 feet (2 to 4 m) tall, but sometimes reaching 20 feet (6 m) [6,27].  Young twigs are soft and pithy but the wood is quite hard [49] with grayish bark [76] or thin, dark brown irregularly furrowed and ridged bark [56].  There may be a thick taproot with fibrous, spreading, lateral roots [20,69].  The leaves are opposite and odd-pinnate with five to nine serrate leaflets [56].  The flowers are perfect, white or cream colored, and borne in a cyme.  The entire inflorescence is about 1.6 to 5.9 (7.9) inches (4 to 15 [20] cm) across and nearly flat topped. The fruit is globose, edible, and blue-black with a glaucous bloom that makes it appear to be powder blue [6,27,56]. RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :       Phanerophyte REGENERATION PROCESSES : Reproduction of blue elderberry is sexual through small nutlets, three to five of which are contained in each edible, berrylike fruit [27,76]. There are good seed crops almost every year, and the seeds are dispersed by birds and other animals that eat the fruit [20,86].  Seeds retain their viability for up to 16 years in storage [20].  Blue elderberry seeds have a hard seed coat and dormant embryos that delay germination [58].  Heat treatment or sulfuric acid scarification and stratification hasten germination.  Detailed descriptions of seed gathering and germination are in Schopmeyer [68], Heit [26], Landis and Simonich [38], Shaw [69], and Stanton [75].  Without treatment, germination of seedlings may be delayed from 2 to 5 years after planting. Seedlings of blue elderberry develop extensively branched shoot systems with numerous large leaves [69].  They also grow expansive root systems that make it difficult to cultivate blue elderberry seedlings in seed beds [38,69].  Seedlings may bloom and bear fruit by their 2nd or 3rd year [16].  Plants can reach full size in 3 to 4 years in the Intermountain region [58]. Vegetative reproduction is limited to vigorous coppicing if the stems are killed or injured [61,90]. SITE CHARACTERISTICS : Blue elderberry prefers moist, well-drained sunny sites [9,76,75,90]. Thus it is found as a seral species on forested sites where it may persist in openings, in ravines, and alongside roads in drier habitat types, and as a riparian species in California's Central Valley and in Arizona [2,4,16,25].  In the Northwest it grows in valley bottoms and on open slopes with sufficient moisture [6,27].  It is the most common elderberry in eastern Oregon and Washington and is generally found along fence rows or in stream valleys [24].  In Utah it is found in the riparian, sagebrush (Artemisia spp.), mountain brush, pinyon-juniper (Pinus edulis-Juniperus utahensis), ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa), aspen (Populus tremuloides), and spruce-fir (Picea engelmannii-Abies lasiocarpa) communities [58,93].  Near the limits of its range it is more restricted.  In southeastern British Columbia and Vancouver Island it is found only in the valley bottoms where the growing seasons are longer [20].  In western Colorado it grows along creeks, in valleys, and at the base of cliffs [23].  In Arizona it is found locally in boreal, riparian shrublands and becomes more important below 8,500 feet (2,591 m) [4].  In general, blue elderberry is more common on warmer sites than the closely related red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa), although their preferred sites overlap [34]. Soils:  Blue elderberry grows on a variety of soils from gravelly or stony [28] to heavy clay loam [11].  However, growth is good on loam, and sandy loam soils; fair to good on sand; fair to poor on clay or gravel and poor on dense clay.  There is no consensus about elderberry's growth on organic and acidic soils; however, there is agreement that it grows poorly on saline, sodic, and saline-sodic soils, and optimum soil depth is given as 20+ inches (51 cm) [10].  Mueggler [50] found that elderberries were associated with soils that contained 5.6 to 8.0+ percent organic matter. Elevation:  Blue elderberry is most common from sea level to moderate elevations in the mountains [9,27].  However, it grows to 10,000 feet in California (3,048 m) [54] and 9,514 feet (2,900 m) in the Pacific Northwest [6].  In western Colorado it is reported at 5,500 to 8,000 feet (1,692 to 2,438 m) [23]. SUCCESSIONAL STATUS : Blue elderberry is a short lived seral species that is shade intolerant [50,61] or slightly shade tolerant [58].  