Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The effect of clipping date and height on forage yields, nutritive quality and stored food reserves of… Heyes, Glenn E. 1979

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1979_A6_7 H49.pdf [ 8.3MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0094534.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0094534-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0094534-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0094534-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0094534-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0094534-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0094534-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0094534-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0094534.ris

Full Text

THE EFFECT OF CLIPPING DATE AND HEIGHT ON FORAGE YIELDS, NUTRITIVE QUALITY AND STOKED FOOD RESERVES OF A CKELCOTIN WETLAND MEADOW by GLENN E. HEYES B.Sc. ( A g r . ) , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1 9 7 6 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES ( i n the Department of P l a n t Science) We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the r e q u i r e d standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA March, 1 9 7 9 © G l e n n E . H e y e s In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an a d v a n c e d d e g r e e a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , I a g r e e t h a t t h e L i b r a r y s h a l l m a k e i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e a n d s t u d y . I f u r t h e r a g r e e t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y p u r p o s e s may be g r a n t e d by t h e H e a d o f my D e p a r t m e n t o r by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l n o t be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . D e p a r t m e n t o f 7>LAA/T 5dI'£*>C £ T h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 D a t e Qtro&£R 2-6 , 9 - i i ABSTRACT The o b j e c t i v e s of the f o l l o w i n g research p r o j e c t were to 1) determine the optimum time and i n t e n s i t y of h a r v e s t i n g a wetland meadow i n terms of forage y i e l d , forage n u t r i t i v e q u a l i t y , and p l a n t v i g o r ; 2) to determine the c a r r y i n g c a p a c i t y of a wetland meadow under d i f f e r e n t seasons of use'-and; 3) to c o n t r i b u t e to the development of a wetland c l a s s i f i c a t i o n scheme by c h a r a c t e r i z i n g a wetland meadow. The study s i t e was lo c a t e d on the Fraser P l a t e a u about 100 kms west of W i l l i a m s Lake, B r i t i s h Columbia, at an e l e v a t i o n of 1250 m. Meadow water t a b l e , water pH, water c o n d u c t i v i t y , water calcium i o n conc e n t r a t i o n , and s o i l temperatures were measured twice per month. The meadow and surrounding upland s o i l s were c l a s s i f i e d . The species composi-t i o n and f o l i a r cover of 5 ve g e t a t i o n zones were described f o r the meadow and surrounding upland area. To asses meadow p r o d u c t i v i t y and forage n u t r i t i v e q u a l i t y under d i f f e r e n t seasons of use 6 har v e s t i n g periods were employed, mid May to mid J u l y , June and J u l y , mid June to mid August, J u l y and August and mid May through August. The standing crop seasonal trend was monitored by anal y s i n g forage samples c o l l e c t e d twice monthly. C l i p p i n g samples were oven d r i e d and weighed to determine harvest y i e l d s . The crude p r o t e i n content of the samples was determined by a m i c r o k j e l d h a l technique. Phosphorus content was assessed by a vanadomolybdate method. Calcium, potassium, magnesium, z i n c , copper, i r o n and manganese contents were determined by spectrophotometry. The r e l a t i v e p l a n t stored food reserves were assessed by an e t i o l a t i o n experiment. S o i l - ve g e t a t i o n plugs were c o l l e c t e d from a l l harvest pe r i o d treatment p l o t s as w e l l as u n d i p p e d c o n t r o l p l o t s and placed i n a dark c o n t r o l l e d environment chamber. The e t i o l a t e d growth was c o l l e c t e d , weighed and used to compare the r e l a t i v e p l a n t stored food reserves amoung d i f f e r e n t harvest p e r i o d treatments. A stepwise simple r e g r e s s i o n procedure was used to compare the sea-sonal trend data and a stepwise m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n procedure was used to compare the d i f f e r e n t harvest p e r i o d treatments. A-2; step Student Newman Keuls m u l t i p l e range t e s t was performed on the e t i o l a t i o n experiment sod reserve i n d i c i e s and harvest treatment t o t a l y i e l d s data. Meadow water t a b l e , water pH, water calcium i o n content, water con-d u c t i v i t y , s o i l temperatures at 10 cm and s o i l temperatures at 50 cm ranged between +29 and -2 cm, 7.0 and 7.4, 14 and 89 ppm, 249 and 840 mmho/ cm, 6.9 and 11.2°C and 6.8 and 10.6°C r e s p e c t i v e l y . Meadow s o i l s i n c l u d e d a Typic Humisol - Mesic Humisol - T e r r i c Mesic Humisol complex, a c a l c a r -eous Gleyed Humic Regosol, a calcareous Gleyed Regosol, an.Orthic Humic G l e y s o l and a Gleyed Gray L u v i s o l . The upland s o i l was an O r t h i c Gray L u v i s o l . The 5 v e g e t a t i o n zones were named according to the dominant pla n t species. Included were a Carex r o s t r a t a zone, a Carex - B e t u l a glandulosa zone, a Carex p r a e g r a c i l i s - Juncus b a l t i c u s zone, a S a l i x - B e t u l a  glandulosa zone, arid a Pinus c o n t o r t a - Calamagrostis rubescens zone. P r o d u c t i v i t y and n u t r i t i o n a l data c o l l e c t i o n was r e s t r i c t e d to the Carex r o s t r a t a zone. The standing crop v a r i e d from 1 to 6 mt/ha. The n u t r i e n t content of the standing crop v a r i e d between 0.35 and 0.51% of t i s s u e , 2.1 - 5.7, 1.0 - 1.5% of t i s s u e , 0.17 - 0.26% of t i s s u e , 133 - 326 ppm, and 49 and 165 ppm f o r the calcium, calcium - phosphorus r a t i o , potassium, magnesium, manganese and i r o n contents r e s p e c t i v e l y . The meadow forage crude p r o t e i n , phosphorus, z i n c and copper contents remained un-iv changed at 10.1% of tissue, 0.14% of tissue, 30 ppm and 11 ppm through the season. The 8 cm July and August harvest period produced the greatest treat-ment yield, 6807 kg/ha, followed by the 8 cm - mid June to mid August harvest treatment yield. The least productive treatments were the 8 and 23 cm harvests during the period mid May to mid August. The nutrient content of the meadow forage subjected to the 10 different harvest treatments varied as follows: crude protein - 8.3 to 12.0% of tissue, calcium - 0.368 to 0.646% of tissue, phosphorus - 0.21 to 0.27% of tissue, calcium: phosphorus ratio - 1.4 to 3.6, zinc - 35 to 46 ppm, copper - 13 ppm, potassium - 1.7 to 2.4% of tissue, magnesium-0.19 to 0.23% of tissue, manganese ---194 to 271 ppm and iron - 94 to 119 ppm. Repeated clipping increased the meadow forage crude protein, phosphorus, zinc, copper, potassium, manganese slightly, and iron contents. Repeated clipping reduced the meadow forage calcium: phosphorus ratio. The stored food reserves of the meadow vegetation was found not to vary with harvest treatment. Based on productivity, nutritive quality and plant vigot data, grazing during the period mid June to mid August and close u t i l i z a t i o n (an 8 cm as opposed to a 23 cm stubble height) appears most appropriate. Wet meadow hay should be cut as early as possible. The theoretical safe maximum carrying capacity i s 23 AUM'S/ha (20 AUM'S/ ha when grazed to an 8 cm stubble height during the period mid June to mid August). The meadow characterization and productivity data w i l l be useful to per-son(s) undertaking the task of formulating a classification scheme for British Columbia wetland meadows. TABLE OF CONTENTS T i t l e Page A b s t r a c t T a b l e o f C o n t e n t s L i s t o f T a b l e s L i s t o f F i g u r e s Acknowledgements I n t r o d u c t i o n H i s t o r y and Use o f C a r i b o o - C h i l c o t i n W e t l a n d s The P u r p o s e o f T h i s R e s e a r c h P r o j e c t S t u d y S i t e L i t e r a t u r e R e v i e w Some A s p e c t s o f W e t l a n d E c o l o g y W e t l a n d Meadow P r o d u c t i v i t y W e t l a n d F o r a g e Q u a l i t y and U t i l i z a t i o n The I n f l u e n c e o f C l i p p i n g on P l a n t s P l a n t S t o r e d Food R e s e r v e s A n i m a l s and W e t l a n d V e g e t a t i o n Methods S i t e S e l e c t i o n • C h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n o f t h e S t u d y Meadow P r o d u c t i v i t y and N u t r i t i o n E t i o l a t i o n E x p e r i m e n t S t a t i s t i c a l A n a l y s i s v i Page Results and Observations Characterization of the Study Meadow hj> P r o d u c t i v i t y 61 N u t r i t i o n 71 Stored Food Reserves 76 Discussion Characterization of the Study Meadow 78 P r o d u c t i v i t y 82 N u t r i t i o n 85 Stored Food Reserves 88 Range Use of Wetland Meadows by Domestic Livestock 89 Conclusions 91 Bibliography 93 Appendix A - Dail y Maximum and Minimum Temperature Values 103 for the Study S i t e Exclosure and the T a u t r i Creek Climate S t a t i o n Appendix B - S o i l Temperatures and Water Quality Raw Data 105 Appendix C - Study Area S o i l P r o f i l e s 106 Appendix D - Seasonal Trend Raw Data 109 Appendix E - T o t a l Y i e l d and Sod Reserve Index Raw Data 111 Appendix F - C l i p p i n g Treatments Raw Data 113 Appendix G - Study Area Spermatophyta Species L i s t 120 v i i LIST OF TABLES Page TABLE I - N u t r i e n t Content of North Western North 19 American Wetland Sedges TABLE I I - Legend f o r Species F o l i a r Cover E a t i n g 35 TABLE I I I - Legend f o r Abundance and S o c i o b i l i t y R a t i n g 36 TABLE IV - C l i m a t i c Data ^ TABLE V - S o i l Water Table Data ^7 TABLE VI - S o i l Temperature and Water Parameters Data ^8 From Regression Equations TABLE V I I - S o i l Temperature and Water Parameters ^9 Regression Equations TABLE V I I I - F o l i a r Cover Measured by the Line P o i n t 5^ Sampling Method TABLE IX - F o l i a r Cover and Abundance and S o c i a b i l i t y 55 Measured by Ocular Estimate TABLE X - Vegetation Height Data 59 TABLE XI - Seasonal Trend Data from Regression Equations 63 TABLE X I I - Seasonal Trend Regression Equations TABLE X I I I - Seasonal Trend Winter Data 65 TABLE XIV - Treatment Y i e l d s From C l i p p i n g Treatment 66 Regression Data TABLE XV - T o t a l Y i e l d S i g n i f i c a n t l y D i f f e r e n t Means 67 TABLE XVI - C l i p p i n g Treatments Data Regression Equations 68 TABLE XVII - C l i p p i n g Treatments Regression Equations 70 v i i i Page TABLE XVIII - Sod Reserve Index S i g n i f i c a n t l y D i f f e r e n t 77 Means TABLE XIX - Beef C a t t l e Nutrient Requirements 86 i x LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1 - General Location of the Study S i t e 7 Figure 2 - Specific Location of the Study S i t e 8 Figure 3 - S o i l , Water and Temperature Sampling Locations 32 Figure k - F i e l d Exclosure 37 Figure 5 - Sampling Frame 38 Figure 6 - Clipping Dates of Treatment Plots kO Figure 7 -Study Area S o i l Map 50 Figure 8 - Hummock Map 52 Figure 9 -.Study Area Vegetation Map 53 X ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author would l i k e to thank the f o l l o w i n g people f o r t h e i r g r e a t l y appreciated help i n completing t h i s research p r o j e c t : : Dr. M. P i t t , Dr. V. Runeckles, Dr. V. C. B r i n k , Dr. R. Strang, Dr. L. L a v k u l i c h , Mr. P. Fofonoff, Ms. M. Beautemps, the r e s t of the members of the M i n i s t r y of A g r i c u l t u r e at Wi l l i a m s Lake, mem-bers of the B. C. F.;S. Range D i v i s i o n i n Wil l i a m s Lake, Dr. A. van Ryswyk and Arthur Yee of the A g r i c u l t u r e Canada Range Research S t a t i o n i n Kamloops, Mr. R. K l i n e , Mr. J . Neufeld and the s t a f f of the M i n i s t r y of A g r i c u l t u r e S o i l Feed and Tissue A n a l y s i s Lab. i n Kelowna, Mr. D. Pearce, Mr. I . D e r i c s , Dr. G. W. Eaton, Mr. G. Barber and Anne. 1 INTRODUCTION HISTORY AND USE OF CARIBOO - CHILCOTIN WETLANDS Cariboo - . C h i l c o t i n wetland meadows vary i n s i z e from a few hectares to s e v e r a l square k i l o m e t r e s (van Ryswyk 1971) and occupy 10 - 7C$ of the la n d surface depending upon the l o c a l i t y (McLean,_et a l 1963)- These wet-lands have been formed behind beaver dams (van Ryswyk 1971) or i n depres-s i o n s caused by the unequal d e p o s i t i o n s of t i l l (Weir 1964). Wetlands vary i n ve g e t a t i o n and s o i l type (McLean, _et_ a l 1963) 5 but many are f e r t i l e because of the input from eutrophic water d r a i n i n g o f f the surrounding b a s i c t e r t i a r y l a v a beds (van Ryswyk 1971). Haylands were among the f i r s t l o c a t i o n s pre-empted on the uplands throughout the Cariboo - C h i l c o t i n r e g i o n (Weir 1964). Haying and summer domestic g r a z i n g of Cariboo - C h i l c o t i n wetlands have taken place s i n c e the e a r l y 1900 's ( P r i n g l e and van Ryswyk 1967) and i n the past, s u r p l u s wetland hay was s o l d to supplement the ranch income (Weir 1964). I n the Cariboo - C h i l c o t i n , 59^ of the hayland i s n a t u r a l meadow (Weir 1964). I n a d d i t i o n , wetland meadows are the only e a s i l y watered s o i l type which a l l o w easy machinery operation because many have a f a i r l y l e v e l topography and no stones (van Ryswyk 1971)* Use of the meadows i s l i m i t e d to midsummer haying and f a l l g r a z i n g at lower e l e v a t i o n s due to f l o o d i n g during the s p r i n g and e a r l y summer (McLean, _et a l 1963) and midsummer gr a z i n g i n the spruce - a l p i n e f i r zone (McLean and T i s d a l e i 9 6 0 ) . F a l l g r a z i n g on the meadows has c o n t i n -ued u n t i l January i n m i l d years as sedge above the snow and i c e w i l l remain green (Weir 196k). S p r i n g use of the meadows i s l i m i t e d w i t h -out drainage improvements because of f l o o d i n g (McLean, et d. 1963). Weir (I96A-) r e p o r t s haying p r a c t i c e s v a r i e d l i t t l e throughout the area. Horse drawn machinery was more commonly used than power d r i v e n machinery owing to the rougher ground. Cut hay was raked i n t o windrows and moved to the stack by sweeps. S l i n g s were h o i s t e d by a d e r r i c k (boom stacker) powered by horses. Stacks were fenced as a p r o t e c t i o n against both c a t t l e and l a r g e game animals. Today (1977) t r a c t o r d r i v e n b a l e r s are f r e q u e n t l y used on the smoother meadows. The type of b a l i n g method i s u s u a l l y a f u n c t i o n of the s i z e of the haying o p e r a t i o n . During w i n t e r , ranches which were dependent mainly on meadow hay, found i t necessary to move the herd from one feeding ground to another according to the d i s t r i b u t i o n of hay meadows. Young weaker animals were taken from the herd to the home ranch. Water holes had t o be chopped i n the i c e of a nearby pond or creek and a watch maintained against predatory animals. During the n i g h t , c a t t l e found s h e l t e r i n the timber c l o s e at hand to gain p r o t e c t i o n against the strong c o l d wind (Weir 196^). THE OBJECTIVES OF THIS RESEARCH PROJECT Most wetland meadow studies conducted in interior British Columbia (B. C.) discuss the results of flooding, f e r t i l i z i n g and/or sowing tame forage species (Pringle 1965, Pringle and van Ryswyk 1967, van Ryswyk and Bawtree 1971, van Ryswyk et al 1971). Most British Columbia wetland meadows are widely distributed and have poor access which limits their development potential. Only McLean e_t al (1963) discuss these meadows in terms of their growth patterns, chemical composition, forage yeilds, animal gains, and the effect of periodical clipping during the grazing season. Their nutritional analyses suggest that growing animals grazing only wetland meadows would have an inadequate diet after mid-August and in some years as soon as the end of July. This suggestion invites the question, "can the time of grazing be used to modify the seasonal march of nutrients within the sedge forage?" Studies revealing the importance of grazing and mowing on the ac-cumulation of food reserves in plants are abundant in the literature (Marx 1964) but articles discussing the stored food reserves of sedges are scarce. McLean et a l (1963) observed that rest near the end of the grazing season appeared to improve sedge yields the following year. They concluded that these improved yields resulted because sedge plants were allowed to build up root reserves before frost. This research project tests the above hypothesis by determining the relative food reserves of a Carex rostrata wetland meadow subjected to different clipping treatments. 4 In range management, as i n other resource management d i s c i p l i n e s , i t i s necessary to have certain basic information to be able to manage the resource well. Determination of the proper stocking rate for a range unit can be accomplished by summing the quotients of the area of the component plant communities divided by their i n d i v i d u a l carrying capacities (when expressed as area per Animal Unit Month). In addition, reduction of the stocking rate due to imperfect livestock d i s t r i b u t i o n , yearly climatic fluctuations and other resource users must be considered. To date there has been l i t t l e investigation of the carrying capacity of i n t e r i o r B r i t i s h Columbia native wetland meadow plant communities. A number of different methods for c l a s s i f y i n g wetland meadows exi s t . Within each c l a s s i f i c a t i o n scheme a number of different wetland types exist (International Peat Society 1973). A universal wetland c l a s s i f i -cation scheme i s sought. Descriptive information collected from the meadow studied w i l l , one hopes, aid i n the development of a c l a s s i f i c a t i o n scheme. In addition, the descriptive information makes the experimental results more meaningful. In summary, the objectives of this research project were: 1) to determine the optimum time and intensity of harvesting a wetland meadow i n terms of forage y i e l d , forage q u a l i t y , and plant vigor, 2) to determine the carrying capacity of a wetland meadow under different seasons of use, and 3) to contribute to the development of a wetland c l a s s i f i c a t i o n scheme by characterizing a wetland meadow. 