Index of Species Information
SPECIES: Hordeum jubatum
Introductory
SPECIES: Hordeum jubatum
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION :
Tesky, Julie L. 1992. Hordeum jubatum. 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/horjub/all.html [].
ABBREVIATION :
HORJUB
SYNONYMS :
Critesion jubatum L. Nevski [3]
SCS PLANT CODE :
HOJU
HOJUC
COMMON NAMES :
foxtail barley
foxtail
squirreltail barley
squirreltail grass
foxtail grass
wild barley
skunktail
TAXONOMY :
The currently accepted scientific name for foxtail barley is Hordeum
jubatum L. [4,17,19]. Hordeum jubatum L. hybridizes with H.
brachyantherum in interior and coastal British Columbia, where the two
species share the same habitat [4]. Recognized subspecies and
varieties of H. jubatum are as follows [4,17,19]:
H. j. ssp. jubatum
H. j. ssp. intermedium Bowden
H. j. ssp. breviarestatum Bowden
H. j. var. boreale Scribn. & Smith (Boivin)
H. j. var. caespitasum (Sribn.) Hitchc.
LIFE FORM :
Graminoid
FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS :
No special status
OTHER STATUS :
NO-ENTRY
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Hordeum jubatum
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION :
Foxtail barley is indigenous to the western United States [35]. It has
become naturalized in the East and now occurs throughout the United
States with the exception of the South Atlantic and Gulf Coast states
[2,17]. It occurs throughout most of Canada and some areas of Mexico
[35,45].
ECOSYSTEMS :
FRES10 White - red - jack pine
FRES11 Spruce - fir
FRES20 Douglas-fir
FRES21 Ponderosa pine
FRES23 Fir - spruce
FRES24 Hemlock - Sitka spruce
FRES29 Sagebrush
FRES30 Desert shrub
FRES34 Chaparral - mountain shrub
FRES35 Pinyon - juniper
FRES36 Mountain grasslands
FRES37 Mountain meadows
FRES38 Plains grasslands
FRES39 Prairie
FRES40 Desert grasslands
FRES41 Wet grasslands
FRES42 Annual grasslands
FRES44 Alpine
STATES :
AL AK AZ AR CA CO CT DE ID IL
IN IA KS KY ME MD MA MI MN MS
MO MT NE NV NH NJ NM NY ND OH
OK OR PA RI SD TN TX UT VT WA
WV WI WY AB BC LB MB NB NF NT
NS ON 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
14 Great Plains
15 Black Hills Uplift
16 Upper Missouri Basin and Broken Lands
KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :
K001 Spruce - cedar - hemlock forest
K010 Ponderosa shrub forest
K011 Western ponderosa forest
K012 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
K021 Southwestern spruce - fir forest
K023 Juniper - pinyon woodland
K024 Juniper steppe woodland
K027 Mesquite bosque
K033 Chaparral
K034 Montane chaparral
K037 Mountain-mahogany - oak scrub
K038 Great Basin sagebrush
K039 Blackbrush
K040 Saltbush - greasewood
K041 Creosotebush
K048 California steppe
K049 Tule marshes
K050 Fescue - wheatgrass
K051 Wheatgrass - bluegrass
K053 Grama - galleta steppe
K055 Sagebrush steppe
K056 Wheatgrass - needlegrass shrubsteppe
K057 Galleta - three-awn shrubsteppe
K060 Mesquite savanna
K063 Foothills prairie
K064 Grama - needlegrass - wheatgrass
K065 Grama - buffalograss
K066 Wheatgrass - needlegrass
K067 Wheatgrass - bluestem - needlegrass
K068 Wheatgrass - grama - buffalograss
K069 Bluestem - grama prairie
K070 Sandsage - bluestem prairie
K074 Bluestem prairie
K081 Oak savanna
K093 Great Lakes spruce - fir forest
K094 Conifer bog
K095 Great Lakes pine forest
K098 Northern floodplain forest
K101 Elm - ash forest
SAF COVER TYPES :
1 Jack pine
5 Balsam fir
12 Black spruce
13 Black spruce - tamarack
22 White pine - hemlock
23 Eastern hemlock
38 Tamarack
32 Red spruce
33 Red spruce - balsam fir
34 Red spruce - Fraser fir
31 Red spruce - sugar maple - beech
35 Paper birch - red spruce - balsam fir
206 Engelmann spruce - subalpine fir
210 Interior Douglas-fir
224 Western hemlock
225 Western hemlock - Sitka spruce
229 Pacific Douglas-fir
230 Douglas-fir - western hemlock
237 Interior ponderosa pine
239 Pinyon - juniper
244 Pacific ponderosa pine - Douglas-fir
245 Pacific ponderosa pine
SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES :
NO-ENTRY
HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES :
Foxtail barley is a common riparian dominance type at low to
mid-elevations throughout Montana. It occurs in disturbed areas,
meadows, basins, and drawdown areas, where soils are saline or alkaline
[15].
MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
SPECIES: Hordeum jubatum
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE :
Many waterfowl species eat the seeds and occasionally the leaves of
foxtail barley [20]. Before flowering, foxtail barley is palatable to
livestock and big game. Up to the time when seedheads develop, it is
fair to good forage for cattle and horses and fair for sheep [35].
Foxtail barley seedheads, when dry, are very harmful to all kinds of
grazing animals, particularly deer, elk, and pronghorn [35]. The
sharp-pointed joints of the spike, each with several long and slender
awns, stick in the nose and mouth of grazing animals, often penetrating
the flesh [24,35]. Infection caused by awns stuck in tissue can cause
necrotic sores and necrotic stomatitis, which in turn finally attacks
the bones and causes an abnormal enlargement as well as lumpy jaw and
pus-forming abscesses. These infections may result in death of the
animal [35].
PALATABILITY :
The palatability of foxtail barley to livestock and wildlife species in
several western states is rated as follows [8]:
CO MT ND UT WY
Cattle Fair Poor Fair Fair Poor
Sheep Fair Fair Fair Poor Fair
Horses Fair ---- ---- Fair Fair
Pronghorn ---- Poor Poor Fair Poor
Elk ---- Poor ---- Good Poor
Mule deer ---- Poor Poor Fair Poor
White-tailed deer ---- Poor Poor ---- Poor
Small mammals ---- ---- ---- Fair Fair
Small nongame birds ---- Fair ---- Fair ----
Upland game birds ---- Poor ---- Fair Fair
Waterfowl Good Fair ---- Fair Fair
NUTRITIONAL VALUE :
NO-ENTRY
COVER VALUE :
The degree to which foxtail barley provides environmental protection
during one or more seasons for wildlife species is rated as follows [8]:
CO MT ND UT WY
Pronghorn ---- ---- Poor Poor Poor
Elk ---- Poor ---- Poor Poor
Mule deer ---- Poor Poor Poor Poor
White-tailed deer Poor Fair ---- Poor ----
Small mammals ---- Poor ---- Fair Good
Small nongame birds ---- Poor ---- Fair Good
Upland game birds Poor Poor ---- Fair Fair
Waterfowl ---- Good Good Fair Fair
VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES :
Foxtail barley has potential for revegetation of saline mine spoils
where forage value is of secondary importance. Its extensive root
system and aggressive habit make it a good species for erosion control.
Foxtail barley seeds are not commercially available [45].
OTHER USES AND VALUES :
Foxtail barley, cut before the awns have expanded, is sometimes used as
an ornamental in dry bouquets [24].
OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Because of the damage foxtail barley can cause to livestock and other
animals, it is often considered a pasture weed [21,24,35]. Hay
containing foxtail barley is nearly valueless [24]. Additionally,
seedheads of this species can downgrade the value of wool or pelts,
causing further economic loss to ranchers [24]. Once established,
foxtail barley is hard to eradicate. It increases under excessive
grazing pressure. Dense stands are usually associated with some type of
disturbance, such as overgrazing, close mowing, or repeated burning
[14,29,45].
Seeding disturbed meadows and pastures with desirable, fast-growing
forage grasses is effective in reducing the amount of foxtail barley
that invades the site. Additionally, conservative grazing can
facilitate the establishment of native, palatable grasses and reduce
foxtail barley [15,35].
Control with herbicides: Forty-eight pounds of dalapon
(2,2-dichloropropionic acid) per acre (7.2 kg/ha) in water at 50 gallons
per acre (76 liters/ha) has been shown to give complete kill of foxtail
barley. Lower rates of 16 and 32 pounds of dalapon per acre (2.4
kg/ha-4.8 kg/ha) allows some survival. A combination of 30 pounds (4.5
kg/ha) of dalapon and 4 pounds (0.6 kg/ha) of amino triazole per acre
will also effectively control foxtail barley [36]. The herbicide
mefluidide is most effective in controlling foxtail barley when applied
near initiation of flowering [39]. In a meadow brome (Bromus spp.)
stand, the herbicide kerb at the rate of 0.5 pounds per acre ( 0.7
kg/ha) gave excellent control of foxtail barley without apparent
reduction of the meadow brome [18].
