Index of Species Information
SPECIES: Schedonorus arundinaceus
Introductory
SPECIES: Schedonorus arundinaceus
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION :
Walsh, Roberta A. 1995. Schedonorus arundinaceus. 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/scharu/all.html [].
ABBREVIATION :
SCHARU
SYNONYMS :
Festuca arundinacea Schreb. [28,32,33,79].
Lolium arundinacea (Schreb.) S.J. Darbyshire [80]
SCS PLANT CODE :
FEAR3
COMMON NAMES :
tall fescue
reed fescue
TAXONOMY :
The scientific name of tall fescue is Schedonorus arundinaceus (Schreb.) Dumort. (Poaceae) [81].
LIFE FORM :
Graminoid
FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS :
No special status
OTHER STATUS :
NO-ENTRY
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Schedonorus arundinaceus
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION :
Tall fescue occurs throughout the continental United States
[4,28,31,75,77] and southern Canada [76]. It was introduced to North
America from northern Europe, where it is native [31,61,65]. It has also
been introduced to South America [76], Australia [9,10,24], and New
Zealand [20.].
ECOSYSTEMS :
Tall fescue occurs in most ecosystems.
STATES :
AL AK AZ AR CA CO CT DE FL GA
HI ID IL IN IA KS KY LA ME MD
MA MI MN MS 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
DC AB BC MB NB NF NS ON PE PQ
SK
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 :
NO-ENTRY
SAF COVER TYPES :
Tall fescue occurs in most SAF Cover Types.
SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES :
Tall fescue occurs in most SRM Cover Types.
HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES :
Tall fescue is listed as a codominant in the following publication:
Plant associations within the interior valleys of the Umpqua River
Basin, Oregon [64]
Tall fescue is found in tallgrass prairie [56], salt desert shrub, and
sagebrush (Artemisia spp.) [76]. It is also found in pine-Douglas-fir
(Pinus spp.-Pseudotsuga menziesii) forest, ponderosa pine (Pinus
ponderosa) forest, pinyon-juniper (Pinus-Juniperus spp.)
woodland, mountain-mahogany-oak (Cercocarpus-Quercus spp.) scrub,
and saltbush-greasewood (Atriplex-Sarcobatus spp.) communities [16].
MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
SPECIES: Schedonorus arundinaceus
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE :
The herbage of mature tall fescue tends to be coarse, but it is taken by
all livestock when it is young, green, and succulent [57]. Tall fescue
is a commonly planted cool-season forage grass [27].
Songbirds consume tall fescue seeds; both seeds and foliage are used by
small mammals [75].
Animals grazing tall fescue infested with the endophytic fungus
Acremonium coenophialum [5] may develop "fescue foot," a serious disease
which affects cattle, horses, and sheep. All parts of the plant,
whether green or dry, may contain the alkaloid poison at any time of
year. Symptoms include poor weight gain, lower pregnancy rates, and
decreased milk production. Lameness and gangrene in the extremities
occur in infected cattle [5,66]. No alkaloids have been found in meat
or milk from animals eating endophyte-infected tall fescue [5].
According to Burchick [7], tall fescue may present "reproductive
problems" to wildlife, particularly rabbits.
PALATABILITY :
Tall fescue is palatable to livestock when the leaves are young.
However, it becomes somewhat coarse, tough, and unpalatable with age
[65]. Management and fertilization extend the season of palatability
[77]. Some commercially available varieties are more palatable than
others. Livestock prefer tall fescue uninfected with endophytic fungus
and eat more of it [61,77].
Tall fescue palatability for elk has been reported as poor [75], and elk
may show a preference for other grasses [61]. However, elk ate tall
fescue in the Mount St. Helens area during October and November 1985.
Forbs and shrub species dominated their summer diet, but grasses were
selected in greater proportion than their relative abundance in the
fall. Tall fescue was a predominant choice [46].
Reports of tall fescue palatability for deer vary. Some authors report
poor palatability [61,75]. In the White River Basin of southern
Missouri, tall fescue was widely available, but deer consumption from
April through September was low [52]. However, in Madera County,
California, tall fescue ranked third of 14 forage species in deer
preference early in the season (March). Tall fescue remained high in
preference throughout the summer months and provided year-round green
feed [58].
NUTRITIONAL VALUE :
Tall fescue energy value is rated fair; protein value is rated poor [16].
Nutritive value of tall fescue for cattle is less than that of
orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata), smooth brome (Bromus inermis), or
intermediate wheatgrass (Thinopurum intermedium) [29].
Tall fescue nutritive value drops during its summer dormant period. In
southwestern Missouri steers eating spring-baled tall fescue in the
summer gained an average of 0.70 pound (0.3 kg) per day from June to
September. Steers grazing tall fescue left standing in the field lost
on average almost a pound (0.45 kg) a day from June to August. In
contrast, steers grazing switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) from late May to
late August gained an average of 1.43 pounds (0.65 kg) per day [27].
White-tailed deer in the Ozarks of southern Missouri eat tall fescue.
