Index of Species Information
SPECIES: Tamarix aphylla
Introductory
SPECIES: Tamarix aphylla
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION :
Tesky, Julie L. 1992. Tamarix aphylla. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online].
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station,
Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available:
https://www.fs.usda.gov/database/feis/plants/tree/tamaphe/all.html [].
ABBREVIATION :
TAMAPH
SYNONYMS :
Tamarix articulata Vahl.
SCS PLANT CODE :
TAAP
COMMON NAMES :
Athel tamarisk
TAXONOMY :
The currently accepted scientific name for Athel tamarisk is Tamarix
aphylla (L.) Karst. [2,11,16]. There are no recognized subspecies,
varieties, or forms.
LIFE FORM :
Tree
FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS :
No special status
OTHER STATUS :
NO-ENTRY
DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE
SPECIES: Tamarix aphylla
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION :
Athel tamarisk is an introduced species native to Africa and the Middle
East [1,16,20,21]. It has escaped cultivation in some areas of the
United States but has not naturalized. It occurs from southern Texas to
southern Arizona and California [1,16,20,31].
ECOSYSTEMS :
FRES21 Ponderosa pine
FRES29 Sagebrush
FRES30 Desert shrub
FRES34 Chaparral - mountain shrub
FRES35 Pinyon - juniper
FRES40 Desert grasslands
STATES :
AZ CA HI NV NM TX UT
BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS :
3 Southern Pacific Border
6 Upper Basin and Range
7 Lower Basin and Range
12 Colorado Plateau
13 Rocky Mountain Piedmont
14 Great Plains
KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS :
K019 Arizona pine forest
K023 Juniper - pinyon woodland
K027 Mesquite bosque
K033 Chaparral
K034 Montane chaparral
K038 Great Basin sagebrush
K039 Blackbrush
K040 Saltbrush - greasewood
K041 Creosotebush
K057 Galleta - threeawn shrubsteppe
K059 Trans-Pecos shrub savanna
K071 Shinnery
SAF COVER TYPES :
68 Mesquite
95 Black willow
235 Cottonwood - willow
237 Interior ponderosa pine
238 Western juniper
SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES :
NO-ENTRY
HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES :
Athel tamarisk is sometimes found associated with the following species:
screwbean mesquite (Prosopis pubescens), big saltbrush (Atriplex
lentiformis), arrow-weed (Pluchea sericea), western honey mesquite
(Prosopis glandulosa torreyana), desert saltbrush (Atriplex polycarpa),
pickleweed (Allenrolfea occidentalis), and saltgrass (Distichlis
spicata) [27,33].
MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
SPECIES: Tamarix aphylla
WOOD PRODUCTS VALUE :
Athel tamarisk wood is used for fuel. It produces a fragrant odor when
burned [16]. The wood is fine grained, light colored, and capable of
taking a high polish. It has been proposed for use in making furniture
and fenceposts [2,16,21].
IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE :
Tamarix spp. communities in general are less valuable to wildlife than
are native riparian plant communities [12,30].
PALATABILITY :
Tamarix spp. are relatively unpalatable to most classes of livestock and
wildlife [5]. Athel tamarisk foliage contains phenolic acids which may
prevent herbivory [32].
NUTRITIONAL VALUE :
NO-ENTRY
COVER VALUE :
NO-ENTRY
VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES :
Athel tamarisk is planted for windbreaks and shade [7,24]. It is
frequently planted in desert areas [10,24]. Cuttings root best in
moist, loose, low salinity soil [18].
OTHER USES AND VALUES :
Athel tamarisk is planted as an ornamental from California to Texas [2].
Tamarix spp. flowers provide an important source of pollen for the
European honeybee [14,15].
OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Unlike the deciduous Tamarix spp., which have become serious weed
species in the Southwest, Athel tamrisk seldom escapes cultivation
and, therefore, rarely becomes a problem [9].
Where it is unwanted, Athel tamairsk may be controlled by cutting stumps
and applying herbicide or mechanically excavating stumps
followed by direct treatment of roots with herbicide [33].
BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SPECIES: Tamarix aphylla
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
Athel tamarisk is a introduced, fast-growing, evergreen tree. It has a
rounded or irregular, spreading crown of many heavy, stout branches and
long, drooping twigs [2,16,31]. It attains a height of 33 to 60 feet
(10-18 m) and may attain a diameter of 2.5 feet (0.8 m). The leaves are
tiny scales 0.06 inch (1.5 mm) long. The twigs are wiry, very slender,
and jointed. The bark becomes thick and deeply furrowed into long
narrow ridges on the trunk and smooth on the branches [2,16,19,31].
