Sanguisorba minor

Salad Burnet

Flickr photo 'Sanguisorba minor (48°09' N 16°57' E)' by: HermannFalkner/sokol.

Flickr photos above were identified by the individual photographers but not reviewed by EoPS. Contact us to report errors.

Species group: Plants

Data Sources

Classification

Kingdom:

Plantae

Phylum:

Anthophyta

Class:

Dicotyledoneae

Order:

Rosales

Family:

Rosaceae

Genus:

Sanguisorba

Encyclopedia of Life

For more info, visit:

Source:
http://eol.org/pages/626892/details

Comprehensive Description
Distribution
Morphology
Habitat
Dispersal
Associations
General Ecology
Cyclicity
Life Expectancy
Molecular Biology
Conservation Status
Management
Benefits

Comprehensive Description

Description

General: Rose Family (Rosaceae). Sanguisorba minor is an introduced, hardy, herbaceous, relatively long-lived, evergreen, non-leguminous, perennial forb. It is usually a branched caudex (thick base of stems) with a prominent taproot and sometimes-weakly rhizomatous.

Small burnet plants have alternate pinnately compound leaves. Leaflets are mostly 9 to 17, oval to oblong, 4 inches long and coarsely serrate. Total height varies from 6 inches on droughty sites to approximately 25 inches on irrigated sites. The flowers are sessile and closely packed in head-like to elongate spikes, which are 3 to 8 inches long. The flowers are mostly imperfect, the lower ones staminate and the upper ones pistillate with no petals and about 12 stamens, which are filiform. Native burnet species have two to four stamens. The seed is an achene, oblong, about 4 to 5 mm long, woody, papillate-warty, between and along rather prominent ridges, which are four in number.

Source:

USDA NRCS PLANTS Database

License:

Rights Holder:

USDA NRCS Idaho State Office & the National Plant Data Center

Alternative names

This species is recognized as having the following subspecies occurring in the U.S.: Sanguisorba minor ssp. muricata.

Source:

USDA NRCS PLANTS Database

License:

Rights Holder:

USDA NRCS Idaho State Office & the National Plant Data Center

Distribution

More info for the term: forb

Small burnet is native to Europe, western Asia and Siberia, and northern Africa [41,109,112]. It is nonnative in North America, South America, Australia, and New Zealand. Most North American small burnet populations originated in Europe [49,50,89,132,155]. A few small burnet accessions came from the Middle East [127]. Small burnet was deliberately introduced as a pasture and rehabilitation forb. It is very rarely invasive [7,78,119,156], typically occurring in small populations in only a few counties of the states in which it grows (for example, see [74,78,101,132]). In western North America, small burnet occurs sporadically from British Columbia east to Montana and south to California, New Mexico, and Nebraska [18,60,64]. It is also sporadically distributed to the east [42,110] from Ontario east to Nova Scotia and south to Tennessee and North Carolina [60,110]. Plants Database provides a distributional map of small burnet.

Subspecies: Nearly all small burnet populations in North America are Sanguisorba minor subsp. muricata. The North American distribution of Sanguisorba minor subsp. muricata overlaps that of the species, given above [109,143]. Sanguisorba minor subsp. minor occurs in northwestern Washington and southwestern British Columbia, with very small, widely scattered populations in Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Ontario [85]. Sanguisorba minor subsp. magnolii is native to the Mediterranean region [112] and was introduced in North America from Spain and Portugal in the 2000s. It is grown experimentally and is rare in North America [41].

References:

74. Martin, William C.; Hutchins, Charles R. 1981. A flora of New Mexico. Volume 2. Germany: J. Cramer. 2589 p. [37176]
132. Strausbaugh, P. D.; Core, Earl L. 1977. Flora of West Virginia. 2nd ed. Morgantown, WV: Seneca Books, Inc. 1079 p. [23213]
42. 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]
49. Hickman, James C., ed. 1993. The Jepson manual: Higher plants of California. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1400 p. [21992]
64. Lackschewitz, Klaus. 1991. Vascular plants of west-central Montana--identification guidebook. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-227. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 648 p. [13798]
7. Beaulieu, Jean Thomas. 1975. Effects of fire on understory plant populations in a northern Arizona ponderosa pine forest. Flagstaff, AZ: Northern Arizona University. 38 p. Thesis. [29095]
18. Cronquist, Arthur; Holmgren, Noel H.; Holmgren, Patricia K. 1997. Intermountain flora: Vascular plants of the Intermountain West, U.S.A. Vol. 3, Part A: Subclass Rosidae (except Fabales). New York: The New York Botanical Garden. 446 p. [28652]
50. Hitchcock, C. Leo; Cronquist, Arthur. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press. 730 p. [1168]
101. 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]
109. Robertson, Kenneth R. 1974. The genera of Rosaceae in the southwestern United States. Journal of the Arnold Arboretum. 55: 344-401. [69721]
110. Roland, A. E.; Smith, E. C. 1969. The flora of Nova Scotia. Halifax, NS: Nova Scotia Museum. 746 p. [13158]
127. Stevens, Richard; Monsen, Stephen B. 2004. Forbs for seeding range and wildlife habitats. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Stevens, Richard; Shaw, Nancy L., comps. Restoring western ranges and wildlands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-136-vol. 2. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 425-466. [52842]
155. Welsh, Stanley L.; Atwood, N. Duane; Goodrich, Sherel; Higgins, Larry C., eds. 1987. A Utah flora. The Great Basin Naturalist Memoir No. 9. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University. 894 p. [2944]
156. Wieneke, Silvia; Prati, Daniel; Brandl, Roland; Stocklin, Jurg; Auge, Harald. 2004. Genetic variation in Sanguisorba minor after 6 years in situ selection under elevated CO2. Global Change Biology. 10(8): 1389-1401. [68964]
78. Mohlenbrock, Robert H. 1986. [Revised edition]. Guide to the vascular flora of Illinois. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press. 507 p. [17383]
60. Kartesz, John T. 1999. A synonymized checklist and atlas with biological attributes for the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. 1st ed. In: Kartesz, John T.; Meacham, Christopher A. Synthesis of the North American flora (Windows Version 1.0), [CD-ROM]. Chapel Hill, NC: North Carolina Botanical Garden (Producer). In cooperation with: The Nature Conservancy; U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. [36715]
41. Germplasm Resources Information Network. 2007. National plant germplasm system, [Online]. Beltsville, MD: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Germplasm Resources Information Network (Producer). Available: http://www.ars-grin.gov/npgs/aboutgrin.html [2008, February 26]. [69523]
85. Natural Resources Canada. 2007. Canada's plant hardiness site - going beyond the zones, [Online]. Natural Resources Canada (Producer). Available: http://www.planthardiness.gc.ca/ph_spp_intro.pl?lang=en [2008, February 27]. [69550]
89. Ogle, Daniel G. 2002. Small burnet--Sanguisorba minor Scop., [Online]. In: Plant fact sheet. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (Producer). Available: http://plants.usda.gov/java/factSheet [2008, March 6]. [69667]
112. Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh. 2008. Flora Europaea, [Online]. Edinburgh, UK: Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh (Producer). Available: http://rbg-web2.rbge.org.uk/FE/fe.html [2008, March 17]. [41088]
119. St. John, L.; Tilley, D. J.; Ogle, D. G. 2006. Plants for solving resource problems: 'Delar' small burnet, [Online]. Aberdeen, ID: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Aberdeen Plant Materials Center (Producer). 2 p. Available: http://www.plant-materials.nrcs.usda.gov/pubs/idpmcbr6973.pdf [2008, March 6]. [69668]
143. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2008. PLANTS Database, [Online]. Available: http://plants.usda.gov/. [34262]

Source:

USDA Forest Service Fire Effects Information Service

License:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain/

Distribution in Egypt

Mediterranean region and Sinai.

Source:

Bibliotheca Alexandrina

License:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/

Rights Holder:

Bibliotheca Alexandrina

Localities documented in Tropicos sources

Sanguisorba minor Scop.:
Canada (North America)
Chile (South America)
United States (North America)
Peru (South America)

Note: This information is based on publications available through Tropicos and may not represent the entire distribution. Tropicos does not categorize distributions as native or non-native.

References:

Anonymous. 1986. List-Based Rec., Soil Conserv. Serv., U.S.D.A. Database of the U.S.D.A., Beltsville.
Voss, E. G. 1985. Michigan Flora. Part II Dicots (Saururaceae-Cornaceae). Bull. Cranbrook Inst. Sci. 59. xix + 724.
Gleason, H. A. 1968. The Choripetalous Dicotyledoneae. vol. 2. 655 pp. In H. A. Gleason Ill. Fl. N. U.S. (ed. 3). New York Botanical Garden, New York.
Marticorena, C. & M. Quezada. 1985. Catálogo de la Flora Vascular de Chile. Gayana, Bot. 42: 1–157.
Gutte, G., K. Müller & C. Müller. 1986. Neufunde für die peruanishe Flora und Wiederfunde seltener Arten: Ranunculaceae bis Primulaceae. Willdenowia 16(1): 187–210.
Radford, A. E., H. E. Ahles & C. R. Bell. 1968. Man. Vasc. Fl. Carolinas i–lxi, 1–1183. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.
Fernald, M. 1950. Manual (ed. 8) i–lxiv, 1–1632. American Book Co., New York.
Munz, P. A. & D. D. Keck. 1959. Cal. Fl. 1–1681. University of California Press, Berkeley.
Munz, P. A. 1974. Fl. S. Calif. 1–1086. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Source:

Missouri Botanical Garden

License:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/

Rights Holder:

Missouri Botanical Garden, 4344 Shaw Boulevard, St. Louis, MO 63110 USA

National Distribution

Canada

Origin: Exotic

Regularity: Regularly occurring

Currently: Unknown/Undetermined

Confidence: Confident

United States

Origin: Exotic

Regularity: Regularly occurring

Currently: Unknown/Undetermined

Confidence: Confident

Source:

NatureServe

License:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/

Rights Holder:

NatureServe

Distribution

For current distribution, please consult the Plant Profile page for this species on the PLANTS Web site.

Source:

USDA NRCS PLANTS Database

License:

Rights Holder:

USDA NRCS Idaho State Office & the National Plant Data Center

Morphology

Description

More info for the terms: caudex, forb, hypanthium, imperfect, perfect, resistance

This description provides characteristics that may be relevant to fire ecology and is not meant for identification. Keys for identification are available (for example, [42,49,64,101]).

Small burnet is a perennial forb. Stems are erect [49], ranging from 0.8 inch (2 cm) in height on droughty sites to 28 inches (70 cm) on moist sites [49,64,119]. There are 12 to 17 pinnately compound basal leaves that are 2 to 8 inches (4-20 cm) long, egg-shaped, and sharply toothed. Cauline leaves become few and much reduced up the stem. The inflorescence is a terminal spike with dense, mostly imperfect, sessile flowers. Lower flowers are often staminate, with upper flowers pistillate or perfect. Flowers have 4 broad, petal-like sepals; true petals are lacking. The fruits are achenes, paired in a persistent, usually winged, 3- to 5-mm-long hypanthium [18,42,49,64,101,117,119,155]. Hypanthia are sometimes wingless [101]. The seeds are small, with about 50,000 seeds/lb [58,106,117]. The stem base ends in a usually branched caudex, with a long, stout taproot beneath [18,42,89,119,120,127]. Roots of plants in southern England were estimated at more than 16 inches (40 cm) in length [11], while small burnet roots in New Zealand were traced to 3-foot (1 m) depths [117]. Small burnet sometimes has short rhizomes [42,64,115,116,119].

Small burnet is drought tolerant [11,157]. Drought resistance is partially attributable to its long, stout taproots, which have high water-storing capacity [38,133]. Small burnet can also adjust its water-use efficiency as environmental conditions change [37,38].

Age classes: Small burnet may live as long as 20 years on western rangelands, although life spans of 7 to 12 years are typical [89,99]. On chalk grasslands in southern England, 7 of 21 small burnet rosettes that emerged from plots in spring survived to flower. An additional 5 plants died after flowering, so total mortality rate from spring through summer averaged 57% [77].

