Overview

Brief Summary

Species Abstract

Nasella pulchra is a widely distributed tuft grass species throughout California grasslands, and is, in fact, the state grass; moreover, the species range extends into Baja Mexico. California grasslands represent a threatened ecosystem due to intensive conversion to agricultural land, urban development and invasion of non-native grasses. Correspondingly, N. pulchra is receiving strong consideration by researchers for grassland restoration.

With a common name of Purple needlegrass, this perennial bunchgrass can attain a height of 30 to 100 cm. Roots of mature plants extend to an incredible depth of up to seven meters, allowing the notable longevity of individuals that may reach centuries in age.

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© C. Michael Hogan

Supplier: C. Michael Hogan

Trusted

Article rating from 1 person

Average rating: 5.0 of 5

Distribution

National Distribution

United States

Origin: Unknown/Undetermined

Regularity: Regularly occurring

Currently: Unknown/Undetermined

Confidence: Confident

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Regional Distribution in the Western United States

More info on this topic.

This species can be found in the following regions of the western United States (according to the Bureau of Land Management classification of Physiographic Regions of the western United States):

BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS [11]:

3 Southern Pacific Border

4 Sierra Mountains
  • 11. Bernard, Stephen R.; Brown, Kenneth F. 1977. Distribution of mammals, reptiles, and amphibians by BLM physiographic regions and A.W. Kuchler's associations for the eleven western states. Tech. Note 301. Denver, CO: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 169 p. [434]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Occurrence in North America

CAMEXICO

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Purple needlegrass occurs on the west side of the Coast Ranges from northern Baja California north to the Oregon border. The species also occurs in the Central Valley and foothills of the Cascade Range and Sierra Nevada, and on the Channel Islands [36,51]. Cal Flora provides a distributional map of purple needlegrass.
  • 36. Hickman, James C., ed. 1993. The Jepson manual: Higher plants of California. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1400 p. [21992]
  • 51. Munz, Philip A. 1973. A California flora and supplement. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1905 p. [6155]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Purple Needlegrass is found in grasslands, chaparral and oak woodland in California extending south to Baja Mexico at elevations less than 1300 meters.. Within California it is found in Northwestern California, northern and central Sierra Nevada Foothills, southern Sacramento Valley, Central Western California, South Coast, Channel Islands, Western Transverse Ranges, western Peninsular Ranges. Prehistorically it has been posited to have been the dominant grass in what is now present day California.

  • * C.Michael Hogan. 2009. ''Nassela pulchra''. GlobalTwitcher.com. ed. N.Stromberg [http://www.globaltwitcher.com/artspec_information.asp?thingid=88883]* H.F.Heady, J.W.Bartolome, M.D, Pitt, G.D.Savelle and M.C.Stroud. 1992. ''Coastal Prairie in R.T.Coupland ed. Natural grasslands: introduction and western hemisphere'', Elsevier, New York, pp 313-332
Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

Supplier: C. Michael Hogan

Trusted

Article rating from 1 person

Average rating: 2.5 of 5

Physical Description

Morphology

Description

More info for the terms: caespitose, density, litter

Purple needlegrass is a caespitose perennial native grass [23,36]. Culms are 24 to 39 inches (60-100 cm) tall, producing an open, nodding panicle 4 to 8 inches (10-20 cm) long [51]. Leaves are 0.031 to 0.14 inch (0.8-3.5 mm) wide [36]. The species expands vegetatively when tussocks are fragmented. Stands with fire and grazing exclusion are likely to be low density with larger individuals and more litter accumulation. With fragmenting disturbance, stands are higher density with smaller size tussocks and less litter accumulation, at least in the short term [21,45]. Bunches are roughly circular when undisturbed and more irregular with fragmenting disturbance [23,45]. Purple needlegrass is apparently long lived: 1 study found mortality of mature individuals was 2 to 6% annually over a 7-year period [20]. Purple needlegrass is arbuscular mycorrhizal and has a rooting depth of at least 25 inches (64 cm) on deep soils. 
  • 36. Hickman, James C., ed. 1993. The Jepson manual: Higher plants of California. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1400 p. [21992]
  • 20. Dyer, A. R.; Rice, K. J. 1997. Intraspecific and diffuse competition: the response of Nassella pulchra in a California grassland. Ecological Applications. 7(2): 484-492. [41114]
  • 21. Dyer, Andrew R. 1993. Response of native bunchgrass to grazing, burning. Restoration & Management Notes. 11(2): 150-151. [22787]
  • 23. Dyer, Andrew R.; Rice, Kevin J. 1999. Effects of competition on resource availability and growth of a California bunchgrass. Ecology. 80(8): 2697-2710. [41115]
  • 45. Langstroth, Robert Peter. 1991. Fire and grazing ecology of Stipa pulchra grassland: a field study at Jepson Prairie, California. Davis, CA: University of California. 75 p. Thesis. [27349]
  • 51. Munz, Philip A. 1973. A California flora and supplement. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1905 p. [6155]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Physical Description

Perennials, Terrestrial, not aquatic, Stems nodes swollen or brittle, Stems erect or ascending, Stems geniculate, decumbent, or lax, sometimes rooting at nodes, Stems caespitose, tufted, or clustered, Stems terete, round in cross section, or polygonal, Stem nodes bearded or hairy, Stem internodes hollow, Stems with inflorescence less than 1 m tall, Stems, culms, or scapes exceeding basal leaves, Leaves mostly basal, below middle of stem, Leaves mostly cauline, Leaves conspicuously 2-ranked, distichous, Leaves sheathing at base, Leaf sheath mostly open, or loose, Leaf sheath smooth, glabrous, Leaf sheath hairy, hispid or prickly, Leaf sheath hairy at summit, throat, or collar, Leaf sheath and blade differentiated, Leaf blades linear, Leaf blades 2-10 mm wide, Leaf blades mostly flat, Leaf blade margins folded, involute, or conduplicate, Leaf blades mostly glabrous, Leaf blades more or less hairy, Ligule present, Ligule an unfringed eciliate membrane, Inflorescence terminal, Inflorescence an open panicle, openly paniculate, branches spreading, Inflorescence solitary, with 1 spike, fascicle, glomerule, head, or cluster per stem or culm, Inflorescence lax, widely spreading, branches drooping, pendulous, Inflorescence curved, twisted or nodding, Inflorescence branches more than 10 to numerous, Flowers bisexual, Spikelets pedicellate, Spikelets dorsally compressed or terete, Spikelet less than 3 mm wide, Spik elets with 1 fertile floret, Spikelets solitary at rachis nodes, Spikelets all alike and fertille, Spikelets bisexual, Spikelets disarticulating above the glumes, glumes persistent, Spikelets disarticulating beneath or between the florets, Rachilla or pedicel glabrous, Glumes present, empty bracts, Glumes 2 clearly present, Glumes equal or subequal, Glumes equal to or longer than adjacent lemma, Glume equal to or longer than spikelet, Glumes 3 nerved, Glumes 4-7 nerved, Lemma coriaceous, firmer or thicker in texture than the glumes, Lemma 5-7 nerved, Lemma body or surface hairy, Lemma distinctly awned, more than 2-3 mm, Lemma with 1 awn, Lemma awn 1-2 cm long, Lemma awn 2-4 cm long or longer, Lemma awned from tip, Lemma awn twisted, spirally coiled at base, like a corkscrew, Lemma awn twice geniculate, bent twice, Lemma margins thin, lying flat, Lemma apices fused distally into a crown, Lemma margins inrolled, tightly covering palea and caryopsis, Lemma straight, Callus or base of lemma evidently hairy, Callus hairs shorter than lemma, Palea present, well developed, Palea membranous, hyaline, Palea shorter than lemma, Stamens 3, Styles 2-fid, deeply 2-branched, Stigmas 2, Fruit - caryopsis, Caryopsis ellipsoid, longitudinally grooved, hilum long-linear.
Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial Share Alike 3.0 (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0)

Dr. David Bogler

Source: USDA NRCS PLANTS Database

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Type Information

Holotype for Stipa pulchra Hitchc.
Catalog Number: US 416590
Collection: Smithsonian Institution, National Museum of Natural History, Department of Botany
Verification Degree: Card file verified by examination of alleged type specimen
Preparation: Pressed specimen
Collector(s): A. A. Heller
Year Collected: 1902
Locality: S of Healdsburg., Sonoma, California, United States, North America
  • Holotype: Hitchcock, A. S. 1915. Amer. J. Bot. 2: 301.
Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 (CC BY 3.0)

© Smithsonian Institution, National Museum of Natural History, Department of Botany

Source: National Museum of Natural History Collections

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Ecology

Habitat

California Central Valley Grasslands Habitat

This taxon is found in the California Central Valley grasslands, which extend approximately 430 miles in central California, paralleling the Sierra Nevada Range to the east and the coastal ranges to the west (averaging 75 miles in longitudinal extent), and stopping abruptly at the Tehachapi Range in the south. Two rivers flow from opposite ends and join around the middle of the valley to form the extensive Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta that flows into San Francisco Bay.

