Index of Species Information
SPECIES: Lycium andersonii
|
|
 |
| Anderson wolfberry in Inyo County, CA. Image ©2010 Jean Pawek. |
Introductory
SPECIES: Lycium andersonii
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION:
Tesky, Julie L. 1992. Lycium andersonii. 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/shrub/lycand/all.html [].
Revisions:
On 2 August 2018 images were added.
ABBREVIATION:
LYCAND
SYNONYMS:
Lycium andersonii forma deserticola C.L. Hitchcock [12,16]
NRCS PLANT CODE:
LYAN
COMMON NAMES:
Anderson wolfberry
Anderson desert thorn
Anderson lycium
Anderson's thornbush
water jacket
TAXONOMY:
The scientific name of Anderson wolfberry is Lycium andersonii
Gray [12,16,30]. Recognized varieties are as follows:
Lycium andersonii var. andersonii A. Gray,
Lycium andersonii var. deserticola C.L. Hitchcock (C.L. Hitchcock) ex Munz,
Lycium andersonii var. wrightii A. Gray [12,16].
LIFE FORM:
Shrub
FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS:
No special status
OTHER STATUS:
NO-ENTRY
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Lycium andersonii
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION:
Anderson wolfberry grows in southern and eastern Nevada, southeastern
California, the southern half of Arizona and into northern Arizona,
along the Colorado River, and northward into Utah on the Colorado
Plateau [12,16,30] . This species also occurs in New Mexico and
northwestern Mexico [12].
 |
| Distribution of Anderson wolfberry in the United States. Map courtesy of USDA, NRCS. 2018. The PLANTS Database.
National Plant Data Team, Greensboro, NC [2018, August 2] [30]. |
ECOSYSTEMS:
FRES29 Sagebrush
FRES30 Desert shrub
FRES34 Chaparral - mountain shrub
FRES35 Pinyon - juniper
STATES:
AZ CA CO NV NM UT MEXICO
BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS:
3 Southern Pacific Border
6 Upper Basin and Range
7 Lower Basin and Range
11 Southern Rocky Mountains
12 Colorado Plateau
KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS:
KO23 Juniper - pinyon woodland
KO35 Coastal sagebrush
KO38 Great Basin sagebrush
K041 Creosotebush
K043 Paloverde - cactus shrub
SAF COVER TYPES:
68 Mesquite
239 Pinyon - juniper
242 Mesquite
SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES:
NO-ENTRY
HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES:
Anderson wolfberry occurs in some desert shrub and woodland community
types but seldom attains dominance. Anderson wolfberry codominates
the Larrea-Lycium andersonii-Grayia association tha occurs
in the Mojave Desert of Nevada.
The publication listing Anderson wolfberry as an indicator or dominant
species is as follows:
Area Classification Authority
NV, Mojave Desert Veg. (pas) Beatley 1969
MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
SPECIES: Lycium andersonii
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE:
Anderson wolfberry is sometimes used as forage by livestock and feral
burros [9,12]. In the lower Colorado River Valley, Arizona, this shrub
can provide an important source of phosphorous and B-carotene for feral
burros in late summer and fall when other more preferred species were
unavailable [9].
The red berries are eaten by some birds and mammals [8,16]. Berries of
this plant constituted 2 percent of the diet of chukar partridges living
on the eastern desert ranges of California. In some areas of southern
Nevada, the fleshy leaves and juicy berries provide part of the
succulence permitting Gambel quail to occupy desert areas devoid of
drinking water. Ord kangaroo rats are also known to eat these berries
[8]. Black-chinned hummingbirds are attracted to Anderson wolfberry's
pollen [30].
PALATABILITY:
Palatability of Anderson wolfberry browse is presumably fair to low.
This species is used as forage only when more desirable species are
unavailable [8,9]. The fruit, however, appears to be moderately
palatable.
NUTRITIONAL VALUE:
Nutrient values were examined in detail in a Great Basin study at
Mercury Valley, Nye County, Nevada [23]. Selected values are as
follows:
Percent dry weight
N P Na K Ca Mg Si
shoot - .10 .010 2.12 2.65 .24 .04
leaf 3.26 .12 .013 5.58 11.64 1.44 .05
ppm dry weight (micrograms)
Zn Cu Fe Mn B Sr
shoot 9 3 90 5 12 77
leaf 41 4 162 33 65 648
In the lower Colorado River Valley, Arizona, researchers found that the
gross energy for Anderson wolfberry was lowest in January and February,
but stayed between 4.0 and 5.0 kcal/g all year. Crude protein was
highest in the spring at approximately 0.075 percent and decreased
through summer, fall, and early winter to approximately 0.05 percent
[9]. Phosphorus levels generally decreased in the summer and fall and
were highest in the spring. B-carotene levels were greatest in the late
winter when growth was active [9].