Tall fescue is most abundant in late spring, summer, and fall. Forage
samples were collected in the White River Basin of southern Missouri
from fertilized and unfertilized fescue stands during May, July,
September, and November. Protein did not vary significantly with
respect to fertilizer treatment. The following mean nutritive values
and dry matter digestibility of tall fescue forage were reported for
combined fertilized and unfertilized samples [52]:
Harvest Date Percent
Protein Ca P ADF* DMD**
May 16.2 0.31 0.29 30.7 61.3
July 9.1 0.43 0.21 35.2 51.4
September 9.3 0.36 0.26 37.5 50.9
November 9.5 0.29 0.25 31.0 55.9
* ADF: acid detergent fiber
** DMD: dry matter digestibility
Tall fescue in May had a crude protein content value higher than
adequate for reproduction of white-tailed deer and only slightly below
that yielding good growth and antler production. The protein values in
other measured months were adequate to obtain some growth but retard
antler development. Tall fescue is most valuable for deer in early
spring and late fall when protein, acid-detergent fiber, and dry matter
digestibility are at their most desirable levels [52].
The following wildlife food values have been reported for tall fescue
[16]:
Utah Wyoming
Elk good good
Mule deer fair poor
White-tailed deer ---- fair
Pronghorn fair poor
Upland game birds good ----
Waterfowl good ----
Small nongame birds good ----
Small mammals good ----
COVER VALUE :
Tall fescue cover value is reported as follows [16]:
Utah Wyoming
Upland game birds good good
Waterfowl good poor
Small nongame birds good good
Small mammals good good
VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES :
Tall fescue is useful in rehabilitation work. It produces coarse, tough
roots which prevent erosion and decrease soil density [29]. Tall fescue
is an excellent soil improver, especially on heavy soils; its roots open
up the soil below the 6 inch (15 cm) level. The root system is
partially renewed each year, leaving behind large amounts of organic
matter in the soil [65].
Tall fescue makes ground cover which has high "wearing ability" [29].
It provides good cover for areas where a long-lived, tenacious,
deep-rooted grass is needed, such as airports, playgrounds, parking
lots, cuts and fills, eroding gullies, and waterways and dikes
[19,60,65,75]. Tall fescue is also used for medium to long-term
watershed protection [73].
On the east slope of the Sierra Nevada, tarweed (Madia spp.) has
replaced native perennial vegetation on meadow and sagebrush ranges. On
moist and poorly drained areas tall fescue performed best of 40
different grasses and legumes seeded for revegetation of
tarweed-infested areas [13].
Tall fescue is the most used and versatile of the grasses suited for
reclamation of surface mines in the eastern United States. However,
tall fescue stands usually do not thrive unless planted with a legume or
fertilized occasionally [73].
In west-central Illinois tall fescue was planted on 30-year-old
strip-mined coal spoils amended with dry sewage sludge and on similar
unamended sites. By the end of the second growing season, tall fescue
produced significantly (p<.05) more biomass on amended sites than on
unamended sites. Amended sites averaged 625 g/sq m biomass for spring
planting and 613 g/sq m for fall planting. Unamended sites averaged 313
g/sq m for spring planting and 222 g/sq m for fall planting. No
significant differences occurred between spring and fall plantings [55].
Tall fescue can be used to revegetate acid mine spoils having excess
manganese, but it does not tolerate high aluminum concentrations. Tall
fescue was found to be tolerant of pH 4 to 6 and manganese at 4 to 64
ppm. However, concentration of 4 ppm aluminum severely inhibited top
and root development of tall fescue [23].
Tall fescue produces allelopathic compounds which adversely affect many
plant species. In Pennsylvania tall fescue hindered woody plant growth
and survival on strip-mined sites. On low-fertility acid mine sites
several years of tall fescue control was necessary to ensure adequate
survival of silky dogwood (Cornus amomum) and northern arrowwood
(Viburnum recognitum). Tall fescue also significantly (p<.05) decreased
black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia) live plants per plot, average plant
height, and canopy cover [34,35]. After 4 years an established
unfertilized tall fescue stand on coal mine spoils in Kentucky had
greatly retarded growth of planted sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua)
and sycamore (Platanus occidentalis). However, survival of the trees
was not affected [72].
Black walnut (Juglans nigra) seedling growth is reduced by tall fescue
leachates; established trees suffer higher mortality and crown dieback
when growing with tall fescue [71]. In Sullivan County, Indiana, tall
fescue ground cover reduced survival of black walnut and northern red
oak (Quercus rubra) seedlings on a reclaimed coal mine site and an
unmined site. The tree seedlings suffered severe stem dieback on plots
with no groundcover control. When tall fescue was chemically
controlled, survival and height growth of both tree species were greater
[3].
Tall fescue seed was added to the seedbank in topsoil derived from a
native species forest community in Anderson County, Tennessee. The
topsoil was spread in a thin layer over mine spoils from a coal seam in
Campbell County, Tennessee. The resulting community produced less total
biomass and less total biomass in native species than a control
community without tall fescue. The community containing tall fescue
also had fewer native species and lower populations of native plants
than the community without tall fescue [74].
Tall fescue persistence has not been consistent in revegetation efforts.