5 STUDY SITE The wetland meadow s t u d i e d , "the study meadow", r e s t s on the Fr a s e r P l a t e a u 1250 metres above sea l e v e l about 100 km. west of Wi l l i a m s Lake, B. C. (Figures l a n d 2 ) . The study meadow's geographic g r i d coordinates 52° 12' N, 123° 0 5 ' W are found on map sheet 93 - B - 3 - L (Canadian N a t i o n a l Topographic System). B.C. Government a i r -e a l photographs BC 7712 033 - 035 show the true sedge fen p o r t i o n of the study s i t e to occupy about 2 hectares. The study meadow was mechanically harvested p e r i o d i c a l l y from about 19^0 to i 9 6 0 and sin c e then grazed by c a t t l e , u s u a l l y i n the f a l l . The r e g i o n a l c l i m a t e best f i t s the Koppen C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Dfc. ( K r a j i n a 1969). O r t h i c Grey L u v i s o l i c s o i l s from g l a c i a l t i l l , o v e r l a y the gently r o l l i n g t e r r a i n surrounding the study meadow. The microtopographical contour of the study meadow i s d i s r u p t e d by numerous hummocks and un d e r l a i n by O r g a i n i c s o i l s . Drainage i s very poor. The surrounding v e g e t a t i o n , dominantly Pinus c o n t o r t a , has a sparse Calamagrostis rubescens and Arc t o s t y p h y l o s u v a - u r s i understory. From the surrounding upland to the centre of the study meadow d i f f e r e n t v e g e t a t i o n types occur as roughly concentric zones. The intermediate zone c o n s i s t s mainly of B e t u l a glandulosa and S a l i x species w i t h an 6 u n d e r s t o r y o f many f o r b s a n d g r a s s e s . The o c c a s i o n a l P i c e a g l a u c a c a n be o b s e r v e d . The c e n t r a l a n d most i n t e n s i v e l y s t u d i e d v e g e t a t i o n zone i s d o m i n a t e d b y C a r e x r o s t r a t a . Figure 1 - General Location of the Study S i t e 8 Figure 2 - S p e c i f i c Location of the Study S i t e (Scale 16,000:1) 8a 9 Wild ungulates, waterfowl and upland birds make use of the study-meadow. For the immediately surrounding area Canada Land Inventory (C.L.I.) Forest Capability r a t i n g , 6 m*, and C.L.I. A g r i c u l t u r a l I p c c Capability r a t i n g , 5 P (5 p)* both indicate low productivity. The C.L.I. Land Capability c l a s s i f i c a t i o n classes t h i s land as Native Range - rangeland that support native perennial forage and i s essen-t i a l l y l i m i t e d to the grazing of livestock and wild ungulates. •Symbols refer to capability c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s . Numerals rate the capability of the land for a particular use from excellent (1) to very poor (7). Letters denote the factors which l i m i t the s i t e ' s c a p a b i l i t y . LITERATURE REVIEW For persons u n f a m i l i a r w i t h wetland terminology a short g l o s s a r y i s provided i n Heinselman (1963). SOME ASPECTS OF WETLAND ECOLOGY Ecology s t u d i e s the r e l a t i o n s h i p of p l a n t s and animals to t h e i r environments - where they l i v e , how they l i v e there, and why they l i v e there ( B i l l i n g s 1970). I n t e r a c t i o n s between environmental f a c t o r s and an organism are numerous and complex. The h o l i s t i c view of ecology would be v i o l a t e d without some mention of these i n t e r a c t i o n s . This f i r s t s e c t i o n of the l i t e r a t u r e review w i l l present research f i n d i n g s d e s c r i b i n g and e x p l a i n i n g some of these i n t e r a c t i o n s i n wetlands. Three environmental f a c t o r s account f o r the m a j o r i t y of v a r i a t i o n i n wetland v e g e t a t i o n . In order of importance they are disturbance (Walker and Wehrhahn 1971), a v a i l a b l e n u t r i e n t s and water regime (Walker and Wehrhahn 1971, van der Valk and B l i s s 1970, Mornsjo 1969). Few papers d i s c u s s the e f f e c t s of disturbance on wetlands whereas stu d i e s of the impact of a v a i l a b l e n u t r i e n t s and water regime on wet-land v e g e t a t i o n are abundant (Sjors 1950, P r i n g l e and van Ryswyk 1967, Boyd 1969, Mornsjo 1969, Boyd 1970 a, Boyd 1970 b, Boyd and Hess 1970, van der Valk and B l i s s 1970, M i l l a r 1973, Walmsley and L a v k u l i c h 1973). The r a t e of n u t r i e n t c y c l i n g w i t h i n an ecosystem i s dependent on 11 many f a c t o r s , any of which may l i m i t or s t i m u l a t e p r o d u c t i v i t y . Nu-t r i e n t s may accumulate i n organic matter as demonstrated by the f o l -lowing two examples. 1) The accumulation of organic matter produces a b o t t l e n e c k i n the n u t r i e n t c y c l e of grasslands. This means the i n -a c t i v i t y of decomposer organisms l i m i t s the p r o d u c t i v i t y of the whole system, g r a z i e r s included (MacFadyen 1964). 2) Phosphorus was found l e s s a v a i l a b l e and p o s s i b l y l i m i t i n g f o r p l a n t growth on peat s o i l s ( P r i n g l e and van Ryswyk 1967). Here much of the ecosystem's phosphorus i s probably present and u n a v a i l a b l e i n p h y t i n , p h y t i n d e r i v a t i v e s , n u c l e i c a c i d s and phospholipides. Bernard (1974) found dust from an adjacent road s u p p l i e d a s i z a b l e input of p l a n t n u t r i e n t s to the n u t r i e n t c y c l e of a sedge meadow. S a l t c o n c e n t r a t i o n and pH were higher and the oxygen c o n c e n t r a t i o n was lower i n extreme minerotrophic fens than i n extreme o l i g o t r o p h i c bogs (Walmsley and L a v k u l i c h 1973). Wetlands w i t h intermediate vege-t a t i o n had a d e f i n i t e but wide range of pH and s a l t c o n c e n t r a t i o n . The s a l t c o n c e n t r a t i o n ranges were more v a r i a b l e that the pH ranges f o r a given wetland type. Therefore, other than extremes, s a l t c o n c e n t r a t i o n seems to have had a l e s s d i r e c t i n f l u e n c e on the composition of the wetland v e g e t a t i o n that pH. S a l t concentrations and pH of water were i n d i c a t i v e of the complicated s o i l c o n d i t i o n s c o n t r o l l i n g v e g e t a t i o n composition, but should not be regarded as s t r i c t l y d e c i s i v e f a c t o r s ( S j o r s 1950). The c o n c e n t r a t i o n of n u t r i e n t s i n aquatic macrophytes are r e g u l a t e d by both p h y s i o l o g i c a l and environmental f a c t o r s (Boyd 1970 a ) . Borman and L i k e n (1967) s t a t e that many plan t p h e n o l o g i c a l events are r e l a t e d to c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the n u t r i e n t c y c l e . The greatest accumulation of n u t r i e n t s by p l a n t s occurs e a r l y i n t h e season. The maximum q u a n t i t i e s of n u t r i e n t per u n i t area are c l o s e l y r e l a t e d to maximum dry matter standing crop, but are not n e c e s s a r i l y a f u n c t i o n of p r o d u c t i v i t y (Boyd 1969). C o r r e l a t i o n s between environmental l e v e l s of s e v e r a l nu-t r i e n t s and plant t i s s u e concentrations of these n u t r i e n t s were s i g n i -f i c a n t , but not strong (Boyd and Hess 1970). Immobile n u t r i e n t s were absorbed i n p r o p o r t i o n to dry matter production during most of the growing season, but l i m i t i n g elements such as n i t r o g e n and phosphorus were absorbed e a r l y i n the growing season and t r a n s l o c a t e d to meri-stematic t i s s u e when c o n d i t i o n s f o r growth were o p t i m a l , a l l e v i a t i n g competition from other species (Boyd 19&9i Boyd 1970 b ) . Suc c e s s i o n a l changes i n wetland v e g e t a t i o n i n c l u d e submerged a q u a t i c s , f l o a t i n g leaved a q u a t i c s , emergent aqu a t i c s and wetland meadow ve g e t a t i o n . The l e a f area index d i d not d i f f e r among seres. C h l o r o p h y l l content increased w i t h each.advanced s e r a i s t a t e except the submerged aqu a t i c s contained more c h l o r o p h y l l than the f l o a t i n g leaved v e g e t a t i o n (van der Valk and B l i s s 1970). Small amounts of deep water emergents i n shallow wetlands were not considered a r e -l i a b l e i n d i c a t o r o f a wetter moisture regime. However the species composition of rooted submergents i n a wetland were used as an i n d i -c a t o r of the moisture regime. Two or more years of continuous f l o o d i n g were re q u i r e d to e l i m i n a t e emergent v e g e t a t i o n ( M i l l e r 1973). Carex r o s t r a t a i s t o l e r a n t of immersion and emersion of i t s a e r i a l shoots. I t e x h i b i t e d low shoot d e n s i t y on water covered ground and high shoot density-on l o c a l i t i e s w i t h i r r e g u l a r or seasonal inundation. The lower d e n s i t y shoots were t a l l e r , and enlarged at the base by a r i c h formation of aerenchyma t i s s u e . The high d e n s i t y shoots were s h o r t e r , t h i n n e r and more compact. A r e s u l t i n g dense canopy reduced l i g h t i n -t e n s i t y at the ground and was probably an important c o n d i t i o n i n m i n i -mizing the presence of a d d i t i o n a l species (Mornsjo 1969). Bernard (1975) has noted s i m i l a r shoot development c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i n Carex  l a c u s t r i s , and has a l s o observed that more shoots flower i f the water l e v e l i n the wetland was higher than the previous year. New shoots of C_^_ r o s t r a t a were produced during the winter - s p r i n g p e r i o d i n frozen ground (Bernard 1974) and from midsummer through to l a t e f a l l (Bernard 1973). Winter - s p r i n g shoots flowered and died a f t e r about eighteen months, w h i l e the midsummer - l a t e f a l l shoots, which d i d not mature v e g e t a t i v e l y u n t i l the f o l l o w i n g summer, had a l i f e span of about two years. The f l o w e r i n g culms of the winter -s p r i n g shoots were s i m i l a r i n diameter, but s u f f e r e d l e s s premature m o r t a l i t y (Gorham and Somers 1972). Cj_ r o s t r a t a shoot m o r t a l i t y periods were i ) s p r i n g when the p l a n t s began r a p i d growth and were no longer hardened to c o l d temperatures, and i i ) l a t e J u l y to mid Sep-tember (Bernard 1973, 1974). Another wetland species, Carex a q u a t i l i s followed a s i m i l a r pattern except the l a t e summer shoots matured vege-t a t i v e l y before the f i r s t winter, then flowered and died the following year, l i v i n g approximately one year (Gorham and Somers 1972). WETLAND MEADOW PRODUCTIVITY Many aspects of natural wetland meadow plant p r o d u c t i v i t y have been studied and repeated by researchers. These p r o d u c t i v i t y values are useful to compare with r e s u l t s from the study meadow and to deter-mine some factors i n f l u e n c i n g p r o d u c t i v i t y . The peak above ground standing crops of fen vegetation throughout northern North American and northern Europe ranges from 2000 - 15000 kg/ha (van der Valk and B l i s s 1970, Boyd 1970, P r i n g l e and van Ryswyk 1967, Gorham and Somer 1972, Mornsjo 1969, Bernard 197*0. C. r o s t r a t a communities s i m i l a r to the study meadow are reported to have had peak above ground standing crops of *+750 - 9000 kg/ha (Gorham and Somers 1972, Bernard 197*0* A C. r o s t r a t a community had a maximum below ground standing crop of 3280 kg/ha and a below ground winter standing crop of 1500 kg/ha (Bernard 197*+) • Measurement of winter biomass i s important for two reasons. F i r s t l y , some material from the present year's growth .'.si'ss present during the previous winter and without a winter standing crop determination, an overestimate w i l l r e s u l t and secondly, a consi-derable proportion of the spring growth above ground was due to the t r a n s l o c a t i o n of stored reserve materials (Bernard 1973). The range of harvested y i e l d s from some northern North American fens, 760 - 5657 kg/ha ( P r i n g l e and van Ryswyk 1967, H i l t o n 1970, McLean _et a l 1963) w a s c u r i o u s l y l e s s than the previous ranges s t a t e d f o r peak standing crops. The reason i s p o s s i b l y due to die o f f d u r i n g the growing season. The net primary p r o d u c t i v i t y f o r wetland communities i n northern North America ranged from l e s s than 0 - 109 kg/ha day (Muc 1971, J e r v i s 19^9? Bernard 1975)- An average of 10 kg/ha day was added to the underground biomass of r o s t r a t a from e a r l y J u l y through to November (Bernard 1973)-The highest phytomass production i n the subboreal zone was 2^000 kg/ha year on bog formation (Roden _et_ a l 1972). The highest net p r i -mary production i n temperate l a t i t u d e s was 4-5000 - 15000 kg/ha year on wetlands and i n the world was 50000 - 80000 kg/ha year f o r t r o p i c a l reedswamps, t r o p i c a l r a i n f o r e s t s and t r o p i c a l p e r e n n i a l p l a n t s under i n t e n s i v e c u l t i v a t i o n (Westlake 1965). Rodin _et a l (1972) reported the highest phytomass production i n the world, 150000 kg/ha year to be on t r o p i c a l bog formations. Carex communities produced l e a f area i n d i c e s of 13000 - 70000 2 2 cm /m ( J e r v i s 19^91 van der Valk and B l i s s 1970), canopy h e i g h t s of 7.0 - 100 cm, species presence of 15 - 26 spp and c h l o r o p h y l l con-t e n t s of 5-4 - 14.1 kg/ha (van der Valk and B l i s s 1970). C h l o r o p h y l l content i n the v a r i o u s l a y e r s of wetland v e g e t a t i o n has been found to i n d i c a t e the zones w i t h predominating a s s i m i l a t i o n processes ( J a k r -l o v a 1967). However, under the s p e c i a l c o n d i t i o n s of extended f l o o d i n g 16 there was no correlation between chlorophyll content and dry matter pro-duction ( P i l a t 1967). There was a great va r i a t i o n i n rostrata shoot density, 600 - 700 2 shoots/m (Mornsjo 1969)- The seasonal changes i n above ground green biomass ref l e c t e d changes i n shoot number and size (Gorham and Somers 1972). The highest standing crop values were from the most dense stands (Mornsjo 1969). The below ground biomass comprised from 10 - 97-5% of the t o t a l biomass i n wetland vegetation (Muc 1971, Westlake 1965, Westlake 1966, Mornsjo 1969, Bernard 197*1-, van der Valk and B l i s s 1970). In C. rostrata the underground portion of the t o t a l biomass varied from a summer mini-mum of 22% to a winter maximum of 7*+# (Bernard 197*0. Col l e c t i o n of the rhizomes and roots from wetland species other than Typha species i s im-pr a c t i c a l because of t h e i r scattered d i s t r i b u t i o n . Single samplings of root to shoot r a t i o s are not very useful because they fluctuate with the annual course of translocated materials within the plant (Jervis 1969). Vascular aquatic plant productivity varied from season to season and from species to species (Penfound 1956). Vascular aquatic plants had the highest productivity rate during spring and f a l l . The lower productivity during summer may be due to the fact that the maximum rate of photosyn-thesis occurs at lower temperatures than the maximum rate of respi r a t i o n (Penfound 1956, J e r v i s 1969). The high productivity of wetlands was as-sociated with the periodic flushing of nutrients from the surrounding up-lands (Jervis 1969? Boyd and Hess 1970). The productivity of wetland communities depended on the translocation of materials from underground storage areas to the a e r i a l portion of the plant and vice versa i n the f a l l (Jervis 1969> Bernard 1974). Wetland productivity p o s i t i v e l y cor-related with available water (Penfound 1956, Getz i960), but root production decreased from xeric to hydric species (Bray 1963). A sub-s t a n t i a l decrease i n Carex standing crop occurred with increasing la t i t u d e and elevation (Bernard 1973). WETLAND FORAGE QUALITY AND UTILIZATION Data on the comparative annual yields from different time se-quences of harvesting a forage through a complete growing season are essential i f harvesting or grazing programs are to be planned on an objective basis (Raymond 1969)- Vegetation type, site and stage of growth effect the nutritive value of range forage. The nutrient con-tent of forage i s influenced by many interdependent factors with the resulting additive or mass effect of a l l the factors operating simul-taneously (Cook and Harris 1950). Crude protein B r i t i s h Columbia wetland sedges declined through-out the growing season (McLean and Tisdale 1960, McLean _et_ a l 1963). Phosphorus, later i n the season, (McLean and Tisdale i960) and copper and zinc contents generally were below beef cattle requirements (van Ryswyk _et a l 1973). An exclusive diet of B r i t i s h Columbia wetland sedge was inadequate to meet beef cattle requirements after late July - mid August (McLean and Tisdale i960, McLean et a l 1963). A warm summer and mild f a l l resulted i n increased nutritive quality (McLean et a l 1963). Sedge hay generally met beef cattle winter nutrient maintenance requirements (McLean and Tisdale i960). Animals forage selectively, and their preference for plant species consumed i s influenced by many factors. Clipping studies have shown that changes i n the relative amounts of chemical compounds occur after a plant i s clipped and that the relative amounts of cer-tain chemical compounds influence palatability. Preference has been 18 -WETLAND FORAGE QUALITY AND UTILIZATION Data on the comparative annual yields from different time se-quences of harvesting a forage through a complete growing season are essential i f harvesting or grazing programs are to be planned on an objective basis (Raymond 1969). Vegetation type, site and stage of growth effect the nutritive value of range forage. The nutrient con-tent of forage i s influenced by many interdependent factors with the resulting additive or mass effect of a l l the factors operating simul-taneously (Cook and Harris 1950). Crude protein in British Columbia wetland sedges declined through-out the growing season (McLean and Tisdale 1960, McLean et^ a l 1963) a l -though the i n i t i a t i o n of new rostrata shoots during July and August (Bernard and Gorham 1977, Gorham and Somers 1973) suggests that in C.  rostrata the crude protein content does not decline as rapidly as in forage from other plant species, i f at a l l . Phosphorus, later in the season, (McLean and Tisdale 1960) and copper and zinc contents generally were below beef cattle requirements (van Ryswyk e_t al 1973) . An exclu-sive diet of Briti s h Columbia wetland sedge was inadequate to meet beef cattle requirements after late July - mid August (McLean and Tisdale 1960, McLean e_t aT 1963) . A warm summer and mild f a l l resulted in increased nutritive quality (McLean ej: al 1963). Sedge hay generally met beef cattle winter nutrient maintenance requirements (McLean and Tisdale 1960). Animals forage selectively, and their preference for plant species consumed i s influenced by many factors. Clipping studies have shown that changes in the relative amounts of chemical compounds occur after a plant i s clipped and that the relative amounts of cer-tain chemical compounds influence 'palatability. Preference has been J. - Nutrient Content of North Western North American Wetland Sedges crude protein 6.46 - 15-78$ crude f i b r e 21.71 - 28.1 % d i g e s t i b i l i t y 40 63.1 % acid detergent l i g n i n 4.7 % acid detergent fi b r e 34 % nitrogen free extract 54.7 - 55.2 % ether extract 2.0 - 2.2 % gross energy- 3841 - 4075 c a l / i cellulose 30.97 - 34.64% nitrogen 0.73 - 1.62^ calcium 0.64 - 2.94% phosphorus 0.013- 0.45% calcium:phosphorus r a t i o 2.44 - 8.57 potassium 0.35 - 1.39$ sulphur 0.09$ magnesium 0.40$ s i l i c a 3.76% copper 2.6 - 6.4 ppm molybdenum 5.0 ppm copper:molybdenum r a t i o 0.6 i r o n 62 ppm zinc 10 32 ppm manganese 135 pp™ (McLean and Tisdale i960, McLean_et a l 1963, Pringle and van Ryswyk 1967, Pringle and Miltimore 1966, van Ryswyk et a l 1973, Miltimore et a l 1970, Raleigh _et a l 1964). correlated with groups of compounds rather than simple items i n most studies. Proteins, sugars, fats and some compounds of ether extract were p o s i t i v e l y correlated with preference. Preference was probably negatively related to the presence of awns or spines, position of the leaves or plant hairiness, s t i c k i n e s s , texture, succulence or disease. Preference was dependent on the available surrounding plant species, the influence of climate, s o i l and topography on animal behaviour, animal t a c t i