Perennial grasses that were adapted to cool-season growth once dominated the ecoregion. The deep-rooted Purple Needle Grass (Nassella pulchra) was particularly important, although Nodding Needle Grass (Stipa cernua), Wild Ryes (Elymus spp.), Lassen County Bluegrass (Poa limosa), Aristida spp., Crested Hair-grass (Koeleria pyramidata), Deergrass (Muhlenbergia rigens,), and Coast Range Melicgrass (Melica imperfecta) occurred in varying proportions. Most grass growth occurred in the late spring after winter rains and the onset of warmer and sunnier days. Interspersed among the bunchgrasses were a rich array of annual and perennial grasses and forbs, the latter creating extraordinary flowering displays during certain years. Some extensive mass flowerings of the California Poppy (Eschscholzia californica), Lupines (Lupinus spp.), and Exserted Indian Paintbrush (Castilleja exserta) are found in this grassland ecoregion.

Prehistoric grasslands here supported several herbivores including Pronghorn Antelope (Antilocapra americana), elk (including a valley subspecies, the Tule Elk, (Cervus elaphus nannodes), Mule Deer (Odocoileus hemionus), California ground squirrels, gophers, mice, hare, rabbits, and kangaroo rats. Several rodents are endemics or near-endemics to southern valley habitats including the Fresno Kangaroo Rat (Dipodomys nitratoides exilis), Tipton Kangaroo Rat (Dipodomys nitratoides nitratoides), San Joaquin Pocket Mouse (Perognathus inornatus), and Giant Kangaroo Rat (Dipodomys ingens). Predators originally included grizzly bear, gray wolf, coyote, mountain lion, ringtail, bobcat, and the San Joaquin Valley Kit Fox (Vulpes velox), a near-endemic.

The valley and associated delta once supported enormous populations of wintering waterfowl in extensive freshwater marshes. Riparian woodlands acted as important migratory pathways and breeding areas for many neotropical migratory birds. Three species of bird are largely endemic to the Central Valley, surrounding foothills, and portions of the southern coast ranges, namely, the Yellow-billed Magpie (Pica nuttalli), the Tri-colored Blackbird (Agelaius tricolor EN), and Nuttall’s Woodpecker (Picoides nuttallii).

The valley contains a number of reptile species including several endemic or near-endemic species or subspecies such as the San Joaquin Coachwhip (Masticophis flagellum ruddocki), the Blunt-nosed Leopard Lizard (Gambelia sila EN), Gilbert’s Skink (Plestiodon gilberti) and the Sierra Garter Snake (Thamnophis couchii). Lizards present in the ecoregion include: Coast Horned Lizard (Phrynosoma coronatum NT); Western Fence Lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis); Southern Alligator Lizard (Elgaria multicarinata); and the Northern Alligator Lizard (Elgaria coerulea).

There are only a few amphibian species present in the California Central Valley grasslands ecoregion. Special status anuran taxa found here are: Foothill Yellow-legged Frog (Rana boylii NT); Pacific Chorus Frog (Pseudacris regilla); and Western Spadefoot Toad (Pelobates cultripes). The Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma tigrinum) occurs within this ecoregion.

Although many endemic plant species are recognized, especially those associated with vernal pools, e.g. Prickly Spiralgrass (Tuctoria mucronata). A number of invertebrates are known to be restricted to California Central Valley habitats. These include the Delta Green Ground Beetle (Elaphrus viridis CR) known only from a single vernal pool site, and the Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle (Desmocerus californicus dimorphus) found only in riparian woodlands of three California counties.

Vernal pool communities occur throughout the Central Valley in seasonally flooded depressions. Several types are recognized including valley pools in basin areas which are typically alkaline or saline, terrace pools on ancient flood terraces of higher ground, and pools on volcanic soils. Vernal pool vegetation is ancient and unique with many habitat and local endemic species. During wet springs, the rims of the pools are encircled by flowers that change in composition as the water recedes. Several aquatic invertebrates are restricted to these unique habitats including a species of fairy shrimp and tadpole shrimp.

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial Share Alike 3.0 (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0)

© World Wildlife Fund & C. Michael Hogan

Supplier: C. Michael Hogan

Trusted

Article rating from 1 person

Average rating: 5.0 of 5

Habitat characteristics

More info for the term: cover

Purple needlegrass habitats occur in areas with a Mediterranean climate of mild, moderately wet winters and warm to hot summers with drought. The growing season is 7 to 11 months long with 205 to 325 frost-free days. Mean annual precipitation ranges from 5.9 to 19.7 inches (150-500 mm), with peaks from October through March and from late April to early May [15].

Purple needlegrass occurs on a variety of soil types but is well adapted to those with high clay content. Robinson [58] reports purple needlegrass dominant on sites in Monterey County, California with high clay content, and a "sudden and dramatic" change in vegetation to nonnative annuals where clay content decreases. Stromberg and Griffin [63] also found clay content in soils supporting native perennial grasses (purple needlegrass and Sandberg bluegrass) higher than on sites supporting nonnative annual grasses. Purple needlegrass often grows in mound topography wherein a claypan exists approximately 7.9 inches (20 cm) below intermounds and 25.6 inches (65 cm) below mounds. Deeper soil on mounds often gives purple needlegrass an advantage over annual  grasses [20].

Purple needlegrass grows well where nonnative annuals are suppressed and, for this reason, is generally more dominant on serpentine-derived soils than on other soil types [14]. In northern coastal prairie, pure stands often occur on serpentine ridges [35]. A vegetation survey at Jasper Ridge Experimental Area on the San Francisco peninsula found purple needlegrass more dominant on serpentine than on sandstone areas; on sandstone soils it was best developed on drier sites with lower aboveground standing crop. Conversely, it had highest cover on wetter serpentine areas [48]. These patterns are generally consistent throughout the species' range [8].

Purple needlegrass occurs from sea level to 5,000 feet (1,500 m) [36,51].

  • 36. Hickman, James C., ed. 1993. The Jepson manual: Higher plants of California. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1400 p. [21992]
  • 8. Bartolome, James W. 1989. Local temporal and spatial structure. In: Huenneke, L. F.; Mooney, H., eds. Grassland structure and function: California annual grassland. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers: 73-80. [28348]
  • 14. Bowcutt, Frederica S. 1999. A floristic study of Sugarloaf Ridge State Park, Sonoma County, California. Aliso. 18(1): 19-34. [40636]
  • 15. Brown, David E. 1982. Californian valley grassland. In: Brown, David E., ed. Biotic communities of the American Southwest--United States and Mexico. Desert Plants. 4(1-4): 132-135. [8896]
  • 20. Dyer, A. R.; Rice, K. J. 1997. Intraspecific and diffuse competition: the response of Nassella pulchra in a California grassland. Ecological Applications. 7(2): 484-492. [41114]
  • 48. McNaughton, S. J. 1968. Structure and function in California grasslands. Ecology. 49: 962-972. [28361]
  • 51. Munz, Philip A. 1973. A California flora and supplement. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1905 p. [6155]
  • 58. Robinson, Richard Hayes. 1971. An analysis of ecological factors limiting the distribution of a group of Stipa pulchra associations. Korean Journal of Botany. 14(3): 61-80. [28363]
  • 63. Stromberg, Mark R.; Griffin, James R. 1996. Long-term patterns in coastal California grasslands in relation to cultivation, gophers, and grazing. Ecological Applications. 6(4): 1189-1211. [41117]
  • 35. Heady, Harold F.; Foin, Theodore C.; Hektner, Mary M.; [and others]. 1977. Coastal prairie and northern coastal scrub. In: Barbour, Michael G.; Major, Jack, eds. Terrestrial vegetation of California. New York: John Wiley and Sons: 733-760. [7211]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Key Plant Community Associations

More info for the terms: association, cover, density, shrub, shrubs

Purple needlegrass occurs in grasslands, oak and
pine woodlands, mixed evergreen forests, chaparral, and coastal scrub. It is most prominent in the vegetation type known as the California
prairie or valley grassland. This community is similar to the palouse prairie of Washington
and Oregon in that Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis), prairie Junegrass (Koeleria
macrantha), Sandberg bluegrass (Poa secunda) and bottlebrush squirreltail (Elymus
elymoides)
are present, but purple needlegrass is dominant
in place of bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata) [34]. Other
important
perennial associates in California prairie are California oatgrass (Danthonia
californica), California fescue (Festuca californica), tussockgrass (Nassella lepida),
beardless wildrye (Leymus triticoides),
and melicgrass (Melica spp.). Mediterranean annuals such as wild oat (Avena fatua),
slender oat (A. barbata), ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), soft chess (B.
hordeaceus),
mouse barley (Hordeum murinem), and rattail fescue (Vulpia myuros) have replaced
native perennial grasses in some areas (see Successional Status).
Forbs present include fiddleneck (Amsinckia spp.), shooting star (Dodecatheon spp.),
goldenpoppy (Escholzia
spp.), lupine (Lupinus spp.), malacothrix (Malacothrix spp.), phacelia (Phacelia spp.), and sage (Salvia spp.) [46].

Purple needlegrass is dominant in northern coastal prairie,
and present in coastal areas from San Francisco Bay north to the Oregon border.
Associated grasses include Pacific reedgrass (Calamagrostis nutkaensis),
Idaho fescue, red fescue (F. rubra), and California oatgrass; forbs
present are rockcress (Arabis spp.), Mariposa lily (Calochortus spp.),
hairy goldenaster (Heterotheca villosa), congested snakelily (Dicholstemma
congestum), hairy gumweed (Grindelia hirsutula), Douglas iris (Iris
douglasiana), lupine, and pineforest woodrush (Luzula subsessilis) [35,46,62]. Mediterranean
annuals are also prominent in this prairie type, especially on nonserpentine
soils [35]. 