Tall fescue was seeded on tripoli quarries in the Ozark Highlands of
eastern Oklahoma. Twenty years after initial establishment of a dense
stand of tall fescue on newly graded and filled quarries, tall fescue
had disappeared. Plant succession on the quarries had moved toward oak
(Quercus spp.)-hickory (Carya spp.)/tallgrass prairie savanna. Tripoli
minesoil, at pH 4.0 to 5.6, was substantially below the optimum pH for
tall fescue. The tripoli soils were also deficient in nitrogen and
phosphorus. Low nitrogen levels were probably a factor in the
replacement of tall fescue by native prairie grasses. Tall fescue was
also temporary vegetation on highway corridors in the Piedmont region;
it was short-lived without nitrogen fertilization. At other sites tall
fescue has been one of the most easily established and persistent
cool-season grasses on mine spoils [56].
Because of the density of tall fescue root mats and because of
allelopathic substances produced, tall fescue should probably not be
used for wetland mitigation, reforestation, or rehabilitation with
intent of managing for wildlife and plant diversity [7].
OTHER USES AND VALUES :
Tall fescue has been successfully used as a cover crop in established
irrigated orchards where shade is not dense [29].
Tall fescue has been used to control musk thistle (Carduus nutans) in
Virginia. The more extensive root system of tall fescue reduces musk
thistle root and stem size as well as bud production [43].
OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Several varieties of tall fescue are available commercially [29].
Endophyte-free tall fescue seed is available. However, uninfected tall
fescue is more difficult and expensive to establish and maintain than
infected tall fescue, and it is prone to fail under stress such as
drought. Insects prefer uninfected tall fescue and survive and
reproduce better when consuming it [5]. Infected tall fescue is more
widely adapted, has a longer growing season, greater resistance to
pests, is more successful under adverse growing conditions including
drought, poor soils, and a wider range of soil pH than is uninfected
tall fescue [5].
Tall fescue is in the spring or fall in the eastern United States [73].
In the South and Midwest, tall fescue may remain productive through
drought periods; its extensive root system enables it to obtain moisture
from the subsoil [77]. However, tall fescue is intolerant of protracted
drought [75]. Near Amarillo, Texas, tall fescue persisted under
irrigation but died out under dryland conditions [59].
Tall fescue has good competitive ability against other species in
mixtures; tall fescue stands are easily established and develop rapidly
[61]. Tall fescue is sometimes seeded alone, but is more commonly
seeded with legumes such as alfalfa (Medicago sativa), white clover
(Trifolium repens), birdsfoot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus), purple
crownvetch (Coronilla varia), or sericea lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata),
which supply nitrogen [75]. However, tall fescue allelopathic compounds
inhibit the growth of other plants, making it difficult to maintain
legumes in the mixtures. Tall fescue growth can be reduced by some
other species. Sericea lespedeza residues reduce tall fescue
germination, seedling growth, aboveground biomass, and nitrogen
concentration [38,39].
Tall fescue responds well to nitrogen fertilization [75], although
fertilization increases alkaloid production [27].
Tall fescue is used to convert tree and brush stands to grasslands in
the Ozarks [51]. Tall fescue sod interferes with hardwood seedling
growth through allelopathy and competition for water, nutrients, and
light [70]. In Illinois old fields tall fescue produced greater height
declines, dieback, and mortality among planted black walnut than
occurred in fields with tall fescue removed. The effect was seen in
stands with tree seedlings and in 17-year-old black walnut stands [50].
Tall fescue can be invasive in native vegetation. It is encroaching on
the Clymer Meadow Preserve, a native prairie in northeastern Texas.
Tall fescue typically spreads by establishing in wet or disturbed areas
along roads, in eroded patches, and in damp hollows. It grows through
the winter, shades out other plants, and begins spreading. It now
covers as much as 40 percent of the ground in test plots at Clymer
Meadow. Tall fescue has devastated many other prairie remnants in Texas
and to the north [11].
Tall fescue has good tolerance to grazing. Periodic close grazing will
induce regrowth and prolong the period of palatability [75]. In the
Pacific Northwest and Great Basin states, sheep graze tall fescue stands
in the wet winter months [29].
Tall fescue grows best in cooler seasons [77] and stays green into late
fall. It withstands high temperatures and maintains some production
during the summer but it does not produce good quality forage under
these conditions [61,77]. Tall fescue can be grazed earlier than
warm-season grass range, which lengthens grazing season and carrying
capacity [42].
The level of tall fescue endophyte infection tends to increase in a
field over time as infected plants outcompete uninfected plants.
Management for grazing can include favoring other species to dilute the
effect of the toxins on animals. The endophyte is concentrated in the
seedheads of tall fescue [5].
Tall fescue does not appear to be affected by atrazine [54]. However,
tall fescue can be effectively controlled with the herbicide fluazifop
[7].
Tall fescue can cause hayfever [16].
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Schedonorus arundinaceus
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
Tall fescue is a densely cespitose to short-rhizomatous [20,28,65],
cool-season [75], long-lived [65] perennial grass [77]. Culms are
hollow [30], erect [28], and 20 to 80 inches (50-200 cm) in height
[30,76]. Leaves form basal tufts [61]; blades are 2 to 28 inches (5-70
cm) long [28,48] and 0.1 to 0.5 inch (3-13 mm) wide [61,76]. A tuft
produces 10 to 30 flowerstalks [66]. The inflorescence is an open to
narrow branched panicle [28,66] 4 to 14 inches (10-35 cm) long [31,57].
