Index of Species Information
SPECIES: Dactylis glomerata
Introductory
SPECIES: Dactylis glomerata
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION :
Sullivan, Janet. 1992. Dactylis glomerata. 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/graminoid/dacglo/all.html [].
ABBREVIATION :
DACGLO
SYNONYMS :
Dactylis aschersoniana Graebn.
NRCS PLANT CODE :
DAGL
COMMON NAMES :
orchardgrass
cocksfoot (European)
TAXONOMY :
The currently accepted scientific name of orchardgrass is Dactylis
glomerata L. [21,62,67]. Recognized varieties include [21]:
Dactylis glomerata var. ciliata Peterm.
Dactylis glomerata var. detonsa Fries
LIFE FORM :
Graminoid
FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS :
No special status
OTHER STATUS :
NO-ENTRY
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Dactylis glomerata
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION :
Orchardgrass was introduced to the eastern United States from Europe in
1760. It is widely planted in the United States and Canada, and is
found from Nova Scotia south to the Carolinas, west to central
California, and north to coastal British Columbia [21,67].
ECOSYSTEMS :
FRES11 Spruce - fir
FRES19 Aspen - birch
FRES20 Douglas-fir
FRES21 Ponderosa pine
FRES26 Lodgepole pine
FRES29 Sagebrush
FRES34 Chaparral - mountain shrub
FRES36 Mountain grasslands
FRES37 Mountain meadows
FRES38 Plains grasslands
FRES39 Prairie
FRES40 Desert grasslands
FRES41 Wet grasslands
STATES :
AK AZ AR CA CO CT DE GA HI ID
IL IN IA KS KY ME MD MA MI MN
MO MT NE NV NH NJ NM NY NC ND
OH OK OR PA RI SC SD TN TX UT
VT VA WA WV WI WY AB BC NF NS
ON PQ
BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :
1 Northern Pacific Border
2 Cascade Mountains
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
14 Great Plains
15 Black Hills Uplift
16 Upper Missouri Basin and Broken Lands
KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :
NO-ENTRY
SAF COVER TYPES :
occurs in many SAF Cover Types
SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES :
occurs in many SRM Cover Types
HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES :
An introduced species, orchardgrass is not generally used for habitat
typing. However, Sugihara and others [68] have described an Oregon
white oak (Quercus garryana)/orchardgrass vegetation type in Redwood
National Park, California. This vegetation type occurs exclusively as
closed canopy stands, and is predominant on lower slopes. A mixture of
tall perennial grasses and perennial forbs codominates the understory
with orchardgrass. The shrub layer is sparse. Other important
associates in this type include yerba buena (Satureja douglasii),
mountain sweetroot (Osmorhiza chilensis), California strawberry
(Fragaria californica), western sanicle (Sanicula crassicaulis),
American vetch (Vicia americana), and climbing bedstraw (Galium
nuttallii). California honeysuckle (Lonicera hispidula) and rigid
betony (Stachys rigida) are common characteristic species [68].
Smith [64] has described an Oregon white oak/poison oak (Toxicodendron
diversilobum)/orchardgrass vegetation type as an even-aged woodland with
three well-developed strata. Oregon white oak and California black oak
(Quercus kellogii) are the dominant overstory trees; poison oak and wild
rose (Rosa spp.) are the dominant midstory or shrub-layer; and
orchardgrass and hedgehog dogtail (Cynosurus echinatus) are codominant
grasses [64].
Orchardgrass is listed as a dominant or codominant understory plant in
the following publications:
Plant associations within the Interior Valleys of the Umpqua River
Basin, Oregon [64].
The principal plant associations of the Saint Lawrence Valley [74].
Vegetation of the Bald Hill oak woodlands, Redwood National Park,
California [68].
MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
SPECIES: Dactylis glomerata
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE :
Orchardgrass is moderately nutritious and highly palatable to deer, elk,
bighorn sheep, cattle, and domestic sheep and goats. The persistent,
green, basal rosette provides good winter forage for deer and elk
[14,50]. Early spring growth provides green forage for all species
[60]. Cattle will eat orchardgrass preferentially in early spring and
summer, up to 50 percent of total diet [59,65]. Elk and mule deer also
prefer orchardgrass over a number of other species [42]. In areas
disturbed by fire where orchardgrass has been seeded (usually in a
mixture with other grasses and forbs), wildlife use increases over
nonseeded areas and nonburned areas [19,42,44,50,58]. Forest openings,
where orchardgrass is dominant, are associated with rufous hummingbirds,
pine siskins, slate-colored juncos, American robins, valley pocket
gophers, desert harvest mice, deer mice, Mexican voles, and white-tailed
deer [56]. Grasshopper sparrows and eastern meadowlarks were more
abundant in cultivated fields in Georgia codominated by orchardgrass
than in fallow or natural fields [33]. Wild turkeys graze orchardgrass
in winter, and poults use it as a source of cover and insects in late
summer. Rabbits use orchardgrass for food and cover; Canada geese feed
on the seeds and leaves [13].