References:

11. Buckland, S. M.; Grime, J. P.; Hodgson, J. G.; Thompson, K. 1997. A comparison of plant responses to the extreme drought of 1995 in northern England. Journal of Ecology. 85(6): 875-882. [69662]
42. 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]
49. Hickman, James C., ed. 1993. The Jepson manual: Higher plants of California. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1400 p. [21992]
64. Lackschewitz, Klaus. 1991. Vascular plants of west-central Montana--identification guidebook. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-227. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 648 p. [13798]
18. Cronquist, Arthur; Holmgren, Noel H.; Holmgren, Patricia K. 1997. Intermountain flora: Vascular plants of the Intermountain West, U.S.A. Vol. 3, Part A: Subclass Rosidae (except Fabales). New York: The New York Botanical Garden. 446 p. [28652]
37. Ferris, Rachel; Taylor, Gail. 1994. Elevated CO2, water relations and biophysics of leaf extension in four chalk grassland herbs. New Phytologist. 127(2): 297-307. [68937]
38. Ferris, Rachel; Taylor, Gail. 1995. Contrasting effects of elevated CO2 and water deficit on two native herbs. New Phytologist. 131(4): 491-501. [68935]
58. Jorgensen, Kent R.; Stevens, Richard. 2004. Seed collection, cleaning, and storage. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Stevens, Richard; Shaw, Nancy L., comps. Restoring western ranges and wildlands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-136-vol. 3. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 699-716. [42398]
77. Mitchley, J. 1988. Control of relative abundance of perennials in the chalk grassland in southern England. III. Shoot phenology. Journal of Ecology. 76(3): 607-616. [69660]
99. Plummer, A. Perry; Christensen, Donald R.; Monsen, Stephen B. 1968. Restoring big-game range in Utah. Publ. No. 68-3. Ephraim, UT: Utah Division of Fish and Game. 183 p. [4554]
101. 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]
106. Redente, Edward F.; Ogle, Phillip R.; Hargis, Norman E. 1982. Growing Colorado plants from seed: a state of the art: Volume III: forbs. FWS/OBS-82/30. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services, Western Energy and Land Use Team. 117 p. [36609]
115. Shaw, Nancy L. 2004. Production and use of planting stock. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Stevens, Richard; Shaw, Nancy L., comps. Restoring western ranges and wildlands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-136-vol. 3. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 745-768. [42197]
116. Shaw, Nancy L.; Monsen, Stephen B. 1983. Nonleguminous forbs for rangeland sites. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Shaw, Nancy, compilers. Managing Intermountain rangelands--improvement of range and wildlife habitats: Proceedings of symposia; 1981 September 15-17; Twin Falls, ID; 1982 June 22-24; Elko, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-157. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 123-131. [2121]
117. Sheppard, J. S.; Wills, B. J. 1985. Sheep's burnet - a forage herb for soil conservation in New Zealand. New Zealand Agricultural Science. 19(3): 115-118. [68960]
120. Stanton, Frank. 1974. Wildlife guidelines for range fire rehabilitation. Tech. Note 6712. Denver, CO: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 90 p. [2221]
127. Stevens, Richard; Monsen, Stephen B. 2004. Forbs for seeding range and wildlife habitats. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Stevens, Richard; Shaw, Nancy L., comps. Restoring western ranges and wildlands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-136-vol. 2. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 425-466. [52842]
133. Sydes, C. L.; Grime, J. P. 1984. A comparative study of root development using a simulated rock crevice. Journal of Ecology. 72(3): 937-946. [68962]
155. Welsh, Stanley L.; Atwood, N. Duane; Goodrich, Sherel; Higgins, Larry C., eds. 1987. A Utah flora. The Great Basin Naturalist Memoir No. 9. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University. 894 p. [2944]
157. Wills, B. J. 1984. Alternative plant species for revegetation and soil conservation in the tussock grasslands of New Zealand. Tussock Grasslands and Mountain Lands Institute Review. 42: 49-58. [68971]
89. Ogle, Daniel G. 2002. Small burnet--Sanguisorba minor Scop., [Online]. In: Plant fact sheet. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (Producer). Available: http://plants.usda.gov/java/factSheet [2008, March 6]. [69667]
119. St. John, L.; Tilley, D. J.; Ogle, D. G. 2006. Plants for solving resource problems: 'Delar' small burnet, [Online]. Aberdeen, ID: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Aberdeen Plant Materials Center (Producer). 2 p. Available: http://www.plant-materials.nrcs.usda.gov/pubs/idpmcbr6973.pdf [2008, March 6]. [69668]

Source:

USDA Forest Service Fire Effects Information Service

License:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain/

Habitat

Habitat characteristics

More info for the terms: mesic, xeric

Small burnet is frost, cold, and drought tolerant [11,157]. In the Great Basin small burnet is most common on relatively mesic sites [71]. It does not establish well on xeric sites in either the Great Basin [10] or the Mojave Desert [71]. Small burnet establishes best in areas receiving 18 or more inches (>457 mm) of mean annual precipitation [120], although it can establish in areas receiving as little as 10 inches (255 mm) of annual precipitation [127]. It does not generally persist with less than 12 inches (305 mm) of mean annual precipitation [10,51,119,127]. Small burnet occurs mostly on moist slopes and in moist woodlands in New Mexico [74].

In the East, small burnet is reported mostly on disturbed sites [101,110,132,149] and "waste places" [101]. It grows on cliffs in the Carolinas [101].

Soils: Small burnet accessions in North America are adapted to relatively infertile, well-drained soils [120,157]. Small burnet is most productive on slightly acidic to mildly alkaline soils [119,156], although small burnet tolerates soils up to 8.0 in pH [51]. It also tolerates mildly saline soils [89]. 'Delar' small burnet, a cultivar widely seeded in the Intermountain West, does not grow on sites that are poorly drained, flooded, or have a high water table [119,152].

Parent materials and soil textures: Small burnet is restricted mostly to calcareous soils in Europe [76,113], growing, for example, on limestone- and chalk-derived soils in Great Britain grasslands [76,118,141,147]. It also grows on siliceous soils in Spain (Salmeron 1966, cited in [117]), [142]. Small burnet grows on calcareous soils in North America but is not restricted to them. Soil types supporting small burnet in Michigan, for example, include rocky, calcareous streambanks and lakeshores, but small burnet also grows on gravels and sands in Michigan [149]. Small burnet is most productive on silty or loamy soil textures, although it grows on sandy and clayey soils [117,152]. It is reported on sands in eastern New Jersey [137]. Small burnet's near-restriction to calcareous soils in Europe may help explain its inability to spread on most North American sites. Further studies on soil preferences of small burnet in North America are needed.

Elevation: Small burnet grows on mid- and low-elevation sites in the Intermountain West. It does not establish well on low-elevation, xeric sites in the Great Basin. The mountain big sagebrush zone, which is higher in elevation than the basin big sagebrush zone, favors small burnet growth there [10]. Small burnet does not establish well in high-elevation Sierra Nevada locations [71].

Small burnet elevational ranges in the western United States

California 100-5,200 feet (30-1,600 m) [49] Nevada 6,500-7,500 feet (2,000-2,300 m) [61] Utah 5,000-7,005 feet (1,525-2,135 m) [155] New Mexico 6,000-7,500 feet (1,800-2,300 m) [74] Intermountain West 5,200-8,900 feet (1,600-2,700 m) [18]

Elevational ranges in Eurasia

Europe sea level-4,600 feet (0-1,400 m) Iran and Afghanistan 5,900-6,600 feet (1,800-2,000 m) (review by [29])

References:

74. Martin, William C.; Hutchins, Charles R. 1981. A flora of New Mexico. Volume 2. Germany: J. Cramer. 2589 p. [37176]
11. Buckland, S. M.; Grime, J. P.; Hodgson, J. G.; Thompson, K. 1997. A comparison of plant responses to the extreme drought of 1995 in northern England. Journal of Ecology. 85(6): 875-882. [69662]
132. Strausbaugh, P. D.; Core, Earl L. 1977. Flora of West Virginia. 2nd ed. Morgantown, WV: Seneca Books, Inc. 1079 p. [23213]
49. Hickman, James C., ed. 1993. The Jepson manual: Higher plants of California. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1400 p. [21992]
10. Blaisdell, James P.; Murray, Robert B.; McArthur, E. Durant. 1982. Managing Intermountain rangelands--sagebrush-grass ranges. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-134. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 41 p. [467]
18. Cronquist, Arthur; Holmgren, Noel H.; Holmgren, Patricia K. 1997. Intermountain flora: Vascular plants of the Intermountain West, U.S.A. Vol. 3, Part A: Subclass Rosidae (except Fabales). New York: The New York Botanical Garden. 446 p. [28652]
29. Douglas, Grant Brodie. 1991. Establishment and early regrowth of sheep's burnet (Sanguisorba minor ssp. muricata (Spach) Briq.) examined multivariately. Palmerson North, New Zealand: Massey University. 357 p. Dissertation. [69083]
51. Hoag, J. Chris; Young, Gary L. 1994. 'Delar' small burnet: an outstanding range forb. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Kitchen, Stanley G., compilers. Proceedings--ecology and management of annual rangelands; 1992 May 18-22; Boise, ID. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-313. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 379. [24313]
71. Love, R. Merton; Jones, Burle J. 1952. Improving California brush ranges. Circular 371. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Agriculture Experiment Station. 13 p. [16664]
76. McLellan, A. J.; Law, R.; Fitter, A. H. 1997. Response of calcareous grassland plant species to diffuse competition: results from a removal experiment. Journal of Ecology. 85(4): 479-490. [69659]
101. 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]
110. Roland, A. E.; Smith, E. C. 1969. The flora of Nova Scotia. Halifax, NS: Nova Scotia Museum. 746 p. [13158]
113. Ryser, Peter. 1993. Influences of neighbouring plants on seedling establishment in limestone grassland. Journal of Vegetation Science. 4(2): 195-202. [68959]
117. Sheppard, J. S.; Wills, B. J. 1985. Sheep's burnet - a forage herb for soil conservation in New Zealand. New Zealand Agricultural Science. 19(3): 115-118. [68960]
118. Silvertown, Jonathan W.; Dickie, John B. 1981. Seedling survivorship in natural populations of nine perennial chalk grassland plants. New Phytologist. 88(3): 555-558. [69663]
120. Stanton, Frank. 1974. Wildlife guidelines for range fire rehabilitation. Tech. Note 6712. Denver, CO: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 90 p. [2221]
127. Stevens, Richard; Monsen, Stephen B. 2004. Forbs for seeding range and wildlife habitats. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Stevens, Richard; Shaw, Nancy L., comps. Restoring western ranges and wildlands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-136-vol. 2. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 425-466. [52842]
137. Toth, S. J.; McLain, P.; MacNamara, L. G. 1964. Fertilization of burnet for game food on Lakewood sand soils. Journal of Wildlife Management. 28(4): 840-845. [69665]
141. Trabaud, L.; de Chanterac, B. 1985. The influence of fire on the phenological behaviour of Mediterranean plant species in Bas-Languedoc (southern France). Vegetatio. 60: 119-130. [19777]
142. Trabaud, Louis. 1974. Experimental study on the effects of prescribed burning on a Quercus coccifera L. Garrigue: early results. In: Proceedings, annual Tall Timbers fire ecology conference; 1973 March 22-23; Tallahassee, FL. No. 13. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station: 97-129. [18972]
147. Vecrin, M. P.; Grevilliot, F.; Muller, S. 2007. The contribution of persistent soil seed banks and flooding to the restoration of alluvial meadows. Journal for Nature Conservation. 15(1): 59-69. [67387]
149. Voss, Edward G. 1985. Michigan flora. Part II. Dicots (Saururaceae--Cornaceae). Bull. 59. Bloomfield Hills, MI: Cranbrook Institute of Science; Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Herbarium. 724 p. [11472]
152. 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]
155. Welsh, Stanley L.; Atwood, N. Duane; Goodrich, Sherel; Higgins, Larry C., eds. 1987. A Utah flora. The Great Basin Naturalist Memoir No. 9. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University. 894 p. [2944]
156. Wieneke, Silvia; Prati, Daniel; Brandl, Roland; Stocklin, Jurg; Auge, Harald. 2004. Genetic variation in Sanguisorba minor after 6 years in situ selection under elevated CO2. Global Change Biology. 10(8): 1389-1401. [68964]
157. Wills, B. J. 1984. Alternative plant species for revegetation and soil conservation in the tussock grasslands of New Zealand. Tussock Grasslands and Mountain Lands Institute Review. 42: 49-58. [68971]
61. Kartesz, John Thomas. 1988. A flora of Nevada. Reno, NV: University of Nevada. 1729 p. [In 2 volumes]. Dissertation. [42426]
89. Ogle, Daniel G. 2002. Small burnet--Sanguisorba minor Scop., [Online]. In: Plant fact sheet. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (Producer). Available: http://plants.usda.gov/java/factSheet [2008, March 6]. [69667]
119. St. John, L.; Tilley, D. J.; Ogle, D. G. 2006. Plants for solving resource problems: 'Delar' small burnet, [Online]. Aberdeen, ID: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Aberdeen Plant Materials Center (Producer). 2 p. Available: http://www.plant-materials.nrcs.usda.gov/pubs/idpmcbr6973.pdf [2008, March 6]. [69668]