l e experiences and the animal's physiologic state (Burton et a l 196*1, Heady 196*f, Masten 1970). C. rostrata was palatable and readily consumed by c a t t l e (Hilton 1970, Ingvason 1969). Forage consumption was generally considered the most important indication of forage quality. On forages, ruminant animals were cap-able of consuming only three times the i r maintenance requirements (Heath et a l 1973). A normal voluntary daily consumption was 3-0 kg. of dry matter for every 100 kg. of body weight (Crampton 1957). As the t o t a l fibrous f r a c t i o n of the forage increased, voluntary intake decreased (van Soest 1965). The rate of forage intake was l i m i t e d by the capacity of the lower digestive tract to handle the undigested fib r e mass (Crampton 1957, Waldo 1970, Heath et a l 1970). Therefore, when d i g e s t i b i l i t y was high there was a low amount of residue and the lower digestive tract did not r e s t r i c t the rate of passage (Heath _e_t a l 1973). The rate of digestion was retarded by excessive l i g n i f i -cation, p a r t i a l starvation of the rumen f l o r a from a lack of nitrogen, minerals or vitamins, or from excessive bacteriostatic agents i n the rumen (Crampton 1957)• The relationship between digestible dry matter and voluntary intake was highly correlated with both chemical composition and d i -gestible dry matter (van Soest 1965). In v i t r o laboratory determin-ations have resulted i n 0.95 correlations of digestible energy intake with acid dissolved dry matter. These procedures were related to consumption rate i n a positive way and c e l l wall constituents were related to consumption rate i n a negative way. This suggested that consumption rate was related to the r a t i o of soluble c e l l content to fi b r e content (Heath et a l 1973). Single factors were not used to estimate d i g e s t i b i l i t y (van Soest 1967). Bacteria more readily attacked simpler carbohydrates. Protein r i c h feeds promoted the microbial breakdown of f i b r e (Maynard and L o o s l i 1969). Lignin lowered the d i g e s t i b i l i t y of cellulose and other complex carbohydrates (Harper 1963, Maynard and L o o s l i 1969). Intact f i b r e hindered the action of digesting enzymes -thus reducing the d i g e s t i b i l i t y of a l l nutrients (Maynard and L o o s l i 1969). The main digestible portions of hay included protein, hydrolizable carbohy-drates, f a t s , vitamins and minerals (Harper 1969). As crude protein i n forage increased, d i g e s t i b i l i t y of protein increased exponentially and the percent digestible protein increased r e c t i l i n e a r l y . The true d i g e s t i b i l i t y of protein was r e l a t i v e l y constant regardless of the concentration of crude protein i n forages (Holter and Eeid 1959)-Lack of time for digestion or absorption may have explained a decrease 22 i n d i g e s t i b i l i t y with high forage intake. Digestion c o e f f i c i e n t s varied with the rate of forage intake, r a t i o n , age and vitamin and mineral deficiencies (Maynard and L o o s l i 1969). High summer tempera-tures decreased the d i g e s t i b i l i t y of forage. Forage produced on a sward after grazing was of lower d i g e s t i b i l i t y than forage produced on a cut sward because the grazed sward was comprised of regrowth and less d i -gestible old growth while the cut sward was comprised e n t i r e l y of highly digestible regrowth (Raymond I969K Digestible energy i s the c a l o r i c value of the digestible portion of a food. The t o t a l digestible nutrients (kg ) x 917 equals diges-t i b l e energy (kcal. ) (Stoddart _e_t a l 1975). Determination of digestible energy was replaced by a determination of digestible dry matter (Ritten-house 1971). The assumptions that were made with respect to fermenta-t i o n , heat increment and methane losses gave both net energy and meta-b o l i c energy an appearance of precision not actually achieved. Diges-t i b l e energy was the best p r a c t i c a l measurement of nutrient value. Chemical analyses were not accepted as t o t a l l y r e l i a b l e determinations of forage worth because different forages had different d i g e s t i b i l i t i e s (Stoddart et a l 1975). THE INFLUENCE OF CLIPPING ON PLANTS Generally, c l i p p i n g was detrimental to plants. The severity of p a r t i a l d e f o l i a t i o n upon a plant depended upon the proportions and structures removed, frequency of d e f o l i a t i o n , quantity of stored food reserves, hereditary factors governing growth rate and the s u i t a b i l i t y "23 "of the environment f o r growth a f t e r d e f o l i a t i o n (Troughton 1957). Frequent c l i p p i n g r e s u l t e d i n increased p l a n t crude p r o t e i n con-tent (Aldous 1931 b ) , greater p l a n t m o r t a l i t y (Troughton 1957), i n h i -b i t e d p l a n t reproduction (Carter and Law 1948), lowered herbage y i e l d s (Aldous 1930 b, Parker and Sampson 1931, B i s w e l l and Weaver 1933, Gernert 1936, H a r r i s o n 1939, H a r r i s o n and Hogson 1939, Carter and Law 1948, Sprague and S u l l i v a n 1950, C r i d e r 1955, Branson 1956, Troughton 1957, McLean et^ al_ 1963) and produced un d e s i r a b l e changes i n the vege-t a t i o n composition paving the way f o r s o i l d e t e r i o r a t i o n and e r o s i o n (Aldous 1931 b, Weinman 1948). P r i n g l e and van Ryswyk (1967) reported c l i p p i n g d i d not reduce y i e l d s and M i l l a r (1973) found that c l i p p i n g d i d not i n f l u e n c e p l a n t species composition. C l i p p i n g caused c e s s a t i o n of p l a n t root growth (Graber 1931, B i s w e l l and Weaver 1933, Gernert 1936, H a r r i s o n and Hogson 1939, Car t e r and Law 1948, C r i d e r 1955, Branson 1956, Troughton 1957). The continuous suppression of above ground growth r e s u l t e d i n l a s t i n g root i n a c t i v i t y and the i n a b i l i t y of the p l a n t to r e p l e n i s h food reserves (Leukel 1927, McCarthy 1935, H a r r i s o n 1939, McCarthy and P r i c e 1942, Weinman 1948, S u l l i v a n and Sprague 1953, C r i d e r 1955, Troughton 1957, Baker and Gar-wood 1961, Lobb 1969). The weakened pla n t was l e s s able to absorb nu-t r i e n t s (Graber 1931) and r e s i s t g r a z i n g , c o l d , e r o s i o n ( C r i d e r 1955), drought, disease ( C r i d e r 1955, Carter and Law 1948), i n s e c t s (Graber 1931), competing:; p l a n t s (Aldous 1930 b, Carter and Law 1948, Neiland and C u r t i s 1956) and winter i n j u r y (Leukel 1927, Graber 1931). The effect of d e f o l i a t i o n upon food reserves at the end of the growing season was more drastic when a higher proportion of herbage was removed (Troughton 1957, Davis i960); the operation was carried out frequently (Troughton 1957); d e f o l i a t i o n occurred nearer to a period of reserve food storage (McCarthy 1935, Troughton 1957); or environmental conditions were favourable for rapid regrowth (S u l l i v a n and Sprague 1953)- The harmful effects of frequent d e f o l i a t i o n were offset by cutting the atiubbiehigher and ensuring s u f f i c i e n t photosyn-t h e t i c a l l y active tissue was l e f t to meet the future carbohydrate need of the plant. The quality of the regrowth was not altered by increased stubble height (Davis i960). PLANT STORED FOOD RESERVES Management practices imposed upon perennial sod crops must a l -ways be evaluated i n terms of the i r effect upon the continued growth of the sod (Burton and Jackson 1962). Plants require adequate stored food reserves for the production of new spring growth (McCarthy 1935, McCarthy and Price 19^2, Lobb 1969), disease resistance, insect re-sistance (Graber 1929, Marx 1964, Lobb 1969), drought resistance (Weaver 1930, Lobb 1969), winter hardiness (Weaver 1930, Mooney and B i l l i n g s i960, Lobb 1969), seed v i a b i l i t y (Weaver 1930) and to permit an increase i n t e r r i t o r y and plant cover reducing weed invasion and preventing erosion (Graber 1929, Weaver 1930, Lobb 1969)- Reserve substance refers to materials which are alternately accumulated and u t i l i z e d by the plant i n i t s growth or when disturbed by changes i n i t s environment (Sullivan and Sprague 194-3) • The stored food reserve compounds i n graminoid plants i n order of importance are simple sugars, fruct'osans, possibly pentosans, starch and hemicellulose (McCarthy 1938, McCarthy and Price 1942, Troughton 1957, Lobb 1969). Graminoid plants store lower volumes of food reserves than broadleaf plants (Fonda and B l i s s 1966). In graminoid plants the food reserves are stored i n roots, r h i -zomes, corms, bulbs, l e a f bases, lea f sheath bases and stem bases (Weinman 1948, Troughton 1957, Lobb 1969). The greatest amount of food reserves are stored i n the roots because of the i r large volume but the greatest concentrations of food reserves were located near the abundant meristematic tissue i n stubble (Troughton 1957, Garwood 1961, Lobb 1969)- Underground food reserves were l o c a l i z e d near the s o i l surface (Marx 1964). In C. rostrata, rhizomes played a more important storage role than roots (Fonda and B l i s s 1966). Stored reserves were highest i n the f a l l dormancy period, de-clined gradually through winter, declined rapidly i n early spring during rapid spring growth, increased rapidly i n l a t e spring and early summer u n t i l flowering where they remained constant or de-clined and f i n a l l y increased after seed maturity u n t i l f a l l dormancy set i n (Aldous 1930, McCarthy 1938, Troughton 1957, Hyder and Sneva 1959, Mooney and B i l l i n g s i960, Fonda and B l i s s 1966, Lobb 1969). The rapid decline of food reserves i n the early spring was due to trans-location of materials from stored areas for use i n a e r i a l shoot growth. The .rapid increase of food reserves i n late spring, early summer and early f a l l was due to the translocation of photosynthate from a e r i a l shoots to storage areas. Many researchers have noted that plant growth rate and stored food reserve accumulation were inversely related (Samp-son and McCarthy 1930, McCarthy 1935, McCarthy and Price 19*f2, Weinman 19*f8, Fonda and B l i s s 1966, Bernard 197*0 . Plant stored food reserves were influenced by the duration of preflower vegetative growth, vegetative to reproductive stem r a t i o , basal leafiness, height of the growing plant, delay i n stem elongation and rate of growth (Hyder and Sneva 1959). The duration of preflower vegetative growth was determined partly by cutting, pruning or gra-zing practices (Graber 1931). The rate of growth was influenced by s o i l f e r t i l i t y especially nitrogen content (Graber 1931, Weinman 19*+8, Hyder and Sneva 1959), s o i l moisture (Graber 1931, McCarthy and Price 19*1-2, Weinman 19*1-8), s o i l texture (Weinman 19*1-8), temperature (Mc-Carthy and Price 19*f2, Weinman 19*f8, Fonda and B l i s 1966) and l i g h t (Graber 1931, Weinman 19*1-8). The maximum competitive eff i c i e n c y of b e n e f i c i a l plants occurred when optimum f e r t i l i t y was combined with practices of cutting or grazing which maintained a productive l e v e l of reserve foods i n such grasses (Graber 1931, McCarthy 1938). McLean et a l (1963) f e l t the native sedge meadows of B r i t i s h Columbia would benefit from early removal of c a t t l e to allow a b u i l d up of food re-serves. One method of determining the quantity of stored food reserves i n plants i s by chemical analysis. A review of chemical techniques was published by Archbold (1940). Disadvantages of chemical methods are that the disturbance of the remaining graminoid system makes i t useless for study, there i s a loss of many fine roots during removal and samples usually contain dead roots which are not part of the plant being studied (Marx 1964, Lobb 1969). An easier method of determining stored food reserves exists which does not have the same drawbacks that are associated with chem-i c a l determinations. Photosynthesis i s prevented by excluding l i g h t and t h i s causes the plant to exhaust stored food reserves for re-covery. The e t i o l a t e d growth correlates with the amount of stored food reserves and i s measured i n grams of new dry matter produced per unit area of sod termed the "sod reserve index" (Burton and Jackson 1962, Marx 1964, Lobb 1969). Sod reserve index was found to vary with the species, s o i l conditions, management practices, amount of solar radiation, trampling, compaction, and seasonal changes (Marx 1964). The precision of t h i s method depended on the v a r i a b i l i t y of the test area, v a r i a b i l i t y of the material sampled (Burton and Jack-son 1962) and adequate environmental control i n the dark chamber (Marx 1964). ANIMALS AND WETLAND VEGETATION Heavy grazing has damaged wetland meadows (van Ryswyk and Baw-tree 1971). As with cl i p p i n g , grazing causes a reduction of y i e l d (Sullivan and Sprague 194-2) Altered wetland plant species composi-ti o n associated with grazing i s probably due to trampling which des-troys roots and rhizomes and exposes raw s o i l creating an id e a l seed bed ( M i l l a r 1973). Plants with shorter vegetative stem internodes, large numbers of vegetative stems and low growing points were more resistant to grazing because they l o s t less and were able to produce more, photosynthetic area preventing a deleterious taxation of stored food reserves (Troughton 1957, Lobb 1969). Plants were susceptible to grazing during periods of rapid growth, flower production and seed production (Sampson and McCarthy 1930). Grazing heavily after seed maturity prevented normal food reserve storage and stimulated growth drawing on stored food reserves (McCarthy 1938). van Kyswyk et a l (1973) found c a t t l e consuming B r i t i s h Columbia sedge hay had an average daily gain of 0.22 kg/head, a conversion rate of 25-9 kg of dry matter/per kg of gain and a beef y i e l d of 89 kg of gain/ha year. McLean et_ a l (1963) recorded an average daily gain of 0.64 kg/head for animals grazing B r i t i s h Columbia sedge. A downward trend i n the average daily gain, t o t a l gain per hectare and t o t a l digestible nutrients produced per hectare over the season sug-gested the pastures were overstocked or season long grazing reduced forage production. Most wetland primary producers are consumed only after they die as i s frequently the case i n natural ecosystems (Jervis 1969). Arth-ropod grazing stimulated productivity (Westlake 1965) possibly by re-ducing the bottleneck of b u i l t up organic matter i n the nutrient cycle In a sedge fen, the epibioses were consumed by four gastropods and one ostracod. Another s i g n i f i c a n t food resource i n the sedge fen was detritus which was consumed by numerous invertebrates. The l i v i n g tissue of macrophytes were not s i g n i f i c a n t l y consumed. Bacteria were the main agents i n the transformation of macrophyte tissues on fens. These bacteria were consumed by animals along with epibioses and detritus. The role of fungi i n the transformation of the tissue of macrophytes i n fens were considerable only i n the parts of the plants above water (Smirnov 1952, 1961). Invertebrates consumed 0.4 - 7*5% of the leaves and inflorescences of an emergent community standing crop per day (Westlake 1965). SITE SELECTION METHODS No " t y p i c a l " wetland meadow exists i n i n t e r i o r B r i t i s h Columbia. I n t e r i o r wetland meadows vary with differences i n nutrient enrichment, water regime, climate, vegetation, plus a multitude of other factors r e s u l t i n g i n a wide variety of meadow types. The study area chosen was as representative as possible of the type of meadows grazed i n i n t e r i o r B r i t i s h Columbia. The study area was chosen i n consultation with l o c a l B r i t i s h Columbia Department of Agriculture and Forest Service Range Di v i s i o n personnel. CHARACTERIZATION OF THE STUDY MEADOW The study meadow's size was estimated (after the method of M i l l a r 1973) and the elevation was measured with an altimeter. The ambient a i r temperature of the study s i t e was monitored by a thermoscribe set i n a Stevenson screen 1.2 m above the ground. Mean daily maximum and minimum a i r temperatures, r a i n f a l l , snowfall and to-t a l p r e c i p i t a t i o n data were obtained from an Environment Canada climate station kO km north and 7 km west of the study s i t e . The temperature and p r e c i p i t a t i o n data from the climate station were used to assess climate after the temperature readings from the climate station and study s i t e were compared. The microtopography of the study s i t e was assessed by running twenty-six 5 m long p a r a l l e l transects spaced 20 m apart over a 5 square metre block within the study exclosure. Microtopographical elevations were divided into two types, high (hummock tops) and low (between hummocks). Wherever the side of a hummock intersected a transect a point was recorded on graph paper. When the points were joined a map of the microtopography was produced from which the area covered by hummocks could be measured. Meadow drainage was observed while walking around the p e r i -meter of the study meadow. The water table was measured approximately bi-weekly with a metre s t i c k at the same locat i o n within the study exclosure. When the water table dropped below the s o i l surface a p i t was dug to continue measurement. S o i l temperature and meadow water pH, conductivity and calcium ion concentration were measured at approximately bi-weekly i n t e r v a l s from four consistent locations i n and near the study exclosure (Figure 3). The f i r s t three meadow water pH determinations were made i n the f i e l d . Succeeding meadow water pH, a l l water conductivity, and a l l water calcium ion determinations were made at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia i n early September from water samples collected i n 1 l i t r e p l a s t i c bottles. These samples had been adequately pre-served by the addition of 1 ml/1 of 0.1 g of phenylmercurie acetate dissolved i n a 20% 1,4-dioxane solution (Orion Research 1975). Figure 3 - S o i l , Water, and Temperature Sampling Locations (Scale 1,000:1) 32a LEGEND (  Exclosure L~_-3 Stevenson Screen B Sampling Location (Water p H . S o i l Temp. ,Water Sample ) • Soil Sampling or Soil Pit Location o 33 Meadow water pH was determined i n both the f i e l d and the lab-oratory by a Fisher accumet d i g i t a l pH meter., equipped with a Fisher combination electrode, to the nearest 0.1 pH unit. Stock pH stan-dards of pH 7 and h were used to calibrate the pH meter. Care was taken to clean the electrode between readings with d i s t i l l e d water and lens tissue paper. Conductivity was measured d i r e c t l y using a Radiometer type CDM conductivity meter. Calcium ion concentration was determined by an EEL atomic ab-sorption flame photometer. Gravity f i l t e r e d samples (#41 f i l t e r paper) were dilut e d and analysed along with standard solutions of known calcium ion concentration. A graph of concentration i n recorder units versus parts per m i l l i o n was produced from which the unknown sample calcium ion concentrations could be read i n parts per m i l l i o n . These values were then multiplied by the appropriate d i l u t i o n s y i e l -ding the actual calcium ion concentrations i n the meadow water. S o i l temperatures were measured by a standard mercury bulb ther-mometer lowered down p l a s t i c tubes embedded i n the s o i l 10 and 50 cm at each sampling location. S o i l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n was determined by f i e l d inspection of s o i l p i t s and laboratory analysis of s o i l cores. S o i l p i t locations were s t r a t i f i e d by vegetation type. Two s o i l cores were collected from the most intensively studied vegetation zone with a s o i l auger and 34 and analysed at the A g r i c u l t u r e Canada Range Research S t a t i o n i n Kamloops. The two s o i l cores were sectioned and analysed f o r percent water h o l d i n g c a p a c i t y , bulk d e n s i t y , percent shrinkage, wet c o l o r (1 core o n l y ) , unrubbed f i b r e content (1 core o n l y ) , rubbed f i b r e content, c o n d u c t i v i t y (1 core o n l y ) , pH i n d i s t i l l e d water (1 core o n l y ) , pH i n 0.2 M CaCl^ (1 core o n l y ) , pyrophosphate s o l u b i l i t y , percent ash content and percent i n s o l u b l e ash content (System of S o i l C l a s s i f i c a t i o n f o r Canada 1974). Vegetation zones were a r b i t a r i l y d e l i n e a t e d by the dominant species. F o l i a r cover was estimated by surveying each v e g e t a t i o n zone v i s u a l l y and p l a c i n g each p l a n t species i n t o 1 of 8 broad f o -l i a r cover groups (Table I I ) . F o l i a r cover i n the most i n t e n s i v e l y s t u d i e d zone was a l s o measured by the l i n e point sampling technique (Brown 1954). A b l u n t p i n was dropped every 15-24 cm along a 15-24 m t r a n s e c t . Means and standard e r r o r of the means were c a l c u l a t e d f o r each plant species from the l i n e point sampling data. Abundance and s o c i a b i l i t y estimates f o r each species w i t h i n 3 of the 5 zones were obtained (Table I I I ) . P l a n t s present i n the study area were c o l l e c t e d and i d e n t i f i e d . The r e s u l t i n g plant c o l l e c t i o n i s h e l d by the B r i -t i s h Columbia F o r e s t S e r v i c e Herbarium i n W i l l i a m s Lake. PRODUCTIVITY AND NUTRITION A 15 m by 15 m exclosure s u f f i c i e n t to exclude ungulates was constructed on the study s i t e (Figure 4) c o n t a i n i n g 72 p l o t s arranged i n a completely random design. Each sample area was 25 centimetre 35 TABLE I I - Legend for Species F o l i a r Cover* 1 - r/o 1 - 1 to 5% 2 - 5 to 25$ 3 - 25 to 50$ k - 50 to 75$ 5 - 75 to 95$ 6 - 95$ * s i m i l a r to the method mentioned by Daubenmire (1968). 