Index of Species Information
SPECIES: Wyethia amplexicaulis
|
|
 |
| Photo by Mary Ellen Harte, Bugwood.org. |
Introductory
SPECIES: Wyethia amplexicaulis
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION :
Matthews, Robin F. 1993. Wyethia amplexicaulis. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online].
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station,
Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available:
https://www.fs.usda.gov/database/feis/plants/forb/wyeamp/all.html [].
Revisions : Photos added on 17 December 2014.
ABBREVIATION :
WYEAMP
SYNONYMS :
NO-ENTRY
SCS PLANT CODE :
WYAM
COMMON NAMES :
mule-ears
mules ears
wyethia
mule ear dock
black sunflower
TAXONOMY :
The currently accepted scientific name of mule-ears is Wyethia
amplexicaulis (Nutt.) Nutt. It is in the family Asteraceae [12,32].
Mule-ears apparently hybridizes with W. arizonica Gray [12] and
with arrowleaf balsamroot (Balsamorhiza sagittata) [35].
LIFE FORM :
Forb
FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS :
No special status
OTHER STATUS :
NO-ENTRY
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Wyethia amplexicaulis
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION :
Mule-ears is distributed from Washington to Montana and south to
Colorado and Nevada [12,16,32].
ECOSYSTEMS :
FRES20 Douglas-fir
FRES21 Ponderosa pine
FRES23 Fir - spruce
FRES28 Western hardwoods
FRES29 Sagebrush
FRES34 Chaparral - mountain shrub
FRES35 Pinyon - juniper
FRES36 Mountain grasslands
FRES37 Mountain meadows
STATES :
CO ID MT NV OR UT WA WY
BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :
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
KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :
K010 Ponderosa shrub forest
K011 Western ponderosa forest
K012 Douglas-fir forest
K015 Western spruce - fir forest
K018 Pine - Douglas-fir forest
K020 Spruce - fir - Douglas-fir forest
K021 Southwestern spruce - fir forest
K023 Juniper - pinyon woodland
K024 Juniper steppe woodland
K037 Mountain-mahogany - oak scrub
K038 Great Basin sagebrush
K050 Fescue - wheatgrass
K051 Wheatgrass - bluegrass
K055 Sagebrush steppe
K056 Wheatgrass - needlegrass shrubsteppe
K063 Foothills prairie
SAF COVER TYPES :
206 Engelmann spruce - subalpine fir
210 Interior Douglas-fir
217 Aspen
220 Rocky Mountain juniper
237 Interior ponderosa pine
238 Western juniper
239 Pinyon - juniper
SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES :
NO-ENTRY
HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES :
Mule-ears has a wide ecological amplitude, occurring in many plant
communities. It is most abundant in mesic sagebrush (Artemisia
spp.)-grassland habitats. It is also common in woodlands and seral
coniferous forests above the elevational limits of sagebrush [28,35].
 |
| A ponderosa pine/mule-ears savanna on the Malheur NF, OR. Photo by Dave Powell, USDA Forest Service, Bugwood.org. |
Trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides)/mule-ears community types in the
Intermountain region are minor and mostly confined to the north [17].
In the Bridger-Teton, Caribou, and Targhee National Forests, these types
usually result from severe overgrazing. These communities generally
have an open canopy of trembling aspen with the herbaceous layer
completely dominated by mule-ears [18,37]. Other species sometimes
cooccurring include mountain snowberry (Symphoricarpos oreophilus),
Saskatoon serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia), western stickseed
(Hackelia floribunda), common dandelion (Taraxacum officinale), western
coneflower (Rudbeckia occidentalis), cinquefoil (Potentilla spp.),
lupine (Lupinus spp.), butterweed groundsel (Senecio serra), California
brome (Bromus carinatus), slender wheatgrass (Elymus trachycaulus), blue
wildrye (E. glaucus), and Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratense) [17,18,37].
Trembling aspen/mule-ears community types in the Intermountain region
are fairly stable [17,18,36]. Mueggler and Campbell [18] suggested that
they should be recognized as distinct habitat types on the Caribou and
Targhee National Forests.
Other species commonly associated with mule-ears include ninebark
(Physocarpus malvaceus), Oregon-grape (Mahonia repens), Gambel oak
(Quercus gambelii), Wood's rose (Rosa woodsii), antelope bitterbrush
(Purshia tridentata), rubber rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus nauseosus), low
rabbitbrush (C. viscidiflorus), curlleaf mountain-mahogany (Cercocarpus
ledifolius), Rocky Mountain maple (Acer glabrum), arrowleaf balsamroot,
western yarrow (Achillea millefolium), slenderleaf collomia (Collomia
linearis), duncecap larkspur (Delphinium occidentale), buckwheat
(Eriogonum spp.), sticky geranium (Geranium viscosissimum), bluebunch
wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata), Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis),
cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum), prairie junegrass (Koeleria cristata), and
bluegrass (Poa spp.) [2,3,11,14].