Coastal prairie occurs in association with northern coastal scrub; here purple needlegrass cover is lower or more intermittent. This vegetation type is
present from southern Oregon south to San Mateo County. Associated species include San
Diego bush monkeyflower (Diplacus auranticus), Monterey Indian
paintbrush (Castilleja latifolia), Pacific dewberry (Rubus
vitifolius), open lupine (Lupinus varicolor), cow parsnip (Heracleum
lanatum), seaside woollysunflower (Eriophyllum staechadifolium),
salal (Gaultheria shallon), western pearlyeverlasting (Anaphalis
margaritacea), coastal wormwood (Artemisia suksdorfi), and
seaside fleabane (Erigeron glaucus) [51,60,67].
Coastal sage scrub occurs on slopes in the Coast Ranges;
purple needlegrass, tussockgrass, and giant wildrye (Leymus condensatus)
are present in areas of lower shrub density. Associated shrubs include California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), white
sage (Salvia apiana), black sage (S. mellifera), purple sage (S.
leucophylla), coyote bush (Baccharis pilularis), eastern Mojave
buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), lemonade sumac (Rhus integrifolia),
and California brittlebrush (Encelia californica) [4,19]. Purple needlegrass is slightly less
common in chaparral. Chaparral shrubs include chamise (Adenostoma
fasciculatum), toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia), California
coffeeberry (Rhamnus californica), Nuttall's scrub oak (Quercus dumosa),
birchleaf mountain-mahogany (Cercocarpus betuloides), Our Lord's
candle (Yucca whipplei), California flannelbush (Fremontodendron
californicum), hollyleaf cherry (Prunus ilicifolia), ceanothus (Ceanothus
spp.), manzanita (Arctostaphylos spp.), and chaparral pea (Pickeringia
montana) [10,12,51].

Among wooded types, purple needlegrass is common in the understory of oak
woodlands of blue oak (Q. douglasii), California black oak (Q.
kelloggii), canyon live oak (Q. chrysolepis), coast live oak (Q.
agrifolia), interior live oak (Q. wislizenii), and valley oak (Q.
lobata) [17]. It is also
present in some successional stages of woodlands and forests dominated by gray pine (Pinus
sabiana), Coulter pine (P. coulteri), California bay (Umbellularia
californica), California buckeye (Aesculus californica), or bishop pine (P.
muricata), Monterey pine (P. radiata), Mexican pinyon (P.
cembroides), Monterey cypress (Cupressus macrocarpa), and Gowen
cypress (C. goveniana), tanoak (Lithocarpus densiflorus),
Pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii), coast Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga
menziesii var. menziesii), golden chinkapin (Chrysolepis chrysophylla),
California bay, and canyon live oak [51].
Vegetation classification systems describing purple needlegrass-dominated
communities include: [13,34,38,46,54].

  • 4. Axelrod, Daniel I. 1978. The origin of coastal sage vegetation, Alta and Baja California. American Journal of Botany. 65(10): 1117-1131. [5563]
  • 10. Bentley, Jay R. 1967. Conversion of chaparral areas to grassland: techniques used in California. Agric. Handb. 328. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 35 p. [195]
  • 12. Bjorndalen, Jorn Erik. 1978. The chaparral vegetation of Santa Cruz Island, California. Norwegian Journal of Botany. 25: 255-269. [7851]
  • 13. Borchert, Mark I.; Cunha, Nancy D.; Krosse, Patricia C.; Lawrence, Marcee L. 1993. Blue oak plant communities of southern San Luis Obispo and northern Santa Barbara counties, California. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-139. Albany, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station. 49 p. [23487]
  • 17. Danielsen, Karen C.; Halvorson, William L. 1990. Valley oak restoration: a community approach. Fremontia. 18(3): 52. [13826]
  • 19. Desimone, Sandra A.; Burk, Jack H. 1992. Local variation in floristics and distributional factors in Californian coastal sage scrub. Madrono. 39(3): 170-188. [19079]
  • 34. Heady, Harold F. 1977. Valley grassland. In: Barbour, Michael G.; Major, Jack, eds. Terrestrial vegetation of California. New York: John Wiley and Sons: 491-514. [7215]
  • 38. Holland, Robert F. 1986. Preliminary descriptions of the terrestrial natural communities of California. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Fish and Game. 156 p. [12756]
  • 46. Latting, June, ed. 1976. Symposium proceedings--plant communities of southern California. Special Publication No. 2. Berkeley, CA: California Native Plant Society. 164 p. [1414]
  • 51. Munz, Philip A. 1973. A California flora and supplement. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1905 p. [6155]
  • 54. Philbrick, Ralph N., Haller, J. R. 1977. The southern California islands. In: Barbour, Michael G.; Malor, Jack, eds. Terrestrial vegetation of California. New York: John Wiley and Sons: 893-906. [7210]
  • 60. Stephenson, John R.; Calcarone, Gena M. 1999. Mountain and foothills ecosystems: habitat and species conservation issues. In: Stephenson, John R.; Calcarone, Gena M. Southern California mountains and foothills assessment. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-172. Albany, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station: 15-60. [35514]
  • 62. Stomberg, Mark R.; Kephart, Paul; Yadon, Vern. 2001. Composition, invasibility, and diversity in coastal California grasslands. Madrono. 48(4): 236-252. [41371]
  • 67. Westman, W. E. 1983. Xeric Mediterranean-type shrubland associations of Alta and Baja California and the community/continuum debate. Vegetatio. 52: 3-19. [12000]
  • 35. Heady, Harold F.; Foin, Theodore C.; Hektner, Mary M.; [and others]. 1977. Coastal prairie and northern coastal scrub. In: Barbour, Michael G.; Major, Jack, eds. Terrestrial vegetation of California. New York: John Wiley and Sons: 733-760. [7211]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Habitat: Rangeland Cover Types

More info on this topic.

This species is known to occur in association with the following Rangeland Cover Types (as classified by the Society for Range Management, SRM):

More info for the terms: cover, shrub

SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES [59]:

201 Blue oak woodland

202 Coast live oak woodland

204 North coastal shrub

205 Coastal sage shrub

206 Chamise chaparral

207 Scrub oak mixed chaparral

208 Ceanothus mixed chaparral

214 Coastal prairie

215 Valley grassland
  • 59. Shiflet, Thomas N., ed. 1994. Rangeland cover types of the United States. Denver, CO: Society for Range Management. 152 p. [23362]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Habitat: Cover Types

More info on this topic.

This species is known to occur in association with the following cover types (as classified by the Society of American Foresters):

More info for the term: cover

SAF COVER TYPES [25]:

229 Pacific Douglas-fir

232 Redwood

234 Douglas-fir-tanoak-Pacific madrone

244 Pacific ponderosa pine-Douglas-fir

245 Pacific ponderosa pine

246 California black oak

248 Knobcone pine

249 Canyon live oak

250 Blue oak-foothills pine

255 California coast live oak
  • 25. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Habitat: Plant Associations

More info on this topic.

This species is known to occur in association with the following plant community types (as classified by Küchler 1964):

KUCHLER [44] PLANT ASSOCIATIONS:

K006 Redwood forest

K009 Pine-cypress forest

K029 California mixed evergreen forest

K030 California oakwoods

K033 Chaparral

K035 Coastal sagebrush

K036 Mosaic of K030 and K035

K037 Mountain-mahogany-oak scrub

K047 Fescue-oatgrass

K048 California steppe
  • 44. Kuchler, A. W. 1964. United States [Potential natural vegetation of the conterminous United States]. Special Publication No. 36. New York: American Geographical Society. 1:3,168,000; colored. [3455]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Habitat: Ecosystem

More info on this topic.

This species is known to occur in the following ecosystem types (as named by the U.S. Forest Service in their Forest and Range Ecosystem [FRES] Type classification):

ECOSYSTEMS [29]:

FRES20 Douglas-fir

FRES21 Ponderosa pine

FRES27 Redwood

FRES28 Western hardwoods

FRES34 Chaparral-mountain shrub

FRES42 Annual grasslands
  • 29. Garrison, George A.; Bjugstad, Ardell J.; Duncan, Don A.; [and others]. 1977. Vegetation and environmental features of forest and range ecosystems. Agric. Handb. 475. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 68 p. [998]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

General Ecology

Fire Management Considerations

More info for the terms: basal area, competition, cover, fire exclusion, fire management, fire severity, forb, forbs, frequency, fuel, fuel loading, litter, prescribed fire, restoration, severity, tiller

Prescribed fire has been used to reduce dominance of nonnative annuals and to limit encroachment of woody species [28]. Prescribed fire also is used to limit coast Douglas-fir invasion of oak woodlands, a process that reduces herbaceous diversity and abundance [14].

Most research regarding fire effects on purple needlegrass has pertained to its recovery in inland habitats. Few have studied its response to fire in coastal grasslands. Hatch and others [33] found that prescribed burning and grazing in purple needlegrass-dominated coastal prairie had no significant effect on foliar cover or frequency of purple needlegrass. The authors commented that fire and grazing differentially affected California oatgrass, tussockgrass, and purple needlegrass, making restoration efforts in coastal prairie difficult because treatments that improve 1 species' status may be detrimental to other native species. They concluded that, in contrast to inland habitats, fire and grazing manipulation are likely to be of limited value in restoring oatgrass/needlegrass (Nassella spp.) coastal prairie. FIRE CASE STUDIES SPECIES: Nassella pulchra

CASE NAME:
Responses of purple needlegrass to fire and short-duration grazing

REFERENCES:
Dyer, A. R.  1993. [21]
Langsroth, R. P.  1991. [45]

FIRE CASE STUDY AUTHORSHIP:
Steinberg, Peter. 2002.