It is a component of the seral shrub field complex that can inhibit tree regeneration following fire in moist Northwest forests but it is seldom a primary competitor [7,20,50].  In an Idaho study elderberries were absent from stands where over 40 years had passed since fire [50].  In open forests, woodlands, chaparral or riparian zones, blue elderberry can remain in the community, usually as scattered individuals rather than assuming dominance [2,4,16,25,51,52]. SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT : The average dates of phenological events in Montana and Idaho are presented below [67].                         Average Date              Average Date                          West of the               East of the                       Continental Divide        Continental Divide Leaf Buds Burst             4/30                      6/1 Leaves Full Grown           6/4                       6/28 Flowers Start               6/2                       6/27 Flowers End                 6/28                      7/16 Fruits Ripe                 8/21                      8/22 Seed Fall Starts            9/18 Leaves Start to   Color and Wither          8/31 Leaves Begin to Fall        9/19 Leaves Fallen              10/12                      9/20 In Idaho May to July is the flowering time [56].  In California bloom is from June to September with fruiting in September [54].  In Utah bloom occurs in July and August with fruiting from August to October [86].

FIRE ECOLOGY

SPECIES: Sambucus nigra subsp. cerulea
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS : Blue elderberry is fire tolerant [1].  Although blue elderberry is favored by fire, its frequency and cover remain relatively low in most areas where it has been studied [30,50,79].  In Utah [158 blue elderberry is often prominent in burned areas where it establishes from dormant seed. Blue elderberry is able to resprout [61,75,90], and seed buried in seed banks germinates following fire [26].  Since it is short lived and shade intolerant, blue elderberry is usually absent from the understory of closed-canopy forests before fire occurs and must rely on seed banks for regeneration. There may also be occasional sprouts where plants had been growing in openings in the prefire forest [45].  Idaho studies found elderberry seeds consistantly throughout seed bank samples despite the lack of elderberry plants in the forest understory [34,35,45].  Viable seed was found to a depth of 3.9 inches (10 cm) [35].  In the Blue Mountains of Oregon elderberry seed was not consistantly present in samples from different stands in mixed forests, and it was found in the top 0.8 inches (2.0 cm) [83]. POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY :    Tree with adventitious-bud root crown/soboliferous species root sucker    Initial-offsite colonizer (off-site, initial community)

FIRE EFFECTS

SPECIES: Sambucus nigra subsp. cerulea
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT : Fire effects vary with season, severity and intensity, site characteristics, and the age and vigor of the plants; however, fire generally kills aboveground parts of blue elderberry which then sprout vigorously from the root crown [40,61,78].  A severe fire might expose and kill the root and stem buds from which sprouting occurs.  Fire also scarifies buried seed, and germination usually occurs the first growing season following the fire [26,45]. DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT : NO-ENTRY PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE : Blue elderberry can respond to fire by resprouting, although only one fire study in California chaparral shows blue elderberry relying on resprouting [66].  In that study no seedlings of elderberry were found. Fire also scarifies the hard seed coat and stimulates germination of buried seeds [26,75,94].  Buried seeds respond to fire very quickly.  In northern Idaho elderberry seedlings established the first growing season after the fire [45].  There were no new seedlings after that year. There was some resprouting of shrubs that had been growing in stand openings as well.  In Oregon [46,47,79] blue elderberry responded from buried seed more strongly on logged and burned plots than on logged but unburned plots.  Blue elderberry dominated several burned plots and only one or two unburned plots during the 3rd to 5th growing seasons.  Other shrubs were dominant by the 11th to 16th seasons [47,78]. The severity of the fire appeared to make little or no difference to the frequency of elderberry seedlings in studies of high and low severity burns after clearcutting in northern Idaho [45,50]. Repeated fires may reduce elderberry [50]. Isaac [30] stated that blue elderberry spread slowly by seed and so was eliminated by a second fire. DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE : NO-ENTRY FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : NO-ENTRY

