Index of Species Information
SPECIES: Deschampsia cespitosa
Introductory
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION :
Walsh, Roberta A. 1995. Deschampsia cespitosa. 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/desces/all.html [].
ABBREVIATION :
DESCES
SYNONYMS :
Deschampsia caespitosa (L.) Beauv. [36,49,90]
SCS PLANT CODE :
DECE
DECEA2
DECEB
DECEB2
DECEB3
DECEC
DECEG2
DECEH
DECEO
DECEP2
DECEP3
COMMON NAMES :
tufted hairgrass
TAXONOMY :
The currently accepted scientific name of tufted hairgrass is
Deschampsia cespitosa (L.) Beauv. [35,37,48,50,100]. It is in the
family Poaceae.
Currently accepted infrataxa are as follows [55]:
Deschampsia cespitosa subsp. alpina (L.) Tzvelev (alpine tufted hairgrass)
Deschampsia cespitosa subsp. beringensis (Hulten) W. E. Lawrence (Bering's tufted hairgrass)
Deschampsia cespitosa subsp. bottonia (Wahl.) Vasey (tufted hairgrass)
Deschampsia cespitosa subsp. brevifolia (R. Br.) Tzvelev (Bering hairgrass)
Deschampsia cespitosa subsp. cespitosa (L.) Beauv. (tufted hairgrass)
Deschampsia cespitosa subsp. glauca (Hartman) Hartman (tufted hairgrass)
Deschampsia cespitosa subsp. holciformis (J. Presl) W. E. Lawrence (Pacific hairgrass)
Deschampsia cespitosa subsp. orientalis Hulten (oriental hairgrass)
Deschampsia cespitosa subsp. paramushirensis (Honda) Tzvelev (tufted hairgrass)
Deschampsia cespitosa subsp. parviflora (Thuill.) Jarmolenko & Soo (tufted hairgrass)
LIFE FORM :
Graminoid
FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS :
No special status
OTHER STATUS :
The South Dakota Natural Heritage Program has listed tufted hairgrass as
rare in South Dakota. It is known from a few sites in the Black Hills,
which are considered to be the edge of its natural range [51].
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Deschampsia cespitosa
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION :
Tufted hairgrass has circumglobal distribution [43,48,56,74,100]; it is
found in moist arctic and temperate regions of the world [10,49]. It
occurs from Alaska to Greenland [49,56] and south in the western United
States into northern Mexico [50,100]. It is occasional in the Black
Hills and the northern Great Plains [63]. It occurs from Minnesota to
Maine and south to Iowa, Illinois, Ohio, and Georgia [90]. Tufted
hairgrass is native to North America [43], but some European populations
have been introduced [29]. Tufted hairgrass is cultivated in Hawaii
from European stock [105].
ECOSYSTEMS :
FRES10 White-red-jack pine
FRES11 Spruce-fir
FRES13 Loblolly-shortleaf pine
FRES15 Oak-hickory
FRES17 Elm-ash-cottonwood
FRES18 Maple-beech-birch
FRES19 Aspen-birch
FRES20 Douglas-fir
FRES21 Ponderosa pine
FRES22 Western white pine
FRES23 Fir-spruce
FRES24 Hemlock-Sitka spruce
FRES25 Larch
FRES26 Lodgepole pine
FRES27 Redwood
FRES28 Western hardwoods
FRES29 Sagebrush
FRES30 Desert shrub
FRES33 Southwestern shrubsteppe
FRES34 Chaparral-mountain shrub
FRES35 Pinyon-juniper
FRES36 Mountain grasslands
FRES37 Mountain meadows
FRES38 Plains grasslands
FRES39 Prairie
FRES40 Desert grasslands
FRES41 Wet grasslands
FRES42 Annual grasslands
FRES44 Alpine
STATES :
AK AZ CA CO CT DE GA HI ID IL
IA ME MD MA MI MN MT NV NH NJ
NM NY NC ND OH OR PA RI SD UT
VT VA WA WV WI WY AB BC MB NB
NF NT NS ON PE PQ SK YT MEXICO
BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :
1 Northern Pacific Border
2 Cascade Mountains
3 Southern Pacific Border
4 Sierra Mountains
5 Columbia Plateau
6 Upper Basin and Range
7 Lower Basin and Range
8 Northern Rocky Mountains
9 Middle Rocky Mountains
10 Wyoming Basin
11 Southern Rocky Mountains
12 Colorado Plateau
13 Rocky Mountain Piedmont
15 Black Hills Uplift
16 Upper Missouri Basin and Broken Lands
KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :
K001 Spruce-cedar-hemlock forest
K002 Cedar-hemlock-Douglas-fir forest
K003 Silver fir-Douglas-fir forest
K004 Fir-hemlock forest
K005 Mixed conifer forest
K006 Redwood forest
K007 Red fir forest
K008 Lodgepole pine-subalpine forest
K010 Ponderosa shrub forest
K011 Western ponderosa forest
K012 Douglas-fir forest
K013 Cedar-hemlock-pine forest
K014 Grand fir-Douglas-fir forest
K015 Western spruce-fir forest
K016 Eastern ponderosa forest
K017 Black Hills pine forest
K018 Pine-Douglas-fir forest
K019 Arizona pine forest
K020 Spruce-fir-Douglas-fir forest
K021 Southwestern spruce-fir forest
K022 Great Basin pine forest
K023 Juniper-pinyon woodland
K025 Alder-ash forest
K026 Oregon oakwoods
K028 Mosaic of K002 and K026
K029 California mixed evergreen forest
K035 Coastal sagebrush
K037 Mountain-mahogany-oak scrub
K038 Great Basin sagebrush
K040 Saltbush-greasewood
K047 Fescue-oatgrass
K048 California steppe
K051 Wheatgrass-bluegrass
K052 Alpine meadows and barren
K055 Sagebrush steppe
K056 Wheatgrass-needlegrass shrubsteppe
K058 Grama-tobosa shrubsteppe
K063 Foothills prairie
K064 Grama-needlegrass-wheatgrass
K065 Grama-buffalograss
K066 Wheatgrass-needlegrass
K067 Wheatgrass-bluestem-needlegrass
K070 Sandsage-bluestem prairie
K081 Oak savanna
K093 Great Lakes spruce-fir forest
K095 Great Lakes pine forest
K096 Northeastern spruce-fir forest
K098 Northern floodplain forest
K101 Elm-ash forest
K102 Beech-maple forest
K103 Mixed mesophytic forest
K104 Appalachian oak forest
K106 Northern hardwoods
K107 Northern hardwoods-fir forest
K108 Northern hardwoods-spruce forest
K110 Northeastern oak-pine forest
K111 Oak-hickory-pine forest
SAF COVER TYPES :
1 Jack pine
5 Balsam fir
12 Black spruce
13 Black spruce-tamarack
14 Northern pin oak
15 Red pine
16 Aspen
18 Paper birch
19 Gray birch-red maple
20 White pine-northern red oak-red maple
21 Eastern white pine
22 White pine-hemlock
23 Eastern hemlock
24 Hemlock-yellow birch
25 Sugar maple-beech-yellow birch
26 Sugar maple-basswood
27 Sugar maple
30 Red spruce-yellow birch
32 Red spruce
33 Red spruce-balsam fir
34 Red spruce-Fraser fir
35 Paper birch-red spruce-balsam fir
38 Tamarack
39 Black ash-American elm-red maple
52 White oak-black oak-northern red oak
53 White oak
55 Northern red oak
57 Yellow-poplar
58 Yellow-poplar-eastern hemlock
59 Yellow-poplar-white oak-northern red oak
60 Beech-sugar maple
62 Silver maple-American elm
63 Cottonwood
201 White spruce
202 White spruce-paper birch
203 Balsam poplar
204 Black spruce
205 Mountain hemlock
206 Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir
207 Red fir
208 Whitebark pine
210 Interior Douglas-fir
211 White fir
212 Western larch
213 Grand fir
215 Western white pine
216 Blue spruce
217 Aspen
218 Lodgepole pine
219 Limber pine
221 Red alder
222 Black cottonwood-willow
223 Sitka spruce
224 Western hemlock
225 Western hemlock-Sitka spruce
226 Coastal true fir-hemlock
227 Western redcedar-western hemlock
228 Western redcedar
229 Pacific Douglas-fir
230 Douglas-fir-western hemlock
231 Port-Orford-cedar