PALATABILITY :
Palatability is rated high for cattle, elk, mule deer, and white-tailed
deer [15,50,59,64].
NUTRITIONAL VALUE :
Orchardgrass is ranked below other popular grass species in nutritive
value and is considered by many farmers to be poor, but this perception
is based on harvesting orchardgrass for hay after its peak nutritive
level in the spring. Nutritive values have been shown to decline
steadily after the early season peak [62,72]. Crude protein is highest
in the spring and declines to an average winter level of 4.3 percent
[62].
A number of studies have been done on nutritional values and
digestibility for cattle, elk, and domestic sheep. The tables below
represent the range of average values as reported by author under
different conditions and extraction methods.
Cattle crude protein 14-16% [22] 16-19% [7]
crude fiber 23-25% [22]
lignin 4-8.5% [22] 5-7% [9]
organic matter 92-93% [22]
dry matter 20-25% [9]
digestibility 56-77% [22] 55-59% [9]
Sheep crude protein 8-21%
fiber 17-33%
organic matter 89-93%
digestibility 55-81% [22]
Elk crude protein 9-13%
organic matter 87%
digestibility 55-62% [8]
COVER VALUE :
NO-ENTRY
VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES :
Orchardgrass is widely recommended and used for a variety of
rehabilitation applications. It is recommended for planting with a
mixture of grasses and legumes to reduce erosion after devegetation by
fire. Orchardgrass often shows early success, eventually being replaced
by native vegetation or other seeded species [12,45,49].
Orchardgrass is used in seed mixtures with other grasses and forbs
(usually clover or alfalfa) for rehabilitation of overgrazed lands. The
success of orchardgrass appears to depend on the appropriateness of the site
to specific adaptations of orchardgrass cultivars, and also on proper
management of grazing [1,10,18,47,63].
Orchardgrass is planted in areas that have been logged and burned to
provide a vegetative cover for soil stabilization and provide forage for
cattle and/or wildlife [10,31,49].
Orchardgrass is also used for rehabilitation of sites disturbed by
mining [28,46]. The most successful applications in the western United
States appear to be sites that are relatively cool and moist (upper
elevations, shaded areas, etc.) [27,29,53].
Plantings of orchardgrass mixtures do well where there is adequate
moisture (12 inches or more annual precipitation) [28,60] and where
temperatures are not extreme [4,70]. In the drier western states it is
better adapted for higher elevations or in irrigated pastures and
croplands [69]. However, in the northeastern United States,
particularly the southern part of the region, orchardgrass is so well
adapted that it will invade alfalfa stands (Medicago spp.) [72].
Some cultivars are more drought resistant than others [54,55]. The
following list of cultivars indicates the wide range of strains
available; there are many more cultivars available--new ones are still
being listed.
'LATAR' is a late-season strain, highly recommended for pasture and hay
production; it is 10 percent higher in digestibility than other
cultivars and is more compatible with legumes, especially alfalfa
(Medicago sativa) [30].
'POTOMAC' is an early-season strain, better adapted to mountain sites
[30].
'PAIUTE' is more drought tolerant than other cultivars [30].
'POMAR' is a specially adapted low-growing strain particularly suited as
a cover crop in orchards and for road bank stabilization [30].
OTHER USES AND VALUES :
Orchardgrass is a widely planted pasture grass [1,21,25,62] and is used
to increase forage production on rangelands [48]. It is frequently part
of mixtures that are seeded in mountain brush (especially Gambel oak
(Quercus gambelii) types to improve rangeland. These mixtures are
drilled or broadcast seeded after some type of surface
preparation--usually removal of brush by burning or chaining, or by
herbicide application [6,38]. Orchardgrass is used to stabilize ski
slopes in Montana and to suppress annual weeds [5,39,40,41].
OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
As a forage species, orchardgrass does not withstand continuous heavy
use; it is therefore recommended for planting in less accessible sites,
and for early season, moderate grazing [32,47,65]. Grazing tends to
increase both crude protein and dry matter production, and increase
production of phytomass the following spring [57]. Orchardgrass
responds well to nitrogen fertilizers, and moderately well to coplanting
with legumes [62,72]. Clipping height has an effect on productivity--it
is recommended that orchardgrass not be clipped below 3 inches (7.6 cm)
in height as it appears to become much more drought sensitive [72].