REFERENCES

SPECIES: Sambucus nigra subsp. cerulea
REFERENCES :  1.  Aro, Richard S. 1971. Evaluation of pinyon-juniper conversion to        grassland. Journal of Range Management. 24(2): 188-197.  [355]  2.  Belluomini, Linda; Trapp, Gene R. 1984. Ringtail distribution and        abundance in the Central Valley of California. In: Warner, Richard E.;        Hendrix, Kathleen M., eds. California riparian systems: Ecology,        conservation, and productive management. Berkeley, CA: University of        California Press: 906-914.  [5880]  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.  Brown, David E.; Lowe, Charles H.; Hausler, Janet F. 1977. Southwestern        riparian communities: their biotic importance and management in Arizona.        In: Johnson, R. Roy; Jones, Dale A., tech. coords. Importance,        preservation and management of riparian habitat: a symposium:        Proceedings; 1977 July 9; Tucson, AZ. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-43. Fort        Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky        Mountain Forest and Range Experiment 201-211.  [5348]  5.  Carson, Robert G.; Edgerton, Paul J. 1989. Creating riparian wildlife        habitat along a Columbia River impoundment in northcentral Washington.        In: Wallace, Arthur; McArthur, E. Durant; Haferkamp, Marshall R.,        compilers. Proceedings--symposium on shrub ecophysiology and        biotechnology; 1987 June 30 - July 2; Logan, UT. Gen. Tech. Rep.        INT-256. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,        Intermountain Research Station: 64-69.  [5924]  6.  Cronquist, Arthur; Holmgren, Arthur H.; Holmgren, Noel H.; [and others].        1984. Intermountain flora: Vascular plants of the Intermountain West,        U.S.A. Vol. 4. Subclass Asteridae, (except Asteraceae). New York: The        New York Botanical Garden. 573 p.  [718]  7.  Daubenmire, Rexford F.; Daubenmire, Jean B. 1968. Forest vegetation of        eastern Washington and northern Idaho. Technical Bulletin 60. Pullman,        WA: Washington State University, Agricultural Experiment Station. 104 p.        [749]  8.  Davis, E. A.; Gottfried, G. J. 1983. Picloram pellets control New Mexico        locust sprouts on a cleared forest site in Arizona. Down to Earth.        39(1): 18-21.  [6827]  9.  Dayton, William A. 1931. Important western browse plants. Misc. Publ.        101. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 214 p.  [768] 10.  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] 11.  Everett, Percy C. 1957. A summary of the culture of California plants at        the Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden 1927-1950. Claremont, CA: The Rancho        Santa Ana Botanic Garden. 223 p.  [7191] 12.  Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and        Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p.  [905] 13.  Ferguson, Robert B.; Frischknecht, Neil C. 1985. Reclamation on Utah's        Emery and Alton coal fields: techniques and plant materials. Res. Pap.        INT-335. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,        Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 78 p.  [917] 14.  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] 15.  Goldner, Bernard H. 1984. Riparian restoration efforts associated with        structurally modified flood control channels. In: Warner, Richard E.;        Hendrix, Kathleen M., eds. California riparian systems: Ecology,        conservation, and productive management: Proceedings of the conference;        1981 September 17-19; Davis, CA. Berkeley, CA: University of California        Press: 445-451.  [5852] 16.  Goldner, Bernard H. 1988. The Alamitos Creek revegetation project-the        lessons learned. In: Rieger, John P.; Williams, Bradford K., eds.        Proceedings of the second native plant revegetation symposium; 1987        April 15-18; San Diego, CA. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin -        Arboretum, Society of Ecological Restoration & Management: 185-192.        [4113] 17.  