Index of Species Information
SPECIES: Phleum pratense
Introductory
SPECIES: Phleum pratense
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION :
Esser, Lora L. 1993. Phleum pratense. 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/phlpra/all.html [].
ABBREVIATION :
PHLPRA
SYNONYMS :
NO-ENTRY
SCS PLANT CODE :
PHPR3
COMMON NAMES :
timothy
common timothy
herd's grass
TAXONOMY :
The currently accepted scientific name for timothy is Phleum pratense L.
There are two recognized varieties [59]:
Phleum pratense var. pratense
Phleum pratense var. nodosum (L.) Huds.
LIFE FORM :
Graminoid
FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS :
No special status
OTHER STATUS :
NO-ENTRY
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Phleum pratense
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION :
Timothy is of Eurasian origin but was first cultivated in the United
States [47]. It was found growing in New Hampshire in 1711 and was
named herd's grass. In 1747, timothy spread from New England to Canada
and westward [139]. Timothy is found in all 50 states and throughout
Canada except Prince Edward Island and Labrador [9,113,129]. Timothy is
widely cultivated in the northeastern states south to the Cotton Belt
and west to the 100th meridian, in humid regions of Puget Sound, and in
mountainous regions [45].
ECOSYSTEMS :
FRES10 White - red - jack pine
FRES11 Spruce - fir
FRES12 Longleaf - slash pine
FRES13 Loblolly - shortleaf pine
FRES14 Oak - 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
FRES28 Western hardwoods
FRES29 Sagebrush
FRES30 Desert shrub
FRES31 Shinnery
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 :
AL AK AZ AR CA CO CT DE FL GA
HI ID IL IN IA KS KY LA ME MD
MA MI MN MS MO MT NE NV NH NJ
NM NY NC ND OH OK OR PA RI SC
SD TN TX UT VT VA WA WV WI WY
AB BC MB NB NF NS NT ON PQ SK
YT
BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :
1 Northern Pacific Border
2 Cascade Mountains
3 Southern Pacific Border
4 Sierra Mountains
5 Columbia Plateau
6 Upper Basin and Range
7 Lower Basin and Range
8 Northern Rocky Mountains
9 Middle Rocky Mountains
10 Wyoming Basin
11 Southern Rocky Mountains
12 Colorado Plateau
13 Rocky Mountain Piedmont
14 Great Plains
15 Black Hills Uplift
16 Upper Missouri Basin and Broken Lands
KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :
widely planted, occurs in nearly all types
SAF COVER TYPES :
widely planted, occurs in nearly all types
SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES :
NO-ENTRY
HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES :
NO-ENTRY
MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
SPECIES: Phleum pratense
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE :
Timothy is a palatable and nutritious forage for domestic livestock and
big game animals [22,119]. It is cultivated for both hay and pasture
throughout North America [140]. Timothy is valuable for range seeding
because it grows under a wide variety of range and soil moisture
conditions [96]. On a Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) clearcut in
Montana, timothy was the preferred forage species of livestock [7].
Timothy is frequently seeded in mixtures with legumes for better
performance but is grown alone to make premium hay for horses. Timothy
is also grown with meadow foxtail (Alopecurus arundinaceus), big trefoil
(Lotus uliginosus), and white clover (Trifolium repens) for hay and
silage [39]. Timothy is inferior to alfalfa and clover hays for
fattening cattle [22].
Timothy is grazed by deer and rodents in Washington [27]. Songbirds and
gamebirds consume timothy seeds. It is an important forage for elk in
Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado and elsewhere, and is eaten by
mule deer and mountain sheep [46]. In Arizona in July, timothy
contributed 0.38 percent to mule deer diets [53]. In Glacier National
Park, timothy contributed 20 percent to elk diets in the spring, and
just a trace in the winter [109].
PALATABILITY :
Timothy is highly palatable to all classes of livestock and big game
species [119,122]. It is highly palatable to horses and cattle in
spring, summer, and fall; and to sheep in summer [141]. Palatability of
timothy is high for elk in the spring and summer, and high for deer in
the summer [108].
Palatability ratings for timothy from selected western states are as
follows [143]:
WY UT CO MT ND
cattle good good good good good
sheep good fair good good fair
horses good good good good good
elk good good ---- fair ----
mule deer good fair ---- poor ----
white-tailed deer good ---- ---- ---- ----
antelope poor ---- ---- ---- ----
upland game birds poor good ---- ---- ----
waterfowl poor ---- good ---- ----
small nongame birds good good fair ---- ----
small mammals fair good fair ---- ----
NUTRITIONAL VALUE :
The nutritive value of timothy decreases as plants mature; the
digestibility of cellulose is directly proportional to overall nutritive
value of timothy [8].
Crude protein, phosphorus, and carotene levels of timothy decline over
the course of the growing season. Some nutritional values for timothy
are as follows [56]:
dry crude crude crude ash Ca P carotene
matter protein fat fiber (%) (%) (%) (mg/kg)
(%) (%) (%) (%)
STAGE
leaf stage 92.2 13.3 3.17 24.3 7.23 0.37 0.20 45.2
heading 92.6 7.20 2.57 28.3 5.13 0.22 0.12 29.8
seed ripe 94.4 5.70 2.10 29.7 5.50 0.25 0.08 5.80
cured 93.0 2.94 1.86 34.4 7.30 0.38 0.04 2.12
weathered 95.1 2.45 1.20 42.5 4.85 0.26 0.03 1.00
Moisture content of timothy decreases as the plant matures; before
heading, moisture content is 78.5 percent; at full bloom, moisture
content is 67.2 percent; and as seeds mature, moisture content is 49.9
percent [46].
Feeds with low digestibility have a low net energy value; the net energy
value of timothy hay is 43 therms. The best time to cut grass for hay
is a few days after it has reached the stage of maximum flowering and
before seeds begin to form. It will yield a greater return of
digestible nutrients per acre [57]:
Yields of digestible nutrients per acre of timothy cut at different
stages of growth (in pounds)
dry matter crude carbos crude fat total digestible
protein matter
STAGE
early bloom 3.41 135 1.68 43 1.91
full bloom 4.00 147 1.87 44 2.11
seed formed 4.01 113 1.80 51 2.03
seed in dough 4.04 98 1.70 54 1.91
seed ripe 3.75 92 1.58 38 1.75
Livestock utilize forested sites in the Black Hills of South Dakota less
than adjacent meadow sites. Shading of timothy in forested areas
decreases sugars and easily hydrolyzable carbohydrates. The high sugar
content of timothy in the meadow sites is associated with an increase in
utilization of these sites. Phenological development is 1 to 2 weeks
later in forested areas than in meadow areas [83].
COVER VALUE :
Timothy provides important cover for a variety of game birds, small
mammals, and waterfowl [40,75,138]. It provides cover for dwarf shrews
and deer mice in southeastern Montana [75]. Stands of redtop (Agrostis
alba), Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis), and timothy are indispensable
as nesting cover and brood-rearing cover for prairie chickens in the
North Central States [131,138].