36 TABLE I I I - Legend for Abundance and S o c i a b i l i t y Scale* 1 - rare i n d i v i d u a l 2 - few scattered individuals 3 - single patch of individuals k - several scattered individuals 5 - few small patches of individuals 6 - several well spaced individuals 7 - continuous cover of well spaced individuals 8 - continuous dense cover with few openings 9 - uninterrupted dense cover *Natural Resource Inventory, Methodology, A v a i l a b i l i t y and Interpretation (1976). gure k - Field Exclosure 37a . ^ F e n c e Pos t , 5 m a p a r t _ * -* ®~^~ - B a r b Wi re Fence 5 m 9 m 6 II 10 12 13 15 8 Hm-H 18 14 17 12 17 9 4 5 18 2 u 6 7 Plot S i z e : Im j r l m T rea tment No. 0 .5 m between rows 15 14 15 7 13 8 1 1 17 1 1 10 6 12 18 16 14 13 E to 6 16 2 3 15 16 2 5 14 3 9 5 17 10 18 8 4 6 12 8 7 10 5 9 3 9 13 16 E to 0 - * ® — * v * — ® — * — H * -HZ) 15m 38 Figure 5 - Sampling Frame 1 0 0 c m square (625 cm1) i n the centre of a 1 square metre plot (Figure 5)• There were 18 different c l i p p i n g treatments with 4 replicates each. Treatments 1 - 8 and 17 were clipped to an 8 cm height and treatments °j - 16 and 18 were, clipped to a 23 cm height. Treatments 1 - 4 and 9 - 1 2 were clipped 5 times at ^two'.vwe'ek'intervals sim-ulating a 2 month grazing period. The f i r s t clippings of these treatments were staggered at approximately 2 week in t e r v a l s . Treat-ments 1 - 3 , 5 , 9 - 1 1 and 13 were clipped again at the end of August when the e t i o l a t i o n experiment began. The l a s t c l i p p i n g of the 2 month cl i p p i n g period for treatments 4 and 12 comprised part of the treatment y i e l d as well. Treatments 5 and 13 represented controls for the e t i o l a t i o n experiment. Treatments 5 - 8 and 13 - 16, to-gether with the f i r s t c l i p p i n g of treatments 1 - 4 and 9 - 1 2 served as control treatments, showing the seasonal trend of standing crop and chemical composition of the unmanipulated CL_ rostrata community (Figure 6). Each additional c l i p p i n g was made to supplement produc-t i v i t y and n u t r i t i o n a l data. Two sets of 8 cm and 23 cm clippings each replicated twice were made. One set of 4 on November 15, 1977 and another set of 4 on February 2, 1978. A l l clippings were re-tained and a i r dried at the end of each sampling day. A l l samples were oven drisrd at a temperature of 70°C for 24 hours before t h e i r dry weights were measured and recorded to the nearest 0.1 g. Each sample was then ground by a Wiley M i l l so that they would pass through a 40 mesh screen. Smaller samples were ground Figure 6 - Clipping Dates of Treatment P l o t s 40a TREATMENT NO. CLIPPING.. ' H T (cm) "" CLIPPING DATE M a y 2 0 May 31 June 15 June 27 July 18 July 28 Aug. 16 Aug. 29 8 X X X X X X 23 ; 2 ' 8 X X X X X ^ X 10 23 '• ',3 ; ; ' •• 8 X X X , . x ' X ;' . X II 23 • , 8 . X X •' X X . x •12 23 ,.' 8 X 13 ' 23 6 8 ' x • : • 14 : 23 8 • •• .. . x :. ' 5 23 , 8 8 x 16 : 23 ' , 17 ' ' . • 8 '.' X X X • x X x X • . x •;' 18 23 L E G E N D P l o t C l i p p e d 1 X 1 P l o t N o t C l i p p e d I | 41 w i t h a mortar and p e s t l e . A l l samples were analysed f o r crude p r o t e i n content by the standard M i c r o k j e l d a h l method f o r t o t a l Nitrogen deter-mination ( A s s o c i a t i o n of O f f i c i a l A n a l y t i c a l Chemists 1971). The samples were digested i n n i t r i c - p e r c h l o r i c a c i d as i n the aluminum -block method of John (1972). From the residue of d i g e s t i o n the Phos-phorus content of the forage was determined by the vanadomolybdate method ( A s s o c i a t i o n of O f f i c i a l A n a l y t i c a l Chemists 1971). Calcium, potassium, magnesium, z i n c , copper, i r o n and manganese contents were determined by atomic absorption - flame emission spectrophotometry. ETIOLATION EXPERIMENT S o i l - p l a n t plugs, approximately 15 cm i n diameter and 10 cm i n h e ight, p l o t s 1 - 5, 9 - 13, 17 and 18 and were used to o b t a i n a r e l a t i v e measure of p l a n t stored food reserves (Marx 1964). The s o i l cores were brought to the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia where the remaining stubble was removed from the p l a n t s and the plugs were placed i n a P e r c i v a l model PG 78 growth chamber. The temperature was main-tained at 20 C, the water l e v e l at 0 - 10 cm below the s o i l surface and the chamber a i r C0 2 concentration was kept the same as the ambient atmosphere. L i g h t was completely excluded from the chamber. The e t i o l a t e d growth was c o l l e c t e d about once per month u n t i l growth ceased. At t h i s time the oven dry weights of the e t i o l a t e d growth were measured to the nearest 0.01 g. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS S t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s of the data was undertaken to a i d i n d e t e r -mining the e f f e c t s of c l i p p i n g data and height of forage c l i p p i n g on plant y i e l d , n u t r i t i v e components, and stored food reserves. Produc-t i v i t y and nutrient component data within each cl i p p i n g period treat-ment were analysed by a stepwise multiple regression procedure (Le and Tenisci 1971) using three independent variables, c l i p p i n g height, days to f i r s t c l i p p i n g and days since f i r s t c l i p p i n g . Terms with a proba-b i l i t y of less than 0.01 were omitted from the overall regression e-2 quation (Dependent variable) = h + t + c + h t + h c + t c + htc + t + 2 2 2 c + ht + he (where h = clipping; 0 = 8 cm and 1 = 23 cm; t = time of f i r s t c l i p i n days after May 20; c = days after f i r s t c l i p within a treatment). Using the generated regression equations, values were calculated to produce regression adjusted data tables. Total season long y i e l d and e t i o l a t i o n experiment data were analysed by a two step Student Neuman Keuls multiple range test (Halm and Le 1975) at an alpha l e v e l = 0.01 to determine s i g n i f i c a n t l y different treatment groups of means. The 99$ confidence int e r v a l s were calculated for the t o t a l y i e l d and e t i o l a t i o n experiment r e s u l t s . Productivity and nutrient data from bi-monthly clipped samples of untouched standing crop were analysed by a stepwise simple regression procedure (Le and Tenisci 1971). Terms with a probability of less than 0.01 were omitted from the regres-sion equation. Using the generated regression equations values were calculated to produce regression adjusted data tables. The four c l i p -pings were made during the la t e f a l l and winter were each replicated twice. Means and standard errors of the means were calculated for the f a l l and winter raw data. 43 BESULTS AND OBSERVATIONS CHARACTERIZATION OF THE STUDY MEADOW  Climate The June 13 through August 31, 1977 range of daily minimum temper-ature, -8.5 to 6.0°C and -1.0 to 9-0°C, and daily maximum temperatures, 4.5 to 31.0°C and 8.0 to 24.5°C, for the study s i t e and the Tautri Creek Climate Station respectively, indicated that similar temperature regimes were found at both locations (Appendix A). Daily temperatures appeared s l i g h t l y milder at the Climate,Station. The 1976 - 77 winter temperatures were somewhat milder than usual. The coldest month, January, had a mean daily minimum temperature of -17.2°C, 3.1°C warmer than the adjusted standard average (Table IV). The 113-3 cm of snow which f e l l prior to March, 1977 was 17-4 cm less than usual but the 59-9 cm which f e l l during March was 3 times the adjusted standard average. The May - August r a i n -f a l l , 207-1 mm, was 21.3 mm greater than that of the adjusted standard average. 1977 was much wetter than the average year, 492.1 mm of pre-c i p i t a t i o n f e l l . This was 73-3 mm greater than the adjusted standard average annual p r e c i p i t a t i o n (Table IV). Meadow Water The study meadow received water from p r e c i p i t a t i o n , seepage and an inflowing.drainage course. Meadow water was l o s t v i a evaporation and a northward drainage outlet. The water table dropped from 29 cm above the s o i l surface on May 20 to 2 cm below the s o i l surface on July 28. , From la t e July u n t i l mid August the water table rose 4 cm 44 TABLE IV - .Climatic Data Monthly Mean Daily Temperatures (°C) YEAR MONTH February A p r i l June August October December January March May July September November Adjusted Standard Average Maximum -.5.8 0.6 3.1 7.8 13-8 17-5 19-9 18.8 15-2 8.4 0.7 -3-9 Minimum -21.3 -17-6 -13-9 -6.7 -1-9 ,1-6 3-3 1.9 -1.6 -4.6 -11.5 -17-3 1976 Maximum - 2.2 - 0.9 1.7 8.8 12.6 13-4 - 17-1 17.1 8.0 2.6 - 1.2 Minimum -16.2 -17-1 -13-8 -6.0 -1.2 0.8 - 5-1 0.3 -4.4 - 8.0 -13-2 1977 Maximum - 1.3 2.7 2.0 10.2 11.4 17-0 18.2 21.1 12.6 8.3 - 1.3 - 9-0 Minimum -17-2 -10.2 -12.6 -5.2 -1.7 1.2 4.0 3-2 -0.8 3-9 -13-6 -23-0 1978 Maximum - 7-1 0.7 4.2 8.5 12.0 19.9 Minimum -17.0 -14.6 -10.6 -3.6 -2.5 1.3 45 Monthly P r e c i p i t a t i o n YEAR MONTH February A p r i l June August October December January March May July September November Adjusted Standard Average Mean R a i n f a l l (mm) 0.7 1-3 5-1 8.4 38.6 40.6 51-8 54.8 22.1 26.4 5-3 1.3 Mean Snowfall (cm) 35.3 26.2 20.3 11.2 4.6 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.8 9-9 23.4 35-1 Mean Total P r e c i p i t a t i o n (mm) 36.1 27-4 25.8 19.6 43-2 40.9 51-8 54.8 22.9 36.3 28.7 36.3 1976 Mean R a i n f a l l (mm) 1.3 0.0 0.0 5-6 25.4 86.6 40.1 84.9 27.2 17.2 5.6 7.4 Mean Snowfall (cm) 35-6 23.1 34.3 1.8 1-5 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9-1 25.4 49.8 Mean Total P r e c i p i t a t i o n (mm) 36.8 23.1 34.3 7-4 26.9 87.6 40.1 84.9 27.2 26.4 31.0 57.2 1977 Mean R a i n f a l l (mm) 1.3 1.3 0.0 11.7 20.1 47.5 83.6 55-9 68.9 13.6 1.8 0.0 Mean Snowfall (cm) 18.3 10.7 59-9 6.1 15.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.5 35-0 34.3 Mean Total P r e c i p i t a t i o n (mm) 19.6 11.9 59-9 17.8 35-8 47.5 83.6 55-9 68.9 20.1 36.8 34.3 1978 Mean R a i n f a l l (mm) 0.0 0.0 6.6 29.0 30.3 42.0 Mean Snowfall (cm) 33-3 6.4 24.1 7.0 12.0 0.0 Mean Total P r e c i p i t a t i o n (mm) 33-3 6.4 30.7 36.0 42.3 42.0 46 -aft e r which i t bagan f a l l i n g slowly f o r the r e s t of the season (Table V). The water pH f e l l from 7.2 on May 20 to 7.0 by l a t e June then rose s t e a d i l y to a value of 7.4 i n l a t e August (Table V I ) . Water calcium content increased throughout the season from 13.6 ppm i n mid May to 88.5 ppm by the end of August (Table V I ) . Meadow water c o n d u c t i v i t y increased from 249 mmho/cm i n mid May to a peak of 840 mmho/cm at the end of J u l y . There was a s l i g h t d e c l i n e i n the water c o n d u c t i v i t y through August (Table V I ) . S o i l s The s o i l temperature at 10 cm increased from 6.9°C to a maximum of 11.2°C i n l a t e J u l y then decreased to 10.2°C by the end of August. The s o i l temperature at 50 cm followed a s i m i l a r p a t t e r n except the peak temperature was about 2 weeks l a t e r and 1°C coo l e r and the temper-ature v a r i a t i o n throughout the season was smaller (Table V I ) . The v a r i o u s s o i l types u n d e r l a i d the study area i n co n c e n t r i c r i n g s , i n some cases broken r i n g s around the meadow centre. The major-i t y of the meadow was u n d e r l a i d by a c e n t r a l l y l o c a t e d Typic Humisol -Mesic Humisol - T e r r i c Mesic Humisol complex. At three l o c a t i o n s around t h i s Humisol complex a calcareous Gleyed Humic Regosol followed by a calcareous Gleyed Regosol formed the "broken r i n g s " mentioned above. The calcareous Gleyed Regosol was formed from a marl parent m a t e r i a l . The next r i n g was a calcareous O r t h i c 'Humic G l e y s o l . A Gleyed Gray L u v i s o l was found at the meadow boundary. The surrounding upland s o i l was an O r t h i c Gray L u v i s o l (Figure 7, Appendix C). The 47 TABLE V - S o i l Water Table Data DATE WATER TABLE (cm above s o i l surface) May 20 +29 May 31 +16 June 15 +15 June 27 +10 J u l y 18 + 8 J u l y 28 - 2 August 16 + 3 August 29 + 1 48 TABLE VI - S o i l Temperature and Water Parameters Data From Regression Equations SOIL TEMPERATURE (°C) WATER pH WATER CALCIUM WATER CONDUCTANCE DATE 10 cm 50 cm CONCENTRATION (ppm) (mmho/( May 20 6.85 6.75 7 .20 13.6 249 May 31 8.16 7-70 7-09 21 .8 407 June 15 9-57 8.77 7.00 3 2 . 9 583 June 27 10.39 9-45 6.96 41 .8 692 J u l y 18 11.16 10.25 6.99 57.4 813 J u l y 28 11.23 10.46 7.04 64 .8 840 August 16 10.82 10.55 7.21 78.9 836 August 29 10.15 10.37 7.38 8 8 . 5 792 49 TABLE VII - S o i l Temperature and Water Parameters Regression Equations S o i l Temp (10°C) = 6.8448 + 0.12993t - 0.00096271t 2 SE = 1.0616 r 2 = 0.67391 S o i l Temp (50°C) = 6.7482 + 0.092494t - 0.00056083t 2 SE = 0.84322 r = 0.73536 Water pH = 7.2 - 0.011222t + 0.00012836t 2 SE = 0.209.84 r 2 = 0.313 Water Ca (ppm) = 13.599 + 0.74159t SE = 33.156 r 2 = 0.38081 Water Conductance (mmho/cm) =248.81 + 15.444t - 0.099624t SE = 231.79 r = 0.46913 where t = days a f t e r May 20 50 Figure 7 - Study Area S o i l Map (Scale 1,000:1) LEGEND Orthic Gray Luvisol 1 I Gleyed Gray Luvisol K \ \ \ \ 1 Calcarious Orthic Humic Gleysol V/////A Calcarious Gleyed Regosol II1111 11 Typic Humisol-Mesic Humisol- _ _ _ Terric Mesic; Humisol. Complex J- R X X 3 Calcarious Gleyed Humic Regosol i ^ H H 51 meadow surface was dotted with hummocks. There were 3 major types of these surface undulations each separated by s o i l - vegetation zones. The hummocks of the central Carex zone (Humisol complex) were li n e a r i n shape, up to 50 cm high and had a less productive plant population associated with them. Hummock size was increased toward the drainage outlet. The hummocks covered about h% of the meadow surface (Figure 8). The hummocks of the surrounding Betula - S a l i x zone (calcareous Orthic Humic Gleysol) were dome shaped. Many of these were active or extinct ant h i l l s . A very irr e g u l a r intermediate hummock type was observed under the Betula - Carex zone (Humisol complex). Vegetation The differences between the 5 major vegetation zones were s t r i k i n g . The vegetation zone boundaries closely followed the s o i l type boun-daries (Figures 7, 9)- The Carex zone was dominated by C. rostrata which had a f o l i a r cover of 77% (Tables V I I I , IX). This plant grew between the hummocks rather than on them. The height of C^ rostrata increased from 60 cm on May 20 to 130 cm i n mid July after which the height remained s t a t i c (Table X). C^ rostrata heads were f i r s t observed flowering on June 15 while the majority of the flowering culms did not flower u n t i l l a t e June or early July. The side of the C^ rostrata inflorescences facing the sun turned dark brown' while those of Carex  atherodes remained green. The inner sheaths of C^ rostrata grew faster than the outer sheaths. Generally Calamagrostis inexpansa and forbs l i s t e d under Zone 1 of Table IX but excluding Petasites saggitatus were 52 F i g u r e 8 - Hummock Map (Hummocks r e p r e s e n t e d by t h e d o t t e d a r e a s and s a m p l i n g t r a n s e c t s r e p r e s e n t e d by t h e l i n e s ) 52a 53 Figure 9 - Study Area Vegetation Map (Scale 1,000:1) LEGEND Pinus- Calamagrostis I I Betula-Salix-^ I I Betula -Carex 1111 I I I 11 C a r e x - J u n c u s - H o r d e u m Y////A C a r e x M 1 I I I 11 Aquatic |w:v-.'..'.^ --.v| TABLE VII I - F o l i a r Cover Measured by Method (Brown 195*+) the Line Point Sampling SPECIES C. rostrata L i t t e r Calamagrostis inexpansa Class Musci C. a q u a t i l i s  C. atherodes Ranunculus gemelinii var hookeri Petasites saggitatus S t e l l a r i a calycantha var bongardiana FOLIAR COVER STANDARD ERROR (#) OF THE MEAN (% F o l i a r Cover) 76.7 7 .9 14.7 3-7 2.9 3 . 9 2.9 3-6 1.4 2 . 5 0.7 2 .2 0.4 1.3 0 . 2 0 . 6 0.1 3 . 