SEASON/SEVERITY CLASSIFICATION:
Fall/moderate

STUDY LOCATION:
Eighteen 4,300-square-foot (400 m2) plots were established at Jepson Prairie Reserve in Solano County in the California Central Valley.

PREFIRE VEGETATIVE COMMUNITY:
Purple needlegrass (Nassella pulchra) was the most prominent native grass; others included saltgrass (Distichlis spicata), beardless wildrye (Leymus triticoides), Lemmon's canarygrass (Phalaris lemmonii), and meadow barley (Hordeum brachyantherum). Native forbs included common stickyseed (Blennosperma nanum), triphysaria  (Triphysaria eriantha ssp. eriantha), and clover (Trifolium spp.). Nonnative grasses were all annuals; species present were slender oat (Avena barbata), soft chess (B. hordeaceus), ripgut brome (B. diandrus), mouse barley (Hordeum murinum), and medusahead (Taeniatherum caput-medusae). Nonnative forbs present were filaree (Erodium spp.), dovefoot geranium (Geranium molle), and smooth catsear (Hypochoeris glabra).

TARGET SPECIES PHENOLOGICAL STATE:
Fire was prescribed in early September near the end of purple needlegrass drought dormancy.

SITE DESCRIPTION:
The site was characterized by mound topography with intermound areas having poor drainage. Cover of native species was highest in intermound areas because nonnative grasses' growth is limited by poor aeration in spring. 

Purple needlegrass individuals were marked on mound and intermound sites and subjected to 6 treatments: prescribed fire or fire exclusion in combination with short-duration domestic sheep grazing in early season, summer, and or excluded. Early spring grazing consisted of 14 ewes per plot for 2 to 4 days in late March or early April. Summer grazed plots had 15 ewes per plot in late August. Grazing durations were determined by ocularly estimating when herbaceous biomass was reduced to 570 pounds per acre (500 kg/ha) for the spring grazing treatment and 1,360 pounds per acre (1,200 kg/ha) for the summer grazing treatment. Grazing treatments were applied in seasons preceding and following fire.

FIRE DESCRIPTION:
Plots were burned at mid-day on September 1, 1988. Air temperature ranged from 75 to 82 degrees Fahrenheit (24-28 °C), and relative humidity ranged from 47 to 61%. Winds ranged from 6 to 16 miles per hour (10-25 km/h) with gusts of up to 25 miles per hour (40 km/h). Fuel loading was highest on ungrazed mounds and lowest on summer grazed intermound areas.

FIRE EFFECTS ON TARGET SPECIES:
Many burned plants senesced shortly after fire, but individuals retained some green leaf material in bunch interiors and bases for the rest of the summer. During the growing season burned plants grew from basal meristems at the soil surface. Plants that were grazed but not burned grew from bunch interiors and were therefore generally taller. Langsroth [45] observed changes in average and maximum foliage heights, live crown cover, fragmentation, basal area, seed production, seedling establishment, and community composition for 2 years. Dyer [21] commented on general trends in the purple needlegrass population several years thereafter.

Foliage height: Average and maximum foliage heights were reduced by fire for 2 seasons. Fire reduced December 1988 average foliage height 71% (p<0.001), and maximum foliage height was reduced 65% (p=0.013). Foliage height was most reduced by fire on mounds where the highest fuel loading was present during fire. Grazing had no effect on burned plant foliage heights. On unburned plots, summer and spring grazing both had reduced foliage heights compared to ungrazed and unburned plots, but spring and summer grazing were not significantly different from each other. By January 1990, foliage heights were similar across all treatments.

Live crown cover: Measured in December 1988, fire had no significant effect on live crown cover of early-spring grazed intermound plants, while fire did significantly (p=0.001) reduce live crown cover on summer grazed plots and ungrazed plots. Plants growing on mounds that were burned had reduced live crown cover, irrespective of grazing treatment. Importantly, by January 1990, the immediate postfire effect had reversed: burned plants had higher mean live crown cover (p=0.005) than unburned plants (except on summer grazed intermounds and mounds (p=0.053)).

Fragmentation: Because of high litter accumulations and fire temperatures, fragmentation was highest on mounds; grazing was important in causing fragmentation in the 1st postfire year. Ungrazed plots that were burned showed no fragmentation at all. Without fire, grazing did not increase fragmentation significantly. The highest rate of fragmentation was on spring grazed, burned plots, most likely because summer grazing lessened fire severity by removing fuel.

Basal area: Basal area of burned plants, measured in 1989, averaged 40% less than unburned plants. Basal area of ungrazed or summer-grazed plants on mounds was most strongly (p=0.042) reduced by fire. Mean basal area of intermound plants increased under all treatments.

Seed production: One year after fire, burned plots had 32% fewer mature reproductive tillers per plant (p=0.048). Early spring grazing also reduced mature reproductive tiller numbers, particularly on intermound plants. Grazing and burning had no significant (p>0.05) effects on average number of seeds per tiller. Fire reduced seed output but increased seed mass. Fire caused a 45% reduction in mean number of seeds per plant (p=0.01). Fire increased mean seed weight by 14% (p=0.002). Early spring grazed plants had lower seed weights than summer grazed plants; this pattern was most pronounced with grazing in combination with burning.

Seedling establishment: Seedling numbers (assessed in April following fire) were variable, particularly for 2-tillered seedlings. On intermound areas, ungrazed, unburned plots had higher seedling establishment (12.3 m2) compared to early spring grazed (3.7 m2) or early spring burned plots (3.1 m2). Intermound areas with other treatments had 5.8 to 8.1 seedlings per m2. Seedling establishment trends were reversed on mounds: early spring grazed, burned plots had 13.1 seedlings per m2 compared to 1.9 m2 on ungrazed, unburned plots.

Community composition: On summer grazed plots, fire reduced total native grass cover (p=0.048 for interaction of fire and grazing). With the exception of purple needlegrass, native grasses individually had no significant (p>0.05) trends in response to any treatments. For nonnative annual grasses fire reduced total cover only on spring grazed or ungrazed plots. Without fire, nonnative grasses' cover was most reduced by spring grazing. Fire significantly (p=0.004) increased native forb frequency, particularly on ungrazed plots where frequency increased 250%. Few native forbs had significant individual responses to treatments. On plots with early spring grazing or no grazing, fire increased exotic forb cover. In the absence of fire, early spring grazed plots had higher exotic forb cover (grazing and fire treatments were both significant, interaction term was not significant (p=0.09)) [45].

Long-term responses: Monitoring after 3 postfire years showed that many fire effects were short lived, perhaps reflecting the sudden change in management from exclusion of fire and grazing to introduction of both practices in the same year. Increased fragmentation and decreased basal area of purple needlegrass because of burning and grazing were no longer perceptible. After 3 years it was evident that while summer grazing reduced purple needlegrass more than spring grazing did, burned plots with summer grazing had more native forb species [21].

FIRE MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS:
This study highlights the value of prescribed fire and seasonal grazing for improving purple needlegrass seedling establishment and competitive ability. One notable result was the dramatic increase in purple needlegrass seedling establishment on burned mounds, most likely because of reduction of competition from annual grasses. In the absence of litter removal, nonnative grasses have a competitive advantage on mounds because they, unlike purple needlegrass, are able to germinate in litter and extend roots into soil. Seedling establishment and fragmentation of purple needlegrass compensated for short-term decreases in live crown cover, basal cover, and foliage height. Also notable were the decreases in cover of native grass and forbs, indicating that management to maximize purple needlegrass cover and minimize that of nonnative annuals may be detrimental to other native species.
  • 14. Bowcutt, Frederica S. 1999. A floristic study of Sugarloaf Ridge State Park, Sonoma County, California. Aliso. 18(1): 19-34. [40636]
  • 21. Dyer, Andrew R. 1993. Response of native bunchgrass to grazing, burning. Restoration & Management Notes. 11(2): 150-151. [22787]
  • 28. Gaidula, Peter. 1978. A summary of controlled burning programs within the California State Park System. Unpublished report on file at: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT. 2 p. [26464]
  • 33. Hatch, Daphne A.; Bartolome, James W.; Fehmi, Jeffrey S.; Hillyard, Deborah S. 1999. Effects of burning and grazing on a coastal California grassland. Restoration Ecology. 7(4): 376-381. [33060]
  • 45. Langstroth, Robert Peter. 1991. Fire and grazing ecology of Stipa pulchra grassland: a field study at Jepson Prairie, California. Davis, CA: University of California. 75 p. Thesis. [27349]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Plant Response to Fire

More info for the terms: basal area, competition, culm, density, litter, natural

With rain after defoliation by fire, purple needlegrass grows new tillers from meristems at the ground surface [45]. Often, growth the fall after fire is limited because of carbohydrate loss, and increases in growth rates (relative to unburned sites) are not observed until spring [1,45]. Mowing treatments have produced similar, though less pronounced effects, suggesting an important effect of postfire nutrient release. One study comparing mowing and burning found that production of purple needlegrass tillers was increased 3- to 4-fold by burning and 2-fold by mowing [1].