In grass meadows along drainage ditches in Wisconsin, timothy provides
nesting cover for sharp-tailed grouse, blue-winged teal, and prairie
chickens [40].
Regional cover values for selected wildlife species are as follows [143]:
UT CO WY MT
Elk poor ---- poor ----
Mule deer poor ---- fair ----
White-tailed deer ---- ---- fair ----
Antelope poor ---- poor ----
Upland game birds fair good good fair
Waterfowl ---- fair good good
Small nongame birds fair ---- good fair
Small mammals good ---- good fair
VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES :
Timothy is widely used for rehabilitation of cutover, burned-over, and
overgrazed mountain rangelands [119]. It helps stabilize the soil and
is commonly used in Nebraska and the cornbelt for erosion control [107].
Timothy is used for rehabilitation of sites disturbed by construction of
railroads, canals, trails, and highways; logged sites; and sites altered
for recreational purposes. It is recommended for use in the Alaska
boreal zone for reclamation and erosion control. Timothy was seeded
onto a strip mine in south-central Alaska in 1976 and 1979, and was
found growing on those sites in 1981 and 1985 [25]. Timothy is well
adapted to intense disturbances. Plant cover of timothy increases with
a corresponding increase in disturbance [63].
Timothy was used in the rehabilitation of a high-elevation mine on the
Beartooth Plateau, Montana. Timothy was transplanted while dormant to
reduce physiological damage. The well-developed root system and root
crown of transplants are not as susceptible to frost heaving and
desiccation as are those of emerging seedlings. Consequently
transplanting is the most successful technique available for alpine
areas [13,14]. Timothy is good for short-term rehabilitation efforts
[13].
After a fire in South Dakota, timothy was seeded with other grasses at a
rate of ll pounds per acre (12.4 kg/ha). As ground cover developed,
summer runoff and erosion rates decreased until cover density reached
about 60 percent. Some stabilization of soil was realized in the first
growing season, and by the fourth growing season all areas were
stabilized. Introduced species provide a more evenly dispersed cover
than native species and supply a steady accumulation of litter cover
[93].
Timothy was used as a part of a seed mixture for streambank and stream
bottom reseeding on the Manti-LaSal National Forest in Utah. It was
recommended that all recently exposed sand and gravel bars within the
stream channel and floodplain be broadcast seeded with this seed mixture
to help control flooding and landslides [128].
OTHER USES AND VALUES :
NO-ENTRY
OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Timothy is successfully and profitably used for reseeding rangelands
where the soil is moist and the growing season long enough for seed
production [119]. Before planting, managers should take into account
the grazing management plan for the ranch or range unit. Seeded species
can do more harm than good, and timothy may not always be the most
appropriate species. Exotic grasses are one of the most disruptive
factors in native fescue grasslands in Glacier National Park [118].
Timothy is the most widely distributed exotic in the park, where it is
associated with substrate disturbed by post-1980 underground utility
construction. Timothy was intentionally seeded by outfitters in the
1940's and by park personnel in the 1980's. Extensive tiller mats of
timothy limit cryptogam colonization sites and reduce native graminoid
colonization. Reduction of timothy is not a realistic option in Glacier
or other natural areas; the most reasonable recommendation for resource
managers is not to use it for revegetating disturbed sites [118].
The exotics of greatest concern to wildland managers are timothy and
Kentucky bluegrass because they establish quickly, spread vigorously,
and usually escape early detection. Timothy has the highest ability of
34 exotics tested to invade closed vegetation areas. Constancy values
in forest, meadow, and alpine tundra is 99, 99, and 36 percent,
respectively. Numbers and frequency of timothy increases from
undisturbed sites to regularly disturbed sites. More resources are
available at the latter sites because competition is greatly reduced.
Timothy is of great concern because it often dominates the area it
occupies. Control should include both elimination and simultaneous
introduction of a desirable competitor [130].
Livestock use: Timothy maintains itself well with proper management,
but it is not resistant to heavy grazing. It will grow up to 12 years
on properly managed rangelands, but stands tend to die out in 6 to 7
years [119]. Grazing is chiefly responsible for impoverishment and
retrogressive succession of vegetation in Utah; erosion caused by sheep
and cattle grazing is pronounced, and the runoff in many riparian areas
has reached flood proportions. Grazing must be regulated better in
these areas [20]. Moderate grazing in Iowa and Wisconsin was more
destructive than mowing. Grazing compacts the soil and if important
range grasses are overgrazed, timothy will start to dominate range sites
[23].
Cattle grazing should be deferred to late summer to lessen streambank
alterations; forage utilization should be monitored closely to enhance
improvements in bank protection [78]. Noncontinuous grazing early or
late in the growing season has a less detrimental effect on other
vegetation than does continuous season-long grazing [67]. Meadows
should be grazed on a rotation plan. In humid zones, timothy should be
grazed until the jointing stage, then mown for hay at bloom stage; this
can be repeated two to three times under favorable grazing conditions.
Timothy meadows should be harrowed and fertilized annually [130].
Riparian areas are directly affected by upland site conditions.
Management including no grazing, limited grazing, or artificial
restoration can stabilize erosive areas and reduce sedimentation and
destructive erosive runoff to downslope riparian areas [111].
Timothy seedlings can be detrimental or beneficial in young conifer
plantations. They may hinder conifer seedling establishment by
preemption of resources, allelopathy, attraction of insects and animals,
and increased fire potential. They can be beneficial by excluding other
competitive plant species. Timothy seedlings compete strongly with
conifer seedlings, especially when conifer seedlings are not fully
established. After establishment of conifer seedlings, approximately 5
years, timothy seeds may aid conifer seedling growth by excluding shrub
competition. Grasses should be eliminated from plantations until
conifer seedlings have become established; the limiting resource is soil
moisture [82]. The interior Douglas-fir-Engelmann spruce (Picea
engelmanii)-subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) biegeoclimatic zones have
potential for producing both trees and grass depending on soil
capability, erosion hazards, regeneration objectives, and cattle
management problems [85].
Establishment: Timothy should be planted before or early during the
2-month period most favorable for rapid germination and seedling growth:
late summer, early spring, or late fall in most regions; June or early
July in high mountains; August for irrigated plantings. When used in
mixtures with legumes, the mixture should be at the optimum time for
seeding legumes. Timothy seeds germinate rapidly: 10 days in lab
testing aided by prechilling. Timothy seedlings are moderately
vigorous. They usually become well established by the second growing
season, and sometimes by the end of the first growing season under
favorable conditions and a longer growing season. Maximum dry matter
hay yields are obtained by harvesting in the postbloom stag [129].
Fall seeding is best when seeding timothy alone or with winter wheat.
