Download A related threat is how climate change will influence the

A related threat is how climate change will influence the environmental conditions of the
Presidio. All models indicate that northern California will experience warmer temperatures
(Cayan et al. 2008, Miller et al. 2003, Hayhoe et al. 2004, Knowles et al. 2006), and more recent
studies suggest that rainfall will decrease on average, but in a pattern of quite variable yearly
rainfall, with some extremely wet years, and with series of droughts (Cayan et al. 2008). What is
not known yet, is how climate shifts will influence oceanic currents, and as a consequence, the
frequency of summer fog along the coast.
Other issues that have not been given substantial consideration in previous recovery plants
involve mutualists that the Presidio manzanita may require. One group of important mutualists
includes pollinators. Previous plans have suggested mixed populations of the Presidio manzanita
along with the Franciscan manzanita (A. franciscana); mixed populations with overlapping but
different flowering times would provide additional resources for appropriate pollinators. A
second group of mutualists would be mycorrhizal fungi. Adding these types of organisms to soil
of cloned plants just prior to out-planting, or just afterwards, may increase survival greatly, as
these organisms not only improve nutrition of host plants in poor soils, but also improve survival
of droughts through the summer (Horton et al. 1999).
27
Figure 13. Presidio clone from the Yerba Buena serpentine site. A). The plant is healthy, but exhibits a number of
dieback areas due to interactions with other plants. In the upper left, a coastal scrub species (Baccharis pilularis)
overtopping the shrub. In the center of the manzanita, soap-plant has shaded out much of the manzanita branches.
Other species are also involved in this example. B). A close-up of the same shrub shows more detail of the
individual associated plants and their impact on the prostrate manzanita clone. Photos by V.T. Parker.
A final group of potential mutualists involve seed predators that may cache seeds of manzanitas.
These animals normally consume a large proportion of each year’s crop of seeds. Because they
compete with one another for seed, they bury (or cache) seeds into holes roughly 5 cm across and
over 5 cm deep (Borchert et al. 2003). These types of caches are known for a number of species
of manzanitas (Tevis 1953, Keeley and Zedler 1978, Parker, unpublished data). What is
important about these seed predators is that their burying activity inadvertently provides a fire
adaptation for manzanitas (Parker, unpublished data). Current models of manzanita management
assume a great ‘immaturity risk’ to seed bank development. Thus, the original Presidio
manzanita should have a seed bank sufficiently deep, but the clones at the Yerba Buena site
would still be too young (if they were producing fruit) to have developed any substantial seed
bank. This indicates that effective management of these species may require effective
management of animal communities within chaparral. Animal caching of Arctostaphylos seeds
may shrink the period of time currently considered ‘immaturity risk’ due to more rapid burial of
seeds to safe depths.
28
Figure 14. Changes associated with the Yerba Buena and WWII Memorial sites over the last 35 years. Observable
are changes such as the removal of landfill associated with the Yerba Buena site, some tree removal. Photos
courtesy of Californiacoastlines.org.
Management Recommendations for Arctostaphylos montana subsp.
ravenii in the Presidio
IV.
A. Current Management for Arctostaphylos montana subsp. ravenii:
Plans and activities: Considerable efforts have resulted in improvement of the potential for the
Presidio manzanita to recover over the last 35 years (Figure 14). Current management practices
follow the 2003 Recovery Plan. The 2003 Recovery Plan incorporated recommendations from
the 1984 Recovery Plan and the 2001 Vegetation Management Plan. Specific recommendations
from the 2003 Recovery Plan are in Table 4. The principal recommendations listed at that point
were:
1) To protect the original individual, including removing of trees or other plants that might shade
or otherwise threaten the plant.
This recommendation has been followed, including the removal of trees near the Presidio
manzanita. The original plant and clones are frequently monitored (see Appendix 2).
2) Increase the number of populations.
29
The 1984 plan recommended 5 separate populations with at least 20 individuals each. In
1987, the Presidio and GGNRA propagated 168 cuttings and yielded about 50 survivors.
Several cluster of clones were planted (mother plant, Triangle, Yerba Buena serpentine,
West Crissy Bluffs, Inspiration Point). Additional clones were planted in 1988 at the site
with the mother plant. A cluster of cloned individuals have been added around the original
mother plant. Of the original plantings, some 8 or 9 clones have established. At the
triangle, one plant of the original plantings remains, and at the Yerba Buena serpentine site,
seven individuals remain. Other plantings met with failure to establish new individuals.
An inventory of all potential planting sites within the Presidio and outside the Presidio was
suggested. Potential locations were discussed in the 2003 Recovery Plan. The 2003
Recovery Plan recommends the same number, and suggests as a recovery criteria that there
be 5 separate populations outside the Presidio and 2 within the Presidio.
3) Based on the fact that seedlings were successfully germinated from isolated clones at UC
Botanic Garden, a third objective was to restore sexual reproduction and regeneration of the
Presidio manzanita. To achieve this, two mechanisms were suggested. One was, if the seedlings
from the UCBG plants proved to be from selfing, then they could be cloned and new populations
established. A second mechanism was to use the process of introgressive hybridization to
develop sufficient genetic variation in additional individuals that spontaneous sexual
reproduction could occur.
Genetic studies conducted at SFSU indicate that several of the seedlings from UCB
resulted from selfing (2000.191, 2000.195, 2000.196, and ‘unlabeled’). The other
seedlings were either clearly the result of outcrossing or were sufficiently ambiguous as to
be suspected.
4) Develop populations that incorporated A. franciscana (Franciscan manzanita) as well as the
Presidio manzanita. Now that an individual of A. franciscana has been found within the
Presidio, this should be more easily achieved and accepted.
Interim Recovery Criteria from the 2003 Recovery Plan involved 1) habitat stabilization, 2)
propagation of seedling and clonal stock, 3) establishment of new daughter clones on Presidio
serpentine bluff sites, and 4) investigation of taxonomic relationships and reproduction.
Habitat and population stabilization within the Presidio is an ongoing process, but apparently
there have been no loss of individuals since the plan. Propagation of seedling and clonal stock is
ongoing. Now that selfed seedlings have been identified, this process can proceed. There have
yet to be additional populations established at other sites.
Taxonomic relationships among the Presidio manzanita and other species have been completed,
although not all information is published yet (Parker et al. 2007, Keeley et al. 2007, Vasey and
Parker 2008, Parker et al. 2009). The Presidio manzanita is a tetraploid species that appears to
be of allopolyploid origin, meaning that it has genes from multiple potential parent species,
rather than resulting from polyploidization within a single lineage. The possible parents include
A. franciscana and A. hookeri, as well as having other alleles associated with maritime species
from the Santa Cruz Mt to Monterey Bay region (Parker, unpublished).
30
B. Management Recommendations
The following recommendations follow the 2003 Recovery Plan as modified by current
information.
1). Protect and manage the original plant and the clones surrounding it.
2). Increase the number of populations.
3). Create populations with the potential for sexual reproduction by intermixing seedling clones
with parent clones.
4). Investigate additional serpentine sites within the Presidio, outside the Presidio, and in other
locations.
5). At some sites, mix populations of seedling clones, parent clones, and clones from different A.
franciscana individuals.
6). Continue with ongoing management practices involving removal of introduced species or
native species whose growth results in significant dieback of planted manzanitas.
7). Research different aspects of the Presidio manzanita, including seed banks, controlled
breeding experiments, and phenology studies.
These recommendations build upon the previous recovery plans and expand them or modify
recommendations based upon new information. A comparison of these recommendations with
those of the 2003 Recovery Plan is in the following table (Table 4).
1). Protect and manage the original plant and the clones surrounding it. At this location, a
number of introduced and native species interact with the Presidio manzanita resulting in
diebacks of different parts of the plant. This seems especially true with Chlorogalum (soapplant), and in some locations with other species. It may be necessary to monitor these sites and
remove some of the Chlorogalum individuals as they get too large. Most importantly,
conservative management of the original plant continues to seem prudent (Table 4, left side, #1,
3, 4).
2) Increase the number of populations. It is still critical to have as many populations as possible
due to unforeseen future events. This includes populations both inside the historic range, and
outside the range as well (Table 4, left side, #5)
Within the historic range, a number of potential sites have been located. These include the ridge
above Crissy Field, downslope of Inspiration Point, and outcroppings of serpentine along the
bluffs overlooking the Golden Gate, from Fort Point to the Yerba Buena outcropping.
Table 4. Comparison of recommendations between this plan and the 2003 Recovery Plan.
Previous Recommendations (2003 Recovery Plan)
Recommendations in this plan
1. Management of areas around the Presidio manzanita
1. Management of areas around the Presidio
and any outplantings to suppress invasion of nonnative
manzanita and any outplantings to both suppress
vegetation (p. 69).
native or nonnative vegetation that might result in
dieback of plants.
2. The Presidio Trust needs to plan for future
endangered species recovery, starting with obtaining
complete inventories of outcropping and near-surface
serpentine subsoils of the Presidio (p. 73).
2. Given that this information appears to exist now, no
specific recommendations were made regarding
inventories of serpentine soils; planning for future
endangered species recovery also appears to be
31
ongoing.
3. The Presidio Trust needs to initiate an outreach
program to schools, horticultural, conservation and
community organizations (p. 73).
3. While not specifically recommended, this should
accompany any activity and be an ongoing process to
bring the public into conservation and management.
(within the specific recommendation section)
4. Continue to protect existing clone conservatively (p.
75).
5. Increase number of independent populations of the
original clone at various locations. (Both this report and
the 1984 report recommend at least 5 separate
populations). Under recovery criteria, the report
suggests 5 spontaneously reproducing variable
populations outside the Presidio and at least 2 within
the Presidio, with individuals increasing in size over a
30 yr period (p. 75).
6. Restore sexual reproduction and regeneration (p. 7576).
4. Continue to protect the existing clone conservatively,
by that, do not plant other individuals or species near it
until other populations are proven and results evaluated.