Gordon, Aaron; Sampson, Arthur W. 1939. Composition of common California        foothill plants as a factor in range management. Bull. 627. Berkeley,        CA: University of California, College of Agriculture, Agricultural        Experiment Station. 95 p.  [3864] 18.  Gray, M. Violet; Greaves, James M. 1984. Riparian forest as habitat for        the least Bell's vireo. In: Warner, Richard E.; Hendrix, Kathleen M.,        eds. California riparian systems: Ecology, conservation, and productive        management: Proceedings of a conference; 1981 September 17-19; Davis,        CA. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press: 605-611.  [5862] 19.  Gullion, Gordon W. 1964. Wildlife uses of Nevada plants. Contributions        toward a flora of Nevada No. 49. Beltsville, MD: U. S. Department of        Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, National Arboretum Crops        Research Division. 170 p.  [6729] 20.  Haeussler, S.; Coates, D. 1986. Autecological characteristics of        selected species that compete with conifers in British Columbia: a        literature review. Land Management Report No. 33. Victoria, BC: Ministry        of Forests, Information Services Branch. 180 p.  [1055] 21.  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] 22.  Hann, Wendel John. 1982. A taxonomy for classification of seral        vegetation of selected habitat types in western Montana. Moscow, ID:        University of Idaho. 235 p. Dissertation.  [1073] 23.  Harrington, H. D. 1964. Manual of the plants of Colorado. 2d ed.        Chicago: The Swallow Press Inc. 666 p.  [6851] 24.  Hayes, G. L. 1959. Forest and forest-land problems of southwestern        Oregon. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,        Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 54 p.  [8595] 25.  Hehnke, Merlin; Stone, Charles P. 1979. Value of riparian vegetation to        avian populations along the Sacramento River Sy. In: Johnson, R. Roy;        McCormick, J. Frank, technical coordinators. Strategies for protection        and management of floodplain wetlands & other riparian ecosystems: Proc.        of the symposium; 1978 December 11-13; Callaway Gardens, GA. General        Technical Report WO-12. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture,        Forest Service: 228-235.  [4363] 26.  Heit, C. E. 1967. Propagation from seed. Part 7: Germinating six        hardseeded groups. American Nurseryman. 125(12): 10-12; 37-41; 44-45.        [1120] 27.  Hitchcock, C. Leo; Cronquist, Arthur; Ownbey, Marion. 1959. Vascular        plants of the Pacific Northwest. Part 4: Ericaceae through        Campanulaceae. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press. 510 p.        [1170] 28.  Hosie, R. C. 1969. Native trees of Canada. 7th ed. Ottawa, ON: Canadian        Forestry Service, Department of Fisheries and Forestry. 380 p.  [3375] 29.  Hungerford, Roger D. 1984. Native shrubs: suitability for revegetating        road cuts in northwestern Montana. Res. Pap. INT-331. Ogden, UT: U.S.        Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and        Range Experiment Station. 13 p.  [1220] 30.  Isaac, Leo A. 1940. Vegetative succession following logging in the        Douglas-fir region with special reference to fire. Journal of Forestry.        38: 716-721.  [4964] 31.  Katibah, Edwin F.; Nedeff, Nicole E.; Dummer, Kevin J. 1984. Summary of        riparian vegetation aerial and linear extent measurements from the        Central Valley Riparian Mapping Project. In: Warner, Richard E.;        Hendrix, Kathleen M., eds. California riparian systems: Ecology,        conservation, and productive management: Proceedings of the conference;        1981 September 17-19; Davis, CA. Berkeley, CA: University of California        Press: 46-50.  [5824] 32.  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] 33.  Kingsbury, John M. 1964. Poisonous plants of the United States and        Canada. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc. 626 p.  [122] 34.  Kramer, Neal B. 1984. Mature forest seed banks on three habitat types in        central Idaho. Moscow, ID: University of Idaho. 106 p. Thesis.  [1375] 35.  Kramer, Neal B.; Johnson, Frederic D. 1987. Mature forest seed banks of        three habitat types in central Idaho. Canadian Journal of Botany. 65:        1961-1966.  [3961] 36.  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] 37.  Kufeld, Roland C. 1973. Foods eaten by the Rocky Mountain elk. Journal        of Range Management. 