Spikelets are three- to nine-flowered [31,75]. Lemmas are awnless to
short-awned. The fruit is a caryopsis [28]. Tall fescue roots are
tough and coarse; they normally penetrate to a depth of at least 60
inches (150 cm) in moist soils [65].
RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :
Hemicryptophyte
REGENERATION PROCESSES :
Tall fescue reproduces by seed and increases vegetatively [16]. It
spreads primarily by seed to form dense, solid stands. The seed is
often spread in animal manure [7]. Viable tall fescue seeds were found
in the seedbank on revegetated roadside embankments in northern Kentucky
[45].
Tall fescue spreads slowly by short rhizomes [20] and by tillering.
Tall fescue produces more tillers after a cold winter. Nitrogen
fertilization also increases tillering. If nutrition is adequate
cessation of tillering is caused by self-shading of tiller buds. Tall
fescue self-thins by this process. Cut tall fescue produces new tillers
from the root crown [63].
Tall fescue endophytic fungus is maternally transmitted to the seed.
The fungus can survive in stored seed for about a year. Infected tall
fescue seeds have more rapid germination rates in some environments than
do uninfected seeds, and infected seeds produce seedlings with greater
biomass that are more likely to survive. Infected plants have been
shown to be capable of higher seed production than uninfected plants
[5].
Tall fescue seeds germinate within 14 days after prechilling [75]. In a
germination test of tall fescue seeds, emergence was 93 percent in the
year grown. The same seed lot stored in cool, dry conditions for 19
years had 4.5 percent emergence [36]. In another study tall fescue
seeds had emergence of more than 80 percent at 54 to 75 degrees
Fahrenheit (12-24 deg C). Emergence was less than 35 percent at 37 to
43 degrees Fahrenheit (3-6 deg C). Although the number of days to first
emergence was increased and germination percentage decreased by low
temperatures, when temperatures were then raised the final emergence
percentage was 80 percent. Maximum emergence was from sowing depths of
0 to 1.2 inches (0-30 mm) and decreased with increasing sowing depth
[10].
Tall fescue requires one growing season to establish [9,65]. Because of
slow establishment tall fescue is sensitive to competition from other
plants during early development [9].
When tall fescue stands become sod-bound seed production declines [77].
SITE CHARACTERISTICS :
Tall fescue is cultivated for pasture, from which it often escapes [66].
It occurs in grazed woods [7], along roads, ditches [28], and railroad
tracks, in fallow and abandoned fields, [7,33], meadows [32], and
marshes [22]. It is a weed of cultivated areas [76] and is found in
moist, disturbed places [17,18,47,78].
Tall fescue is mesic in its moisture requirements. It is tolerant of
poor drainage, winter flooding, and fairly high water tables. It has
fair drought tolerance [75].
Tall fescue grows best on deep, fertile, silty to clayey loam soils but
with adequate moisture it is tolerant of most soil textures [75]. Tall
fescue seeds have low establishment in crusted soils; seedlings emerge
only through soft soil crusts. However, tall fescue seeds germinate
well and produce good forage on high saline-sodic soils as long as soils
are not crusted [25]. Although tall fescue responds well to high
fertility, it persists satisfactorily on infertile soils and in
difficult environments if not overgrazed [77]. Tall fescue is salt
tolerant and does well on heavy alkaline soils [61,76.77]. It grows at
a wide range of pH. In south-central Missouri tall fescue grows on silt
loam with pH 5.1 to 5.5 [15]. In western South Dakota it grows on
calcareous clay with pH 7.7 [37]. Tall fescue can withstand pH values
as low as 3.6 [56], but pH 4.5 is considered its lower growth limit
[73]. Best growth is obtained at pH 6.2 [56].
Tall fescue is adapted to a wide range of climatic conditions [65]. In
the northern and mountainous West, tall fescue produces good growth in
areas with over 18 inches (457 mm) mean annual precipitation; optimal
growth in the East occurs in areas with over 30 inches (762 mm) mean
annual precipitation. Tall fescue demonstrates good cold tolerance,
making fair winter growth in southern Missouri and and the mid-South
[75].
Tall fescue is reported at the following elevations:
Feet Meters
California <8,859 <2,700 [31]
Colorado 4,800-8,700 1,463-2,652 [16]
Oregon 443-1,657 135- 505 [64]
Utah 4,200-6,004 1,280-1,830 [16,76]
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS :
Tall fescue is a long-lived, aggressive perennial [7]. Tall fescue
competitive ability and persistence is increased by the allelopathic
compounds it produces [14]. It colonizes bare soil, and is a strong
competitor in many species mixtures [34,35]. Tall fescue can invade
open, natural communities and displace native species. It spreads
slowly vegetatively, but once the heavy clumps of tall fescue develop
they are difficult to eradicate [7].
Tall fescue grows best in open sunlight [7] but is somewhat suppressed
by shade [75]. Tall fescue grew within and adjacent to staghorn sumac
(Rhus typhina) colonies on revegetated roadside embankments in northern
Kentucky. Both areas were dominated by tall fescue, but inside the
colonies tall fescue was less prominent [45].
SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT :
Tall fescue grows best under relatively cool conditions [65]. However,
growth rate was found to decline as temperatures decreased from the
optimal alternate 12-hour day/night temperatures of 75/66 degrees
Fahrenheit (24/19 deg C) to 59/50 degrees Fahrenheit (15/10 deg C) [1].