Athel tamarisk has a deep taproot [33].
RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM :
Phanerophyte (Mesophanerophyte)
REGENERATION PROCESSES :
Athel tamarisk flowers and produces many seeds, but most of the seeds
are sterile [9,34]. Its main method of propagation is vegetative. It
sprouts from the root crown or forms adventitous roots from submerged,
broken or buried stems [9,18].
SITE CHARACTERISTICS :
Where established outside of cultivation, Athel tamarisk commonly
occurs on salt flats, springs, and other saline habitats especially
along streams and rivers [22]. Athel tamarisk has been found along the
saline portions of the lower Colorado and Gila rivers and in the Salton
Sea Basin [27]. It also grows along irrigation ditches in bottomlands
[2].
Athel tamarisk is a facultative phreatophyte [33]. It is drought
resistant and is tolerant of alkaline and saline soils [16]. The
minimum annual rainfall required for reasonable growth is less than 16
inches (400 mm) [26]. The elevational range for Athel tamarisk in
California is from below sea level to 5,000 feet (1,524 m) [33]; in
Texas it occurs from 1,850 to 2,000 feet (564-610 m) [22].
SUCCESSIONAL STATUS :
Information on the successional status of Athel tamarisk is lacking.
It sprouts from on-site surviving root crowns in initial communities
[9,26]. Although it does not colonize sites by seed, it can colonize
disturbed areas by broken limbs carried by water [9,34].
SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT :
Athel tamarisk generally flowers from March through August [16,25,29].
The fruit matures in late summer [16].
FIRE ECOLOGY
SPECIES: Tamarix aphylla
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS :
Athel tamarisk is a fire-adapted species. The high ash (30-40%) and
salt content of its foliage make it hard to burn even when dry. Athel
tamarisk sprouts from the root crown after fire [26].
FIRE REGIMES :
Find fire regime information for the plant communities in which this
species may occur by entering the species name in the FEIS home page under
"Find Fire Regimes".
POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY :
survivor species; on-site surviving root crown or caudex
FIRE EFFECTS
SPECIES: Tamarix aphylla
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT :
Athel tamarisk generally survives fire [26], although severe fire may
destroy the root crown and prevent sprouting.
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT :
NO-ENTRY
PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE :
Athel tamarisk generally sprouts from the root crown after fire
[26,33].
DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE :
NO-ENTRY
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Because of the fire-resistant qualities of Athel tamarisk foliage, it
is a good species for use in fire shelterbelts [26].
In very arid regions, Athel tamarisk can be killed by piling cut debris
on the stumps and burning. This method resulted in 100 percent success
rate in killing Athel tamarisk [4].
REFERENCES
SPECIES: Tamarix aphylla
REFERENCES :
1. Baum, Bernard R. 1967. Introduced and naturalized tamarisks in the
United States and Canada [Tamaricaceae]. Baileya. 15: 19-25. [17655]
2. Benson, Lyman; Darrow, Robert A. 1981. The trees and shrubs of the
Southwestern deserts. Tucson, AZ: The University of Arizona Press.
[18066]
3. Bernard, Stephen R.; Brown, Kenneth F. 1977. Distribution of mammals,
reptiles, and amphibians by BLM physiographic regions and A.W. Kuchler's
associations for the eleven western states. Tech. Note 301. Denver, CO:
U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 169 p.
[434]
4. 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]
6. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and
Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
7. Felger, Richard S. 1990. Non-native plants of Organ Pipe Cactus National
Monument, Arizona. Tech. Rep. No. 31. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona,
School of Renewable Natural Resources, Cooperative National Park
Resources Studies Unit. 93 p. [14916]
8. 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]
9. Hoddenbach, Gerry. 1989. Tamarix control. In: Kunzmann, Michael R.;
Johnson, R. Roy; Bennett, Peter, technical coordinators. Tamarisk
control in southwestern United States; 1987 September 2-3; Tucson, AZ.
