Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Botany Program Update 2016

209 views

Published on

Botany Program 2016 update from the Montana Natural Heritage Program's annual partner's meeting held December 1, 2016 in Helena, Montana.

Published in: Environment
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Botany Program Update 2016

  1. 1. To collect & maintain reliable & comprehensive data on Montana’s native botanical species….
  2. 2. 6847 8660 10101 10967 74232 76941 83631 5600 6410 7015 7475 6301 7710 9740 376 458 489 525 502 505 516 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000 90000 2008 2009 2010 2011 2014 2015 2016 NUMBER All Botanical Observations SOC/PSOC Occurrences Number of SOC/PSOC
  3. 3. “STATUS UNDER REVIEW” 335 PLANTS • Status is not common, not rare, but is unknown. • Disputed State rank; New, but unassessed information; or Not ranked • Project creates a defensible State rank. • Added: 795 observations, 68 photographs, & expanded profile for 44 taxa • Back-log in conducting Reviews on 418 spp. reduced 20% by September 2017 FUNDING: MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
  4. 4. Coefficient of Conservatism (C-) Values • Funding: MTDEQ • 1,623 plants assigned a C-value • 948 plants lack a C-value - mostly upland species • C-value reflects the plant’s tolerance to disturbance AND its affinity to a specific, unimpaired habitat in Montana. • C-value is the basic unit of Floristic Quality Assessment method.
  5. 5. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Exotic Native: habitat moderate thrives or persists with natural or human disturbance Native: habitat specialist may tolerate or cannot tolerate disturbance Native: habitat generalist & restricted to human disturbance
  6. 6. C-Values Are USEFUL At the Project Level: • Make a plant species list • Add their assigned C-value • Calculate Statistics: - number of plant species (n) - minimum / maximum C-value found - average C-value ( 𝐶 ) - Floristic Quality Index (FQI) = 𝐶 𝑛 C-value Statistics allows: • Sites to be compared to determine which has better ecological quality • Baseline and future conditions to be monitored and compared • Drives engineering design and species to seed/plant to create restoration that results in a greater array of ecological function (higher average C-values, greater range of C-values) 948 (upland) species lack C-values in Montana.
  7. 7. Howell’s Gumweed – S2S3 SOC, USFS Sensitive • Missoula / Powell Counties, MT Idaho • Study to assess genetic variability - among populations, - with its look alike – Curly Cup Gumweed, and - will assist in guiding management decisions. Funding: USFS, Lolo National Forest
  8. 8. TEACHING Boosting people’s skills in identifying wetland & riparian plants. • 3 beginner / refresher • 2 intermediate (grass, sedge, rush plants) Funding: MTDEQ
  9. 9. 2010-2016 Wetland Plant Identification • At least 30 classes • At least 450 participants attended • Participants work in wetland/riparian systems: Federal, State, County, Tribal, Academia, NGOs, Watershed / CDs, Consultants, Non-Profits, & others. Training Topics Catered to Your Organization: • Upland plants • Wetland plants • Grasses, Shrubs/Trees • Rare species • Mosses / Lichens • others
  10. 10. MOSS CYANOBACTERIA LIVERWORT LICHEN ALGAE & FUNGI & BACTERIA
  11. 11. Dr. Bruce McCune, Dr. Roger Rosentreter, Dr. Daphne Stone, Ann DeBolt, Andrea Pipp, Dr. Katherine Glew, Wendy Velman, Rob Smith, Wildfire Wanderning Funding: Montana Native Plant Society; Bureau of Land Management; Milton Ranch
  12. 12. Pilot Study Accomplishments: • Mussellshell County: 1st documented moss & lichen survey! they exist! • Collected ‘ground layer indicator’ data to assess ecological function. • Compliments vegetation data collected in MFWP Greater Sage-Grouse Grazing Study plots & BLM / Milton Ranch transects.
  13. 13. Water Howellia Completed Analysis: 1978-2015 Spalding’s Catchfly Pursue funding to continue Recovery Plan monitoring. Ute Ladies’-Tresses Pursue funding to survey private lands. Funding: Swan Ecosystem Center, U.S. Forest Service
  14. 14. Populating Moss Field Guide & Database Draft Checklist: 511 species - coming Feb. 2017 MTNHP Database: 423 species Moss Field Guide: • 395 w/ species profile • 84 w/ photograph(s) • Publish Checklist • Update nomenclature in database
  15. 15. MTNHP Database: 639 spp Documented in MT: 1,074 spp • Create lichen checklist • Update nomenclature & field guide
  16. 16. Didymo Coming Soon: • 152,073 MTDEQ diatom observations • 87 Didymo observations • Herbarium observations

×