Source:

USDA Forest Service Fire Effects Information Service

License:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain/

Key Plant Community Associations

More info for the terms: mesic, nonnative species

Small burnet grows in grasslands and shrublands in Europe. It is most common on
chalk grasslands in England [44,72,76,118,141,147]. In France, it occurs on
alluvial meadows [147] and chaparral-like,
Kermes oak (Quercus coccifera) maquis (sclerophyllous shrubland on
siliceous soil) and garrigue (sclerophyllous shrubland on calcareous soil)
in the southern part of the country [139,141,142].

Small burnet is most common on western rangelands in North America.
It is usually planted in pinyon-juniper (Pinus-Juniperus spp.) woodlands [21,31,127,128],
ponderosa pine (P. ponderosa) forests [128], relatively dry quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides)
parklands [19,127], mountain grasslands [95], chaparral [9,135], mountain brushlands [98,127,128], desert shrublands
[116,127,128], and sagebrush (Artemisia spp.) steppes [98,127,128]. In sagebrush ecosystems,
it is most abundant in the relatively mesic types such as Wyoming big
sagebrush (A. tridentata subsp. wyomingensis) and mountain big sagebrush
(A. t. subsp. vaseyana) [10,127,128], although it persists in some basin big sagebrush
(A. t. subsp. tridentata) communities [127].
Seed mixes applied on western rangelands contain a fairly consistent blend of
recommended species. The mix often contains both nonnative and native species, selected to help ensure no
one species interferes greatly with development of the other species [54,75,80,89].
Because they are regenerated artificially and establish together, the seeded species are often associated across a
broad array of plant communities. Nonnative species most often included in seed mixes with
small burnet include dryland alfalfa (Medicago sativa), forage
kochia (Kochia prostrata), yellow sweetclover (Melilotus officinalis),
Russian wildrye (Psathyrostachys juncea),
Siberian wheatgrass (Agropyron fragile), crested wheatgrass (A.
cristatum), and desert wheatgrass (A.
desertorum). Native species often included in the mix are Lewis flax (Linum lewisii), bottlebrush
squirreltail (Elymus elymoides), and bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria
spicata) [17,48,81,94,108,121].
In the East, small burnet is associated more closely with
disturbance than with particular plant communities (see Site Characteristics).
Predicting distribution of nonnative species is often difficult due to gaps in
understanding of nonnative species' biological and ecological characteristics,
and because nonnative species may still be expanding their North American range.
Therefore, small burnet may occur in plant communities
other than those discussed here and in Fire Ecology.

References:

9. Biswell, H. H.; Taber, R. D.; Hedrick, D. W.; Schultz, A. M. 1952. Management of chamise brushlands for game in the north coast region of California. California Fish and Game. 38(4): 453-484. [13673]
10. Blaisdell, James P.; Murray, Robert B.; McArthur, E. Durant. 1982. Managing Intermountain rangelands--sagebrush-grass ranges. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-134. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 41 p. [467]
17. Clary, Warren P.; Wagstaff, Fred J. 1987. Biological and economic effectiveness of several revegetation techniques in the pinyon-juniper-sagebrush zone. In: Everett, Richard L., compiler. Proceedings--pinyon-juniper conference; 1986 January 13-16; Reno, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-215. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 305-312. [29490]
19. Crowther, Evan G.; Harper, K. T. 1965. Vegetational and edaphic characteristics associated with aspen "strips" in Big Cottonwood Canyon. Utah Academy Proceedings. 42(2): 222-230. [15663]
21. Davis, James N.; Harper, Kimball T. 1990. Weedy annuals and establishment of seeded species on a chained juniper-pinyon woodland in central Utah. In: McArthur, E. Durant; Romney, Evan M.; Smith, Stanley D.; Tueller, Paul T., compilers. Proceedings--symposium on cheatgrass invasion, shrub die-off, and other aspects of shrub biology and management; 1989 April 5-7; Las Vegas, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-276. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 72-79. [12872]
31. Eddleman, Lee E.; Miller, Patricia M.; Miller, Richard F.; Dysart, Patricia L. 1994. Western juniper woodlands (of the Pacific Northwest): Science assessment. Walla Walla, WA: Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project. 131 p. [27969]
44. Graham, David J.; Hutchings, Michael J. 1988. A field investigation of germination from the seed bank of a chalk grassland ley on former arable land. Journal of Applied Ecology. 25(1): 253-263. [69666]
48. Harrison, R. Deane; Waldron, Blair L.; Jensen, Kevin B.; Page, Richard; Monaco, Thomas A.; Horton, Howard; Palazzo, Antonio J. 2002. Forage kochia greenstrips have a successful reputation in retarding western rangeland wildfires. Rangelands. 24(5): 3-7. [51924]
54. Horton, Howard, ed./comp. 1989. Interagency forage and conservation planting guide for Utah. Extension Circular 433. Logan, UT: Utah State University, Cooperative Extension Service. 67 p. [12231]
72. Maccherini, Simona; De Dominicis, Vincenzo. 2003. Germinable soil seed-banks of former grassland converted to coniferous plantation. Ecological Research. 18(6): 739-752. [48314]
75. McArthur, E. Durant; Monsen, Stephen B.; Welch, Bruce L. 1987. Shrubs and forbs for revegetation plantings in the sagebrush ecosystem. In: Onsager, Jerome A., ed. Integrated pest management on rangeland: State of the art in the sagebrush ecosystem. ARS-50. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service: 28-39. [3331]
76. McLellan, A. J.; Law, R.; Fitter, A. H. 1997. Response of calcareous grassland plant species to diffuse competition: results from a removal experiment. Journal of Ecology. 85(4): 479-490. [69659]
80. Monsen, Stephen B. 2004. Controlling plant competition. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Stevens, Richard; Shaw, Nancy L., comps. Restoring western ranges and wildlands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-136-vol. 1. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 57-64. [52823]
81. Monsen, Stephen B.; McArthur, E. Durant. 1995. Implications of early Intermountain range and watershed restoration practices. In: Roundy, Bruce A.; McArthur, E. Durant; Haley, Jennifer S.; Mann, David K., compilers. Proceedings: wildland shrub and arid land restoration symposium; 1993 October 19-21; Las Vegas, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-315. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 16-25. [24819]
94. Pellant, Mike. 1994. History and applications of the Intermountain greenstripping program. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Kitchen, Stanley G., compilers. Proceedings--ecology and management of annual rangelands; 1992 May 18-22; Boise, ID. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-313. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 63-68. [24254]
95. Pellant, Mike; Lysne, Cindy R. 2005. Strategies to enhance plant structure and diversity in crested wheatgrass seedings. In: Shaw, Nancy L.; Pellant, Mike; Monsen, Stephen B., eds. Sage-grouse habitat restoration symposium proceedings; 2001 June 4-7; Boise, ID. Proc. RMRS-P-38. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 81-92. [63187]
98. Plummer, A. Perry. 1977. Revegetation of disturbed Intermountain area sites. In: Thames, J. C., ed. Reclamation and use of disturbed lands of the Southwest. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press: 302-337. [27411]
108. Richards, Rebecca T.; Chambers, Jeanne C.; Ross, Christopher. 1998. Use of native plants on federal lands: policy and practice. Journal of Range Management. 51(6): 625-632. [30307]
116. Shaw, Nancy L.; Monsen, Stephen B. 1983. Nonleguminous forbs for rangeland sites. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Shaw, Nancy, compilers. Managing Intermountain rangelands--improvement of range and wildlife habitats: Proceedings of symposia; 1981 September 15-17; Twin Falls, ID; 1982 June 22-24; Elko, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-157. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 123-131. [2121]
118. Silvertown, Jonathan W.; Dickie, John B. 1981. Seedling survivorship in natural populations of nine perennial chalk grassland plants. New Phytologist. 88(3): 555-558. [69663]
121. Stevens, Richard. 1994. Interseeding and transplanting to enhance species composition. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Kitchen, Stanley G., compilers. Proceedings--ecology and management of annual rangelands; 1992 May 18-22; Boise, ID. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-313. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 300-306. [24301]
127. Stevens, Richard; Monsen, Stephen B. 2004. Forbs for seeding range and wildlife habitats. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Stevens, Richard; Shaw, Nancy L., comps. Restoring western ranges and wildlands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-136-vol. 2. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 425-466. [52842]
128. Stevens, Richard; Monsen, Stephen B. 2004. Guidelines for restoration and rehabilitation of principal plant communities. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Stevens, Richard; Shaw, Nancy L., comps. Restoring western ranges and wildlands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-136-vol. 1. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 199-294. [52829]
135. Talbot, M. W.; Biswell, H. H. 1942. The forage crop and its management. In: Hutchison, C. B.; Koto, K. The San Joaquin Experimental Range. Bulletin 663. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Agricultural Experiment Station: 13-49. [12315]
139. Trabaud, L. 1984. Fire adaptation strategies of plants in the French Mediterranean area. In: Margaris, N. S.; Arianoutsou-Faraggitaki, Margarita; Oechel, W. C., eds. Being alive on land: proceedings of the international symposium on adaptations to the terrestrial environment; 1982; Halkidiki, Greece. The Hague; Boston, MA: W. Junk: 63-69. [66790]
141. Trabaud, L.; de Chanterac, B. 1985. The influence of fire on the phenological behaviour of Mediterranean plant species in Bas-Languedoc (southern France). Vegetatio. 60: 119-130. [19777]
142. Trabaud, Louis. 1974. Experimental study on the effects of prescribed burning on a Quercus coccifera L. Garrigue: early results. In: Proceedings, annual Tall Timbers fire ecology conference; 1973 March 22-23; Tallahassee, FL. No. 13. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station: 97-129. [18972]
147. Vecrin, M. P.; Grevilliot, F.; Muller, S. 2007. The contribution of persistent soil seed banks and flooding to the restoration of alluvial meadows. Journal for Nature Conservation. 15(1): 59-69. [67387]
89. Ogle, Daniel G. 2002. Small burnet--Sanguisorba minor Scop., [Online]. In: Plant fact sheet. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (Producer). Available: http://plants.usda.gov/java/factSheet [2008, March 6]. [69667]

Source:

USDA Forest Service Fire Effects Information Service

License:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain/

Habitat

Two other studies [20,34] found seeding made little difference in native species recovery on seeded plots compared to native species recovery on unseeded plots. After wildfires on Wyoming big sagebrush communities in the Snake River Plains of southern Idaho, there was no significant difference in species composition on seeded vs. unseeded plots. Thirty-four burns, all seeded during postfire year 1, were inventoried. Time-since-seeding ranged from 2 to 17 years across the burned sites. The seed mixes contained small burnet, other nonnative species, and native species including Wyoming big sagebrush. Across sites, native plants were establishing or recovering as well on unseeded as seeded plots. Coverage of nonnative species was similar on seeded and unseeded plots [20].