In the South tall fescue grows in the spring, fall, and winter. At
higher latitudes it grows mostly in the spring and fall. Where summers
are hot, tall fescue remains green but growth slows or stops [29].
During the hot, dry Corn Belt summers, tall fescue is dormant [27]. At
high altitudes tall fescue grows in the summer [75]. Well established
tall fescue withstands low winter temperatures in most of the United
States [77].
Tall fescue flowering times are:
California May-June [48]
Colorado May-July [16]
Florida April-May [12]
Illinois May-August [47]
Montana July-August [16]
Wyoming May-July [16]
Great Plains May-October [28]
Tall fescue seeds ripen before leaves lose their moisture and green
color [77]. In the Great Plains tall fescue seeds mature in late summer
[4]. Seeds shatter as soon as they mature [59].
FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Schedonorus arundinaceus
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS :
Tall fescue probably sprouts from short rhizomes [28] after aerial
portions are burned. Tufts formed by the leaves [61] may protect basal
buds from fire damage. Tall fescue seeds have been found in the
seedbank [45]; tall fescue may regenerate from soil-stored seed.
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 :
Rhizomatous herb, rhizome in soil
Tussock graminoid
Ground residual colonizer (on-site, initial community)
FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Schedonorus arundinaceus
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT :
Tall fescue culms and leaves are probably killed by fire.
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT :
NO-ENTRY
PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE :
Tall fescue is fire tolerant in the dormant state [75].
In south-central Iowa tall fescue was burned to test the effectiveness
of spring fire in eliminating or suppressing cool-season grasses. Plots
were within livestock exclosures constructed in 1984. A baseline
inventory of plots was conducted in 1985; plot inventories were
conducted after treatments were completed in 1986, 1987, and 1988. Tall
fescue was burned in late March or early April. Some plots were
initially burned in 1986 and some in 1987. In 1988 the plots burned in
1986 were burned again. In 1986 tall fescue relative shoot frequency
increased significantly (p<.10) after fire in the same year; the
increase did not persist in subsequent years. Fire had no significant
effect on tall fescue in any other year [54].
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE :
NO-ENTRY
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Tall fescue is not usually decreased by burning when it is dormant [54,75].
FIRE CASE STUDY
SPECIES: Schedonorus arundinaceus
FIRE CASE STUDY CITATION :
Walsh, Roberta A., compiler. 1995. Tall fescue response to prescribed fire on the
Mark Twain National Forest, Missouri. In: Schedonorus arundinaceus.
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/scharu/all.html#FireCaseStudies [].
REFERENCE :
Probasco, George E.; Bjugstad, Ardell J. 1977. Tall fescue response to
fire. Res. Note NC-218. St. Paul, MN: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station. 3 p. [51].
SEASON/SEVERITY CLASSIFICATION :
late winter (February)/moderate
early spring (April)/moderate
mid-summer (August)/moderate
late fall (November)/moderate
STUDY LOCATION :
Prescribed fires were conducted on the Mark Twain Grazing Allotment on
the Ava Ranger District of the Mark Twain National Forest in Missouri.
PREFIRE VEGETATIVE COMMUNITY :
The prefire community was a uniform tall fescue (Schedonorus arundinaceus)
stand.
TARGET SPECIES PHENOLOGICAL STATE :
Tall fescue was dormant at the time of the February fire. It had just
broken dormancy at the time of the April fire. Tall fescue was not
growing at the time of the August fire. It was in the phase just before
initiation of dormancy at the time of the November fire.
SITE DESCRIPTION :
Not given
FIRE DESCRIPTION :
Plots on a uniform tall fescue stand were burned at four different
times; a no-burn control was associated with each burning treatment.
The control plot was mowed each time burning was done, so that burned
and unburned stands could be compared. The burning times were selected
to coincide with periods when both damage to tall fescue vegetation and
the time required for regrowth and return to grazing would be minimal.
Maximum fire temperatures were estimated by means of thermal sensors
placed 1 inch (2.5 cm) below soil surface, at soil surface, and 2 inches
(5 cm), 6 inches (15 cm), and 24 inches (61 cm) above soil surface. The
sensors set below the soil surface were unaffected by the fires. The
fires produced consistently higher maximum temperatures at the mid-range
height of 2 to 6 inches (5-15 cm) than at other vertical locations.
Maximum temperatures varied at the upper and lower heights; higher
temperatures occurred at lower heights early in the year and at upper
heights late in the year.
FIRE EFFECTS ON TARGET SPECIES :
Forage yields were measured on twenty 4.8 square foot (0.45 sq m)
quadrats on each plot during June and October of the year following
burning. There were no significant differences (p<.10) in forage yields
after burning among the four fire treatments considered individually.
However, when burning during the inactive (late winter and mid-summer)
periods was compared with burning during active growth (early spring and
late fall), there was a significant difference (p<.10). Burning during
dormant seasons produced yields similar to those on unburned plots.
Burning during active growth produced lower yields than burning on
dormant plots. Tall fescue seedstalk numbers were stimulated by the
mid-summer fire. Tall fescue forage yields and seedstalk production
following fire treatments were as follows:
Burning Season Pounds/Acre Seedstalks/Sq Foot
Late Winter 2,856a 20f
Early Spring 2,406a 8g
Mid-summer 3,312a 31h
Late Fall 2,651a 22f
No Burn 2,893a 16i
Active Growth 2,529b (early spring and late fall)
Inactive Period 3,083c (late winter and midsummer)
Note: Means followed by "a" were not significantly different at p<.05.