232 Redwood
233 Oregon white oak
234 Douglas-fir-tanoak-Pacific madrone
235 Cottonwood-willow
237 Interior ponderosa pine
239 Pinyon-juniper
243 Sierra Nevada mixed conifer
244 Pacific ponderosa pine-Douglas-fir
245 Pacific ponderosa pine
251 White spruce-aspen
252 Paper birch
253 Black spruce-white spruce
254 Black spruce-paper birch
256 California mixed subalpine
SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES :
102 Idaho fescue
103 Green fescue
109 Ponderosa pine shrubland
110 Ponderosa pine-grassland
203 Riparian woodland
204 North coastal shrub
209 Montane shrubland
213 Alpine grassland
214 Coastal prairie
215 Valley grassland
216 Montane meadows
304 Idaho fescue-bluebunch wheatgrass
305 Idaho fescue-Richardson needlegrass
306 Idaho fescue-slender wheatgrass
307 Idaho fescue-threadleaf sedge
308 Idaho fescue-tufted hairgrass
309 Idaho fescue-western wheatgrass
311 Rough fescue-bluebunch wheatgrass
312 Rough fescue-Idaho fescue
313 Tufted hairgrass-sedge
315 Big sagebrush-Idaho fescue
316 Big sagebrush-rough fescue
319 Bitterbrush-rough fescue
323 Shrubby cinquefoil-rough fescue
324 Threetip sagebrush-Idaho fescue
409 Tall forb
410 Alpine rangeland
411 Aspen woodland
412 Juniper-pinyon woodland
413 Gambel oak
418 Bigtooth maple
422 Riparian
501 Saltbush-greasewood
504 Juniper-pinyon pine woodland
505 Grama-tobosa shrub
601 Bluestem prairie
606 Wheatgrass-bluestem-needlegrass
607 Wheatgrass-needlegrass
608 Wheatgrass-grama-needlegrass
611 Blue grama-buffalograss
HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES :
Tufted hairgrass is an indicator or dominant species in the following
published classifications:
Ecology of wetlands in Big Meadows, Rocky Mountain National Park,
Colorado [21]
Classification and management of Montana's riparian and wetland sites [42]
Grassland, shrubland, and forestland habitat types of the White
River-Arapaho National Forest [47]
Habitat types on selected parts of the Gunnison and Uncompahgre National
Forests [58]
Riparian zone associations: Deschutes, Ochoco, Fremont, and Winema
National Forests [59]
Major indicator shrubs and herbs in riparian zones on National Forests
of central Oregon [60]
Preliminary riparian community type classification for Nevada [66]
Riparian community type classification of Utah and southeastern Idaho [75]
A meadow site classification for the Sierra Nevada, California [79]
Riparian community type classification of eastern Idaho - western
Wyoming [103]
In California tufted hairgrass was one of the original native perennial
grass dominants of the north coastal prairie, a discontinuous grassland.
Original associates included California oatgrass (Danthonia
californica), western fescue (Festuca occidentalis), Idaho fescue (F.
idahoensis), and Pacific reedgrass (Calamagrostis nutkaensis). Tufted
hairgrass is still found in this area, although the original perennial,
mid-grass dominants have been replaced for the most part by annual
grasses such as wild oat (Avena fatua), slender oat (A. barbata), soft
chess (Bromus hordeaceus), ripgut brome (B. diandrus), red brome (B.
rubens), seaside barley (Hordeum maritimum), mouse barley (H. murinum),
little barley (H. pusillum), and foxtail fescue (Vulpia myuros) [36].
In Mendocino and Sonoma counties, California, tufted hairgrass is
commonly a dominant of coastal terraces [44].
In mountainous terrain, tufted hairgrass usually occurs in open forests
or moist openings. In California tufted hairgrass is found in the
Klamath Mountains, the northern Coast Ranges, and the Sierra Nevada in
meadows, glades, and open forests [13]. On the White River in the
Arapaho National Forest of Colorado, tufted hairgrass occurs below
timberline on high elevation meadows and subalpine valleys, and in
hydric sites in forest openings. It also occurs above timberline on
mesic sites with moderate snow accumulation [47]. In alpine areas of
the Beartooth Plateau in south-central Montana, tufted hairgrass is a
dominant in meadow vegetation on well-drained sheltered uplands, lower
mesic slopes, and basins protected by snow cover that may persist until
mid-July. Tufted hairgrass is the most conspicuous species in these
habitats and may occur in nearly pure stands with up to 44 percent cover
[54].
In the pumice deposition zone of central Oregon, meadows dominated by
tufted hairgrass support an extensive grass (Poaceae)-forb component on
the more xeric portion and an extensive sedge (Cyperaceae)-rush
(Juncaceae) component on more mesic sites [97].
MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
SPECIES: Deschampsia cespitosa
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE :
Tufted hairgrass provides good to excellent forage for all classes of
livestock [70,90]. It is often an abundant source of forage throughout
its growing season [100]. Tufted hairgrass is sometimes cut for hay on
native meadows [46,94].
In Arizona tufted hairgrass provides excellent forage in mountain
meadows [56]. In Colorado it produces an abundance of forage [46]. In
western Montana tufted hairgrass/sedge (Carex spp.) meadows are among
the best summer range for cattle [73]. In the western United States
tufted hairgrass is listed in the category of most desirable as
livestock forage in aspen (Populus spp.) forests [72]. In moist
habitats in California tufted hairgrass furnishes fresh succulent
grazing all summer [84].
In Wyoming tufted hairgrass/sedge alpine and subalpine communities are
the most extensive and most productive vegetation types for grazing by
domestic sheep and wildlife. Tufted hairgrass is a preferred forage
species, consistently grazed by both sheep and wildlife [53].
Tufted hairgrass forage value for wildlife has been rated fair to good
[90].
Use of tufted hairgrass by wildlife species is variable. Tufted
hairgrass is frequently grazed by bears [43]. Feral horses in the
foothills of western Alberta consume tufted hairgrass; in 1976, tufted
hairgrass constituted a maximum of 1.7 percent of fecal fragments in
November-December and a low of 0.8 percent in January-March. Annual
average was 1.3 percent [83]. Sitka black-tailed deer in low-elevation,
old-growth stands of western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla)-Sitka spruce
(Picea sitchensis) on Admiralty Island, Alaska, did not eat tufted
hairgrass from January to March. They ate only trace amounts of tufted
hairgrass in April and June and none from July to September. Mean
composition (dry weight) of tufted hairgrass was 1 percent of deer feces
from October to December [41]. Columbian black-tailed deer in southern
Vancouver Island, British Columbia, did not eat tufted hairgrass in a
sedge meadow community, even though it was very abundant [22].
PALATABILITY :
Tufted hairgrass provides palatable early spring through summer growth
[43].