A study in Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, Utah, had similar findings. Three Buckskin Mountain sites burned by summer wildfiresÂ1 in 1966 and 2 in 1997Âwere studied. The burned plant community was primarily Utah juniper woodland, with patches of big sagebrush-Stansbury cliffrose (Purshia mexicana var. stansburiana) steppe. Burned areas were seeded with native-nonnative mixes the fall or spring after the fires. Small burnet was included in the seed mix used on 1 of the burned sites. The study found that whether seeded or not, burned plots had significantly higher diversity and cover of nonnative species and lower diversity and cover of native species compared to unburned plots (P<0.001). Coverage of small burnet alone was not provided. Cheatgrass dominated both burned and unburned plots. Comparing the two 1997 burns, which were on west and east slopes, the east-slope burn had significantly higher coverage of native plants than the west-slope burn (P<0.01). The authors concluded that site factors were at least as important in determining postfire recovery of the native species as rehabilitation seedings [34]. Further studies are needed to assess the effectiveness of postfire rehabilitation seedings that include small burnet and the ecological impacts of such seedings on native species.

Postfire rehabilitation: Despite the potential interference of nonnative species with native species' establishment and growth, seed mixes with small burnet and other nonnative, noninvasive plants are widely used in the Intermountain West to prevent postfire erosion and slow postfire spread of invasive nonnative plants [108,128]. Stevens and Monsen [128] recommend against using nonnative species to restore native communities when possible. However, nonnative seedings will likely continue until native plant materials become more widely available [128]. Seed mixes that include nonnative species can be effective where rapid plant establishment and coverage are desired. Nonnative species in commercial seed mixes usually grow quickly and have wide ecological amplitudes. Compared to native seed mixes, nonnative seed mixes are less expensive, and species in nonnative seed mixes selected for the Intermountain West may establish more easily than species native to the area [6,128]. Further, seeds of many native species may be unavailable [96,102,128]. Small burnet, dryland alfalfa, Siberian wheatgrass, and desert wheatgrass were among the most frequently seeded species in a study of 50 burned-area rehabilitation sites on the Battle Mountain, Elko, Ely, and Winnemucca Districts of the US Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management in Nevada. In contrast, most species sown on mine reclamation sites were native grasses [108]. Small burnet provides only spotty cover when planted alone, but shows good establishment when included in seed mixes [79].

Postfire control of invasive species: Seed mixes with nonnative species can help control spread of invasive species on some sites [128]. Small burnet is often included in seed mixes used to reduce postfire establishment of cheatgrass in sagebrush and pinyon-juniper ecosystems [13,17]. Species selected for cheatgrass control show rapid seedling establishment and growth, have broad adaptability and high forage value, and are resistant to grazing. Small burnet is usually blended with Lewis flax, dryland alfalfa, forage kochia, Russian wildrye, and/or nonnative wheatgrasses (Agropyron spp.) in mixes formulated for cheatgrass control. Native grasses are often included in the mix [81,94,121,128]. See Cultural control for further information on this subject.

Greenstrips are long, narrow bands of vegetation that maintains relatively high moisture contents during the fire season. They are used to disrupt fuel flammability, accumulation, and continuity [23,79,93,94]. Seed mixes used on greenstrips usually include nonnative and native species. Small burnet, forage kochia, dryland alfalfa, and Lewis flax are forbs commonly used in greenstrip seedings; crested or desert wheatgrass, bottlebrush squirreltail, and bluebunch wheatgrass are commonly used grasses [48]. Small burnet's long, stout taproot enables it to store water and maintain high moisture levels under drought, so small burnet is well suited for greenstrip seedings. During an extreme drought in southern England, small burnet maintained a higher relative water content than 30 associated species [11].

Interference with conifers: Small burnet and other seeded species may interfere with postfire conifer seedling growth. On the Fort Valley Experiment Station near Flagstaff, Arizona, ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa var. scopulorum) seedlings on seeded plots gained significantly less height and stem diameter growth than ponderosa pine seedlings on plots where other vegetation was hand-pulled (P<0.05 for all study measures). The study site had been severely burned by a wildfire that removed all aboveground vegetation. Burned areas were planted in postfire year 1 with 2-year-old ponderosa pine seedlings and herbaceous species including small burnet, yellow sweetclover, crested wheatgrass, desert wheatgrass, orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata), bottlebrush squirreltail, and blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis). Soils on burned sites had significantly higher nitrogen levels compared to unburned plots. The authors suggested that small burnet and ponderosa pine were competing for nitrogen and water on burned plots [32].

References:

11. Buckland, S. M.; Grime, J. P.; Hodgson, J. G.; Thompson, K. 1997. A comparison of plant responses to the extreme drought of 1995 in northern England. Journal of Ecology. 85(6): 875-882. [69662]
6. Asay, K. H.; Horton, W. H.; Jensen, K. B.; Palazzo, A. J. 2001. Merits of native and introduced Triticeae grasses on semiarid rangelands. Canadian Journal of Plant Science. 81(1): 45-52. [43354]
13. Chadwick, James H.; Nelson, Deanna R.; Nunn, Carol R.; Tatman, Debra A. 1999. Thinning versus chaining: which costs more? In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Stevens, Richard, compilers. Proceedings: ecology and management of pinyon-juniper communities within the Interior West: Sustaining and restoring a diverse ecosystem; 1997 September 15-18; Provo, UT. Proceedings RMRS-P-9. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 290-292. [30569]
17. Clary, Warren P.; Wagstaff, Fred J. 1987. Biological and economic effectiveness of several revegetation techniques in the pinyon-juniper-sagebrush zone. In: Everett, Richard L., compiler. Proceedings--pinyon-juniper conference; 1986 January 13-16; Reno, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-215. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 305-312. [29490]
20. Dalzell, Cynthia R. 2004. Post-fire establishment of vegetation communities following reseeding on southern Idaho's Snake River Plain. Boise, ID: Boise State University. 112 p. Thesis. [62175]
32. Elliott, Katherine J.; White, Alan S. 1987. Competitive effects of various grasses and forbs on ponderosa pine seedlings. Forest Science. 33(2): 356-366. [860]
34. Evangelista, Paul; Stohlgren, Thomas J.; Guenther, Debra; Stewart, Sean. 2004. Vegetation response to fire and postburn seeding treatments in juniper woodlands of the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, Utah. Western North American Naturalist. 64(3): 293-305. [61033]
48. Harrison, R. Deane; Waldron, Blair L.; Jensen, Kevin B.; Page, Richard; Monaco, Thomas A.; Horton, Howard; Palazzo, Antonio J. 2002. Forage kochia greenstrips have a successful reputation in retarding western rangeland wildfires. Rangelands. 24(5): 3-7. [51924]
79. Monsen, Stephen B. 1994. Selection of plants for fire suppression on semiarid sites. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Kitchen, Stanley G., compilers. Proceedings--ecology and management of annual rangelands; 1992 May 18-22; Boise, ID. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-313. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 363-373. [24310]
81. Monsen, Stephen B.; McArthur, E. Durant. 1995. Implications of early Intermountain range and watershed restoration practices. In: Roundy, Bruce A.; McArthur, E. Durant; Haley, Jennifer S.; Mann, David K., compilers. Proceedings: wildland shrub and arid land restoration symposium; 1993 October 19-21; Las Vegas, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-315. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 16-25. [24819]
86. Newman, Gregory J.; Redente, Edward F. 2001. Long-term plant community development as influenced by revegetation techniques. Journal of Range Management. 54(6): 717-724. [42296]
91. Ott, Jeffrey E. 2001. Vegetation of chained and non-chained rangelands following wildfire and rehabilitation in west-central Utah. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University. 79 p. Thesis. [46563]
93. Pellant, Mike. 1990. The cheatgrass-wildfire cycle--are there any solutions? In: McArthur, E. Durant; Romney, Evan M.; Smith, Stanley D.; Tueller, Paul T., compilers. Proceedings--symposium on cheatgrass invasion, shrub die-off, and other aspects of shrub biology and management; 1989 April 5-7; Las Vegas, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-276. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 11-18. [12730]
94. Pellant, Mike. 1994. History and applications of the Intermountain greenstripping program. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Kitchen, Stanley G., compilers. Proceedings--ecology and management of annual rangelands; 1992 May 18-22; Boise, ID. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-313. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 63-68. [24254]
96. Pellant, Mike; Monsen, Stephen B. 1993. Rehabilitation on public rangelands in Idaho, USA: a change in emphasis from grass monocultures. In: Proceedings of the 17th international grassland congress; 1993 February 8-21; Palmerston North, New Zealand. Wellington, New Zealand: SIR Publishing: 778-779. [25665]
108. Richards, Rebecca T.; Chambers, Jeanne C.; Ross, Christopher. 1998. Use of native plants on federal lands: policy and practice. Journal of Range Management. 51(6): 625-632. [30307]
121. Stevens, Richard. 1994. Interseeding and transplanting to enhance species composition. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Kitchen, Stanley G., compilers. Proceedings--ecology and management of annual rangelands; 1992 May 18-22; Boise, ID. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-313. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 300-306. [24301]
128. Stevens, Richard; Monsen, Stephen B. 2004. Guidelines for restoration and rehabilitation of principal plant communities. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Stevens, Richard; Shaw, Nancy L., comps. Restoring western ranges and wildlands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-136-vol. 1. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 199-294. [52829]
150. Walker, Scott C. 1999. Species compatibility and successional processes affecting seeding of pinyon-juniper types. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Stevens, Richard, compilers. Proceedings: ecology and management of pinyon-juniper communities within the Interior West: Sustaining and restoring a diverse ecosystem; 1997 September 15-18; Provo, UT. Proceedings RMRS-P-9. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 331-337. [30578]
23. Davison, Jason; Smith, Ed. 2008. Greenstrips: another tool to manage wildfire. In: Living with fire. Reno, NV: University of Nevada Cooperative Extension. Available: http://www.livingwithfire.info/pdf/WEB-Greenstrips.pdf [2008, March 24]. [69828]
102. Rainier Seeds, Inc. 2008. Seed catalog and reference guide, [Online]. Davenport, WA: Rainier Seeds, Inc. 31 p. Available: http://waspserver.com/accounts/seed-rainier/data_documents/8/files/oldra... [31 March 2008]. [69912]

Source:

USDA Forest Service Fire Effects Information Service

License:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain/

Plant Response to Fire

More info for the terms: caudex, cover, density, frequency, presence, shrub, wildfire

Small burnet response to fire is not well documented. Since it is known to sprout from a thick caudex [79,117] that is attached to a large, storage taproot [18,42,89,119,120,127], sprouting is likely important to small burnet's postfire recovery. Rhizomatous plants may also sprout from the rhizomes after fire. Monsen [79] rates small burnet's sprouting ability as "good". Barnes [144] collected a small burnet plant that had sprouted from the caudex and produced a single flowerhead the year following fire in a pinyon-juniper community in the Beaver Dam Mountains of Utah. The specimen can be viewed online at Utah Valley State College's Virtual Herbarium.

As the flowering herbarium specimen suggests, small burnet can establish from seed after fire [139]. Top-killed plants that sprout and produce seed after fire provide on-site seed sources for small burnet regeneration. Since small burnet has long-lived seed that is stored in soil [67,141,147,147], the seed bank is another likely source of postfire establishment for small burnet.

Excluding sites seeded after fire, only one study was found for this literature review that documented small burnet presence after fire in North America. Small burnet was present in small numbers after prescribed fires in blackbrush (Coleogyne ramosissima) communities of southwestern Utah [12]. Method of regeneration (from seed or by sprouting) was not noted in the study.

