Index of Species Information
SPECIES: Quercus shumardii
Introductory
SPECIES: Quercus shumardii
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION :
Sullivan, Janet. 1993. Quercus shumardii. 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/tree/queshu/all.html [].
Revisions : Infrataxa and [52] citation added on 17 Jult 2014.
ABBREVIATION :
QUESHU
SYNONYMS :
None
SCS PLANT CODE :
QUSH
COMMON NAMES :
Shumard oak
Shumard's red oak
Shumard red oak
TAXONOMY :
The currently accepted scientific name for Shumard oak is Quercus
shumardii Buckl. (Fagaceae). It is a member of the red oak group (subgenus
Erythrobalanus) [11,25,38,52]. Varieites include [52]:
Quercus shumardii Buckley var. schneckii (Britton) Sarg., Schneck oak
Quercus shumardii Buckley var. shumardii, Shumard oak
Quercus shumardii Buckley var. stenocarpa Laughlin, Shumard oak
Shumard oak forms hybrids with at least nine other species of oaks [11,25,45]. It
is most closely related to blackjack oak (Q. marilandica) and black oak
(Q. velutina), as determined by electrophoresis [17].
LIFE FORM :
Tree
FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS :
See OTHER STATUS
OTHER STATUS :
Information on state- and province-level protection status of plants in the
United States and Canada is available at NatureServe.
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Quercus shumardii
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION :
Shumard oak occurs on the Atlantic Coastal Plain from North Carolina
south to northern Florida; west to central Texas; north to central
Oklahoma, eastern Kansas, Missouri, southern Illinois, western and
southern Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee. It occurs locally north to
southern Michigan, and southern Pennsylvania [9,11,25]. Specimens have
been collected from extreme southwestern Ontario and the eastern Niagara
peninsula [38].
The status of Shumard oak in Maryland is uncertain. It has been
reported in Maryland by reliable sources [9], but specimens were not
located by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Fish and Wildlife Service
survey [47].
ECOSYSTEMS :
FRES12 Longleaf - slash pine
FRES13 Loblolly - shortleaf pine
FRES14 Oak - pine
FRES15 Oak - hickory
FRES16 Oak - gum - cypress
FRES17 Elm - ash - cottonwood
FRES18 Maple - beech - birch
FRES32 Texas savanna
FRES39 Prairie
STATES :
AL AR FL GA IL IN KY KS LA MD
MI MS MO NC OH OK PA SC TN TX
VA WV ON
BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :
14 Great Plains
KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :
K084 Cross Timbers
K086 Juniper - oak savanna
K099 Maple - basswood forest
K100 Oak - hickory forest
K101 Elm - ash forest
K111 Oak - hickory - pine forest
K112 Southern mixed forest
K113 Southern floodplain forest
SAF COVER TYPES :
26 Sugar maple - basswood
40 Post oak - blackjack oak
52 White oak - black oak - northern red oak
53 White oak
62 Silver maple - American elm
66 Ashe juniper - redberry (Pinchot) juniper
67 Shin (Mohrs) oak
75 Shortleaf pine
76 Shortleaf pine - oak
80 Loblolly pine - shortleaf pine
81 Loblolly pine
82 Loblolly pine - hardwood
91 Swamp chestnut oak - cherrybark oak
93 Sugarberry - American elm - green ash
94 Sycamore - sweetgum - American elm
SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES :
NO-ENTRY
HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES :
Shumard oak is usually widely spaced and never occurs in pure stands
[33]. It occurs with the more prominent southern oaks included in the
oak-hickory forest region described by Braun [46].
Common tree associates not previously mentioned include white ash
(Fraxinus americana), shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), shellbark hickory
(C. laciniosa), mockernut hickory (C. tomentosa), bitternut hickory (C.
cordiformis), water hickory (C. aquatica), Delta post oak (Quercus
stellata var. paludosa), willow oak (Q. phellos), water oak (Q. nigra),
southern red oak (Q. falcata var. falcata), blackgum (Nyssa sylvatica),
winged elm (Ulmus alata), magnolia (Magnolia grandiflora), yellow-poplar
(Liriodendron tulipifera), American beech (Fagus grandiflora), and
spruce pine (Pinus glabra) [11].
MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
SPECIES: Quercus shumardii
WOOD PRODUCTS VALUE :
Shumard oak wood is close-grained, hard, strong, and heavy [45]. This
wood is superior to that of other red oaks; it is marketed as "red oak",
and is not distinguished commercially from red oak species. The wood is
used for veneer, cabinets, furniture, flooring, interior trim, and
lumber [11,45].