Publications listing mule-ears as a dominant herbaceous-layer species
are as follows:
Subalpine forb community types of the Bridger-Teton National Forest,
Wyoming [11]
Aspen community types on the Caribou and Targhee National Forests in
southeastern Idaho [18]
Aspen community types of the Intermountain Region [17]
The vegetation of the Wasatch Mountains, Utah and Idaho [22]
Aspen community type classifications in the Intermountain West [36]
Aspen community types on the Bridger-Teton National Forest in western
Wyoming [37].
MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
SPECIES: Wyethia amplexicaulis
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE :
Mule deer prefer mule-ears early in the growing season [5,19,24].
Sheep forage new leaves in spring and early summer. Mature foliage is
coarse and harsh, and plants dry out by mid-summer, so it is little used
after early summer. Elk, deer, and all classes of livestock eat the
flower heads [26,28,35].
PALATABILITY :
Mule-ears is generally unpalatable [1,8,19,37]. However, the leaves
may be moderately palatable in the spring, and flower heads are relished
by livestock, deer, and elk [11,28].
NUTRITIONAL VALUE :
Mule-ears is generally poor in energy and protein value [8]. July
estimates for crude protein and in-vitro dry matter digestiblity for
mule-ears collected in a moist meadow were 11.1 percent and 75.7
percent, respectively [27].
COVER VALUE :
Mule-ears often forms dense stands [22,28,30,37] and may provide good
cover for birds and small mammals [8]. Blue grouse nests in Utah are
commonly located in sagebrush-mule-ears vegetation near trees or tall
shrubs [23].
VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES :
In the Wasatch Mountains of Utah and Idaho, mule-ears forms dense cover
and its well-developed root system aids in preventing erosion [22].
Mule-ears may be useful in revegetating mine spoils [35].
OTHER USES AND VALUES :
Native Americans fermented the roots of mule-ears for 2 days in a pit
heated with hot stones to make a sweet flavored food [26,28].
OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Mule-ears-dominated understory communities in the Intermountain region
have relatively high production levels, but the production is mainly
from unpalatable mule-ears [11,17]. These stands are poor livestock
range and poor wildlife habitat because of a lack of structural and
species diversity [17].
The understory of many trembling aspen/mule-ears stands has been
altered due to severe grazing pressure, as evidenced by the overwhelming
dominance of mule-ears in environments that could support palatable
grasses and forbs [17]. When grazing pressure is less intense and a
shrub layer is present, such as in trembling aspen/mountain
snowberry-mule-ears community types, ground-level shading may be too
intense to support a dominant cover of mule-ears [17].
Mule-ears dominates some mountain meadows in northeastern Oregon that
are in poor condition due to grazing. It is less abundant in meadows
that have been improved by seeding with desirable forage [27].
Mule-ears has a negative effect on available soil moisture because it
uses large amounts of moisture early in the season [19,37]. If grazing
was restricted, mule-ears would probably still dominate many sites to
the exclusion of other plants because of this factor [37].
Triclopyr or 2,4-D applied early in the blooming period effectively
controls mule-ears [20,30,33].
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Wyethia amplexicaulis
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
Mule-ears is a native, perennial, cool-season forb with stems up to 32
inches (80 cm) tall. The leaves are alternate and are 8 to 16 inches
(20-40 cm) long and 2 to 6 inches (5-15 cm) wide. There are usually
several flower heads but flower heads may occasionally be solitary. The
fruits are achenes [12,16,32]. Mule-ears has a stout taproot up to 9
inches (22 cm) in circumference. The taproot may reach depths of over 6
feet (180 cm). Strong lateral roots run 3 to 4 feet (90-120 cm) from
the main root [31]. Mule-ears is strongly aromatic [1,19].
RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :
Hemicryptophyte
Geophyte
REGENERATION PROCESSES :
Mule-ears reproduces by seed [19,26,30,35]. Seeds germinate without
stratification, but a cool-moist stratification greatly enhances
germination. Best germination occurs when seeds are stratified for 4
weeks at 35 to 41 degrees Fahrenheit (2-5 deg C) [35].
Mule-ears sprouts from underground rootstalks or from the root crown
following damage to aboveground portions of the plant [20,37].
SITE CHARACTERISTICS :
Mule-ears is found in moist draws, meadows, open woods, and open
grasslands [12,13,19,26]. Elevational limits of mule-ears are from
4,500 to 11,000 feet (1,360-3,300 m) [8]. Mule-ears requires 10 to 18
inches (25.4-45.7 cm) of annual precipitation [19]. It grows well on
sandy loam, loam, and clay-loam textured soils [8], but is apparently
most aggressive in heavy clay soils [11,18]. Mule-ears grows well on
gentle to moderately steep slopes [8].