2 55 TABLE IX - F o l i a r Cover and. Abundance and S o c i o b i l i t y Measured by Ocular Estimate SPECIES Zone 1 - Carex zone FOLIAR COVER ABUNDANCE AND SOCIOBILITY Forbs P. sa g g i t a t u s 1-5 A s t e r j u n c i f o r m i s <1 R. g m e l i n i i var hookeri <1 Sparganium a n g u s t i f o l i u m <1 Ranunculus macounii var macounii <1 Rumex o c c i d e n t a l i s var o c c i d e n t a l i s <1 S. lo n g i p e s var a l t o c a u l i s <1 Few small patches o f i n d i v i d u a l s S e v e r a l s c a t t e r e d i n d i v i d u a l s S e v e r a l s c a t t e r e d i n d i v i d u a l s S i n g l e patch of i n d i v i d u a l s S i n g l e patch of i n d i v i d u a l s Rare i n d i v i d u a l Rare i n d i v i d u a l Graminoid P l a n t s C. r o s t r a t a 75-95 Continuous dense cover of w e l l spaced i n d i v i d u a l s C. inexpansa 1-5 Few small patches of i n d i v i d u a l s C. a q u a t i l i s 1-5 Few small patches of i n d i v i d u a l s C. atheroides < 1 Few s m a l l patches of i n d i v i d u a l s G l y c e r i a grandies <1 Few small patches of i n d i v i d u a l s Beckmania schizachne <1 S i n g l e patch o f i n d i v i d u a l s C. a r c t a <1 S i n g l e patch of i n d i v i d u a l s Hierochloe odorata <1 Few s c a t t e r e d i n d i v i d u a l s Poa p r a t e n s i s <1 Rare i n d i v i d u a l Zone 2 - Carex - Juncus - Hordeurn Forbs E r i g e r o n lonchophyllus <1 Few s c a t t e r e d i n d i v i d u a l s Graminoid P l a n t s C. p r a e g r a c i l i s 50-75 Continuous dense cover w i t h few openings Hordeurn jubatum 1-5 S e v e r a l w e l l spaced i n d i v i d u a l s C. inexpansa 1-5 Few small patches of i n d i v i d u a l s Juncus b a l t i c u s var b a l t i c u s < 1 Few small patches of i n d i v i d u a l s Agropyron subsecundum < 1 S e v e r a l s c a t t e r e d i n d i v i d u a l s Agropyron trachycaulum <1 S e v e r a l s c a t t e r e d i n d i v i d u a l s C. a r c t a <1 S e v e r a l s c a t t e r e d i n d i v i d u a l s Poa p r a t e n s i s <1 S e v e r a l s c a t t e r e d i n d i v i d u a l s Agropyron repens <1 Few s c a t t e r e d i n d i v i d u a l s Zone 3 - B e t u l a - Carex Trees P i c e a glauca 1 Rare i n d i v i d u a l 56 SPECIES FOLIAR COVER ABUNDANCE AND SOCIOBILITY Shrubs Betula glandulosa S a l i x maccalliana 25-50 Continuous cover of well spaced individuals 1-5 Several scattered individuals Forbs A c h i l l e a m i l l i f o l i u m ssp. lanulosa var lanulos <-1 Aster junciformis <1 Rumex occidentalis var occidentalis d Pyrola minor <1 Graminoid Plants C. c u s i c k i i 5-25 C. rostrata 5-25 C. aquatalis 1-5 C. inexpansa < 1 P. pratensis <1 Zone h - Betula - S a l i x Few scattered individuals Few scattered individuals Few scattered individuals Rare individuals Continuous cover of well spaced individuals Continuous cover of well spaced individuals Several scattered individuals Several scattered individuals Few scattered individuals Trees P. glauca Pinus contorta < 1 < 1 Shrubs B. glandulosa  Arctostaphylos uva-ursi  S a l i x m y r t i l l i f o l i a var pseudomyrsinites Rosa a c i c u l a r i s 50-75 5-25 5-25 1-5 S a l i x brachycarpa ssp. niphoclada 1-5 Forbs Fragaria virginiana 5-25 Antennaria araphaloides 1-5 A. m i l l i f o l i u m ssp. lanulosa var lanulosa 1-5 Smiliacina s t e l l a t a 1-5 Agroseris glauca var glauca <1 Anenome mul t i f i d a var m u l t i f i d a <1 Aster c i l i o l a t u s <1 C a s t i l l e j a minata var minata <1 Ceractium arvense < 1 Epilobium angustifolium <1 Epilobium palustre <1 SPECIES FOLIAR COVER ABUNDANCE AND SOCIOBILITY Erigeron l a n c h o p h y l l i s <1 Gentiana amarella <1 Habenaria hyperborea <1 Parnassia p a l u s t r i s var montanensis <1 P e d i c u l a r i s groenlandica <1 P e t a s i t e s f r i g i d u s var palmatus <1 P o t e n t i l l a g r a c i l i s var permollis <1 Pyrola minor <1 Ranunculus inamoenus <1 Rubus a c a u l i s <1 Senecio pauperculus <1 Solidago canadensis var salebrosa <1 Spiranthes romanzoffiana var romanzoffiana O S t e l l a r i a longipes var a l t o c a u l i s <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 Graminoid Plants Agropyron sub secundum <. 1 A. trachycaulum <1 Bromus pumpellianus <1 Carex concinna <1 C. concinnoides <1 C. l a s i o c a r p a var americana <1 Danthonia intermedia <1 Festuca ovina O J . b a l t i c u s var b a l t i c u s <1 K o e l e r i a c r i s t a t a <1 Munlenbergia richardsonis <1 Oryzopsis hymenoides <1 P. pratensis <1 Schizachne purpurascens <1 S t i p a r i c h a r d s o n i <1 Zone 5 - Pinus - Calamagrostis Trees P. contorta 5-25 Picea glauca < 1 Populus tremuloides <• 1 Shrubs A. uva-ursi 50-75 Linnaea b o r e a l i s 1-5 Taraxacum o f f i c i n a l e  Thalictrum occidentale  Valeriana d i o i c a  V i c i a americana var truncata V i o l a adunca var b e l l i d i f o l i a SPECIES FOLIAR COVER ABUNDANCE AND SOCIOBILITY R. a c i c u l a r i s 1-5 Sheperdia canadensis 1-5 Spirea b e t u l i f o l i a <1 Forbs Polemonium pulcherimum <1 E. angustifolium <1 A. m i l l i f o l i u m ssp. lanulosa var lanulosa ^1 E. virginiana 1-5 Anemone mul t i f i d a var m u l t i f i d a <1 V. adunca var b e l l i d i f o l i a <1 C. minota var minota ' <1 A. glauca var glauca <1 Senecio stre p t a n t h i f o l i u s <1 Arabis drummondii <1 Arnica c o r d i f o l i a <1 Antennaria microphylla •<£ 1 L. borealis <^  1 Galium boreale <1 Penstemon procerus var procerus 1 Solidago spathulata var neomexicana O Antennaria neglecta var attenuata <1 Lathyrus ochroleucus < 1 Senecio integerrimus var exaltatus -C1 Pyrola p i c t a -cl Antennaria neglecta var h o w e l l i i <.1 G. amarella <.1 Aster s i b i r i c u s O Graminoid Plants Calamagrostis rubescens 5-25 C. concinnoides 1-5 Carex pachystachya <1 F. ovina <1 0. hymenoides <1 Calamagrostis canadensis <1 Agrostis scabra <1 Trisetum specatum <f1 K. c r i s t a t a O TABLE X - Vegetation Height Data DATE HEIGHT OF (cm) May 20 60 May 31 75 June 15 90 June 27 105 July 18 130 July 28 130 August 16 130 August 29 130 observed growing on tops of hummocks. By June 15 C^ inexpansa began growth, but only after the water table had dropped below the hummock tops. By early August most of the inexpansa panicles were open. Ranunculus gmelinii var hookeri and Sparganium angustifolium were located i n the wettest part of the meadow. Betula glandulosa were observed forming catkins early i n May. The greatest species richness was i n the Betula - S a l i x zone which contained 52 different spermatophyte species. The dryer Pinus - Calamagrostis zone possessed 41 species. The Carex zone although dominated by one species had the t h i r d richest complement of species, 17. The Carex - Betula zone and Carex - Juncus - Hordeum zone con-tained the smallest number of species 12 and 10 respectively. PRODUCTIVITY The standing crop seasonal trend equation p r e d i c t s a steady increase from about 1 to 6 mt/ha of dry matter through the season (mid May through August) (Table X I , X I I ) . Winter standing crops were measured and found to be about 8 mt/ha (Table X I I I ) . Growth was most r a p i d during June and the f i r s t h a l f of J u l y . The raw data i n d i c a t e s a p r o d u c t i v i t y d i f f e r e n c e due to c l i p p i n g height although t h i s d i f f e r e n c e was not p r e d i c t e d by the re g r e s s i o n . The r e g r e s s i o n equation Y i e l d (kg/ha) = 1174 + 48.2t (where t = days a f t e r May 20) w i t h a S.E. (standard e r r o r of the r e g r e s s i o n l i n e ) of 1961.76 accounted f o r 42% of the standing crop raw data v a r i a b i l i t y (Table X I I ) . In the op i n i o n of the w r i t e r the unaccounted f o r v a r i a b i l i t y i s due to the inherent random v a r i a b i l i t y of the p l a n t m a t e r i a l being sampled, the small number of sample r e p l i c a t e s and the s t r i n g e n t l e v e l of Type I e r r o r . Regression a n a l y s i s found no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n t o t a l y i e l d between treatments c l i p p e d at d i f f e r e n t times (Table XIV). However an i n s p e c t i o n of the raw data appeared to show greater y i e l d s from t r e a t -ments c l i p p e d l a t e r i n the season (Appendix F ) . The t o t a l y i e l d of the 8 cm c l i p p i n g s were about 5200 kg/ha, about 1330 kg/ha greater than the 23 cm c l i p p i n g s (Table XV). The r e g r e s s i o n equation Y i e l d (kg/ha) = 878 + 77t - 18.7 ht + 2 2 l . l l t -21.8 c - 1.36 t c + 0.210 c (where c = days a f t e r f i r s t c l i p ) w i t h a S.E. of 843.7 accounted f o r 61% of the treatment harvest raw data v a r i a b i l i t y (Table XVI, XV I I ) . The e a r l i e s t c l i p p i n g treatments produced no d i f f e r e n c e i n treatment y i e l d s 2350 kg/ha, r e g a r d l e s s of c l i p p i n g height but as the season progressed the treatment p l o t s c l i p p e d at 8 cm produced greater y i e l d s . The p l o t s c l i p p e d at 8 cm during J u l y - August yielded 6807 kg/ha, 3552 kg/ha more than the plots clipped at 23 cm during the same cli p p i n g period (Table XIV). The i n i t i a l c l i p p i n g harvest of a l l treatments was- greater than any of the sub-sequent regrowth harvests and these differences became larger for a l l but season-long c l i p p i n g treatments as the season progressed. Re-growth comprised 39% °f the mid May - mid July treatment yi e l d s and 33$> of the July - August treatment y i e l d s (Table XV). The season-long clippi n g treatments, both of which yielded 44-55 kg/ha, alone produced more regrowth l a t e r i n the season. Of the 3577 kg/ha of regrowth harvested from season-long clipped plots, 819 kg/ha were harvested during the f i n a l August 29th clippings (Table XVI). 63 TABLE XI - Seasonal Trend Data From Regression Equations CLIPPING CLIPPING CALCIUM: MAG- MANGA-HEIGHT DATE YIELD CALCIUM PHOSPHORUS POTASSIUM NESIUM NESE IRON (cm) (Days)(kg/ha){% t i s s u e ) {% t i s s u e ) ( [% t i s s u e ) (ppm) (ppm) 8 May 20 1174 0.423 2.61 1.54 0.173 326 165 8 June 1 1752 0.385 2.25 1.53 0.175 302 134 8 June 13 2331 0.361 2.11 1.51 0.179 277 108 8 June 25 2909 0.352 2.18 1.47 0.186 253 86 8 J u l y 7 3488 0.356 2.46 1.42 0.195 229 70 8 J u l y 19 4066 0.373 2.96 1-35 0.208 205 58 8 J u l y 31 4644 0.405 3.67 1.27 0.223 181 51 8 August 12 5543 0.451 4.59 1.18 0.241 157 49 8 August 24 5801 0.510 5-72 1.06 0.262 133 52 23 May 20 1174 0.423 2.61 1.54 0.173 326 130 23 June 1 1752 0.385 2.25 1.53 0.175 302 106 23 June 13 2331 0.361 2.11 1.51 0.179 277 86 23 June 15 2909 0.352 2.18 1.47 0.186 253 72 23 J u l y 7 3488 0.356 2.46 1.42 0.195 229 62 23 J u l y 19 4066 0.373 2.96 1.35 0.208 205 57 23 J u l y 31 4644 0.405 3-67 1.27 0.223 181 57 23 August 12 5543 0.451 4.59 1.18 0.241 157 62 23 August 2k 5801 0.510 5.72 1.06 0.262 133 77 TABLE XLI- Seasonal Trend Regression Equations Y i e l d (kg/ha) = 1174 + 48.2 t SE = 1961.76 r 2 = 0.42162 Crude Protein (,% tissue) = 10.076 SD = 2.7834 Calcium (% tissue) = 0.42268 - 0.0037086t + 0 . 0 0 0 0 4 8 l 0 5 t 2 SE = O.088858 r 2 = 0.32302 Phosphorus {% tissue) = 0.13984 SD = 0.043236 CalciumrPhosphorus = 2 .6082 - 0.028528t + 0 . 0 0 0 7 3 9 6 l t 2 SE =- 0.81675 r 2 = 0.75899 Zinc (ppm) = 29-573 SD = 9.8411 Copper (ppm) = 1 1 . 0 3 0 SD = 16.224 Potassium ($ tissue) = 1.5454 - 0 .000051096t 2 SE = 0.26135 r 2 = 0 .33468 Magnesium {% tissue) = 0.17314 + 0 . 0 0 0 0 9 6 l 1 1 t 2 SE = 0.028597 r 2 = 0.59785 Manganese (ppm) = 325-68 - 2 . 0 1 l 8 t SE = 85.520 r 2 = 0.40050 Iron (ppm) = 165.80 - 3 5 - l 8 2 h - 2 . 8 l 2 t + 0 . 5 8 l 2 5 h t + 0 . 0 l 6 9 1 5 t 2 SE = 27.551 r 2 = 0.62302 Where t = days after May 20 and h = cl i p p i n g height ( 0 = 8 cm. and 1 = 23 cm.) 65 TABLE X I I I - Seasonal Trend Winter Data Clipping Date November 15 February 2 Clipping Height (cm) 8 23 8 23 x/S.E. ( standard error of the mean) Y i e l d (kg/ha) 8040/3399 4980/1 8650/7 6470/113 Crude Protein (% tissue) 4 . 8 / 0 . 2 0 4 . 6 5 / 0 . 0 5 4 . 3 5 / 0 . 5 5 3 .75/0.15 Calcium (% tissue) 0.605/0.11 0 . 7 0 5 / 0 . 0 6 0 .685/0.18 O.615/O.08 C alc ium:Pho sphorus 6.73/1.17 8.37/1-26 9 .02/1 .73 7.12/0.46 Copper (ppm) 4-5/1.5 2 . 0 / 0 . 0 2 . 0 / 0 . 0 2 . 0 / 0 . 0 Zinc (ppm) 3 0 . 0 / 6 . 0 2 8 . 0 / 0 . 0 2 9 . 0 / 8 . 0 24 . 5 / 0 . 5 Magnesium (% tissue) 0.265/0.005 0 .34/0.01 0 . 3 4 / 0 . 6 0 0 .33/0.01 Manganese (ppm) 295/51 267/17 229/3 238/58 Iron (ppm) 144/25 84/2 90/2 67/1 66 TABLE XIV - Treatment Y i e l d s From C l i p p i n g Treatment Regression Data CLIPPING HEIGHT CLIPPING DATE YIELD REGROWTH CARRYING CAPACITY (cm) (kg/ha) (kg/ha) (ha/AUM) (ac/AUM) 8 mid May - mid J u l y 2350 1472 0.128 0.317 8 June - J u l y 4036 2556 0.074 0.184 8 mid June- mid August 6013 3723 0.050 0.124 8 J u l y - August 6807 3877 0.044 0.109 23 mid May - mid J u l y 2350 14-72 0.128 0.317 23 June - J u l y 3035 1765 0.099 0.245 23 mid June- mid August 3614 1804 O.O83 0.206 23 J u l y - August 3255 1035 0.092 0.229 8 season l o n g 4455 3577 O.O67 0.167 23 season lon g 4455 3577 O.O67 0.167 TABLE XV - Total Y i e l d S i g n i f i c a n t l y Different Means Total Y i e l d (kg/ha) Treatment Mean - 9 9 % C.I. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 1 7 5 2 0 1 i 1 0 5 4 9 , 1 0 , 1 1 , 1 2 , 1 3 , 1 8 3 8 7 2 - 861 "68 TABLE XVI - C l i p p i n g Treatments Data From Regression Equation CLIPPING CLIPPING CRUDE CALCIUM: HEIGHT DATES YIELD PRO- CAL- PHOS- PHOS- POTAS- MAGNE-MANGA-(cm) (Days)(kg/ha) TEIN CIUM PHORUS PHORUS ZINC SIUM SIUM NESE IRON (% t i s s u e ) ( % (% t i s - (ppm)(% t i s - ( % tis-(ppm)(ppm) t i s s u e ) sue) sue) sue) Treatments 1 (May 20 - J u l y 18) and 17 (season long) 8 May 20 878 11.4 0. 368 0.19 2. 4 46. 3 1. 66 0.19 , 348 119 8 May 31 664 11.8 0. 368 0.20 2. 1 46. 3 1. 94 0.20 305 119 8 June 15 454 12.0 0. 368 0.22 1. 7 46. 3 2. 21 0.21 259 119 8 June 27 354 11.9 0. 368 0.23 1. 1 46. 3 2. 34 0.21 233 119 8 J u l y 18 324 11.4 0. 368 0.23 1. 5 46. 3 2. 37 0.22 208 119 8 J u l y 28 375 10.9 0. 368 0.23 1. 6 46. 3 2. 30 0.23 207 119 8 August 16 587 9.5 0. 368 0.21 1. 9 46. 3 2. 02 0.24 222 119 8 August 29 819 8.3 0. 368 0.19 2. 3 46. 3 1. 72 0.25 245 119 >.atment 2 (May 31 - J u l y 28) 8 May 31 1480 10.7 0. 370 0.21 2. 3 43. 6 1. 94 0.19 305 119 8 June 15 1040 14.2 0. 372 0.23 1. 9 43. 6 2. 21 0.20 259 119 8 June 27 766 11.3 0. 374 0.24 1. 7 43. 6 2. 34 0.21 233 119 8 J u l y 18 424 11.1 0. 378 0.24 1. 6 43. 6 2. 37 0.21 208 119 8 J u l y 28 326 10.2 0. 379 0.24 1. 6 43. 6 2. 30 0.22 207 . 119 Treatment 3 (June 15 - August 16) 8 June 15 2290 9.9 0.378 0. 24 2. 3 39. 8 2. 21 0.19 259 119 8 June 2 7 1780 10.2 0.383 0. 25 2. 0 39. 8 2. 34 0.20 233 119 8 J u l y 18 1000 10.4 0.391 0. 25 1. 8 39. 8 2. 37 0.21 208 119 8 J u l y 28 700 10.3 0.395 0. 25 1. 5 39. 8 2. 30 0.21 207 119 8 August 16 243 9.7 0.402 0. 23 i ; 6 39. 8 2/ 02 0.22 222 119 iatment 4 (June 27 - August 29) 8 June 27 2930 9.1 0.390 0. 25 2. 5 36. 8 2. 34 0.19 232 119 8 July'18 1810 9.7 0.402 0. 26 2. 2 36. 8 2. 37 0.20 208 119 8 J u l y 28 1350 9.'7 0.407 0. 26 2. 2 36. 8 2. 30 0:21 207 119 8 August 16 582 9.4 0.418 0. 26 2. 3 36. 8 2. 02 0.21 222 119 8 August 29 135 8.9 0.426 0. 23 2. 5 36. 8 1. 72 0.22 245 119 Treatments 9 (May 20 - J u l y 18) and 18 (season long) 23 May 20 878 11. 4 0.368 0. 21 2. 4 46.3 1.66 0.17 348 94. 4 23 May 31 664 11. 8 0.390 0. 22 2. 1 46.3 1.84 0.18 305 94. 4 23 June 15 454 12. 0 0.427 0. 24 1. 7 46.3 2.03 0, 19 259 94; 4 23 June 27 354 11. 9 0.464 0. 26 1. 1 46.3 2.13 0.19 233 .94. 4 23 J u l y 18 324 11. 4 0.542 0. 25 1. 5 46.3 2.20 0.20 208 94. 4 23 J u l y 28 375 10. 9 0.586 0. 22 1. 6 46.3 2.10 0.21 207 94. 4 23 August 16 587 9; 5 0.681 0. 20 1. 9 46.3 1.86 0.22 222 .94. 4 23 August 29 819 8. 3 0.755 0. 18 2. 3 46.3 1.63 0.23 245 94. 4 69 CLIPPING CLIPPING CRUDE CALCIUM: HEIGHT DATES YIELD PRO- CAL- PHOS- PHOS- POTAS- MAGNE-MANGA-(cm) (Days)(kg/ha) TEIN CIUM PHORUS PHORUS ZINC SIUM SIUM NESE IRON (% t i s s u e ) ( % (% t i s - (ppm)(% t i s - ( % tis-(ppm)(ppm) t i s s u e ) sue) sue) sue) Treatment 10 (May 31 - J u l y 28) 1270 10. 7 0.391 0.23 2.3 43.6. 1. 75 0. 17 304 94. 4 837 11. 2 0.431 0.25 1.9 43.6 1. 94 0. 18 256 94. 4 558 11. 3 0.470 0.26 1.7 43.6 2. 04 0. 19 228 94. 4 216 11. 1 0.552 0.26 1.6 43.6 2. 11 0. 19 201 94. 4 118 10. 7 0.598 0.26 1.6 43.6 2. 10 0. 20 199 94. 4 23 May 31 23 June 15 23 June 27 23 J u l y 18 23 J u l y 28 Treatment 11 (June 15 - August 16) 23 June 15 1810 9. 9 0. 437 0.26 23 June 27 1300 10. 2 0. 479 0.27 23 J u l y 18 522 10. 4 0. 565 0.27 23 J u l y °28 219 10. 3 0. 613 0.27 23 August 16 -237 9. 7 0. 716 0.25 Treatment 12 (June 27 - August 29) 2.3 39.8 1.81 0.17 252 94.4 2.0 39.8 1.91 0.18 228 94.4 1.8 39.8 1.98 0.19 192 94.4 1/5 39.8 1.97 0.19 188 94.4 1.6 39.8 1.86 0.20 197 94.4 23 June 27 2220 9.1 0.485 0.27 23 J u l y 18 1104 9.7 0.576 0.28 23 J u l y 28 645 9.7 0.626 0.28 23 August 16 -138 9.4 0.731 0.28 23 August 29 -576 8.9 0.812 0.25 2.5 36.8 1.82 0. 17 217 94.4 2.2 36.8 1.89 0. 18 184 94.4 2.2 36.8 . 1.88 0. 19 179 94.4 2.3 36.8 1.77 0. 19 186 94.4 2.5 36.8 1.63 0. 20 204 94.4 70 TABLE XVII- Clipping Treatments Regression Equations Y i e l d (kg/ha) = 878 + 77t - l 8 . 7 h t + 1 . 11 t 2 - 21 .8c - 1 .36tc + 0.210c2 SE =843 .7 r 2 = 0 .6060574 Crude Protein {% tissue) = 11.4 - 0 .0595t + 0.101c - 0 .000717c 2 SE =2 . 2 3 9 r 2 = 0.2836354 Calcium {% tissue) = O.368 - 0.00173hc + 0 .000015tc + 0 .0000208hc 2 SE = O.O8318 r 2 = 0.1888221 Phosphorus <S tissue) = O.I87 - 0 .0153h - 0 .000930t + 0 .0018c - 0.0000174c 2 SE = 0 .0334 r 2 = 0.4169921 Calcium:Phosphorus = 2.41 + 0 .0171t + 0 . 0 0 0 5 6 2 t 2 - 00361c - 0 .000328tc + ' 0 . 0 0 0 4 3 9 c 2 SE = 0.6729 r 2 = 0.6383437 Zinc (ppm) = 46 .3 - 0.249t SE = 24.69 r 2 = 0 .0460093 Copper (ppm) = 13.0 SE = 1.766 Potassium (% tissue) = 1 .66 - 0 .00827ht + 0 .0281c - 0 . 0 0 9 8 l h c - 0 . 0 0 0 2 7 2 c 2 + 0.0001l8hc 2 SE > 0 .4384 r 2 = 0.2611006 Magnesium {% tissue) = 0.191 - 0.0201h + 0.000567c SE = 0 .03875 r 2 = 0 .2092404 Manganese (ppm) = 348 - 4.26c - 0 .0109htc + 0.0321c2 SE = 77.85 r 2 = O.2585663 Iron (ppm) = 119.0 - 24 .6h SE = 56.42 r 2 = 0.0455365 where c = days after date of f i r s t c l i p 71 NUTRITION  Crude P r o t e i n The 10% dry weight crude p r o t e i n content of the untouched standing crop was found not to vary over the experimental season or because of c l i p p i n g height (Table X I ) , but an i n s p e c t i o n of the raw data i m p l i e d an i n i t i a l peak forage crude p r o t e i n content of 13% i n e a r l y June followed by a downward trend during the remainder of the season reaching 8% by l a t e August (Appendix D). The wet meadow forage crude p r o t e i n content dropped to about 4 to 5% by winter (Table X I I I ) . U n l i k e the treatment height of c l i p p i n g , the time of a treatment c l i p p i n g p e r i o d had a s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t on the crude p r o t e i n content of the wet meadow forage. This f a c t i s demonstrated by the r e g r e s s i o n 2 equation, crude p r o t e i n (% t i s s u e ) = 11.4 - 0.0595t + 0.101c - 0.000717c (Table X V I I ) . Generally crude p r o t e i n t i s s u e content increased and then d e c l i n e d w i t h i n each treatment c l i p p i n g p e r i o d . Treatment p l o t s c l i p p e d from mid May to mid J u l y obtained the highest o v e r a l l percent t i s s u e crude p r o t e i n values. The mean crude p r o t e i n t i s s u e contents f o r the mid May - mid J u l y , June - J u l y , mid June - mid August, J u l y - August and season long treatment c l i p p i n g periods were 11.7%, 11.0%, 10.1%, 9.4% and 10.9% r e s p e c t i v e l y (Table XVI). Calcium, Phosphorus, Calcium: Phosphorus Ratio The wet meadow forage calcium t i s s u e content of the untouched standing crops d e c l i n e d from 0.42% i n mid May to 0.35% by the end of 72 June then increased to 0.51% by the end of the season. No effect due to c l i p p i n g height was detected (Table XI). Winter measurements re-vealed calcium contents i n excess of 0.6% of the plant tissue (Table XI I ) . Among treatment samples the calcium tissue content was lower early i n the season and when clipped at 8 cm. The mid May - mid July, June - July, mid June - mid August, July - August and season long c l i p -ping periods mean calcium contents, when clipped at 8 cm, were O.368, 0 . 3 7 5 , 0 . 3 9 0 , 0.409 and O.368 respectively. When plants were clipped at 23 cm the respective values for the same cl i p p i n g periods were 0 . 4 3 8 , 0 . . 4 8 8 , 0 . 5 6 2 , 0 . 6 4 6 and 0.527 percent calcium (Table XVI). Repeated cl i p p i n g appears to have reduced the wet meadow forage calcium content. There was no s i g n i f i c a n t difference i n the 0.14% phosphorus tissue content of the untouched wet meadow standing crop due to height or time of clip p i n g (Table XI). However the raw data implied an i n i t i a l increase i n phosphorus content to 0.19% i n l a t e May and then a general decline to 0.10% i n la t e August (Appendix D). Forage clipped i n the f a l l and winter contained about 0.08% phosphorus (Table X I I I ) . The mean percent phosphorus tissue contents for samples clipped at 8 cm were 0 . 2 1 , 0 . 2 3 , 0 . 