Mean small burnet cover across 8 burned blackbrush communities in Utah. Values are means (SD) [12]. Postfire year Cover (%) 1 0.0 (0.0) 2 0.7 (0.9) 6 0.0 (0.0) 12 1.9 (0.4) 17 0.0 (0.0) 19.5 0.0 (0.0) 37 0.0 (0.0) unburned plots 0.0 (0.0)

A single study was found of small burnet response to fire in Europe. A study in a Kermes oak community near Montpellier, France, found small burnet established only from seed after single or repeated prescribed fires. Trabaud [140] noted that small burnet was present in trace amounts before summer or fall prescribed burning. In postfire year 4, small burnet frequency was low on all plots, but was higher on burned than on unburned plots [139,140,142]. Repeat-burn sites were burned every other spring or fall, with a total of 5 fires in 9 years. Small burnet established in low numbers in some years and failed to establish in others on repeat-burn plots [139]. Small burnet flower production was similar on burned and unburned plots [141].

Small burnet seedling frequency (%) after spring or fall prescribed burning in southern France [139] Year Spring fires Fall fires 1969* 0 1 1970 0 1 1971* 0 0 1972 3 0 1973* 1 0 1974 2 0 1975* 0 0 1976 0 0 1977* 0 1 1978 0 1 *Burn year.

Postfire seedings: Small burnet usually establishes the year after seeding, then declines rapidly [43,98]. Quantitative studies documenting small burnet presence after postfire seedings are few. In Wyoming big sagebrush and Utah juniper-Colorado pinyon (Juniperus osteosperma-Pinus edulis) communities of central Utah, small burnet was mixed with other nonnative herbs and native fourwing saltbush (Atriplex canescens) and seeded on burned sites the fall after an August wildfire. Small burnet's mean frequency 1 and 2 years after the wildfire was 25%; its frequency dropped to 19% in postfire year 3. Small burnet was not present on unburned plots [91,92]. It was also included in a nonnative seed mix used after wildfire in a threetip sagebrush (Artemisia tripartita)-basin big sagebrush-mountain big sagebrush community near Pocatello, Idaho. In postfire year 2, small burnet had 0.20% cover on seeded plots and 0% cover on unseeded plots [103]. In central Utah, a nonnative-native mix was seeded in the fall after July wildfires on pinyon-juniper and big sagebrush communities. In postfire year 3, small burnet was present in only trace amounts in both communities [15].

Small burnet was used in a mostly nonnative seed mix that included mountain big sagebrush after a prescribed fall fire in Daggett County, Utah, shrublands. Colorado pinyon and junipers (Juniperus spp.) were encroaching onto 2 shrub communities: a north-slope alderleaf mountain-mahogany (Cercocarpus montanus var. montanus)/bluebunch wheatgrass community and a south-slope rubber rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus nauseosus)-mountain big sagebrush community. The fire was used to remove the conifers, and both communities were seeded soon after the fire. Moisture the year after fire was "favorable for establishment and growth of plants". Small burnet frequencies on south-slope sites were 23% in postfire year 6 and 0% in postfire year 11. Small burnet did not establish on north-slope sites [43].

Small burnet may not establish on harsh, high-elevation burned sites. It was included in a seed mix sown on a burned lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta var. latifolia) site on the Colville National Forest, Washington. The site experienced a stand-replacement wildfire in the summer of 1929, was burned under prescription in the fall of 1949 to prepare the site as a lodgepole pine plantation, then seeded with a grass-forb mix that fall. The effect of the double burning was to remove all standing live vegetation and much organic material from the soil. Four years later, small burnet showed no establishment on southwest-facing slopes. It had "good vigor" and a density of 0.2 plant/footÂ² on the moister, northeast-facing slopes [35].

References:

42. 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]
15. Clary, Warren P. 1988. Plant density and cover response to several seeding techniques following wildfire. Res. Note INT-384. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 6 p. [5609]
18. Cronquist, Arthur; Holmgren, Noel H.; Holmgren, Patricia K. 1997. Intermountain flora: Vascular plants of the Intermountain West, U.S.A. Vol. 3, Part A: Subclass Rosidae (except Fabales). New York: The New York Botanical Garden. 446 p. [28652]
35. 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]
43. Goodrich, Sherel; Huber, Allen. 1999. Response of a seed mix and development of ground cover on northerly and southerly exposures in the 1985 Jarvies Canyon Burn, Daggett County, Utah. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Stevens, Richard, compilers. Proceedings: ecology and management of pinyon-juniper communities within the Interior West: Sustaining and restoring a diverse ecosystem; 1997 September 15-18; Provo, UT. Proceedings RMRS-P-9. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 346-351. [30580]
67. Lavorel, Sandra; Debussche, Max; Lebreton, Jean-Dominique; Lepart, Jacques. 1993. Seasonal patterns in the seed bank of Mediterranean old-fields. Oikos. 67(1): 114-128. [69664]
79. Monsen, Stephen B. 1994. Selection of plants for fire suppression on semiarid sites. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Kitchen, Stanley G., compilers. Proceedings--ecology and management of annual rangelands; 1992 May 18-22; Boise, ID. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-313. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 363-373. [24310]
91. Ott, Jeffrey E. 2001. Vegetation of chained and non-chained rangelands following wildfire and rehabilitation in west-central Utah. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University. 79 p. Thesis. [46563]
92. Ott, Jeffrey E.; McArthur, E. Durant; Sanderson, Stewart C. 2001. Plant community dynamics of burned and unburned sagebrush and pinyon-juniper vegetation in west-central Utah. In: McArthur, E. Durant; Fairbanks, Daniel J., compilers. Shrubland ecosystem genetics and biodiversity: proceedings; 2000 June 13-15; Provo, UT. Proc. RMRS-P-21. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 177-191. [41971]
98. Plummer, A. Perry. 1977. Revegetation of disturbed Intermountain area sites. In: Thames, J. C., ed. Reclamation and use of disturbed lands of the Southwest. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press: 302-337. [27411]
103. Ratzlaff, Teresa D.; Anderson, Jay E. 1995. Vegetal recovery following wildfire in seeded and unseeded sagebrush steppe. Journal of Range Management. 48(5): 386-391. [26539]
117. Sheppard, J. S.; Wills, B. J. 1985. Sheep's burnet - a forage herb for soil conservation in New Zealand. New Zealand Agricultural Science. 19(3): 115-118. [68960]
120. Stanton, Frank. 1974. Wildlife guidelines for range fire rehabilitation. Tech. Note 6712. Denver, CO: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 90 p. [2221]
127. Stevens, Richard; Monsen, Stephen B. 2004. Forbs for seeding range and wildlife habitats. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Stevens, Richard; Shaw, Nancy L., comps. Restoring western ranges and wildlands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-136-vol. 2. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 425-466. [52842]
139. Trabaud, L. 1984. Fire adaptation strategies of plants in the French Mediterranean area. In: Margaris, N. S.; Arianoutsou-Faraggitaki, Margarita; Oechel, W. C., eds. Being alive on land: proceedings of the international symposium on adaptations to the terrestrial environment; 1982; Halkidiki, Greece. The Hague; Boston, MA: W. Junk: 63-69. [66790]
140. Trabaud, L. 1991. Is fire an agent favouring plant invasions? In: Groves, R. H.; Di Castri, F., eds. Biogeography of mediterranean invasions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 179-190. [43839]
141. Trabaud, L.; de Chanterac, B. 1985. The influence of fire on the phenological behaviour of Mediterranean plant species in Bas-Languedoc (southern France). Vegetatio. 60: 119-130. [19777]
142. Trabaud, Louis. 1974. Experimental study on the effects of prescribed burning on a Quercus coccifera L. Garrigue: early results. In: Proceedings, annual Tall Timbers fire ecology conference; 1973 March 22-23; Tallahassee, FL. No. 13. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station: 97-129. [18972]
147. Vecrin, M. P.; Grevilliot, F.; Muller, S. 2007. The contribution of persistent soil seed banks and flooding to the restoration of alluvial meadows. Journal for Nature Conservation. 15(1): 59-69. [67387]
12. Callison, Jim; Brotherson, Jack D.; Bowns, James E. 1985. The effects of fire on the blackbrush [Coleogyne ramosissima] community of southwestern Utah. Journal of Range Management. 38(6): 535-538. [593]
89. Ogle, Daniel G. 2002. Small burnet--Sanguisorba minor Scop., [Online]. In: Plant fact sheet. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (Producer). Available: http://plants.usda.gov/java/factSheet [2008, March 6]. [69667]
119. St. John, L.; Tilley, D. J.; Ogle, D. G. 2006. Plants for solving resource problems: 'Delar' small burnet, [Online]. Aberdeen, ID: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Aberdeen Plant Materials Center (Producer). 2 p. Available: http://www.plant-materials.nrcs.usda.gov/pubs/idpmcbr6973.pdf [2008, March 6]. [69668]
144. Utah Valley State College Herbarium. 2006. Utah Valley State College virtual herbarium--Sanguisorba minor Scopoli, [Online]. Orem, UT: Utah Valley State College Herbarium (Producer). Available: http://herbarium.uvsc.edu/virtual/viewer.asp?file=10182s1.jpg&title=Sang... [2008, March 17]. [69736]

Source:

USDA Forest Service Fire Effects Information Service

License:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain/

Immediate Effect of Fire

More info for the terms: caudex, top-kill

Fire's effect on small burnet is not documented in English-language literature. Since it has a thick caudex protected by soil [18,42,89,119,120,127], most fires probably only top-kill small burnet.

References:

42. 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]
18. Cronquist, Arthur; Holmgren, Noel H.; Holmgren, Patricia K. 1997. Intermountain flora: Vascular plants of the Intermountain West, U.S.A. Vol. 3, Part A: Subclass Rosidae (except Fabales). New York: The New York Botanical Garden. 446 p. [28652]
120. Stanton, Frank. 1974. Wildlife guidelines for range fire rehabilitation. Tech. Note 6712. Denver, CO: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 90 p. [2221]
127. Stevens, Richard; Monsen, Stephen B. 2004. Forbs for seeding range and wildlife habitats. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Stevens, Richard; Shaw, Nancy L., comps. Restoring western ranges and wildlands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-136-vol. 2. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 425-466. [52842]
89. Ogle, Daniel G. 2002. Small burnet--Sanguisorba minor Scop., [Online]. In: Plant fact sheet. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (Producer). Available: http://plants.usda.gov/java/factSheet [2008, March 6]. [69667]
119. St. John, L.; Tilley, D. J.; Ogle, D. G. 2006. Plants for solving resource problems: 'Delar' small burnet, [Online]. Aberdeen, ID: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Aberdeen Plant Materials Center (Producer). 2 p. Available: http://www.plant-materials.nrcs.usda.gov/pubs/idpmcbr6973.pdf [2008, March 6]. [69668]

Source:

USDA Forest Service Fire Effects Information Service

License:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain/

Post-fire Regeneration

More info for the terms: caudex, ground residual colonizer, rhizome, secondary colonizer

POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY [131]:
Rhizomatous herb, rhizome in soil
Caudex, growing points in soil
Ground residual colonizer (on site, initial community)
Secondary colonizer (on- or off-site seed sources)

References:

131. Stickney, Peter F. 1989. Seral origin of species comprising secondary plant succession in Northern Rocky Mountain forests. FEIS workshop: Postfire regeneration. Unpublished draft on file at: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT. 10 p. [20090]

Source:

USDA Forest Service Fire Effects Information Service

License:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain/

Fire Ecology

More info for the terms: cover, fire regime, fire-return interval, greenstrip, litter, natural, nonnative species

Fire adaptations: Although small burnet is native to fire-adapted ecosystems such as Kermes oak maquis [139,141], little is known regarding small burnet's adaptations to fire. It is anecdotally noted as fire resistant because its foliage remains green through the fire season [89,116,129]. Little fire research has been conducted on small burnet where it is native. Research in North America has focused on postfire establishment of small burnet from seed mixes sown soon after fires have passed, not postfire self-regeneration of small burnet. Further research is needed on the fire ecology of small burnet in both its native lands and in areas where it is nonnative.