Recovery rate depends on the type and extent of damage to purple needlegrass relative to the reduction in competition from annuals. Where fire is relatively severe, particularly in mound topography, individuals have an immediate reduction in basal area and are likely to fragment [6,45]. In such stands, increased density and decreased basal area are noticeable for about 3 years after fire [45]. One study found little effect of fire on density but a large increase in basal area on sites with high density of nonnative annuals. This was primarily because purple needlegrass competition with nonnative annuals had been severe before density of annuals was greatly reduced by fire, allowing expansion of purple needlegrass basal area via increased tillering [1]. Mean foliage height (or mean maximum foliage height) is often reduced for 1 year after fire even if total productivity increases. This results because burned and unburned plants initiate new growth from different heights: burned plants regrow from basal meristems and unburned plants regrow from buds on culm bases in the bunch interior. Growth is also shorter on burned areas if fire burns the center of bunches where the tallest growth originates [45].

Tussocks that are old and/or growing on mounds generally have higher litter accumulations and greater immediate damage from fire than young and/or intermound plants. Fire temperatures are hottest on mounds and may kill basal meristems in the centers of purple needlegrass bunches. This process creates 2 or more clones from 1 individual, which initiate tillers on their exteriors. Postfire grazing greatly increases fragmentation. Many researchers state that, prior to heavy continuous grazing by domestic livestock in the 1800s, intermittent grazing and periodic fire interacted as important means of purple needlegrass regeneration [1,6,21,45,68].

There is some debate about the effect of fire seasonality. Some have cautioned against prescribed burning in spring because this causes greatest carbohydrate loss and reduces purple needlegrass seed production by removing flowerstalks [6,45]. Fire in spring, however, also burns nonnative annuals in their period of rapid growth and may therefore be a net benefit to purple needlegrass. One study compared burning in June, August, and September and found each produced significant (p<0.05) increases in growth rates and basal area of purple needlegrass with no significant effect of fire seasonality [1].

Purple needlegrass density prior to fire influences postfire responses. Ahmed [1] observed effects of fire in June, August, and September on purple needlegrass when planted at low (40 individuals per 96.8 square foot (9 m2) plot), medium (70 plants per plot), and high (100 plants per plot) density.  Fall growth was reduced by all fire treatments; growth rates and basal area the following spring were higher than on control plots. On plots with low density of purple needlegrass, spring growth increased 109%; on high density plots growth increased only 38% (percentages are based on the aggregate data set from fires in June, August, and September). The author concluded on low-density sites, reduction of competition from nonnatives is more important than on high-density sites. These results could indicate that fire regrowth is greater without conspecific competition [1].

Several researchers have noted short term increases in purple needlegrass seedling establishment and seed viability following fire [1,22,45]. Dyer and others [22] tested prescribed burning and domestic sheep grazing effects on planted seedlings and natural seedling establishment. Fire slightly increased purple needlegrass emergence for 1 year, but only 0.01% of seedlings survived 4 years. No treatment had any significant effect on 4-year survival, indicating that in some cases, establishment and survival to maturity may be influenced more by annual climatic variation than by management practices.

  • 6. Bartolome, James W. 1981. Stipa pulchra, a survivor from the pristine prairie. Fremontia. 9(1): 3-6. [28346]
  • 21. Dyer, Andrew R. 1993. Response of native bunchgrass to grazing, burning. Restoration & Management Notes. 11(2): 150-151. [22787]
  • 22. Dyer, Andrew R.; Fossum, Heather C.; Menke, John W. 1996. Emergence and survival of Nassella pulchra in a California grassland. Madrono. 43(2): 316-333. [41118]
  • 45. Langstroth, Robert Peter. 1991. Fire and grazing ecology of Stipa pulchra grassland: a field study at Jepson Prairie, California. Davis, CA: University of California. 75 p. Thesis. [27349]
  • 68. White, Keith L. 1966. Old-field succession on Hastings Reservation, California. Ecology. 47(5): 865-868. [18873]
  • 1. Ahmed, Elgaily Osman. 1983. Fire ecology of Stipa pulchra in California annual grassland. Davis, CA: University of California, Davis. 64 p. Dissertation. [28343]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Immediate Effect of Fire

More info for the terms: culm, fuel, fuel loading, litter, severity

Factors that influence immediate severity of damage and subsequent recovery of purple needlegrass include fuel loading, landscape position, fire seasonality, grazing, and abundance of annual grasses. Older, decadent individuals, and/or those growing on mounds with litter accumulation, support more severe fire with more immediate damage [21]. Burned material senesces soon after fire but bunches often retain some green foliage in the center and at culm bases until fall rain allows new growth. Carbohydrate reserves decrease with burning, particularly with fire during periods of active growth [45].
  • 21. Dyer, Andrew R. 1993. Response of native bunchgrass to grazing, burning. Restoration & Management Notes. 11(2): 150-151. [22787]
  • 45. Langstroth, Robert Peter. 1991. Fire and grazing ecology of Stipa pulchra grassland: a field study at Jepson Prairie, California. Davis, CA: University of California. 75 p. Thesis. [27349]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Post-fire Regeneration

More info for the terms: graminoid, ground residual colonizer, tussock

POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY [61]:
Tussock graminoid
Ground residual colonizer (on-site, initial community)
  • 61. Stickney, Peter F. 1989. Seral origin of species originating in northern Rocky Mountain forests. Unpublished draft on file at: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT. 10 p. [20090]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Fire Ecology

More info for the terms: basal area, competition, cover, density, fire exclusion, fire frequency, fire regime, frequency, litter, sere, shrubs, succession, tree

Fire adaptations: After fire, cover, density, and seedling establishment of purple needlegrass often increase as a result of increased soil temperature, light intensity, and nutrient release, and decreased standing litter [1,15,21,22,45]. Regeneration occurs from tillers at the soil surface, fragmentation of bunches, and/or by seedling establishment. Stands that experience severe fire have larger decreases in individuals' basal area and foliage height in the 1st postfire year but are more likely to increase by fragmentation. These patterns are more pronounced with short-duration grazing, particularly in early spring [21,45]. Annual grasses have larger seeds than purple needlegrass and are better adapted to establishing in litter layers. For this reason, fire can increase purple needlegrass seedling establishment, particularly in old stands where litter accumulation is highest [1,21,45]. Adult individuals are also benefited by reduction of competition from annual grasses. Even though fire during periods of rapid growth can be detrimental to purple needlegrass, it is generally more damaging to nonnative annuals [1,6]. Some studies, however, have found fire and/or grazing effects on cover, density, or seedling establishment of purple needlegrass were highly variable or insignificant, suggesting a large influence of climate on purple needlegrass' response to fire [22,33].

FIRE REGIMES: There is little direct physical evidence of the historical extent of purple needlegrass, and less about historic fire frequencies in the communities where it occurs. Most agree, however, that purple needle grass' abundance was historically greater, and fire exclusion has been a factor in its decline [6,15,45]. In the coastal scrub, chaparral, and woodland fire frequency declined in the early 1900s with restrictions against burning; in grasslands fire frequency declined in the 1840s when heavy grazing and intermittent drought reduced fuels [15,30]. Before Spanish settlement, California prairie was used by tule elk, pronghorn, and mule deer, but grazing was intermittent enough to allow dominant grasses to regrow and support fire [15]. In many areas where purple needlegrass and nonnative annuals now coexist, purple needlegrass and native annuals were historically mixed. Here, the interaction of fire and grazing likely reduced competition from annual grasses, reduced woody species encroachment, and improved purple needlegrass regeneration [20,45].

One study of vegetation dynamics in coastal sage scrub, chaparral, and coast live oak woodland near Santa Barbara found that without fire or livestock grazing, coastal sage scrub was replaced by oak woodland at a rate of 0.3% annually. Grassland to coastal sage scrub transition occurred at a rate of 0.69% per year, and oak woodland reverted to grassland at a rate of 0.08% per year. On burned areas without livestock grazing or on unburned sites with livestock grazing, rates of transition of grassland to coastal scrub and coastal scrub to oak woodland were lower. On areas burned without grazing or grazed without burning the rate of oak woodland reversion to grassland was higher than on areas with neither burning nor grazing [16].

In chaparral and coastal scrub, early postfire vegetation is dominated by native and nonnative annuals. Herbaceous vegetation is greatest in areas where fire eliminates nonsprouting shrubs [42,49]. Purple needlegrass and other perennial grasses are more abundant after fire in coastal scrub than in chaparral. Fire repeated in less than approximately 3-year intervals often causes the herbaceous sere to persist [42]. Conversion of purple needlegrass grassland to coyote bush/ripgut brome communities has been observed with 24 years of fire exclusion [45].

Purple needlegrass is present in oak and pine woodlands and in the early seral stages of mixed evergreen forests, redwood and coast Douglas-fir forests. Generally, purple needlegrass and other herbaceous species are present in later successional oak woodlands only in intercanopy areas. Closed stands have up to 5 inches (12.7 cm) of oak litter that essentially eliminates grass growth [55]. Generally tree establishment is better after some shrubs have established in grasslands excluded from fire or grazing. In these cases, transition from grassland/coastal scrub mosaic to mixed evergreen forest can occur in 50 years. In other cases, however, fire exclusion does not result in type conversion but rather maintenance of a system wherein reversion and succession allow both vegetation types to persist [16].