26(2): 106-113.  [1385] 38.  Landis, Thomas D.; Simonich, Edward J. 1984. Producing native plants as        container seedlings. In: Murphy, Patrick M., compiler. The challenge of        producing native plants for the Intermountain area: proceedings:        Intermountain Nurseryman's Association 1983 conference; 1983 August        8-11; Las Vegas, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-168. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department        of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range        Experiment Station: 16-25.  [6849] 39.  Lines, Ivan L., Jr.; Carlson, Jack R.; Corthell, Robert A. 1979.        Repairing flood-damaged streams in the Pacific Northwest. In: Johnson,        R. Roy; McCormick, J. Frank, technical coordinators. Strategies for        protection and management of floodplain wetlands & other riparian        ecosystems: Proc. of the symposium; 1978 December 11-13; Callaway        Gardens, GA. Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-12. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of        Agriculture, Forest Service: 195-200.  [4361] 40.  Little, Elbert L., Jr. 1979. Checklist of United States trees (native        and naturalized). Agric. Handb. 541. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of        Agriculture, Forest Service. 375 p.  [2952] 41.  Martin, Alexander C.; Zim, Herbert S.; Nelson, Arnold L. 1951. American        wildlife and plants. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc. 500 p.        [4021] 42.  Mason, Herbert L. 1957. A flora of the marshes of California. Berkeley,        CA: University of California Press. 878 p.  [16905] 43.  Monsen, Stephen B. 1984. Use of shrubs on mine spoils. In: Murphy, P.        M., compiler. The challenge of producing native plants for the        Intermountain area: Proceedings: Intermountain Nurseryman's Association        1983 conference; 1983 August 8-11; Las Vegas, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep.        INT-168. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,        Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 26-31.  [6847] 44.  Monsen, Stephen B. 1987. Shrub selections for pinyon-juniper plantings.        In: Everett, Richard L., compiler. Proceedings--pinyon-juniper        conference; 1986 January 13-16; Reno, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-215.        Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain        Research Station: 316-329.  [4925] 45.  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] 46.  Morris, William G. 1958. Influence of slash burning on regeneration,        other plant cover, and fire hazard in the Douglas-fir region (A progress        report). Res. Pap. PNW-29. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture,        Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station.        49 p.  [4803] 47.  Morris, William G. 1970. Effects of slash burning in overmature stands        of the Douglas-fir region. Forest Science. 16(3): 258-270.  [4810] 48.  Moss, E. H. 1959. Flora of Alberta. Toronto: University of Toronto        Press. 546 p.  [8948] 49.  Mozingo, Hugh N. 1987. Shrubs of the Great Basin: A natural history.        Reno, NV: University of Nevada Press. 342 p.  [1702] 50.  Mueggler, Walter F. 1965. Ecology of seral shrub communities in the        cedar-hemlock zone of northern Idaho. Ecological Monographs. 35:        165-185.  [4016] 51.  Mueggler, Walter F. 1988. Aspen community types of the Intermountain        Region. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-250. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of        Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 135 p.        [5902] 52.  Mueggler, Walter F.; Campbell, Robert B., Jr. 1982. Aspen community        types on the Caribou and Targhee National Forests in southeastern Idaho.        Res. Pap. INT-294. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest        Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 32 p.        [1713] 53.  Mueggler, Walter F.; Campbell, Robert B., Jr. 1986. Aspen community        types of Utah. Res. Pap. INT-362. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of        Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 69 p.        [1714] 54.  Munz, Philip A. 1973. A California flora and supplement. Berkeley, CA:        University of California Press. 1905 p.  [6155] 55.  