5. Increase the number of independent populations,
some strictly A. montana subsp. ravenii. but most
combining both the Presidio and Franciscan manzanita.
Specific numbers of populations are not specified, but
increasing the number of independent populations
should be a continuing goal.
6. Given that many of the seedlings raised at UC
Botanical Garden are the result of selfing, they should
be cloned and all new populations should be intermixed
combinations of these different individuals.
7. Restore its potential natural ecological interactions
with native associated species including A. franciscana
(p. 75-76).
7. Incorporating additional natives is a lower priority,
but has the advantage of supporting a more viable
insect and rodent community, on both of which
manzanitas depend for pollination and seed dispersal.
8. Restore populations in interior San Francisco as well
and including A. franciscana in some of these
restorations (p. 76).
8. Given the limited number of adequate sites within
the Presidio, restoring large numbers of populations
will require utilizing other locations within San
Francisco.
9. Generate new seedling-grown plants resulting from
self-fertilization under controlled conditions (p. 77-78).
10. Potentially develop a breeding program using close
relatives and backcrossing to generate more genetic
diversity (p. 78).
9. Generating new individuals under controlled
conditions is discussed under suggested research.
11. Develop a genetic management plan describing the
crossing program and any reintroduction (p. 79).
10/11. Developing a breeding program using close
relatives and then backcrossing is not recommended at
this time. There may be sufficient variability among the
seedlings to establish a reproductive population.
12. Establish research priorities for increasing genetic
and ecological diversity in restored populations.
Some of these additional sites for populations should include sites on the ocean/Golden Gate side
of Lincoln Blvd. This would permit the opportunity of experimental burns in the distant future.
These populations should combine different cloned individuals of A. montana subsp. ravenii, and
could also be intermixed with different clones of A. franciscana (see next recommendation).
Figure 14. Serpentine bluffs north of Yerba Buena (A.) and 30 yrs of minor changes near the bridge (B., C.).
Pictures courtesy of Californiacoastlines.org.
32
This should include attempting to establish clones at botanic gardens outside of the Bay Area, for
example, the Santa Barbara Botanic Garden or the Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden. Another
simple concept might be to purchase serpentine rock and soil and establish a site outside the
33
Presidio, for example on the slopes above Rodeo Lagoon in the GGNRA to create another
artificial site.
3). Create populations with the potential for sexual reproduction by intermixing seedling clones
with parent clones As UC Botanic Garden and the Presidio Nursery produces clones from the
selfed seedlings, one practical objective for management should to create multiple populations
within the Presidio containing mixes of parent and seedling clones. Another will be discussed
under potential research objectives. Within the Presidio, mixed populations should be
established on both sides of Lincoln Ave. On the ocean/Golden Gate side of Lincoln Avenue,
there are considerable serpentine outcroppings. These plants would not only help to stabilize
some of the bluffs, but planting mixtures of clones on this side would permit a direct test of
recovery in the distant future. If these plants have sufficient genetic diversity and begin setting
viable seed, then in the future, prescribed burns could be used to test the viability of these
populations, killing off the adults, and stimulating the seeds from the persistent seed bank. This
is really the basis for recovery for a chaparral plant like the Presidio manzanita. Some of these
populations could also be intermixed not only with diverse clones from the Presidio manzanita,
but also with genetically diverse clones from the Franciscan manzanita.
4). Investigate additional serpentine sites within the Presidio and outside the Presidio (Table 4,
left side, #2, #8). This may require modification of some habitats by removal of current
vegetation or leftover construction from the military. If the sites have trees or other vegetation,
gradual conversion of the site may be more practical than a rapid change in condition if it is in
public view (see recommendation #3 in the 2003 Recovery Plan, Table 4). Some sites within the
Presidio could be better optimized by adding crushed serpentinite rock like the Log Cabin area,
or in sites lacking serpentine. It may be that serpentine areas will have to be created given the
loss of habitat to golf courses and anthropogenic forests that will be difficult to modify or
restore.
5). At some sites, mix populations of seedling clones, parent clones, and clones from A.
franciscana (Table 4, left side, #5, 6). This objective is in keeping with the 2003 Recovery Plan
as well. No or little genetic transmission is likely between the species because they differ in
ploidy level. Given that A. franciscana already has alleles represented in the Presidio Manzanita,
it might be difficult to determine introgression in any case. More important, the species may
differ in the timing of flowering, and those differences not only limit the potential for
introgression, but more importantly, can support the enhancement of potential pollinator
populations. Pollinator populations are critical for long-term seed and fruit development and
steps should be taken to enhance their populations.
6). Continue with ongoing management practices involving removal of introduced species or
native species whose growth results in significant dieback of planted manzanitas (Table 4, left
side, #1, 7). I list this activity separately because of the critical nature of this management
action. In areas in which there is some soil development, many different species can
establishment within or near plantings of these prostrate manzanitas and easily overtop them.
This would defeat attempts to establish new populations or maintain current populations.
34
7). Research different aspects of the Presidio manzanita, including seed banks, controlled
breeding experiments, and phenology studies (Table 4, left side, #9, 10, 11, 12). In addition to
attempts to increase the number of populations of the Presidio manzanita, research needs to be
conducted into aspects of increasing genetic diversity as well as in increasing the ecological
integrity of the restored populations.
Given the recent discovery of Arctostaphylos franciscana within the Presidio, the context of
recommendations for the Presidio manzanita has changed. Now that another rare plant will be
receiving a similar priority for recovery, the total number of potential sites for either the Presidio
or Franciscan manzanita has halved. Nonetheless, the principal recommendations are not
altered. The list below is provided as further ways of insuring recovery of the Presidio
manzanita by either increasing the genetic diversity of its populations or by increasing the
resilience and efficiency of the maritime chaparral system within which it lives. These are
considered potential research directions for the Presidio Trust that may increase the potential for
full recovery of the Presidio manzanita.
1. Research studies of the persistent soil seed bank of Arctostaphylos montana subsp.
ravenii. This species has a persistent soil seed bank. The history of the plant suggests
that it may well have been isolated for at least a century. The missing information
includes whether there were any additional individuals nearby that hadn’t been observed
and whether there is much of a developed seed bank beneath the plant. If we assume
there is at least a small seed bank, then there could be additional genetic variation
available from other parents who no longer exist. The seed banks of Arctostaphylos
species, however, are difficult to germinate. They do seem to require chemicals from
smoke, but additional requirements also appear to be necessary, as smoke-induced
germination yields only low percentages. Thus, stimulating the soil seed bank beneath
the mother plant should be approached conservatively. A first step alternative is to
support research into germinating seeds from soil seed banks of closely related species,
using their seed banks until there has been some success or optimization of the process.
Thus, this recommendation is to develop methods first on other species (e.g.,
Arctostaphylos montana), and only later try small soil samples from beneath the mother
plant.
Goal is to increase the number of potentially different genetic individuals using the seed
bank as the source.
2. Another approach to increasing some genetic diversity involves assessing inbreeding
potential. The recommendation is to approach this quantitatively as a research project.
The Presidio manzanita is a tetraploid species, and they often exhibit lower rates of
inbreeding. The project should focus on a set of tetraploids including the Presidio
manzanita as well as A. montana subsp. montana, and a few additional tetraploids
(preferably non-sprouting tetraploids like A. bakeri or A. manzanita). As well, the
inbreeding project should include several diploid species, for example, A. franciscana,
and other regional diploids (A. montaraensis, A. canescens, A. virgata, etc).
35
Goal is to permit evaluation of inbreeding potential for the Presidio manzanita both
quantitatively and from the perspective of ploidy level.
3. Now that additional individuals of the Presidio manzanita have been raised from seed, an
experimental crossing program should be initiated. In this program, hand crosses among
individuals would be made (including reciprocal crosses of using each individual as a
pollen parent). Control crosses would involve hand crossing each individual. To
evaluate the recovery potential of the Presidio manzanita in the context of other species,
this project should also perform similar experiments with other species, both diploid and
tetraploid.
First, conduct experimental crosses of seedling x parent and seedling x other seedling.
Results should be compared with crosses of seedling x self, and parent x self, to
investigate whether the seedlings and parent have sufficient genetic variation among
them to produce spontaneous successful sexual reproduction. For each pair of
individuals used in crossing experiments, each individual should be used both as the
pollen donor and pollen recipient in separate crosses. Inflorescences should be bagged to
prevent other pollen from modifying results. These experiments should be replicated
multiple times (multiple years) to account for variation in climate, condition of plants,
viability of experimental pollen. If there is greater fruit formation with crosses among
separate genetic individuals compared to selfed crosses, then the indication would be that
spontaneous sexual reproduction should occur among plants in populations created in the
field. Controls would be tests on other tetraploid and diploid species (listed in previous
paragraph). If there are no significant differences, then introgressive hybridization may
be required in the future (see 2003 Recovery Plan).
Goal is to assess the reproductive potential of the Presidio manzanita given the current set
of genetic variants
4. Given that the 2003 recovery plan and this recovery plan propose mixed plantings of A.
franciscana with the Presidio manzanita, evaluating the potential for genetic exchange is
another experimental direction that could be performed, hand-crossing reciprocally,
individuals of both species. Crosses should be performed of the Presidio manzanita x
Franciscan manzanita under controlled conditions, using each individual as both a pollen
donor and pollen recipient in separate experiments. This would assess the potential for
gene flow between these species of different ploidy levels. Another important recent
discovery within San Francisco is a new (although currently undescribed) subspecies of
A. bakeri, another tetraploid serpentine endemic. Clones should be made of this species
as well and crossing studies among species performed as this might be another species
that could be incorporated into mixed populations in the future.