In California cattle admitted to tufted hairgrass range before the
plants are mature readily consume it. In moist areas the plant
continues to furnish fresh succulent grazing throughout the summer [84].
In Utah during the summer tufted hairgrass ranks good in palatability
for cattle and fair to good for sheep. However, mature leaves are
grazed only slightly [94].
Tufted hairgrass forage palatability has been rated as follows [26]:
UT CO WY MT ND
Cattle good good good good good
Sheep fair fair good fair good
Horses good good good good good
NUTRITIONAL VALUE :
Tufted hairgrass energy value is fair; protein value is poor [26].
The following wildlife food values have been reported for tufted
hairgrass:
Montana Utah Wyoming
Elk good* good good
Mule deer fair* fair fair
White-tailed deer fair* ---- fair
Pronghorn fair* poor poor
Upland game birds fair* fair poor
Waterfowl good* fair fair
Small nongame birds poor* fair fair
Small mammals poor* fair fair
* Values reported in [5]. All other values reported in [26].
In vitro digestibility of tufted hairgrass cellulose was determined
for five growth stages: leaf stage, heading, seed ripe, cured, and
weathered. Cellulose content, percent digestibility of cellulose, and
calculated percent digestible protein for each growth stage were as
follows [3]:
Percent Percent Cellulose Percent
Cellulose Digestibility Digestible Protein
Leaf Stage 30.0 44.6 5.0
Heading 34.5 31.1 2.1
Seed Ripe 33.9 25.7 1.6
Cured 34.7 13.4 0.7
Weathered 34.2 6.2 0.3
In southeastern Alaska, tufted hairgrass nutritive value was monitored
bimonthly (except March) for 1 year (1981) to assess seasonal changes in
chemical composition. Reported percent dry weights were as follows [40]:
Percent Jan 9 May 27 Aug 3 Sept 29 Nov 30
NDF* 70.7 54.9 56.5 78.2 85.3
ADF** 37.3 28.0 25.2 42.9 48.4
Cellulose 22.1 23.1 21.3 33.6 37.4
IVDMD*** 29.7 44.9 40.7 22.6 10.8
Total Ash 14.3 5.0 6.0 4.8 3.4
Nitrogen 1.14 3.55 1.26 0.50 0.69
Phosphorus 0.14 0.29 0.16 0.06 0.06
Potassium 0.60 2.27 1.76 0.44 0.24
Calcium 0.19 0.16 0.48 0.09 0.11
* NDF: Neutral Detergent Fiber
** ADF: Acid Detergent Fiber
*** IVDMD: In-Vitro Dry-Matter Digestibility (12 hour)
COVER VALUE :
Tufted hairgrass cover value is reported as follows [26]:
MT UT WY
Upland game birds poor fair fair
Waterfowl good fair fair
Small nongame birds poor fair good
Small mammals poor good good
VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES :
Tufted hairgrass has a broad ecological range and is useful for
revegetation, particularly on disturbances at high elevation or high
latitude [10]. Tufted hairgrass occurs on acidic or pyritic mine spoils
at high elevations throughout the western United States [10]. It grows
at a medium rate compared to other grasses used at these sites; it has a
poor rate of spread. Tufted hairgrass has good competitive ability
compared to other plants evaluated for high latitude revegetation [43].
It has low to medium potential for short-term revegetation; it has
medium to high potential for long-term revegetation [26]. It is a
valuable soil stabilizer [43,48], especially in wet, acid locations
[43].
Tufted hairgrass has been successfully established by seeding on alpine
disturbances. Seeds from locally adapted populations have been most
successful [8,9]. For disturbances on well-developed soils that contain
minimum amounts of toxic substances, seeds can be selected from a broad
range of relatively well-adapted populations. On sites with limiting
spoil characteristics, selection from metal and/or acid tolerant
populations is more successful. Some tufted hairgrass populations are
highly tolerant of lead, zinc, copper, or manganese contaminated
tailings [43]. Late fall seeding is most successful; seedling
establishment is improved if seeds are exposed to cold dormancy over
winter [10,17].
Although tufted hairgrass is typically associated with mesic meadows,
the U.S. Forest Service has had success revegetating dry, windblown,
disturbed sites at high elevations using ecotypes from similar habitats
[100]. On sites with severely limiting edaphic factors, a high tufted
hairgrass seeding rate, ameliorative soil treatment, and fertilization
may be necessary for tufted hairgrass establishment [10]. Tufted
hairgrass responds to nitrogen inputs, but has good growth rates over a
broad range of nitrogen and phosphorus availability [8,9].
Tufted hairgrass can be established by transplanting soil plugs or sod
in which it is established. In Nevada in the Lake Tahoe Basin, tufted
hairgrass seeds and vegetation were part of wetland plugs which were cut
from a mature wet meadow, allowed to grow out, recut, and successfully
transplanted [38]. Tufted hairgrass plugs were planted on spoils of an
open-pit copper, gold, and silver mine at 9,800 feet (3,000 m) elevation
in the Beartooth Mountains of Montana. Tufted hairgrass survival after
1 year was 72 percent [11]. At the site of a backfilled gas pipeline
trench at Rollins Pass, Colorado, tufted hairgrass sod was removed
during plant dormancy, stored for 2 weeks during construction, and
replaced. Tufted hairgrass sod recovery after 18 years was excellent;
it was the most successful of the native sods used [12].
In the Rocky Mountain foothills of west-central Alberta, tufted
hairgrass naturally colonized spoils of abandoned coal mines [82]. In
the Sudbury, Ontario, mining and smelting region north of Lake Huron,
tufted hairgrass invaded moist sites on barrens following smelter
closure. The barren lands had been subject to logging, fire, soil
erosion, enhanced frost action, sulfur dioxide fumigation, and copper,
nickel, and iron particulate fallout [101].
Tufted hairgrass is suitable for boreal revegetation work [93]. In the
Richardson Mountains on the Yukon Territory-Northwest Territories
border, tufted hairgrass seed from a northern collection was planted in
early June 1979, along with 21 other grass seed selections. At the time
of seeding there was no vegetative cover on the shale borrow pit
material. Tufted hairgrass was one of the five most successful
selections. It emerged in 77 percent of microsites in 1979. By 1985,
tufted hairgrass had increased through natural reseeding and occupied
100 percent of microsites; from the original 3.3 feet (1 m) between
microsites it had spread until it approached a solid stand. By 1985,
100 percent of extant tufted hairgrass plants were producing seed [93].
OTHER USES AND VALUES :
NO-ENTRY
OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Tufted hairgrass is a decreaser with excessive grazing by cattle
[73,97,104]. However, it is tolerant of moderate amounts of fairly
close grazing [43,84] because of dense growth and tillering. Grazing
practices should allow for ample seedset to maintain stands [94].
Tufted hairgrass is favored by moderate grazing in areas where shrubs
and other vegetation invade in the absence of grazing. In Marin County,
California, tufted hairgrass bunchgrass terrain dominates on the grazed
side of a road; on the grazing-excluded side, coyotebrush (Baccharis
pilularis) and common velvetgrass (Holcus lanatus) have replaced tufted
hairgrass [27].
Long-term, intensive herbage removal is detrimental to tufted hairgrass
and reduces seed production. Carbohydrate reserves become depleted
after sustained close grazing, resulting in declines in root length,
basal area, and leaf length. Eventually stand composition shifts to
other species [97]. A clipping study of tufted hairgrass was conducted
in Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks, California. Tufted
hairgrass on treatment plots was given four clippings per growing season
for 4 years. Control plots were clipped once in late September after
plant senescence. In the fifth year no clipping was done. Productivity
during the fifth year on the treatment plots was only 45 percent of that
on the control plots [87].
