Index of Species Information

SPECIES:  Chimaphila umbellata


SPECIES: Chimaphila umbellata
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION : Matthews, Robin F. 1994. Chimaphila umbellata. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: []. Revisions : On 15 December 2014, the common name of this species was changed from: prince's-pine to: pipsissewa. ABBREVIATION : CHIUMB SYNONYMS : Pyrola umbellata L. [41,82] SCS PLANT CODE : CHUM COMMON NAMES : pipsissewa prince's-pine prince's pine waxflower wintergreen TAXONOMY : The currently accepted scientific name of pipsissewa is Chimaphila umbellata (L.) Barton [17,39,57,81,82]. Pipsissewa comprises a circumboreal complex in which several geographical varieties have been recognized [70]. The following varieties and subspecies are accepted: Chimaphila umbellata var. umbellata (Eurasia) [70] Chimaphila umbellata var. occidentalis (Rydb.) Blake (western North America) [17,38,39,57,82] Chimaphila umbellata var. cisatlantica Blake (eastern North America) [17,24,63,70] Chimaphila umbellata var. acuta (Rydb.) Blake (Arizona and New Mexico) [35,44] Chimaphila umbellata subsp. domingensis (S.F. Blake) Dorr (Dominican Republic) [84] Chimaphila umbellata subsp. mexicana (DC.) Hulten (Mexico) [41] LIFE FORM : Shrub, Forb FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS : See OTHER STATUS OTHER STATUS : Chimaphila umbellata var. cisatlantica is listed as threatened in Ohio by the Natural Heritage Program [85]. Chimaphila species are considered vulnerable in New York and may become rare, threatened, or endangered in the future if collection and/or development continues. They are protected under the 1974 New York State Wildflower Law [50].


SPECIES: Chimaphila umbellata
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION : Pipsissewa is a circumboreal species that is widely distributed in the northern hemisphere.  It is found from Newfoundland to Alaska south to California and Mexico, and east to New Mexico, Colorado, and South Dakota.  It is also found in the eastern United States from Maine south in the mountains to Georgia and west to Minnesota [25,44,63,67,81,82]. ECOSYSTEMS :    FRES10  White - red - jack pine    FRES11  Spruce - fir    FRES13  Loblolly - shortleaf pine    FRES15  Oak - hickory    FRES17  Elm - ash - cottonwood    FRES18  Maple - beech - birch    FRES19  Aspen - birch    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 STATES :      AK  AZ  CA  CO  CT  DE  GA  ID  IL  IN      IA  KY  ME  MD  MA  MI  MN  MT  NV  NH      NJ  NM  NY  NC  OH  OR  PA  RI  SC  SD      TN  UT  VT  VA  WA  WV  WI  WY  AB  BC      MB  NB  NF  NT  NS  ON  PE  PQ  SK  YT      MEXICO BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :     1  Northern Pacific Border     2  Cascade Mountains     3  Southern Pacific Border     4  Sierra Mountains     5  Columbia Plateau     6  Upper Basin and Range     7  Lower Basin and Range     8  Northern Rocky Mountains     9  Middle Rocky Mountains    10  Wyoming Basin    11  Southern Rocky Mountains    12  Colorado Plateau    13  Rocky Mountain Piedmont    15  Black Hills Uplift    16  Upper Missouri Basin and Broken Lands KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :    K001  Spruce - cedar - hemlock forest    K002  Cedar - hemlock - Douglas-fir forest    K003  Silver fir - Douglas-fir forest    K004  Fir - hemlock forest    K005  Mixed conifer forest    K006  Redwood forest    K007  Red fir forest    K008  Lodgepole pine - subalpine forest    K010  Ponderosa shrub forest    K011  Western ponderosa forest    K012  Douglas-fir forest    K013  Cedar - hemlock - pine forest    K014  Grand fir - Douglas-fir forest    K015  Western spruce - fir forest    K016  Eastern ponderosa forest    K017  Black Hills pine forest    K018  Pine - Douglas-fir forest    K019  Arizona pine forest    K020  Spruce - fir - Douglas-fir forest    K021  Southwestern spruce - fir forest    K026  Oregon oakwoods    K029  California mixed evergreen forest    K030  California oakwoods    K093  Great Lakes spruce - fir forest    K094  Conifer bog    K095  Great Lakes pine forest    K096  Northeastern spruce - fir forest    K097  Southeastern spruce - fir forest    K098  Northern floodplain forest    K099  Maple - basswood forest    K100  Oak - hickory forest    K102  Beech - maple forest    K103  Mixed mesophytic forest    K104  Appalachian oak forest    K106  Northern hardwoods    K107  Northern hardwoods - fir forest    K108  Northern hardwoods - spruce