Means followed by "b" and "c" were significantly different at p<.10.
Means followed by "f" through "i" were significantly different at
p<.05 if the letters differ.
FIRE MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS :
After 1 year of study it appears that when burning only for tall fescue
stand maintenance, fire should be applied during a dormant or inactive
period, either late winter or mid-summer. To increase tall fescue seed
production, fire should be applied in mid-summer.
REFERENCES
SPECIES: Schedonorus arundinaceus
REFERENCES :
1. Aguirre, Lucrecia; Johnson, Douglas A. 1991. Influence of temperature
and cheatgrass competition on seedling development of two bunchgrasses.
Journal of Range Management. 44(4): 347-354. [15368]
2. Amme, David; Pitschel, Barbara M. 1990. Restoration and management of
California's grassland habitats. In: Hughes, H. Glenn; Bonnicksen,
Thomas M., eds. Restoration `89: the new management challenge:
Proceedings, 1st annual meeting of the Society for Ecological
Restoration; 1989 January 16-20; Oakland, CA. Madison, WI: The
University of Wisconsin Arboretum, Society for Ecological Restoration:
532-542. [14721]
3. Andersen, C. P.; Bussler, B. H.; Chaney, W. R.; [and others]. 1989.
Concurrent establishment of ground cover and hardwood trees on reclaimed
mined land and unmined reference sites. Forest Ecology and Management.
28: 81-99. [10920]
4. Atkins, M. D.; Smith, James E., Jr. 1967. Grass seed production and
harvest in the Great Plains. Farmers' Bulletin 2226. Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 30 p. [5535]
5. Ball, Donald M.; Pedersen, Jeffrey F.; Lacefield, Garry D. 1993. The
tall-fescue endophyte. American Scientist. 81: 370-379. [22506]
6. 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]
7. Burchick, Mark. 1993. The problems with tall fescue in ecological
restoration. Wetland Journal. 5(2): 16. [22049]
8. Burrows, George E.; Tyrl, Ronald J.; Rollins, Dale;. [and others].
[n.d.]. Toxic plants of Oklahoma and the Southern Plains. E-868.
Stillwater, OK: Oklahoma State University, Cooperative Extension
Service. 40 p. [4994]
9. Charles, Graham W.; Blair, Graeme J.; Andrews, Alan C. 1991. The effect
of sowing time, sowing technique and post-sowing weed competition on
tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea Schreb.) seedling establishment.
Australian Journal of Agricultural Research. 42(4): 1251-1259. [20982]
10. Charles, Graham W.; Blair, Graeme J.; Andrews, Alan C. 1991. The effect
of soil temperature, sowing depth and soil bulk density on the seedl.
emergence of tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea Schreb.) and white clover
(Trifolium repens L.). Australian Journal of Agricultural Research.
42(4): 1261-1269. [20981]
11. Cheater, Mark. 1992. Alien invasion. Nature Conservancy. 42(5): 24-29.
[19483]
12. Clewell, Andre F. 1985. Guide to the vascular plants of the Florida
Panhandle. Tallahassee, FL: Florida State University Press. 605 p.
[13124]
13. Cornelius, Donald R.; Talbot, M. W. 1955. Rangeland improvement through
seeding and weed control on east slope Sierra Nevada and on southern
Cascade Mountains. Agric. Handb. 88. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service. 51 p. [7510]
14. Creek, Robert; Wade, Gary L. 1985. Excretion of phenolic compounds from
the roots of Festuca arundinacea, Eragrostis curvula, and Lespedeza
striata. Transactions, Kentucky Academy of Science. 46(1-2): 51-55.
[24996]
15. Defelice, Michael S. 1991. Buckbrush (Symphoricarpos orbiculatus)
control in tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea) pastures. Weed Technology.
5(4): 841-844. [18197]
16. 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]
17. Dorn, Robert D. 1984. Vascular plants of Montana. Cheyenne, WY: Mountain
West Publishing. 276 p. [819]
18. Dorn, Robert D. 1988. Vascular plants of Wyoming. Cheyenne, WY: Mountain
West Publishing. 340 p. [6129]
19. Ehley, Alan M. 1990. Program encourages use of prairie species on
roadsides. Restoration & Management Notes. 8(2): 101-102. [14156]
20. Ensign, R. D. 1985. Phalaris, orchardgrass, fescue, and selected minor
grasses: Part II: The fescues - perennial western rangeland grasses. 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: 25-28. [868]
21. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and
Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
22. Fiedler, Peggy Lee; Leidy, Robert A. 1987. Plant communities of Ring
Mountain Preserve, Marin County, California. Madrono. 34(3): 173-192.
[4068]
23. Fleming, A. L.; Schwartz, J. W.; Foy, C. D. 1974. Chemical factors
controlling the adaptation of weeping lovegrass and tall fescue to acid
mine spoils. Agronomy Journal. 66(6): 715-719. [25068]
24. Flood, R. G.; Halloran, G. M. 1982. Flowering behaviour of four annual
grass species in relation to temperature and photoperiod. Annals of
Botany. 49(4): 469-475. [22393]
25. Frelich, James R.; Jensen, E. H.; Gifford, R. O. 1973. Effect of crust
rigidity and osmotic potential on emergence of six grass species.