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Hordeum jubatum
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
Foxtail barley is a short-lived, native, perennial, cool-season grass
[1,14,26,32]. It has erect, slender stems, 1 to 2 feet (0.3-0.6 m)
tall, growing in thick bunches or tufts [23,26,38]. The roots are
fibrous [35].
RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :
Chamaephyte
Hemicryptophyte
REGENERATION PROCESSES :
Sexual reproduction: Foxtail barley is a prolific seeder. Ripe
seedheads break up and are dispersed by wind or transported in the hair
of grazing animals [35].
Seed germination: Foxtail barley produces two germination cohorts: one
in the spring and one in the fall. These two cohorts are important in
maintaining populations of foxtail barley [2]. On a saline marsh at
Rittman, Ohio, foxtail barley seed production per inflorescence was
greater with an increase in soil salinity [1]. Seed germination is
inhibited by warm summer temperatures, but seeds readily germinate when
exposed to cooler fall temperatures. After cold stratification the
temperature range favorable for germination broadens. Freezing
temperatures result in high seed mortality [1]. Seeds are capable of
germinating in 1.0 percent total salts or less. Germination decrease
when salinity increases past 1.0 percent [34]. Germination is
independent of light conditions [1].
Seedlings: Foxtail barley seedlings can survive for several months at
salinities unfavorable for growth and reproduction. In a marsh at
Rittman, Ohio, highest survival of fall and spring seedlings occurred in
the most saline lower marsh [2].
Vegetative reproduction: Foxtail barley reproduces vegetatively by
tillering [33].
SITE CHARACTERISTICS :
Foxtail barley grows chiefly on grassland types on the plains and lower
foothills but also extends upward to subalpine elevations in the spruce
belt. It is very common throughout the West, especially along roadsides
and other waste places, and in grain and hay fields [17,23,31,35]. It
reaches its greatest abundance on the edges of sloughs and salt marshes,
grassy slopes, and flatlands in the western prairies [4]. It is also
abundant in overgrazed sagebrush margins and irrigated meadows [14]. In
sagebrush, pinyon-juniper, salt-desert shrub, and plains grasslands
communities, it generally occurs in areas where extra water has
accumulated, such as sloughs and around stock-water developments [38].
Soils and salt-tolerance: Foxtail barley grows well on a variety of
soil textures ranging from sandy loam to clay, with clay content varying
from 17 percent to 56 percent [34,45]. It requires fairly moist
conditions and cannot sustain itself during long dry periods [8,34].
Foxtail barley commonly occurs on soils with moderate salinity but can
also grow and reproduce under nonsaline conditions [34,45]. Foxtail
barley has a broad tolerance to variations in pH. It occurs in areas
with a pH from 6.4 to 9.5, with a median value of 8.1 in the surface
soils [34].
Elevational range: The elevational range of foxtail barley in several
western states is as follows [8]:
Utah: 2,500 to 8,800 feet (762-2,682 m)
Colorado: 3,400 to 10,400 feet (1,036-3,170 m)
Wyoming: 3,500 to 9,400 feet (1,067-2,865 m)
Montana: 2,100 to 3,900 feet (640-1,189 m)
Plant associates: Foxtail barley may occur in relatively pure stands in
moderately saline communities or as a codominant with inland saltgrass
(Distichlis stricta var. stricta) and spearleaf saltweed (Atriplex
patula var. hastata) [34]. Foxtail barley is also commonly associated
with coastal saltgrass (Distichlis spicata), nutka alkaligrass
(Puccinellia nutkaensis), Pursh seepweed (Suaeda depressa), heath aster
(Aster ericoides), field sowthistle (Sonchus arvensis), curly dock
(Rumex crispus), bluegrass (Poa spp.), and wheatgrass (Agropyron spp.)
[6,13,15,34].
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS :
Facultative Seral Species
Foxtail barley is a pioneer or invader in disturbed areas and in areas
with high salinity [10,15,20,43]. It is among the first grasses to
establish after disturbance and may become dominant in early seral
grassland communities. It also occurs but is not dominant in some late
seral to climax grassland communities [29]. It rapidly invades areas
exposed by a receding water table. If the water table becomes stabilized
at a high level, foxtail barley will ultimately be replaced by saltgrass
(Distichlis spp.) or common spikesedge (Eleocharis palustris) in saline
areas [10,20,43].
SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT :
Foxtail barley starts growth in April or May. Flowering and seed set
generally occur from May until late July [2,33,34].
FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Hordeum jubatum
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS :
Foxtail barley will rapidly establish on disturbed sites through
off-site seed sources [15,35].
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 :
Initial-offsite colonizer (off-site, initial community)
FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Hordeum jubatum
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT :
Moderate fires with probably top-kill foxtail barley, and hot fires may
kill the underground root system.
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT :
NO-ENTRY
PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE :
Foxtail barley generally recovers after fire through off-site seeds
[27]. Foxtail barley is most sensitive to spring fire that coincides
with its active growing period [41,42]. After a North Dakota prairie
fire in the spring of 1966, foxtail barley culm production was greatly
reduced [12]. However, the opposite was found to be true following a
1972 spring fire on a northwestern Minnesota prairie. Here flowering
activity was stimulated [27]. Following a burn along the Missouri River
Breaks of central Montana, foxtail barley was one of the first grass
species to become established [44].
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
foxtail barley, that was not available when this species review was written.
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
As a general rule, undesirable cool-season grasses such as foxtail
barley can be reduced with late spring burns [41].
REFERENCES
SPECIES: Hordeum jubatum
REFERENCES :
1. Badger, Kemuel S.; Ungar, Irwin A. 1989. The effects of salinity and
temperature on the germination of the inland halophyte Hordeum jubatum.
Canadian Journal of Botany. 67(5): 1420-1425. [14650]
2. Badger, Kemuel S.; Ungar, Irwin A. 1991. Life history and population
dynamics of Hordeum jubatum along a soil salinity gradient. Canadian
Journal of Botany. 69: 384-393. [14539]
3. Barkworth, Mary E.; Dewey, Douglas R. 1985. Genomically based genera in
the perennial Triticeae of North America: identification and membership.
American Journal of Botany. 72(5): 767-776. [393]
4. Baum, Bernard R.; Bailey, L. Grant. 1990. Key and synopsis of North
American Hordeum species. Canadian Journal of Botany. 68: 2433-2442.
[16150]
5. 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]
6. Clambey, Gary K.; Landers, Roger Q. 1978. A survey of wetland vegetation
in north-central Iowa. In: Glenn-Lewin, David C.; Landers, Roger Q.,
Jr., eds. Proceedings, 5th Midwest prairie conference; 1976 August
22-24; Ames, IA. Ames, IA: Iowa State University: 32-35. [3304]
7. Conn, Jeffery S. 1990. Seed viability and dormancy of 17 weed species
after burial for 4.7 years in Alaska. Weed Science. 38: 134-138.
[11815]
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. Frolik, A. L.; Shepherd, W. O. 1940. Vegetative composition and grazing
capacity of a typical area of Nebraska sandhills rangeland. University
of Nebraska Agricultural Experimental Station Research Bulletin. Number
117. 39 p. [5417]
11. 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]
12. Hadley, Elmer B. 1970. Net productivity and burning response of native
eastern North Dakota prairie communities. American Midland Naturalist.
84(1): 121-135. [5434]
13. Hadley, E. B.; Buccos, R. P. 1967. Plant community composition and net
primary production within a native eastern North Dakota prairie.
American Midland Naturalist. 77: 116-127. [11422]
14. Hallsten, Gregory P.; Skinner, Quentin D.; Beetle, Alan A. 1987. Grasses
of Wyoming. 3rd ed. Research Journal 202. Laramie, WY: University of
Wyoming, Agricultural Experiment Station. 432 p. [2906]
15. Hansen, Paul L.; Chadde, Steve W.; Pfister, Robert D. 1988. Riparian
dominance types of Montana. Misc. Publ. No. 49. Missoula, MT: University
of Montana, School of Forestry, Montana Forest and Conservation
Experiment Station. 411 p. [5660]
16. Hitchcock, C. Leo; Cronquist, Arthur. 1961. Vascular plants of the
Pacific Northwest. Part 3: Saxifragaceae to Ericaceae. Seattle, WA:
University of Washington Press. 614 p. [1167]
17. Hitchcock, C. Leo; Cronquist, Arthur. 1973. Flora of the Pacific
Northwest. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press. 730 p. [1168]
18. Humberg, N. E.; Alley, H. P.; Vore, R. E. 1981. Rangeland and
meadowland: Section II. University of Wyoming Agricultural Experiment
Station Research Journal. 63: 29-51. [4907]
19. Kartesz, John T.; Kartesz, Rosemarie. 1980. A synonymized checklist of
the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. Volume
II: The biota of North America. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North
Carolina Press; in confederation with Anne H. Lindsey and C. Richie
Bell, North Carolina Botanical Garden. 500 p. [6954]
20. Keith, Lloyd B. 1961. A study of waterfowl ecology on small impoundments
in southeastern Alberta. Wildlife Monographs. 6: 1-88. [4501]
21. Kingsbury, John M. 1964. Poisonous plants of the United States and
Canada. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc. 626 p. [122]
22. 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]
23. 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]
24. Lamson-Scribner, F. 1900. Economic grasses. Bulletin No. 14. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Division of Agrostology. 85 p.