5. Another recommended study would involve quantifying the phenology and the
pollination ecology of A. montana subsp. ravenii, A. franciscana, the undescribed A.
bakeri subspecies, and other common shrubs in the Presidio maritime chaparral such as
the prostrate Ceanothus thyrsiflorus. The goal of this study is understand how to create
combinations of species so that there is a continuing flowering period for the community
36
as a whole. In that way, a larger and more persistent pollinator community would be
possible, maximizing the reproductive potential of any of the species involved. This
would increase the overall integrity of the system. While relatively pure stands of the
Presidio manzanita or stands mixed with the Franciscan manzanita should be a short-term
goal, on the longer term, mixing in additional species to support a broader pollinator and
rodent community will also be critical.
6. Similarly, additional studies should experimentally investigate techniques of
outplantings. This would involve tests manipulating combinations of mycorrhizal
mutualists and maintaining different levels of soil moisture through the first or first and
second years.
Several practices need to be experimentally investigated with respect to planting clones in
the field. One of these is the timing of plantings and what soil moisture levels to maintain
during the summer drought. Because these are potted plants from cuttings, and not
seedlings establishing post-germination, it is critical to plant these cuttings just before or
after the first fall rains. Experimental plots should be set up with soil moisture probes.
Plots could be permitted to dry to different extents before watering. Plants also may need
to be watered in during the fall between initial rains. Quantification by using soil
moisture probes will establish which levels of soil moisture are tolerable to small
plantings, determining if and when plantings should be watered during the dry season.
This should permit a greater degree of success in future plantings. Keeping the soils
sufficiently dry is just as much an objective of these studies as is keeping sufficient
moisture in the soil; manzanita roots are not tolerate to extended periods of soil moisture
indefinitely.
A second practice that should be investigated is the use of mycorrhizal fungi to aid in
plant establishment. Because of the establishment of fungal diseases in a number of Bay
Area counties (such as sudden oak death), it is not advisable to transport soil from
beneath stands of A. montana on Mt Tamalpais, for example, to provide inoculum. It is
possible, however, to collect fruiting bodies of mushrooms from beneath these stands and
to create slurries to add to potted plants or to plantings as a way to add potential
mycorrhizal fungi. Given that the great majority of fungi involved in mycorrhizae do not
fruit very often, it might be necessary for this process to occur across multiple years and
multiple serpentine chaparral sites that contain manzanitas. Plants experimentally
planted could receive supplemental mycorrhizal additions (from Mt. Tamalpais
mushrooms beneath A. montana as an example) or have these supplements withheld to
determine if plants survive better or grow better over a few year period.
Summary: The long-term goal should be to have multiple populations in a variety of locations.
These should incorporate mixtures of species in the long run (such as A. franciscana) in order to
produce whole ecological communities that can maintain themselves. That would include the
plant component, and the soil community, the pollinator community, and the seed
predator/caching community. Once some populations are established with mixes of individuals
37
that appear to be spontaneously reproducing, it might be possible to practice prescribe burning
on some of these populations after they have been established over 20-30 years to increase the
potential genetic component of these populations from seedling establishment. Seedlings will
have resulted from crosses among the different genetic individuals continuing the process of
mixing up alleles resulting in additional phenotypes. At that point, reproductively successful
populations will have been established.
38
APPENDIX 1 - Summary of the history of the Presidio manzanita
~1940
~1952
1958
1961
1976
1979
1980
1981
1984
1985
1985
1986
1987
1987
Compiled by Mark Frey (last updated 11/26/08)
Laurel Hill Cemetery and Masonic Cemetery populations destroyed by
development. A third population at Mount Davidson was destroyed sometime
between 1923 and 1962.1
Mother plant found by Peter Raven1
WWII memorial built1
James Roof took 4 cuttings from the mother plant to what is now East Bay
Regional Parks Botanic Garden2
Proposed for ESA listing1
Listed as Endangered1
20 cuttings rooted at UC Botanical Garden and grown. One planted in serpentine
display bed, the remaining 19 potted up for open and controlled pollination
experiment16
Sue Smith met with representatives of the three Botanic Gardens in the area and
Jim Eldredge. They decided to remove 2 large conifers. The trees were remove
din the fall.20
Recovery Plan
Road work done on Lincoln2
Army plants 140 Arctostaphylos uva-ursi but they were later removed2
8/14/86: Army removed four pines. 22
9/24/86: CNPS removed duff and one small cypress.22
January: 168 cuttings were collected. Roger Raiche (UC Bot.) took 61 and Philip
McMillan-Browse (Saratoga Horticulture Foundation) took 107. At the same time
it appears that 2 went to Strybing and some went to the Fort Funston Nursery.2,4
December: 50 rooted cuttings.
 Saratoga retains 6.2, 23
 Strybing gets 2.2, 23 Maybe from the Saratoga collection.
 8 planted near mother plant by Peter Straub, he periodically watered and
maintained them over the next two to three years.2,4,7,18, 23
 22 planted at Yerba Buena by GGNRA staff.2
 2 at IP by Peter Straub.2 They were ~10 feet from the Quarry Road trail.23
These plants survived for several years until unauthorized mountain bike
use caused their demise.18
 6 (or maybe 4) at West Crissy Bluffs, below Lincoln, near the corner of
Lincoln and Crissy Field Ave. by Peter Straub.2, 23 These plants did not
survive.18
 12 planted within the WWII memorial site itself, right near the path.23
Three pines may have been removed.2,23 This work was done by CNPS, the trees
were ~30 ft tall.19 It seems likely that these may be the same trees that were
39
1988
1988
alive2
1988
1991-1992
1994
1994
1995
1995
1996
1996
1996
1996
1998
1998
1998
~1998
1999
2003
2003
2003
2000
2002
2003
plant)11
?-2003
actually removed by the Army 8/14/86. The Reference 22 notes that the plan was
to removed three pines but a four was added at the last minute.
Seeds collected in June and July by Terri Thomas. UC Bot. Garden took them.
They treated 38 seeds and one germinated.4, 6 They have since then died.16
Clone status: 7 clones near mother plant, 22 at Yerba Buena, no other clones
2 more clones planted near mother plant, 4 clones at triangle, 6 “near Lincoln
Blvd, south of the parent plant”, 3 clones at IP2
Fencing and signage installed2
Clone status: 10 clones near mother plant, 12 at Yerba Buena, 2 at triangle5
One IP clone alive but very small (I can’t find my reference). In 1996 this plant
was not noted8 and in 1998 it was not found9.
UC Bot has clones from collections in 1980 and 1987.
UC Botanical Garden collects over 4500 berries from open pollination and several
hundred from controlled pollination at their site.16
Two pines removed (I can’t find my reference).
Clone status: 11 clones near mother plant, 11 at Yerba Buena, ? at triangle10.
UC Botanical Garden has 1995 seed set tested at Ransom Seed Laboratory by Dr.
Nancy Vivrette. Tetrazolium testing gave 19% viability for individual nutlets for
both controlled and open pollinated seeds. Many nutlets had no embryos.16
UC Botanical Garden seed germination experiments result in twelve plants.16
Clone status: 11 clones near mother plant, 8 at Yerba Buena, 1 at triangle10.
30-40% dieback noted.24 Dr. Raabe at UC Berkeley tested samples of the mother
plant for plant pathogens and identified Phomopsis spp.9,24
Peter Baye reports clones growing at Regional Parks Botanic Garden3
Tissue culture attempted by Ellen Sutter at UC Davis using the growing tips of the
mother plant but too many fungi growing on the plant cells. She tried a similar
strategy with a related species but was unsuccessful.
UC Botanical Garden has 12 young plants (from the 1995 seed)3,16
Strybing Arboretum has one clone there since before 1984 but it is declining.1,3
Regional Parks Botanic Garden has clones.3
Recovery Plan3
Tussock moth infestation10
Strybing received one clone from Yerba Buena Nursery. All earlier clones had
died by 200226
Clone status: 13 are alive3 (7 at Yerba Buena, 1 at the Triangle, ? near the mother
Clones stored at Marin Headlands nursery and Fort Funston Nursery.12 These
clones are from the East Bay21 but not from UC Botanical Garden16, so they were
presumably the surviving individuals of the ~85 cuttings taken to Tilden in 1960,
1981, and 1987. Tilden was “under quarantine” and had to get rid of them.25
40
_____
2004
2004
2004
2006
2007
2005-2008
9/11/2008
2008
Seed collected from the clones at the Marin Headlands nursery12
~12 clones still at Fort Funston Nursery.13
Peter Brastow planted all of the clones (~11) that were in any nurseries in the
GGNRA at Yerba Buena serpentine.13, 21 These were planted in the late winter
and did not get watered. They all died.21
Clones stored at UC Botanical garden had produced seed collected in 1995. 12
plants were grown from this seed but as of 2/2008 only three survive.16
Kirra collected one fruit from a clone at Yerba Buena15
Kirra collected seed from mother plant15
Tom Parker does genetics work on the plants grown from this seed and on
seedlings from open pollination at UC Botanical Garden. Preliminary evidence
suggests that at least some of these are true to subspecies).17
Raven’s Manzanita workshop at the Presidio’s Golden Gate Club. A report is in
preparation.
Clone summary. In the Presidio: approximately 9 clones are still found near
mother plant, 1 at the triangle, and 7 at Yerba Buena serpentine (Area A). 67 total
cuttings ever planted on the Presidio and 17 are still alive. Over 100 cuttings have
made their way to various botanical gardens and only 4 are still known. One is at
the EBRPD, 2 clones at UC Botanical garden, and one is at Strybing26. Strybing
reports that that specimen was gotten in 2002 from Yerba Buena Nursery. Yerba
Buena Nursery appears to sell this species but I have found no record of where
they got it from.