forest    K109  Transition between K104 and K106    K110  Northeastern oak - pine forest SAF COVER TYPES :      1  Jack pine      5  Balsam fir     12  Black spruce     13  Black spruce - tamarack     14  Northern pin oak     15  Red pine     16  Aspen     17  Pin cherry     18  Paper birch     19  Gray birch - red maple     20  White pine - northern red oak - red maple     21  Eastern white pine     22  White pine - hemlock     23  Eastern hemlock     24  Hemlock - yellow birch     25  Sugar maple - beech - yellow birch     26  Sugar maple - basswood     27  Sugar maple     30  Red spruce - yellow birch     31  Red spruce - sugar maple - beech     32  Red spruce     33  Red spruce - balsam fir     34  Red spruce - Fraser fir     35  Paper birch - red spruce - balsam fir     37  Northern white-cedar     38  Tamarack     42  Bur oak     45  Pitch pine     51  White pine - chestnut oak     52  White oak - black oak - northern red oak     53  White oak     55  Northern red oak     58  Yellow-poplar - eastern hemlock     59  Yellow-poplar - white oak - northern red oak     60  Beech - sugar maple     63  Cottonwood    107  White spruce    108  Red maple    110  Black oak    201  White spruce    202  White spruce - paper birch    203  Balsam poplar    204  Black spruce    205  Mountain hemlock    206  Engelmann spruce - subalpine fir    207  Red fir    208  Whitebark pine    210  Interior Douglas-fir    211  White fir    212  Western larch    213  Grand fir    215  Western white pine    217  Aspen    218  Lodgepole pine    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    231  Port-Orford-cedar    232  Redwood    233  Oregon white oak    234  Douglas-fir - tanoak - Pacific madrone    235  Cottonwood - willow    236  Bur oak    237  Interior ponderosa pine    243  Sierra Nevada mixed conifer    244  Pacific ponderosa pine - Douglas-fir    245  Pacific ponderosa pine    246  California black oak    249  Canyon live oak    251  White spruce - aspen    252  Paper birch    253  Black spruce - white spruce    254  Black spruce -  paper birch    256  California mixed subalpine SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES : NO-ENTRY HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES : Pipsissewa is a common understory species in many habitat types throughout its range but often does not reach dominance.  It is found in coniferous and mixed forests with numerous tree species.  In addition to those already mentioned, pipsissewa may occur with sugar pine (Pinus lambertiana), giant sequoia (Sequoia gigantea), and Brewer spruce (Picea breweriana) [6,65,79].  Several publications that list pipsissewa as a dominant understory species in the western United States follow. Description and classification of the forests of the upper Illinois   River drainage of southwestern Oregon [6] Preliminary plant associations of the Siskiyou Mountain Province [8] Preliminary plant associations of the southern Oregon Cascade Mountain   Province [7] Terrestrial vegetation of California [66] Natural vegetation of Oregon and Washington [21] Plant association and management guide: Willamette National Forest [37] Plant associations of south Chiloquin and Klamath Ranger   Districts--Winema National Forest [40] Vegetation and fire history of a ponderosa pine-white fir forest in    Crater Lake National Park [53] Associated species are well described for the Northwest and include baldhip rose (Rosa gymnocarpa), Nootka rose (R. nutkana), Greene mountain-ash (Sorbus scopulina), common snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), Saskatoon serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia), Pacific yew (Taxus brevifolia), huckleberry (Vaccinium spp.), russet buffaloberry (Shepherdia canadensis), spiraea (Spiraea spp.), menziesia (Menziesia ferruginea), creeping juniper (Juniperus horizontalis), common juniper (J. communis), pachistima (Pachistima myrsinites), snowbrush ceanothus (Ceanothus velutinus), Utah honeysuckle (Lonicera utahensis), currant (Ribes spp.), raspberry (Rubus spp.), twinflower (Linnaea borealis), bunchberry (Cornus canadensis), beargrass (Xerophyllum tenax), Oregon-grape (Mahonia repens), queencup beadlily (Clintonia uniflora), violet (Viola spp.), strawberry (Fragaria spp.), sweet-scented bedstraw (Galium trifolium), pyrola (Pyrola spp.), oneleaf foamflower (Tiarella unifoliata), western rattlesnake plantain (Goodyera oblongifolia), pinegrass (Calamagrostis rubescens), and elk sedge (Carex geyeri) [1,7,14,28,37].


