Hostname: page-component-669899f699-swprf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-26T11:25:54.829Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Modeling Tamarisk (Tamarix spp.) Habitat and Climate Change Effects in the Northwestern United States

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Becky K. Kerns ,
Bridgett J. Naylor ,
Michelle Buonopane ,
Catherine G. Parks  and
Brendan Rogers
Becky K. Kerns*
Affiliation:
USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Western Wildland Environmental Threat Assessment Center, 3160 NE 3rd Street, Prineville, OR 97754
Bridgett J. Naylor
Affiliation:
USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Forestry and Range Sciences Lab, La Grande, OR 97850
Michelle Buonopane
Affiliation:
USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Western Wildland Environmental Threat Assessment Center, 3200 SW Jefferson Way, Corvallis, OR 97331
Catherine G. Parks
Affiliation:
USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Forestry and Range Sciences Lab, La Grande, OR 97850
Brendan Rogers
Affiliation:
Department of Forest Science, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: bkerns@fs.fed.us
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Tamarisk species are shrubs or small trees considered by some to be among the most aggressively invasive and potentially detrimental exotic plants in the United States. Although extensively studied in the southern and interior west, northwestern (Oregon, Washington, and Idaho) distribution and habitat information for tamarisk is either limited or lacking. We obtained distribution data for the northwest, developed a habitat suitability map, and projected changes in habitat due to climate change in a smaller case study area using downscaled climate data. Results show extensive populations of tamarisk east of the Cascade Mountains. Despite the perceived novelty of tamarisk in the region, naturalized populations were present by the 1920s. Major population centers are limited to the warmest and driest environments in the central Snake River Plain, Columbia Plateau, and Northern Basin and Range. Habitat suitability model results indicate that 21% of the region supports suitable tamarisk habitat. Less than 1% of these areas are occupied by tamarisk; the remainder is highly vulnerable to invasion. Although considerable uncertainty exists regarding future climate change, we project a 2- to 10-fold increase in highly suitable tamarisk habitat by the end of the century. Our habitat suitability maps can be used in “what if” exercises as part of planning, detection, restoration, management, and eradication purposes.

Keywords

Tamariskspecies in the genus Tamarix L.primarily Tamarix chinensis Lour. and Tamarix ramosissima Ledeb. and their hybridsBiomapperclimate envelope modelingexotic plantsEcological Niche Factor Analysissaltcedarspecies distribution model
Type
Research
Information
Invasive Plant Science and Management , Volume 2 , Issue 3 , July 2009 , pp. 200 - 215
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Literature Cited

Bailey, J. K., Schweitzer, J. A., and Whitham, T. G. 2001. Salt cedar negatively affects biodiversity of aquatic macroinvertebrates. Wetlands 21:442–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baum, B. R. 1978. The Genus Tamarix. Jerusalem Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities. 209.Google Scholar
Birken, A. S. and Cooper, D. J. 2006. Processes of Tamarix invasion and floodplain development along the lower Green River, Utah. Ecol. Appl 16:1103–1120.Google Scholar
Bony, S., Colman, R., Fichefet, T., et al. 2007. Climate models and their evaluation. Working Group I Report: The physical science basis. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Fourth Assessment Report.Google Scholar
Bradley, B. A., Oppenheimer, M., and Wilcove, D. S. 2009. Climate change and plant invasions: restoration opportunities ahead? Glob. Change Biol. DOI: 10.111/j.1365-2486.2008.01824.x.Google Scholar
Braunisch, V., Bollmann, K., Graf, R., and Hirzel, A. 2008. Living on the edge—modeling habitat suitability for species at the edge of their fundamental niche. Ecol. Model 214:153–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cleverly, J., Smith, S., Sala, A., and Devitt, D. 1997. Invasive capacity of Tamarix ramosissima in a Mohave Desert floodplain: the role of drought. Oecologia 111:12–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohn, J. P. 2005. Tiff over tamarisk: can a nuisance be nice, too? Bioscience 55:648–654.Google Scholar
Daly, C., Halbleib, M., Smith, J. I., Gibson, W. P., Doggett, M. K., Taylor, G. H., Curtis, J., and Pasteris, P. A. 2008. Physiographically sensitive mapping of climatological temperature and precipitation across the conterminous United States. Int. J. Climatol. DOI: 10.1002/joc.1688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daly, C., Smith, J. I., and McKane, R. 2007. High-resolution spatial modeling of daily weather elements for a catchment in the Oregon Cascade Mountains, United States. J. Appl. Meteorol. Climatol 46:1565–1586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, A. J., Jenkinson, L. S., Lawton, J. L., Shorrocks, B., and Wood, S. 1998. Making mistakes when predicting shifts in species range in response to global warming. Nature 391:783–786.Google Scholar