References:
1. 1984 Recovery Plan
2. 1994 VRAP by Sharon Farrell
3. 2003 Recovery Plan
4. 1987 letter to USFWS from NPS
5. Peter Brastow’s VRAP for planting clones on the bluffs
6. Terri Thomas, personal communication 2007
7. Notes page associated with the 1987 letter to FWS. Undated and un-named.
8. 1996 Rare Plant Monitoring Report
9. 1998 Rare Plant Monitoring Report
10. 2000 Rare Plant Monitoring Report
11. 2003 Rare Plant Monitoring Report
12. Presidio Plant Conservation Committee notes 2003
13. Presidio Plant Conservation Committee notes 2004
14. Holly Forbes, personal communication 2003.
15. Kirra Swenerton, personal communication 2007
16. Holly Forbes, personal communication February 2008.
17. Tom Parker, personal communication February 2008.
18. Letter from Peter Straub to the SF Weekly April 2008.
19. Hand written note to Sharon (Farrell) but unsigned (presumably from Peter Straub) dated 5/11/94.
20. Letter from Sue Smith (CNPS, Conservation Chair) to Sharon Farrell dated 4/18/94
21. Peter Brastow, personal communication May 2008.
22. 12/2/86 letter from the Army to USFWS
23. Letter stamped 1/13/88 from Army to USFWS with maps of planted clones and table attached. Another version
of the letter was also found and it was dated December 1988
41
24. Arctostaphylos hookeri ssp, ravenii monitoring report – Draft 04/99
25. Email from Sharon Farrell to Katrina Strathmann, Terri Thomas, and Betty Young 2003
26. Email from David Kruse, 10/15/2008
42
APPENDIX 2 – 2008 Monitoring Report
GGNRA (Presidio)
Special Status Plant Species Monitoring
2008
Arctostaphylos hookeri G. Don ssp. ravenii P. V. Wells
(PRESIDIO MANZANITA, RAVEN’S MANZANITA)
REPORTER: Michael Chasse, GGNRA, National Park Service
LIFE HISTORY: Perennial, woody shrub. Flowering time is between January through
April.
RARITY STATUS: Federal Endangered; State Endangered; CNPS List 1B.1 (Rare or
Endangered in CA; seriously endangered)
RANGE: Endemic to San Francisco, California; known from only one extant native
occurrence at the Presidio in San Francisco; plants there belong to a single clone; five of
six historical occurrences extirpated by urbanization (CNPS 2001).
PRESIDIO POPULATIONS: The single “parent plant” and 17 clones exist near the
World War II Memorial in the Presidio.
MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVE: Maintain presence of Arctostaphylos hookeri ssp.
ravenii at all 3 Presidio locations.
MONITORING OBJECTIVE: Conduct annual census and assessment of general
conditions at all locations.
2008 MONITORING RESULTS:
Location
Subsite name
Monitoring
attribute
2008 Results
General trend
(past 5 years)
W.W. II
Memorial
Raven’s
manzanita
census
Parent plant and approx.
10 clones present
Stable
W.W. II
Memorial
Yerba Buena
(W. of Lincoln)
census
approx. 7 clones present
Stable
W.W. II
Memorial
The Triangle
census
1 clone present
Stable
Surveys were conducted on January 11, 2008. Monitoring was conducted by staff and
interns from the National Park Service and Presidio Trust. Parent plant and clones were
43
surveyed for presence and condition. It is no longer possible to distinguish and count
individual clones at the ‘Raven’s” subsite without damaging plants, due to the expansion
of growth and co-mingling of branches between plants. As no significant dieback has
been observed, i.e., dieback matching the average size of a clone, it can be inferred that
clones counted in previous years remain extant.
Native plants associated with A. hookeri ssp. ravenii include: Achillea millefolium,
Ceanothus thyrsiflorus, Chlorogallum pomeridianum var. divaricatum, Dudleya farinosa,
Eriogonum latifolium, Grindelia hirsutula var. maritima, Iris douglasiana, Lupinus
variicolor, Oemlaria cerasiformis, Rubus ursinus, Polypodium californicum, and native
perennial grasses.
Currently, there is no accepted protocol for demographic monitoring of Arctostaphylos
hookeri ssp. ravenii. A workshop on management of A. hookeri ssp. ravenii was hosted
by the Presidio Trust and National Park Service on September 11, 2008. Results from
this workshop may guide future approaches to demographic monitoring of the species.
THREATS:
 Although most herbaceous weeds have been effectively controlled in the areas
surrounding A. hookeri ssp. ravenii, Oxalis pes-caprae continues to be abundant
just east of the parent plant.
 Ceanothus thyrsiflorus (coast blue blossom) is encroaching upon many of the
clones in the “Raven’s” and “Yerba Buena” subsites, and in many (but not all)
cases the shading is causing dieback on clones.
 Leaf and branch dieback, previously attributed to fungal activity, continues to be
observed. New growth appears healthy at branch ends, but dieback areas are not
regenerating and remain as gaps in the canopy. Native plants, such as
Chlorogallum pomeridianum var. divaricatum, overtop the manzanita canopy
during each growing season and also appear to be contributing to leaf dieback.
Herbivory, apparently by small mammals, has been observed on manzanita
branches and may be another factor in dieback.
 A large stand of non-native trees, mainly Pinus radiata and Cupressus
macrocarpa, remain to the north and west of Arctostaphylos hookeri ssp. ravenii
habitat. The effects from these trees on microclimate patterns have not been
measured but may be a threat maintaining the environmental conditions necessary
for preserving this species.
CURRENT MANAGEMENT:
 On-going manual removal of non-native plants such as Oxalis pes-caprae, Briza
maxima, and Plantago lanceolata through the Presidio stewardship program.
 Occasional small-scale plantings of coastal prairie species in areas where the
native plant component has been lost or greatly reduced due to the effects of nonnative trees and invasive plants; no plantings have been conducted within 30 feet
of Arctostaphylos hookeri ssp. ravenii individuals.
MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS:
44




Continue on-going stewardship of A. hookeri ssp. ravenii habitat, particularly
hand and mechanical weed control and revegetation in areas previously disturbed
or occupied by non-native trees.
Consider the use of herbicide to control Oxalis pes-caprae and prevent its spread
into habitat occupied by the parent plant.
Prune back Ceanothus thyrsiflorus where it encroaches upon individuals of
Arctostaphylos hookeri ssp. ravenii.
Plan for the phased removal of non-native trees to the north and west of A.
hookeri ssp. ravenii habitat.
CURRENT RESEARCH:
 Propagation of A. hookeri ssp. ravenii at UC Berkeley Botanical Garden (Holly
Forbes) and genetic testing of seedlings (Tom Parker, SFSU) to determine
offspring that would be genetically appropriate for outplanting to augment the
current single genetic individual in the Presidio.
45
APPENDIX 3 – Workshop on Presidio manzanita conservation and
management
Arctostaphylos hookeri ssp. ravenii update and planning workshop, 11 September 2008, Presidio of
San Francisco.
The objective for the September 2008 Presidio Manzanita workshop was to develop guidelines for
a 5-year outline of steps towards recovery. The morning session for the workshop were
presentations concerning history and status of the current population (Mark Frey, Michael
Chasse), propagation and germination trials (John D, Holly Forbes, Kirra S), status of the
recovery plan (Valary Bloom), status of A. franciscana and potential for recovery (Michael
Chasse) and ecology of the Presidio manzanita and genetic status of seedlings from UC Botanic
Garden (Tom Parker). In the afternoon were a series of break out sessions in which particular
questions were considered by small groups of individuals.
8:00
8:30
9:10
9:30
9:55
10:10
10:30
11:00
11:30
Terri, Betty, Sue Welcome / introductions / objectives
Michael C and Mark Review and amend management history.
What is a meaningful monitoring regime?
John D. / Holly F. Propagation and seed germination at UC Bot. Garden
Kirra S Update on germination trials at the Presidio
Tom P. Arctostaphylos ecology
BREAK
Valary Bloom Recovery plan overview and history
Michael C A. franciscana update
Tom P. Arctostaphylos taxonomy update
Tom P. Arctostaphylos hookeri ssp. ravenii genetics
Mark Frey Identify groups for breakout sessions.
11:45 LUNCH
12:45 Break out session 1
1. (Lew) What questions remain to guide our choices?
2. (Mark) What is the role of fire for this species?
3. (Kirra) What are the issues and solutions for propagation in nursery and field
4. (Michael) Is there a seed bank? Should we go looking? How?
1:15 Mark Frey Group reports discussion
2:15 BREAK
2:30 Break out session 2
5. (Kirra) Where do we plant the next set of plants?
6. (Michael) Is A. franciscana appropriate for reintroduction?
7. (Mark) How should we monitor the mother plant/existing clones/new plants?
8. (Lew) What are the parameters/problems/solutions we should consider when discussing the
genetics of outcrossing?