Clipping frequency is apparently not as critical; orchardgrass has been
found to be as productive when cut at 2- to 3-week intervals as when cut
at 5- to 7-week intervals [72].
Burned sites (either from wildfire, or sites that have been logged and
burned) seeded with orchardgrass had higher forage values than either
unseeded or unburned areas [37,45,53]. However, seeded grasses may
suppress growth of desirable timber species and native forbs.
[2,17,35,45,47]. Seidel and others [61] reported that seedling
mortality of Douglas-fir and ponderosa pine were slightly increased (5-6
percent) over unseeded areas. They concluded that a light rate of
seeding is compatible with the establishment of tree seedlings [61].
Seedling survival of trees planted in established stands of orchardgrass
can be greatly enhanced (depending on soil type) by the application of
herbicide before planting.
On sites where growth of tree seedlings is desirable, grazing by cattle
and wildlife improves tree growth compared with no grazing or grazing by
wildlife alone. The degree of forage use and timing of grazing are
critical to tree growth/cattle use compatibility; light, early season
grazing is the most beneficial [36,47].
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Dactylis glomerata
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
Orchardgrass is a cool-season, perennial bunchgrass, 1.4 to 4 feet
(0.5-1.2 m ) tall with erect, glabrous culms and blades 4 to 16 inches
(10-40 cm) long and 0.1 to 0.5 inch (0.2-1.1 cm) wide. The
inflorescence is a panicle with two to six florets per spikelet, with
the spikelets tightly clustered on one side of the branch. Orchardgrass
is nonrhizomatous [21]. Most root development is in the upper 3 inches
(8 cm) of soil but extends to at least 18 inches (46 cm) below the
surface [23], producing a dense sod of medium-sized roots [26].
RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :
Hemicryptophyte
REGENERATION PROCESSES :
Orchardgrass reproduces largely by seed and by tiller formation. The
relatively large seed does not have an innate dormancy [24]. Seed can
germinate in either light or darkness; germination is largely controlled
by moisture availability, and most seed germinates in the fall. Thus,
orchardgrass does not tend to build up seedbanks in the soil [24].
SITE CHARACTERISTICS :
Orchardgrass is best adapted to well-drained, rich or moderately fertile
soils with an adequate water regime (12 inches or more annual
precipitation [30 cm]) [24,28,62,71] and temperatures that are not
extreme [4,28]. Optimum top growth is achieved at temperatures of
approximately 70 degrees Fahrenheit (21 deg C) [72]. Orchardgrass is
shade tolerant and does well at higher elevations in the western United
States and Canada (4,900 to 6,200 feet [1,500-1,900,m]) [28]. It is
widely planted in the eastern United States, most notably in
Pennsylvania, Maryland, and West Virginia [13].
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS :
Facultative Seral Species
Orchardgrass is shade tolerant. It is often seeded on disturbed areas
and is naturalized to fields, meadows, and waste places [67]. It is
long-lived but susceptible to replacement by native species, especially
in drier areas, and does not usually persist past 1 or 2 decades
[12,42,43].
Stands of orchardgrass tend to become clumpier with age, especially
under high nitrogen conditions. This may be best explained by the
relative amounts of competition among tillers and among plants [72].
SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT :
Orchardgrass begins growth early in spring and flowers from May to
September or October. In dry areas it is dormant in summer, but will
add new growth in the fall, and will flower again in fall under
appropriate conditions. Most European populations are obligately
dormant in the summer, showing no growth even when irrigated. Some
Mediterranean populations do not have this obligate dormancy [16]. A
green basal rosette is maintained through winter [14]. Flowering
appears to be temperature rather than light dependent [20]. Seed
shattering takes place in late summer; most seed will germinate in fall
as there is no innate dormancy [24].
FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Dactylis glomerata
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS :
NO-ENTRY
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 :
Tussock graminoid
Caudex, growing points in soil
Ground residual colonizer (onsite, initial community)
Secondary colonizer - offsite seed
FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Dactylis glomerata
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT :
In general, bunchgrasses with large accumulations of dead material can
generate high temperatures for long periods of time after the fire has
passed. This can reduce fire survival for older plants [73].
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT :
NO-ENTRY
PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE :
Orchardgrass is reported to increase or remain stable after burning
[11,52].