COVER VALUE:
In desert washes Anderson wolfberry grows in dense thorny thickets which
provide good cover for quail and other small wildlife [7,8]. In
southern Arizona, Anderson wolfberry provides resting and feeding cover
for masked bobwhite quail [7]. Anderson wolfberry provides midday shade and is
open around the base to allow easy escape from predators [7].
VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES:
No specific information is available on Anderson wolfberry's value for
rehabilitating disturbed sites. Lycium spp., however, have been used to
rehabilitate abandoned desert farmlands in the Sonoran desert lowlands,
disturbed sites in Red Rock, Arizona, and disturbed lands in the Mojave
Desert [11,22]. In the Sonoran Desert lowlands and in Red Rock,
Arizona, sites were restored by establishing berms on the contour, and
then seeding with wolfberry (Lycium spp.) and other desert shrubs [11].
Desert shrub transplants should be protected from grazing animals to
ensure establishment and survival [22]. In addition, summer annuals
(Salsola spp.) must be removed from around the transplanted shrubs to
reduce competition for water, and some of the nutrient resource must be
returned to the soil [22].
OTHER USES AND VALUES:
Native Americans used the fleshy berries of Anderson wolfberry either
fresh or boiled and then dried them for later use [17]. This shrub is
also used as an ornamental valued chiefly for its showy red berries
[24].
OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS:
NO-ENTRY
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Lycium andersonii
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS:
Anderson wolfberry is a native desert shrub [28]. It is spiny, rounded,
and much branched, obtaining a height of 1 to 9 feet (0.30-2.7 m)
[12,16,17,18,25,30,33]. Twigs are light barked [25]; spines are
numerous and slender, 0.20 to 0.80 inch (5-20 mm) long [25,30,33];
leaves are flattened, but thick and fleshy, 0.09 to 0.66 inch (3-17 mm)
long [16,17,30,33]. This species is drought deciduous, meaning it loses
foliage in response to low moisture availability [31].
 |
| Anderson wolfberry in San Bernardino, CA, showing fruit, leaves, and spines. Image © Neal Kramer. |
Anderson wolfberry roots are tough and fibrous [29]. The root system
is relatively extensive in comparison with aerial portions [29,31],
often extending 25 to 30 feet (7.6-9.1 m) from the plant [29].
RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM:
Phanerophyte
REGENERATION PROCESSES:
Flowers and Fruits: The perfect flowers of Anderson wolfberry are
pollinated by birds such as black-chinned hummingbirds. The fleshy red
berries of this plant contain many seeds [19,24]. After ingestion,
seeds are disseminated by small mammals and birds in droppings [19,24].
Seed germination: Seeds generally germinate late in the year following
summer rains. In a Nevada test site study, a large number of Anderson wolfberry
seeds germinated in the late summer of 1967 and early spring
1968 presumably as a result of 1967 summer rains [31]. By germinating
late in the year, the seedlings have the advantage of both winter and
spring rains [31].
Vegetative reproduction: Root sprouting is another form of regeneration
[31,32]. Adventitious shoots form readily on broken roots [31]. Shoots
will actually form on uninjured roots that have been exposed to the air
[31].
SITE CHARACTERISTICS:
Anderson wolfberry commonly grows on sandy or gravelly washes, sandy or
alkali flats, mesas and slopes generally from 1,500 to 6,000 feet
(457-1,829 m) in elevation [16,30]. This species exhibits some degree
of facultative adaptation for salt tolerance and has been known to occur
on poorly drained soils with high alkalinity and/or salinity [10,23].
Anderson wolfberry also occurs on highly calcareous, well-developed
desert pavement with a strongly cemented caliche layer [23]. Soil pH of
some sites where this species occurs ranges from 8.0 to 8.3 [21].
Growth of Anderson wolfberry appears to be independent of soil
temperature but not of soil pH [33]. When cuttings were grown for 90
days in loam soil, acidification of the soil resulted in decreased dry
weight and calcium carbonate [33].
Anderson wolfberry is commonly found associated with the following
species: creosotebush (Larrea tridentata), foothill "yellow" paloverde
(Cercidium microphyllum), white bursage (Ambrosia dumosa), smoke tree
(Dalea spinosa), rough ephedra (Ephedra nevadensis), hop-sage (Grayia
spinosa), pale desert-thorn (Lycium pallidum), blackbrush (Coleogyne
ramosissima), burrobush (Hymenoclea monogyra), Joshua tree (Yucca
brevifolia) [5,10,14,28,33].
Some of these species form discrete clumps of vegetation separated by
bare areas of desert pavement. Size and spacing is irregular, and as
many as 10 different species may aggregate with interlocking foliage
[33].
Anderson wolfberry typically occurs on hot, dry sites. It often occurs
in areas with only 5 to 6.5 inches (128-162 mm) annual precipitation
[1].