3:00 Mark Frey Group reports and full group discussion
46
4:00 Terri T. Review Outcomes
4:30 Sue, Terri, Betty Thank you
List of those Invited and Attendees
attend Sept
11 mtg
No
Last Name
Albert
First
Name
Marc
Organization
Title
National Park Service
Natural Resource Management
Specialist
Coastal Plant Ecologist
Fish and Wildlife Biologist
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Baye
Bloom
Brastow
Chasse
Cooley
Peter
Valary
Peter
Michael
Gene
No
No
Delgado
Domzalski
Bruce
John
No
Yes
No
Edwards
Ehrlich
Elam
Steve
Peter
Diane
Yes
Evans
Richard
No
Yes
Farrell
Forbes
Sharon
Holly
Yes
Yes
Yes
Frey
Fritzke
Hackett
Mark
Sue
Wes
No
No
No
Hayes
Hildebidle
Keeley
Grey
Brian
Jon
No
Yes
No
Yes
Lambert
Markos
McKechnie
Parker
Amy
Staci
Michael
Tom
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Poinsot
Raiche
Raabe
Raven
Rogers
Straub
Stringer
Wendy
Roger
Robert
Peter
Debra
Pete
Lew
San Francisco State
University
GGNRA
Planet Horticulture
UC Berkeley
Missouri Botanical Garden
UC Davis
U.S. Army
National Park Service
Yes
No
Swenerton
Thomas
Kirra
Terri
Parks Conservancy
The Presidio Trust
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Nature in The City
National Park Service
California Department of
Fish and Game
University of California
Botanical Garden
Tilden Botanic Garden
The Presidio Trust
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Stewardship Coordinator
Botanist, Bay Delta Region North
Propagator
Forester
Deputy Chief, Division of Listing,
Recovery and Section 10
UC Davis
Professor, Department of Plant
Science
Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy
University of California
Curator
Botanical Garden
The Presidio Trust
Supervisory Ecologist
National Park Service
Supervisory Vegetation Ecologist
UC Davis
Adjunct Professor, Department of
Plant Science
Elkhorn Slough Coastal Training Program
The Presidio Trust
Stewardship Coordinator
USGS Western Ecological
Research Scientist
Research Center
University of California Jepson Herbarium
47
Environmental Planner, Fire Program
President
Natural Resources Mangament
Specialist
Propagule Collector
Director of Cultural and Natural
Resources
No
No
Yes
Yes
Vasey
Ward
Warne
Young
Mike
Kristen
Betty
Betty
No-unable
to contact
No-unable
to contact
Yes
McMillanBrowse
White
Philip
Hull
Josh
Wayne
National Park Service
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Golden Gate National Parks
Conservancy
Wisley Bot Garden?
Director of Nurseries
U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service
U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service
11 September 2008 Presidio Manzanita Workshop; Break-out Session Notes
FIRE
Break-Out Session Notes
1. Presidio Fire History
 see FMP
 little available
 old oaks in GGP could tell a fire history if cored
 San Francisco—1840s, 1906
 “No” lightning strikes
 Native American burning—assumed here
2. Other disturbances that might play a role
 Landslides, ungulate, bears, flooding
 If fire interval is very long, then there would be a 200year generation time, therefore,
there are few generations in 10,000 years
3. Ways to use fire
 FMP for NPS permits
 PT work with NPS
4. Things to try
 Burn box on entire clone
 Has it been long enough for the seedboat to develop and be buried? (probably
only 4 years)
 Kill adult
 Make sure it has been seeding
 One clone every ten years?
 Liquid smoke/ash/smoke
 typically soak seeds for 24 hours
 In field
 In greenhouse?
 The liquid in the field may be a problem
 Treatments on related Mt. Tam? (1920—last fire); Treatments at Mt. Davidson?
48



Burn box downhill of existing clone
burn first then plant—kill fungi
Eventually try at the mother plant
5. Maintaining adults?
 Unlikely because is doesn’t re-sprout
MONITORING
Break-Out Session Notes
Lots of things listed in Recovery Plan but they are vague
 “Site-wide”
 Pollinators
 Do a pollinator study for the species
 Seeds
 Growth
 Seed production
What we do
 Survivorship
Possibilities
 Transects
(a) Bury tubes that are paired
(b) Note length of plant at each transect
 Photos
(a) Kites—beware of traffic
(b) Poles—or use painting extenders
(c) Ladders—not practical
(d) Frame
(i) Use fisheye?
(ii) Have fixed corners to reuse
(iii)Use bright stuff to help ID exact locations in photos
Do we need to monitor size?
Maybe not
Can we just monitor threats with a qualitative assessment and photomonitoring?
 Do a simple/repeatable photo technique
 Clones: can’t tell apart; focus on cover
SEED BANK
49
Break-Out Session Notes
Is there a Seed Bank?
Yes
Needs to be re-proposed in situ release rather than dig
Question:
What is the plan if/once found?
Actions:
 Looking at myco tips?
 See below 5 cm
Where should we go looking?
 Check historic locations where serpentine (or greenstone) is still uncovered
 Manzanita guy
 Knows Laurel Hill outcrop location?
 In Situ—needs a plan/needs attention
 Pump, sprayer, option
 Supplement watering
 Rodent proofing
 Have cages ready
 Damage to root system
 Not a big issue
 What distance?
 Not worth going below 5 cm.
 Flaming? Smoke?
 It is in the smoke
 Sterling Keeley
 Do A. montana stand first
Arctostaphylos franciscana + Raven’s Manzanita
Break-Out Session Notes
Is co-reintroduction an important objective?
 Sympatric and important
 Could hybridize… into tetraploid
 Do it away from original “population”
 There are precedents, ie., Condor
 Easy because not listed
How many genetic individual are there in cultivation?
 Steve Edwards ? at Yerba Buena
50

Don Mahoney ? at Las Pilatas
Other items
 The flowering times may not overlap
 They may support more pollinators when together
 SFNAP call for A. franciscana re-introduction
 Bernal Heights
PROPAGATION
Break-Out Session Notes
Question:
What are the issues and solutions for propagation in the nursery and field?
Goal:
Establish several breeding populations.
Objective:
Perfect propagation techniques including: germinating seed, rooting clones, growing on, field
establishment
Actions:
 Salvage maximum amount of seed as possible from clones every year to increase material
available for experimentation.
 Review and consolidate existing seed/clonal propagation data, document best practices.
 Send in 400+ seed to Ransome Seed lab for viability testing
 Try floating/sinking seed as a first pass at judging viability
 X-ray current seed inventory to assess seed viability (non-destructive method) Davis nursery
or CDFA (state ag) or seed certification program may have one.
 Root cuttings from clones, grow to maturity and do pollinator exclusion/ hand pollination to
produce known self-pollinated seed
 Take cuttings (Nove-Jan) and increase number of clones of seed plants (from UC Berekely)
for outplanting experiments
Future Research:
 What liquid smoke product to use?
 Quantify active compounds in smoke.
 Determine appropriate concentration of smoke product.
 Determine seed viability of self pollinated seed.
 Pollination biology questions, what pollinates this plant? What is the range of these
pollinators? Are there other Arctostaphylos that could potentially hybridize with the Raven’s
within the range of its pollinators? Survey nearby neighborhoods.
51




Try additional germination treatments including: GA 47 and BA combo, varying smoke
concentrations, burial of seed and burning of excelsior, varying strat period, sulfuric acid, hot
water or mechanical scarification and combination of treatments,
Propagation treatments: mycorrhizal fungi addition aid in germination/rooting
How to retain clones in containers and manage for maximum seed production?
Revisit micropropagation possibilities – Valerie Pence at CREW (Cincinnati Zoo)
Know info:
 Parent plant and some clones produce seed.
 Plants are very sensitive to overwatering in nursery
 Plants don’t do well in containers for very long
 Seed from UC Bot Garden (some selfed/some outcrossed seed) showed 19% viability with
tetrazolium testing (higher for multi-nutlet stones, lower for single nutlets)
 Previous micropropagation attempts had pathogen problems (Fusarium sp.)
WHERE SHOULD WE PLANT?
Break-Out Session Notes
Question:
Where do we plant the next set of plants?
Goal:
Establish 2+ new populations within the Presidio and 5+ outside the Presidio
Objectives:
 Find most suitable sites
 Determine proper site preparation, planting and aftercare techniques
Types of plants: Clones of parent, A. franciscana, seed-grown plants (or clones of these)
resulting from self pollination of original clones
Sites:
 Refer to Recovery Plan and Michael Chasse’s site evaluation for A. franciscana: Franciscan
manzanita M. Chasse.ppt
 Within the Presidio: Coastal Bluffs, Inspiration Point, Quarry Area (Hesperolinon congestum
site), Log Cabin, West Crissy Bluffs, Golf Course
 Site conditions: serpentine soils or very poor soils, outcrops or more developed soils, sunny,
mix up slope and aspect to assess optimum conditions
 Consider greenstone locations. Should chert, bare colma or other poor soils be included?
 Investigate outside Presidio locations
 Prioritize first experimental plantings in areas outlined in Recovery Plan
52
Future Research:
 Why did some past plantings fail? How were those failed plantings sites managed? Planting
timing of failed attempts may have been too late in the year (March) and then may have been
over watered through the dry season
 What are the minimum numbers to plant to start new populations?
 Planting density?
 Assess site prep techniques including: pre-burning to kill fungal pathogens, scrape and burn,
scrape and apply smoke water
 Will pre-burning planting site actually be hot enough to kill pathogenic fungi? Try putting
thick layer of straw or burn pile on top of site to increase temperature of burn
 Try inoculating rooted cuttings in containers with mycorrhizal fungi to assess, try amending
planting holes
 Which fungi to use? When does inoculation need to occur?
 Where to obtain inoculum? Possible sources: around parent plant (doesn’t exclude
pathogenic fungi), from other around other woody plants/pines in area, from mycorrhizal
mushrooms collected around conifers in area (create slurry and pour around planting site),
from other manzanita sites with closely related species (may be cleaner material, outside park
reintroduction issues?)
 Should plants be watered for first year after installation?
 What is the optimal size container for plants? In 1987 were probably 4” pots. Best to keep
containers small because of rocky soils and fact that plants don’t do well in containers in
nursery
 Could there be Sudden Oak Death issues with container soil?
 Conduct seedbank analyses before outplanting any plants (A. montana ssp. ravenii or A.
franciscana or other potentially hybridizing plants) so as not to confound seedbank study
results
Actions
 Experimental planting of clones from selfed seedlings grown at UC Berkeley should be
planted away from original parent plant. How far away?
 Experimental planting should seed to restore evolutionary processes and include clones of
original parent plant, clones of selfed seedlings and clones
 Check with SF Mycological Society for inoculum, or JR Blair from SF State who specializes
in mushroom associations with manzanitas (Tom Parker has his contact info)
 New populations should be of varying age classes – stager planting timing to plan for this
 Associated planting should include pollinator attractors ex: Ceanothus and Eriogonum
 Future plantings should be planted in grids with centers marked/GPS’d to aid in future
monitoring efforts. Should they be planted further apart?