FIRE REGIMES: It is difficult to predict how small burnet may respond to various FIRE REGIMES because its response to fire is not well documented. Since small burnet seed accessioned for North America came mostly from northern and western Europe, fire histories there best reflect the FIRE REGIMES under which North American small burnet plants evolved. The grasslands of Europe have been managed for so long that their natural fire regime is unknown. In the historical period of Europe (750 BC on), most grassland fires were set for pastoral and agricultural purposes (review by [138]). The chaparral-like maquis of Europe experiences a fire regime similar to that of chaparral in southwestern Oregon and California: moderate (10-50 years) to long (>50 years) fire-return interval, stand-replacement fires that are difficult to suppress (review by [138]), [63]. This literature review found only 1 study on small burnet's response to fire in Europe (see Plant Response to Fire), so discussions of small burnet's fire ecology in this review are largely speculative.

The fire regime in the Intermountain West, where small burnet is most commonly seeded, is probably unlike FIRE REGIMES under which small burnet evolved in Europe because the climates are so different. Intermountain West plant communities in which small burnet is commonly seeded include pinyon-juniper woodlands, big sagebrush steppes, and mountain grasslands. FIRE REGIMES for those communities range from mixed-severity and long return interval, stand-replacement fires in pinyon-juniper [40,62], moderate return interval, mixed-severity fires in big sagebrush [4,161], and frequent fires in mountain grasslands [2,3]. Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) population expansions have dramatically changed FIRE REGIMES and plant communities in the Intermountain West by creating flammable, continuous fuels that ignite easily and produce fires that spread rapidly, cover large areas, and occur frequently [130,158,159,160].

Since small burnet is seeded in after fire and is noninvasive, its response under various FIRE REGIMES of the Intermountain West may be less important than its rate of seedling establishment in postfire seedings, which is discussed in Plant Response to Fire. Some of the other nonnative species in seed mixes with small burnet may become invasive, however, particularly crested wheatgrass and desert wheatgrass [33].

For further information on FIRE REGIMES of plant communities where small burnet is often seeded in after fire, see the small burnet Fire Regime Table. The expanded version of the Fire Regime Table provides information on FIRE REGIMES of plant communities in which small burnet is less common.

Fuels: Small burnet leaves stay green and maintain a relatively high moisture content in the fire season [119]. Monsen [79] rates small burnet foliage as moderately flammable and its litter as low in flammability. Because of its high moisture content, small burnet is often seeded onto greenstrip fuelbreaks [79,93,94] (see Greenstrips for further information).

References:

40. Floyd, M. Lisa; Romme, William H.; Hanna, David D. 2000. Fire history and vegetation pattern in Mesa Verde National Park, Colorado, USA. Ecological Applications. 10(6): 1666-1680. [37590]
4. Arno, Stephen F.; Gruell, George E. 1983. Fire history at the forest-grassland ecotone in southwestern Montana. Journal of Range Management. 36(3): 332-336. [342]
3. Arno, Stephen F. 1976. The historical role of fire on the Bitterroot National Forest. Res. Pap. INT-187. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 29 p. [15225]
2. Antos, Joseph A.; McCune, Bruce; Bara, Cliff. 1983. The effect of fire on an ungrazed western Montana grassland. The American Midland Naturalist. 110(2): 354-364. [337]
33. Erdman, James A. 1970. Pinyon-juniper succession after natural fires on residual soils of Mesa Verde, Colorado. Brigham Young University Science Bulletin: Biological Series. 11(2): 1-26. [11987]
63. Keeley, Jon E.; Keeley, Sterling C. 1977. Energy allocation patterns of a sprouting and a nonsprouting species of Arctostaphylos in the California chaparral. The American Midland Naturalist. 98(1): 1-10. [13729]
79. Monsen, Stephen B. 1994. Selection of plants for fire suppression on semiarid sites. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Kitchen, Stanley G., compilers. Proceedings--ecology and management of annual rangelands; 1992 May 18-22; Boise, ID. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-313. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 363-373. [24310]
93. Pellant, Mike. 1990. The cheatgrass-wildfire cycle--are there any solutions? In: McArthur, E. Durant; Romney, Evan M.; Smith, Stanley D.; Tueller, Paul T., compilers. Proceedings--symposium on cheatgrass invasion, shrub die-off, and other aspects of shrub biology and management; 1989 April 5-7; Las Vegas, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-276. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 11-18. [12730]
94. Pellant, Mike. 1994. History and applications of the Intermountain greenstripping program. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Kitchen, Stanley G., compilers. Proceedings--ecology and management of annual rangelands; 1992 May 18-22; Boise, ID. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-313. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 63-68. [24254]
116. Shaw, Nancy L.; Monsen, Stephen B. 1983. Nonleguminous forbs for rangeland sites. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Shaw, Nancy, compilers. Managing Intermountain rangelands--improvement of range and wildlife habitats: Proceedings of symposia; 1981 September 15-17; Twin Falls, ID; 1982 June 22-24; Elko, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-157. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 123-131. [2121]
129. Stevens, Richard; Shaw, Nancy; Howard, Charles G. 1985. Important nonleguminous forbs for Intermountain ranges. In: Range plant improvement in western North America: Proceedings of a symposium at the annual meeting of the Society for Range Management; 1985 February 14; Salt Lake City, UT. Denver, CO: Society for Range Management: 102-112. [2248]
130. Stewart, George; Hull, A. C. 1949. Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum L.)--an ecologic intruder in southern Idaho. Ecology. 30(1): 58-74. [2252]
138. Trabaud, L. V.; Christensen, N. L.; Gill, A. M. 1993. Historical biogeography of fire in temperate and mediterranean ecosystems. In: Crutzen, P. J.; Goldammer, J. G., eds. Fire in the environment: the ecological, atmospheric, and climatic importance of vegetation fires. New York: John Wiley & Sons Ltd: 277-295. [64921]
139. Trabaud, L. 1984. Fire adaptation strategies of plants in the French Mediterranean area. In: Margaris, N. S.; Arianoutsou-Faraggitaki, Margarita; Oechel, W. C., eds. Being alive on land: proceedings of the international symposium on adaptations to the terrestrial environment; 1982; Halkidiki, Greece. The Hague; Boston, MA: W. Junk: 63-69. [66790]
141. Trabaud, L.; de Chanterac, B. 1985. The influence of fire on the phenological behaviour of Mediterranean plant species in Bas-Languedoc (southern France). Vegetatio. 60: 119-130. [19777]
158. Young, James A. 1989. Intermountain shrubsteppe plant communities--pristine and grazed. In: Western raptor management symposium and workshop: Proceedings; 1987 October 26-28; Boise, ID. Scientific Technical Series No. 12. Washington, DC: National Wildlife Federation: 3-14. [25377]
159. Young, James A. 1991. Cheatgrass. In: James, Lynn F.; Evans, John O., eds. Noxious range weeds. Westview Special Studies in Agriculture Science and Policy. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, Inc: 408-418. [30594]
160. Young, James A.; Evans, Raymond A. 1978. Population dynamics after wildfires in sagebrush grasslands. Journal of Range Management. 31(4): 283-289. [2657]
161. Young, James A; Evans, Raymond A.; Major, Jack. 1977. Sagebrush steppe. In: Barbour, Michael G.; Major, Jack, eds. Terrestrial vegetation of California. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons Inc.: 763-796. [2680]
62. Keeley, Jon E. 1981. Reproductive cycles and FIRE REGIMES. In: Mooney, H. A.; Bonnicksen, T. M.; Christensen, N. L.; Lotan, J. E.; Reiners, W. A., tech. coords. FIRE REGIMES and ecosystem properties: Proceedings of the conference; 1978 December 11-15; Honolulu, HI. Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-26. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 231-277. [4395]
89. Ogle, Daniel G. 2002. Small burnet--Sanguisorba minor Scop., [Online]. In: Plant fact sheet. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (Producer). Available: http://plants.usda.gov/java/factSheet [2008, March 6]. [69667]
119. St. John, L.; Tilley, D. J.; Ogle, D. G. 2006. Plants for solving resource problems: 'Delar' small burnet, [Online]. Aberdeen, ID: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Aberdeen Plant Materials Center (Producer). 2 p. Available: http://www.plant-materials.nrcs.usda.gov/pubs/idpmcbr6973.pdf [2008, March 6]. [69668]

Source:

USDA Forest Service Fire Effects Information Service

License:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain/

Successional Status

Regeneration Processes

More info for the terms: caudex, density, frequency, hypanthium, mesic, monoecious, selection, xeric

Small burnet establishes from seed [127,156] and by sprouting from the caudex [79,117]. Some plants may sprout from rhizomes [115,116].

Pollination: Small burnet is pollinated by bees [97].

Breeding system: Small burnet populations in North America are mostly derived from European stock selected for rapid seedling establishment and growth, high seed production, cold tolerance, and high forage value for wildlife and livestock [58,81,89,146]. Because of founder effects and subsequent breedings in the United States to enhance only these traits, overall genetic diversity of North American populations is probably low compared to native European populations.

Small burnet is monoecious [109]. Rarely, it is also apomictic [87,109].

Flower and seed production: Small burnet first flowers and sets seed at 2 years of age [124].

Small burnet produces seed prolifically on mesic sites [120]. In dryland pastures on the San Juan Basin Research Center, Colorado, small burnet was the highest seed producer among 11 species tested. Across 3 years, mean small burnet seed production ranged from 623 to 1,307 seeds/3 mÂ² [39]. Small burnet generally does not reproduce in the most xeric areas of the Great Basin [128].

Herbivorous animals can reduce small burnet's ability to reproduce from seed [152]. Ungulates, lagomorphs, granivorous rodents, and grasshoppers sometimes consume small burnet seeds so heavily that there is little net seed production [127,152]. Small burnet usually produces seed on such sites when rodent and lagomorph populations are low and/or when livestock grazing is controlled. Dense grass stands also impair small burnet's ability to set seed and persist in wildlands [127].

Seed dispersal: Small burnet seed remains in the hypanthium when dispersed. Hypanthia are dispersed by animals, and possibly by wind and water. In the Great Basin, small burnet has established from unretreived seed in rodent caches [127]. The wings on most small burnet hypanthia may facilitate wind and/or water dispersal; speculation on the function of the wings was not found in the literature. In a study of flooded meadow communities in France, small burnet was present in soil seed banks on riverbanks subjected to periodic, short-term floods [147]. Small burnet is reported mostly from shorelines in Michigan [149]. These studies raise the possibility that water disperses small burnet hypanthia.

Seed banking: Small burnet has a persistent soil seed bank [67,99,141,147,147]. Studies in northwestern Europe found viable small burnet seed persisted for at least 30 years in the soil. Mean small burnet seed density was 24 seeds/mÂ²; mean burial depth was 4 inches (10 cm) (review by [136]). In greenhouse studies in Italy, small burnet germinants showed 63% frequency in soil samples collected from grassland. In soil samples collected on former grassland sites converted to cedar (Cedrus deodora, C. atlantica) plantations 26 years before the study, small burnet germinants had 20% and 40% frequency in soils collected from plantations with respectively "sparse" and "dense" cedar plantings [72].

Small burnet seed stored in a warehouse for 25 years showed no appreciable drop in germinability, raising the possibility of a long-lived seedbank on some sites. Mean seed viability after 2 years was 88%; viability was still 88% after 15 years and 83% after 25 years of storage [125,126]. Humid conditions reduce the viability of soil-stored small burnet seed [29].

Germination and emergence: Germination rate of commercial small burnet seed is "excellent" [58]. Germination rates of 90% to 95% have consistently been obtained in Great Basin wildlands [58,82,120]. Small burnet seed from a commercial mixture showed 90% germination in field trials near Silver Lake, Oregon. Study plots were in a western juniper (Juniperus occidentalis) community (review by [69]).

Seeds require an afterripening period before germinating [58,106]. In the laboratory, 80% of small burnet seed germinated within 21 days of sowing, and 91% of the seed had germinated 35 days after sowing [59]. Warehouse-stored seed showed improved germination rates each year through 3 years of dry storage [125]. Information on small burnet seed viability and emergence rates for naturally-reproducing North American populations were not available as of 2008. Naturally reproducing small burnet populations in Spain showed 50% emergence in the field (Salmeron 1966, cited in [29]).