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE :
In Texas, Shumard oak is preferred browse for white-tailed deer in Ashe
juniper (Juniperus ashei) woodlands [3].
Shumard oak acorns are excellent food for wildlife; they are consumed by
songbirds, wild turkeys, waterfowl, white-tailed deer, and various
species of squirrels [11].
PALATABILITY :
Shumard oak acorns were intermediate in palatability to fox squirrels
when compared with those of eight other southern oaks [30].
NUTRITIONAL VALUE :
Nutritional values (percent dry weight) for Shumard oak acorns are as
follows [8]:
crude fat 9.8
total carbohydrates 29.3
total protein 3.8
phosphorus 0.06
calcium 0.27
magnesium 0.06
COVER VALUE :
NO-ENTRY
VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES :
Shumard oak had one of the highest survival rates of nine oak species
planted on minespoils in Illinois [4]. It exhibited outstanding growth
on cast overburden in Illinois and Indiana [37]. In Mississippi,
reforestation of agricultural lands to bottomland hardwoods was
successful with direct-seeded Shumard oak (in addition to other
species). Sites were seeded without preparation. Weeds were controlled
on one site, where Shumard oak had better growth and survivorship than
at the other sites [1].
Shumard oak seedlings have been planted successfully in reforestation
projects on eroded ridgetops in Mississippi [14].
OTHER USES AND VALUES :
Shumard oak is planted as an ornamental [38].
Shumard oak acorns are bitter, but are edible if the tannins are leached
out. They can be ground and used as flour, roasted and ground to make
coffee, or eaten whole [12,22]. Native Americans had many uses for the
bark and acorns of oaks, probably including Shumard oak [22].
OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Shumard oak can be successfully direct seeded or planted as seedlings
[20,39]. Soil fertilization does not improve establishment success
[39]. Height growth of direct-seeded Shumard oaks is slow compared to
that of planted stock; growth rates are sufficient to achieve wildlife
habitat management objectives but not for timber production [1].
Acorns with a moisture content below 20 to 30 percent are not likely to
germinate [48]. Seed moisture for Shumard oaks can be measured by using
microwave ovens [7].
Diseases of Shumard oak include oakleaf blister, oak wilt, and various
wood rotting fungi (Fomes spp., Polyporus spp., and Stereum spp.) [11].
Insect defoliators that attack Shumard oak, but are not species
specific, include June beetles, orange-striped oakworms, cankerworms,
forest tent caterpillars, yellow-necked caterpillars, variable oakleaf
caterpillars, and red-humped oakworms [11]. Shumard oak acorns are
subject to attack by acorn weevils [26].
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Quercus shumardii
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
Shumard oak is a large, deciduous, native tree. It ranges up to 120
feet (40 m) in height, with trunk diameters of up to 80 inches (200 cm)
[9,33,38,45]. The crown is open and wide spreading, with massive,
ascending branches. The trunk of older trees is heavily buttressed.
The bark is furrowed, with broken ridges [38]. The leaves are
five-lobed to nine-lobed. Shumard oak acorns are egg-shaped,
approximately 1 inch (2.5 cm) long, and enclosed in a thick, flat,
saucer-shaped cup with pubescent scales [11].
Shumard oak is long-lived; the oldest Shumard oak found on a blue
ash (Fraxinus quadrangulata) savanna was 480 years of age [10].
RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :
Phanerophyte
REGENERATION PROCESSES :
Minimum seed-bearing age for Shumard oak is 25 years. Optimum seed
production occurs at about 50 years of age. Good seed crops are
produced every 2 to 3 years [11]. The acorns are frequently multiseeded
(an unusual trait). Seeds are dispersed by seedhoarding mammals (mainly
squirrels) [11]. Acorns exhibit internal dormancy, which is broken by
cold, moist conditions. Moist stratification at 36 degrees Fahrenheit
(2 deg C) for 8 to 12 weeks breaks dormancy. The acorns typically
contain about 40 percent moisture at maturity [8]. Factors affecting
seed germination and seedling establishment include microclimate
conditions, soil moisture, and stand variables. The limiting factor
appears to be seed supply, which may be affected by seed predation
[11,26]. Full light is required for good seedling establishment and
growth [11].
Shumard oak sprouts from the roots when top-killed [3]. This ability is
more pronounced in younger individuals. Shumard oak is not a prolific
sprouter on moist sites; more sprouts are found on dry sites. It is
difficult to propagate by cuttings [26].