SPECIES: Chimaphila umbellata
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE : Pipsissewa is of minor importance in winter, spring, and fall diets of Roosevelt elk in the Pacific Northwest [43].  It is a component of white-tailed deer winter diets in the Swan Valley, Montana [56]. Mature stands of white fir (Abies concolor)-giant chinquapin (Chrysolepsis chrysophylla)/pachistima (Pachistima myrsinites)-prince's pine and Shasta red fir (Abies magnifica var. shastensis)-white fir-giant chinquapin/pipsissewa-long stolon sedge (Carex inops) plant associations in the Winema National Forest are critical elk calving and deer fawning habitat.  They are also important for feeding and nesting sites for birds and are suitable habitats for spotted owls, goshawks, and pileated woodpeckers [40].  White fir-Brewer spruce/pipsissewa plant associations in the southern Oregon Cascade Mountain Province are also excellent wildlife habitat [8]. PALATABILITY : NO-ENTRY NUTRITIONAL VALUE : NO-ENTRY COVER VALUE : NO-ENTRY VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES : Pipsissewa is sensitive to trampling and has a low potential for recovery.  It may, however, recover from very low (less than 40 passes per year) or low (75-100 passes per year) trampling intensities [13]. OTHER USES AND VALUES : Historically, pipsissewa roots and leaves were boiled and the infusion was ingested as a treatment for tuberculosis and long-lasting colds.  The leaves were also used as an astringent.  Pipsissewa can also be used as an ingredient in root beer [34,40].   OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : In a study of lodgepole pine stands in spruce (Picea engelmannii and P. glauca)/queencup beadlily (Clintonia uniflora) habitat types in Glacier National Park, pipsissewa displayed a significant (p<.10) decrease in frequency in response to a mountain pine beetle infestation and was more numerous on sites never infested than sites infested 80 years earlier. It was negatively correlated to overstory removal and increased light intensity, as shown by a steady decline in cover and frequency following the epidemic [3]. Pipsissewa is a major constituent of old-growth forests in the Swan Valley, Montana.  It often persists only on sheltered, unburned microsites.  It is present (39% frequency) in untreated old-growth and mature stands but is absent from burned clearcuts and plantation sites (20-30 years old).  Where standing trees remain to provide cover, frequency may be as high as 67 percent in stands that have been select cut without burning [22].  At other locations pipsissewa has essentially disappeared from stands or has had a major decrease in frequency or cover following stand removal with or without subsequent burning [4,5,14,74]. In the Vancouver Forest Region of British Columbia, pipsissewa is an indicator species in several variants of biogeoclimatic units for which guidelines for site diagnosis, tree species selection, and slash burning have been developed [26].  It is used as an indicator of good forest sites in the Winema and Fremont National Forests, Oregon.  When associated with twinflower, it is an indicator of the best fir (Abies spp.) sites [32,40].  The presence of pipsissewa is used to predict natural regeneration success under partially cut stands on the Dead Indian Plateau in southwest Oregon [55]. Pipsissewa is not a serious competitor to conifer seedlings [7].


SPECIES: Chimaphila umbellata
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS : Pipsissewa is a native evergreen low shrub or perennial rhizomatous herb.  The woody stems are usually 4 to 12 inches (10-30 cm) tall and the leathery, whorled leaves are sharply serrate.  The fertile stems are generally erect and may have 2 to 15 flowers.  Fruits are depressed, globose capsules which often persist through the winter [25,39,57,70,72,82]. Across its range, pipsissea was show wide variation in size; in leaf blade length, number of teeth, and prominence of lower surface venation; in sepal shape; and in stigma and capsule size [31]. RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :    Chamaephyte    Geophyte REGENERATION PROCESSES : Pipsissewa reproduces both sexually and vegetatively.  Flowers have been observed being pollinated by bumblebees and staphylinid beetles [11]. Pipsissewa develops numerous, minute seeds [25,57,72].  Their dispersal mechanism has not been documented.  A New Brunswick study of boreal herb reproductive biology found that pipsissewa flowered for an average of 30 days.  Fruit set was low for flowers opening at the beginning of the flowering period.  Eighty-three percent of buds opened and 76.5 percent survived the flowering period.  Forty-seven percent of flower buds eventually developed fruit, and 45.6 percent actually matured fruit [36]. Pipsissewa produces long rhizomes that normally grow at a fast rate. Genets are generally long-lived [83].  Reports differ concerning the depth of pipsissewa rhizomes.  In a study of the Douglas-fir forest zone in southern interior British Columbia, McLean [52] listed prince's pine with species that have rhizomes growing from 2 to 5 inches (5-13 cm) below the mineral soil surface.  