OUTCROSSING
Break-Out Session Notes
Question:
53
What are the parameters/problems/solutions we should consider when discussing the
genetics of outcrossing?
Goal:
Re-establish evolutionary processes
Objectives:
Establish a reproducing population with the highest potential for genetic variability.
Future Research:
 Does existence of selfed seedlings change our strategy change the need for introgressive
breeding?
 What is the genetic diversity of selfed seedlings?
 Does selfing affect seed viability?
 Are we selecting for certain phenotypes?
 Does seed collected from the parent plant and existing clones in the Presidio need genetics
work?
 How far does pollen move?
 Where is the closest congener in the neighborhood?
 If introgressive breeding program is to be pursued, which species should it be crossed with?
A. franciscana or A. montana ssp. montana?
 Should A. montana ssp. montana be planted with A. montana ssp. ravenii? Both are
tetraploids but there may be phenological reproductive barriers (differences in bloom time).
Risk of uncontrolled introgression if they cross pollinate in the field.
Actions:
 This winter, take cuttings from selfed seedlings grown at UC Berkeley and increase numbers
of clones of each of these, resulting plants can be ready in about one year
 Equalize the genetic input into each new site/plant equal numbers of each type of plants
(clones from mother, clones of each selfed seedling)
 Survey neighborhoods adjacent to Presidio (Sea Cliff, Richmond District) for other
manzanita species
 USFWS will tackle question of continuing introgressive breeding alternative, accounting for
new information on selfing potential
 A. franciscana should be planted with A.montana ssp. ravenii because they historically
occurred together
Known info:
 All these coastal Arctostaphylos species seem to begun with small endemic populations in
the first place
 Several seedlings resulting from seed collected from clones at the UCB Botanical Garden
appear to be products of selfing based on three nuclear genes (one is now dead): 2000.191,
2000.195, 2000.196 and “unlabeled”.
54


A.franciscana, A. montana and A. m. ravenii are all within the same clade but Mt. Tam and
Presidio manzanita are both tetraploids, while the Franciscan manzanita is diploid. Reference
Tom Parker’s presentation: ArctoEvolSept08 T. Parker.ppt
Reference symposia documents from Center For Plant Conservation on this subject of small
populations genetics
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
This is a compilation of questions identified during the day, most are also listed within the notes
for the breakout session.
Pollinators
 Which species do we have?
 Which species do we need?
 What plants can support those species?
Seed Bank
Fire History in Presidio
Seed predations
X-ray seed viability
Should we collect 100% of seed?
Burn Boxes
 Burn box on entire clone
 Liquid smoke/ash/smoke
 Treatments on related Mt. Tam? (1920—last fire);
 Treatments at Mt. Davidson?
 Burn box downhill of existing clone
 Eventually try at the mother plant
Propagation:
 What liquid smoke product to use?
 Quantify active compounds in smoke.
 Determine appropriate concentration of smoke product.
 Determine seed viability of self pollinated seed.
 Pollination biology questions, what pollinates this plant? What is the range of these
pollinators? Are there other Arctostaphylos that could potentially hybridize with the Raven’s
within the range of its pollinators? Survey nearby neighborhoods.
 Try additional germination treatments including: GA 47 and BA combo, varying smoke
concentrations, burial of seed and burning of excelsior, varying strat period, sulfuric acid, hot
water or mechanical scarification and combination of treatments,
55



Propagation treatments: mycorrhizal fungi addition aid in germination/rooting
How to retain clones in containers and manage for maximum seed production?
Revisit micropropagation possibilities – Valerie Pence at CREW (Cincinnati Zoo)
Planting:
 Why did some past plantings fail? How were those failed plantings sites managed? Planting
timing of failed attempts may have been too late in the year (March) and then may have been
over watered through the dry season
 What are the minimum numbers to plant to start new populations?
 Planting density?
 Asses site prep techniques including: pre-burning to kill fungal pathogens, scrape and burn,
scrape and apply smoke water
 Will pre-burning planting site actually be hot enough to kill pathogenic fungi? Try putting
thick layer of straw or burn pile on top of site to increase temperature of burn
 Try inoculating rooted cuttings in containers with mycorrhizal fungi to assess, try amending
planting holes
 Which fungi to use? When does inoculation need to occur?
 Where to obtain inoculum?
Outcrossing:
 Does existence of selfed seedlings change our strategy change the need for introgressive
breeding?
 What is the genetic diversity of selfed seedlings?
 Does selfing affect seed viability?
 Are we selecting for certain phenotypes?
 Does seed collected from the parent plant and existing clones in the Presidio need genetics
work?
 How far does pollen move?
 Where is the closest congener in the neighborhood?
 If introgressive breeding program is to be pursued, which species should it be crossed with?
A. franciscana or A. montana ssp. montana?
 Should A. montana ssp. montana be planted with A. montana ssp. ravenii? Both are
tetraploids but there may be phenological reproductive barriers (differences in bloom time).
Risk of uncontrolled introgression if they cross pollinate in the field.
56
Appendix 4. Indication that Arctostaphylos montana subsp. ravenii is of
allopolyploid origin.
DNA extractions were made from dried material of the Presidio Manzanita provided by the
UCBG. This material was used to amplify and sequence alleles from several genes (LEAFY,
WAXY, RPB2). These sequences were aligned and used to develop phylogenetic trees,
incorporating sequences from a number of additional species.
Results from two of the trees appear below in Figure App. 5-1, and App. 5-2.
Figure App.5-1. Phylogenetic tree of sequenes from the nuclear gene WAXY indicating multiple alleles from
Arctostaphylos montana, but with A. montana subsp. ravenii, all individuals cluster with A. hookeri. The Presidio
manzanita clusters with only a single maritime species.
57
Figure App.5-2. Phylogenetic tree of sequenes from the nuclear gene RPB2 indicating multiple alleles from both
Arctostaphylos montana and A. montana subsp. ravenii. The Presidio manzanita clusters with a group of maritime
species.
In these trees, when individual alleles cluster with those of another species, two interpretations
can be made. One is that they share an ancient allele that has not changed during the evolution of
the group, a second is that the species are close relatives. When a tetraploid species is involved
and allopolyploidy is suspected, then the clustering of alleles provides suggestions as to potential
parents. Summarizing from three different nuclear genes (LEAFY, WAXY, RPB2), it appears
that the Presidio manzanita shares alleles from multiple parents, suggesting an allopolyploid
origin. Those parents include A. franciscana, A. hookeri, and multiple potential parents arising
from a rapidly evolving group of maritime species to the south of San Francisco. In addition, the
Presidio manzanita appears to overlap considerably with that of the Mt. Tamalpais manzanita (a
manzanita it resembles) with respect to potential parentage (Figure App.5-3). The overlap
suggests the reason why they are similar in appearance. The fact that the Presidio manzanita also
contains alleles from A. hookeri that the Mt. Tamalpais manzanita lacks, suggests why they
differ in fruit size, the most significant difference between them.
58
Figure App.5-3. This figure shows the potential parentages of both the Presidio manzanita (A. montana subsp.
ravenii) and the Mt. Tamalpais manzanita (A. montana subsp. montana). The species listed below each serpentine
endemic are species with which alleles from either the Presidio or Mt. Tamalpais manzanitas clustered with,
suggesting relationships.
59
Literature Cited
Hileman, L., V. T. Parker and M C. Vasey. 2001. Phylogeny and biogeography of Arbutoideae
(Ericaceae); implications for the Madrean-Tethyan hypothesis. Systematic Botany 26:
131-143.
Abrams, L. and R. Ferris. 1951. Illustrated Flora of the Pacific States, Vol. 3. Stanford
University Press, Palo Alto, CA.
Adams, R.P., J.A. Bartel, R.A. Price. 2009. A new genus, Hesperocyparis, for the cypresses of
the Western Hemisphere (Cupressaceae). Phytologia 91(1): 160-185.
Axelrod, D.I. 1989. Age and origin of chaparral. In S.C. Keeley, ed. The California chaparral:
paradigms reexamined. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Science Series,
no. 34, Los Angeles, CA. Pp. 7–19.
Azevedo, T.E. and D.L. Morgan. 1974. Fog Precipitation in Coastal California Forests. Ecology.
55:1135-1141
Batten, K.M., K. M. Scow, K.F. Davies, and S. Harrison. 2006. Two invasive plants alter soil
microbial community composition in serpentine grasslands. Biological Invasions 8: 217230.
Behr, H. H. 1888. Flora of the vicinity of San Francisco. San Francisco, California.
Behr, H. H. 1892. Botanical reminiscences. Zoe 2:2-6.
Borchert, M., M. Johnson, D.S. Schriener, S.B. Vander Wall. 2003. Early post-fire seed
dispersal, seedling establishment and seedling mortality of Pinus coulteri (D.Don) in
central coastal California (USA). Plant Ecology 168: 207-220.
Boykin, L.M., M.C. Vasey, and V.T. Parker. 2005. Two lineages of Arctostaphylos (Ericaceae)
identified using the internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region of the nuclear genome.
Madroño 52: 139–147.
Brandegee, K. 1892. Catalogue of the flowering plants and ferns growing spontaneously in the
City of San Francisco. Zoe. 2: 334-386.
Brockmann, C., A.K. Brysting, I.G. Alsos, L. Borgen, H.H. Grundt, A.-C. Scheen, and R. Elven.
2004. Polyploidy in arctic plants. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 82: 521–536.
Callaway, R.M., Thelen, G.C., Rodriguez, A. and Holben, W.E . 200. Soil biota and exotic
plant invasion. Nature 427: 731–733
Cayan, D.R., E.P. Maurer, M.D. Dettinger, M. Tyree, and K. Hayhoe. 2008. Climate change
scenarios for the California region. Climatic Change 87: S21-S42.