SITE CHARACTERISTICS :
Shumard oak grows best on moist, well-drained loamy soils on terraces,
colluvial sites, and adjacent bluffs associated with large and small
streams. Shumard oak also occurs in Coastal Plains hammocks [26].
Shumard oak is intolerant or only weakly tolerant of flooding [2,19],
and does not usually occur on the lowest river bottoms [18]. It is
fairly drought tolerant, and is tolerant of alkaline soils and their
associated nutrient deficiency [11]. It can be planted in soils with pH
greater than 7.5 [2,21]. In central Texas, it occurs on dry, low
limestone hills. In the south-central United States, it occurs on dry
uplands and ridges [26].
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS :
Shumard oak is intolerant of shade but is rare in early successional
stands. It often occurs in climax forests. Since Shumard oak is shade
intolerant and requires openings in which to establish, it is not
considered a true climax species [11]. Monk [27] classifies Shumard oak
as a climax exclusive: a species which occupies specific environmental
situations in the climax community and is rarely encountered in
successional stands. It is likely that Shumard oak colonizes gaps in
mature forests. In Florida, Shumard oak occurs in climax magnolia-beech
forests [15]. In Missouri, it occurs as an overstory associate on river
bottom ridges occupied by sugar maple (Acer saccharum), pawpaw (Asimina
triloba), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), and swamp chestnut oak
(Quercus michauxii). There were no Shumard oak seedlings or saplings in
these stands [31]. In Texas, Shumard oak was found in 47-year-old
bottomland hardwood stands and undisturbed adjacent forest, but not in
early successional stands [29].
It is likely that mature Shumard oak produces allelopathic substances [11].
SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT :
Shumard oak flowers from March to April, and as late as June in some
parts of its range [9,11]. Acorns ripen from September to October of
their second year [11].
FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Quercus shumardii
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS :
Specific information on the relationship of Shumard oak and fire was not
found in the literature. Shumard oak occurs in bottomland hardwood
forests which are dependent on fire exclusion [43]. It also occurs in
post oak (Quercus stellata)-blackjack oak communities which, though they
can be damaged by fire, are fire resistant [42]. Shumard oak occurs in
blue ash savannas, which are maintained by a combination of factors
including fire [10].
Shumard oak is probably moderately resistant to immediate fire damage,
but, like many hardwoods, is subject to attack by disease when wounded
by fire. Basal wounding usually results in at least top-kill of such
trees, either by girdling the tree or by creating avenues for infection
by wood-rotting fungi. Top-killed Shumard oak produce root sprouts [40].
Shumard oak is not usually found in early seral communities and is
therefore unlikely to colonize early postfire communities.
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 :
Tree with adventitious-bud root crown/soboliferous species root sucker
FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Quercus shumardii
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT :
Information concerning fire severity and damage to Shumard oak is
lacking in the literature. Mature trees are probably intermediate in
resistance to low- and moderate-severity fires. Severe fires would
probably top-kill or kill mature trees. Seedlings and saplings are
likely to be killed by any fire.
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT :
NO-ENTRY
PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE :
Hot fires will stimulate root sprouting in Shumard oak, presumably after
top-kill [3,40].
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE :
NO-ENTRY
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Management of Shumard oak as deer browse in Ashe juniper woodlands
includes prescribed burning of previously chained sites. These sites
should be burned with hot fires, with intervals of at least 7 to 10
years between fires [3]. Prescribed fire on chained Ashe juniper sites
removed dead Ashe juniper debris and killed young Ashe juniper trees.
Over 10 years, Shumard oak was one of three dominant secondary species
which provided browse and cover for game birds and white-tailed deer
[40].
Shumard oak occurs in bottomland hardwood forests, which are not usually
subjected to prescribed fires since the risk of fire damage is high. It
also occurs on sites where pines, particularly loblolly pine (Pinus
taeda) and shortleaf pine (P. echinata), are the desired species.
Prescribed fire is used to control hardwoods on these sites when the
pines have reached pole size or larger [43].
REFERENCES
SPECIES: Quercus shumardii
REFERENCES :
1. Allen, James A. 1990. Establishment of bottomland oak plantations on the
Yazoo National Wildlife Refuge Complex. Southern Journal of Applied
Forestry. 14(4): 206-210. [14615]
2. Allen, James A.; Kennedy, Harvey E., Jr. 1989. Bottomland hardwood
reforestation in the lower Mississippi Valley. Slidell, LA: U.S.
Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands
Research Center; Stoneville, MS: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Southern Forest Experimental Station. 28 p. [15293]
3. Armstrong, W. E. 1980. Impact of prescribed burning on wildlife. In:
White, Larry D., ed. Prescribed range burning in the Edwards Plateau of
Texas: Proceedings of a symposium; 1980 October 23; Junction, TX.
College Station, TX: Texas Agricultural Extension Service, The Texas A&M
University System: 22-26. [11430]
4. Ashby, W. Clark. 1990. Growth of oaks on topsoiled mined lands. 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: 20. Abstract. [13147]
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. Bogle, Laurie A.; Engle, David M.; McCollum, F. Ted. 1989. Nutritive
value of range plants in the Cross Timbers. Report P-908. Stillwater,
OK: Oklahoma Agricultural Experiment Station. 29 p. [9293]
7. Bonner, F. T.; Turner, B. J. 1980. Rapid measurement of the moisture
content of large seeds. Tree Planters' Notes. 31(3): 9-10. [13311]
8. Bonner, F. T.; Vozzo, J. A. 1987. Seed biology and technology of
Quercus. Gen. Tech. Rep. SO-66. New Orleans, LA: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station. 21 p.
[3248]
9. Brown, Russell G.; Brown, Melvin L. 1972. Woody plants of Maryland.
Baltimore, MD: Port City Press. 347 p. [21844]
10. Bryant, William S.; Wharton, Mary E.; Martin, William H.; Varner,
Johnnie B. 1980. The blue ash-oak savanna--woodland, a remnant of
presettlement vegetation in the Inner Bluegrass of Kentucky. Castanea.
45(3): 149-165. [10375]
11. Edwards, M. B. 1990. Quercus shumardii Buckl. Shumard oak. In: Burns,
Russell M.; Honkala, Barbara H., technical coordinators. Silvics of
North America. Volume 2. Hardwoods. Agric. Handb. 654. Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 734-737. [21823]
12. Elias, Thomas S.; Dykeman, Peter A. 1982. Field guide to North American
edible wild plants. [Place of publication unknown]: Outdoor Life Books.
286 p. [21103]
13. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and
Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
14. Francis, John K. 1983. Cherrybark and Shumard oaks successfully planted
on eroded ridges. Tree Planters' Notes. 34(2): 28-30. [21958]
15. Gano, Laura. 1917. A study in physiographic ecology in northern Florida.
Botanical Gazette. 63: 337-372. [21989]
16. 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]
17. Guttman, Sheldon I.; Weigt, Lee A. 1989. Electrophoretic evidence of
relationships among Quercus (oaks) of eastern North America. Canadian
Journal of Botany. 67(2): 339-351. [10401]
18. Hodges, John D.; Switzer, George L. 1979. Some aspects of the ecology of
southern bottomland hardwoods. In: North America's forests: gateway to
opportunity: Proceedings, 1978 joint convention of the Society of
American Foresters and the Canadian Institute of Forestry. Washington,
DC: Society of American Foresters: 360-365. [10028]
19. Hosner, John F.; Boyce, Stephen G. 1962. Tolerance to water saturated
soil of various bottomland hardwoods. Forest Science. 8(2): 180-186.
[18950]
20. Kennedy, Harvey E., Jr. 1990. Oak regeneration - what we know. 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: 26. Abstract. [13153]
21. Kennedy, Harvey E., Jr.; Krinard, Roger M. 1985. Shumard oaks
successfully planted on high pH soils. Res. Note SO-321. New Orleans,
LA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest
Experiment Station. 3 p. [21957]
22. Krochmal, Arnold; Krochmal, Connie. 1982. Uncultivated nuts of the
United States. Agriculture Information Bulletin 450. Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 89 p. [1377]
23. 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]
24. Laughlin, Kendall. 1969. Quercus shumardii var. stenocarpa Laughlin:
Stenocarp Shumard oak. Phytologia. 19(2): 57-64. [21959]
25. Little, Elbert L., Jr. 1979. Checklist of United States trees (native
and naturalized). Agric. Handb. 541. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service. 375 p. [2952]
26. Lotti, Thomas. 1960. Silvical characteristics of Shumard oak. Res. Note
No. 113. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Southeast Forest Experiment Station. 10 p. [21956]
27. Monk, Carl D. 1968. Successional and environmental relationships of the
forest vegetation of north central Florida. American Midland Naturalist.