Most of those species are able to regenerate from those depths, but he stated that only pipsissewa rhizomes near the soil surface are able to produce new shoots.  Stickney [78] reported that in the northern Rocky Mountains, pipsissewa rhizomes are confined to the duff near or above the mineral soil surface. SITE CHARACTERISTICS : Pipsissewa is found in a wide variety of soils and soil moisture regimes.  It most commonly occurs in mixed woods and coniferous forests [17,24,35,38,44] on dry, well-drained, rocky or sandy soils [7,18,24,26].  In coastal regions of British Columbia, pipsissewa is an indicator of dry to very dry, nutrient-poor soils in montane boreal, temperate, and cool mesothermal climates.  Its occurrence decreases with increasing elevation and precipitation, and increases with continentality [47].  In Ontario, pipsissewa most often occurs on sandy or rocky soil on well-drained sites, on gravel terraces, and in jack pine (Pinus banksiana) barrens [70].  In red pine (P. resinosa)-white pine (P. strobus) forests of Voyageurs National Park, Minnesota, pipsissewa is found on dry, shallow, well-drained, nutrient poor to medium loamy sand to sandy loam soils [51].  In the nearby Boundary Waters Canoe area, pipsissewa is found on shallow, sandy soils to deep soils with a high clay content [59]. Pipsissewa also occurs in moist or imperfectly-drained situations throughout its range.  It is found on moist sites in oak ecosystems of Michigan [2], on moist sites in the Black Hills of South Dakota [72], and in lodgepole pine (P. contorta) forests in Alberta [9].  In the Adirondack Mountains of New York, pipsissewa occurs on well- to imperfectly-drained sites, most often under pines (Pinus spp.) on outwash soils, but also on tills in mixed woods [50]. Pipsissewa occurs in the following elevational ranges:                          feet              meters                _________________________________________________                UT     6,930-9,570     2,100-2,900 [82]                AZ     6,000-9,570     1,800-2,900 [31]                CA     1,000-9,570       300-2,900 [38,57]                CO     8,000-11,500    2,400-3,500 [35] SUCCESSIONAL STATUS : Pipsissewa has been classified as moderately shade tolerant to tolerant throughout its range [26,29,42,47,50,60].  Its highest frequency or cover is probably reached at intermediate light levels, such as in relatively open conifer stands in the Siskiyou Mountains of Oregon [15]. In the western Cascades, pipsissewa is significantly more frequent (p<.05) under a Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) canopy than under a western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla) canopy (71% vs. 4% frequency). Average cover under western hemlock is less than 1.0 percent compared to 12.5 percent under Douglas-fir.  The difference may be due to less direct radiation in the western hemlock stands [73]. Pipsissewa is present throughout succession and occurs in stands of all ages [28,29,59,64,71].  It is found in relatively young stands [1,20,45], but is probably more frequent in mid-successional stages and mature forests [3,5,21,29].  Pipsissewa is a common understory component in many old-growth and climax forests of the Pacific Northwest [20,27,30,42]. SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT : Pipsissewa flowers from June to August throughout its range [17,24,25,31,57].


SPECIES: Chimaphila umbellata
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS : Pipsissewa is a fire-sensitive species that is very susceptible to damage and often shows a strong decline following fire [33,52,71,78]. Survival probably depends to a great extent on damage to rhizomes, so it depends on depth of rhizomes, fire severity, and consumption of duff [68,78].  Loss of the long-lived evergreen leaves may also reduce survival.  Postfire vegetative recovery depends primarily on the survival of scattered individuals in undisturbed microsites [33]. POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY :    Rhizomatous low woody plant, rhizome in organic mantle    Rhizomatous herb, rhizome in soil


SPECIES: Chimaphila umbellata
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT : Pipsissewa has a moderate to high probability of being killed by fire [40,76].  Low-severity fires that do not consume the organic mantle may only top-kill it. DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT : NO-ENTRY PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE : Postfire response of pipsissewa is variable and is probably most dependent on fire severity and the uniformity of the burn.  Some studies have reported pipsissewa surviving fire.  In mixed western hemlock-Douglas-fir-western redcedar (Thuja plicata) stands in North Cascades National Park, Washington, pipsissewa was considered a residual species following a July wildfire.  Its frequency in postfire years 1, 2, and 3 was 65.3, 52.1, and 52.1 percent, respectively [54]. Pipsissewa appeared to survive on moderately burned sites following the Waterfalls Canyon Fire in Grand Teton National Park in July, 1974, but was eliminated from severely burned sites.  The prefire vegetation was spruce-fir with lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) and whitebark pine (P. albicaulis).  