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE :
NO-ENTRY
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Orchardgrass is frequently seeded onto areas disturbed by fire to
control soil erosion. Concern has been raised that the increase of
grass species in the area, especially summer-dormant grasses such as
orchardgrass, could increase the risk of fast-spreading, low-intensity
fires that could set back the rate of tree and shrub regeneration. The
application of seed to reduce erosion is, therefore, not always
beneficial [12,31].
Orchardgrass mixtures are recommended in the conversion of chaparral to
grassland to reduce fire intensity and frequency [6].
FIRE CASE STUDY
SPECIES: Dactylis glomerata
FIRE CASE STUDY CITATION :
Sullivan, Janet, compiler. 1992. Orchardgrass response to spring and fall burning
for wildlife habitat improvement in western Montana. In: Dactylis glomerata.
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/ [].
REFERENCE :
Noste, Nonan V. 1982. Vegetation response to spring and fall burning for
wildlife habitat improvement. In: Baumgartner, David M., compiler &
editor. 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: 125-132. [51].
SEASON/SEVERITY CLASSIFICATION :
Spring- moderate severity
Fall -extreme severity
STUDY LOCATION :
Ten miles (16 km) north of Missoula, Montana, on a generally southeast
aspect below 4,920 feet (1,500 m).
PREFIRE VEGETATIVE COMMUNITY :
The study site had been previously burned by wildfire in 1945, which set
back the successional stage to a seral shrub community. The habitat
type is Douglas-fir/ninebark (Pseudotsuga menziesii/Physocarpus
malvaceus). This area remained unburned until 1979 (the year of the
prescribed burns), and the shrub species important for wildlife had
become decadent.
Herbaceous vegetation aerial crown cover averaged 19 percent prior to
the fall burn, and 24 percent prior to the spring burn.
Species present on the site prior to the spring burn were serviceberry
(Amelanchier alnifolia), evergreen ceanothus (Ceanothus velutinus,
creeping Oregon grape (Berberis repens), ninebark (Physocarpus
malvaceus), chokecherry (Prunus virginiana), Scouler willow (Salix
scouleriana), snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), spreading dogbane
(Apocynum androsaemifolium), kinnikinnick (Arctostaphylos uva-ursi),
arrowleaf balsamroot (Balsamorhiza sagittata), pinegrass (Calamagrostis
rubescens), elk sedge (Carex geyeri), orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata),
and timothy (Phleum pratense). Species present present prior to the
fall burned site included all of the above, except creeping Oregon
grape, spreading dogbane, arrowleaf balsamroot, kinnikinnick, and
timothy, but did include Douglas hawthorn (Crataegus douglasii) and
spotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa).
TARGET SPECIES PHENOLOGICAL STATE :
The target species for this study was evergreen ceanothus (Ceanothus
velutinus), selected for its importance to wildlife. A number of
species were monitored preburn and postburn. Orchardgrass on the spring
burn site was in a green growing stage, not yet in flower. On the fall
burn site, orchardgrass was generally dormant (tall dead material with a
green basal rosette).
SITE DESCRIPTION :
Both burned sites occurred on generally southeast aspect below 4,920
feet (1,500 m). The slope averages 30 percent with a maximum of 50
percent.
FIRE DESCRIPTION :
Fuel loadings on the fall burn were greater than on the spring burn, but
fuel loadings on both sites were low. The amount of fine fuel was
marginal for carrying the fire.
The fall fire prescription called for a "hot fire moving fast enough to
consume all grasses and forbs and kill the cambium at the stems of most
of the shrubs." For the fall fire, rate of spread ranged from 40 chains
per hour on the lower slope to 56 chains per hour on the upper slope.
On the spring fire, rate of spread ranged from 10 chains per hour on the
mid-slope, 11 chains per hour on the upper slope to 18 chains per hour
on the lower slope.
Weather and fuel moisture conditions during the burn are shown in the
tables below:
Fine fuel moisture contents:
---------------------------------------
Transect Fuel
Dead Live
---------------------------------------
----(percent)-----
Fall fire 6 55
F1-4 upper slope 8 62
F1-2 mid slope 8 53
F1-1 lower slope
Spring fire
S1-2 upper slope 8 67
S1-3 mid slope 9 156
S1-1 lower slope 12 149
---------------------------------------
Weather conditions during the burn:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Observations
-----------------------------------------------
Dry bulb Relative Wind
temperature humidity velocity
Transect
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(deg F(deg C)) (percent) (Mi/h) (km/h)
Fall fire
F1-4 upper slope 59 (15) 30 6/gusts to 8 (10)
F1-2 mid slope 69 (20) 23 8 (13)
F1-1 lower slope 70 (21) 18 7/gusts to 12 (11)
Spring fire
S1-2 upper slope 65 (18) 36 5/gusts to 7 (8)
S1-3 mid slope 57 (14) 30 6/gusts to 10 (10)
S1-1 lower slope 62 (17) 37 6/gusts to 8 (10)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
FIRE EFFECTS ON TARGET SPECIES :
In the 2 years following the spring burn, herbaceous aerial crown cover
averaged 21 to 22 percent. In the 2 years following the fall burn,
average herbaceous aerial crown cover was 28 percent. Orchardgrass was
considered an important component of the preburn vegetation that
reproduced well.