79(2): 441-457. [10847]
28. Moorhead, David J.; Hodges, John D.; Reinecke, Kenneth J. 1991.
Silvicultural options for waterfowl management in bottomland hardwood
stands and greentree reservoirs. In: Coleman, Sandra S.; Neary, Daniel
G., compilers. Proceedings, 6th biennial southern silvicultural research
conference: Volume 2; 1990 October 30 - November 1; Memphis, TN. Gen.
Tech. Rep. SE-70. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station: 710-721. [17507]
29. Nixon, Elray S. 1975. Successional stages in a hardwood bottomland
forest near Dallas, Texas. Southwestern Naturalist. 20: 323-335.
[12250]
30. Ofcarcik, R. P.; Burns, E. E.; Teer, J. G. 1973. Acceptance of selected
acorns by captive fox squirrels. Southwestern Naturalist. 17(4):
349-355. [11365]
31. Robertson, Philip A.; Weaver, George T.; Cavanaugh, James A. 1978.
Vegetation and tree species patterns near the northern terminus of the
southern floodplain forest. Ecological Monographs. 48(3): 249-267.
[10381]
32. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant
geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
33. Simpson, Benny J. 1988. A field guide to Texas trees. Austin, TX: Texas
Monthly Press. 372 p. [11708]
34. Stoynoff, Nick; Hess, William J. 1990. A new status for Quercus
shumardii var. acerifolia (Fagaceae). SIDA. 14(2): 267-271. [21955]
35. 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]
36. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 1990. 50 CFR
Pt 17. Endangered & threatened wildlife & plants; review of plant taxa
for listing as endangered or threatened species; notice of review.
Federal Register. 55(35): 6184-6229. [14528]
37. Vogel, Willis G. 1990. Results of planting oaks on coal surface-mined
lands. 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: 19. Abstract. [13146]
38. Waldron, Gerald E.; Aboud, Steven W.; Ambrose, John D.; Meyers, George
A. 1987. Shumard oak, Quercus shumardii, in Canada. Canadian
Field-Naturalist. 101(4): 532-538. [5731]
39. Wittwer, R. F. 1991. Direct seeding of bottomland oaks in Oklahoma.
Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 15(1): 17-22. [13978]
40. Wright, Henry A. 1986. Manipulating rangeland ecosystems with fire. In:
Komarek, Edwin V.; Coleman, Sandra S.; Lewis, Clifford E.; Tanner,
George W., compilers. Prescribed fire and smoke management symposium
proceedings; 1986 February 13; Kissimmee, FL. Denver, CO: Society for
Range Management: 3-6. [3092]
41. Komarek, E. V. 1974. Effects of fire on temperate forests and related
ecosystems: southeastern United States. In: Kozlowski, T. T.; Ahlgren,
C. E., eds. Fire and ecosystems. New York: Academic Press: 251-277.
[10167]
42. Watson, Geraldine E. 1986. Influence of fire on the longleaf pine -
bluestem range in the Big Thicket region. In: Kulhavy, D. L.; Conner, R.
N., eds. Wilderness and natural areas in the eastern United States: a
management challenge. Nacogdoches, TX: Stephen F. Austin University:
181-185. [10334]
43. Wright, Henry A.; Bailey, Arthur W. 1982. Fire ecology: United States
and southern Canada. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 501 p. [2620]
44. Windisch, Andrew G.; Good, Ralph E. 1991. Fire behavior and stem
survival in the New Jersey Pine Plains. In: Proceedings, 17th Tall
Timbers fire ecology conference; 1989 May 18-21; Tallahassee, FL.
Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station: 273-299. [17612]
45. Vines, Robert A. 1960. Trees, shrubs, and woody vines of the Southwest.
Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. 1104 p. [7707]
46. Braun, E. L. 1950. Deciduous forests of eastern North America.
Philadelphia, PA: The Blakiston Co. 596 p. [19637]
47. Broome, C. Rose; Reveal, James L.; Tucker, Arthur O.; Dill, Norman H.
1979. Rare and endangered vascular plants of Maryland. Newton Corner,
MA: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 64 p. [16508]
48. Olson, David F., Jr. 1974. Quercus L. oak. In: Schopmeyer, C. S., ed.
Seeds of woody plants in the United States. Agric. Handb. 450.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 692-703.
[7737]
49. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 1993. 50 CFR
Part 17: Plant taxa for listing as endangered or threatened species;
notice of review--September 30, 1993. Federal Register. 58(188):
51144-51190. [23816]
50. 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]
51. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 1992. Canadian
species at risk. Ottawa, ON. 10 p. [26183]
52. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2014.
PLANTS Database, [Online]. Available: https://plants.usda.gov/. [34262]
FEIS Home Page