Pipsissewa had the following percent frequency and cover as measured in 1975 [10]:                          Frequency     Cover ______________________________________________ Unburned sites              52           5 Sites burned in 1932         2         trace Moderately burned sites     17           1 Severely burned sites        0           0  In the northern Rocky Mountains, slow recovery after fire has been reported.  Pipsissewa was eliminated from initial postfire communities by a severe wildfire in western larch (Larix occidentalis)-Douglas-fir stands on the Flathead National Forest, Montana [75].  In western larch-fir (Abies grandis and A. lasiocarpa) stands on the Flathead and Lolo National Forests, Montana, pipsissewa had not recovered by postfire year 9 following logging and broadcast burning [74].  Pipsissewa was also absent 10 months after a late-summer wildfire in lodgepole pine stands in the Chamberlain Basin, Idaho.  It was found on adjacent unburned sites and was present on burned sites 5 years after the fire, but had less biomass production than on unburned sites [61]. Variable responses to fire have been reported for pipsissewa in Minnesota.  It survived the Little Sioux Wildfire in May, 1971, in mixed conifer-hardwood stands in northeastern Minnesota.  Number of individuals (on seventy 0.605 sq m plots) and aboveground average dry weight per individual pipsissewa were measured at the end of each growing season for the first 5 postfire years [58]:                        1971     1972      1973     1974     1975 ________________________________________________________________ No. of individuals      15     no data     57       30        7 Ave. dry wt. (g)       .07     no data    .33      .29      .46 Pipsissewa responded more slowly after wildfires in second-growth mixed conifer-hardwood forests in northeastern Minnesota.  It was not present in postfire years 3, 5, or 14 after the April Heartlake Fire. It was not present on the Kelley Creek Burn, resulting from a July fire, at postfire year 2 but had a frequency of 3 percent in postfire years 5 and 11 [48]. DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE : The Research Project Summary Vegetation response to restoration treatments in ponderosa pine-Douglas-fir forests of western Montana provides
information on prescribed fire and postfire response of plant community species, including pipsissewa, that was not available when this species review was written. FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : Pipsissewa is a component in many subzones in which guidelines for prescribed burning and tree species selection have been developed in the Vancouver Forest District, British Columbia [46].


SPECIES: Chimaphila umbellata
REFERENCES :  1.  Antos, J. A.; Habeck, J. R. 1981. Successional development in Abies        grandis (Dougl.) Forbes forests in the Swan Valley, western Montana.        Northwest Science. 55(1): 26-39.  [12445]  2.  Archambault, Louis; Barnes, Burton V.; Witter, John A. 1989. Ecological        species groups of oak ecosystems of southeastern Michigan. Forest        Science. 35(4): 1058-1074.  [9768]  3.  Armour, Charles David. 1982. Fuel and vegetation succession in response        to mountain pine beetle epidemics in northwestern Montana. Moscow, ID:        University of Idaho. 47 p. Thesis.  [16488]  4.  Arno, Stephen F.; Simmerman, Dennis G. 1982. Succession after cutting        and fire treatments on forest habitat types in western Montana. In:        Baumgartner, David M., compiler. Site preparation and fuels management        on steep terrain: Proceedings of a symposium; 1982 February 15-17;        Spokane, WA. Pullman, WA: Washington State University, Cooperative        Extension: 113-117.  [18537]  5.  Arno, Stephen F.; Simmerman, Dennis G.; Keane, Robert E. 1985. Forest        succession on four habitat types in western Montana. Gen. Tech. Rep.        INT-177. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,        Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 74 p.  [349]  6.  Atzet, Thomas. 1979. Description and classification of the forests of        the upper Illinois River drainage of southwestern Oregon. Corvallis, OR:        Oregon State University. 211 p. Dissertation.  [6452]  7.  Atzet, Thomas; McCrimmon, Lisa A. 1990. Preliminary plant associations        of the southern Oregon Cascade Mountain Province. Grants Pass, OR: U.S.        Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Siskiyou National Forest. 330        p.  [12977]  8.  Atzet, Thomas; Wheeler, David L. 1984. Preliminary plant associations of        the Siskiyou Mountain Province. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of        Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 278 p.  [9351]  9.  Baranyay, J. A.; Safranyik, L. 1970. Effect of dwarf mistletoe on growth        and mortality of lodgepole pine in Alberta. Publ. No. 1285. Ottawa:        Canadian Forestry Service, Department of Fisheries and Forestry. 19 p.        [8286] 10.  Barmore, William J., Jr.; Taylor, Dale; Hayden, Peter. 1976. Ecological        effects and biotic succession following the 1974 Waterfalls Canyon Fire        in Grand Teton National Park. Research Progress Report 1974-1975.        