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS:
Anderson wolfberry is a slow-growing shrub which appears to be a
stress-tolerant competitor and is therefore found in many older seral
communities. This species eventually dominates over other colonizing
species but gradually gives way to the stress tolerators of the climax
communities [34].
SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT:
Seasonal development of Anderson wolfberry varies with seasonal climatic
conditions [26,33]. In the western United States, flowering starts in
April to June, in the southwestern United States in January to May, and
in California flowering occurs from November to April [26]. Studies in
the Lower Colorado River Valley, Nevada, showed that leaf development
occurs in late February to March followed by flowering in mid-March to
April and fruiting in April and May [9].
The plant generally becomes dormant in late May through January
depending on the amount of available moisture [9,29]. Leaf fall was
found to coincide with high temperatures and depletion of soil moisture
[33]. A study in the Rock Valley, Nevada, found that high winter
temperatures delayed leafing [29]. New leaves normally occur on
established stems even in dry years, but new shoots generally are
produced only in relatively moist growing seasons [33].
FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Lycium andersonii
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS:
Many long-lived desert perennials are poorly adapted to fire [4] and
Anderson wolfberry is no exception. Adaptations to fire are present but
are not strongly developed [25]. This shrub does have the ability to
sprout from the root crown after disturbance [33,34], but it may take
many years for it to reach preburn densities on a burned site [4,25].
Seedling establishment of Lycium spp. was observed following a fire on a
Sonoran Desert site; these seedlings resulted from seeds surviving fire
in the soil, surviving on burned plants, or dispersed from resistant
plants within the burn, or from unburned areas [25].
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:
survivor species; on-site surviving root crown or caudex
off-site colonizer; seed carried by animals or water; postfire yr 1&2
secondary colonizer; off-site seed carried to site after year 2
FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Lycium andersonii
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT:
Fire typically destroys aboveground parts of Anderson wolfberry, but the
degree of damage to the plant depends on fire severity. Following a
high-severity fire in a creosotebush community, most plants were reduced
to ash and mortality was almost inevitable [4]. Following moderate
severity fires, however, intermittent sprouting occurred [4].
Lycium species were sampled following two June Sonoran Desert fires
[25]. No information of the fire's severity or intensity was provided.
Results are as follows [25]:
Burned plots and transects*
N RS %Kill %Consumption
-----------------------------------------
Deadman wash site: 9 0 50 10
Saguaro site: 33 9 100 51
* N=Number of plants RS=number of plants sprouting %Kill=Mean value of
proportion of photosynthetic surface scorched or consumed by fire.
%Consumption= Mean reduction of total biomass.
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT:
NO-ENTRY
PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE:
Anderson wolfberry sprouts from the root crown or roots after
disturbance, and will presumably do so after fire [33,34].
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE:
The Research Project Summary Nonnative annual grass fuels and fire in
California's Mojave Desert provides information on prescribed fire and
postfire response of plant community species, including Anderson wolfberry,
that was not available when this species review was written.
The Research Project Summary Ibarra-F and others 1996 provides
information on mortality of Anderson wolfberry after prescribed fires
in buffelgrass (Pennisetum ciliare) pastures in Sonora, Mexico.
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS:
In some desert communities, such as creosotebush, where Anderson wolfberry occurs, fires tend to be infrequent due to limited fuel, wide
spacing between shrubs, and sparse ground cover [4]. Many desert
perennials are poorly adapted to burning. Recurrent fires appear to
select for short-lived desert shrubs at the expense of long-lived
species [4] such as Anderson wolfberry. Postdisturbance recolonization
by long-lived species is very slow initially and may require hundreds of
years [4,25]. A conservative approach toward desert fire management is
recommended [25].
REFERENCES
SPECIES: Lycium andersonii
REFERENCES:
1. Barbour, M. G.; MacMahon, J. A.; Bamberg, S. A.; Ludwig, J. A. 1977. The
structure and distribution of Larrea communities. In: Mabry, T. J.;
Hunziker, J. H.; DiFeo, D. R., Jr., eds. Creosote bush: Biology and
chemistry of Larrea in New World deserts. U.S./IBP Synthesis Series 6.