The paired seeds in small burnet's hypanthium emerge within 1 to 4 days of one another, with the earliest emergent usually dominating [29]. In the greenhouse, commercial small burnet seed from Oregon showed 54% emergence. Plants germinating from large seeds had higher mean stem and root lengths, more massive roots, and larger leaf areas than plants from small seeds (P<0.05) [25]. Highest seedling emergence occurs when small burnet hypanthia are lightly covered with soil no more than 0.25 inch (6 cm) deep [127]. Soil texture may affect emergence rate. In field studies in New Zealand, small burnet seed from Oregon showed 62.2% emergence in sand and 26.5% emergence in silty loam [27].

Seedling establishment/growth: North American populations of small burnet grow well on arid rangelands [127]. Because of deliberate selection and breeding, North American populations often have greater seedling survivorship and "vigor" and are more productive than small burnet populations in the Old World [25,81,117]. Small burnet establishes easily from commercial seed, usually providing "good ground cover" within 1 or 2 years of seeding [127]. Small burnet seedlings grow taproots "rapidly" [157], providing access to moist, lower soils layers early in development. Its overall growth is rated as "rapid" and "good to excellent" in sagebrush, pinyon-juniper, and mountain brushland zones [83,120,156].

Small burnet stands may be self-sustaining in the Great Basin, provided they are protected from grazing enough to set seed every 3 or 4 years [127]. Small burnet in New Zealand reseeded naturally after domestic sheep and rabbits were excluded [30].

Vegetative regeneration: Small burnet sprouts from the caudex [79,117]. Some plants also sprout from rhizomes [109,115,116,119], but rhizomes are short [116,119], so clonal expansion of small burnet is limited [119].

References:

25. Douglas, G. B.; Gordon, I. L.; Chu, A. C. P.; Robertson, A. G. 1993. Effect of genotype and seed size on early vegetative growth of sheep's burnet. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research. 36(1): 109-116. [68977]
27. Douglas, G. B.; Robertson, A. G.; Chu, A. C. P.; Gordon, I. L. 1990. Establishment and growth of sheep's burnet in the lower North Island of New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research. 33(3): 385-394. [68932]
29. Douglas, Grant Brodie. 1991. Establishment and early regrowth of sheep's burnet (Sanguisorba minor ssp. muricata (Spach) Briq.) examined multivariately. Palmerson North, New Zealand: Massey University. 357 p. Dissertation. [69083]
30. Douglas, J. A. 1970. The Cockayne plots of Central Otago. Proceedings of the New Zealand Ecological Society. 17: 18-24. [69720]
39. Fisher, A. G.; Brick, M. A.; Riley, R. H.; Christensen, D. K. 1987. Dryland stand establishment and seed production of revegetation species. Crop Science. 27(6): 1303-1305. [42300]
58. Jorgensen, Kent R.; Stevens, Richard. 2004. Seed collection, cleaning, and storage. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Stevens, Richard; Shaw, Nancy L., comps. Restoring western ranges and wildlands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-136-vol. 3. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 699-716. [42398]
59. Jorgensen, Kent R.; Wilson, G. Richard. 2004. Seed germination. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Stevens, Richard; Shaw, Nancy L., comps. Restoring western ranges and wildlands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-136-vol. 3. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 723-732. [41906]
67. Lavorel, Sandra; Debussche, Max; Lebreton, Jean-Dominique; Lepart, Jacques. 1993. Seasonal patterns in the seed bank of Mediterranean old-fields. Oikos. 67(1): 114-128. [69664]
69. Leckenby, Donavin A.; Toweill, Dale E. 1983. Response of forage species seeded for mule deer in western juniper types of southcentral Oregon. Journal of Range Management. 36(1): 98-103. [8098]
72. Maccherini, Simona; De Dominicis, Vincenzo. 2003. Germinable soil seed-banks of former grassland converted to coniferous plantation. Ecological Research. 18(6): 739-752. [48314]
79. Monsen, Stephen B. 1994. Selection of plants for fire suppression on semiarid sites. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Kitchen, Stanley G., compilers. Proceedings--ecology and management of annual rangelands; 1992 May 18-22; Boise, ID. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-313. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 363-373. [24310]
81. Monsen, Stephen B.; McArthur, E. Durant. 1995. Implications of early Intermountain range and watershed restoration practices. In: Roundy, Bruce A.; McArthur, E. Durant; Haley, Jennifer S.; Mann, David K., compilers. Proceedings: wildland shrub and arid land restoration symposium; 1993 October 19-21; Las Vegas, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-315. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 16-25. [24819]
82. Monsen, Stephen B.; Richardson, Bland Z. 1984. Seeding shrubs with herbs on a semiarid mine site with and without topsoil. In: Tiedemann, Arthur R.; McArthur, E. Durant; Stutz, Howard C.; Stevens, Richard; Johnson, Kendall L., comps. Proceedings--symposium on the biology of Atriplex and related chenopods; 1983 May 2-6; Provo, UT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-172. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 298-305. [1683]
83. Monsen, Stephen B.; Stevens, Richard. 2004. Seedbed preparation and seeding practices. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Stevens, Richard; Shaw, Nancy L., comps. Restoring western ranges and wildlands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-136-vol. 1. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 121-154. [52825]
87. Nordborg, Gertrud. 1967. Embryological studies in the Sanguisorba minor complex (Rosaceae). Botaniska Notiser. 120: 109-119. [69081]
99. Plummer, A. Perry; Christensen, Donald R.; Monsen, Stephen B. 1968. Restoring big-game range in Utah. Publ. No. 68-3. Ephraim, UT: Utah Division of Fish and Game. 183 p. [4554]
106. Redente, Edward F.; Ogle, Phillip R.; Hargis, Norman E. 1982. Growing Colorado plants from seed: a state of the art: Volume III: forbs. FWS/OBS-82/30. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services, Western Energy and Land Use Team. 117 p. [36609]
109. Robertson, Kenneth R. 1974. The genera of Rosaceae in the southwestern United States. Journal of the Arnold Arboretum. 55: 344-401. [69721]
115. Shaw, Nancy L. 2004. Production and use of planting stock. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Stevens, Richard; Shaw, Nancy L., comps. Restoring western ranges and wildlands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-136-vol. 3. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 745-768. [42197]
116. Shaw, Nancy L.; Monsen, Stephen B. 1983. Nonleguminous forbs for rangeland sites. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Shaw, Nancy, compilers. Managing Intermountain rangelands--improvement of range and wildlife habitats: Proceedings of symposia; 1981 September 15-17; Twin Falls, ID; 1982 June 22-24; Elko, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-157. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 123-131. [2121]
117. Sheppard, J. S.; Wills, B. J. 1985. Sheep's burnet - a forage herb for soil conservation in New Zealand. New Zealand Agricultural Science. 19(3): 115-118. [68960]
120. Stanton, Frank. 1974. Wildlife guidelines for range fire rehabilitation. Tech. Note 6712. Denver, CO: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 90 p. [2221]
124. Stevens, Richard. 2004. Management of restored and revegetated sites. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Stevens, Richard; Shaw, Nancy L., comps. Restoring western ranges and wildlands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-136-vol. 1. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 193-198. [52828]
125. Stevens, Richard; Jorgensen, Kent R. 1994. Rangeland species germination through 25 and up to 40 years of warehouse storage. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Kitchen, Stanley G., comps. Proceedings--ecology and management of annual rangelands; 1992 May 18-22; Boise, ID. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-313. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 257-265. [24292]
126. Stevens, Richard; Jorgensen, Kent R.; Davis, James N. 1981. Viability of seed from thirty-two shrub and forb species through fifteen years of warehouse storage. The Great Basin Naturalist. 41(3): 274-277. [2244]
127. Stevens, Richard; Monsen, Stephen B. 2004. Forbs for seeding range and wildlife habitats. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Stevens, Richard; Shaw, Nancy L., comps. Restoring western ranges and wildlands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-136-vol. 2. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 425-466. [52842]
128. Stevens, Richard; Monsen, Stephen B. 2004. Guidelines for restoration and rehabilitation of principal plant communities. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Stevens, Richard; Shaw, Nancy L., comps. Restoring western ranges and wildlands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-136-vol. 1. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 199-294. [52829]
136. Thompson, Ken; Bakker, Jan P.; Bekker, Renee M. 1997. The soil seed banks of north west Europe: methodology, density and longevity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 276 p. [65467]
141. Trabaud, L.; de Chanterac, B. 1985. The influence of fire on the phenological behaviour of Mediterranean plant species in Bas-Languedoc (southern France). Vegetatio. 60: 119-130. [19777]
146. Van Epps, Gordon A.; Stevens, Richard. 2004. Shrub and forb seed production. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Stephens, Richard; Shaw, Nancy L., comps. Restoring western ranges and wildlands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-136-vol. 3. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 717-722. [38755]
147. Vecrin, M. P.; Grevilliot, F.; Muller, S. 2007. The contribution of persistent soil seed banks and flooding to the restoration of alluvial meadows. Journal for Nature Conservation. 15(1): 59-69. [67387]
149. Voss, Edward G. 1985. Michigan flora. Part II. Dicots (Saururaceae--Cornaceae). Bull. 59. Bloomfield Hills, MI: Cranbrook Institute of Science; Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Herbarium. 724 p. [11472]
152. 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]
156. Wieneke, Silvia; Prati, Daniel; Brandl, Roland; Stocklin, Jurg; Auge, Harald. 2004. Genetic variation in Sanguisorba minor after 6 years in situ selection under elevated CO2. Global Change Biology. 10(8): 1389-1401. [68964]
157. Wills, B. J. 1984. Alternative plant species for revegetation and soil conservation in the tussock grasslands of New Zealand. Tussock Grasslands and Mountain Lands Institute Review. 42: 49-58. [68971]
89. Ogle, Daniel G. 2002. Small burnet--Sanguisorba minor Scop., [Online]. In: Plant fact sheet. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (Producer). Available: http://plants.usda.gov/java/factSheet [2008, March 6]. [69667]
97. Plants for a Future. 2004. Sanguisorba minor, [Online]. In: Plants for a Future - species database. Cornwall, UK: Plants for a Future (Producer). Available: http://www.ibiblio.org/pfaf/cgi-bin/arr_html?Sanguisorba+minor [2008, March 5]. [69676]
119. St. John, L.; Tilley, D. J.; Ogle, D. G. 2006. Plants for solving resource problems: 'Delar' small burnet, [Online]. Aberdeen, ID: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Aberdeen Plant Materials Center (Producer). 2 p. Available: http://www.plant-materials.nrcs.usda.gov/pubs/idpmcbr6973.pdf [2008, March 6]. [69668]

Rights Holder:

NatureServe

Status

This is an introduced plant. Please consult the PLANTS Web site and your State Department of Natural Resources for this plant’s current status, such as, state noxious status and wetland indicator values.

Source:

USDA NRCS PLANTS Database

License:

Rights Holder:

USDA NRCS Idaho State Office & the National Plant Data Center

Management

Management considerations

More info for the terms: competition, density, fire management, forbs, tree

Cultural control:
Small burnet may provide cultivation control of invasive nonnative
herbs. When grown with rush skeletonweed (Chondrilla juncea) in a greenhouse pot
study, small burnet was rated "most competitive" against rush skeletonweed
among 5 herbaceous species tested. Compared to other herbs tested, small burnet showed highest productivity rates
when grown with rush skeletonweed [100]. Small
burnet is rated moderate in ability to control nonnative hawkweed (Hieracium
spp.) in New Zealand [157].