[4282]
25. Lyon, L. Jack; Stickney, Peter F. 1976. Early vegetal succession
following large northern Rocky Mountain wildfires. In: Proceedings, Tall
Timbers fire ecology conference and Intermountain Fire Research Council
fire and land management symposium; 1974 October 8-10; Missoula, MT. No.
14. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station: 355-373. [1496]
26. Morris, H. E.; Booth, W. E.; Payne, G. F.; Stitt, R. E. 1950. Important
grasses on Montana ranges. Bull. No. 470. Bozeman, MT: Montana
Agricultural Experiment Station. 52 p. [5520]
27. Pemble, R. H.; Van Amburg, G. L.; Mattson, Lyle. 1981. Intraspecific
variation in flowering activity following a spring burn on a
northwestern Minnesota prairie. In: Stuckey, Ronald L.; Reese, Karen J.,
eds. The prairie peninsula--in the "shadow" of Transeau: Proceedings,
6th North American prairie conference; 1978 August 12-17; Columbus, OH.
Ohio Biological Survey: Biological Notes No. 15. Columbus, OH: Ohio
State University, College of Biological Sciences: 235-240. [3435]
28. Ferguson, Dennis E.; Boyd, Raymond J. 1988. Bracken fern inhibition of
conifer regeneration in northern Idaho. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 11 p.
[2834]
29. Ross, Robert L.; Hunter, Harold E. 1976. Climax vegetation of Montana
based on soils and climate. Bozeman, MT: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Soil Conservation Service. 64 p. [2028]
30. Russell, W. B. 1985. Vascular flora of abandoned coal-mined land, Rocky
Mountain Foothills, Alberta. Canadian Field-Naturalist. 99(4): 503-516.
[10461]
31. Sampson, Arthur W.; Chase, Agnes; Hedrick, Donald W. 1951. California
grasslands and range forage grasses. Bull. 724. Berkeley, CA: University
of California College of Agriculture, California Agricultural Experiment
Station. 125 p. [2052]
32. Stubbendieck, J.; Nichols, James T.; Roberts, Kelly K. 1985. Nebraska
range and pasture grasses (including grass-like plants). E.C. 85-170.
Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska, Department of Agriculture,
Cooperative Extension Service. 75 p. [2269]
33. Stubbendieck, J.; Hatch, Stephan L.; Hirsch, Kathie J. 1986. North
American range plants. 3rd ed. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska
Press. 465 p. [2270]
34. Ungar, Irwin A. 1974. Inland halophytes of the United States. In:
Reinold, Robert J.; Queen, William H., eds. Ecology of halophytes. New
York: Academic Press, Inc: 235-305. [11429]
35. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1937. Range plant
handbook. Washington, DC. 532 p. [2387]
36. 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]
37. 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]
38. Vallentine, John F. 1961. Important Utah range grasses. Extension
Circular 281. Logan, UT: Utah State University. 48 p. [2937]
39. White, Larry M. 1989. Growth regulators' effect on crested wheatgrass
forage yield and quality. Journal of Range Management. 42(1): 46-50.
[4170]
40. Whitman, W. C., Wali, M. K. 1975. Grasslands of North Dakota. In: Wali,
Mohan K., ed. Prairie: a multiple view. Grand Forks, ND: University of
North Dakota Press: 53-74. [4430]
41. Wright, Henry A.; Bailey, Arthur W. 1982. Fire ecology: United States
and southern Canada. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 501 p. [2620]
42. Young, Richard P. 1986. Fire ecology and management in plant communities
of Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. Portland, OR: Oregon State
University. 169 p. Thesis. [3745]
43. Millar, J. B. 1973. Vegetation changes in shallow marsh wetlands under
improving moisture regimes. Canadian Journal of Botany. 51: 1443-1457.
[14589]
44. Eichhorn, Larry C.; Watts, C. Robert. 1984. Plant succession on burns in
the river breaks of central Montana. Proceedings, Montana Academy of
Science. 43: 21-34. [15478]
45. 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]
46. 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]
FEIS Home Page