Seedlings from fall seedings are less likely to be injured by dry
weather in late spring or early summer than seedlings from spring
seedings. Also, less seed is required for fall than for spring
seedings. For the fall, 3.5 pounds per acre (4.0 kg/ha) are needed; in
the spring, 10 pounds per acre (11.2 kg/ha) are needed. Timothy is
commonly sown with clover or alfalfa to produce hay with higher protein
content and to maintain better soil productivity [119]. When timothy is
seeded in mixtures with other perennial grasses, it will be replaced by
the slower developing, longer lived species in a few years. Except at
higher elevations, properly managed stands are maintained by good seed
crops. Timothy competes successfully with native grasses only where
moisture and soil are favorable [104].
Fertilizers increase timothy seedling establishment in mineral and peat
soils. There is more rapid growth on peats, but sustained growth is
better on mineral soils that are kept moist. Fertilizer trials indicate
that a N plus P treatment is most effective [9].
Diseases: Timothy is susceptible to winter crown and root rots. Purple
spot (Heterosporium phlei) is widespread in timothy stands but is rarely
severe. Severe infection will impair hay quality and reduce seed yields
[139].
Cultivars: There are 25 varieties of timothy used in agricultural
practices today. In Montana, recommended varieties are 'Climax' and
'Hopkins'. 'Climax' timothy should be used for seed production on
irrigated land or dryland with favorable moisture. 'Hopkins' timothy
should be used for hay and seed production on irrigated lands or high
altitude dryland with favorable moisture [18]. Another cultivar used
frequently in Alaska, is 'Engmo' timothy. It is a long-lived perennial
that can persist indefinitely if not killed by winter or pathogens [62].
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Phleum pratense
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
Timothy is an introduced, cool-season, perennial bunchgrass that grows
from 20 to 40 inches (51-102 cm) tall [114,129]. Culms emerge from a
swollen or bulblike base and form large clumps. The flowering heads of
timothy are cylindrical and spikelike, and about 6 inches (15 cm) long.
The one-flowered spikelet produces seeds that are small and enclosed in
awned, urn-shaped husks [23,90,139]. Leaves of timothy are flat and 3
to 13 inches (7.6-33 cm) long [119]. Timothy is generally short-lived
(4 to 5 years) but can live up to 6 or 7 years [124]. Timothy has a
moderately shallow and fibrous root system; roots can extend to 48
inches (120 cm) in depth [129,139]. Timothy is nonrhizomatous [114,119].
Timothy plants contain corms at their base which are annual, forming in
early summer and dying the next year when the seed matures [47].
Timothy forms vesicular-arbuscular endomycorrhizal associations [143].
RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :
Hemicryptophyte
Geophyte
REGENERATION PROCESSES :
Sexual reproduction: Timothy reproduces mainly from seed. It is a
prolific seeder [140]; the small, hard seeds are dispersed by livestock,
wind, and other agents [119]. There are 1.1 to 1.3 million seeds per
pound (0.495-.0585 million per kg) [133]. Maximum germination usually
occurs about 3 or 4 weeks after it is harvested, when nearly 100 percent
should germinate. Germination rates remain high for 1 to 2 years.
Timothy seed remains viable for 4 to 5 years if kept in a dry, cool
place [133]. Timothy seedlings are vigorous and fast growing [18].
Vegetative reproduction: Timothy reproduces vegetatively through
tillering [2]. When timothy plants are plowed under, many become
reestablished through rooting stems which develop and grow upwards to
the surface. Vegetative reproduction occurs through buds in the axils
of the leaves, at nodes which may or may not be adjacent to the corms
[29]. Tillering suppression has been noted at the onset of sexual
reproductive growth [2].
The major site of carbohydrate storage is in the lower regions of the
stems (corms, stem bases, and stolons). Adequate carbohydrate reserves
are important in perennial plants for winter survival, early spring
growth initiation, and regrowth initiation after herbage removal [134].
High night temperatures decrease the carbohydrate reserves of timothy.
SITE CHARACTERISTICS :
Timothy is adapted to a wide range of climatic and edaphic conditions
but grows best on well-drained moist clay or loam soils [104,140].
Timothy is best adapted to growth in poorly drained alluvial, Humic
Gley, and Brown Podzolic soils [39]. It thrives in deep, fertile,
loamy, silty, and clayey soils of humid regions but can also grow in
thin, gravelly, and rocky substrates if adequately moist [129].
Timothy has escaped cultivation and has become established at medium to
high elevations in the mountains where it grows in moist grasslands, in
aspen and conifer stands, and along roadways. It has become naturalized
on sites ranging from warm, dry grasslands to cool, moist subalpine
forests [32]. Timothy has a medium to high water requirement and is
intolerant of drought. It does best on sites where the water table is
low enough to allow at least the upper 6 inches (15 cm) of soil to
remain unsaturated most of the year [108,140]. Timothy is intolerant of
alkaline or acidic soils. Lower pH limit is 4.5 to 5.0 [124]. It can
tolerate up to several weeks of flooding in the winter but only a few
days during the growing season [39,129].
Timothy needs about 20 inches (50 cm) of precipitation per year on good
soils, and up to 30 inches (76 cm) on less favorable soils. Irrigation
greatly enhances productivity in dry climates [23,129]. Timothy has
excellent cold tolerance and winter hardiness [129]. It will tolerate
high shade but thrives in partial shade [108].
Timothy does best at medium elevations but grows up to 11,500 feet
(3,506 m) in Colorado [119]. Regional elevation distributions are as
follows [17,18,25,27,50,102,143]:
feet meters
Utah 500 - 10,000 150 - 3,048
Colorado 4,500 - 11,500 1,370 - 3,506
Nevada up to 6,000 1,830
California up to 6,000 1,830
Idaho up to 8,400 2,560
Montana 3,100 - 8,000 945 - 2,440
Alaska 1,300 - 3,015 396 - 919
Washington up to 5,000 1,524
Wyoming 5,600 - 9,100 1,700 - 2,775
Alberta up to 3,200 975
British Columbia up to 4,400 1,340
Graminoid species commonly associated with timothy are: sloughgrass
(Beckmannia syzigachne), creeping wildrye (Elymus triticoides), meadow
barley (Hordeum brachyantherum), Nevada bluegrass (Poa nevadensis),
carpet bentgrass (Agrostis stolonifera), big bluestem (Andropogon
gerardi), porcupine grass (Stipa spartea), little bluestem
(Schizachyrium scoparium), Junegrass (Koeleria cristata), prairie
dropseed (Sporobolus heterolepis), Canada wildrye (E. canadensis),
bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata), Idaho fescue (Festuca
idahoensis), reedgrass (Calamagrostis spp.), streambank wheatgrass
(Elymus lanceolatus), red fescue (F. rubra), crested wheatgrass (A.
cristatum), fescue (Festuca spp.), wheatgrass (Agropyron spp.), tufted
hairgrass (Deschampsia caespitosa), and oniongrass (Melica spp.)
[19,74,98].