Prior to the spring burn, orchardgrass provided 253 cubic feet per acre
(2.9 m3/ha) and in the following 2 years provided 45 cubic feet per acre
(0.52 m3/ha) and 654 cubic feet per acre (7.5 m3/ha) respectively.
Prior to the fall burn, orchardgrass is reported as 554 cubic feet per
acre (6.35 m3/ha), and in the years following the burn is reported as 30
and 134 cubic feet per acre (0.34 and 1.54 m3/ha), respectively.
FIRE MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS :
The fall burn was hotter and faster moving than the spring burn, and
apparently caused more damage to orchardgrass plants than did the spring
burn. But even the greater severity of the fall burn did not result in
a complete removal of orchardgrass. As is true of most perennial grass
species, orchardgrass is well adapted to recover after even severe
fires, although recovery is slower after severe burns or hot fires. If
the management objective is to increase orchardgrass specifically (as
this study was not intended), then a less severe treatment, such as the
spring burn, would be recommended.
REFERENCES
SPECIES: Dactylis glomerata
REFERENCES :
1. Adams, Theodore E., Jr.; Kay, Burgess L. 1985. Phalaris, orchardgrass,
fescue and selected minor grasses. Part I: Perennial grasses for
California rangelands. In: Carlson, Jack R.; McArthur, E. Durant,
chairmen. Range plant improvement in western North America: Proceedings
of a symposium at the annual meeting of the Society for Range
Management; 1985 February 14; Salt Lake City, UT. Denver, CO: Society
for Range Management: 20-24. [4383]
2. Anderson, E. William; Brooks, Lee E. 1975. Reducing erosion hazard on a
burned forest in Oregon by seeding. Journal of Range Management. 28(5):
394-398. [12807]
3. Bailey, A. W.; Irving, B. D.; Fitzgerald, R. D. 1990. Regeneration of
woody species following burning and grazing in aspen parkland. Journal
of Range Management. 43(3): 212-215. [11775]
4. Baker, Barton S.; Jung, G. A. 1968. Effect of environmental conditions
on the growth of four perennial grasses. I. Response to controlled
temperature. Agronomy Journal. 60: 155-158. [202]
5. Behan, Mark J. 1983. The suitability of commercially available grass
species for revegetation of Montana ski area. Journal of Range
Management. 36(5): 565-567. [425]
6. Bentley, Jay R. 1967. Conversion of chaparral areas to grassland:
techniques used in California. Agric. Handb. 328. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 35 p. [195]
7. Bergen, Peter; Moyer, James R.; Kozub, Gerald C. 1990. Dandelion
(Taraxacum officinale) use by cattle grazing on irrigated pasture. Weed
Technology. 4(2): 258-263. [14775]
8. Brooks, John, III; Urness, Philip J. 1984. Comparison of in vivo and in
vitro digestibility of forages by elk. Journal of Animal Science. 58(4):
963-970. [6912]
9. Burritt, E. A.; Pfister, J. A.; Malechek, J. C. 1988. Effect of drying
method on the nutritive composition of esophageal fistula forage
samples: influence of maturity. Journal of Range Management. 41(4):
346-349. [5239]
10. Clary, Warren P. 1975. Range management and its ecological basis in the
ponderosa pine type of Arizona: the status of our knowledge. Res. Pap.
RM-158. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 35 p.
[4688]
11. Cocking, W. D.; Baxter, E. E.; Lilly, S. L. 1979. Plant community
responses to the use of prescribed burning as an alternative to mowing
in the management of Big Meadows, Shenandoah NP. In: Linn, Robert M.,
ed. Proceedings, 1st conference on scientific research in the National
Parks: Volume II; 1976 November 9-12; New Orleans, LA. NPS Transactions
and Proceedings Series No. 5. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the
Interior, National Park Service: 1205-1207. [10545]
12. Crane, M. F.; Habeck, James R.; Fischer, William C. 1983. Early postfire
revegetation in a western Montana Douglas-fir forest. Res. Pap. INT-319.
Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain
Forest and Range Experiment Station. 29 p. plus chart. [710]
13. Crawford, Hewlette S.; Kucera, Clair L.; Ehrenreich, John H. 1969. Ozark
range and wildlife plants. Agric. Handb. 356. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 236 p. [18602]
14. Dalke, Paul D. 1941. The use and availability of the more common winter
deer browse plants in the Missouri Ozarks. Transactions, 6th North
American Wildlife Conference. 6: 155-160. [17044]
15. Dietz, Donald R.; Nagy, Julius G. 1976. Mule deer nutrition and plant
utilization. In: Workman; Low, eds. Mule deer decline in the West: A
symposium; [Date of conference unknown]; [Location of conference
unknown]. [Logan], UT: College of Natural Resources, Utah Agriculture
Experiment Station: 71-78. [6909]
16. Eagles, C. F.; Ostgard, O. 1971. Variation in growth and development in
natural populations of Dactylis glomerata from Norway and Portugal. I.
Growth analysis. Journal of Applied Ecology. 8: 367-381. [18603]
17. Elliott, Katherine J.; White, Alan S. 1987. Competitive effects of
various grasses and forbs on ponderosa pine seedlings. Forest Science.
33(2): 356-366. [860]
18. Enyeart, George W. 1956. Responses of sage grouse to grass reseeding in
the pines area, Garfield County, Utah. Logan, UT: Utah State University.
55 p. Thesis. [1324]
19. Evanko, Anthony B. 1953. Performance of several forage species on newly
burned lodgepole pine sites. Res. Note. 133. Missoula, MT: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Rocky Mountain
Forest and Range Experiment Station. 6 p. [7905]
20. Evans, Morgan W. 1958. Growth and development in certain economic
grasses. Agronomy Series No. 147. Wooster, OH: Ohio Agricultural
Experiment Station. 112 p. [12111]
21. 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]
22. Forbes, R. M.; Garrigus, W. P. 1950. Some relationships between chemical
composition, nutritive value, and intake of forages grazed by steers and
wethers. Journal of Animal Science. 9: 354-362. [7176]
23. Gist, George R.; Smith, R. M. 1948. Root development of several common
forage grasses to a depth of eighteen inches. Journal of the American
Society of Agronomy. 40: 1036-1042. [8138]
24. Grime, J. P. 1979. Plant strategies & vegetation proceses. Chichester,
England: John Wiley & Sons. 222 p. [2896]
25. Hafenrichter, A. L. 1957. Management to increase forage production in
the west. SCS-TP-128. Washington D. C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Soil Conservation Service. 16 p. [11735]
26. Hafenrichter, A. L.; Schwendiman, John L.; Harris, Harold L.; [and
others]. 1968. Grasses and legumes for soil conservation in the Pacific
Northwest and Great Basin states. Agric. Handb. 339. Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 69 p.
[18604]
27. Hardison, John R. 1980. Role of fire for disease control in grass seed
production. Plant Disease. July: 641-645. [4500]
28. Hardy BBT Limited. 1989. Manual of plant species suitability for
reclamation in Alberta. 2d ed. Report No. RRTAC 89-4. Edmonton, AB:
Alberta Land Conservation and Reclamation Council. 436 p. [15460]
29. Harris, Grant A.; Dobrowolski, James P. 1986. Population dynamics of
seeded species on northeast Washington semiarid sites, 1948-1983.
Journal of Range Management. 39(1): 46-51. [1095]
30. Stevens, Richard. 1983. Species adapted for seeding mountain brush, big,
black, and low sagebrush, and pinyon-juniper communities. In: Monsen,
Stephen B.; Shaw, Nancy, compilers. Managing Intermountain
rangelands--improvement of range and wildlife habitats: Proceedings;
1981 September 15-17; Twin Falls, ID; 1982 June 22-24; Elko, NV. Gen.
Tech. Rep. INT-157. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 78-82.