Fire return intervals: Greenlee and Langenheim [30] described FIRE REGIMES in purple needlegrass associated communities in the Monterey Bay area between aboriginal time and present. Their results, presented below, show the large decline in fire frequency in coastal sage, chaparral, and forests, and savannas in the recent era (1929 was chosen to demarcate the recent fire regime because of restrictions that were put in place against burning in the Santa Cruz area). "Probable mean fire interval" refers to estimates of fire intervals that are derived from historical or very limited physical evidence. Estimates of presettlement fire return intervals in coastal terrace grasslands are similar to those reported below for prairie [62].

Fire regime Vegetation where burning concentrated Vegetation where burning incidental Recorded or calculated mean fire intervals (years) Probable mean fire intervals (years)
Lightning   Prairie   1-15
  Coastal sage   1-15
  Chaparral   10-30
  Oak woodland   10-30
Mixed evergreen     15-30
Redwood forest   135  
Aboriginal (until approximately 1792) Prairies   1-2  
Coastal sage   1-2  
  Chaparral 18-21  
Oak woodland   1-2  
  Mixed evergreen   50-75
  Redwood forest 17-82  
Spanish (1792 to 1848)   Prairies   1-15
  Coastal sage   1-15
Chaparral   19-21  
  Oak woodland   2-30
  Mixed evergreen   50-75
  Redwood forest 82  
European-American (1847 to 1929)   Prairies   20-30
  Coastal sage   20-30
  Chaparral 10-27  
  Oak woodland 50-75  
Mixed evergreen   7-29  
Redwood forest   20-50  
Recent (1929 to present)   Prairies   20-30
  Coastal sage 155  
  Chaparral 155  
  Oak woodland 225  
  Mixed evergreen 215  
  Redwood forest 130  

FIRE REGIMES for plant communities and ecosystems in which purple needlegrass occurs are presented below. More information regarding FIRE REGIMES and fire ecology of these communities can be found in the 'Fire Ecology and Adaptations' section of the FEIS species summary for the plant community or ecosystem dominants below.

Community or Ecosystem Dominant Species Fire Return Interval Range (years)
California chaparral Adenostoma and/or Arctostaphylos spp.
coastal sagebrush Artemisia californica
California steppe Festuca-Danthonia spp. 52,62]
pine-cypress forest Pinus-Cupressus spp.
Pacific ponderosa pine* Pinus ponderosa var. ponderosa 1-47 [3]
coastal Douglas-fir* Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii 40-240 [3,50,57]
California mixed evergreen Pseudotsuga menziesii var. m.-Lithocarpus densiflorus-Arbutus menziesii
California oakwoods Quercus spp. 3]
coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 2-75 [30]
canyon live oak Quercus chrysolepis
blue oak-foothills pine Quercus douglasii-Pinus sabiniana 3]
California black oak Quercus kelloggii 5-30 [52
redwood Sequoia sempervirens 5-200 [3,27,64]
*fire return interval varies widely; trends in variation are noted in the species summary
  • 3. Arno, Stephen F. 2000. Fire in western forest ecosystems. In: Brown, James K.; Smith, Jane Kapler, eds. Wildland fire in ecosystems: Effects of fire on flora. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-42-vol. 2. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 97-120. [36984]
  • 6. Bartolome, James W. 1981. Stipa pulchra, a survivor from the pristine prairie. Fremontia. 9(1): 3-6. [28346]
  • 15. Brown, David E. 1982. Californian valley grassland. In: Brown, David E., ed. Biotic communities of the American Southwest--United States and Mexico. Desert Plants. 4(1-4): 132-135. [8896]
  • 16. Callaway, Ragan M.; Davis, Frank W. 1993. Vegetation dynamics, fire, and the physical environment in coastal central California. Ecology. 74(5): 1567-1578. [21675]
  • 20. Dyer, A. R.; Rice, K. J. 1997. Intraspecific and diffuse competition: the response of Nassella pulchra in a California grassland. Ecological Applications. 7(2): 484-492. [41114]
  • 21. Dyer, Andrew R. 1993. Response of native bunchgrass to grazing, burning. Restoration & Management Notes. 11(2): 150-151. [22787]
  • 22. Dyer, Andrew R.; Fossum, Heather C.; Menke, John W. 1996. Emergence and survival of Nassella pulchra in a California grassland. Madrono. 43(2): 316-333. [41118]
  • 27. Finney, Mark A.; Martin, Robert E. 1989. Fire history in a Sequoia sempervirens forest at Salt Point State Park, California. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 19: 1451-1457. [9845]
  • 33. Hatch, Daphne A.; Bartolome, James W.; Fehmi, Jeffrey S.; Hillyard, Deborah S. 1999. Effects of burning and grazing on a coastal California grassland. Restoration Ecology. 7(4): 376-381. [33060]
  • 42. Keeley, Jon E. 1990. The California valley grassland. In: Schoenherr, Allan A., ed. Endangered plant communities of southern California: Proceedings of the 15th annual symposium; 1989 October 28; Fullerton, CA. Special Publication No. 3. Claremont, CA: Southern California Botanists: 2-23. [21317]
  • 45. Langstroth, Robert Peter. 1991. Fire and grazing ecology of Stipa pulchra grassland: a field study at Jepson Prairie, California. Davis, CA: University of California. 75 p. Thesis. [27349]
  • 49. Mensing, Scott A. 1998. 560 years of vegetation change in the region of Santa Barbara, California. Madrono. 45(1): 1-11. [30134]
  • 50. Morrison, Peter H.; Swanson, Frederick J. 1990. Fire history and pattern in a Cascade Range landscape. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-254. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 77 p. [13074]
  • 55. Plumb, Timothy R.; Gomez, Anthony P. 1983. Five southern California oaks: identification and postfire management. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-71. Berkeley, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 56 p. [5898]
  • 57. Ripple, William J. 1994. Historic spatial patterns of old forests in western Oregon. Journal of Forestry. 92(11): 45-49. [33881]
  • 62. Stomberg, Mark R.; Kephart, Paul; Yadon, Vern. 2001. Composition, invasibility, and diversity in coastal California grasslands. Madrono. 48(4): 236-252. [41371]
  • 64. Stuart, John D. 1987. Fire history of an old-growth forest of Sequoia sempervirens (Taxodiaceae) forest in Humboldt Redwoods State Park, California. Madrono. 34(2): 128-141. [7277]
  • 30. Greenlee, Jason M.; Langenheim, Jean H. 1990. Historic FIRE REGIMES and their relation to vegetation patterns in the Monterey Bay area of California. The American Midland Naturalist. 124(2): 239-253. [15144]
  • 1. Ahmed, Elgaily Osman. 1983. Fire ecology of Stipa pulchra in California annual grassland. Davis, CA: University of California, Davis. 64 p. Dissertation. [28343]
  • 52. Paysen, Timothy E.; Ansley, R. James; Brown, James K.; [and others]. 2000. Fire in western shrubland, woodland, and grassland ecosystems. In: Brown, James K.; Smith, Jane Kapler, eds. Wildland fire in ecosystems: Effects of fire on flora. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-42-volume 2. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 121-159. [36978]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Successional Status

More info on this topic.

More info for the terms: climax, competition, cover, culm, density, forbs, mesic, prescribed fire, restoration, serpentine soils, shrubs

Purple needlegrass is difficult to classify as a climax or seral species. Many researchers, following Kuchler [44], have described the species as a climax that was historically dominant with other perennial grasses throughout the valley and coastal grassland and was displaced by nonnative annual grasses with overgrazing in the mid-1800s [7]. More recently the former extent of purple needlegrass has been debated, primarily because of limited physical evidence of the composition of presettlement grasslands. Stromberg and others [62] state classification of purple needlegrass as a climax species is not supported by long-term studies or critical review of existing evidence. This group and others argue that large areas of the interior valley grassland may have been occupied by native annual forbs that were quickly replaced by nonnative annual forbs and grasses [15,62]. Holstein [39] has also criticized the climax classification of purple needlegrass, noting that in the valley and foothill grasslands there are "at least an order of magnitude" more prairie remnants dominated by rhizomatous beardless wildrye than by native bunchgrasses. He suggests that beardless wildrye was more dominant on heavier soils, while sandy areas were dominated by purple needlegrass. Keeley [43] has stated purple needlegrass was historically more abundant and widespread, but in southern California it was likely in isolated patches in dry areas similar to its current habit.

There are several possible origins of nonnative annual communities. Some current annual grasslands, both native and nonnative, were created sometime prior to about 1920 when prescribed fire was used to remove shrubs and improve forage production in chaparral or coastal scrub [42,43]. Additionally, some nonnative annual grasslands are likely the results of overgrazing of native annual grasslands [15]. While early vegetation will not be known, it is apparent that the assumption that all nonnative annual grasslands were dominated by perennial bunchgrasses has led to many failed restoration attempts [39].

Despite disagreement about the former extent of purple needlegrass, there is agreement that it is now suppressed by competition with nonnnative annuals. Invasion by nonnative grasses and forbs has been less complete on serpentine soils; these soils frequently support vigorous stands of purple needlegrass [14,26]. Dyer and Rice [23] observed competition effects by weeding nonnatives, planting purple needlegrass at different densities, and measuring growth and flowering for 3 years. Competition from nonnative annuals restricted growth and flowering of purple needlegrass more than intraspecific competition; intraspecific competition decreased productivity only in the absence of nonnative annuals. Both inter- and intraspecific competition affected flowering culm production more than vegetative production.