Ourecky, D. K. 1970. Chromosome morphology in the genus Sambucus.        American Journal of Botany. 57(3): 239-244.  [6721] 56.  Patterson, Patricia A.; Neiman, Kenneth E.; Tonn, Jonalea. 1985. Field        guide to forest plants of northern Idaho. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-180.        Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain        Research Station. 246 p.  [1839] 57.  Peck, Morton E. 1941. A manual of the higher plants of Oregon. Portland,        OR: Binfords & Mort. 800 p.  [12444] 58.  Plummer, A. Perry; Christensen, Donald R.; Monsen, Stephen B. 1968.        Restoring big-game range in Utah. Publ. No. 68-3. Ephraim, UT: Utah        Division of Fish and Game. 183 p.  [4554] 59.  Plummer, A. Perry; Hull, A. C., Jr.; Stewart, George; Robertson, Joseph        H. 1955. Seeding rangelands in Utah, Nevada, southern Idaho and western        Wyoming. Agric. Handb. 71. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of        Agriculture, Forest Service. 73 p.  [11736] 60.  Powell, David C. 1988. Aspen community types of the Pike and San Isabel        National Forests in south-central Colorado. R2-ECOL-88-01. Denver, CO:        U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region.        254 p.  [15285] 61.  Preston, Richard J., Jr. 1948. North American trees. Ames, IA: The Iowa        State College Press. 371 p.  [1913] 62.  Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant        geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p.  [2843] 63.  Ritter, C. M.; McKee, G. W. 1964. The elderberry, history,        classification and culture. Pa. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 709 22 pgs.  [1221] 64.  Robinette, Sadie L. 1974. Checkerberry wintergreen (Gaultheria        procembens L. In: Gill, John D.; Healy, William M., compiler (also        revised). Shrubs and vinesfor northeastern wildlife. Gen. Tech. Rep.        NE-9. Upper Darby, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,        Northeastern Forest Experiment Station: 20-22.  [10109] 65.  Sampson, Arthur W.; Jespersen, Beryl S. 1963. California range        brushlands and browse plants. Berkeley, CA: University of California,        Division of Agricultural Sciences, California Agricultural Experiment        Station, Extension Service. 162 p.  [3240] 66.  Sauer, Jonathan D. 1977. Fire history, environmental patterns, and        species patterns in Santa Monica Mountain chaparral. In: Mooney, Harold        A.; Conrad, C. Eugene, technical coordinators. Proceedings of the symp.        of the environmental consequences of fire and fuel management in        Mediterranean ecosystems; 1977 August 1-5; Palo Alto, CA. Gen. Tech.        Rep. WO-3. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest        Service: 383-386.  [4866] 67.  Schmidt, Wyman C.; Lotan, James E. 1980. Phenology of common forest        flora of the northern Rockies--1928 to 1937. Res. Pap. INT-259. Ogden,        UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest        and Range Experiment Station. 20 p.  [2082] 68.  Schopmeyer, C. S. 1974. Nemopanthus mucronatus (L.) Trel.        Mountain-holly. 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: 553.  [7713] 69.  Shaw, N. 1984. Producing bareroot seedlings of native shrubs. In:        Murphy, P. M., compiler. The challenge of producing native plants for        the Intermountain area: Proceedings, Intermountain Nurseryman's        Association conference; 1983 August 8-11; Las Vegas, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep.        INT-168. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,        Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 6-15.  [6850] 70.  Shiflet, Thomas N., ed. 1994. Rangeland cover types of the United        States. Denver, CO: Society for Range Management. 152 p.  [23362] 71.  Smith, Arthur D. 1950. Feeding deer on browse species during winter.        Journal of Range Management. 3(2): 130-132.  [68] 72.  Smith, Arthur D. 1952. Digestibility of some native forages for mule        deer. Journal of Wildlife Management. 16(3): 309-312.  [2160] 73.  Smith, Arthur D. 1953. Consumption of native forage species by captive        mule deer during summer. Journal of Range Management. 6: 30-37.  [2161] 74.  Smith, Arthur D.; Hubbard, Richard L. 1954. Preference ratings for        winter deer forages from northern Utah ranges based on browsing time and        forage consumed. Journal of Range Management. 