2 4 , 0 .25 and 0.21 for the mid May - mid July, June - July, mid June -mid August, July - August and season long c l i p p i n g periods respectively. The mean percent phosphorus tissue content for the same cl i p p i n g periods where samples were clipped at 23 cm were 0 . 2 3 , 0 . 2 5 , 0 . 2 6 , 0.27 and 0 . 2 2 respectively (Table XVI) .Theses data show,., the mean phosphorus content was greater when clipped at 2 3 cm during July - August. I t should be noted that within the July - August clippi n g treatments the phosphorus 73 content of the f i n a l harvest declined 0.02% from the previous harvest (Table XVI). Repeated, c l i p p i n g appears to have increased the phos-phorus tissue content of the wet meadow forage. The wet meadow untreated standing crop calcium:phosphorus r a t i o was 2 . 6 i n mid May, declined to 2.1 by mid July and then increased to 5.7 by lat e August regardless of cli p p i n g height (Table XI). This r a t i o reached about 8:1 by winter (Table X I I I ) . There was no s i g n i f i -cant difference i n the calcium:phosphorus r a t i o of the treatment samples due to cli p p i n g height. The calcium:phosphorus r a t i o began increasing during l a t e June i n e a r l i e r treatments, and during mid July i n l a t e r treatments. These r a t i o increases were due mainly to forage calcium content increased. As evidenced by the mean calcium:phosphorus r a t i o s , 1.4, 1 .8, 2 . 2 , 2 .3 and 3 . 6 for the mid May - mid July, June - July, mid June - mid July, July - August and season-long treatment c l i p p i n g per-iods an e a r l i e r commencement of cli p p i n g maintains lower calcium:phos-phorus r a t i o s (Table XVI). Repeated c l i p p i n g appears to decrease the calcium:phosphorus r a t i o of the wet meadow forage markedly. Zinc, Copper, Potassium, Magnesium, Manganese and Iron Zinc content of the wet meadow untreated standing crop remained about 30 ppm throughout the season (Table XII) and dropped about 2 to 3 ppm by winter (Table X I I I ) . The time of f i r s t c l i p seemed to have a premier influence on the treated wet meadow vegetation zinc content be-cause regardless of cli p p i n g height samples averaged 46 ppm, 44 ppm, 40 ppm, 35 ppm and 46 ppm during mid May - mid July, June - July, mid June - mid August and season long c l i p p i n g periods respectively (Table 74 XVI). The wet meadow untreated standing crop contained 11 ppm copper throughout the season (Table X I I ) . During winter the forage copper content dropped as low as 2 ppm (Table X I I I ) . Samples c o l l e c t e d from c l i p p i n g treatments a l l contained 13 ppm copper (Table X V I I ) . The potassium content of the wet meadow untreated standing crop dropped from 1.5% to 1.0% during the season (Table X I ) . Closer c l i p -ping r e s u l t e d i n tre a t e d samples w i t h an average 0.25% greater potas-sium content. In a l l treatments c l i p p i n g s were found to reach a peak 2.4% potassium content during mid J u l y and then d e c l i n e . The lowest treatment potassium content, 1.7%, occurred i n mid May (Table XVI). The magnesium content of the wet meadow untreated standing crop increased to 0.26% of the forage dry weight by the end of the season (Table XI) and to 0.34% during the f o l l o w i n g w i nter (Table X I I I ) . The treat e d forage magnesium content remained s t a t i c through the season but increased i n forage regrowth. When c l i p p e d at 8 cm the mid May - mid J u l y , June — J u l y , mid June - mid August, J u l y - August and season long c l i p p i n g p e r i o d treatment' samplesJcontained ,an.average 0.21,0.21,0.21,0.21 and 0.22 percent magnesium' t i s s u e content respectively^."'The samples .clipped at 23 cm contained'0.02 percentagei.points l e s s magnesium per respective, sample (Table XVI). The wet meadow untreated standing crop manganese content d e c l i n e d from 326 ppm i n mid May to 133 ppm by the end of August (Table XI) then increased to about 280 ppm by winter (Table X I I I ) . The manganese con-tent of the tr e a t e d v e g e t a t i o n i n mid May was 348 ppm. By l a t e J u l y 75 the samples clipped at 8 cm reached a minimum manganese percent tissue content of 207 ppm. From la t e July through August the vegetation man-ganese content increased about 38 ppm. The mid May - mid July, June -July, mid June - mid August, July - August and season long c l i p p i n g per-iod samples average manganese content when clipped at 8 cm were 271, 242, 226, 223 and 253 ppm respectively. When samples were clipped at 23 cm the average manganese content corresponding to the above cl i p p i n g periods were 271, 238, 211, 194 and 253 ppm respectively (Table XVI). Only the iron content of the wet meadow untreated standing crop was influenced s i g n i f i c a n t l y by cli p p i n g height or the cl i p p i n g height -clip p i n g time interaction. The clippin g height - clippin g time i n t e r -action i s the combined effect of clippin g height and cli p p i n g time d i s -counting the separate effect of each of these two factors (Table X I I ) . The wet meadow untreated standing crop i r o n percent tissue content when clipped at 8 cm decreased from 165 ppm i n mid May to a minimum of 4-9 ppm i n mid August and then increased s l i g h t l y u n t i l the end of the sea-son. The samples clipped at 23 cm followed a similar pattern decreasing from 130 ppm i n mid May to 57 ppm i n l a t e July and then increased to 77 ppm at the end of the season (Table XI). The time of clippin g did not influence the iro n content of the treated wet meadow vegetation. The samples clipped at 8 cm contained a constant 119 PP m iron and the sam-ples clipped at 23 cm contained a constant 94 ppm iro n . Repeated c l i p p i n g increased the content of zinc, copper, potassium, manganese s l i g h t l y , and iro n i n the wet meadow vegetation. Magnesium content seems uninfluenced by repeated clipping. -STORED FOOD RESERVES .The p l a n t s subjected to the dark room treatment appeared normal except f o r a shiny w h i t i s h appearance, smoother t e x t u r e , l a c k of scab-orousness i n C_ r o s t r a t a , reduced s t r u c t u r a l r i g i d i t y , random d i r e c t i o n of shoot growth, and r a p i d shoot growth. The sod reserve index was found not to vary because of p l a n t c l i p p i n g height. A s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the sod reserve index due to the c l i p p i n g p e r i o d time w i t h i n the season was found but the m u l t i p l e range t e s t grouped a l l treatments i n t o the same subset. As expected the c o n t r o l treatments, 5 and 13, r e s u l t e d i n p l a n t s w i t h the greatest stored food reserves, followed by the e a r l i e s t c l i p p i n g t r e a t -ments, 1 and 9. In con t r a s t to the suggestion that l a t e h a r v e s t i n g may reduce sedge stored food reserves by McLean et a l (1963), the l a t e s t c l i p p i n g treatments p l a n t s contained the next highest sod reserve index. These were followed by the season long c l i p p i n g treatments. The June -J u l y and mid June - mid August treatments contained the l e a s t stored food reserves. The o v e r a l l average sod reserve index value was 0.18 (Table X V I I I ) . TABLE XVIII- Sod Reserve Index S i g n i f i c a n t l y D i f f e r e n t Means Sod Reserve Index (g/97.14 cm ) Treatment Mean - 99% C.I. 1.9 0.248 - 0.321 2.10 0.0975 - 0 .348 3.11 0.0775 - 0.248 4.12 0.194 i 0.381 5 J 3 0.323 - 0.429 17,18 0.153 - 0.325 78 DISCUSSION CHARACTERIZATION OF THE STUDY MEADOW  Climate I t i s reasonable to assume that the climatic data from the Tautri Creek Climate Station adequately represents the climatic regime of the study meadow. I f any r e a l differences between the two locations do ex-i s t , i t i s suspected that the Tautri Creek Station's climate i s s l i g h t l y milder because i t s daily temperatures are s l i g h t l y less extreme than those at the study meadow. Meadow Water As the water table was observed to be l e v e l , replicated water table measurements were considered unnecessary. The water table rose unex-pectly during l a t e July and early August. This was probably due to run-off from unusually heavy July rains. Wet meadows are known to ameliorate runoff and t h i s quality was demonstrated by a curious occurrence during late June. An upstream beaver dam was destroyed causing a flood. The water table of the study meadow, already above the s o i l surface of the majority of the meadow, rose over a metre. The meadow gradually re-leased the flood water over a period of 3 to k days. The meadow served asaan effective natural flood control mechanism. Heavy rains probably caused the decreased water pH during the early part of the season. The lower pH of the carbonic acid carrying r a i n water would d i l u t e the meadow water. The increased pH l a t e r i n the season was probably caused by a r i s i n g concentration of cations when meadow water evaporated and ground water seeping"'into the meadow. This interpretation i s supported by the data demonstrating an increase i n water calcium ion concentration throughout the season and water conduc-t i v i t y u n t i l the l a t t e r part of August. The water quality raw data depicts a curious jump i n the water calcium content and conductivity on July 28. A plausible explanation i s that on t h i s date p i t s to c o l l e c t water samples mixed s o i l p a r t i c l e s with the meadow water. Unfortunately water samples must have been c o l -lected before the p a r t i c l e s had a chance to s e t t l e out. S o i l s S o i l temperatures nearer the s o i l surface were closer to the am-bient a i r temperatures throughout the season probably because the s o i l i t s e l f insulated the deeper s o i l . As expected, s o i l s with shallower' organic layers and better drain-age were found near the edge of the meadow. The organic make-up of the central Carex zone reveals a s o i l formed almost exclusively from vegetative matter. Travelling from the centre of the meadow outward s o i l s are encountered which have less vegetative parent material. The Gleyed Humic Regosol and Calcareous Gleyed Regosol observed at various locations around the meadow are most l i k e l y the resu l t s of past deltas near the edge of the meadow when i t was s t i l l a pond. The marl present i s probably the skeletal remains of fresh water gastropods which could 80 have inhabited these extinct deltas. The Orthic Gray Luvisol seems to have been formed from a well washed g l a c i a l t i l l parent material. Some explanation for the formation of meadow hummocks are offered. These include burning or frost heaving. The burning hypothesis assumes that during dry years f i r e s consumed subsurface meadow organic matter and when the overlying peat collapsed the areas between hummocks were formed. The frost heaving hypothesis assumes that a winter freezing plane moves downwards i r r e g u l a r l y . Increasing pressure on lenses of unfrozen material causes them to be heaved upward. An observation which lends c r e d i b i l i t y to the burning hypothesis i s that some meadows are hummocked while others are not. Regardless of the i n i t i a l method of formation hummocks seem to be modified by meadow drainage. Hummocks close to a drainage outlet, where water flow i s the fastest, are often larger and more closely aligned with the direction of water movement. Vegetation The close alignment of vegetation zone and s o i l type boundaries demonstrates the pronounced influence the vegetation has on the s o i l type and vice versa. Probably the single most i n f l u e n t i a l factor on the study area vegetation type would be water. The Carex zone i s an area which i s usually inundated with water from spring thaw u n t i l Au-gust. The Betula - Carex zone i s an area which i s usually flooded from spring thaw u n t i l June but the s o i l remains very moist for the majority of the season i n an average year. The Betula - S a l i x zone covers an area which i s flooded b r i e f l y or not at a l l . The well drained upland s o i l supports a Pinus - Calamagrostis association. The Carex - Juncus - Hordeurn zone i s present mainly because of the underlying very moist alkaline s o i l . The ocular estimate and the more accurate l i n e point sampling method produced similar f o l i a r cover r e s u l t s , although many of the less common species were not recorded by the l a t t e r . Eight species were re-corded by the l a t t e r method while seventeen species, not including members of the class Musci, were recorded by the former method. 82 PRODUCTIVITY The highest standing crop measured during the season, 58OO kg/ha, lay within the range of peak aboveground standing crops reported by other researchers, 4-750 - 9000 kg/ha. The aboveground standing crops would have been higher, but s t i l l much less than 9000 kg/ha i f the plants had been clipped at the base rather than at 8 cm. The seasonal trend raw data indicate that the 23 cm harvests ap-pear greater than the 8 cm harvests during l a t e May. The res u l t must be due to the inherent v a r i a b i l i t y amongst plots. The apparent slower growth during l a t e July and August may have been due to the increasing water table i n l a t e July and early August preventing high s o i l temper-atures or more l i k e l y a seasonal die back similar to the die back of mature C. rostrata shoots observed by Gorham and Somers ( 1973) . Sedge die back complicates the c o l l e c t i o n of material. Throughout the season the t i p s of Cj_ rostrata leaves died. This necrosis then progressed down the lea f making i t d i f f i c u l t to separate a l l the ne-c r o t i c tissue from the l i v i n g tissue. Leaves which were mostly dead material were discarded. This die back phenomenon was not as pronounced early i n the season. Although the regression equation found no difference among t o t a l y i e l d s , i t s sbringent significance l e v e l s and balancing effect of the harvest at the end of the season i n the mid May - mid July, June - July, and mid June - mid August treatments add c r e d i b i l i t y to the data i n t e r -83 pretation that treatment forage y i e l d s are i n fact higher near the end of the season. This implies that regardless of time of c l i p p i n g or c l i p p i n g taking place the sedge produces the same amount of foliage during the season and i f harvested l a t e r i n the season a higher pro-portion of the foliage produced w i l l be collected (Table XVI). Like-wise i f foliage i s clipped closer to the plant base more foliage i s collected. Curiously, a contributing factor to the higher y i e l d s of the 8 cm c l i p p i n g i s the apparent finding that closer c l i p p i n g simula-ted a greater regrowth production especially among l a t e r commencing treatments (Table XIV). I f the study meadow were grazed to 8 cm l a t e i n the season based on the forage y i e l d data i t could support 23 animal unit months (AUM's) per hectare. This staggering carrying capacity must be tempered with further knowledge. F i r s t l y , the maximum y i e l d i s comprised of greater amounts of less palatable mature growth. Secondly, as w i l l be shown plant n u t r i t i o n a l quality indicates e a r l i e r use. Thirdly, within one l o c a l i t y c a t t l e w i l l graze some meadows heavily while leaving others of the same vegetation type and a c c e s s i b i l i t y untouched. Fourthly, i f c a t t l e graze the centre of a meadow properly the edge of the meadow i s usually badly overgrazed. F i f t h l y , even within one meadow zone the c a t t l e do not graze uniformly. Some plants may be l e f t r e l a t i v e l y un-grazed while others are clipped to t h e i r base. S i x t h l y , moist s i t e s such as wetlands are very subject to trampling damage during grazing. Trampling i s an additional stress tapping a plants resources, and draining i t s vigor. Considering the above concerns a r e a l i s t i c estimated stoc-king rate could be 2 - 5 AUM's per hectare. This estimate could vary-widely depending on the circumstances of the range s i t e . 85 NUTRITION  Crude Protein The fact that the crude protein content of the vegetation varied s i g n i f i c a n t l y with the cl i p p i n g period time while the control (standing crop seasonal trend) did not, demonstrates the cl i p p i n g treatments had an appreciable effect. Repeated clippings resulted i n higher vegetation crude protein contents, especially c l i p p i n g during June. This informa-t i o n shows that meadow vegetation can be conditioned to maintain a higher crude protein content. The crude protein content of a l l treated plants remained above the minimum dietary requirements of a l l classes of beef cat t l e from May through August. In November i t was below the requirements of a l l classes of beef c a t t l e . Calcium, Phosphorus, Calcium:Phosphorus Ratio Both the calcium and phosphorus contents of wetland meadow vege-tat i o n were low, but within the range reported by other researchers. The standing crop data low mean phosphorus content and high c a l -cium: phosphorus ratioSviwereinadequate for beef c a t t l e requirements from May through August. A l l treatment samples contained adequate calcium, most contained adequate phosphorus and most had a favourable calcium: phosphorus r a t i o meeting the minimum dietary requirements of a l l classes of beef c a t t l e . Only the beginning of the e a r l i e s t treatments and the end of the season long c l i p p i n g treatments produced i n s u f f i c i e n t phos-86 TABLE XIX - Beef Cattle Nutrient Requirements (after N.R.C. 1970 and National Academy of Science 1976) NUTRIENT CLASS OF ANIMAL GROWING AND FINISHING DRY PREGNANT BREEDING BULLS POSSIBLE TOXIC STEERS AND HEIFERS Daily Dry Matter per Animal (kg) 8.0 - 10.6 Total Protein (.