Tufted hairgrass is a key indicator of condition and grazing utilization
of mountain meadows in California [84]. In Wyoming tufted hairgrass is
a key representative of the desirable grass group in alpine and
subalpine areas and can be used as an indicator of the response of this
group to grazing. The best-condition alpine and subalpine sedge/tufted
hairgrass communities have the highest proportion of tufted hairgrass
[53].
Seed properties of tufted hairgrass, including percent fill, viability,
and longevity, are variable among years. It may be necessary to harvest
seeds 1 to several years prior to reclamation of a disturbed area in
order to obtain an adequate supply of viable seeds [14].
High seeding rates of tufted hairgrass may inhibit succession and the
establishment of greater species diversity. If the objective of
revegetation is to provide immediate surface protection with long-term
successional development of a diverse community, then low seeding rates
are recommended [10].
Species composition and dominance in tufted hairgrass meadows are very
sensitive to fluctuations in the water table. Lowering the water table
through channel cutting, poor road locations, or drought has changed
site potential and favored the expansion of Kentucky bluegrass (Poa
pratense) and perennial forbs in the central Oregon pumice zone. Raised
water tables favor sedge and rush (Juncus spp.) dominance. Livestock
grazing in late spring and early summer may result in severe soil
displacement and pedestalling of tufted hairgrass clumps on wet soils
[97].
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Deschampsia cespitosa
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
Tufted hairgrass is a densely cespitose [37,94] cool-season [90] native
perennial bunchgrass [26,70]. Culms are hollow [37], slender [29,89],
erect [63], and 8 to 48 inches (20-120 cm) in height [35,37,43,48].
Abundant leaves form basal tufts [74,84]; blades are 0.8 to 13 inches
(2-33 cm) [34] long and 0.04 to 0.16 inch (1-4 mm) wide [74,90]. The
inflorescence is generally a loose, open panicle [39,49], though
occasionally narrow and contracted [35,48,63]; it is 4 to 12 inches
(10-30 cm) long [37,39,67]. Branches are whorled [35,84], hairlike
[63,94], and spikelet-bearing near their tips [29,84]. Spikelets are
two- to occasionally three-flowered [37,48]. Lemmas are awned toward
the base [49,67,90]. The fruit is a caryopsis [37].
Tufted hairgrass root distribution was measured on the Beartooth Plateau
above Red Lodge, Montana. In the 4 inch (10 cm) cores taken,
approximately 45 percent of root mass was in the upper 0.8 inch (2 cm)
of soil, with lower proportions in each succeeding 0.8 inch (2 cm) [99].
RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :
Hemicryptophyte
REGENERATION PROCESSES :
Tufted hairgrass reproduces by seed [43,70,90].
Tufted hairgrass is self-incompatible. Seeds of tufted hairgrass can be
dormant and persist in the seedbank [34]. Germination is enhanced by
light and by cold storage. Tufted hairgrass seeds were collected in
September 1983 on the Beartooth Plateau, Montana; filled seeds had 81
percent viability. Tufted hairgrass seeds were given 90 days of dry
cold storage or wet cold storage in light or dark conditions. Day
temperatures were 64 degrees Fahrenheit (18 deg C) for 14 hours and
night temperatures were 39 degrees Fahrenheit (4 deg C) for 10 hours.
Over 30 days from beginning of treatment, tufted hairgrass seeds showed
the following accumulated germination response [17]:
Percent Germination
Light Dark
Dry Cold Storage 95 64
Wet Cold Storage 63 46
Tufted hairgrass germination response was significantly (p<.001) better
in light than in dark conditions, and also in dry cold than in wet cold
storage conditions. Light increased total percent seed germination more
than did cold storage [17].
Tufted hairgrass seeds collected in 1983 on the Beartooth Plateau showed
a decrease in viability from 80 percent at the time of collection to 35
percent 3 years later [18]. Viability of filled tufted hairgrass seeds
produced in different years on the Beartooth Plateau was significantly
(p<.001) variable. About 40 percent of seeds collected in 1986 were
filled; almost 100 percent were filled in 1983. Viability of filled
tufted hairgrass seeds varied from about 1 percent in 1984 to about 80
percent in 1983. This variation is attributed to the severe and
unpredictable nature of the alpine environment [14].
In the Richardson Mountains on the Yukon Territory-Northwest Territories
border, tufted hairgrass plants produced no seed the year of planting
but did so during their second year [93].
SITE CHARACTERISTICS :
Tufted hairgrass is common in grassland communities within its
circumglobal range. In the Northern Hemisphere it occurs from sea level
to over 14,100 feet (4,300 m) elevation [10]. It is found in very moist
to saturated habitats at the margins of bogs and marshes and in sloughs,
moist areas along shores, drainage ditches, and moist draws, and in
moderately dry to very dry locations on slopes [34,43]. It is
frequently found on disturbed sites, especially at higher elevations and
moist habitats [10].
In Colorado tufted hairgrass grows best in moist habitats, wet meadows,
and bogs. It often occurs in nearly pure stands in moist, favorable
sites. It generally requires 20 inches (500 mm) of precipitation a year
[23]. On drier, less favorable sites it grows in open stands in
association with other plants [46]. In northwestern Montana tufted
hairgrass is a facultative wetland species [5].
Tufted hairgrass grows on a variety of soil types and textures. It is
found on sandy loam [45,79,98], sandy clayey loam [6], silty loam [47],
loam [6,47,64,66], loamy clay [6,66], and clay [6]. Tufted hairgrass
growth is rated fair on sandy loam and good on loam and clayey loam
[26,43]. It is found on gravel in Alaska [95], Michigan [98], and Utah
[64]. It occurs on granitic material in Idaho [32] and Wyoming [53].
It is found on peat in British Columbia [96] and on calcareous seeps in
Illinois [88]. It grows on pumice in Oregon [97] and on volcanic soils
in Wyoming [53].
Tufted hairgrass is adapted to cool, acid locations [68] but it also
grows on somewhat alkaline soils [43,77]. It has been found on soils
varying from pH 3.3 on mine tailings in Ontario [43] to pH 8.4 in
central Idaho [77]. However, it generally grows best in soils with pH
5.2 to 5.5 [54]. Tufted hairgrass will tolerate some saline water
[48,71]; along the north-central Oregon coast, tufted hairgrass occurs
in high saltmarsh that is very occasionally flooded by salt water
during the summer growing season [31]. Some tufted hairgrass
populations are adapted to growing on spoils with elevated levels of
heavy metals [43].
In the western United States tufted hairgrass reaches its greatest
development at high elevations, where it becomes a nearly ubiquitous
floral component of most plant communities above treeline [10]. Tufted
hairgrass dominates moist areas of the alpine tundra of the Rocky
Mountains, where it occurs along soil moisture gradients from the middle
of lee slopes with early melting snowdrifts to the bottoms of lee slopes
with very wet meadows [34].
Tufted hairgrass is reported at the following elevations:
Feet Meters
Arizona 8,800- 9,500 2,680-2,900 [30,56]
California <12,800 <3,900 [45,48,67,74]
Colorado 5,000-14,000 1,500-4,300 [26,46,47]
Montana 2,500-10,000 800-3,000 [19,26,73,76]
Utah 4,500-12,500 1,400-3,800 [26,100]
Wyoming 4,000-12,000 1,200-3,700 [26,39]
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS :
Tufted hairgrass can occur as a colonizer [10] and as a component or
dominant of successional [16] and climax vegetation [81]. It is rarely
found in dense shade [94].