The trembling aspen/mule-ears community types of the Bridger-Teton,
Caribou, and Targhee National Forests are usually found below 7,000 feet
(2,120 m). They most often occur in heavy clay soils with slopes seldom
exceeding 25 percent [17,18,37].
Mule-ears-dominated subalpine forb communities also occur in heavy clay
soils on the Bridger-Teton National Forest. The forb communities are
characterized by large stands of mule-ears surrounded by trembling
aspen or subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa). They are found at the lower
elevations of the subalpine zone (average elevation 7,296 feet [2,210
m]). Average soil pH of these stands is 6.4 [11].
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS :
Mule-ears is highly competitive and aggressive and often occurs in
large, dense, almost pure stands [26,28,30]. Its aggression on some
sites may be partly attributed to its ability to dominate heavy clay
soils [28] and its tendency to monopolize soil moisture [19,37]. It
excludes other species in some heavily grazed areas [11,17,35]. Even
when grazing pressure is eliminated, mule-ears persists for a long time
[22].
Mule-ears is common in seral coniferous forests within its range [35].
SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT :
Mule-ears begins growth in March or April and flowers from April until
June [26]. Annual growth usually dries up by July [31].
FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Wyethia amplexicaulis
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS :
Mule-ears probably sprouts after fire damage. Postfire sprouting has
not been documented, but sprouting was noted following top-kill by
disking on the Targhee National Forest. Mule-ears apparently sprouted
from damaged roots [37].
Mule-ears is covered with a varnish-like resin [16] that may make it fairly
flammable when cured.
FIRE REGIMES :
Find fire regime information for the plant communities in which this
species may occur by entering the species name in the FEIS home page under
"Find Fire Regimes".
POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY :
Geophyte, growing points deep in soil
FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Wyethia amplexicaulis
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT :
Information on the effect of fire on mule-ears is not available in the
literature. Moderately severe or severe fires probably at least
top-kill mule-ears.
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT :
NO-ENTRY
PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE :
Young and Evans [34] reported that mule-ears density generally
increases after rangeland fires. Postfire frequencies (percent)
for mule-ears in seral big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata)/Thurber
needlegrass (Stipa thurberiana) communities after three summer wildfires
in Nevada follow:
Postfire Year
Location 1 2 3 4
__________________________________________________________
Red Rock 3 2 2 4
Hallelujah Junction 2 1 T ---
Seven Lakes 2 2 --- ---
At the Red Rock site, mule-ears was present within 1 month following
the fire.
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE :
NO-ENTRY
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Predictions of fire behavior and suggested guidelines for management
with prescribed fire have been formulated for trembling aspen/mule-ears
community types in southeastern Idaho and western Wyoming. It has been
suggested that fires in these communities are likely to be of low
intensity and will usually spread slowly. Fuel loadings are marginal
for sustained spread. Fires may occasionally crown but prescribed fires
could be easily controlled in trembling aspen/mule-ears communities [7].
Brown [6] determined that the moisture content of mule-ears in
trembling aspen stands is approximately 300 percent when green, but may
be as low as 25 percent when cured.
REFERENCES
SPECIES: Wyethia amplexicaulis
REFERENCES :
1. Andersen, Berniece A.; Holmgren, Arthur H. [n.d.]. Mountain plants of
northeastern Utah. Circular 319. Logan, UT: Utah State University,
Extension Services. 148 p. [312]
2. Austin, Dennis D.; Urness, Philip J.; Riggs, Robert. 1986. Vegetal
change in the absence of livestock grazing, mountain brush zone, Utah.
Journal of Range Management. 39(6): 514-517; 1986. [365]
3. Banner, Roger E.; Johnson, Kendall L.; McCawley, Paul F. 1990.
Evaluation of curlleaf mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus ledifolius Nutt.)
stands 23 years following mechanical treatment. In: Johnson, Kendall L.,
ed. Proceedings, 5th Utah shrub ecology workshop: The genus Cercocarpus;
1988 July 13-14; Logan, UT. Logan, UT: Utah State University, College of
Natural Resources: 67-74. [16097]
4. 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]
5. Bodurtha, Timothy S.; Peek, James P.; Lauer, Jerry L. 1989. Mule deer
habitat use related to succession in a bunchgrass community. Journal of
Wildlife Management. 53(2): 314-319. [6677]
6. Brown, James K. 1985. Fire effects and application of prescribed fire in
aspen. In: Sanders, Ken; Durham, Jack; [and others], eds. Rangeland fire
effects: Proceedings of a symposium; 1984 November 27-29; Boise, ID.