% tissue) Calcium ($ tissue) Phosphorus {°/o tissue) Zinc (mg) (ppm of min. dry matter intake) Copper (mg) (ppm of min. dry matter intake) Potassium (% tissue) Magnesium (% tissue) Manganese (mg) (ppm of min. dry matter intake) Iron (mg) (ppm of min. dry matter intake) 8-9 - 11.1 0.18 - 1.04 0.18 - 0.70 20 - 30 1.9 - 3-8 4 0.3 - 0.5 0.6 - 0.8 o.o4 - 0.10 1.0 - 10.0 0.1 - 1.3 10 0.9 - 1.3 cows 6.8 - 7.6 5-9 0.18 0.18 20.0 1.8 - 2.5 AND LACTATING COWS 9-3 - 9-9 9-2 0.18 - 0.44 0.18 - 0.39 0.18 LEVEL (ppm) 900 - 1200 115 150, 2000 400 *Unknown. I t i s suggested that the l e v e l for the growing and f i n i s h i n g animal be used. 87 phorus for beef c a t t l e . An unfavourable calcium:phosphorus r a t i o greater than 2:1 was r e s t r i c t e d to the la t e s t treatments. The repeated c l i p p i n g especially e a r l i e r i n the season favours a much higher n u t r i t i v e quality forage. This i s abundantly clear when the treatment data 'Sareo compared with, the seasonal trend data. A more favourable calcium:phosphorus r a t i o i s obtained because of a higher forage phosphorus content and mostly, a lower forage calcium content. Zinc, Copper, Potassium, Magnesium, Manganese, Iron The standing crop zinc content was high but within the range re-ported by other researchers. The copper content was twice as high as findings by other researchers. Curiously, a few samples with very high copper contents contribute to r e s u l t i n g high mean. Potassium, manganese, and iro n contents were a l l somewhat higher than what other researchers have reported while the magnesium content was lower. A l l treatments resulted i n s u f f i c i e n t zinc, copper, potassium, magnesium,manganese and iron i n the wetland vegetation to meet the d i -etary requirements of a l l classes of beef c a t t l e . The manganese con-tent of the meadow vegetation exceeds the 150 ppm toxic l e v e l (National Academy of Sciences 1976) for most of the season. Maynard and L o o s l i (1969) state that manganese i s rarely toxic and has a t o x i c i t y l e v e l of 2000 ppm. The author i s unaware of anemic conditions, which resu l t when excess manganese interferes with t'te:ir.ontme'il5ibo?Msmiincoa,ttlegrazing i n the study area. Therefore i t i s f e l t that the manganese content of the wetland meadow vegetation i s not tox i c . STORED FOOD RESERVES Based on the r e s u l t s of the e t i o l a t i o n experiment m u l t i p l e range t e s t , p l a n t stored food reserves d i d not vary due to treatment. In other words no treatment caused a s i g n i f i c a n t d r a i n on the wetland mea-dow vegetations' stored food reserves. I t can be seen by i n s p e c t i n g the raw data from the e t i o l a t i o n experiment that the u n d i p p e d c o n t r o l p l o t s and p l o t s c l i p p e d e a r l i e s t i n the season had a higher sod reserve index. Coupled w i t h the f a c t that the f i r s t step of the two step m u l t i p l e range t e s t produced a s i g n i f i c a n t F w i t h a s t r i n g e n t 0.01 alpha l e v e l , doubt i s cast on the c o n c l u s i o n that the treatments had no e f f e c t on the p l a n t stored food reserves. Considering the f i n d i n g s of McLean e_t a l (1963) suggesting that l a t e grazing n e g a t i v e l y i n f l u e n c e s wetland meadow ve g e t a t i o n pro-d u c t i v i t y the f o l l o w i n g year, implying reduced p l a n t v i g o r , c a s t s f u r -ther doubt on the i n i t i a l c o n c l u s i o n above. Regardless, the wetland meadow ve g e t a t i o n appears to have very robust q u a l i t i e s . Unexpectedly, the c o n t i n u o u s l y - c l i p p e d : p l a n t s \did:rndt'. c o n t a i n the lowest sod reserves. A p o s s i b l e explanation f o r t h i s may be that the sample core s i z e f o r the e t i o l a t i o n experiment was too small and more r e p l i c a t e s were re q u i r e d . This small area supporting few p l a n t s and l a r g e v a r i a b i l i t y among p l a n t s may have added an overbearing amount of unaccounted v a r i a b i l i t y masking the treatment e f f e c t s . Future wetland meadow ve g e t a t i o n e t i o l a t i o n experiments should use a l a r g e r core s i z e and a greater number of sample r e p l i c a t e s . 89 RANGE USE OF WETLAND MEADOWS BY DOMESTIC LIVESTOCK When contemplating the use of wetland meadows for beef c a t t l e , the following points must be considered along with the preceding i n -formation. On the same ranges where the timber i s thick and the canopy closed, meadows may comprise the only s i g n i f i c a n t grazing area and they may be used throughout the season. On the majority of areas where a l -ternate forage i s available i t i s more palatable to ca t t l e u n t i l l a t e r i n the season and hence w i l l tend to draw c a t t l e away from the wet mea-dows. Cattle tend to prefer to use the wetland meadows from late sum-mer on when the n u t r i t i o n a l quality and p a l a t a b i l i t y of the upland forage Me:cli£n"es..ned.- The n u t r i t i o n a l data suggests c a t t l e gains w i l l decline i f meadows are grazed at t h i s time of year without supplements. Early use of the meadows i s often prohibited by flooding. as.3ca.t$leaare ; usually understandably hesitant to venture onto flooded meadows. Some of these problems can be overcome by modifying the meadow environment. Meadows can be drained, seeded and f e r t i l i z e d i n order to make intensive use of them. These improvements are not usually economi-c a l l y j u s t i f i a b l e i n a range circumstance and can be detrimental to w i l d l i f e . C i r c u i t stock t r a i l s can be constructed which w i l l route c a t t l e along meadow drainages allowing a more uniform use of meadows. Salt can be located away from favoured meadows. Probably one of the cheapest and single most effective ways of improving meadows for c a t t l e use i s burning. The removal of the unpalatable old growth w i l l encour-age c a t t l e ontoc a meadow. I f one meadow of a group of meadows i s burned i t i s quite l i k e l y c a t t l e w i l l concentrate heavily on that meadow. Therefore when burning meadows a number of them should be burned to encourage a more even c a t t l e d i s t r i b u t i o n . In addition meadows are preferably burned i n the spring when the peat and underground plant organs are protected because of abundant s o i l and surface moisture. CONCLUSIONS The standing crop of the Cj^ rostrata community studied ranged from about 1200 to 5 8 O O kg/ha and contained 10$ crude protein, 0.35 to 0.51$ calcium, 0.14-$ phosphorus, a 2.1 to 5-7 calcium:phosphorus r a t i o , 30 ppm zinc, 11 ppm copper, 1.1 - 1-5$ potassium, 0.17 - 0.26$ magnesium, 130 - 330 ppm manganese, and 4-9 - 165 ppm iron between la t e May and the end of August. Total foliage production of the C^ rostrata community appears i n -dependent of time of de f o l i a t i o n but greater foliage production appears to be stimulated by closer cropping. More foliage i s available when harvesting occurs l a t e i n the season. Under optimal conditions the carrying capacity of the C^ rostrata community could be as high as 23 AUM's per hectare, but a r e a l i s t i c stocking rate would be about 2 - 5 AUM's per hectare. Repeated d e f o l i a t i o n caused the C^ rostrata community forage to contain a higher crude protein content, lower calcium content, higher phosphorus content, lower calcium:phosphorus r a t i o , higher zinc content higher copper content, higher potassium content, s l i g h t l y higher man-ganese content, and a higher i r o n content. Repeated c l i p p i n g condi-tioned the forage so that i t provided adequate crude protein, calcium, phosphorus (except at the beginning of the e a r l i e s t and end of the sea-son long clipp i n g treatments), zinc, copper, potassium, magnesium, man-ganese, and iron to meet the minimum dietary requirements of a l l classe 92 of beef c a t t l e throughout the season (mid May through August). Harvest-ing during June through J u l y provided the highest forage average crude p r o t e i n content. Harvesting J u l y through August provided the highest average forage phosphorus content but the calcium:phosphorus r a t i o be-comes higher than d e s i r a b l e . Considering that the va r i o u s c l i p p i n g treatments appeared not to have s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t e f f e c t s on the p l a n t s ' a b i l i t y to s t o r e food r e s e r v e s , as w e l l as the p r o d u c t i v i t y and n u t r i t i o n a l data, the best time to graze Cj_ r o s t r a t a wetland meadows appears to be mid June through mid August and the best average stubble height appears to be 8 cm r a t h e r than 23 cm.- When" contemplating the use of wetland meadows the above c o n c l u s i o n must be tempered w i t h the c o n s i d e r a t i o n s mentioned i n the d i s c u s s i o n chapter under the s e c t i o n e n t i t l e d "Range Use Of Wetland Meadows By Domestic L i v e s t o c k " . BIBLIOGRAPHY Aldous, A. E. 1930 a. R e l a t i o n of organic food reserves to the growth of some Kansas pasture p l a n t s . J . Am. Soc. Agron. 22:385-392. Aldous, A. E. 1930 b. E f f e c t of d i f f e r e n t c l i p p i n g treatment on the y i e l d and v i g o r of p r a i r i e grass v e g e t a t i o n . Ecology 11:752-759. Archbold, H. K. 1940. Fructosans i n the monocotyledons. A review. New P h y t o l . 39:185-219. A s s o c i a t i o n of O f f i c i a l A n a l y t i c a l Chemists. 1971. Handbook of the A.O.A.C, 3rd Ed., Washington, D.C. Baker, H. K. and E. A. Garwood. 1961. Studies on the root development of herbage p l a n t s . 5 seasonal changes i n f r u c t o s a n and s o l u b l e sugar contents of cocksfoot herbage, stubble and roots under 2 c u t t i n g treatments. J . Br. Grassland Soc. 16:263-267. Bernard, J . M. 1973. Production ecology of wetland sedges: the genus ICarex. P o l . Arch. Hydrobiol. 20:201-214. Bernard, J . M. 1974. Seasonal changes i n standing crop and primary p r o d u c t i v i t y i n a sedge wetland and an adjacent dry o l d - f i e l d i n c e n t r a l Minnesota. Ecology 55:350-359. Bernard, J . M. 1975. The l i f e h i s t o r y of shoots of Carex l a c u s t r i s . Can. J. Bot. 53:256. Bernard, J . M. and E. Gorham. 1977. L i f e h i s t o r y aspects of primary production i n sedge wetlands. In Freshwater wetlands. Ed. Good R. E., D. F. Wigham, and R. L. Simpson. Academic P r e s s , San F r a n c i s c o , C a l i f . Bernard, J . M. and J . G. McDonald, J r . 1974. Primary production and l i f e h i s t o r y of Carex l a c u s t r i s . Can. J . Bot. 52:117-123. B i l l i n g s , W. D. 1970. P l a n t s , Man and the Ecosystem, 2nd Ed., Wads-worth P u b l i s h i n g Co. Inc., Belmont, C a l i f . B i s w e l l , H. H. and J . E. Weaver. 1933. E f f e c t of frequent c l i p p i n g on the development of roots and tops of grasses i n p r a i r i e sod. Ecology 14:368-390. Borman, F. E. and G. E. Tikens. 1967. N u t r i e n t c y c l i n g . Science 155: 424-429. Boyd, C. E. 1969. P r o d u c t i o n , mineral n u t r i e n t a b s o r p t i o n , and b i o -chemical a s s i m u l a t i o n by J u s t i c a americana and A l t e r n a n t h e r a p h i l o x e r o i d e s . Arch. Hydrobiol. 66:139-160. Boyd, C. E. 1970 a. Chemical a n a l y s i s of some v a s c u l a r aquatic p l a n t s Arch. H y d r o b i o l . 67:78-85. 94 Boyd, C. E. 1970 b. Production, mineral accumulation and pigment con-centration i n Typha l a t i f o l i a and Scirpus americanus. Ecology 51: 285-290. Boyd, C. E. and L. W. Hess. 1970. Factors influencing shoot production and mineral nutrient l e v e l s i n Typha l a t i f o l i a . Ecology 51 :296-300. Boydell, A. N., N. F. A l l e y , J. M. Ryder, D. E. Howes, M. E. Walmsley,  A. Patterson, B. Thompson, T. Void, and R. Beai. 1976. Terrain Class-i f i c a t i o n System. B r i t i s h Columbia Environment and Land Use Committee Secretariat. Branson, F. A. 1953- Two new factors affecting resistance of grasses to grazing. J. Range Mangt. 6:165-171. Branson, F. A. 1956. Quantitative effects of c l i p p i n g treatments on five range grasses. J. Range Mangt. 9 : 8 6 - 8 8 . Bray, J. R. 1963* Root production and the estimation of net produc-t i v i t y . Can. J. Bot. 41 :65-72. Brown, D. 1954. Methods of surveying and measuring vegetation. Common-wealth Bureau of Pastures and F i e l d Crops. Hurley, Berks. B u l l e t i n 42. 223 pps. Brown, G. R. and J. F. Thilenius. 1977- A t o o l and method of extracting p l a n t - r o o t - s o i l cores on remote s i t e s . J. Range Mangt. 3 0 : 7 2 - 7 4 . Bukey, F. S. and J. E. Weaver. 1939* Effects of frequent c l i p p i n g on the underground food reserves of certain p r a i r i e grasses. Ecology 20:246-252. Burton, G. W. and J. E. Jackson. 1962. A method of measuring sod re-serves^Agron. J. 5 4 : 5 3 - 5 5 . Burton, G. W., F. E. Knox and D. W. Beardsley. 1964. Effect of age on the chemical composition p a l a t a b i l i t y and d i g e s t i b i l i t y of grass leaves. Agron J. 56:160-161. Canfield, R. H. 1939- The effect of in t e n s i t y and frequency of c l i p p i n g on density and y i e l d of black grama grass and tobosa grass. U.S. Dept. Agr. Tech. B u l l . 681. Carter, J. F. and A. G. Law. 1948. Effect of c l i p p i n g upon the vegeta-t i v e development of some perennial grasses. J. Amer. Soc. Agron. 40:1084-1091. 95 Climate of B r i t i s h Columbia. Tables of temperature and p r e c i p i t a t i o n . Climatic normals 19+1 - 1970. Extremes of record. B r i t i s h Columbia Ministry of Agriculture. C o l l i n s , J . G. 1955. N u t r i t i v e value of several samples of slough hay from the Cariboo, B r i t i s h Columbia. Bachelor of Science thesis on f i l e at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia. Cook, C. W. and L. E. Harris. 1950. The n u t r i t i v e value of range forage as affected by vegetation type, s i t e and stage of maturity. Utah Agr. Exp. Sta. B u l l . 344. Cook, C. W. and L. A. Stoddart. 1953. Some growth responses of crested wheatgrass following herbage removal. J. Range Mangt. 6:267-270. Crampton, E. W. 1957- Interrelationship between digestible nutrient and energy content, voluntary dry matter intake and o v e r a l l feeding value of forage. J. Anim. S c i . 16:546-552. Crider, F. J . 1955- Root growth stoppage r e s u l t i n g from d e f o l i a t i o n of grass. U.S. Dept. Agr. Tech. B u l l . 1102:1-23. Daubenmire, R. F. 1940. Exclosure technique i n ecology. Ecol. 21:514-515. Daubenmire, R. F. 1968. Plant Communities. Harper and Row, New York, N. Y. ' • Davis, W. E. P. i960. Effects of clippi n g at various heights on char-a c t e r i s t i c s of regrowth i n Reed Cananygrass. Can. J. Plant S c i . 40:452-456. Donefer, E. 1970. Forage s o l u b i l i t y measurements i n r e l a t i o n to n u t r i -t i v e value. Proc. Natl. Conf. Qual. Eval. U t i l . R. F. Barnes ed. pp. Q1-Q6. Nebr. Centre Continuing Ed. Lincoln. E l l i o t t , W. B. and L. Carrier. 1915- The effect of frequent cl i p p i n g on t o t a l y i e l d and composition of grasses. J. Amer. Soc. Agron. 7=85-87-Fonda, R. W. and L. C. B l i s s . 1966. Annual carbohydrate cycle of alpine plants on Mt. Washington, New Hampshire. B u l l . Torrey Club. Bot. 93: 268-277. Gernert, W. B. 1936. Native grass behaviour as affected by periodic c l i p -ping. J. Amer. Soc. Agron. 28:447-456. 96 Gardner, J. W. 1971. Q u a l i t y and growth of s e v e r a l species of n a t i v e sedge. Unpublished. D i r e c t e d Studies Report. Dept. of P l a n t Science, U.B.C. Getz, L. L. 1960. Standing crop of herbaceous v e g e t a t i o n i n southern Michigan. E c o l . 41:393-395. Gorham, E. and M. G. Somers. 1973. Seasonal changes i n the standing crop of two montane sedges. Can. J . Bot. 51:1097-1108. Graber, L. F.. 1929. P e n a l t i e s of low food reserves i n pasture grasses. J . Am. Soc. Agron. 21:29-34. Graber, L. F. 1931. Food reserves i n r e l a t i o n to other f a c t o r s l i m i t i n g the growth of grasses. P l a n t P h y s i o l . 6:43-71. Graber, L. F., N. T. Nelson, W. A. Leukel, and W. B. A l b e r t . 1927. Organic food reserves i n r e l a t i o n to the growth of a l f a l f a and other p e r e n n i a l herbaceous p l a n t s . Wise. Agr. Exp. Sta. Res. B u l l . 80. Grant, L. 1974. Wetlands, w i l d l i f e and weather. S o i l Cons. 39(8) :2. Halm, J . and C. D. Le. 1975. U.B.C, MFAV, A n a l y s i s of variance/co-v a r i a n c e . Computing Centre. U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. Best P r i n t e r Co. L t d . , Van. B. C. Harper, F. E. 1963. Chemical a n a l y s i s of w i l d hay, i n t e r i o r B r i t i s h Columbia. Bachelor of Science t h e s i s on f i l e at U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. H a r r i s o n , C. M. 1939. Greenhouse s t u d i e s of the e f f e c t of c l i p p i n g on the tops of a l f a l f a at v a r i o u s heights on the production of r o o t s , reserve carbohydrates and top growth. P l a n t P h y s i o l . 14:505-516. : H a r r i s o n , C. M. and C. W. Hogson. 1939. Response of c e r t a i n p e r e n n i a l grasses to c u t t i n g treatments. J . Amer. Soc. Agron. 31:418-430. Heady, H. F. 1964. P a l a t a b i l i t y of herbage and animal preference. J . Range Mangt. 17-76-82. Heath, M.E., D. S. Metcalf and R. F. Barnes. 1973. Forages the science of grassland a g r i c u l t u r e . 3rd Ed. Iowa State U n i v e r s i t y Press. Ames, Iowa. Heinselman, M., 1963. Forest s i t e s , bog processes and peatland types i n g l a c i a l lake Agassiz r e g i o n , Minnesota. E c o l . Monogr. 33:327-374. Heinselman, M. 1974. H i s t o s o l s : t h e i r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , and use. S o i l S c i . Soc. Amer. S p e c i a l Pub. No. 6. Sept. 1974. 97 Holdgate, M. W. 1955- The vegetation of some B r i t i s h upland fens. J . Ecol. 4-3:389-403. Holland, S. S. 1964. Landforms of B r i t i s h Columbia a physiographic out-l i n e . B r i t . Col. Dept. of Mines and Petroleum Resources B u l l . 48. Holter, J . A. and J. T. Reid. 1959- Relationship between the concentra-t i o n of crude protein and apparently digestible protein i n forages. J. Anim. S c i . 18:1339-Hyder, D. N. and F. A. Sneva. 1959- Growth and carbohydrate trends i n crested wheatgrass. J. Range Mangt. 12:271-276. Ingvason, P. A. 1969- The golden sedges of Iceland. World Crops 21: 218-220. I v i n s , J. D. 1952. The r e l a t i v e p a l a t a b i l i t y of herbage plants. J. Br. Grassl. Soc. 7 :43-54. Jakrlova, J. 1967. Plant production, chlorophyll and i t s v e r t i c a l dis-t r i b u t i o n i n inundated meadows. Photosynthetica 1:199-205-Johnstone-Wallace, D. B. and K. Kennedy. 1944. Grazing management practises and t h e i r relationship to the behaviour and grazing habits of c a t t l e . J. Agr. S c i . 34:190-197-Johnstone-Wallace, D. B. and K. Kennedy. 1975- Instruction manual, nit r a t e can electrode model 93-07- Orion Research Incorporated. Form IM 9307/578. International Peat Society. 1973- C l a s s i f i c a t i o n of peat and peatlands, Proceeding of the I.P.S. Symposium i n Glasglow, 1973, H e l s i n k i , 1973-John, M. K. 1972. Automated digestion system for safe use of perch-l o r i c acid. Anal. Chem. 44:429-430. Keicer, G. M. 1974. A guide to c o l l e c t i n g and preserving plants. U.S. Dept. Agr. Forest Service Research Note NE-188. Upper Darby Pa. Krajina, V. J. 1969- Ecology of forest trees i n B r i t i s h Columbia. Ecology of Western North America. 2:1-146. Dept. of Bot. Univer-s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. Le, C. D. and T. Tenisci. 1977- U.B.C., TRP, Triangular regression package. Computing Centre. University of B r i t i s h Columbia. Best Printer Co. Ltd., Van. B. C. 98 Leukel, W. A. 1929- Deposition and u t i l i z a t i o n of reserve foods i n a l -f a l f a plants. J . Amer. Soc. Agron. 19=596-623. Lobb, T. M. 1969- Determining carbohydrate reserves i n three range grasses by the e t i o l a t i o n method. Bachelor of Science thesis on f i l e at University of B r i t i s h Columbia. Macfadyen, A. 1964. Energy flow i n t e r r e s t r i a l and marine environments. In grazing i n t e r r e s t r i a l and marine environments, ed. D. J. Crisp. B r i t . Ecol. Soc. Symp. 4 : 3 - 2 0 . Blackwell, Oxford. Marx, V. F. 1964. A b i o l o g i c a l method for determining turfgrass re-serves. Masters thesis on f i l e at University of B r i t i s h Columbia. Masten, G. C. 1970. Measurement and significance of forage p a l a t a b i l i t y . Proc. Natl. Conf. Forage Qual. Eval. U t i l . R.F. Barnes ed. pp. D1-. D 5 5 - Nebr. Centre Continuing Ed. Lincoln. Mathews, C. P. and D. F. Westlake. 1969- Estimation of production by populations of higher plants subject to high mortality. Oikos 20: 156-160. Maynard, L. A. and J. K. L o o s l i . 1969. Animal N u t r i t i o n . 6 t h Ed. McGraw-Hill, Toronto, Ont. McCarthy, E. C. 1935- Seasonal march of carbohydrates i n Elymus ambi-gures and Muhlenbergia g r a c i l i s and th e i r reaction under moderage grazing use. Plant Physiol. 10:727-738. McCarthy, E. C. 1938. The r e l a t i o n of growth to the varying carbohy-drate content i n mountain brome. U.S. Dept. of Agr. Tech. B u l l . 598. McCarthy, E. C. and R. P r i c e . 1942. Growth and carbohydrate content of important mountain forage plants i n central Utah as affected by cli p p i n g and grazing. U.S. Dept. Agr. Tech. B u l l . 818. McDougald, W. R. and R. C. P i a t t . 