CNPS. 2009. California Native Plant Society. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants. Online
version 7-09a. <http://cnps.web.aplus.net/cgi-bin/inv/inventory.cgi>
Dallman, P. R. 1998. Plant life in the world’s Mediterranean climates. UC Press, Berkeley.
Davis, F. W., D. E. Hickson, and D. C. Odion. 1988. Composition of maritime chaparral related
to fire history and soil, Burton Mesa, California. Madroño 35:169–195.
Davis, F. W., M. Borchert and D. C. Odion. 1989. Establishment of microscale vegetation
pattern in maritime chaparral after fire. Vegetatio 84:53-67.
Denford, K.E. 1981. Chemical subdivisions within the genus Arctostaphylos based on flavonoid
profiles. Experientia 37: 1287–1288.
Diggs, G.M. and G.J. Breckon. 1981. Systematic studies in the Arbuteae (Ericaceae,
Vaccinioideae) including a revision of the genus Comarostaphylis. Ph.D. Dissertation.
The University of Wisconsin-Madison, WI.
60
Dobzhansky, T. 1953. Natural hybrids of two species of Arctostaphylos in the Yosemite region
of California. Heredity 7: 73–79.
Eastwood, A. 1905. New species of western plants. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club
32:201–203.
Eastwood, Alice. 1934. A revision of Arctostaphylos with key and descriptions. Leaflets of
Western Botany. 1(11): 105-127.
Edwards, S.W. 2004. Paleobotany of California. The Four Seasons 12: 3–75.
Gottlieb, L.D. 1968. Hybridization between Arctostaphylos viscida and A. canescens in Oregon.
Brittonia 2: 83–93.
Grayston, S.J., Wang, S., Campbell, C.D. and Edwards, A.C. 1996. Selective influence of plant
species on microbial diversity in the rhizosphere. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 30:
369– 378
Greenlee, J. M., and J. H. Langenheim. 1990. Historic fire regimes and their relation to
vegetation patterns in the Monterey Bay Area of California. American Midland Naturalist
124:239–253.
Griffin, J. R. 1978. Maritime chaparral and endemic shrubs of the Monterey Bay region,
California Madroño 25:65–112.
Hagerup, O. 1954. Autogamy in some drooping Bicornes flowers. Bot. Tidskr 51:103-116.
Harrison, S. 1999. Native and alien species diversity at the local and regional scales in a grazed
Californian grassland. Oecologia 121: 99-106.
Harrison, S. and J. H. Viers, 2006. Serpentine Grasslands. In: Ecology and Management of
California Grasslands. M.R. Stromberg, C. d’Antonio and J. Corbin, eds. Island Press.
Harrison, S., H. D. Safford, J.B. Grace, J.H. Viers and K.F. Davies, 2006b. Regional and local
species richness in an insular environment: serpentine plants in California. Ecological
Monographs 76: 41-56.
Harrison, S., K.F. Davies, J.B. Grace, H.D. Safford, and J.H. Viers 2006a. Exotic invasion in a
diversity hotspot: disentangling the direct and indirect relationships of exotic cover to
native richness in the Californian serpentine flora. Ecology 87: 695-703.
Hayhoe, K., D. Cayan, C.B. Field, P.C. Frumhoff, E.P. Maurer, NL Miller, SC Moser, SH
Schneider, KN Cahill, EE Cleland, L Dale, R Drapek, RM Hanemann, LS Kalkstein, J
Lenihan, CK Lunch, RP Neilson, SC Sheridan, JH Verville. 2004. Emissions pathways,
climate change, and impacts on California. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. (USA) 101: 1242212427.
Holl, K. D., H. N. Steele, M. H. Fusari, and L. R. Fox. 2000. Seed banks of maritime chaparral
and abandoned roads: potential for vegetation recovery. Journal of the Torrey Botanical
Society 127:207-220.
Horton, T. R., T. Bruns and V. T. Parker. 1999. Ectomycorrhizal fungi in Arctostaphylos
patches contribute to the establishment of Pseudotsuga menziesii. Canadian Journal of
Botany 77: 93-102.
Horton, T.R., T. Bruns and V.T. Parker. 1999. Ectomycorrhizal fungi in Arctostaphylos patches
contribute to the establishment of Pseudotsuga menziesii. Canadian Journal of Botany 77:
93-102.
Howell, J. T. 1970. Marin Flora, 2nd edition. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los
Angeles, CA.
Howell, J. T., P. H. Raven, and P. Rubtzoff. 1958. A Flora of San Francisco, California. The
Wasmann Journal of Biology 16 (1): 1-157.
61
Huenneke, L., Hamburg, S., Koide, R., Mooney, H. and Vitousek, P. (1990) Effects of soil
resources on plant invasion and community structure in California (USA) serpentine
grassland. Ecology 71: 478–491
Hulme, P.E. and C.W. Benkman. 2002. Granivory. In: C.M. Herrera and O. Pellmyr (eds.)
Plant-animal interactions: an evolutionary approach, pp. 132-154. Blackwell, Oxford.
Jepson, W. L. 1939. Flora of California 3(1):36. (A pumila in SF)
Keeley, J. E. 1977. Seed production, seed populations in soil, and seedling production after fire
for two congeneric pairs of sprouting and nonsprouting chaparral shrubs. Ecology
58:820–829.
Keeley, J. E. 1986. Seed germination patterns in coastal sage, chaparral and desert scrub
populations of Salvia mellifera. Oecologia 71:1-5.
Keeley, J. E. 1987. Role of fire in seed germination of woody taxa in California chaparral.
Ecology 68:434-443.
Keeley, J. E. 1987. Ten years of change in seed banks of the chaparral shrubs, Arctostaphylos
glauca and A. glandulosa. American Midland Naturalist 117:446–448.
Keeley, J. E. 1991. Seed germination and life history syndromes in the California chaparral.
Botanical Review 57: 81-116.
Keeley, J. E., C.J. Fotheringham, and M. Baer-Keeley. 2006. Demographic patterns of postfire
regeneration in mediterranean-climate shrublands of California. Ecological Monographs
76:235-255.
Keeley, J. E., G. Ne’eman, and C. J. Fotheringham. 1999. Immaturity risk in a fire-dependent
pine. Journal of Mediterranean Ecology 1:41–48.
Keeley, J. E., M. C. Vasey and V. T. Parker. 2007. Subspecific variation in the widespread burlforming Arctostaphylos glandulosa. Madroño 54 (1): 42-62.
Keeley, J.E. and A. Massihi. 1994. Arctostaphylos rainbowensis, a new burl-forming manzanita
from northern San Diego County, California. Madroño 41: 1–12.
Keeley, J.E. and P.H. Zedler. 1978. Reproduction of chaparral shrubs after fire: a comparison of
sprouting and seeding strategies. Am. Midl. Nat. 99: 142-161.
Keeley, J.E. and R.L. Hays. 1976. Differential seed predation on two species of Arctostaphylos
(Ericaceae). Oecologia 24:71-81.
Kelly, V. R. and V. T. Parker. 1990. Seed bank survival in sprouting and nonsprouting
Arctostaphylos species. American Midland Naturalist 124:114-123.
Knight, W. 1985. A new glandular manzanita in the southern inner north coast ranges of
California. The Four Seasons 7: 17–20.
Knowles, N., M.D. Dettinger, and D.R. Cayan. 2006. Trends in snowfall versus rainfall in the
Western United States. J. Climate 19: 4545–4559.
Kreissman, B. 1991. California: An Environmental Atlas & Guide. Bear Klaw Press. Davis,
California.
Kron, K.A., W.S. Judd, P.F. Stevens, D.M. Crayn, A.A. Anderberg, P.A. Gadek, C.J. Quinn, and
J.L. Luteyn. 2002. Phylogenetic classification of Ericaceae: molecular and morphological
evidence. Bot. Rev. 68: 335–423.
Kruckeberg, A.R. 1984. California serpentines: flora, vegetation, geology, soils and
management problems. University of California Press, Berkeley, California, 180 pp
Kruckeberg, A.R. 1977. Manzanita (Arctostaphylos) hybrids in the Pacific Northwest: effects of
human and natural disturbance. Syst. Bot. 2: 233–250.
62
Markos, S. E., V. T. Parker, L. Hileman, and M. Vasey. 1999. Phylogeny of the Arctostaphylos
hookeri complex (Ericaceae) based on nrDNA sequence data from the ITS region.
Madroño 45: 187-199.
Miller, N.L., K.E. Bashford, E. Strem. 2003. Potential impacts of climate change on California
hydrology. J Am Water Resour Assoc 39:771-784.
National Park Service and Presidio Trust. 2001. Presidio of San Francisco: Vegetation
Management Plan and Environmental Assessment.
National Park Service and Presidio Trust. 2003. Presidio Trails and Bikeways Master Plan &
Environmental Assessment, Golden Gate National Recreation Area.
National Park Service. 1994. General Management Plan Amendment Final Environmental
Impact Statement, Presidio of San Francisco, Golden Gate National Recreation Area.
National Park Service. 2006. Management Policies 2006. National Park Service, Washington,
D.C.
O’Neil, S. E. and V. T. Parker. 2005. Factors contributing to the seed bank size of two obligate
seeding Ceanothus species in Northern California. Madroño 52: (3): 182-190.
Odion, D. and C. Tyler. 2002. Are long fire-free periods needed to maintain the endangered, firerecruiting shrub Arctostaphylos morroensis (Ericaceae)? Conservation Ecology 6(2): 4.
[online] URL: http://www.consecol.org/vol6/iss2/art4/
Odion, D. C. 2000. Seed banks of long-unburned stands of maritime chaparral: Composition,
germination behavior and survival with fire. Madroño 47: 195-203.
Odion, D. C., and F. W. Davis. 2000. Fire, soil heating, and the formation of vegetation patterns
in chaparral. Ecological Monographs 70:149–169.