7: 262-265.  [2163] 75.  Stanton, Frank. 1974. Wildlife guidelines for range fire rehabilitation.        Tech. Note 6712. Denver, CO: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of        Land Management. 90 p.  [2221] 76.  Stark, N. 1966. Review of highway planting information appropriate to        Nevada. Bull. No. B-7. Reno, NV: University of Nevada, College of        Agriculture, Desert Research Institute. 209 p. In cooperation with:        Nevada State Highway Department.  [47] 77.  Steele, Robert; Geier-Hayes, Kathleen. 1987. The grand fir/blue        huckleberry habitat type in central Idaho: succession and management.        Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-228. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture,        Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 66 p.  [8133] 78.  Steen, Harold K. 1965. Variation in vegetation following slash fires.        Res. Note PNW-25. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest        Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 6 p.        [4797] 79.  Steen, Harold K. 1966. Vegetation following slash fires in one western        Oregon locality. Northwest Science. 40(3): 113-120.  [5671] 80.  Stephens, H. A. 1980. Poisonous plants of the central United States.        Lawrence, KS: The Regents Press of Kansas. 165 p.  [3803] 81.  Stevens, Richard; Davis, James N. 1985. Opportunities for improving        forage production in the Gambel oak types of Utah. In: Johnson, Kendall        L., ed. Proceedings, 3rd Utah shrub ecology workshop; 1983 August 30-31;        Provo, UT. Logan, UT: Utah State University, College of Natural        Resources: 37-41.  [3085] 82.  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] 83.  Strickler, Gerald S.; Edgerton, Paul J. 1976. Emergent seedlings from        coniferous litter and soil in eastern Oregon. Ecology. 57: 801-807.        [2039] 84.  Strahan Jan. 1984. Regeneration of riparian forests of the Central        Valley. In: Warner, Richard E.; Hendrix, Kathleen M., eds. California        riparian systems: Ecology, conservation, and productive management:        Proceedings of the conference; 1981 September 17-19; Davis, CA.        Berkeley, CA: University of California Press: 58-67.  [5825] 85.  U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1937. Range plant        handbook. Washington, DC. 532 p.  [2387] 86.  U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and        Range Experiment Station. 1976. Some important native shrubs of the        west. Ogden, UT. 16 p.  [2388] 87.  U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Region. 1974.        Elk-logging-roads study providing tentative guidelines for use by        resource managers. News from the Forest Service. R1-1155:081674.        Missoula, MT: [pages unknown].  [16523] 88.  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] 89.  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] 90.  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] 91.  Van Dyne, George M.; Payne, Gene F., compilers. 1964. Grazing responses        of western range plants. Bozeman, MT: Montana State College, Department        of Animal and Range Sciences. 69 p.  [2418] 92.  Warner, Richard E. 1984. Structural, floristic, and condition inventory        of central valley riparian systems. In: Warner, Richard E.; Hendrix,        Kathleen M., eds. California riparian systems: Ecology, conservation,        and productive management: Proceedings of a conference; 1981 September        17-19; Davis, CA. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press: 356-374.        [5840] 93.  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] 94.  Wright, Henry A.; Bailey, Arthur W. 1982. Fire ecology: United States        and southern Canada. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 501 p.  [2620] 95.  Young, Vernon A.; Robinette, W. Leslie. 1939. A study of the range        habits of elk on the Selway Game Preserve. Bull. No. 9. Moscow, ID:        University of Idaho, School of Forestry. 47 p.  [6831] 96.  Zamora, Benjamin Abel. 1975. Secondary succession on broadcast-burned        clearcuts of the Abies grandis - Pachistima myrsinites habitat type in        northcentral Idaho. Pullman, WA: Washington State University. 127 p.        Dissertation.  [5154] 97. ITIS Database. 2004. Integrated taxonomic information system, [Online].        Available: http://www.itis.usda.gov/index.html.  [51776]


FEIS Home Page