The following species are often seeded in mixtures with timothy:
bromegrass (Smooth brome), orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata), Kentucky
bluegrass, fescue (Festuca spp.), wheatgrass (Agropyron spp.), creeping
bentgrass (Agrostis palustris), Canadian bluegrass (Poa compressa), tall
oatgrass (Arrhenatherum elatius), reed canarygrass (Phalaris
arundinacea), creeping meadow foxtail (Alopecurus arundinaceus),
sweetclover (Melilotus), alsike clover (Trifolium hybridum), big
trefoil, birdsfoot trefoil (L. corniculatus), alfalfa (Medicago sativa),
meadow foxtail, and yellow foxtail (Setaria geniculata)
[21,29,39,47,102].
Common overstory species associated with timothy not listed in
Distribution and Occurrence are: sandbar willow (Salix exigua),
thinleaf alder (Alnus incana ssp. tenuifolia), and western river alder
(A. incana) [14,46,70].
Species commonly associated with timothy not already listed include:
chokecherry (Prunus), snowberry (Symphoricarpos), woods rose (Rosa
woodsii), sedges (Carex spp.), spike-rush (Eleocharis), rushes (Juncus
spp.), cicer milkvetch (Astragalus cicer), rambler alfalfa (Medicago
media), sainfoin (Onobrychis viciifolia), common yarrow (Achillea
millefolium), field horsetail (Equisetum arvense), yellow salsify
(Tragopogon dubius), aster (Aster spp.), borage (Borago officianalis),
cinquefoil (Potentilla spp.), dandelion (Taraxacum officinale),
willowweed (Epilobium spp.), and dock (Rumex spp.) [10,19,74,84].
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS :
Obligate Initial Community Species
Timothy usually occurs in early to mid seral stages, although it can
also dominate in self-perpetuating grasslands. It is an intermediate
competitor. It colonizes disturbed areas via seed [123]. Timothy has
been observed in early seral mixed forests [41]. In southwest Ohio, it
was found in fields up to 50 years of age but not in fields 90 years of
age [123]. Timothy does better following disturbance of sites in early
successional stages compared with those in later successional stages.
For example timothy cover was high after disturbance in old fields and
low after disturbance in forests. Mid-seral old fields contained an
abundance of timothy [123]. In Wyoming, a cottonwood-grass sere is one
of the dominant riparian communities in the Northern Great Plains. It
progresses from seedlings of Great Plains cottonwood establishing on
newly deposited alluvium, to a thicket of sandbar willow and cottonwood,
to cottonwood forest, to shrubland dominated by snowberry and wood's
rose, to a self-perpetuating grassland dominated by timothy [10].
SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT :
Timothy begins growth in early spring. Flowering occurs from June to
September, depending on altitude and latitude [129,143]. Seeds are
formed by midsummer and are released in August. Timothy produces a
moderate amount of cool-season regrowth in early summer and fall with
adequate moisture and fertility [129].
Some reported dates for anthesis are as follows [133,143]:
Colorado June-September
Wyoming June-September
Montana June-August
North Dakota June-July
Ohio June-July
Timothy seeds are harvested in Missouri in July, and in Minnesota in
early August [133]. There is a critical period in early fall for
transfer of food reserves to the corms [29].
FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Phleum pratense
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS :
As with most perennial grasses, timothy is well adapted to fire.
Susceptibility of pasture or range vegetation to fire depends on
specific fire adaptations of the species and phenological stage when
burned. Timothy has underground regenerative organs that are not harmed
by moderately severe fires. Timothy is harmed if burned when actively
growing in the spring and summer but is fairly fire tolerant when
dormant [129]. In Yellowstone National Park after the fires of 1988,
timothy sprouted from the roots after being top-killed [4]. Timothy can
occurs on extremely cold sites; these sites seldom burn [129].
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)
Secondary colonizer - off-site seed
FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Phleum pratense
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT :
Moderately severe fires will top-kill timothy, and severe fires may
cause damage to or kill the root crown, killing the plant [4].
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT :
NO-ENTRY
PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE :
Fire stimulates the production of reproductive tillers in timothy. In
Illinois, a prescribed burn in August was beneficial for rejuvenation of
timothy sods. Seed production increased following fire, and there was
an increased success of timothy 2 to 4 years after the burn [132].
In Oregon in early November, fire increased the vegetative yield and
maximum height of timothy [19]. Following a prescribed prairie fire in
Iowa carried out after snowmelt but while the soil was still frozen,
timothy started growth 2 to 3 weeks earlier in the spring and matured
earlier on burned areas than on adjacent unburned areas [24].
Several forage species were tested for performance on recently burned
lodgepole pine sites in northeastern Washington. After 4 years, timothy
was considered adequate in vigor and density. On a northeastern slope,
timothy was more successful because of better soil and moisture
conditions [27].
On a game farm in Pennsylvania, 5 acres (2 ha) were burned on April 22,
1983 to determine vegetation response. Timothy production decreased
after the spring burn. There was no change in percent composition of
timothy between 4 and 16 months after the fire. Early spring burning
temporarily reduced perennial grasses and increased forbs. Grassy cover
improved by postfire year 2 [49].
Total herbaceous production of timothy following the 1983 burn [49]:
months after burn control (%) burn (%)
1 28 3
2 41 10
3 45 7
4 55 0
6 48 6
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE :
Hamilton's Research Paper and the Research Project Summary of Metlen and others'
study provides information on prescribed fire and postfire response of many
plant species, including timothy, that was not available when this species
review was written.
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Timothy is often used to stabilize soil against erosion and to provide
cover for wildlife in clearcut areas that have been burned [3]. In the
midwestern states, prairie fires are often prescribed and timothy seeded
to provide nesting cover for prairie chickens and waterfowl [3].
In Montana, timothy was aerially seeded on a lodgepole pine clearcut
that had been burned. It was monitored for 12 years, from 1962 to 1973.
Timothy was a strong competitor in the early years postburn, but
eventual dominance by native grasses was suggested by the decline of
timothy from 3.0 percent in 1964 to 0.7 percent in 1973 [71].
Percent vegetal cover for timothy for 12 transects, 1962-1973
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
0.6 2.1 3.0 2.5 1.7 1.9 --- 1.8 --- 1.3 --- 0.7
In Oregon on a clearcut burned in 1969, timothy was seeded with a
mixture of other grasses and legumes at a rate of 6 pounds per acre (6.8
kg/ha). In 1973, timothy was abundant. By 1984, timothy declined
drastically in numbers, partially because of heavy grazing pressure
[86].
In Deadwood, South Dakota in 1959, an intense forest fire burned 4,500
acres (1,800 ha) of land. Artificial seeding on 4,011 acres (1,604 ha)
at 11 pounds per acre (12.4 kg/ha) of a mixture containing timothy was
completed. The mixture consisted of 3 pounds per acre (3.4 kg/ha) of
timothy, 3 pounds per acre (3.4 kg/ha) of smooth brome, 2 pounds per
acre (2.25 kg/ha) of Kentucky bluegrass, 2 pounds per acre (2.25 kg/ha)
of yellow sweet clover, and 1 pound per acre (1.125 kg/ha) of hairy
vetch. Two sites were seeded. Site one was on stony-loam soil at 5,400
feet (1,620 m) and site two was on a finer textured soil at 4,900 feet
(1,470 m). Timothy established quickly and persisted in dominance on
site one. At site two, timothy was codominant with other species [93].