Tufted hairgrass can be an aggressive colonizer on disturbed sites,
particularly in alpine and subalpine regions [10]. In south-central
Montana tufted hairgrass is a colonizer on the Beartooth Plateau, where
there are nearly 200 known alpine vascular plant species. Tufted
hairgrass is one of fewer than 5 percent of these species that can be
found on virtually all disturbances of more than a few years of age
[7,15].
Tufted hairgrass occurs naturally on both early and late successional
alpine sites [16]. In Alaska on the north slope of the Alaska Range,
tufted hairgrass occurs on gravel terraces in the meadow stage, but does
not occur in the earlier pioneer stage or in later shrub and tree stages
[95]. In the Medicine Bow Mountains of Wyoming, tufted hairgrass occurs
in successional tundra meadow in ribbon forest and in successional
snow-glade vegetation [4]. In the Great Basin of Nevada, tufted
hairgrass is an early seral species that can continue to occupy sites
indefinitely given relatively stable site conditions [66]. In the
alpine zone of the Uinta Mountains, Utah, tufted hairgrass is middle and
late successional in hydrarch succession where alpine glacial lakes have
been or are in the process of being filled with sediment and plant
remains. Tufted hairgrass is an associate but is not dominant in the
drier climax sedge-grass communities [64].
Tufted hairgrass occurs in climax vegetation. In northwestern Colorado
it is a dominant in climax communities of wet to mesic subalpine and
alpine zones [47]. In the Medicine Bow Mountains of Wyoming, tufted
hairgrass is a component of climax snow-glade vegetation [4]. In
glaciated plains, foothills, and mountains of western Montana, tufted
hairgrass is a dominant in the climax vegetation of subirrigated and
wetland range sites. It is also a dominant in alpine grassland climax
vegetation on deep to moderately deep, well drained to poorly drained
soils; these grasslands occur on sloping to steep windswept mountain
tops above timberline [81].
Tufted hairgrass is not generally a part of the understory of wooded
areas [10] or of forests [4]. In Yellowstone National Park tufted
hairgrass occurs in mesic subalpine meadows. Lodgepole pine (Pinus
contorta var. latifolia) has been progressively invading the borders of
these meadows (for at least 125 years) in the absence of fire. Tufted
hairgrass generally decreased along transects at the edge of meadows as
the size and age of lodgepole pine increased [52].
SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT :
In alpine regions tufted hairgrass maintains green leaves throughout the
winter and begins growth very soon after snow release, when temperatures
at soil level are still near 32 degrees Fahrenheit (0 deg C) [64]. In
Utah tufted hairgrass starts growth early in the spring and remains
green throughout the summer [94].
In Colorado tufted hairgrass phenological conditions at elevations
between 9,843 and 12,468 feet (3,000-3,800 m) were observed. Older
tufted hairgrass leaves began developing autumn coloration about
September 15, 1968; 1 month later it was in winter condition. Tufted
hairgrass had immature green leaves in winter; the new leaves developed
prior to the initiation of dormancy and remained at one-eighth to
one-fourth the length of mature leaves throughout the winter. Through
the winter green leaf surfaces were protected by a covering of dead but
undeteriorated leaves from the previous summer. In the spring no
observable leaf elongation occurred until about 10 days after snow
release [1].
In alpine regions tufted hairgrass reaches maximum flowering
approximately 3 weeks after the initiation of growth [64]. Tufted
hairgrass flowering times are:
Arizona June-September [56]
California May-August [74]
Colorado July-September [26]
Illinois June-July [69]
Montana June-September [26]
North Carolina June-July [78,102]
Virginia June-July [102]
West Virginia June-July [89]
Wyoming July-September [26]
Great Plains June-August [37,63]
Northeastern US May-August [29]
Southeastern
Canada May-August [29]
In alpine regions tufted hairgrass seed matures 7 to 8 weeks after
initiation of leaf growth in the spring [64].
FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Deschampsia cespitosa
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS :
Tufted hairgrass generally survives all but the most severe fires [24].
It usually sprouts from the root crown after aerial portions are burned.
Tufts formed by the leaves [37] often protect basal buds from fire
damage. Tufted hairgrass seeds occur in the seedbank [15]; after fire
tufted hairgrass 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 :
Tussock graminoid
Ground residual colonizer (on-site, initial community)
FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Deschampsia cespitosa
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT :
Tufted hairgrass culms and leaves are often killed by fire, though dense
tufts may protect some green biomass during low-severity fire. Tufted
hairgrass root crowns usually survive all but the most severe fires [25].
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT :
NO-ENTRY
PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE :
Within just a few years tufted hairgrass usually recovers to prefire
levels [25].
In the Medicine Bow Mountains of Wyoming, tufted hairgrass occurs in wet
or dry subalpine meadows that were produced when forests were burned in
1871. Above 9,800 feet (3,000 m) elevation burned areas remain open for
50 to 100 years after stand-replacing fire. After a century or more,
the drier meadows usually are covered by young spruce (Picea)-fir
(Abies) forests and tufted hairgrass declines. However, tufted
hairgrass in wet meadows above 9,800 feet (3,000 m) may remain dominant
for centuries [4].
In the same area, tufted hairgrass is a component of successional tundra
meadow that developed following a severe 1809 crown fire in ribbon
forest [4].
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE :
Wildfire Case Study?
Tufted hairgrass response was studied following a lightning-ignited fire in
Ellis Meadow, a 30-acre (12 ha) subalpine meadow within the Roaring
River drainage of Kings Canyon National Park, California, in the
southern Sierra Nevada. The prefire community was subalpine meadow vegetation
within forest dominated by Sierra lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta spp. murrayana).
The meadow community was dominated by beaked sedge (Carex rostrata), tufted
hairgrass (Deschampsia cespitosa), Idaho bentgrass (Agrostis
idahoensis), and Mexican rush (Juncus mexicanus). Other common
herbaceous species were primrose monkeyflower (Mimulus primuloides),
Parish's yampah (Perideridia parishii), small white violet (Viola
macloskeyi), and several species of fireweed (Epilobium spp.) [24,25].
The study site is at 9,154 feet (2,790 m) elevation. The area is a
generally flat, basin-type meadow. The meadow surface consists of
low-lying troughs between hummocks formed by the root crowns of tufted
grasses and sedges. An organic layer up to 12 inches (30 cm) deep
overlays a loamy sand soil. The water table usually remains within a
few inches of the surface throughout the summer. However, precipitation
had been 45 to 50 percent below the normal average of 41.1 inches (1,044
mm) for each of the 2 years before the fire. The summer of the fire was
very dry. The wildfire occurred in early August, and was light to severe [24,25].
On September 30, 1977, immediately following the fire, two permanent
transects were established on a severely burned portion of the meadow.
Severely burned sites were differentiated by the extent to which the
organic layer was consumed; meadow surfaces were lower in the more
severely burned areas than in other areas, and ash depth exceeded 0.8
inch (2 cm) [24,25].
A lightning storm in early July 1977 ignited several fires in the
vicinity of Ellis Meadow. These were allowed to burn, and fire reached
Ellis Meadow in early August. By late summer, large contiguous areas of
the sedge-tallgrass community within Ellis Meadow had burned. About 60
percent of the meadow had burned by the end of September, when autumn
precipitation extinguished the fire [24,25].
The fire smoldered where it was severe, spreading at a rate of less than
2 inches per minute (5 cm/min). In these areas the fire burned nearly
all the organic layer, including subsurface and aboveground organic
matter. Fire consumed some tufted hairgrass plants entirely by a
combination of surface and subsurface fire. In some cases subsurface
fire combined with sporadic surface flare-ups, resulting in nearly
complete consumption of the root mass and organic matter in the surface
soil layer while leaving portions of the aboveground vegetation intact [24,25].