Unpublished report on file at: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest        Service, Intermountain Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT. 99 p.        [16109] 11.  Barrett, Spencer C.; Helenurm, Kaius. 1987. The reproductive biology of        boreal forest herbs. I. Breeding systems and pollination. Canadian        Journal of Botany. 65: 2036-2046.  [6624] 12.  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] 13.  Cole, David N. 1988. Disturbance and recovery of trampled montane        grassland and forests in Montana. Res. Pap. INT-389. Ogden, UT: U.S.        Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research        Station. 37 p.  [3622] 14.  Edgerton, Paul J. 1987. Influence of ungulates on the development of the        shrub understory of an upper slope mixed conifer forest. In: Provenza,        Frederick D.; Flinders, Jerran T.; McArthur, E. Durant, compilers.        Proceedings--symposium on plant-herbivore interactions; 1985 August 7-9;        Snowbird, UT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-222. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of        Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 162-167.        [7411] 15.  Emmingham, W. H. 1972. Conifer growth and plant distribution under        different light environments in the Siskiyou Mountains of southwestern        Oregon. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University. 50 p. Thesis.  [9651] 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.  Fernald, Merritt Lyndon. 1950. Gray's manual of botany. [Corrections        supplied by R. C. Rollins]. Portland, OR: Dioscorides Press. 1632 p.        (Dudley, Theodore R., gen. ed.; Biosystematics, Floristic & Phylogeny        Series; vol. 2).  [14935] 18.  Filip, Stanley M.; Little, Elbert L., Jr. 1971. Trees and shrubs of the        Bartlett Experimental Forest, Carroll County, New Hampshire. Res. Pap.        NE-211. Upper Darby, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,        Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 20 p.  [13635] 19.  Fischer, William C.; Bradley, Anne F. 1987. Fire ecology of western        Montana forest habitat types. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-223. Ogden, UT: U.S.        Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research        Station. 95 p.  [633] 20.  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] 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.  Freedman, June D. 1983. The historical relationship between fire and        plant succession within the Swan Valley white-tailed deer winter range,        western Montana. Missoula, MT: University of Montana. 139 p.        Dissertation.  [6486] 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.  Gleason, H. A.; Cronquist, A. 1963. Manual of vascular plants of        northeastern United States and adjacent Canada. Princeton, NJ: D. Van        Nostrand Company, Inc. 810 p.  [7065] 25.  Great Plains Flora Association. 1986. Flora of the Great Plains.        Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. 1392 p.  [1603] 26.  Green, R. N.; Courtin, P. J.; Klinka, K.; [and others]. 1984. Site        diagnosis, tree species selection, and slashburning guidelines for the        Vancouver Forest Region. Land Management Handbook Number 8. Abridged        version. Burnaby, BC: Ministry of Forests, Vancouver Forest Region. 143        p.  [9475] 27.  Grier, Charles C.; Logan, Robert S. 1977. Old-growth Pseudotsuga        menziesii communties of a western Oregon watershed: biomass distribution        and production budgets. Ecological Monographs. 47: 373-400.  [8762] 28.  Habeck, James R. 1968. Forest succession in the Glacier Park        cedar-hemlock forests. Ecology. 49(5): 872-880.  [6479] 29.  Habeck, James R. 1970. Fire ecology investigations in Glacier National        Park: Historical considerations and current observations. Missoula, MT:        University of Montana, Department of Botany. 80 p.  [6712] 30.  Habeck, James R. 1978. A study of climax western redcedar (Thuja plicata        Donn.) forest communities in the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness, Idaho.        Northwest Science. 52(1): 67-76.  [7354] 31.  Haber, Erich. 1992. Pyrolaceae: Wintergreen family. In: A new flora for        Arizona in preparation. In: Journal of the Arizona-Nevada Academy of        Science. 26(1): 22-28.  [21484] 32.  Hall, Frederick C. 1973. Plant communities of the Blue Mountains in        eastern Oregon and southeastern Washington. R6-Area Guide 3-1. Portland,        OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest        Region. 82 p.  [1059] 33.  Halpern, C. B. 1989. Early successional patterns of forest species:        interactions of life history traits and disturbance. Ecology. 70(3):        704-720.  [6829] 34.  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] 35.  Harrington, H. D. 1964. Manual of the plants of Colorado. 2d ed.        Chicago: The Swallow Press Inc. 666 p.  [6851] 36.  Helenurm, Kaius; Barrett, Spencer C. H. 1987. The reproductive biology        of boreal forest herbs. II. Phenology of flowering and fruiting.        Canadian Journal of Botany. 65: 2047-2056.  [6623] 37.  Hemstrom, Miles A.; Logan, Sheila E.; Pavlat, Warren. 