Agronomy Journal. 65: 26-29. [3705]
26. 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]
27. Gates, G. A. 1982. Warm-season grasses for livestock and wildlife.
Missouri Conservation. 43(1): 8-13. [5813]
28. Great Plains Flora Association. 1986. Flora of the Great Plains.
Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. 1392 p. [1603]
29. 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]
30. 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]
31. Hickman, James C., ed. 1993. The Jepson manual: Higher plants of
California. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1400 p.
[21992]
32. Hitchcock, A. S. 1951. Manual of the grasses of the United States. Misc.
Publ. No. 200. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Agricultural Research Administration. 1051 p. [2nd edition revised by
Agnes Chase in two volumes. New York: Dover Publications, Inc.]. [1165]
33. Hitchcock, C. Leo; Cronquist, Arthur. 1973. Flora of the Pacific
Northwest. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press. 730 p. [1168]
34. Hughes, H. Glenn. 1989. Use of native shrubs on strip-mined lands in the
humid East. In: Wallace, Arthur; McArthur, E. Durant; Haferkamp,
Marshall R., compilers. Proceedings--symposium on shrub ecophysiology
and biotechnology; 1987 June 30 - July 2; Logan, UT. Gen. Tech. Rep.
INT-256. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Intermountain Research Station: 70-73. [5925]
35. Hughes, H. Glenn. 1990. Ecological restoration: fact or fantasy on
strip-mined lands in western Pennsylvania?. In: Hughes, H. Glenn;
Bonnicksen, Thomas M., eds. Restoration '89: the new management
challenge: Proceedings, 1st annual meeting of the Society for Ecological
Restoration; 1989 January 16-20; Oakland, CA. Madison, WI: The
University of Wisconsin Arboretum, Society for Ecological Restoration:
237-243. [14699]
36. Hull, A. C., Jr. 1973. Germination of range plant seeds after long
periods of uncontrolled storage. Journal of Range Management. 26(3):
198-200. [18728]
37. Johnson, James R.; Nichols, James T. 1969. Crude protein content of
eleven grasses as affected by yearly variation, legume association, and
fertilization. Agronomy Journal. 61: 65-68. [128]
38. Kalburtji, K. L.; Mosjidis, J. A. 1993. Effects of Sericea lespedeza
residues on cool-season grasses. Journal of Range Management. 46(4):
315-319. [21737]
39. Kalburtji, K. L.; Mosjidis, J. A. 1993. Effects of Sericea lespedeza
root exudates on some perennial grasses. Journal of Range Management.
46(4): 312-315. [21738]
40. Kartesz, John T. 1994. A synonymized checklist of the vascular flora of
the United States, Canada, and Greenland. Volume II--thesaurus. 2nd ed.
Portland, OR: Timber Press. 816 p. [23878]
41. 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]
42. Launchbaugh, John L.; Owensby, Clenton E. 1978. Kansas rangelands: Their
management based on a half century of research. Bull. 622. Hays, KS:
Kansas State University, Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station. 56 p.
[9477]
43. Leininger, Wayne C. 1988. Non-chemical alternatives for managing
selected plant species in the western United States. XCM-118. Fort
Collins, CO: Colorado State University, Cooperative Extension. In
cooperation with: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife
Service. 47 p. [13038]
44. Love, R. Merton; Jones, Burle J. 1952. Improving California brush
ranges. Circular 371. Berkeley, CA: Univeristy of California,
Agriculture Experiment Station. 13 p. [16664]
45. Luken, J. O.; Thieret, John W. 1987. Sumac-directed patch succession on
northern Kentucky roadside embankments. Transactions of the Kentucky
Academy of Science. 48(3-4): 51-54. [22088]
46. Merrill, Evelyn H. 1994. Summer foraging ecology of wapiti (Cervus
elaphus roosevelti) in the Mount St. Helens blast zone. Canadian Journal
of Zoology. 72(2): 303-311. [23945]
47. Mohlenbrock, Robert H. 1986. (Revised edition). Guide to the vascular
flora of Illinois. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
507 p. [17383]
48. Munz, Philip A. 1973. A California flora and supplement. Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press. 1905 p. [6155]
49. Peters, E. J.; Lowance, S. A. 1974. Fertility and management treatments
to control broomsedge in pastures. Weed Science. 22(3): 201-205.
[17418]
50. Ponder, Felix, Jr. 1988. Weed control and autumn-olive affect early
growth and survival of black walnut in a hardwood clearcut. New Forests.
2: 195-201. [21595]
51. Probasco, George E.; Bjugstad, Ardell J. 1977. Tall fescue response to
fire. Res. Note NC-218. St. Paul, MN: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station. 3 p. [1916]
52. Probasco, G. E.; Bjugstad, A. J. 1978. Nutrition and in vitro
digestibility of tall fescue for white-tailed deer, May through
November. Res. Note NC-228. St. Paul, MN: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station. 3
p. [13476]
53. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant
geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
54. Rosburg, Thomas R.; Glenn-Lewin, David C. 1992. Effects of fire and
atrazine on pasture and remnant prairie plant species in southern Iowa.