Stroudsburg, PA: Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, Inc.: 227-251. [7172]
2. Beatley, Janice C. 1966. Ecological status of introduced brome grasses
(Bromus spp.) in desert vegetation of southern Nevada. Ecology. 47(4):
548-554. [409]
3. 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]
4. Brown, David E.; Minnich, Richard A. 1986. Fire and changes in creosote
bush scrub of the western Sonoran Desert, California. American Midland
Naturalist. 116(2): 411-422. [537]
5. Burk, Jack H. 1977. Sonoran Desert. In: Barbour, M. G.; Major, J., eds.
Terrestrial vegetation of California. New York: John Wiley and Sons:
869-899. [3731]
6. 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]
7. Goodwin, John G., Jr.; Hungerford, C. Roger. 1977. Habitat use by native
Gambel's and scaled quail and released masked bobwhite quail in southern
Arizona. Res. Pap. RM-197. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment
Station. 8 p. [14970]
8. Gullion, Gordon W. 1964. Wildlife uses of Nevada plants. Contributions
toward a flora of Nevada No. 49. Beltsville, MD: U. S. Department of
Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, National Arboretum Crops
Research Division. 170 p. [6729]
9. Hanley, Thomas A.; Brady, Ward W. 1977. Seasonal fluctuations in
nutrient content of feral burro forages, lower Colorado River Valley,
Arizona. Journal of Range Management. 30(5): 370-375. [4336]
10. Holland, Robert F. 1986. Preliminary descriptions of the terrestrial
natural communities of California. Sacramento, CA: California Department
of Fish and Game. 156 p. [12756]
11. Jackson, Laura L. 1991. Recovery of abandoned arid farmland: Highlights
Desert Restoration Task Force meeting. Restoration & Management Notes.
9(1): 59-60. [16570]
12. Kearney, Thomas H.; Peebles, Robert H.; Howell, John Thomas; McClintock,
Elizabeth. 1960. Arizona flora. 2d ed. Berkeley, CA: University of
California Press. 1085 p. [6563]
13. 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]
14. Latting, June, ed. 1976. Symposium proceedings--plant communities of
southern California. Special Publication No. 2. Berkeley, CA: California
Native Plant Society. 164 p. [1414]
15. 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]
16. MacMahon, James A. 1983. Nothing succeeds like succession: ecology and
the human lot. 67th Faculty Honor Lecture, Utah State University, Logan
Utah. Utah State University Press. 31 p. [7916]
17. Mozingo, Hugh N. 1987. Shrubs of the Great Basin: A natural history.
Reno, NV: University of Nevada Press. 342 p. [1702]
18. Munz, Philip A. 1974. A flora of southern California. Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press. 1086 p. [4924]
19. Pendleton, Rosemary L.; Pendleton, Burton K.; Harper, Kimball T. 1989.
Breeding systems of woody plant species in Utah. 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: 5-22. [5918]
20. 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]
21. Romney, E. M.; Wallace, A.; Kaaz, H.; Hale, V. Q. 1980. The role of
shrubs on redistribution of mineral nutrients in soil in the Mojave
Desert. Great Basin Naturalist Memoirs. 0(4): 124-133. [4248]
22. Romney, E. M.; Hunter, R. B.; Wallace, A. 1990. Field trip report:
natural and managed recovery of vegetation on disturbed areas at the
Nevada Test Site. In: McArthur, E. Durant; Romney, Evan M.; Smith,
Stanley D.; Tueller, Paul T., compilers. Proceedings--symposium on
cheatgrass invasion, shrub die-off, and other aspects of shrub biology
and management; 1989 April 5-7; Las Vegas, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-276.
Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain
Research Station: 344-349. [12870]
25. Thomas, Renee L.; Anderson, Roger C. 1993. Influence of topography on
stand composition in a midwestern ravine forest. American Midland
Naturalist. 130(1): 1-12. [1742]
26. Rudolf, Paul O. 1974. Lycium L. wolfberry. In: Schopmeyer, C. S., ed.
Seeds of woody plants in the United States. Agriculture Handbook No.
450. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service:
522-524. [7699]
27. Shreve, Forrest; Wiggins, Ira L. 1964. Vegetation and flora of the
Sonoran Desert. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. 1575 p. [4595]
28. Vines, Robert A. 1960. Trees, shrubs, and woody vines of the Southwest.
Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. 1104 p. [7707]
29. Turner, Frederick B.; Randall, David C. 1987. The phenology of desert
shrubs in southern Nevada. Journal of Arid Environments. 13: 119-128.
[2764]
30. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2018.
PLANTS Database, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources
Conservation Service (Producer). Available: https://plants.usda.gov/. [34262]
31. Van Dersal, William R. 1938. Native woody plants of the United States,
their erosion-control and wildlife values. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Agriculture. 362 p. [4240]
32. Vines, Robert A. 1960. Trees, shrubs, and woody vines of the Southwest.
Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. 1104 p. [7707]
33. Wallace, A.; Romney, E. M. 1972. Radioecology and ecophysiology of
desert plants at the Nevada Test Site. Rep. TID-25954. [Washington, DC]:
U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Office of Information Services. 439 p.
[15000]
34. Webb, Robert H.; Steiger, John W.; Newman, Evelyn B. 1988. The response
of vegetation to disturbance in Death Valley National Monument,
California. U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1793. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey. 69 p. [8915]
35. 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]
FEIS Home Page
https://www.fs.usda.gov/database/feis/plants/shrub/lycand/all.html