In northern Alberta, timothy was used to reseed burned-over land after a
fire in 1950. The organic matter was destroyed and the depth of ash was
1 to 3 inches (2.5-7.6 cm). Seedings were done in the fall on 3 to 6
inches (7.6-15 cm) of snow and in April at the same depth with no snow
or frost. Productivity was not influenced by the time of seeding.
Timothy seeds established where moisture was adequate. Stands of
timothy declined with age [3].
References for species: Phleum pratense
1. Allison, Chris. 1988. Seeding New Mexico rangeland. Circular 525. Las Cruces, NM: New Mexico State University, College of Agriculture and Home Economics, Cooperative Extension Service. 15 p. [11830]
2. Anderson, Bruce; Matches, A. G.; Nelson, C. J. 1989. Carbohydrate reserves and tillering of switchgrass following clipping. Agronomy Journal. 81: 13-16. [8402]
3. Anderson, C. H.; Elliott, C. R. 1957. Studies on the establishment of cultivated grasses and legumes on burned-over land in northern Canada. Canadian Journal of Plant Science. 37: 97-101. [12821]
4. Anderson, Jay E.; Romme, William H. 1991. Initial floristics in lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) forests following the 1988 Yellowstone fires. International Journal of Wildland Fire. 1(2): 119-124. [16008]
5. Baker, Barton S.; Jung, G. A. 1968. Effect of environmental conditions on the growth of four perennial grasses. I. Response to controlled temperature. Agronomy Journal. 60: 155-158. [202]
6. Basile, Joseph V.; Jensen, Chester E. 1971. Grazing potential on lodgepole pine clearcuts in Montana. Res. Pap. INT-98. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 11 p. [8280]
7. Bedunah, Don; Pfingsten, William; Kennett, Gregory; Willard, E. Earl. 1988. Relationship of stand canopy density to forage production. In: Schmidt, Wyman C., compiler. Proceedings--future forests of the Mountain West: a stand culture symposium; 1986 September 29 - October 3; Missoula, MT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-243. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 99-107. [5070]
8. 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]
9. Bliss, L. C.; Wein, R. W. 1972. Plant community responses to disturbances in the western Canadian Arctic. Canadian Journal of Botany. 50: 1097-1109. [14877]
10. Boggs, Keith; Weaver, T. 1992. Response of riparian shrubs to declining water availability. In: Clary, Warren P.; McArthur, E. Durant; Bedunah, Don; Wambolt, Carl L., compilers. Proceedings--symposium on ecology and management of riparian shrub communities; 1991 May 29-31; Sun Valley, ID. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-289. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 48-51. [19094]
11. Brooks, John, III; Urness, Philip J. 1984. Comparison of in vivo and in vitro digestibility of forages by elk. Journal of Animal Science. 58(4): 963-970. [6912]
12. Brown, J. A. 1974. Cultural practices for revegetation of high-altitude disturbed lands. In: Berg, W. A.; Brown, J. A.; Cuany, R. L., co-chairmen. Proceedings of a workshop on revegetation of high-altitude disturbed lands; 1974 January 31-February 1; Fort Collins, CO. Information Series No. 10. Fort Collins, CO: Colorado State University, Environmental Resources Center: 59-63. [7799]
13. 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]
14. 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]
15. Casterline & Sons Seeds Inc. [n.d.]. Range plants for the High Plains and Rocky Mountain region. Dodge City, KS: Casterline Seeds. 23 p. [18386]
16. Chambers, Jeanne C. 1989. Native species establishment on an oil drillpad site in the Uintah Mountains, Utah: effects of introduced grass density and fertilizer. Res. Pap. INT-402. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 9 p. [6885]
17. Clark, M. B.; McLean, A. 1979. Growth of lodgepole pine seedlings in competition with grass. Res. Note No. 86. Victoria, BC: Province of British Columbia, Ministry of Forests, Research Branch. 12 p. [15610]
18. Cornelius, Donald R.; Talbot, M. W. 1955. Rangeland improvement through seeding and weed control on east slope Sierra Nevada and on southern Cascade Mountains. Agric. Handb. 88. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 51 p. [7510]
19. Cornely, J. E.; Britton, C. M.; Sneva, F. A. 1983. Manipulation of flood meadow vegetation and observations on small mammal populations. Prairie Naturalist. 15: 16-22. [14509]
20. Cottam, Walter P.; Evans, Frederick R. 1945. A comparative study of the vegetation of grazed and ungrazed canyons of the Wasatch Range, Utah. Ecology. 26(2): 171-181. [695]
21. Coulman, B. E. 1987. Yield and composition of monocultures and mixtures of bromegrass, orchardgrass and timothy. Canadian Journal of Plant Science. 67: 203-213. [2704]
22. Crawford, Hewlette S.; Kucera, Clair L.; Ehrenreich, John H. 1969. Ozark range and wildlife plants. Agric. Handb. 356. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 236 p. [18602]
23. Ehrenreich, John H. 1959. Effect of burning and clipping on growth of native prairie in Iowa. Journal of Range Management. 12: 133-137. [853]
24. Ehrenreich, John H.; Aikman, John M. 1963. An ecological study of the effect on certain management practices on native prairie in Iowa. Ecological Monographs. 33(2): 113-130. [9]
25. Elliott, Charles L.; McKendrick, Jay D.; Helm, D. 1987. Plant biomass, cover, and survival of species used for stripmine reclamation in south-central Alaska, U.S.A. Arctic and Alpine Research. 19(4): 572-577. [6116]
26. Etter, Harold M. 1973. Mined-land reclamation studies on bighorn sheep range in Alberta, Canada. Biological Conservation. 5(3): 191-195. [13731]
27. Evanko, Anthony B. 1953. Performance of several forage species on newly burned lodgepole pine sites. Res. Note. 133. Missoula, MT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 6 p. [7905]
28. Evans, Kevin E.; Kershaw, G. Peter. 1989. Productivity of agronomic and native plants under various fertilizer and seed application rates on a simulated transport corridor, Fort Norman, Northwest Territories. In: Walker, D. G.; Powter, C. B.; Pole, M. W., compilers. Proceedings of the conference: Reclamation, a global perspective; 1989 August 27-31; Calgary, AB. Edmonton, AB: Alberta Land Conservation and Reclamation Council: 279-287. [14352]
29. Evans, Morgan W. 1958. Growth and development in certain economic grasses. Agronomy Series No. 147. Wooster, OH: Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station. 112 p. [12111]
30. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
31. Forbes, R. M.; Garrigus, W. P. 1950. Some relationships between chemical composition, nutritive value, and intake of forages grazed by steers and wethers. Journal of Animal Science. 9: 354-362. [7176]
32. Forcella, Frank; Harvey, Stephen J. 1983. Eurasian weed infestation in western Montana in relation to vegetation and disturbance. Madrono. 30(2): 102-109. [7897]
33. Franson, Raymond L. 1990. The effect of mycorrhizal fungi and plant density on belowground interactions between plants. 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: 561-568. [14723]