1987. Plant        association and management guide: Willamette National Forest. R6-Ecol        257-B-86. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,        Pacific Northwest Region. 312 p.  [13402] 38.  Hickman, James C., ed. 1993. The Jepson manual: Higher plants of        California. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1400 p.        [21992] 39.  Hitchcock, C. Leo; Cronquist, Arthur. 1973. Flora of the Pacific        Northwest. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press. 730 p.  [1168] 40.  Hopkins, William E. 1979. Plant associations of south Chiloquin and        Klamath Ranger Districts-- Winema National Forest. R6-Ecol-79-005.        Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific        Northwest Region. 96 p.  [7339] 41.  Hulten, Eric. 1968. Flora of Alaska and neighboring territories.        Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. 1008 p.  [13403] 42.  Ingram, Douglas C. 1931. Vegetative changes and grazing use on        Douglas-fir cut-over land. Journal of Agricultural Research. 43(5):        387-417.  [8877] 43.  Jenkins, Kurt J.; Starkey, Edward E. 1991. Food habits of Roosevelt elk.        Rangelands. 13(6): 261-265.  [17351] 44.  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] 45.  Kittredge, J., Jr. 1934. Evidence of the rate of forest succession on        Star Island, Minnesota. Ecology. 15(1): 24-35.  [10102] 46.  Klinka, K. 1977. Guide for the tree species selection and prescribed        burning in the Vancouver Forest District: Second approximation.        Vancouver, BC: Ministry of Forests, Forest Service Research Division,        VancouverForest District. 56 p.  [16924] 47.  Klinka, K.; Krajina, V. J.; Ceska, A.; Scagel, A. M. 1989. Indicator        plants of coastal British Columbia. Vancouver, BC: University of British        Columbia Press. 288 p.  [10703] 48.  Krefting, Laurits W.; Ahlgren, Clifford E. 1974. Small mammals and        vegetation changes after fire in a mixed conifer-hardwood forest.        Ecology. 55: 1391-1398.  [9874] 49.  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] 50.  Kudish, Michael. 1992. Adirondack upland flora: an ecological        perspective. Saranac, NY: The Chauncy Press. 320 p.  [19377] 51.  Kurmis, Vilis; Webb, Sara L.; Merriam, Lawrence C., Jr. 1986. Plant        communities of Voyageurs National Park, Minnesota, U.S.A. Canadian        Journal of Botany. 64: 531-540.  [16088] 52.  McLean, Alastair. 1968. Fire resistance of forest species as influenced        by root systems. Journal of Range Management. 22: 120-122.  [1621] 53.  McNeil, Robert C.; Zobel, Donald B. 1980. Vegetation and fire history of        a ponderosa pine-white fir forest in Crater Lake National Park.        Northwest Science. 54(1): 30-46.  [166] 54.  Miller, Margaret M.; Miller, Joseph W. 1976. Succession after wildfire        in the North Cascades National Park complex. In: Proceedings, annual        Tall Timbers fire ecology conference: Pacific Northwest; 1974 October        16-17; Portland, OR. No. 15. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research        Station: 71-83.  [6574] 55.  Minore, Don; Carkin, Richard E. 1978. Vegetative indicators, soils,        overstory canopy, and natural regeneration after partial cutting on the        Dead Indian Plateau of southwestern Oregon. PNW-316. Portland, OR: U.S.        Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and        Range Experiment Station. 9 p.  [8218] 56.  Mundinger, John D. 1978. Population ecology and habitat relationships of        white-tailed deer in coniferous forest habitat of northwestern Montana.        Montana deer studies: Job progress report 1977-1978. Helena, MT: Montana        Department of Fish and Game. 74 p.  [21525] 57.  Munz, Philip A. 1973. A California flora and supplement. Berkeley, CA:        University of California Press. 1905 p.  [6155] 58.  Ohmann, Lewis F.; Grigal, David F. 1966. Some individual plant biomass        values from northeastern Minnesota. NC-227. St. Paul, MN: U.S.        Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Forest        Experiment Station. 2 p.  [8151] 59.  Ohmann, Lewis F.; Ream, Robert R. 1971. Wilderness ecology: virgin plant        communities of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area. Res. Pap. NC-63. St.        Paul, MN: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central        Forest Experiment Station. 55 p.  [9271] 60.  Pase, Charles P.; Brown, David E. 1982. Rocky Mountain (Petran) and        Madrean montane conifer forests. In: Brown, David E., ed.  Biotic        communities of the American Southwest--United States and Mexico. Desert        Plants. 4(1-4): 43-48.  [8885] 61.  Phillips, T. A. 1973. The effects of fire on vegetation and wildlife on        a lodgepole pine burn in Chamberlain Basin, Idaho. Range Improvement        Notes. 18(1): 1-9.  [16548] 62.  Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant        geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p.  [2843] 63.  Roland, A. E.; Smith, E. C. 1969. The flora of Nova Scotia. Halifax, NS:        Nova Scotia Museum. 746 p.  [13158] 64.  