Boise, ID: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management,
Idaho State Office: 38-47. [3658]
7. Brown, James K.; Simmerman, Dennis G. 1986. Appraising fuels and
flammability in western aspen: a prescribed fire guide. Gen. Tech. Rep.
INT-205. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Intermountain Research Station. 48 p. [544]
8. Dittberner, Phillip L.; Olson, Michael R. 1983. The plant information
network (PIN) data base: Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, Utah, and
Wyoming. FWS/OBS-83/86. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior,
Fish and Wildlife Service. 786 p. [806]
9. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and
Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
10. Garrison, George A.; Bjugstad, Ardell J.; Duncan, Don A.; [and others].
1977. Vegetation and environmental features of forest and range
ecosystems. Agric. Handb. 475. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service. 68 p. [998]
11. Gregory, Shari. 1983. Subalpine forb community types of the
Bridger-Teton National Forest, Wyoming. Final Report. U.S. Forest
Service Cooperative Education Agreement: Contract OM 40-8555-3-115.
Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain
Region. 100 p. [1040]
12. Harrington, H. D. 1964. Manual of the plants of Colorado. 2d ed.
Chicago: The Swallow Press Inc. 666 p. [6851]
13. Hitchcock, C. Leo; Cronquist, Arthur. 1973. Flora of the Pacific
Northwest. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press. 730 p. [1168]
14. Holechek, Jerry L.; Vavra, Martin; Skovlin, Jon; Krueger, William C.
1982. Cattle diets in the Blue Mountains of Oregon: I. Grasslands.
Journal of Range Management. 35(1): 109-112. [242]
15. 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]
16. Lackschewitz, Klaus. 1991. Vascular plants of west-central
Montana--identification guidebook. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-227. Ogden, UT:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research
Station. 648 p. [13798]
17. 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]
18. 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]
19. Parker, Karl G. 1975. Some important Utah range plants. Extension
Service Bulletin EC-383. Logan, UT: Utah State University. 174 p.
[9878]
20. 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]
21. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant
geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
22. Ream, Robert Ray. 1964. The vegetation of the Wasatch Mountains, Utah
and Idaho. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin. 178 p. Ph.D. thesis.
[5506]
23. Schroeder, Richard L. 1984. Habitat suitability index models: blue
grouse. FWS/OBS-82/10.81. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the
Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 19 p. [11718]
24. Smith, Arthur D. 1953. Consumption of native forage species by captive
mule deer during summer. Journal of Range Management. 6: 30-37. [2161]
25. 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]
26. Stubbendieck, J.; Hatch, Stephan L.; Hirsch, Kathie J. 1986. North
American range plants. 3rd ed. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska
Press. 465 p. [2270]
27. Svejcar, Tony; Vavra, Martin. 1985. Seasonal forage production and
quality on four native and improved plant communities in eastern Oregon.
Technical Bulletin 149. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University,
Agricultural Experiment Station. 24 p. [2298]
28. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1937. Range plant
handbook. Washington, DC. 532 p. [2387]
29. 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]
30. U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Department of the Interior; Range
Seeding Equipment Committee. 1959. Handbook: Chemical control of range
weeds. Washington, DC: [Publisher unknown]. 93 p. [12129]
31. Weaver, John Ernst. 1915. A study of the root-systems of prairie plants
of southeastern Washington. Plant World. 18(9): 227-248, 273-292.
[3758]
32. 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]
33. Williams, M. Coburn; Ralphs, Michael H. 1987. Effect of herbicides on
miserotoxin concentration in Wasatch milkvetch (Astragalus miser var.
oblongifolius). Weed Science. 35: 746-748. [3006]
34. Young, James A.; Evans, Raymond A. 1978. Population dynamics after
wildfires in sagebrush grasslands. Journal of Range Management. 31(4):
283-289. [2657]
35. Young, James A.; Evans, Raymond A. 1979. Arrowleaf balsamroot and mules
ear seed germination. Journal of Range Management. 32(1): 71-74. [2658]
36. Youngblood, Andrew P. 1981. Aspen community type classifications in the
Intermountain West. In: DeByle, Norbert V., ed. Symposium
proceedings--situation management of two Intermountain species: aspen
and coyotes. Volume 1. Aspen; 1981 April 23-24; Logan, UT. Logan, UT:
Utah State University, College of Natural Resources: 40-57. [10437]
37. Mueggler, Walter F.; Blaisdell, James P. 1951. Replacing wyethia with
desirable forage species. Journal of Range Management. 4(3): 143-150.
[22169]
FEIS Home Page
https://www.fs.usda.gov/database/feis/plants/forb/wyeamp/all.html