34. 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]
35. Gates, Dillard H.; Harris, Grant A. 1959. Longevity, competitive ability, and productivity of grasses in three northeastern Washington nurseries. Northwest Science. 33(2): 76-83. [1004]
36. Gist, George R.; Smith, R. M. 1948. Root development of several common forage grasses to a depth of eighteen inches. Journal of the American Society of Agronomy. 40: 1036-1042. [8138]
37. Glenn-Lewin, David C.; Johnson, Louise A.; Jurik, Thomas W.; [and others]. 1990. Fire in central North American grasslands: vegetative reproduction, seed germination, and seedling establishment. In: Collins, Scott L.; Wallace, Linda L., eds. Fire in North American tallgrass prairies. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press: 28-45. [14194]
38. Gross, Katherine L.; Werner, Patricia A. 1982. Colonizing abilities of "biennial" plant species in relation to ground cover: implications for their distributions in a successional sere. Ecology. 63(4): 921-931. [12143]
39. Hafenrichter, A. L.; Schwendiman, John L.; Harris, Harold L.; [and others]. 1968. Grasses and legumes for soil conservation in the Pacific Northwest and Great Basin states. Agric. Handb. 339. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 69 p. [18604]
40. Hamerstrom, F. N., Jr. 1939. A study of Wisconsin prairie chicken and sharp-tailed grouse. Wilson Bulletin. 51(2): 105-120. [15808]
41. Harcombe, Andrew; Pendergast, Bruce; Petch, Bruce; Janz, Doug. 1983. Elk habitat management: Salmon River Valley. MOE Working Report 1. 83-05-10. Victoria, BC: Ministry of the Environment. 83 p. [9984]
42. Harris, Grant A.; Dobrowolski, James P. 1986. Population dynamics of seeded species on northeast Washington semiarid sites, 1948-1983. Journal of Range Management. 39(1): 46-51. [1095]
43. Heide, O. M.; Hay, R. K. M.; Baugerod, H. 1985. Specific daylength effects on leaf growth and dry-matter production in high-latitude grasses. Annals of Botany. 55: 579-586. [2844]
44. Helvey, J. D. 1980. Effects of a north central Washington wildfire on runoff and sediment production. Water Resources Bulletin. 16(4): 627-634. [8562]
45. 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]
46. Hobbs, N. Thompson; Baker, Dan L.; Ellis, James E.; Swift, David M. 1981. Composition and quality of elk winter diets in Colorado. Journal of Wildlife Management. 45(1): 156-171. [7421]
47. Hoover, Max M.; Hein, M. A.; Dayton, William A.; Erlanson, C. O. 1948. The main grasses for farm and home. In: Grass: The yearbook of agriculture 1948. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture: 639-700. [1190]
48. Hopper, T. H.; Nesbitt, L. L. 1930. The chemical composition of some North Dakota pasture and hay grasses. Bull. 236. Fargo, ND: North Dakota Agricultural College, Agricultural Experiment Station. 39 p. [3265]
49. Hughes, H. Glenn. 1985. Vegetation responses to spring burning in an improved pasture in central Pennsylvania. In: Long, James N., ed. Fire management: the challenge of protection and use: Proceedings of a symposium; 1985 April 17-19; Logan, UT. [Place of publication unknown]. [Publisher unknown]. 3-9. [3033]
50. Hull, A. C., Jr. 1973. Germination of range plant seeds after long periods of uncontrolled storage. Journal of Range Management. 26(3): 198-200. [18728]
51. Hull, A. C., Jr. 1974. Seedling emergence and survival from different seasons and rates of seeding mountain rangelands. Journal of Range Management. 27(4): 302-304. [245]
52. Hull, A. C., Jr.; Holmgren, Ralph C.; Berry, W. H.; Wagner, Joe A. 1963. Pellet seeding on western rangelands. Misc. Publ. 922. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 34 p. [3859]
53. Hungerford, C. R. 1970. Response of Kaibab mule deer to management of summer range. Journal of Wildlife Management. 34(40): 852-862. [1219]
54. Jenkins, K. J.; Wright, R. G. 1988. Resource partitioning and competition among cervids in the northern Rocky Mountains. Journal of Applied Ecology. 25: 11-24. [16289]
55. Johnson, James R.; Nichols, James T. 1970. Plants of South Dakota grasslands: A photographic study. Bull. 566. Brookings, SD: South Dakota State University, Agricultural Experiment Station. 163 p. [18483]
56. Johnston, A.; Bezeau, L. M. 1962. Chemical composition of range forage plants of the Festuca scabrella association. Canadian Journal of Plant Science. 42: 105-115. [1291]
57. Johnston, A.; Smoliak, S.; Stringer, P. W. 1969. Viable seed populations in Alberta prairie topsoils. Canadian Journal of Plant Science. 49: 75-82. [1294]
58. Kalisz, P. J.; Davis, W. H. 1992. Effect of prairie voles on vegetation and soils in central Kentucky. The American Midland Naturalist. 127(2): 392-399. [18193]
59. Kartesz, John T.; Kartesz, Rosemarie. 1980. A synonymized checklist of the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. Volume II: The biota of North America. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press; in confederation with Anne H. Lindsey and C. Richie Bell, North Carolina Botanical Garden. 500 p. [6954]
60. Kauffman, J. Boone; Krueger, W. C.; Vavra, M. 1983. Effects of late season cattle grazing on riparian plant communities. Journal of Range Management. 36(6): 685-691. [16965]
61. Keammerer, Warren R.; Johnson, W. Carter; Burgess, Robert L. 1975. Floristic analysis of the Missouri River bottomland forest in North Dakota. Canadian Field-Naturalist. 89: 5-19. [7447]
62. Klebesadel, Leslie J. 1991. Performance of indigenous and introduced slender wheatgrass in Alaska, and presumed evidence of ecotypic evolution. Bulletin 85. Fairbanks, AK: University of Alaska Fairbanks, School of Agriculture and Land Resources Management, Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station. 20 p. [18384]
63. Knapp, Paul A. 1991. The response of semi-arid vegetation assemblages following the abandonment of mining towns in south-western Montana. Journal of Arid Environments. 20: 205-222. [14894]
64. Koterba, Wayne D.; Habeck, James R. 1971. Grasslands of the North Fork Valley, Glacier National Park, Montana. Canadian Journal of Botany. 49: 1627-1636. [6401]
65. Krueger, William C.; Vavra, Martin. 1984. Twentieth-year results from a plantation grazing study. In: 1984 Progress report--research in rangeland management. Special Report 715. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University, Agricultural Experiment Station: 20- 24. In cooperation with: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. [3625]
66. 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]
67. Leege, Thomas A.; Herman, Daryl J.; Zamora, Benjamin. 1981. Effects of cattle grazing on mountain meadows in Idaho. Journal of Range Management. 34(4): 324-328. [2961]
68. Levy, Gerald F. 1970. The phytosociology of northern Wisconsin upland openings. The American Midland Naturalist. 83: 213-237. [9986]
69. Looman, J. 1969. The fescue grasslands of western Canada. Vegetatio. 19: 128-145. [1471]