DiTomaso, J. M. 1998. Impact, biology, and ecology of salt-cedar (Tamarix spp.) in the southwestern United States. Weed Technol 12:326–336.Google Scholar
Friedman, J. M., Auble, G. T., Shafroth, P. B., Scott, M. L., Merigliano, M. F., Freehling, M. D., and Griffin, E. R. 2005. Dominance of non-native riparian trees in western USA. Biol. Invasions 7:747–751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, J. M., Roelle, J. E., Gaskin, J. F., and Roth, J. 2007. Has Tamarix undergone rapid evolution of latitudinal variation in cold hardiness?. San Jose, CA: Ecological Society of America Meeting. [Abstract].Google Scholar
Gaskin, J. F. and Schaal, B. A. 2002. Hybrid Tamarix widespread in U.S. invasion and undetected in native Asian range. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99:11,256–11,259.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glenn, E. P. 2005. Comparative ecophysiology of Tamarix ramosissima and native trees in western U.S. riparian zones. J. Arid Environ 61:419–446.Google Scholar
Glenn, E. P. and Nagler, P. L. 2005. Comparative ecophysiology of Tamarix ramosissima and native trees in western U.S. riparian zones. J. Arid Environ 61:419–446.Google Scholar
Guisan, A. and Zimmermann, N. E. 2000. Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology. Ecol. Model 135:147–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hampe, A. 2004. Bioclimate envelope models: what they detect and what they hide. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr 13:469–476.Google Scholar
Hijmans, R. J. and Graham, C. H. 2006. The ability of climate envelope models to predict the effect of climate change on species distributions. Glob. Change Biol 12:2272–2281.Google Scholar
Hirzel, A. H. and Arlettaz, R. 2003. Modelling habitat suitability for complex species distributions by the environmental-distance geometric mean. Env. Manag 32:614–623.Google Scholar
Hirzel, A. H., Hausser, J., Chessel, D., and Perrin, N. 2002. Ecological-niche factor analysis: how to compute habitat suitability maps without absence data? Ecol 83:2027–2036.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirzel, A. H., Hausser, J., and Perrin, N. 2004. Biomapper Users Manuel. University of Lausanne: Lab of Conservation Biology, Department of Ecology and Evolution.Google Scholar
Hirzel, A. H., Le Lay, G., Helfer, V., Randin, C., and Guisan, A. 2006. Evaluating the ability of habitat suitability models to predict species presence. Ecol. Model 199:142–152.Google Scholar
Horton, J. and Clark, J. 2001. Water table decline alters growth and survival of Salix gooddingii and Tamarix chinensis seedlings. For. Ecol. Manag 140:239–247.Google Scholar
Horton, J., Kolb, T., and Hart, S. 2001. Responses of riparian trees to interannual variation in ground water depth in a semi-arid river basin. Plant Cell. Environ 24:293–304.Google Scholar
Hutchinson, G. E. 1957. Concluding remarks. Pages 415–427. in. Cold Spring Harbour Symposium on Quantitative Biology. New York Long Island Biological Association.Google Scholar
[IPCC] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2000. Special Report on Emission Scenarios. http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/sres/emission/index.htm. Accessed: June 4, 2009.Google Scholar
IPCC 2007. Summary for Policymakers. Fourth Assessment Report. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/syr/ar4_syr_spm.pdf. Accessed: June 4, 2009.Google Scholar
Kennedy, T. A., Finlay, J. C., and Hobbie, S. E. 2005. Eradication of invasive Tamarix ramosissima along a desert stream increases native fish density. Ecol. Appl 15:2072–2083.Google Scholar
Ladenburger, C. G., Hild, A. L., Kazmer, D. J., and Munn, L. C. 2006. Soil salinity patterns in Tamarix invasions in the Bighorn Basin, Wyoming, USA. J. Arid. Environ 65:111–128.Google Scholar
Lesica, P. and DeLuca, T. H. 2004. Is tamarisk allelopathic? Plant Soil 267:357–365.Google Scholar
Lesica, P. and Miles, S. 2001. Tamarisk growth at the northern margin of its naturalized range in Montana, USA. Wetlands 21:240–246.Google Scholar
Lite, S. J. and Stromberg, J. C. 2005. Surface water and ground-water thresholds for maintaining Populus–Salix forests, San Pedro River, Arizona. Biol. Conserv 125:153–167.Google Scholar
Martinez-Meyer, E. 2005. Climate change and biodiversity: some considerations in forecasting shifts in species' potential distributions. Biodivers. Inf 2:42–55.Google Scholar
McKenney, D. W., Pedlar, J. H., Lawrence, K., Campbell, K., and Hutchinson, M. K. 2007. Potential impacts of climate change on the distribution of North American trees. BioScience 57:939–948.Google Scholar