Ash depth where present ranged from 0.4 to 8 inches (1-20 cm), averaging
3.5 inches (9 cm). Mean ash depths were significantly (p<.05) greater
when charred vegetation remained at the surface in association with ash
than when only ash was present [24,25].
Where fire was of light to moderate severity, most of the dry
above-surface tufted hairgrass material and some of the green biomass
were burned. However, subsurface fire was light or absent and ash depth
rarely exceeded 0.8 inch (2 cm). A distinct pattern was observed on
hummocky microtopography. Where fires were of low severity, fire was
largely confined to the troughs between hummocks. Tufted hairgrass,
common on hummocks, was not seriously injured by these fires, and was
seldom observed to have suffered damage to the root crown even when the
tops were heavily burned [24,25].
Where fire was severe and smoldered for some time, both troughs and
hummocks were burned. Here fire burned nearly all of the organic layer,
including tufted hairgrass subsurface and aboveground matter, and tufted
hairgrass was killed. The surface of the meadow in these areas was
lowered between 4 and 10 inches (10-25 cm) relative to adjacent
vegetation.
During the final week of September or the first week of October each
year between 1978 and 1981 the two transects were sampled by measuring
the foliar cover of individual plant species [24,25].
Immediately after fire: 42.7 percent of all vegetation on the lengths
of the transects had been reduced to ash. Ash segments on the transects
included prefire spaces between root crowns as well as individual plants
consumed entirely by a combination of surface and subsurface fire. On
another 41.1 percent of the total transect lengths the root mass and
upper soil layer had been completely burned by subsurface fire, though
partially burned aboveground herbage remained. These transect sections
corresponded to the prefire root crowns of sedges, rushes, and tufted
grasses of which tufted hairgrass was a dominant. Only about 2.3
percent of the original vegetation survived on the lengths of the two
transects [24,25].
Postfire year 1: Tufted hairgrass was widely distributed throughout the
severely burned portions of the meadow; it was generally more abundant
than in the measured transects. Tufted hairgrass appeared to have
established from seeds and also reestablished vegetatively. In less
severely burned areas tufted hairgrass aboveground biomass and cover
appeared comparable to that on unburned sites, even where tops had been
charred or removed by fire [24,25].
Tufted hairgrass percent cover on transects over the 4 years following
fire was as follows [24,25]:
Percent Cover
1978 1979 1980 1981
0.2 11.1 18.5 17.8
The lack of prefire vegetation data prevents precise comparison, but
tufted hairgrass cover on the most severely burned portions of Ellis
Meadow seemed to be succeeding toward that which had been characteristic
of the prefire state [24,25].
Tufted hairgrass root crowns in subalpine meadows generally survive all
but very severe fires. Tufted hairgrass regenerates from the root
crowns and also from seed in the seedbank [24,25].
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
NO-ENTRY
REFERENCES
SPECIES: Deschampsia cespitosa
REFERENCES :
1. Bell, Katherine L. 1974. Autumn, winter and spring phenology of some
Colorado alpine plants. American Midland Naturalist. 91(2): 460-464.
[233]
2. 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]
3. Bezeau, L. M.; Johnston, A. 1962. In vitro digestibility of range forage
plants of the Festuca scabrella association. Canadian Journal of Plant
Science. 42: 692-697. [441]
4. Billings, W. D. 1969. Vegetational pattern near alpine timberline as
affected by fire-snowdrift interactions. Vegetatio. 19: 192-207.
[12824]
5. Boggs, Keith; Hansen, Paul; Pfister, Robert; Joy, John. 1990.
Classification and management of riparian and wetland sites in
northwestern Montana. Missoula, MT: University of Montana, School of
Forestry, Montana Forest and Conservation Experiment Station, Montana
Riparian Association. 217 p. Draft Version 1. [8447]
6. Brichta, Paul Harold. 1986. Environmental relationships among wetland
community types of the northern range, Yellowstone National Park.
Missoula, MT: University of Montana. 74 p. Thesis. [6727]
7. Brown, Ray W.; Johnston, Robert S.; Richardson, Bland Z.; Farmer, Eugene
E. 1976. Rehabilitation of alpine disturbances: Beartooth Plateau,
Montana. In: Zuck, R. H.; Brown, L. F, eds. High-altitude revegetation
workshop No. 2; [Date of conference unknown]; Fort Collins, CO. Fort
Collins, CO: Colorado State University: 58-73. [8266]
8. Brown, Ray W.; Chambers, Jeanne C. 1989. Reclamation of severely
disturbed alpine ecosystems: new perspectives. In: Walker, D. G.;
Powter, C. B.; Pole, M. W., compilers. Reclamation, a global
perspective: Proceedings of the conference; 1989 August 27-31; Calgary,
AB. Rep. No. RRTAC 89-2. Vol. 1. Edmonton, AB: Alberta Land Conservation
and Reclamation Council: 59-68. [14365]
9. Brown, Ray W.; Chambers, Jeanne C. 1990. Reclamation practices in
high-mountain ecosystems. In: Schmidt, Wyman C.; McDonald, Kathy J.,
compilers. Proceedings--symposium on whitebark pine ecosystems: ecology
and management of a high-mountain resource; 1989 March 29-31; Bozeman,
MT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-270. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 329-334. [11704]
10. Brown, Ray W.; Chambers, Jeanne C.; Wheeler, Ray M.; [and others]. 1988.
Adaptations of Deschampsia cespitosa (tufted hairgrass) for revegetation
of high elevation disturbances: some selection criteria. In: High
altitude revegetation workshop no. 8: Proceedings; 1988 March 3-4; Fort
Collins, CO. Information Series No. 59. Fort Collins, CO: Colorado Water
Resources Research Institute: 147-172. [11564]
11. Brown, R. W.; Johnston, R. S. 1978. Rehabilitation of a high elevation
mine disturbance. In: Kenney, S.T., ed. Proceedings: High altitude
workshop no. 3. Environmental Res. Cent. Inf. Series No. 28. Fort
Collins, CO: Colorado State University: 116-130. [3322]
12. Buckner, David L.; Marr, John W. 1990. Use of sodding in alpine
vegetation. In: Hughes, H. Glenn; Bonnicksen, Thomas M., eds.
Restoration `89: the new management challange: 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: 501-508. [14719]
13. Burcham, L. T. 1957. California range land: An historico-ecological
study of the range resource of California. Sacramento, CA: State of
California, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Forestry. 247
p. [186]
14. Chambers, Jeanne C. 1989. Seed viability of alpine species: variability
within and among years. Journal of Range Management. 42(4): 304-308.
[7978]
15. Chambers, Jeanne C. 1993. Seed and vegetation dynamics in an alpine herb
field: effects of disturbance type. Canadian Journal of Botany. 71:
471-485. [21652]
16. Chambers, Jeanne C.; MacMahon, James A.; Brown, Ray W. 1987. Response of
an early seral dominant alpine grass and a late seral dominant alpine
forb to N and P availability. Reclamation and Revegetation Research. 6:
219-234. [3049]
17. Chambers, Jeanne C.; MacMahon, James A.; Brown, Ray W. 1987. Germination
characteristics of alpine grasses and forbs: a comparison of early and
late seral dominants with reclamation potential. Reclamation and
Revegetation Research. 6: 235-249. [2804]
18. Chambers, Jeanne C.; MacMahon, James A.; Brown, Ray W. 1990. Alpine
seedling establishment: the influence of disturbance type. Ecology.