70. Lunan, James S.; Habeck, James R. 1973. The effects of fire exclusion on ponderosa pine communities in Glacier National Park, Montana. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 3(4): 574-579. [6312]
71. Lyon, L. Jack. 1976. Vegetal development on the Sleeping Child burn in western Montana, 1961 to 1973. Res. Pap. INT-184. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 24 p. [138]
72. Lyon, L. Jack. 1984. The Sleeping Child Burn--21 years of postfire change. Res. Pap. INT-330. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 17 p. [6328]
73. 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]
74. MacCallum, Beth. 1989. Seasonal and spatial distribution of bighorn sheep at an open pit coal mine in the Alberta foothills. 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: 141-149. [14359]
75. MacCracken, James G.; Uresk, Daniel W.; Hansen, Richard M. 1985. Habitat used by shrews in southeastern Montana. Northwest Science. 59(1): 24-27. [15523]
76. MacCracken, James G.; Uresk, Daniel W.; Hansen, Richard M. 1985. Rodent-vegetation relationships in southeastern Montana. Northwest Science. 59(4): 272-278; 1985. [1499]
77. Mack, R. N. 1986. Alien plant invasion into the Intermountain West: A case study. In: Mooney, Harold A.; Drake, James A., eds. Ecology of Biological Invasions of North America and Hawaii. Ecological Studies 58. New York: Springer-Verlag: 191-213. [17516]
78. Marlow, Clayton B; Pogacnik, Thomas M; Quinsey, Shannon D. 1987. Streambank stability and cattle grazing in southwestern Montana. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. 42(4): 291-296. [2888]
79. Martens, H.; Younkin, W. 1989. Revegetation in the Canadian North--a 15 year perspective summary of findings. 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: 91-99. [14362]
80. Masters, Robert A.; Stougaard, Robert N.; Nissen, Scott J. 1990. Imidazolinone herbicides for leafy spurge control in Nebraska. In: Leafy spurge symposium: Proceedings and progress reports; 1990 July 10-12; Gillette, WY. [Place of publication unknown]: Great Plains Agricultural Council: 16. [13104]
81. May, Morton. 1960. Key to the major grasses of the Big Horn Mountains based on vegetative characters. Bulletin 371. Laramie, WY: University of Wyoming, Agricultural Experiment Station. 44 p. [3236]
82. McDonald, Philip M. 1986. Grasses in young conifer plantations--hindrance and help. Northwest Science. 60(4): 271-278. [3982]
83. McEwen, Lowell C.; Dietz, Donald R. 1965. Shade effects on chemical composition of herbage in the Black Hills. Journal of Range Management. 18: 184-190. [3993]
84. McInnis, Michael L.; Vavra, Martin. 1986. Summer diets of domestic sheep grazing mountain meadows in northeastern Oregon. Northwest Science. 60(4): 265-2170. [1604]
85. McLean, A.; Clark, M. B. 1980. Grass, trees, and cattle on clearcut-logged areas. Journal of Range Management. 33(3): 213-217. [3901]
86. Miller, Richard F.; Krueger, William C.; Vavra, Martin. 1986. Twelve years of plant succession on a seeded clearcut under grazing and protection from cattle. In: Special Report 773. 1986 Progress report...research in rangeland management. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University, Agricultural Experiment Station: 4-10. In cooperation with: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. [3650]
87. Mitchell, John E. 1983. Overstory-understory relationships: Douglas-fir forests. In: Bartlett, E. T.; Betters, David R., eds. Overstory-understory relationships in western forests. Western Regional Res. Publ. No. 1. Fort Collins, CO: Colorado State University Experiment Station: 27-34. [3314]
88. Mitchell, W. W. 1982. Forage yield and quality of indigenous and introduced grasses at Palmer, Alaska. Agronomy Journal. 74: 899-905. [16172]
89. Morin, Edith; Bouchard, Andre; Jutras, Pierre. 1989. Ecological analysis of disturbed riverbanks in the Montreal area of Quebec. Environmental Management. 13(2): 215-225. [13233]
90. 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]
91. 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]
92. Novacek, Jean M. 1989. The water and wetland resources of the Nebraska sandhills. In: Vander Valk, Arnold, ed. Northern prairie wetlands. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press: 340-384. [15221]
93. Orr, Howard K. 1970. Runoff and erosion control by seeded and native vegetation on a forest burn: Black Hills, South Dakota. Res. Pap. RM-60. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 12 p. [1802]
94. Parker, Karl G. 1975. Some important Utah range plants. Extension Service Bulletin EC-383. Logan, UT: Utah State University. 174 p. [9878]
95. Platts, William S.; Armour, Carl; Booth, Gordon D.; [and others]. 1987. Methods for evaluating riparian habitats with applications to management. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-221. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 177 p. [6171]
96. Plummer, A. Perry; Hull, A. C., Jr.; Stewart, George; Robertson, Joseph H. 1955. Seeding rangelands in Utah, Nevada, southern Idaho and western Wyoming. Agric. Handb. 71. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 73 p. [11736]
97. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
98. Reed, John F. 1952. The vegetation of the Jackson Hole Wildlife Park, Wyoming. The American Midland Naturalist. 48(3): 700-729. [1949]
99. Reid, Elbert H. 1965. Forage production in ponderosa pine forests. In: Proceedings: Society of American Foresters meeting; 1964 September 27 - October 1; Denver, CO. Washington D. C.: Society of American Foresters: 61-64. [11526]
100. Reitz, Louis P.; Morris, H. E. 1939. Important grasses and other common plants on Montana ranges: description, distribution and relative value. Bull. 375. Bozeman, MT: Montana State College, Agricultural Experiment Station. 35 p. [1954]
101. Roberts, Teresa L.; Vankat, John L. 1991. Floristics of a chronosequence corresponding to old field-deciduous forest succession in southwestern Ohio. II. Seed banks. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club. 118(4): 377-384. [17753]
102. Roe, Nicholas A.; Kennedy, Alan J. 1989. Moose and deer habitat use and diet on a reclaimed mine in west-central Alberta. 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: 127-135. [14360]
103. Sabinske, Darold W.; Knight, Dennis H. 1978. Variation within the sagebrush vegetation of Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming. Northwest Science. 52(3): 195-204. [2046]
104. 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]
105. Sanderson, Matt A.; Wedin, W. F. 1989. Phenological stage and herbage quality relationships in temperate grasses and legumes. Agronomy Journal. 81: 864-869. [6889]
106. Seidel, K. W.; Geist, J. Michael; Strickler, Gerald S. 1990. The influence of cattle grazing and grass seeding on coniferous regeneration after shelterwood cutting in eastern Oregon. Res. Pap. PNW-RP-417. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 32 p. [13285]
107. Sharp Bros. Seed Co. [n.d.]. Controlling water quality by the use of grasses and forbs. Fact Sheet. Amarillo, TX: Sharp Bros. Seed Co. 2 p. [18006]