Purple needlegrass response to disturbance is unique. It is seldom present on formerly cultivated sites regardless of grazing history; these sites are commonly occupied by relatively stable communities of native and nonnative annuals [63]. Purple needlegrass and other native bunchgrasses are well adapted to light grazing and defoliation by fire but not to high-intensity continuous grazing, particularly under drought conditions [6]. Pocket gophers occur in high density (10 to 50 per acre (26-125/ha)) in some valley grasslands, sometimes disturbing up to 30% of the soil surface annually. This disturbance has important implications for nitrogen cycling and generally favors annual grasses over native perennials [63].

Where purple needlegrass occurs in mesic grasslands or in the understory of woodlands, chaparral and coastal scrub, shrubs may gradually exclude herbaceous vegetation in the absence of periodic disturbance (See the 'Fire Ecology' section of this species summary). In a wide-ranging survey of northern California, very few purple needlegrass individuals were found in areas with more than 50% cover of woody species [9].

  • 6. Bartolome, James W. 1981. Stipa pulchra, a survivor from the pristine prairie. Fremontia. 9(1): 3-6. [28346]
  • 7. Bartolome, James W. 1987. California annual grassland and oak savannah. Rangelands. 9(3): 122-125. [2861]
  • 9. Bartolome, James W.; Gemmill, Barbara. 1981. The ecological status of Stipa pulchra (Poaceae) in California. Madrono. 28(3): 172-184. [20847]
  • 14. Bowcutt, Frederica S. 1999. A floristic study of Sugarloaf Ridge State Park, Sonoma County, California. Aliso. 18(1): 19-34. [40636]
  • 15. Brown, David E. 1982. Californian valley grassland. In: Brown, David E., ed. Biotic communities of the American Southwest--United States and Mexico. Desert Plants. 4(1-4): 132-135. [8896]
  • 23. Dyer, Andrew R.; Rice, Kevin J. 1999. Effects of competition on resource availability and growth of a California bunchgrass. Ecology. 80(8): 2697-2710. [41115]
  • 26. Fiedler, Peggy Lee; Leidy, Robert A. 1987. Plant communities of Ring Mountain Preserve, Marin County, California. Madrono. 34(3): 173-192. [4068]
  • 39. Holstein, Glen. 2001. Pre-agricultural grassland in central California. Madrono. 48(4): 253-264. [41372]
  • 42. Keeley, Jon E. 1990. The California valley grassland. In: Schoenherr, Allan A., ed. Endangered plant communities of southern California: Proceedings of the 15th annual symposium; 1989 October 28; Fullerton, CA. Special Publication No. 3. Claremont, CA: Southern California Botanists: 2-23. [21317]
  • 62. Stomberg, Mark R.; Kephart, Paul; Yadon, Vern. 2001. Composition, invasibility, and diversity in coastal California grasslands. Madrono. 48(4): 236-252. [41371]
  • 63. Stromberg, Mark R.; Griffin, James R. 1996. Long-term patterns in coastal California grasslands in relation to cultivation, gophers, and grazing. Ecological Applications. 6(4): 1189-1211. [41117]
  • 43. Keeley, Jon E. 2002. Native American impacts on FIRE REGIMES of the California coastal ranges. Journal of Biogeography. 29(3): 303-320. [41422]
  • 44. Kuchler, A. W. 1964. United States [Potential natural vegetation of the conterminous United States]. Special Publication No. 36. New York: American Geographical Society. 1:3,168,000; colored. [3455]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Regeneration Processes

More info for the terms: competition, density, fresh, litter, monoecious, prescribed fire, presence

Breeding system: Purple needlegrass is monoecious [51].

Pollination: Purple needlegrass is pollinated by wind.

Seed production: Purple needlegrass produces large quantities of viable seed. Under favorable conditions 2-year-old plants are able to produce seed. In dense healthy stands seed production may be up to 227 pounds per acre (200 kg/ha). Defoliation during periods of rapid growth or flowering may decrease seed production [6].

Seed dispersal: Purple needlegrass seeds have a twisting awn and pointed seed, which increases self-burial [6].

Seed banking: Seed banking of purple needlegrass is relatively low compared to that of associated nonnative annual grasses [1,66].

Germination: Reported germination rates are varied. Gulmon [31] reported germination rates from 80 to 93.7% on leached litter, fresh litter, and topsoil. Ahmed [1] found mean germination rates of 30 to 75% for seed collected in summer and germinated in petri dishes in October. Germination is reduced and slower in the presence of annual competitors [9,58]. This further reduces competitive ability in the presence of nonnative annuals [9]. Fire may increase germination and emergence in the 1st postfire growing season [1,22].

Seedling establishment/growth: Seedling success is influenced by climate, competition from annuals, grazing intensity and duration, and fire. One study found a 94% decrease in abundance between the 1- and 2-tillered seedling stages, and a 26% decrease between the 2- and 3-tillered seedling stages [45]. Another study found <1% survival of purple needlegrass following 20% germination of "precision planted" seed [20]. Dyer and others [22] found 0.01% 4-year survival, with various grazing and prescribed fire treatments improving survival only during the 1st year. The authors noted that survival to this age "appeared to be more strongly influenced by factors not manipulated or monitored in this study," such as climatic variation. Generally individuals greater than 0.8 inch (2 cm) in diameter are able to survive summer drought [2]. Early spring drought is more detrimental to nonnative annual grass seedlings than to purple needlegrass seedlings. Purple needlegrass seedling growth in shade is poor; in field plots experimental removal of nonnative annuals increased seedling density by 88% and increased biomass by 90% [32]. Annual seedlings' roots grow faster than those of purple needlegrass; 1 study found soft chess root elongation rates under controlled conditions were 50 to 100% greater than purple needlegrass [1]. Rapid growth of annual grass roots causes rapid water depletion in surface soil and interacts with shading to cause high purple needlegrass seedling mortality in spring [9].

Asexual regeneration: Purple needlegrass regenerates by tillering and fragmentation of bunches. Fragmentation is an important form of regeneration for purple needlegrass; it is an adaptation that allows recovery from defoliation by high-intensity, short-duration grazing and/or fire [6,21,45].

  • 2. Allen, Edith B. 1995. Restoration ecology: limits and possibilities in arid and semiarid lands. 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: 7-15. [24818]
  • 6. Bartolome, James W. 1981. Stipa pulchra, a survivor from the pristine prairie. Fremontia. 9(1): 3-6. [28346]
  • 9. Bartolome, James W.; Gemmill, Barbara. 1981. The ecological status of Stipa pulchra (Poaceae) in California. Madrono. 28(3): 172-184. [20847]
  • 20. Dyer, A. R.; Rice, K. J. 1997. Intraspecific and diffuse competition: the response of Nassella pulchra in a California grassland. Ecological Applications. 7(2): 484-492. [41114]
  • 21. Dyer, Andrew R. 1993. Response of native bunchgrass to grazing, burning. Restoration & Management Notes. 11(2): 150-151. [22787]
  • 22. Dyer, Andrew R.; Fossum, Heather C.; Menke, John W. 1996. Emergence and survival of Nassella pulchra in a California grassland. Madrono. 43(2): 316-333. [41118]
  • 31. Gulmon, S. L. 1992. Patterns of seed germination in Californian serpentine grassland species. Oecologia. 89(1): 27-31. [18187]
  • 32. Hamilton, Jason G.; Holzapfel, Claus; Mahall, Bruce E. 1999. Coexistence and interface between a native perennial grass and non-native annual grasses in California. Oecologia. 121(4): 518-526. [41120]
  • 45. Langstroth, Robert Peter. 1991. Fire and grazing ecology of Stipa pulchra grassland: a field study at Jepson Prairie, California. Davis, CA: University of California. 75 p. Thesis. [27349]
  • 51. Munz, Philip A. 1973. A California flora and supplement. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1905 p. [6155]
  • 58. Robinson, Richard Hayes. 1971. An analysis of ecological factors limiting the distribution of a group of Stipa pulchra associations. Korean Journal of Botany. 14(3): 61-80. [28363]
  • 1. Ahmed, Elgaily Osman. 1983. Fire ecology of Stipa pulchra in California annual grassland. Davis, CA: University of California, Davis. 64 p. Dissertation. [28343]
  • 66. U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Resource Conservation Service. 2002. PLANTS database (2002), [Online]. Available: http://plants.usda.gov/. [34262]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Growth Form (according to Raunkiær Life-form classification)

More info on this topic.

More info for the term: hemicryptophyte

RAUNKIAER [56] LIFE FORM:
Hemicryptophyte
  • 56. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Life Form

More info for the term: graminoid

Graminoid

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Life History and Behavior

Cyclicity

Phenology

More info on this topic.