A mix of small burnet, other forbs, and bunchgrasses is often planted for control of
cheatgrass, red brome (Bromus rubens), and/or medusahead (Taeniatherum
caput-medusae) [128]. Stevens and Monsen [127] report that small burnet competes "fairly well" with
cheatgrass once small burnet has established. Seed mixes
with small burnet do not always effectively control cheatgrass, however.
On burned sites where a seed mix was drilled in near Pocatello, Idaho, cheatgrass mean
cover was greater on seeded than unseeded sites (P<0.35). Small burnet
seed comprised 16% of the mix by weight [103].
Few long-term studies were available on the effects of introduced herbs on
establishment of native plant species (as of 2008). A study in a Utah juniper-Colorado pinyon
community in Sanpete County, Utah, found introduced, seeded species were
somewhat more competitive (had higher mean coverages) than native species 23
years after seeding. Sites had been chained to reduce tree density, then seeded with a mix of
nonnative and native grasses and forbs, including small burnet, and native big
sagebrush and rubber rabbitbrush. Twenty-three years after seeding, nonnative
grasses had significantly greater densities than native grasses on ungrazed
sites (P<0.05 for all treatments). Grazing pressure from cattle, mule deer, and
black-tailed jackrabbits lowered the ratio of nonnative:native grass species,
however. On grazed plots, nonnative grasses had lower mean densities
(x=11,459
plants/ha) compared to native species (x=14,887 plants/ha),
with a significant increase in mean native grass density over
23 years [151]. See Fire Management Considerations
for further information on the effects of nonnative seedings on native species.
Response to competition: Small
burnet may be relatively insensitive to small-scale competition where it is
native. On calcareous soils in England, small burnet did not increase mean leaf
length or flower production in response to small increases in space and light.
Competing plants were removed in 0- to 50-mm gaps [76]. In a similar study in
Switzerland, removal of neighboring plants increased small burnet seedling
survival slightly but insignificantly compared to small burnet plants with
neighbors left in place [113]. Competition studies using small burnet and its
associated North American species were not found for this literature review.

References:

76. McLellan, A. J.; Law, R.; Fitter, A. H. 1997. Response of calcareous grassland plant species to diffuse competition: results from a removal experiment. Journal of Ecology. 85(4): 479-490. [69659]
103. Ratzlaff, Teresa D.; Anderson, Jay E. 1995. Vegetal recovery following wildfire in seeded and unseeded sagebrush steppe. Journal of Range Management. 48(5): 386-391. [26539]
113. Ryser, Peter. 1993. Influences of neighbouring plants on seedling establishment in limestone grassland. Journal of Vegetation Science. 4(2): 195-202. [68959]
127. Stevens, Richard; Monsen, Stephen B. 2004. Forbs for seeding range and wildlife habitats. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Stevens, Richard; Shaw, Nancy L., comps. Restoring western ranges and wildlands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-136-vol. 2. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 425-466. [52842]
128. Stevens, Richard; Monsen, Stephen B. 2004. Guidelines for restoration and rehabilitation of principal plant communities. In: Monsen, Stephen B.; Stevens, Richard; Shaw, Nancy L., comps. Restoring western ranges and wildlands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-136-vol. 1. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 199-294. [52829]
157. Wills, B. J. 1984. Alternative plant species for revegetation and soil conservation in the tussock grasslands of New Zealand. Tussock Grasslands and Mountain Lands Institute Review. 42: 49-58. [68971]
100. Prather, Timothy S. 1993. Combined effects of biological control and plant competition on rush skeletonweed. Moscow, ID: University of Idaho. 63 p. Dissertation. [46350]
151. Walker, Scott C.; Stevens, Richard; Monsen, Stephen B.; Jorgensen, Kent R. 1995. Interaction between native and seeded introduced grasses for 23 years following chaining of juniper-pinyon woodlands. In: Roundy, Bruce A.; McArthur, E. Durant; Haley, Jennifer S.; Mann, David K., compilers. Proceedings: wildland shrub and arid land restoration symposium; 1993 October 19-21; Las Vegas, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-315. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 372-380. [24870]

Source:

USDA Forest Service Fire Effects Information Service

License:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain/

Cultivars, improved and selected materials (and area of origin)

Foundation and registered seed is available through the appropriate state Crop Improvement Association or commercial sources to grow certified seed.

'Delar' small burnet is a selected release from seed originating from European sources. The name 'Delar' denotes pleasing or alluring after the attractive green lush appearance of the plant. Aberdeen Plant Materials Center developed the release for outstanding seed and forage production, good cold tolerance, and palatability for both livestock and wildlife. The Natural Resources Conservation Service and the University of Idaho Agricultural Experiment Station released it in 1981.

'Delar' is a hardy, relatively long-lived, evergreen, non-leguminous, introduced, perennial forb from 6 inches tall on droughty sites to approximately 25 inches tall on irrigated sites. It is well adapted to sunny flatlands to open slopes, well-drained soils from moderately basic to weakly acidic, 12 to 18 inch rainfall areas, at 1,000 to 6,000 feet elevation. It will easily establish at the lower rainfall zones, but may not persist below 14 inches. It is not tolerant of shade, poor drainage, flooding, or high water tables. It does well seeded in mixtures with other species. Its intended uses are erosion control, reclamation, rangeland improvement, wildlife forage, and site diversity. Certified seed is readily available through commercial sources and breeder seed is maintained by Aberdeen Plant Materials Center.

Alternative native Sanguisorba species that might be considered include the following: Sanguisorba annua (prairie burnet), Sanguisorba canadensis (Canadian burnet), Sanguisorba menziesii (Menzies’ burnet), Sanguisorba occidentalis (western burnet), and Sanguisorba officinalis (common burnet). Please check PLANTS for the species that occur in your area. Contact your local Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly Soil Conservation Service) office for more information. Look in the phone book under ”United States Government.” The Natural Resources Conservation Service will be listed under the subheading “Department of Agriculture.”

Source:

USDA NRCS PLANTS Database

License:

Rights Holder:

USDA NRCS Idaho State Office & the National Plant Data Center

Control

Please contact your local agricultural extension specialist or county weed specialist to learn what works best in your area and how to use it safely. Please read label and safety instructions for each control method. Trade names and control measures appear in this document only to provide specific information. USDA, NRCS does not guarantee or warranty the products and control methods named and other products may be equally effective.

The following was provided by Holzworth (2000). Using 2 qt Roundup and 1 pt 2,4-D to kill seed fields can accomplish eradication and the fields are also plowed under. Of course, this herbicide mixture would kill desirable plants as well. Pam Hutchinson, Herbicide Specialist at Aberdeen R & E Center, Aberdeen, Idaho, recommended the following to control small burnet in a pasture situation: A tank mix of Escort, Banvel, 2,4-D and a surfactant. The addition of 2,4-D may make the mix hot enough to kill the burnet. Also suggested was a mix of Stinger (0.5-1.5 pt) and 2,4-D (1-2 pt). This mix is labeled for knapweed. Another suggestion was using Tordon, but only as a last resort. Specific information should be obtained through your local agricultural extension office.

Source:

USDA NRCS PLANTS Database

License:

Rights Holder:

USDA NRCS Idaho State Office & the National Plant Data Center

Management

Growth of small burnet begins in early spring and flowers appear in late May through June. The plant establishes slowly and should not be grazed until at least the second growing season. Small burnet plants have been known to persist for more than 20 years on western rangelands. As with other species, the life of the plant can be prolonged if it is permitted to set seed on a rotational basis.

Weed control and removal of very competitive species may improve establishment. Damage from wildlife and rodents may occur and they may need to be controlled. Disease problems are minimal with small burnet.

Seed Production: Small burnet should be seeded in 30 inch rows at the rate of 12 pounds PLS per acre to 42 inch rows at the rate of 10 pounds PLS per acre (25 to 30 seeds per linear foot of row) to allow mechanical weed control. It should be seeded in early spring (April - May).

Hand rouging within row and cultivation between rows may be required after plants have reached 2 to 3 inches in height. Split applications of nitrogen in spring and fall and application of phosphorus in fall will enhance production following the establishment year. For optimum production, do not stress plants for moisture during late bud stage, pollination and re-growth.

Bees are very active in seed fields when plants are in full bloom and therefore it is considered a good nectar producer.

Seed is generally harvested in mid to late August by direct combining with platform set high enough to get most of the seed while leaving as much green material as possible. Seed development occurs progressively from the bottom of plant to the top and is mature when dry and seed is hard and dark in color. Harvest when approximately 80 percent of seed clusters are ripe. Seed shatter is not a serious problem with this species. Seed should be allowed to dry to 12 to 15 percent moisture and then stored in a cool dry area. Seed retains viability for several years under these conditions.

Seed yields of 700 to 1000 pounds per acre can be expected under irrigated conditions and 250 to 350 pounds per acre under dryland conditions. Seed production under dryland conditions is not recommended below 14 inches of average annual rainfall.

Environmental Concerns: Small burnet establishes and spreads relatively quickly via seed distribution. Generally, it is not considered "weedy" or an invasive species, but can spread into adjoining vegetative communities under ideal climatic and environmental conditions. There have been reports of it having invasive weedy characteristics in Wyoming.

Source:

USDA NRCS PLANTS Database

License:

Rights Holder:

USDA NRCS Idaho State Office & the National Plant Data Center

Benefits

Uses

Grazing/rangeland: Small burnet is noted to have well to excellent forage value for livestock and wildlife during all seasons. It stays green throughout the growing season and into winter until heavy snow cover occurs, providing forage and seed to livestock and wildlife. It provides excellent diversity to the seeded plant community.

Erosion control/reclamation: Small burnet is noted for value in mixes for erosion control and beautification.

Wildlife: Small burnet is considered very desirable forage for elk, deer, antelope and birds either as herbage or seed. Birds use the seed in fall, winter and spring. It also provides cover for selected small bird species. It provides diversity to the plant community.

Ethnobotanic: The leaves of small burnet can be added to salads, ice drinks, vinegar, butter, and cream cheese to add a fresh, pleasant, cucumber-like flavor.

Source:

USDA NRCS PLANTS Database

License:

Rights Holder:

USDA NRCS Idaho State Office & the National Plant Data Center

NatureServe

NatureServe Explorer

Source:
ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.140059

Classification

Other Global Common Names:

Small burnet

Synonyms:

Taxonomy:

Informal Taxonomy:

Plants, Vascular - Flowering Plants - Rose Family

Formal Taxonomy:

Plantae - Anthophyta - Dicotyledoneae - Rosales - Rosaceae - Sanguisorba

Ecology and Life History

Short General Description:

Description:

Habitat Type Description:

Migration:

Non-migrant:

Locally Migrant:

Food Comments:

Phenologies:

Reproduction Comments:

Ecology Comments:

Length:

Unit of Length:

Weight:

Unit of Weight:

Conservation Status

NatureServe Conservation Status:

NatureServe Global Status Rank:

Global Status Last Reviewed:

1994-03-22

Global Status Last Changed:

1994-03-22

Other Status:

Distribution

Conservation Status Map:

Global Range:

Global Range Description:

Search for Species

Utilizing double quotes for exact terms can narrow your search results. Ex. A common name search of Northwestern Sedge matches 'Northwestern Sedge' and 'Northwestern Showy Sedge'. Typing "Northwestern Sedge" return only 'Northwestern Sedge'.

Abarenicola claparedi - (Rough-skinned lugworm)
Abarenicola pacifica - (Pacific lugworm)
Abarenicola sp.
Abies amabilis - (Pacific Silver Fir)
Abies concolor - (White Fir)
Abies grandis - (Grand Fir)
Abies lasiocarpa - (Subalpine Fir)
Abies lasiocarpa var. lasiocarpa - (Subalpine Fir)
Abies procera - (Noble Fir)
Abietinaria sp

Sanguisorba minor

Salad Burnet

Data Sources

Table of Contents

Description

Alternative names

Distribution

Distribution in Egypt

Localities documented in Tropicos sources

National Distribution

Canada

United States

Distribution

Description

Habitat characteristics

Key Plant Community Associations

Habitat

Establishment

Associations

Fire Management Considerations

Plant Response to Fire

Immediate Effect of Fire

Post-fire Regeneration

Fire Ecology

Successional Status

Regeneration Processes

Growth Form (according to Raunkiær Life-form classification)

Life Form

Fire Regime Table

Phenology

Life Expectancy

Barcode data: Sanguisorba minor

Statistics of barcoding coverage: Sanguisorba minor

NatureServe Conservation Status

National NatureServe Conservation Status

Canada

United States

Status

Management considerations

Cultivars, improved and selected materials (and area of origin)

Control

Management

Uses

NatureServe Explorer

Search for Species

Main menu

Search form

Species Lists

Resource attribution

External links

SPONSORED BY