Parker, V. T. 1987a. Can native flora survive prescribed burns. Fremontia 15(2):3-6.
Parker, V. T. 1987b. Effect of wet-season management burns on chaparral regeneration:
implications for rare species, pp. 233-237. In T. E. Elias (ed.) Conservation and
Management of Rare and Endangered Plants, Calif. Native Plant Society, Sacramento,
CA.
Parker, V. T. 1990. Problems encountered while mimicking nature in vegetation management: an
example from a fire-prone vegetation. In R. S. Mitchell, C. J. Sheviak and D. J. Leopold
(eds.) Ecosystem Management: Rare species and significant habitats. Proc. 15th Ann.
Natural Areas Conf. New York State Museum Bulletin 471: 231-234.
Parker, V. T. 1993. Conservation issues in land management. In J. E. Keeley (coord. ed.) The
Interface Between Ecology and Land Development, pp. 53-60. Southern California
Academy of Sciences, Los Angeles.
Parker, V. T., M. C. Vasey and J. E. Keeley. 2007. Taxonomic revisions in the genus
Arctostaphylos (Ericaceae). Madroño 54 (2): 148-155.
Parker, V. T., M.C. Vasey, and J. E. Keeley. 2009. Arctostaphylos. In: Flora of North America,
North of Mexico, Volume 8, Magnoliophyta: Paoniaceae to Ericaceae, pp. 406-445.
Oxford University Press, New York, Oxford.
Parker, V. T., M. C. Vasey and J. E. Keeley. 2010, in press. Arctostaphylos. Jepson Flora of
Higher Plants of California. 2nd Edition. University of California Press, Berkeley.
Parker, V.T. and M.C. Vasey. 2004. Arctostaphylos gabilanensis (Ericaceae), a newly described
auriculate-leaved manzanita from the Gabilan Mountains, California. Madroño 51: 322–
325.
Parker, V.T. and V.R. Kelly. 1989. Seed banks in California chaparral and other Mediterranean
climate shrublands. In, M. A. Leck, V. T. Parker and R. L. Simpson (eds) Ecology of Soil
Seed Banks., pp. 231-255. Academic Press, NY.
63
Parker, V.T., M. C. Vasey and J.E. Keeley. 2009. Arctostaphylos. Flora of North America.
Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford.
Presidio Trust. 2002. Presidio Trust Management Plan. Land Use Policies for Area B of the
Presidio of San Francisco.
Raven, P. H. 1952. Plant notes from San Francisco, California. Leaflets of Western Botany
6:208-211.
Raven, P.H. and D.I. Axelrod. 1978. Origin and relationships of the California flora. Univ. Calif.
Publ. Bot. 72: 1–134.
Roof, J. B. 1976. California’s Arctostaphylos pungens alliance. The Four Seasons 5(2): 14-24.
Roof, J. B. 1976. A fresh approach to the genus Arctostaphylos in California. Four Seasons
5(2):20-24
Roof, J. B. 1978. Studies in Arctostaphylos (Ericaceae). Four Seasons 5(4):2-21.
Roof, J. B. 1979. [Continuation of] A fresh approach to the genus Arctostaphylos in California.
Changing Seasons 1(1):3-24.
Roof, J. B. 1980. Changing Seasons 1(3):2–31. (A pumila in SF)
Rosatti, T.J. 1981. A new chromosome number in Arctostaphylos uva-ursi. Can. J. Bot. 59: 272–
273.
Safford, H.D. and S. Harrison, 2004. Fire effects on plant diversity in serpentine versus
sandstone chaparral. Ecology 85: 539-548.
Safford, H.D., J.H. Viers and S. Harrison, 2005. Serpentine endemism in the California flora: a
database of serpentine affinity. Madroño 52: 222-257.
Schierenbeck, K.A., G.L. Stebbins, and R.W. Patterson. 1992. Morphological and cytological
evidence for polyphyletic allopolyploidy in Arctostaphylos mewukka (Ericaceae). Pl.
Syst. Evol. 179: 187–205.
Schmid, R., T. E. Mallory, and J. M. Tucker. 1968. Biosystematic evidence for hybridization
between Arctostaphylos nissenana and A. viscida. Brittonia 20: 34–43.
Smilgel, B.W. and M.L. Rosenzweig. 1974. Seed selection in Dipodomys merriami and
Perognathus penicillatus. Ecology 55: 329-339.
Smith, C.F. 1942. The fall food of the brushfield pocket mouse. J. Mamm. 23: 337-339.
Syphard, A.D., J. Franklin, and J.E. Keeley. 2006. Simulating the effects of frequent fire on
southern California coastal shrublands. Ecological Applications 16:1744-1756.
Tevis, L. 1953. Stomach contents of chipmunks and mantled squirrels in Northeastern
California. J. mammalogy 34: 316-324.
There is a single collection from San Francisco that both Roof (1980) and Jepson (1939)
consider to be A. pumila; Wells (1993) did not mention the putative second occurrence,
which is now extirpated regardless (this record is not in the California Natural Diversity
Database [CNDDB]).
Tyler, C. M. 1996. Relative importance of factors contributing to postfire seedling
establishment in maritime chaparral. Ecology 77(7):2182-2195.
Tyler, C. M. 1995. Factors contributing to postfire seedling establishment in chaparral: direct and
indirect effects of fire. Journal of Ecology 83:1009–1020.
Tyler, C. M. and D. C. Odion. 1996. Ecological studies of Morro Manzanita (Arctostaphylos
morroensis). Report prepared for the California Department of Fish and Game,
Endangered Plant Program. 46pp.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. 1984. Raven’s Manzanita Recovery Plan. Portland, Oregon.
64
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2003. Recovery Plan for Coastal Plants of the Northern San
Francisco Peninsula. Portland, Oregon.
USFWS. 1979. Determination that Arctostaphylos hookeri ssp. ravenii is an Endangered Species.
Federal Register. 44, 209: 61910-61911.
USFWS. 1984. Raven's Manzanita Recovery Plan. Portland, OR: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
p.73.
USFWS. 2001. Draft Recovery Plan for Coastal Plants of the Northern San Francisco Peninsula.
Portland, Oregon: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 1. p.xv + 253.
USFWS. 2001. Draft Recovery Plan for Coastal Plants of the Northern San Francisco Peninsula.
Portland, Oregon: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 1. p.xv + 253.
Van Dyke, E., K. D. Holl, and J. R. Griffin. 2001. Maritime chaparral community transition in
the absence of fire. Madroño 48:221-229.
Vander Wall, S.B. and W.S. Longland. 2004. Diplochory: are two seed dispersers better than
one? Trends Ecology Evol 19: 155-161.
Vander Wall, S.B., E.C.H. Hager, and K.M. Kuhn. 2005. Pilferage of stored seeds and the
relative costs of scatter-hoarding versus larder-hoarding in yellow pine chipmunks.
West. N. Am. Naturalist 65: 248-257.
Vander Wall, S.B., P-M Forget, J.E. Lambert, P.E. Hulme. 2005b. Seed fate pathways: filling
the gap between parent and offspring. In: P-M Forget, JE. Lambert, P.E. Hulme, and
S.B. Vander Wall (eds.) Seed fate: predation, dispersal and seedling establishment, pp. 18. CABI publ, Wallingford, UK.
Vasey, M. C. and V. T. Parker. 2008. A newly described species of Arctostaphylos (Ericaceae)
from the central California coast. Madroño 55:240-245.
Wahlert, G., V.T. Parker, and M.C. Vasey. 2009. A phylogeny of Arctostaphylos (Ericaceae)
inferred from ITS sequence data. J. Bot. Res. Inst. Texas 3(2): 673-682.
Wahlert, G.A. 2005. A phylogeny of Arctostaphylos (Ericaceae) inferred from nuclear ribosomal
ITS sequence data. Master’s thesis. San Francisco State University, San Francisco, CA.
Wells, P. V. 1962. Vegetation in relation to geological substratum and fire in the San Luis
Obispo quadrangle, California. Ecological Monographs 32:79-103.
Wells, P. V. 1968. New taxa, combinations and chromosome numbers in Arctostaphylos
(Ericaceae). Madrono 19:193-208.
Wells, P. V. 1969. The relation between mode of reproduction and extent of speciation in
woody genera of the California chaparral. Evolution 23: 264–26
Wells, P. V. 1988. New Combinations in Arctostaphylos: annotated list of changes in status.
Madroño. 35, 4: 330-341.
Wells, P. V. 1993. Arctostaphylos, pp. 545–559 in J. C. Hickman, ed. The Jepson Manual.
University of California Press, Berkeley.
Wells, P.V. 2000. The manzanitas of California, also of Mexico and the World. Published by the
author.
Wenny, D. G. 2001. Advantages of seed dispersal: A re-evaluation of directed dispersal.
Evolutionary Ecology Research 3: 51–74.
Zammit, C. A. and P. H. Zedler. 1993. Size structure and seed production in even-aged
populations of Ceanothus greggii in mixed chaparral. Journal of Ecology 81:499-511.
Zammit, C. A. and P. H. Zedler. 1994. Organization of the soil seed bank in mixed chaparral.
Vegetatio 111:1–16.
65
Zammit, C. A. and P. H. Zedler. 1988. The influence of dominant shrubs, fire, and time since
fire on soil seed banks in mixed chaparral. Vegetatio 75: 175-187.
Zedler, P.H. 1995. Fire frequency in southern California shrublands: biological effects and
management options. In: J.E. Keeley and T. Scott (eds.) Brushfires in California:
ecology and resource management, pp. 101-112. Int. Assoc. Wildland Fire Publ.,
Fairfield, WA.
Zedler, P.H., C.R. Gautier, and G.S. McMaster. 1983. Vegetation change in response to
extreme events: the effect of a short interval between fires in California chaparral and
coastal scrub. Ecology 64: 809-818.
66