Meehl, G. A., Covey, C., Delworth, T., Latif, M., McAvaney, B., Mitchell, J. F. B., Stouffer, R. J., and Taylor, K. E. 2007. The WCRP CMIP3 multi-model dataset: a new era in climate change research. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc 88:1383–1394.Google Scholar
Morisette, J. T., Jarnevich, C. S., Ullah, A., Cai, W. J., Pedelty, J. A., Gentle, J. E., Stohlgren, T. J., and Schnase, J. L. 2006. A tamarisk habitat suitability map for the continental United States. Front. Ecol. Environ 4:11–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[NAIP] National Agriculture Imagery Program, U.S. Department of Agriculture 2004–2006. Request for Aerial Photography. http://www.fsa.usda.gov/Internet/FSA_File/fsa0441.pdf. Accessed February 1, 2007.Google Scholar
Neilson, R. P., Pitelka, L. F., Solomon, A. M., Nathan, R., Midgley, G. F., Fragoso, J. M. V., Lischke, H., and Thompson, K. 2005. Forecasting regional to global plant migration in response to climate change. BioScience 55:749–759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owen, J. C., Sogge, M. K., and Kern, M. D. 2005. Habitat and sex differences in physiological condition of breeding Southwestern Willow Flycatchers (Empidonax traillii extimus). Auk 122:261–1270.Google Scholar
Pearce, C. M. and Smith, D. G. 2003. Tamarisk: distribution, abundance, and dispersal mechanisms, northern Montana, USA. Wetlands 23:215–228.Google Scholar
Pearson, R. G. and Dawson, T. P. 2003. Predicting the impacts of climate change on the distribution of species: are bioclimate envelope models useful? Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr 12:361–371.Google Scholar
Pearson, R. G. and Dawson, T. P. 2004. Bioclimate envelope models: what they detect and what they hide—response to Hampe (2004). Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr 13:471–473.Google Scholar
Pratt, R. B. and Black, R. A. 2006. Do invasive trees have a hydraulic advantage over native trees? Biol. Invasions 8:1331–1341.Google Scholar
Rehfeldt, G., Crookston, N. L., Warwell, M. V., and Evans, J. S. 2006. Empirical analyses of plant–climate relationships for the western United States. Int. J. Plant Sci 167:1123–1150.Google Scholar
Rehfeldt, G., Ferguson, D. E., and Crookston, N. L. 2008. Quantifying the abundance of co-occurring conifers along inland northwest (USA) climate gradients. Ecology 89:2127–2139.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roe, G. H. and Baker, M. B. 2007. Why is climate sensitivity so unpredictable? Science 318:629–632.Google Scholar
Sexton, J. P., McKay, J. K., and Sala, A. 2002. Plasticity and genetic diversity may allow tamarisk to invade cold climates in North America. Ecol. Appl 12:1652–1660.Google Scholar
Sexton, J. P., Sala, A., and Murray, K. 2006. Occurrence, persistence, and expansion of saltcedar (Tamarix spp.) populations in the great plains of Montana. West. N. Am. Nat 66:1–11.Google Scholar
Shafroth, P. B., Auble, G. T., Stromberg, J. C., and Patten, D. T. 1998. Establishment of woody riparian vegetation in relation to annual patterns of streamflow, Bill Williams River, Arizona. Wetlands 18:577–590.Google Scholar
Shafroth, P. B., Beauchamp, V. B., Briggs, M. K., Lair, K., Scott, M. L., and Sher, A. A. 2008. Planning riparian restoration in the context of Tamarix control in the western United States. Restor. Ecol 16:97–112.Google Scholar
Shafroth, P. B., Cleverly, J. R., Dudley, T. L., Taylor, J. P., Van Riper, C., Weeks, E. P., and Stuart, J. N. 2005. Control of Tamarix in the western United States: implications for water salvage, wildlife use, and riparian restoration. Environ. Manag 35:231–246.Google Scholar
Stein, B. A. and Flack, S. R. 1996. America's Least Wanted: Alien Species Invasions of U.S. Ecosystems. Arlington, VA The Nature Conservancy.Google Scholar
Stromberg, J. and Chew, M. 2002. Foreign visitors in riparian corridors of the American Southwest: is xenophobia justified? 195–219. In Tellman, B. Invasive exotic species in the Sonoran region. Tucson, AZ University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
Thomas, C. D., Cameron, A., Green, R. E., et al. 2004. Extinction risk from climate change. Nature 427:145–148.Google Scholar
VEMAP Members 1995. Vegetation/ecosystem modeling and analysis project: comparing biogeography and biogeochemistry models in a continental-scale study of terrestrial ecosystem responses to climate change and CO2 doubling. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 9:407–437.Google Scholar
Zavaleta, E. 2000a. The economic value of controlling an invasive shrub. Ambio 29:462–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zavaleta, E. 2000b. Valuing ecosystem services lost to Tamarix invasion in the United States. Pages 261–300. In Mooney, H. A. and Dobbs, R. J. Invasive species in a changing world. Washington, DC Island.Google Scholar
Zavaleta, E. S. and Royval, J. L. 2001. Climate change and the susceptibility of U.S. ecosystems to biological invasions: two cases of expected range expansion. Pages 277–342. in Schneider, S. H. and Root, T. L. Wildlife responses to climate change: North American case studies. Washington, DC Island.Google Scholar