[2240]
31. Helvey, J. D.; Fowler, W. B. 1979. Grass seeding and soil erosion in a
steep, logged area in northeastern Oregon. PNW-343. Portland, OR: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and
Range Experiment Station. 11 p. [7253]
32. Humphrey, Robert R. 1960. Arizona range grasses: Description--forage
value--management. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona, Agricultural
Experiment Station. 104 p. [5004]
33. Johnston, David W.; Odum, Eugene P. 1956. Breeding bird populations in
relation to plant succession on the Piedmont of Georgia. Ecology. 37(1):
50-62. [16574]
34. Kay, Burgess L. 1960. Effect of fire on seeded forage species. Journal
of Range Management. 13: 31-33. [1311]
35. Kidd, Frank. 1982. Reduced growth of Douglas-fir in a grass-seeded
plantation. Forestry Technical Paper TP-82-2. Lewiston, ID: Potlatch
Corporation, Wood Products, Western Division. 4 p. [7497]
36. Krueger, William C.; Vavra, Martin. 1984. Twentieth-year results from a
plantation grazing study. In: 1984 Progress report--research in
rangeland management. Special Report 715. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State
University, Agricultural Experiment Station: 20- 24. In cooperation
with: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service.
[3625]
37. Kruse, William H. 1972. Effects of wildfire on elk and deer use of a
ponderosa pine forest. Res. Note RM-226. Fort Collins, CO: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and
Range Experiment Station. 4 p. [5045]
38. Kufeld, Roland C. 1983. Responses of elk, mule deer, cattle, and
vegetation to burning, spraying and chaining of Gambel oak rangeland.
Tech. Publ. 34. Fort Collins, CO: Colorado Division of Wildlife. 47 p.
[253]
39. Larson, Larry L. 1990. Research efforts in Oregon. In: Roche, Ben F.;
Roche, Cindy Talbott, eds. Range weeds revisted: Proceedings of a
symposium: A 1989 Pacific Northwest range management short course; 1989
January 24-26; Spokane, WA. Pullman, WA: Washington State University,
Department of Natural Resource Sciences, Cooperative Extension: 33-34.
[14831]
40. Larson, L. L.; McInnis, M. L. 1989. Impact of grass seedings on
establishment and density of diffuse knapweed and yellow starthistle.
Northwest Science. 63(4): 162-166. [9278]
41. Larson, Larry L.; McInnis, Michael L. 1989. Response of yellow
starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis) and grass biomass to grass,
picloram, and fertilizer combinations. Weed Technology. 3: 497-500.
[9345]
42. Leege, Thomas A.; Godbolt, Grant. 1985. Herebaceous response following
prescribed burning and seeding of elk range in Idaho. Northwest Science.
59(2): 134-143. [1436]
43. Van Rees, K. C. J.; Comerford, N. B. 1990. The role of woody roots of
slash pine seedlings in water and potassium absorption. Canadian Journal
of Forest Research. 20: 1183-1191. [13807]
44. Lowe, Philip O.; Ffolliott, Peter F.; Dieterich, John H.; Patton, David
R. 1978. Determining potential wildlife benefits from wildfire in
Arizona ponderosa pine forests. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-52. Fort Collins, CO:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest
and Range Experiment Station. 12 p. [4481]
45. Lyon, L. Jack. 1984. The Sleeping Child Burn--21 years of postfire
change. Res. Pap. INT-330. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 17 p.
[6328]
46. MacCallum, Beth. 1989. Seasonal and spatial distribution of bighorn
sheep at an open pit coal mine in the Alberta foothills. In: Walker, D.
G.; Powter, C. B.; Pole, M. W., compilers. Reclamation, a global
perspective: Proceedings of the conference; 1989 August 27-31; Calgary,
AB. Rep. No. RRTAC 89-2. Vol. 1. Edmonton, AB: Alberta Land Conservation
and Reclamation Council: 141-149. [14359]
47. McLean, A.; Clark, M. B. 1980. Grass, trees, and cattle on
clearcut-logged areas. Journal of Range Management. 33(3): 213-217.
[3901]
48. McLean, A.; Lord, T. M.; Green, A. J. 1970. Utilization of the major
plant communities in the Similkameen Valley, British Columbia. Journal
of Range Management. 24: 346-351. [7626]
49. Miller, Richard F.; Krueger, William C.; Vavra, Martin. 1986. Twelve
years of plant succession on a seeded clearcut under grazing and
protection from cattle. In: Special Report 773. 1986 Progress
report...research in rangeland management. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State
University, Agricultural Experiment Station: 4-10. In cooperation with:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. [3650]
50. Nelson, Jack R.; Leege, Thomas A. 1982. Nutritional requirements and
food habits. In: Thomas, Jack Ward; Toweill, Dale E., eds. Elk of North
America: ecology and management. Harrisburg, PA: Stackpole Books:
323-368. [14494]
51. Noste, Nonan V. 1982. Vegetation response to spring and fall burning for
wildlife habitat improvement. In: Baumgartner, David M., compiler &
editor. 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: 125-132. [1784]
52. Pase, Charles P.; Granfelt, Carl Eric, tech. coords. 1977. The use of
fire on Arizona rangelands. Arizona Interagency Range Committee
Publication No. 4. [Place of publication unknown]: [Arizona Interagency
Range Committe]. 15 p. [1827]
53. Pearson, H. A.; Davis, J. R.; Schubert, G. H. 1972. Effects of wildfire
on timber and forage production in Arizona. Journal of Range Management.
