December 2012 Number 1 - Utah Native Plant Society

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Utah Native Plant Society vol. 2, 1993; vol. 3, 1997; vol. 4, 2003; vol. 5, 2005; vol. 19, 2006; vol. 20, 2006; vol. 21, 2006; vol. 22, 2000; vol. 23, 2002; vol. 25, 2003; vol. 26, 2002.) Ramsey, R.D. and L. Shultz. 2004. Evaluating the Geographic Distribution of Plants in Utah from the Vascular Atlas of Utah Plants. W. N. Amer. Nat. 64: 421- 432. Shultz, L.M., N. Morin, and R.D. Ramsey. 1998. Floristics in North America: Tracking Rare Species Electronically. In C.I. Peng & P. P. Lowrey II, eds., Institute of Botany, Academia Sinica Monograph 16: 259—273. Shultz, L.M., R.D. Ramsey, W. Lindquist. 2007. Digital Atlas of Utah Plants: http://earth.gis.usu.edu/ plants [revision ongoing, when citing, please give date of access] Shultz, L.M., R.D. Ramsey, and P. Terletzky. 2000. Using an atlas of vascular plants to determine patterns of biodiversity in Utah. Ecological Society of America 85 th Annual Meetings August 6—10. ESA Abstracts: 337. USDA, NRCS. 2009. The PLANTS Database (http:// plants.usda.gov, Accessed May 2007). National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70874-4490 USA. Utah Native Plant Society. 2009. Utah Rare Plant Guide (http://www.utahrareplants.org/rpg_species. html#All) Welsh, S.L., N.D. Atwood, S. Goodrich, and L.C. Higgins. 2003. A Utah Flora, third edition. Brigham Young University, Provo, UT. Addendum A tool that allows users to extract species lists in database form, with accompanying information about species, has been added to the Digital Database website. Users can draw a polygon of any size within the Utah borders (using the ‘limit area’ command) and download a species list in .dbf format (using the ‘get list’ command). The list will be accompanied by information that includes common names, currently accepted acronyms, growth form, elevational range, nativity, etc. in an electronic format that can be incorporated into spreadsheets or database programs. The reference for the site is: Shultz, L.M., R.D. Ramsey, W. Lindquist, and C. Garrard. Utah State University, Logan, UT. (http://earth.gis.usu. edu/plants/). 126
Calochortiana December 2012 Number 1 Molecular Genetic Diversity and Differentiation in Clay Phacelia (Phacelia argillacea Atwood: Hydrophyllaceae) Steven Harrison Brigham Young University, Provo, UT Susan E. Meyer, US Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station, Shrub Sciences Laboratory, Provo UT and Mikel Stevens, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT Abstract. Clay phacelia (Phacelia argillacea Atwood) was listed as federally endangered in 1978. It is known from only two populations in Spanish Fork Canyon, Utah. Samples were taken in each of three years from each of these two populations. We used AFLP markers to assess the genetic relatedness between the two populations and degree of differentiation between P. argillacea and three of its congeners. Six AFLP primer combinations resulted in 535 reliable marker loci of which 124 were polymorphic. Phacelia argillacea is genetically distinct from both its close and distant congeners. The two P. argillacea populations were not strongly differentiated, suggesting that gene flow between these populations probably occurred historically. In contrast, cohorts establishing in different years within a population were often genetically differentiated. Sampling in a single year would seriously underestimate genetic diversity in this species. Phacelia argillacea Atwood (clay phacelia) is a narrow endemic presently known from two locations approximately 8 kilometers apart in the Spanish Fork Canyon, Utah County, Utah (Figure 1). The genus Phacelia is the largest in the Hydrophyllaceae. Phacelia argillacea is a member of the Crenulatae group of section Phacelia, subgenus Phacelia and is thought to be most closely allied to P. glandulosa Nutt., a species of wide distribution in extreme eastern Utah, western Colorado, Wyoming, eastern Idaho, and Montana (Atwood 1975). Another apparently closely allied species is the recently described P. argylensis Atwood (Welsh et al. 2003), known only from the type location in Argyle Canyon, Carbon County, Utah (Figure 1). The Crenulatae group (which consists of approximately 35 species) differs from other species of Phacelia in producing four-seeded capsules, faveolate seeds with a central ridge on the ventral side, and have a chromosome number of n=11 (Atwood 1975). Recent taxonomic work in the genus Phacelia has confirmed the placement of P. glandulosa within the Crenulatae but has not included either P. argillacea or P. argylensis (Garrison 2007, Gilbert et al. 2005). Our goal was to examine molecular genetic diversity within and among the two known populations of P. argillacea as a necessary step in designing strategies for introducing new populations of this species on public land. We also wanted to make a preliminary assessment of the degree of differentiation between P. argillacea and its close congeners P. glandulosa and P. argylensis. We included the more distant congener P. crenulata Torr. ex S. Wats. as an out group in the analysis. Phacelia argillacea is an annual or biennial and has years when few or no actively growing plants are present. Its seeds germinate from spring to late summer or early fall and produce a rosette of leaves which grows during the winter months and bolts in the spring to produce a flowering shoot (Armstrong 1992, Meyer personal observation). The species is an edaphic endemic that is confined to steep hillsides of the Green River shale formation. Because of its restricted habitat and small and widely fluctuating population size, P. argillacea was declared an endangered species in 1978 (US Fish and Wildlife Service 1978, 1989). In 1990, The Nature Conservancy purchased the Tucker site, which at the time was the only known extant population for P. argillacea, and fenced it to prevent damage from grazing and trampling by deer and sheep and from disturbance caused by highway and railroad construction (Armstrong 1992). The plant was later rediscovered at the Railroad site, further down the canyon (Figure 1, inset). This population is on private land and is not fenced or managed for conservation. Known impacts to the Railroad site are highway widening coupled with the construction of a retaining wall, subsequent erosion, and trailing and grazing of domestic and native ungulates. P. argillacea may also be threatened by invasive weeds and drought. 127
Page 1 and 2:
Calochortiana December 2012 Number
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Species # Training Samples Calochor
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76: Calochortiana December 2012 Number
Page 97 and 98: case of the former lake beds a duri
Page 125: Calochortiana December 2012 Number
Page 139 and 140: A. lentiginosus var. ursinus (publi
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Pot Score Min Score Trend Threat In
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
show all

December 2012 Number 1 - Utah Native Plant Society

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?