Special Report No. 9. Tucson, AZ: National Park Service, Cooperative
National Park Resources Studies Unit, School of Renewable Natural
Resources: 116-125. [11357]
10. Horton, J. S. 1957. Inflorescence development in Tamarix pentandra
pallas (Tamaricaceae). Southwestern Naturalist. 2(4): 135-139. [6363]
11. 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]
12. Kerpez, Theodore A.; Smith, Norman S. 1987. Saltcedar control for
wildlife habitat improvement in the southwestern United States. Resource
Publication 169. Washington, DC: United States Department of Interior,
Fish and Wildlife Service. 16 p. [3039]
13. Kuchler, A. W. 1964. Manual to accompany the map of potential vegetation
of the conterminous United States. Special Publication No. 36. New York:
American Geographical Society. 77 p. [1384]
14. Kunzmann, Michael R.; Johnson, R. Roy. 1989. Introduction. In: Kunzmann,
Michael R.; Johnson, R. Roy; Bennett, Peter, technical coordinators.
Tamarisk control in southwestern United States; 1987 September 2-3;
Tucson, AZ. Special Report No. 9. Tucson, AZ: National Park Service,
Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit, School of Renewable
Natural Resources: 1-7. [11339]
15. Lamb, S. H. 1971. Woody plants of New Mexico and their value to
wildlife. Bull. 14. Albuquerque, NM: New Mexico Department of Game and
Fish. 80 p. [9818]
16. Little, Elbert L. 1980. The Audubon Society field guide to North
American trees, northern region. New York: Chanticleer Press, Inc.
[18067]
17. 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]
18. Malcolm, C. V. 1972. Establishing shrubs in saline environments. In:
McKell, Cyrus M.; Blaisdell, James P.; Goodin, Joe R., tech. eds.
Wildland shrubs--their biology and utilization: An international
symposium; Proceedings; 1971 July; Logan, UT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-1.
Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain
Forest and Range Experiment Station: 392-403. [1517]
19. Mason, Herbert L. 1957. A flora of the marshes of California. Berkeley,
CA: University of California Press. 878 p. [16905]
20. McClintock, E. [n.d.] [6897]
21. Mozingo, Hugh N. 1987. Shrubs of the Great Basin: A natural history.
Reno, NV: University of Nevada Press. 342 p. [1702]
22. Powell, A. Michael. 1988. Trees & shrubs of Trans-Pecos Texas including
Big Bend and Guadalupe Mountains National Parks. Big Bend National Park,
TX: Big Bend Natural History Association. 536 p. [6130]
23. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant
geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
24. Rodman, John. 1990. Reflections on tamarisk bashing. 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:
59-68. [14688]
25. Shreve, F.; Wiggins, Il. 1964. cc. cc. [18068]
26. Simpfendorfer, K. J.. 1989. Continuation of #17679 - Keywords. Lands and
Forests Bull. No. 30. East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia: Lands and
Forests Division, Department of Conservation, Forests and Lands. 55 p.
[17680]
27. Turner, Raymond M.; Brown, David E. 1982. Sonoran desertscrub. In:
Brown, David E., ed. Biotic communities of the American
Southwest--United States and Mexico. Desert Plants. 4(1-4): 181-221.
[2375]
28. 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]
29. Vines, Robert A. 1960. Trees, shrubs, and woody vines of the Southwest.
Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. 1104 p. [7707]
30. Waring, Gwendolyn L. 1990. Developing shoreline communities and
potential for natural vegetation in Glen Canyon National Recreation
Area, Arizona-Utah. 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: 73-75.
[14918]
31. 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]
32. Wisdom, Charles S.; Gonzalez-Coloma, Azucena; Rundel, Philip W. 1987.
Phytochemical constituents in a Sonoran Desert plant community. In:
Provenza, Frederick D.; Flinders, Jerran T.; McArthur, E. Durant,
compilers. Proceedings--symposium on plant-herbivore interactions; 1985
August 7-9; Snowbird, UT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-222. Ogden, UT: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research
Station: 84-87. [7401]
33. Rowlands, Peter G. 1989. History and treatment of the salt cedar problem
in Death Valley National National Monument. In: Kunzmann, Michael R.;
Johnson, R. Roy; Bennett, Peter, technical coordinators. Tamarisk
control in southwestern United States; 1987 September 2-3; Tucson, AZ.
Special Report No. 9. Tucson, AZ: National Park Service, Cooperative
National Park Resources Studies Unit, School of Renewable Natural
Resources: 46-56. [11349]
34. Neill, William M. 1989. Volunteers play role in tamarisk control in
desert riparian communities (California). Restoration and Management
Notes. 7(1): 48. [8057]
FEIS Home Page
https://www.fs.usda.gov/database/feis/plants/tree/tamaph/all.html