71(4): 1323-1341. [11818]
19. Chambers, Jeanne C.; MacMahon, James A.; Haefner, James H. 1991. Seed
entrapment in alpine ecosystems: effects of soil particle size and
diaspore morphology. Ecology. 72(5): 1668-1677. [16961]
20. Champness, Stella S.; Morris, Kathleen. 1948. The population of buried
viable seeds in relation to contrasting pasture and soil types. Journal
of Ecology. 36: 149-173. [20023]
21. Cooper, David J. 1990. Ecology of wetlands in Big Meadows, Rocky
Mountain National Park, Colorado. Biological Report 90(15). Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 45 p.
[16106]
22. Cowan, Ian McTaggart. 1945. The ecological relationships of the food of
the Columbian black-tailed deer, Odocoileus hemionus columbianus
(Richardson), in the c. forest region southern Vancouver Island, British
Columbia. Ecological Monographs. 15(2): 110-139. [16006]
23. Davenport Seed Corporation. 1993. Davenport Seed Corporation catalog.
Davenport, WA. 24 p. [21135]
24. DeBenedetti, Steven H.; Parsons, David J. 1979. Natural fire in
subalpine meadows: a case description from the Sierra Nevada. Journal of
Forestry. 77(8): 477-479. [7251]
25. DeBenedetti, Steven H.; Parsons, David J. 1984. Postfire succession in a
Sierran subalpine meadow. American Midland Naturalist. 111(1): 118-125.
[6635]
26. 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]
27. Edwards, Stephen W. 1992. Observations on the prehistory and ecology of
grazing in California. Fremontia. 20(1): 3-11. [19418]
28. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and
Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
29. Fernald, Merritt Lyndon. 1950. Gray's manual of botany. [Corrections
supplied by R. C. Rollins]. Portland, OR: Dioscorides Press. 1632 p.
(Dudley, Theodore R., gen. ed.; Biosystematics, Floristic & Phylogeny
Series; vol. 2). [14935]
30. Franzreb, Kathleen E. 1977. Bird population changes after timber
harvesting of a mixed conifer forest in Arizona. Res. Pap. RM-184. Fort
Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky
Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 26 p. [19331]
31. Frenkel, Robert E.; Morlan, Janet C. 1991. Can we restore our salt
marshes? Lessons from the Salmon River, Oregon. Northwest Environmental
Journal. 7: 119-135. [22340]
32. Gates, Dillard H. 1962. Revegetation of a high-altitude, barren slope in
northern Idaho. Journal of Range Management. 15: 314-318. [20175]
33. 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]
34. Gehring, Janet L.; Linhart, Yan B. 1992. Population structure & genetic
differentiation in native & introduced populations of Deschampsia
caespitosa (Poaceae) in the Colorado alpine. American Journal of Botany.
79(12): 1337-1343. [20216]
35. Gleason, Henry A.; Cronquist, Arthur. 1991. Manual of vascular plants of
northeastern United States and adjacent Canada. 2nd ed. New York: New
York Botanical Garden. 910 p. [20329]
36. Gould, Frank W.; Shaw, Robert B. 1983. Grass systematics. 2d ed. College
Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press. 397 p. [5667]
37. Great Plains Flora Association. 1986. Flora of the Great Plains.
Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. 1392 p. [1603]
38. Greytak, Dan. 1992. A technique for producing riparian plants for
Nevada. In: Landis, Thomas D., technical coordinator. Proceedings,
Intermountain Forest Nursery Association; 1991 August 12-16; Park City,
UT. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-211. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment
Station: 91-93. [20930]
39. 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]
40. Hanley, Thomas A.; McKendrick, Jay D. 1983. Seasonal changes in chemical
composition and nutritive values of native forages in a spruce-hemlock
forests, southeastern Alaska. Res. Pap. PNW-312. Portland, OR: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and
Range Experiment Station. 41 p. [8770]
41. Hanley, Thomas A.; Robbins, Charles T.; Spalinger, Donald E. 1989.
Forest habitats and the nutritional ecology of Sitka black-tailed deer:
a research synthesis with implications for forest management. Gen. Tech.
Rep. PNW-GTR-230. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 52 p. [7509]
42. Hansen, Paul L.; Pfister, Robert D.; Boggs, Keith; [and others]. 1995.
Classification and management of Montana's riparian and wetland sites.
Miscellaneous Publication No. 54. Missoula, MT: The University of
Montana, School of Forestry, Montana Forest and Conservation Experiment
Station. 646 p. [24768]
43. Hardy BBT Limited. 1989. Manual of plant species suitability for
reclamation in Alberta. 2d ed. Report No. RRTAC 89-4. Edmonton, AB:
Alberta Land Conservation and Reclamation Council. 436 p. [15460]
44. Heady, Harold F.; Foin, Theodore C.; Hektner, Mary M.; [and others].
1977. Coastal prairie and northern coastal scrub. In: Barbour, Michael
G.; Major, Jack, eds. Terrestrial vegetation of California. New York:
John Wiley and Sons: 733-760. [7211]
45. Helms, John A.; Ratliff, Raymond D. 1987. Germination and establishment
of Pinus contorta var. murrayana of Yosemite National Park, California.
Madrono. 34(2): 77-90. [6739]
46. Herzman, Carl W.; Everson, A. C.; Mickey, Myron H.; [and others]. 1959.
Handbook of Colorado native grasses. Bull. 450-A. Fort Collins, CO:
Colorado State University, Extension Service. 31 p. [10994]
47. Hess, Karl; Wasser, Clinton H. 1982. Grassland, shrubland, and
forestland habitat types of the White River-Arapaho National Forest.
Final Report. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 335 p.
[1142]
48. Hickman, James C., ed. 1993. The Jepson manual: Higher plants of
California. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1400 p.
[21992]
49. 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]
50. Hitchcock, C. Leo; Cronquist, Arthur. 1973. Flora of the Pacific
Northwest. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press. 730 p. [1168]
51. Houtcooper, Wayne C.; Ode, David J.; Pearson, John A.; Vandell, George
M., III. 1985. Rare animals and plants of South Dakota. Prairie
Naturalist. 17(3): 143-165. [17792]
52. Jakubos, Bonnie; Romme, William H. 1993. Invasion of subalpine meadows
by lodgepole pine in Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming, U.S.A. Arctic
and Alpine Research. 25(4): 382-390. [22582]
53. Johnson, W. M. 1962. Vegetation of high-altitude ranges in Wyoming as
related to use by game and domestic sheep. Bulletin 387. Laramie, WY:
University of Wyoming, Agricultural Experiment Station. 31 p. [3995]
54. Johnson, P. L.; Billings, W. D. 1962. The alpine vegetation of the
Beartooth Plateau in relation to cryopedogenic processes and patterns.
Ecological Monographs. 32(2): 105-135. [12218]
55. 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]
56. 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]
57. Kirby, K. J. 1988. Changes in the ground flora under plantations on
ancient woodland sites. Forestry. 61(4): 317-338. [13357]
58. Komarkova, Vera. 1986. Habitat types on selected parts of the Gunnison
and Uncompahgre National Forests. Final Report Contract No. 28-K2-234.
Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky
Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 270 p. [1369]
59. Kovalchik, Bernard L. 1987. Riparian zone associations: Deschutes,
Ochoco, Fremont, and Winema National Forests. R6 ECOL TP-279-87.
Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific
Northwest Region. 171 p. [9632]
60. Kovalchik, Bernard L.; Hopkins, William E.; Brunsfeld, Steven J. 1988.
Major indicator shrubs and herbs in riparian zones on National Forests
of central Oregon. R6-ECOL-TP-005-88. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 159 p. [8995]
61. 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]
62. Kudo, Gaku. 1991. Effects of snow-free period on the phenology of alpine
plants inhabiting snow patches. Arctic and Alpine Research. 23(4):
436-443. [17701]
63. Larson, Gary E. 1993. Aquatic and wetland vascular plants of the
Northern Great Plains. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-238. Fort Collins, CO: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and
Range Experiment Station. 681 p. [22534]
64. Lewis, Mont E. 1970. Alpine rangelands of the Uinta Mountains. Ogden,
UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Region 4. 75 p.
[1451]
65. Major, J.; Pyott, W. T. 1966. Buried, viable seeds in two California
bunchgrass sites and their bearing on the definition of a flora.
Vegetatio. 13: 254-282. [6343]
66. Manning, Mary E.; Padgett, Wayne G. 1989. Preliminary riparian community
type classification for Nevada. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Region. 135 p. Preliminary
draft. [11531]
67. Mason, Herbert L. 1957. A flora of the marshes of California. Berkeley,
CA: University of California Press. 878 p. [16905]
68. Mitchell, W. W. 1982. Forage yield and quality of indigenous and
introduced grasses at Palmer, Alaska. Agronomy Journal. 74: 899-905.
[16172]
69. Mohlenbrock, Robert H. 1986. (Revised edition). Guide to the vascular
flora of Illinois. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
507 p. [17383]
70. Morris, H. E.; Booth, W. E.; Payne, G. F.; Stitt, R. E. 1950. Important
grasses on Montana ranges. Bull. No. 470. Bozeman, MT: Montana
Agricultural Experiment Station. 52 p. [5520]
71. Mors, Iris von; Begin, Yves. 1993. Shoreline shrub population extension
in response to recent isostatic rebound in eastern Hudson Bay, Quebec,
Canada. Arctic and Alpine Research. 25(1): 15-23. [20940]
72. Mueggler, W. F. 1985. Forage. In: DeByle, Norbert V.; Winokur, Robert
P., eds. Aspen: ecology and management in the western United States.
Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-119. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment
Station: 129-134. [11915]
73. Mueggler, W. F.; Stewart, W. L. 1980. Grassland and shrubland habitat
types of western Montana. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-66. Ogden, UT: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and
Range Experiment Station. 154 p. [1717]
74. Munz, Philip A. 1973. A California flora and supplement. Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press. 1905 p. [6155]
75. Padgett, Wayne G.; Youngblood, Andrew P.; Winward, Alma H. 1989.
Riparian community type classification of Utah and southeastern Idaho.
R4-Ecol-89-01. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Intermountain Region. 191 p. [11360]
76. Pierce, John; Johnson, Janet. 1986. Wetland community type
classification for west-central Montana. Missoula, MT: U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Region, Ecosystem Management
Program. 158 p. [Review draft]. [7436]
77. Rabe, Fred W.; Elzinga, Caryl; Breckenridge, Roy. 1994. Classification
of meandering glide and spring stream natural areas in Idaho. Natural
Areas Journal. 14(3): 188-202. [23961]
78. Radford, Albert E.; Ahles, Harry E.; Bell, C. Ritchie. 1968. Manual of
the vascular flora of the Carolinas. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of
North Carolina Press. 1183 p. [7606]
79. Ratliff, Raymond D. 1982. A meadow site classification for the Sierra
Nevada, California. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-60. Berkeley, CA: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and
Range Experiment Station. 16 p. [1941]
80. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant
geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
81. Ross, Robert L.; Hunter, Harold E. 1976. Climax vegetation of Montana
based on soils and climate. Bozeman, MT: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Soil Conservation Service. 64 p. [2028]
82. Russell, W. B. 1985. Vascular flora of abandoned coal-mined land, Rocky
Mountain Foothills, Alberta. Canadian Field-Naturalist. 99(4): 503-516.
[10461]
83. Salter, R. E.; Hudson, R. J. 1979. Feeding ecology of feral horses in
western Alberta. Journal of Range Management. 32(3): 221-225. [11490]
84. 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]
85. Shiflet, Thomas N., ed. 1994. Rangeland cover types of the United
States. Denver, CO: Society for Range Management. 152 p. [23362]
86. 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]
87. Stohlgren, Thomas J.; DeBenedetti, Steven H.; Parsons, David J. 1989.
Effects of herbage removal on productivity of selected high-Sierra
meadow community types. Environmental Management. 13(4): 485-491.
[13276]
88. Stoynoff, Nick A. 1993. A quantitative analysis of the vegetation of
Bluff Spring Fen Nature Preserve. Transactions, Illinois State Academy
of Science. 63(3&4): 93-110. [23734]
89. Strausbaugh, P. D.; Core, Earl L. 1977. Flora of West Virginia. 2nd ed.
Morgantown, WV: Seneca Books, Inc. 1079 p. [23213]
90. Stubbendieck, James; Hatch, Stephan L.; Butterfield, Charles H. 1992.
North American range plants. 4th ed. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska
Press. 493 p. [25162]
91. 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]
92. 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]
93. Vaartnou, Manivalde. 1988. The potential of native populations of
grasses in northern revegetation. In: Kershaw, Peter, ed. Northern
environmental disturbances. Occas. Publ. No. 24. Edmonton, AB:
University of Alberta, Boreal Institute for Northern Studies: 31-41.
[14418]
94. Vallentine, John F. 1961. Important Utah range grasses. Extension
Circular 281. Logan, UT: Utah State University. 48 p. [2937]
95. Viereck, Leslie A. 1966. Plant succession and soil development on gravel
outwash of the Muldrow Glacier, Alaska. Ecological Monographs. 36(3):
181-199. [12484]
96. Vitt, Dale H.; Horton, Diana G.; Slack, Nancy G.; Malmer, Nils. 1990.
Sphagnum-dominated peatlands of the hyperoceanic British Columbia coast:
patterns in surface water chemistry and vegetation. Canadian Journal of
Forestry Research. 20: 696-711. [11739]
97. Volland, Leonard A. 1985. Guidelines for forage resource evaluation
within central Oregon Pumice Zone. R6-Ecol-177-1985. Portland, OR: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 216
p. [12497]
98. Voss, Edward G. 1972. Michigan flora. Part I. Gymnosperms and monocots.
Bloomfield Hills, MI: Cranbrook Institute of Science; Ann Arbor, MI:
University of Michigan Herbarium. 488 p. [11471]
99. Weaver, T. 1982. Distribution of root biomass in well-drained surface
soils. American Midland Naturalist. 107(2): 393-395. [2469]
100. 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]
101. Winterhalder, Keith. 1990. The trigger-factor approach to the initiation
of natural regeneration of plant communities on industrially-damaged
lands at Sudbury, Ontario. 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: 215-226. [14697]
102. Wofford, B. Eugene. 1989. Guide to the vascular plants of the Blue
Ridge. Athens, GA: The University of Georgia Press. 384 p. [12908]
103. Youngblood, Andrew P.; Padgett, Wayne G.; Winward, Alma H. 1985.
Riparian community type classification of eastern Idaho - western
Wyoming. R4-Ecol-85-01. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Intermountain Region. 78 p. [2686]
104. Zacek, Joseph C.; Hunter, Harold E.; Bown, T. A.; Ross, Robert L. 1977.
Montana grazing guides. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil
Conservation Service. 12 p. [2687]
105. St. John, Harold. 1973. List and summary of the flowering plants in the
Hawaiian islands. Hong Kong: Cathay Press Limited. 519 p. [25354]
FEIS Home Page
https://www.fs.usda.gov/database/feis/plants/graminoid/desces/all.html