Ruggiero, Leonard F.; Jones, Lawrence L. C.; Aubry, Keith B. 1991. Plant        and animal habitat associations in Douglas-fir forests of the Pacific        Northwest: an overview. In: Ruggiero, Leonard F.; Aubry, Keith B.;        Carey, Andrew B.; Huff, Mark H., technical coordinators. Wildlife and        vegetation of unmanaged Douglas-fir forests. Gen. Tech. Rep.        PNW-GTR-285. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest        Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station: 447-462.  [17334] 65.  Rundel, Philip W. 1971. Community structure and stability in the giant        sequoia groves of the Sierra Nevada, California. American Midland        Naturalist. 85(2): 478-492.  [10504] 66.  Sawyer, John O.; Thornburgh, Dale A.; Griffin, James R. 1977. Mixed        evergreen forest. In: Barbour, Michael G.; Major, Jack, eds. Terrestrial        vegetation of California. New York: John Wiley and Sons: 359-381.        [7218] 67.  Seymour, Frank Conkling. 1982. The flora of New England. 2d ed.        Phytologia Memoirs 5. Plainfield, NJ: Harold N. Moldenke and Alma L.        Moldenke. 611 p.  [7604] 68.  Shearer, Raymond C.; Stickney, Peter F. 1991. Natural revegetation of        burned and unburned clearcuts in western larch forests of northwest        Montana. In: Nodvin, Stephen C.; Waldrop, Thomas A., eds. Fire and the        environment: ecological and cultural perspectives: Proceedings of an        international symposium; 1990 March 20-24; Knoxville, TN. Gen. Tech.        Rep. SE-69. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest        Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station: 66-74.  [16635] 69.  Shirley, Hardy L. 1932. Light intensity in relation to plant growth in a        virgin Norway pine forest. Journal of Agricultural Research. 44:        227-244.  [10360] 70.  Soper, James H.; Heimburger, Margaret L. 1982. Shrubs of Ontario. Life        Sciences Misc. Publ. Toronto, ON: Royal Ontario Museum. 495 p.  [12907] 71.  Spies, Thomas A. 1991. Plant species diversity and occurrence in young,        mature, and old-growth Douglas-fir stands in western Oregon and        Washington. In: Ruggiero, Leonard F.; Aubry, Keith B.; Carey, Andrew B.;        Huff, Mark H., technical coordinators. Wildlife and vegetation of        unmanaged Douglas-fir forests. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-285. Portland,        OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest        Research Station: 111-121.  [17309] 72.  Stephens, H. A. 1973. Woody plants of the North Central Plains.        Lawrence, KS: The University Press of Kansas. 530 p.  [3804] 73.  Stewart, G. H. 1988. The influence of canopy cover on understory        development in forests of the western Cascade Range, Oregon, USA.        Vegetatio. 76: 79-88.  [6631] 74.  Stickney, Peter F. 1980. Data base for post-fire succession, first 6 to        9 years, in Montana larch-fir forests. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-62. Ogden,        UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest        and Range Experiment Station. 133 p.  [6583] 75.  Stickney, Peter F. 1982. Initial stages of a natural forest succession        following wildfire in the northern Rocky Mountains, a case study.        Unpublished report on file with: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest        Service, Intermountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory,        Missoula, MT. 2 p.  [20956] 76.  Stickney, Peter F. 1986. First decade plant succession following the        Sundance Forest Fire, northern Idaho. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-197. Ogden,        UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain        Research Station. 26 p.  [2255] 77.  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] 78.  Stickney, Peter F. 1991. Effects of fire on flora:  Northern Rocky        Mountain forest plants. Unpublished paper on file at: U.S. Department of        Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental        Station, Missoula, MT: 10 p.  [21628] 79.  Thornburgh, Dale. 1990. Picea breweriana Wats.  Brewer spruce. In:        Burns, Russell M.; Honkala, Barbara H., technical coordinators. Silvics        of North America. Volume 1. Conifers. Agric. Handb. 654. Washington, DC:        U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 181-186.  [13383] 80.  U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1982.        National list of scientific plant names. Vol. 1. List of plant names.        SCS-TP-159. Washington, DC. 416 p.  [11573] 81.  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] 82.  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] 83.  Zobel, Donald B.; Antos, Joseph A. 1987. Composition of rhizomes of        forest herbaceous plants in relation to morphology, ecology, and burial        by tephra. Botanical Gazette. 148(4): 490-500.  [3882] 84.  Dorr, Laurence J. 1986. A new combination in Chimaphila (Ericaceae).        Sida. 11(4): 370.  [22264] 85.  McCance, R. M., Jr.; Burns, J. F., eds. 1984. Ohio endangered and        threatened vascular plants: Abstracts of state-listed taxa. Columbus,        OH: Department of Natural Resources, Division of Natural Areas and        Preserves. 635 p.  [22520]

FEIS Home Page