Summer drought and cold temperatures in winter induce dormancy. Vegetative growth of purple needlegrass is greatest from March through late May or early June, depending on onset of drought. Vegetative growth increases with precipitation in the fall, which occurs in September or October. Freezing temperatures in December generally stop growth [40,63]. Flowers begin to develop in early May, and seed is mature and dispersed by late July. The length of time from flowering to seed ripening in purple needlegrass is similar to that of nonnative annual grasses, but those species begin flowering approximately 1 month earlier [40].
  • 40. Jackson, Louise E.; Roy, Jacques. 1986. Growth patterns of Mediterranean annual and perennial grasses under simulated rainfall regimes of southern France and California. Acta Ecologica. 7(21): 191-212. [36976]
  • 63. Stromberg, Mark R.; Griffin, James R. 1996. Long-term patterns in coastal California grasslands in relation to cultivation, gophers, and grazing. Ecological Applications. 6(4): 1189-1211. [41117]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Conservation

Conservation Status

National NatureServe Conservation Status

United States

Rounded National Status Rank: NNR - Unranked

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

NatureServe Conservation Status

Rounded Global Status Rank: G5 - Secure

Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)

© NatureServe

Source: NatureServe

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Management

Management considerations

More info for the terms: cover, shrub

Livestock grazing can increase purple needlegrass cover and reduce that of
nonnative annuals [9,24]. One study noted a decrease in purple needlegrass cover from 65
to 10% with only several years of grazing exclusion. Large increases in cover
have been reported for winter and spring grazing on sites studied in southern
California. Grazing in spring may be more detrimental to mature individuals.
However, because nonnative annuals are better adapted to development under their
canopies than purple needlegrass, spring grazing generally increases purple
needlegrass seedling
establishment [6,45].

Davis and
Sherman [18] studied the remaining population of Sonoma spineflower ( Chorizanthe
valida), a plant listed by the state of California as endangered. The
population is located in Marin County. The authors state that though grazing maintains purple needlegrass and
reduces shrub invasion, it may be detrimental to Sonoma spineflower and other rare endemic
forbs.
  • 6. Bartolome, James W. 1981. Stipa pulchra, a survivor from the pristine prairie. Fremontia. 9(1): 3-6. [28346]
  • 9. Bartolome, James W.; Gemmill, Barbara. 1981. The ecological status of Stipa pulchra (Poaceae) in California. Madrono. 28(3): 172-184. [20847]
  • 45. Langstroth, Robert Peter. 1991. Fire and grazing ecology of Stipa pulchra grassland: a field study at Jepson Prairie, California. Davis, CA: University of California. 75 p. Thesis. [27349]
  • 18. Davis, Liam H.; Sherman, Robert J. 1992. Ecological study of the rare Chorizanthe valida (Polygonaceae) at Point Reyes National Seashore, California. Madrono. 39(4): 271-280. [19787]
  • 24. Edwards, Stephen W. 1992. Observations on the prehistory and ecology of grazing in California. Fremontia. 20(1): 3-11. [19418]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Relevance to Humans and Ecosystems

Benefits

Value for rehabilitation of disturbed sites

More info for the term: restoration

Purple needlegrass is used in restoration projects and established by transplants, drilled seed, or broadcasted seed [65]. Purple needlegrass has been used for competitive reseeding after prescribed burning of grasslands invaded by yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis) and nonnative annual grasses [47]. One project in the Santa Monica Mountains used seeded and transplanted purple needlegrass, tussockgrass, California brome (B. carinatus), and smallflower melicgrass (Melica imperfecta) for replacement of ripgut brome [53]. Irrigation has been used to reduce purple needlegrass seedling mortality in summer [2].
  • 2. Allen, Edith B. 1995. Restoration ecology: limits and possibilities in arid and semiarid lands. 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: 7-15. [24818]
  • 53. Perala, C.; Hoover, D. A. 1990. Hand-removal of exotics and planting of natives key to restoration of riparian forest understory. Restoration & Management Notes. 8(2): 118. [13791]
  • 65. Tyson, Wayne; Rackelmann, George. 1982. Restoring and managing indigenous plant communities at Malibu Creek State Park. In: Conrad, C. Eugene; Oechel, Walter C., technical coordinators. Proceedings of the symposium on dynamics and management of Mediterranean-type ecosystems; 1981 June 22-26; San Diego, CA. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-58. Berkeley, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station: 636. [6097]
  • 47. Martin, Eveline L.; Martin, Ian D. 1999. Prescribed burning and competitive reseeding as tools for reducing yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis) at Pinnacles National Monument. In: Kelly, Mike; Howe, Melanie; Neill, Bill, eds. Proceedings, California Exotic Pest Plant Council; 1999 October 15-17; Sacramento, CA. Volume 5. [Davis, CA]: California Exotic Pest Plant Council: 51-56. [40413]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Importance to Livestock and Wildlife

More info for the term: cover

Purple needlegrass was an important source of food for herds of pronghorn, mule deer, and Tule elk that were present in much of the California prairie; some areas were intermittently occupied by herds of several hundred to 3,000 individuals. Purple needlegrass-dominated prairie was heavily used by livestock throughout the 1800s, with cattle numbers peaking in about 1862 and domestic sheep numbers in about 1876. Jackrabbits, Beechey ground squirrels, kangaroo rats, and pocket gophers are numerous throughout the valley grassland [34]. Purple needlegrass is an important source of forage for livestock in California. Valley and foothill grasslands and savannas comprise only 15% of California's land area but are now about 80% of the land used by livestock [7,15].

Palatability/nutritional value: Purple needlegrass has moderate protein value and is highly palatable to livestock and wildlife [66].

Cover value: No information

  • 7. Bartolome, James W. 1987. California annual grassland and oak savannah. Rangelands. 9(3): 122-125. [2861]
  • 15. Brown, David E. 1982. Californian valley grassland. In: Brown, David E., ed. Biotic communities of the American Southwest--United States and Mexico. Desert Plants. 4(1-4): 132-135. [8896]
  • 34. Heady, Harold F. 1977. Valley grassland. In: Barbour, Michael G.; Major, Jack, eds. Terrestrial vegetation of California. New York: John Wiley and Sons: 491-514. [7215]
  • 66. U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Resource Conservation Service. 2002. PLANTS database (2002), [Online]. Available: http://plants.usda.gov/. [34262]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Other uses and values

No information

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Wikipedia

Nassella pulchra

Nassella pulchra, basionym Stipa pulchra, is a species of grass known by the common names purple needlegrass and purple tussockgrass.[3] It is native to California, where it occurs throughout the coastal hills, valleys, and mountain ranges, as well as the Sacramento Valley and parts of the Sierra Nevada foothills, and Baja California.

It grows in many types of local habitat, including grassland, chaparral, and oak woodland. It grows well on clay and serpentine soils.[4]

Description[edit]

Nassella pulchra is a perennial bunch grass producing tufts of erect, unbranched stems up to 1 metre (3.3 ft) tall. The extensive root system can reach 20 feet (6.1 m) deep into the soil, making the grass more tolerant of drought.[5]

The open, nodding inflorescence is up to 60 centimeters long and has many branches bearing spikelets.

The plant produces copious seed, up to 227 pounds per acre in dense stands.[4] The pointed fruit is purple-tinged when young and has an awn up to 10 centimeters long which is twisted and bent twice.[6][7] The shape of the seed helps it self-bury.[4]

Uses[edit]

This grass is the preferred material utilized by the California Indian Basket Weavers for teaching children the art of basket weaving.[8]

State Grass[edit]

Purple needlegrass became the California State Grass in 2004.[9] It is considered a symbol of the state because it is the most widespread native California grass, it supported Native American groups as well as Mexican ranchers, and it helps suppress invasive plant species and support native oaks.[9] It also helps prevent soil erosion by establishing a large, fibrous root system which holds the soil in place.

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^  N. pulchra was published in Taxon; Official News Bulletin of the International Society for Plant Taxonomy, 39(4): 611. 1990. Utrecht, The Netherlands. "Plant Name Details for Nassella pulchra". IPNI. Retrieved August 25, 2010. "Basionym to Stipa pulchra" 
  2. ^  The basionym to N. pulchra, Stipa pulchra, was first described and published in American Journal of Botany, 1915, ii. 301. Lancaster, Penn. "Plant Name Details for Stipa pulchra". IPNI. Retrieved August 25, 2010. "Notes: U.S.A. (Calif.)" 
  3. ^ "Nassella pulchra". ITIS. 
  4. ^ a b c US Forest Service Fire Ecology
  5. ^ California Native Perennial Grasses. Hastings Natural History Reservation.
  6. ^ Jepson Manual Treatment
  7. ^ Grass Manual Treatment
  8. ^ Tolay Lake Park: Natural and Cultural History
  9. ^ a b California State Grass
Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 3.0 (CC BY-SA 3.0)

Source: Wikipedia

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Names and Taxonomy

Taxonomy

Common Names

purple needlegrass

purple stipa

purple tussockgrass

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

The currently recognized scientific name of purple needlegrass is Nassella pulchra (A.S. Hitchc.) Barkworth (Poaceae) [5,36,41].
  • 36. Hickman, James C., ed. 1993. The Jepson manual: Higher plants of California. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1400 p. [21992]
  • 5. Barkworth, Mary E. 1993. North American Stipeae (Gramineae): taxonomic changes and other comments. Phytologia. 74(1): 1-25. [29158]
  • 41. Kartesz, John T.; Meacham, Christopher A. 1999. Synthesis of the North American flora (Windows Version 1.0), [CD-ROM]. Available: North Carolina Botanical Garden. In cooperation with the Nature Conservancy, Natural Resources Conservation Service, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [2001, January 16]. [36715]

Trusted

Article rating from 0 people

Default rating: 2.5 of 5

Disclaimer

EOL content is automatically assembled from many different content providers. As a result, from time to time you may find pages on EOL that are confusing.

To request an improvement, please leave a comment on the page. Thank you!