In: Smith, Daryl D.; Jacobs, Carol A., eds. Recapturing a vanishing
heritage: Proceedings, 12th North American prairie conference; 1990
August 5-9; Cedar Falls, IA. Cedar Falls, IA: University of Northern
Iowa: 107-112. [24724]
55. Rodgers, Cassandra S.; Anderson, Roger C. 1989. Establishment of grasses
on sewage sludge-amended strip mine spoils. In: Bragg, Thomas B.;
Stubbendieck, James, eds. Prairie pioneers: ecology, history and
culture: Proceedings, 11th North American prairie conference; 1988
August 7-11; Lincoln, NE. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska: 103-107.
[14027]
56. Rosiere, R. E.; Engle. D. M.; Cadle, J. M. 1989. Revegetation of tripoli
quarries in the Ozark Highlands of Oklahoma. Landscape and Urban
Planning. 17: 175-188. [9820]
57. 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]
58. 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]
59. 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]
60. Sharp Bros. Seed Co. 1989. Grasses and forbs for erosion control. Fact
Sheet. Amarillo, TX: Sharp Bros. Seed Co. 2 p. [18015]
61. Shaw, A. F.; Cooper, C. S. 1973. The Interagency forage, conservation
and wildlife handbook. Bozeman, MT: Montana State University, Extension
Service. 205 p. [5666]
62. Shiflet, Thomas N., ed. 1994. Rangeland cover types of the United
States. Denver, CO: Society for Range Management. 152 p. [23362]
63. Simon, J. C.; Lemaire, G. 1987. Tillering and leaf area index in grasses
in the vegetative phase. Grass and Forage Science. 42: 373-380. [11087]
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. Smoliak, S.; Penney, D.; Harper, A. M.; Horricks, J. S. 1981. Alberta
forage manual. Edmonton, AB: Alberta Agriculture, Print Media Branch. 87
p. [19538]
66. Stephens, H. A. 1980. Poisonous plants of the central United States.
Lawrence, KS: The Regents Press of Kansas. 165 p. [3803]
67. 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]
68. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1994. Plants
of the U.S.--alphabetical listing. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 954 p. [23104]
69. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Biological Survey. [n.d.]. NP
Flora [Data base]. Davis, CA: U.S. Department of the Interior, National
Biological Survey. [23119]
70. Van Sambeek, J. W.; Rink, George. 1990. Competitive and allelopathic
components of grass sod interference on white oak seedling growth. In:
Van Sambeek, J. W.; Larson, M. M., eds. Proceedings, 4th workshop on
seedling physiology and growth problems in oak plantings; 1989 March
1-2; Columbus, OH. (Abstracts). Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-139. St. Paul, MN:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Forest
Experiment Station: 8. Abstract. [13135]
71. Van Sambeek, J. W.; Schlesinger, Richard C.; Roth, Paul L.; Bocoum,
Ibrahima. 1989. Revitalizing slow-growth black walnut plantings. In:
Rink, George; Budelsky, Carl A., eds. Proceedings, 7th central hardwood
conference; 1989 March 5-8; Carbondale, IL. Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-132. St.
Paul, MN: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central
Forest Experiment Station: 108-114. [9374]
72. Vogel, Willis G. 1973. The effect of herbaceous vegetation on survival
and growth of trees planted on coal-mine spoils. In: Research and
applied technology symposium on mined-land reclamation: Proceedings;
[Date of conference unknown]; [Location of conference unknown].
Monroeville, PA: Bituminous Coal Research, Inc.: 197-207. [21268]
73. Vogel, Willis G. 1981. A guide for revegetating coal minesoils in the
eastern United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-68. Broomall, PA: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest
Experiment Station. 190 p. [15575]
74. Wade, G. L. 1989. Grass competition and establishment of native species
from forest soil seed banks. Landscape and Urban Planning. 17: 135-149.
[6745]
75. Wasser, Clinton H. 1982. Ecology and culture of selected species useful
in revegetating disturbed lands in the West. FWS/OBS-82/56. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Office
of Biological Services, Western Energy and Land Use Team. 347 p.
Available from NTIS, Springfield, VA 22161; PB-83-167023. [2458]
76. 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]
77. Wheeler, W. A.; Hill, D. D. 1957. Grassland seeds. Princeton, NJ: D. Van
Nostrand Company, Inc. 628 p. [18902]
78. Wunderlin, Richard P. 1982. Guide to the vascular plants of central
Florida. Tampa, FL: University Presses of Florida, University of South
Florida. 472 p. [13125]
79. Hickman, James C., ed. 1993. The Jepson manual: Higher plants of California.
Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1400 p. [21992]
80. Kartesz, John T.; Meacham, Christopher A. 1999. Synthesis of the North American
flora (Windows Version 1.0), [CD-ROM]. Available: North Carolina Botanical
Garden. In cooperation with the Nature Conservancy, Natural Resources
Conservation Service, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [2001, January 16].
[38380]
81. Barkworth, Mary E.; Capels, Kathleen M.; Long, Sandy; Anderton, Laurel K.; Piep,
Michael B., eds. 2007. Flora of North America north of Mexico. Volume 24:
Magnoliophyta: Commelinidae (in part): Poaceae, part 1. New York: Oxford
University Press. 911 p. [68092]
FEIS Home Page