108. Shaw, A. F.; Cooper, C. S. 1973. The Interagency forage, conservation and wildlife handbook. Bozeman, MT: Montana State University, Extension Service. 205 p. [5666]
109. Singer, Francis J. 1979. Habitat partitioning and wildfire relationships of cervids in Glacier National Park, Montana. Journal of Wildlife Management. 43(2): 437-444. [4074]
110. Smith, Justin G. 1963. A subalpine grassland seeding trial. Journal of Range Management. 16: 208-210. [3799]
111. Stevens, Richard; McArthur, E. Durant; Davis, James N. 1992. Reevaluation of vegetative cover changes, erosion, and sedimentation on two watersheds -- 1912-1983. In: Clary, Warren P.; McArthur, E. Durant; Bedunah, Don; Wambolt, Carl L., compilers. Proceedings--symposium on ecology and management of riparian shrub communities; 1991 May 29-31; Sun Valley, ID. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-289. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 123-128. [19105]
112. Stewart, R. E.; Beebe, T. 1974. Survival of ponderosa pine seedlings following control of competing grasses. Western Society Weed Science Proceedings. 27: 55-58. [7184]
113. Stubbendieck, J.; Hatch, Stephan L.; Hirsch, Kathie J. 1986. North American range plants. 3rd ed. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. 465 p. [2270]
114. Stubbendieck, J.; Nichols, James T.; Roberts, Kelly K. 1985. Nebraska range and pasture grasses (including grass-like plants). E.C. 85-170. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska, Department of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension Service. 75 p. [2269]
115. Svejcar, Tony; Vavra, Martin. 1985. Seasonal forage production and quality on four native and improved plant communities in eastern Oregon. Technical Bulletin 149. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University, Agricultural Experiment Station. 24 p. [2298]
116. Tew, Ronald K. 1969. Water use, adaptability, and chemical composition of grasses seeded at high elevations. Journal of Range Management. 22(4): 280-283. [18605]
117. Tyser, Robin W. 1990. Ecology of fescue grasslands in Glacier National Park. In: Boyce, Mark S.; Plumb, Glenn E., eds. National Park Service Research Center, 14th annual report. Laramie, WY: University of Wyoming, National Park Service Research Center: 59-60. [14766]
118. Tyser, Robin W. 1992. Vegetation associated with two alien plant species in a fescue grassland in Glacier National Park, Montana. The Great Basin Naturalist. 52(2): 189-193. [20022]
119. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1937. Range plant handbook. Washington, DC. 532 p. [2387]
120. 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]
121. 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]
122. Vallentine, John F. 1961. Important Utah range grasses. Extension Circular 281. Logan, UT: Utah State University. 48 p. [2937]
123. Vankat, John L.; Carson, Walter P. 1991. Floristics of a chronosequence corresponding to old field-deciduous forest success. in southwestern Ohio. III. Post-disturbance vegetation. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club. 118(4): 385-391. [17755]
124. Vogel, Willis G. 1981. A guide for revegetating coal minesoils in the eastern United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-68. Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 190 p. [15575]
125. Waddington, John. 1988. Effect of herbicides for the control of weedy grasses on seed production of bromegrass, crested wheatgrass and timothy. Canadian Journal of Plant Science. 68: 817-821. [15868]
126. Waite, R.; Boyd, J. 1953. The water-soluble carbohydrates of grasses. 1. Changes occurring during the normal life-cycle. J. Sci. Food Agric.. 4 April: 197-204. [102]
127. Wambolt, Carl. 1976. Montana range seeding guide. Bulletin 347. Bozeman, MT: Montana State University, Cooperative Extension Service. 23 p. [99]
128. Ward, Don; Thompson, Robert; Kelly, Dennis. 1986. Willow planting guide. R-4 Hydrograph No. 54. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Range and Watershed Management. 12 p. [2936]
129. Wasser, Clinton H. 1982. Ecology and culture of selected species useful in revegetating disturbed lands in the West. FWS/OBS-82/56. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services, Western Energy and Land Use Team. 347 p. Available from NTIS, Springfield, VA 22161; PB-83-167023. [2458]
130. Weaver, T.; Lichthart, J.; Gustafson, D. 1990. Exotic invasion of timberline vegetation, Northern Rocky Mountains, USA. 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: 208-213. [11688]
131. Westemeier, R. L. 1971. The history and ecology of prairie chickens in central Wisconsin. Research Bulletin 281. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin. 63 p. [16743]
132. Westemeier, Ronald L. 1973. Prescribed burning in grassland management for prairie chickens in Illinois. In: Proceedings, annual Tall Timbers fire ecology conference; 1972 June 8-9; Lubbock, TX. Number 12. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station: 317-341. [8473]
133. Wheeler, W. A.; Hill, D. D. 1957. Grassland seeds. Princeton, NJ: D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc. 628 p. [18902]
134. White, Larry M. 1973. Carbohydrate reserves of grasses: a review. Journal of Range Management. 26(1): 13-18. [2533]
135. 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]
136. Wishart, Donald M. 1988. Reclamation of the Norman Wells pipeline. In: Kershaw, Peter, ed. Northern environmental disturbances. Occas. Publ. No. 24. Edmonton, AB: University of Alberta, Boreal Institute for Northern Studies: 11-27. [14417]
137. Wright, Henry A.; Bailey, Arthur W. 1982. Fire ecology: United States and southern Canada. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 501 p. [2620]
138. Yeatter, Ralph E. 1963. Population responses of prairie chickens to land-use changes in Illinois. Journal of Wildlife Management. 27(4): 739-756. [16739]
139. Smoliak, S.; Penney, D.; Harper, A. M.; Horricks, J. S. 1981. Alberta forage manual. Edmonton, AB: Alberta Agriculture, Print Media Branch. 87 p. [19538]
140. Van Dyne, George M. 1958. Ranges and range plants. Unpublished manuscript on file at: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT. 290 p. [7310]
141. 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]
142. Hansen, Paul; Pfister, Robert; Joy, John; [and others]. 1989. Classification and management of riparian sites in southwestern Montana. Missoula, MT: University of Montana, School of Forestry, Montana Riparian Association. 292 p. Draft Version 2. [8900]
143. 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]
144. Heady, Harold F., ed. 1988. The Vale rangeland rehabilitation program: an evaluation. Resour. Bull. PNW-RB-157. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 151 p. [5726]
145. 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. 10 p. [20090]
FEIS Home Page
https://www.fs.usda.gov/database/feis/plants/graminoid/phlpra/all.html