25: 250-253. [5664]
54. 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]
55. 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]
56. Reynolds, Hudson G.; Johnson, R. Roy. 1964. Habitat relations of
vertebrates of the Sierra Ancha Experimental Forest. Res. Pap. RM-4.
Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky
Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 16 p. [13485]
57. Rhodes, Bruce D.; Sharrow, Steven H. 1990. Effect of grazing by sheep on
the quantity and quality of forage available to big game in Oregon's
Coast Range. Journal of Range Management. 43(3): 235-237. [11763]
58. Roppe, Jerry A.; Hein, Dale. 1978. Effects of fire on wildlife in a
lodgepole pine forest. Southwestern Naturalist. 23(2): 279-287. [261]
59. Schultz, Arnold M. 1953. Reseeding managed chaparral brush areas for
deer. Proceedings, 33rd Annual Conference of Western Association of Game
and Fish Commissioners. 33: 60-264. [16665]
60. Schuster, J. L.; De Leon Garcia, Ricardo C. 1973. Phenology and forage
production of cool season grasses in the Southern Plains. Journal of
Range Management. 26(5): 336-339. [3912]
61. Seidel, K. W.; Geist, J. Michael; Strickler, Gerald S. 1990. The
influence of cattle grazing and grass seeding on coniferous regeneration
after shelterwood cutting in eastern Oregon. Res. Pap. PNW-RP-417.
Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific
Northwest Research Station. 32 p. [13285]
62. Shaw, A. F.; Cooper, C. S. 1973. The Interagency forage, conservation
and wildlife handbook. Bozeman, MT: Montana State University, Extension
Service. 205 p. [5666]
63. Smith, Justin G. 1963. A subalpine grassland seeding trial. Journal of
Range Management. 16: 208-210. [3799]
64. Smith, Winston Paul. 1985. Plant associations within the interior
valleys of the Umpqua River Basin, Oregon. Journal of Range Management.
38(6): 526-530. [2179]
65. Springfield, H. W.; Reynolds, H. G. 1951. Grazing preferences of cattle
for certain reseeding grasses. Journal of Range Management. 4: 83-87.
[80]
66. Stewart, R. E.; Beebe, T. 1974. Survival of ponderosa pine seedlings
followingcontrol of competing grasses. Western Society Weed Science
Proceedings. 27: 55-58. [7184]
67. Stubbendieck, J.; Hatch, Stephan L.; Hirsch, Kathie J. 1986. North
American range plants. 3rd ed. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska
Press. 465 p. [2270]
68. Sugihara, Neil G.; Reed, Lois J.; Lenihan, James M. 1987. Vegetation of
the Bald Hills oak woodlands, Redwood National Park, California.
Madrono. 34(3): 193-208. [3788]
69. Tew, Ronald K. 1969. Water use, adaptability, and chemical composition
of grasses seeded at high elevations. Journal of Range Management.
22(4): 280-283. [18605]
70. Trlica, M. J.; Buwai, M.; Menke, J. W. 1977. Effects of rest following
defoliations on the recovery of several range species. Journal of Range
Management. 30(1): 21-27. [2360]
71. U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1948. Grass: The yearbook of agriculture
1948. Washington, DC. 892 p. [2391]
72. Washko, J. B.; Jung, G. A.; Decker, A. M.; [and others]. 1967.
Management and productivity of perennial grasses in the Northeast: III.
Orchardgrass. Morgantown, WV: West Virginia University, Agricultural
Experiment Station. 48 p. [18606]
73. Wright, Henry A.; Bailey, Arthur W. 1982. Fire ecology: United States
and southern Canada. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 501 p. [2620]
74. Dansereau, Pierre. 1959. The principal plant associations of the Saint
Lawrence Valley. No. 75. Montreal, Canada: Contrib. Inst. Bot. Univ.
Montreal. 147 p. [8925]
75. 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]
76. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and
Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
77. 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]
78. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant
geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
79. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant
geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
80. 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]
81. 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]
FEIS Home Page
https://www.fs.usda.gov/database/feis/plants/graminoid/dacglo/all.html