1976. A method of determining u t i l i -zation for wet mountain meadows on the summit allotment, Sequois National Forest, C a l i f o r n i a . J . Range Mangt. 29:497-501. McLean, A., H. H. Nicholson and A. L. van Ryswyk. 1963. Growth produc-t i v i t y , and chemical composition of a sub-alpine meadow i n i n t e r i o r B r i t i s h Columbia. J. Range Mangt. 16:235-240. McLean, A. and E. W. Tisdale. i 9 6 0 . Chemical composition of native for-age plants i n B r i t i s h Columbia i n r e l a t i o n to grazing practises. Can. J. Plant S c i . 40:405-423. 99 Mellanby, K. 1976. Saving Wetlands. Nature 260 (5547) :91 . Mellanby, K. 1975- Methods of Analysis. Association of O f f i c i a l Analy-t i c a l Chemists, Washington, D.C. M i l l a r , J . B. 1973 a. Estimation of area and circumference of small wet-lands. J . W i l d l . Manage. 3 7 : 3 0 - 3 8 . M i l l a r , J . B. 1973 b. Vegetation changes i n shallow marsh wetlands under improving moisture regime. Can. J. Bot. 51:1443-1457. Miltimore, J. E., J. L. Mason and D. L. Ashby. 1970. Copper, zinc, man-ganese, and iro n v a r i a t i o n i n fi v e feeds of ruminants. Can. J. Anim. S c i . 50:293-300. Mooney, H. A. and W. D. B i l l i n g s , i 9 6 0 . The annual carbohydrate cycle of alpine plants as related to growth. Amer. J. Bot. 47:594-598. Moore and D. Bellamy. 1974. Peatland.B. Springer-Verlog Inc., New York, N. Y. Morns .jo, T. 1969- Studies on vegetation and development of a peatland i n Scania, South Sweden. Opera. Bot. No. 24. 197p. Muc, M. 1971 - Primary productivity i n a high a r t i c sedge meadow. (Ab-st r a c t ) . Amer. J. Bot. 5 8 : 4 2 . National Academy of Science. 1976. Nutrient requirements of beef c a t t l e . 5 t h ed. Neiland, B. M. and J. T. Cur t i s . 1956. D i f f e r e n t i a l responses to c l i p -ping of s i x p r a i r i e grasses i n Wisconsin. Ecol. 37:355-365-Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle . 1970. 4 t h Ed. Subcommittee of beef c a t t l e n u t r i t i o n . Committee on animal n u t r i t i o n . A g r i c u l t u r a l Board Nation. Research Council. Nation. Academy of Sciences. Wash-ington, D. C. Parker, K. W. and A. W. Sampson. 1931- Growth and y i e l d of certain Gramineae as influenced by reduction of photosynthetic tissue. Hilgardia 5 :361-381. P e a r s a i l , W. H. and E. Gorham. 1956. Production ecology I . Standing crops of natural vegetation. Oikos 7 :193-201. Penfound, W. T. 1956. Primary production of vascular aquatic plants. Limnol. Oceanogl. 1:92-101. 100 Pidgen, W. J. 1963- The r e l a t i o n of l i g n i n , c e l l u l o s e , protein, starch, and ether extract to the curing of range grasses.' Can. J. Agr. S c i . 33:364-378. P i l a t , A. 1967. Chlorophyll content and dry matter production i n fi v e meadow communities. Photosynthetica 1:253-257. Pringle, W. L. and J. E. Miltimore. 1966. D i g e s t i b i l i t y of bog forage. Can. J. Plant S c i . 46 :702. Pringle, W. L. and A. L. van Ryswyck. 1965. Response of water sedge i n growth room to f e r t i l i z e r and temperature treatments. Can. J. Plant S c i . 4 5 : 6 0 . P r i n g l e , W. L. and A. L. van Ryswyck. 1967. Carry-over effects of high f e r t i l i z e r rates on native sedge bog vegetation i n i n t e r i o r B r i t i s h Columbia. Can. J. Plant S c i . 4 0 : 4 9 - 5 5 . P'yavehenko, N. I . 1964. Peat bogs of the Russian forest - steppe. I s r a e l Program for S c i e n t i f i c Translations l t d . Raleigh, R. J . , C. B. Rumberg and J. D. Wallace. 1964. D i g e s t i b i l i t y of native flood meadow hay at different stages of growth. Amer. Soc. Anim. S c i . 15 LVT-1 to LVI - 5 . Rappe, G. 1951• Seasonal v a r i a t i o n i n the rate of pasture regrowth after grazing. Plant and S o i l 3 :309-338. Raymond, W. R. 1969- The n u t r i t i v e value of forage crops. Adv. Agron. 21:1-108. Rittenhouse, L. R., C. L. Streeter and D. C. Clanton. 1971. Estimating digestible energy from digestible dry and organic matter i n diets of grazing c a t t l e . J. Range Mange. 24:73-75-Rodin, L. E., N. I . Bozilevich and N. N. Rozov. 1972. The productivity of world's main ecosystems. Proce. of c. Sym. Aug. 31 -.Sept. 1, 1972 at the I General Assembly of the Special Committee of the I . B. P., Seattle, Wash. Sampson, A. W. and E. C. McCarthy. 1930. The carbohydrate metabolism of Stipa pulchra. Hilgardia 5 :61-100. Sculthorpe, C. D. 19&7- The biology of aquatic vascular plants. St. Martin's Press, New York, N. Y. 610 p. S.jors, H. 1950. On the r e l a t i o n between vegetation and electrolytes i n North Sweden waters. Oikos 2:241-258. 101 Smirnov, N. N. 1958. Some data about the food consumption of plant production of bogs and fens by animals. Proc. I n t . Assoc. Limnol. x i i i , 363-368. Smirnov, N. N. 1961. Food cycles i n Spagnous bogs. Hydrobiol. 17= 175-182. Sprague, V. G. and J. T. Su l l i v a n . 1950. Reserve carbohydrate i n or-chard grass clipped p e r i o d i c a l l y . Plant Physiol. 25:92-102. Stoddart, L. A., A. D. Smith and T. W. Box. 1975- Range Management. 3 r d Ed. McGraw-Hill, Toronto, Ont. Sul l i v a n , J . T. and V. G. Sprague. 194-3. Composition of the roots and stubble of perennial ryegrass following p a r t i a l d e f o l i a t i o n . Plant Physiol. 18:656-670. S u l l i v a n , J . T. and V. G. Sprague. 194-9. The effect of temperature on the growth and composition of the stubble and roots of perennial ryegrass. Plant Physiol. 24-:706-719. S u l l i v a n , J . T. and V. G. Sprague. 1953- Reserve carbohydrates i n or-chardgrass cut for hay. Plant Physiol. 28:304—313. •Tarnocai, C. 1974-. Peat landforms and associated vegetation i n Manitoba. Prepared for the National organic s o i l mapping workshop. Canada S o i l Survey. Winnipeg June 3 - 7, 1974-. Troughton, A. 1957- The underground organs of herbage grasses. Comm. Bur. Past. F i e l d Crops, Hurley, B u l l . 4-4, Ch. 12 8c 19. van der Valk, A. G. and L. C. B l i s s . 1971• Hydrarch succession and net • primary production of oxbow lakes i n Central Alberta. Can. J. Bot. 4-9:1177-1199. van Ryswyk, A. L. 1971- Native meadows of the Cariboo. Unpublished. van Ryswyk, A. L. and A. H. Bawtree. 1971. Management and improvement of meadows on organic.soils of i n t e r i o r B r i t i s h Columbia. B r i t i s h Columbia Dept. Agr. Pub. 1971. van Ryswyk, A. L., W. A. Hubbard and J. E. Miltimore. 1973. Beef pro-duction potential and chemical composition of f e r t i l i z e d and un-f e r t i l i z e d sedge hays grown on an organic s o i l of i n t e r i o r B r i t i s h Columbia. Can. J. Anim. Soc. 53:181-186. van Soest, P. J. 1965- Symposium of factors influencing the voluntary intake i n r e l a t i o n to chemical composition and d i g e s t i b i l i t y . J. Anim. S c i . 24 :834. 102 van Soest, P1. J. 19^7• Development of a comprehensive system of feed analysis and i t s application to forages. J. Anim. S c i . 26:119-128. Waldern, D. E. 1971. A rapid micro-digestion procedure for neutral and acid detergent f i b r e . Can. J. Anim. S c i . 51:67-69-Waldo, D. R. 1970. Factors influencing the voluntary intake of forages. Proc. Natl. Conf. Forage Qual. Eval. U t i l . R.F. Barnes ed. pp. E1-E22. Nebr. Centre Continuing Ed. Lincoln. Walker, B. H. and C. T. Wehrhahn. 1971. ' Relationships between derived vegetation gradients and measured environmental variables i n Sask-atchewan. Ecol. 5 2 : 8 5 - 9 5 . Walmsley, M. E. and L. M. Lavkulich. 1973- In s i t u measurement of dis-solved materials as an indicator of organic t e r r a i n type. Can. J. S o i l S c i . 53:231-236. Weaver, J. E. 1930. Underground plant development i n i t s r e l a t i o n to grazing. Ecol. 11:54-3-557. Weinman, H. 1947. Determination of t o t a l available carbohydrates i n plants. Plant Physiol. 22:279-290. Weinman, H. 1948. Underground development and reserves of grasses. A review. J . B r i t . Grassl. Soc. 3:115-140. Weir, T. R. 1964. Ranching i n the southern i n t e r i o r of B r i t i s h Columbia. Geogr. Br. Mem. 4 . Can. Dept. Mines Tech. Surv. Ottawa, Ont. Westlake, D. F. 1963- Comparisons of plant productivity. B i o l . Rev. 38:385-425. Westlake, D. F. 1965- Some basic data for investigations of the pro-du c t i v i t y of aquatic macrophytes. In C. R. Goldman (ed.). Primary productivity i n aquatic environments, Mem. Inst. I t a l . I d r o b i o l . 18 supp. Univ. C a l i f . Press. Berkeley, pp. 231-248. Westlake, D. F. 1966. The biomass productivity of Glyceria maxima I . Seasonal changes i n biomass. J. Ecol. 54:745-753-Westlake, D. F. 1968. Methods used to determine the annual production of reed swamp plants with extensive rhizomes. I.B.P. Symposium: Methods of productivity studies i n root systems and rhizospere organisms. Leningrad, pp. 226-234. 103 APPENDIX A Daily Maximum and Minimum Temperature Values for the Study S i t e Exclosure and Tautri Creek Climate Station STUDY SITE EXCLOSURE CLIMATE STATION DATE (Days) TEMPERATURES (°C) TEMPERATURES (°C) Maximum Minimum Maximum Minimum June 13 4 . 5 14.5 - 0 . 5 June 14 7 . 0 - 8 . 5 15.0 0 . 0 June 15 14.5 - 8 . 5 16.0 0 . 5 June 16 18.0 - 4 . 5 21.5 - 0 . 5 June 17 21.5 - 2 . 0 24 .0 2 . 0 June 18 2 2 . 0 - 2 . 0 24 .5 7.5 June 19 - - 21.5 7-0 June 20 - - 15.5 7.5 June 21 - - 18.5 6.0 June 22 12.0 - 15.5 4 . 0 June 23 15-0 - 6 . 0 18.5 - 1 . 5 June 24 15-0 - 1 . 0 19.0 7 . 0 June 25 - - 14.5 0 . 5 June 26 9-5 - 14.5 0 . 0 June 27 19.0 - 5 . 0 17.5 0 . 0 June 28 15.0 - 2 . 0 14.5 1.0 June 29 - - 15.0 2.5 June 30 - - 15.5 0 . 0 July 1 16.5 18.0 1.0 July 2 11.0 2.5 15-0 1.0 July "3 9.5 - 1 . 0 13.0 - 1 . 0 July 4 9.5 1.0 13.0 4 . 0 July 5 5 . 0 0 . 0 12.0 2 . 0 July 6 13.5 2 . 0 8 . 0 4 . 5 July 7 12.0 -1-5 17.5 1.0 July 8 18.5 - 2 . 5 2 0 . 0 3 . 0 July 9 14.0 - 3 . 0 18.0 3 . 5 July 10 17.0 - 1 . 0 18.0 3 . 5 July 11 16.5 6.0 16.0 9.5 July 12 14.0 5-0 16.0 8.5 July 13 17.0 3 . 5 18.0 4 . 0 July 14 17.0 3 . 5 18.0 7.5 July 15 16.0 3-5 17.0 6 . 0 July 16 15.0 - 0 . 5 17-0 8.5 July 17 - - 1 . 0 13.0 3 . 5 July 18 3 . 5 - 1 . 0 12.0 1.0 July 19 - 5 . 0 19.0 6.0 July 20 2 2 . 0 - 21.0 4 . 0 July 21 2 0 . 0 - 1 . 0 17-5 4 . 0 July 22 2 0 . 0 - 18.0 1.0 104 STUDY SITE EXCLOSURE CLIMATE STATION DATE (Days) TEMPERATURES (°C) TEMPERATURES (°C) Maximum Minimum Maximum Minimum July 23 _ _ 21.1 - 1 . 0 July 24 25-0 0 . 5 2 5 . 0 2 . 0 July 25 2 9 . 0 2 . 0 2 8 . 0 3 . 5 July 26 31 .0 3 . 0 2 8 . 0 5-0 July 27 3 0 . 0 3 . 0 27.0 5 . 0 July 28 19-0 6 . 0 21 .0 8 . 0 July 29 - - 17.5 6 . 0 July 30 - - 2 0 . 0 5 . 5 July 31 21.0 4 . 0 August 1 - - 2 4 . 0 4 . 0 August 2 - - 2 4 . 0 4 . 0 August 3 15.0 6.0 ^22.0 4 . 0 August 4 18.0 3 . 0 21.5 3-0 August 5 26.0 1.0 2 3 . 5 0 . 0 August 6 2 6 . 0 2.5 23-5 3 . 0 August 7 2 9 . 0 3 . 0 2 6 . 0 3-0 August 8 2 5 . 0 5 . 0 21.0 5 . 5 August 9 2 5 . 0 3 . 0 2 3 . 0 2.5 August 10 28.5 4 . 0 25.5 3 . 0 August 11 - - 2 8 . 5 4 . 0 August 12 - - 2 6 . 0 4 . 0 August 13 - - 2 4 . 0 4 . 0 August 14 - - 21.0 9 . 0 August 15 - - 22.5 - 2 . 5 August 16 3 0 . 0 - 26.0 - 2 . 0 August 17 3 1 . 0 - 2 8 . 5 2 . 0 August 18 2 8 . 5 - 2 5 . 0 7 . 0 August 19 - - 2 5 . 0 2 . 0 August 20 2 9 . 0 - 27.5 2.0 August 21 - - 2 6 . 0 3 . 5 August 22 2 8 . 0 - 19.0 10.0 August 23 18.0 - 16.0 8 . 0 August 24 17.0 4 . 0 15.0 - 0 . 5 August 25 11.5 6.0 15.5 3 . 0 August 26 15.5 2.5 14.0 1.0 August 27 18.5 3 . 0 14.5 0 . 0 August 28 - - 13.0 4 . 5 August 29 - - 10.0 4 . 5 August 30 - - 10.5 3 . 5 August 31 - - 12.5 1.5 105 APPENDIX B S o i l Temperatures and Water Q u a l i t y Raw Data MEASURE- SOIL SOIL WATER CALCIUM WATER MENT TEMPERATURE TEMPERATURE WATER CONCENTRATION CONDUCTIVITY DATE (Days) 10 cm (°C) 50 cm (°C) pH (ppm) (mmho/cm) May 20 7-0 6 .5 7.1 20 320 May 20 7 . 0 7 . 0 7 .0 20 340 May 20 7-0 6 .5 7-1 20 360 May 20 7.5 7 . 0 7-0 19 380 May 31 8 . 0 8 .0 7.1 22 380 May 31 7-5 7 .2 7 .2 24 400 May 31 9 . 0 8 .5 7-1 22 360 May 31 7 .5 8 . 0 7-3 24 370 June 15 9-4- 9 . 0 7 . 0 26 390 June 15 9 . 0 8.4 7-2 23 460 June 15 10.2 8 .2 7-3 29 500 June 15 9 .6 8 .8 7-3 24 490 June 27 11.0 9 . 2 6-9 25 590 June 27 9.6 9-2 7.1 24 630 June 27 10.6 9 . 8 7-0 39 720 June 27 10.0 9-6 7 .0 19 550 J u l y 18 10.2 9 . 0 6-9 32 660 J u l y 18 9.4 9 . 0 6.6 27 520 J u l y 18 9-8 9 . 8 6.6 34 730 J u l y 18 10.0 9-8 6.6 30 740 J u l y 28 12.0 10.0 7 .2 193 1560 J u l y 28 11.0 10.8 7-2 148 1440 J u l y 28 14.0 11.6 7 .0 105 990 J u l y 28 11.8 11.2 7.1 85 1190 August 16 12.2 10.4 7 .3 69 630 August 16 11.2 11.2 7 .2 74 770 August 16 12.2 13.0 7-2 35 600 August 16 13.0 12.0 7.1 48 660 August 29 9.k 9 . 0 7.1 83 900 August 29 9-0 9 .2 7-8 94 870 August 29 9 . 2 10.8 7 .2 83 470 August 29 9-0 9-5 7-6 78 880 106 APPENDIX C Study Area S o i l P r o f i l e s 1. Orthic Gray L u v i s o l LFH Ae AB sandy loam - loam Bt 30 - 4-3 cm, s i l t loam - s i l t y c l a . loam C sandy loam 2. Gleyed Gray L u v i s o l LFH Ae Btgj Cg 3- Calcarious Orthic Humic Gleysol LFH t u r f y Ah 10 cm, effervescent Ahe s i l t y clay loam Bg s i l t y clay loam Ah s i l t y clay loam Cg sandy - grav e l l y k. Calcarious Gleyed Regosol L-H t u r f y , effervescent Ah <10 cm, effervescent I C kgj Marl, effervescent II C kgj Marl, effervescent 5- Calcarious Gleyed Humic Regosol L-H t u r f y , effervescent Ah >10 cm, effervescent C kgj effervescent 107 6. T e r r i c M e s i c H u m i s o l H o r i z o n D e p t h T i e r % W a t e r H o l d i n g B u l k D e n s i t y F i b r e C o n t e n t P h y r o p h o s p h a t e C a p a c i t y a t S a t u r a t i o n ( g / c c ) S o l u b i l i t y I n d e x Om T Oh I 100 120 M i n e r a 1 108 7. Typic Humisol Horizon Depth T i e r % Water Holding Bulk Density Fibre Content Pyrophosphate Capacity at Saturation (g/cc) S o l u b i l i t y Index Om Oh 20 60 8o 100 120 140 160 M i n e r a 1 4 APPENDIX D SEASONAL TREND RAW DATA CLIPPING HEIGHT (cm) DATE CALCIUM: CRUDE PHOS- PHOS-YIELD PROTEIN CALCIUM PHORUS PHORUS ZINC (Day) (kg/ha){% t i s s u e ) ( % t i s - ( % t i s -sue) sue) 0 . 4 2 0 . 5 4 0 . 5 3 0.51 0 . 3 5 0.41 0 . 3 7 0 . 3 3 0 . 3 3 0 . 2 8 0 . 3 4 O .36 0 . 2 8 0 . 3 5 0 . 4 6 0 . 3 4 0 . 3 0 0.31 0.56 0 . 2 ? 0 . 3 5 0 . 3 5 0 . 3 3 0 . 4 4 0 . 3 9 0 . 4 4 0 . 5 4 0 . 4 3 0 . 4 2 0 . 4 6 POTAS- MAGNE- MANGA-COPPER SIUM SIUM NESE (ppm) (ppm) (% t i s s u e ) ( % t i s - (% t i s -sue) sue) 8 May 20 608 8.63 8 May 20 96 18.16 8 May 20 752 9-33 8 May 20 944 8.57 8 May 31 960 11.44 8 May 31 320 14.77 8 May 31 1568 12.81 8 May 31 1056 12.62 8 June 15 5216 11.06 8 June 15 2352 13.39 8 June 15 4464 10.70 8 June 15 1664 12.73 8 June 27 4640 8.98 8 June 27 6720 9-*+7 8 June 27 6640 9-33 8 June 27 3488 9.93 8 July 18 1248 8.73 8 July 18 5776 7 .52 8 July 18 2112 10.97 8 July 18 9024 7.36 8 July 28 7888 7.52 8 July 28 4496 6 .65 8 July 28 7104 6.12 8 July 28 6384 6.97 8 August 16 6704 7.51 8 August 16 4976 6 .78 8 August 16 4352 7 .92 8 August 16 5536 7 . 46 8 August 29 7472 7 .85 8 August 29 8624 6 . 8 8 8 August 29 6560 6 . 8 4 ft. nh 0.11 3 . 8 31 .2 7 . 3 1.01 0 . 2 2 2 .5 3 9 . 0 8 . 2 1.28 0.16 3 . 3 4 5 . 2 4 9 . 8 1.03 0.13 3 . 9 31 .8 8 . 5 0 . 7 8 0.17 2.1 3 4 . 2 4 . 5 1.69 0 .23 1.8 31 .0 7-2 1.87 0.18 2.1 3 4 . 8 6 . 0 1.62 0.19 1.7 54.1 85.7 1.76 0.18 1.8 4 5 . 3 11.0 1.75 0.17 1.6 3 6 . 4 6 . 9 1.66 0.17 2 . 0 4 3 . 4 39-2 1.85 0.17 2.1 31.7 5-9 1 .84 0.15 1.9 39.1 6 . 5 1 .46 0.14 2 .5 31 .3 8 . 8 1.57 0 . 1 4 3 . 3 31 .3 4 6 . 5 1 .41 0.13 2.6 35 .4 3 2 . 6 1.75 0.13 2 .3 16.7 3 . 3 1.01 0.13 2 .4 23 .8 3-3 1 .48 0.11 5-1 15.3 6 . 4 1.19 0.11 2 . 5 2 5 . 0 4 . 0 1.21 0.11 3 . 2 3 2 . 2 4 3 . 3 1.34 0.10 3 . 5 27.3 3 2 . 8 1.20 0.10 3 . 3 27.4 4 . 2 1.25 0.10 4 . 4 21.3 3 . 2 1.23 0 .09 4 . 3 15.3 2.7 1.22 0 . 0 8 5-5 15.6 4.1 0 .96 0 .09 6 . 0 2 4 . 4 3 . 6 1.10 0 .09 4 . 8 18.3 6 . 4 0 .94 0 . 0 8 5-3 21 .3 4 . 0 1.34 0 . 0 8 5 . 8 19.8 5 . 2 1.02 R.7 1^.8 •5.2 0 . 9 5 0.16 0 . 2 0 0 . 2 0 0.19 0.16 0.21 0.16 0.19 0.17 0 . 2 4 0.19 0.18 0.18 0 .18 0.21 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.27 0.19 0 . 2 3 0.19 0 . 2 0 0 .25 0.21 0.27 0 . 2 4 0 . 2 8 0 . 2 5 0 . 2 8 0 . 3 2 379.5 228.6 3 7 0 . 0 475.5 3 3 6 . 5 229-2 219.8 316.0 235.2 252.7 2 3 6 . 5 239-7 193.7 205.5 171.7 228.4 77-3 170.5 74 .7 162.3 217.9 311.5 190.4 174.5 162.0 118.2 216.0 1 4 4 . 0 171.0 196.3 113.9 IRON (ppm) 135.8 253.4 171.1 234.3 133.7 140 .1 132.4 76 .7 8 8 . 4 71.3 102.3 81.7 53-3 7 4 . 8 8 4 . 5 6 4 . 6 4 7 . 3 6 3 . 8 7 3 . 2 6 2 . 5 53-2 62.7 6 .52 4.76 4 . 2 2 45.6 7 0 . 0 49.7 5 0 . 3 55.1 73-3 o MO CLIPPING HEIGHT (cm) CALCIUM: CRUDE PHOS- PHOS-DATE YIELD PROTEIN CALCIUM PHORUS PHORUS (Day) (kg/ha)(# tissue){% tis-(# t i s -sue) sue) 2 3 May 2 0 If 16 2 3 May 2 0 5 2 8 2 3 May 2 0 1 5 6 8 2 3 May 2 0 7 6 8 2 3 May 3 1 3 5 2 2 3 May 3 1 2 2 5 6 2 3 May 3 1 7 6 8 2 3 May 3 1 1 8 7 2 2 3 June 1 5 1 6 1 6 2 3 June 1 5 1 1 2 0 2 3 June 1 5 1 6 1 6 2 3 June 1 5 2 8 8 0 2 3 June 2 7 2 7 8 4 2 3 June 2 7 1104 2 3 June 2 7 1 6 1 6 2 3 June 2 7 6 1 4 4 2 3 July 1 8 1 5 5 2 2 3 July 18 7 0 4 2 3 July 1 8 4 3 6 8 2 3 July 18 2 3 July 2 8 3 0 5 6 2 3 July 2 8 5 0 4 0 2 3 July 2 8 6 1 1 2 2 3 July 2 8 4 8 3 2 2 3 August 1 6 1 3 6 0 2 3 August 1 6 4 6 0 8 2 3 August 1 6 8 2 7 2 2 3 August 1 6 8 7 8 4 2 3 August 2 9 3 3 7 6 2 3 August 2 9 6 5 4 4 2 3 August 2 9 4 2 4 0 2 3 August 2 9 864 1 2 . 6 3 1 2 . 7 8 9.96 1 2 . 0 1 1 5 . 0 7 1 3 . 0 6 1 2 . 9 5 1 1 . 5 6 1 3 . 2 9 1 2 . 4 7 1 0 . 9 6 1 2 . 4 7 1 2 . 4 7 6.72 1 3 - 3 9 9.25 8.71 8.56 1 2 . 0 8 1 8 . 3 2 9.46 1 0 . 0 3 9.56 7 . 2 8 1 0 . 8 7 8.64 7 . 0 8 7.04 7.96 7.43 7.06 1 0 . 7 2 O.36 0 . 3 3 0.42 0.49 0.31 O.38 0 . 3 8 0 . 3 0 0 . 3 9 0.31 0 . 3 8 0 . 3 3 0 . 3 2 0 . 2 8 0.64 0.49 0 . 3 9 0.30 0.41 0.42 0.42 0 . 5 5 0 . 3 3 0 . 3 5 0.49 0.49 0.46 0.48 0.56 0.47 0.48 0.76 POTAS- MAGNE- MANGA-ZINC COPPER SIUM SIUM NESE IRON (ppm) (ppm)(# tissue){% t i s - {% t i s - (ppm) sue) sue) 0.17 3 2 2 . 0 7 9 - 3 0.16 3 0 0 . 0 116.1 0.18 3 7 5 - 5 1^9-5 1.7 3 6 5 . 0 1 7 9 . 6 1.6 2 9 4 . 0 8 8 . 2 1.7 4 3 0 . 5 1 0 6 . 6 1.6 7 3 5 . 6 8 9 . 9 1.6 2 5 4 . 1 8 3 . 5 1.5 214.2 7 3 - 9 1.4 1 9 1 . 4 6 2 . 2 1.9 3 4 7 . 0 1 0 5 . 0 1.7 249.9 7 0 . 1 1.7 191.1 6 7 . 4 1.7 1 5 1 . 2 69.O 2.7 1 1 8 . 0 7 3 . 2 1.9 3 3 4 . 0 1 3 5 . 2 2.7 3 3 2 . 0 1 4 0 . 9 1.4 5 1 . 5 5 0 . 2 2.0 1 2 7 . 6 5 4 . 3 2.4 2 2 5 . 0 5 1 . 9 2.1 1 2 9 . 3 7 1 . 6 2.3 1 5 9 . 6 6 9 . 9 1.8 1 3 8 . 9 5 9 - 0 1.8 2 1 9 . 6 7 2 . 7 2.4 1 0 3 . 9 5 7 . 2 2.7 1 5 5 . 5 50.1 2.7 1 6 8 . 8 4 9 . 5 2.9 1 5 9 . 7 4 5 . 2 2.6 2 0 9 . 3 7 5 . 0 2.5 2 0 2 . 9 5 0 . 8 2.6 1 4 6 . 4 6 1 . 7 2.8 1 0 5 . 2 9 5 - 5 0 . 2 2 1.6 41.1 6.7 1.37 0.21 1.6 3 9 - 2 7.7 1.81 0 . 1 4 3.0 4 3 - 9 5.1 1.09 0 . 1 6 2.8 3 9 - 9 6.2 9.9 0.26 1.2 41.0 4.4 2 0 . 4 0 . 2 0 1.9 5 0 . 0 6.0 15.3 0 . 1 8 2.1 35-1 4.5 13.4 0 . 1 6 1.9 4 1 . 6 5-5 16.6 0 . 1 8 2.2 3 4 . 4 4.5 17.9 0 . 1 5 2.1 2 6 . 9 5-3 16.4 0 . 1 6 2.4 4 1 . 6 7-0 15.9 0.17 1.9 3 7 . 7 4.4 1 7 . 3 0.14 2.3 2 5 - 3 5-3 13.7 0 . 1 6 2.4 24.6 5.6 15.7 0 . 1 9 3.4 2 5 . 2 5.6 14.9 0 . 1 3 3.8 3 3 . 8 6.7 12.6 0 . 1 8 2.2 41.0 6 8 . 0 2 1 . 2 0 . 1 5 2.0 19.9 10.9 1 1 . 5 0 . 1 8 2.3 3 2 . 8 4.0 12.6 0 . 1 3 3-2 2 3 . 4 4.5 12.7 0.11 3.8 2 1 . 3 4.0 1 1 . 3 0.14 3-9 2 3 . 4 4.5 13.3 0.11 3.0 18.3 3.1 14.0 0 . 1 0 3-5 30.1 5-7 12.4 0 . 1 2 4.1 16.1 4.1 11.1 0 . 1 0 4.9 24.9 4.9 12.9 0 . 1 2 3.8 2 1 . 8 2.9 11.1 0.09 5.3 21.1 2.2 7.8 0.08 7.0 2 0 . 6 2.8 11.3 0.09 5-2 19.8 5.^ 9.9 0.07 6.9 20.1 10.0 11.0 0 . 1 0 7.6 14.5 3.1 8.4 APPENDIX E Total Y i e l d and Sod Reserve Index Raw Data [ENT NUMBER TOTAL YTETiT) SOD RESERVE IND] (kg/ha) (&/97.14 era) 1 2320 0.20 1 34-08 0.29 1 54-4-0 0.05 1 4628 0.17 2 3360 0.10 2 3512 0.01 2 4096 0.00 2 4736 0.03 3 6304 0.03 3 4464 0.13 3 6704 0.14 3 2831 0.04 6336 0.00 4 8654 0.46 4 8544 0.14 5344 0.23 5 7472 0.69 5 8624 0.14 5 6560 0.43 5 3056 0.24 9 3088 0.29 9 2144 0.36 9 6032 0.22 9 3632 0.40 10 1712 0.14 10 5568 0.03 10 2656 0.07 10 4416 0.40 11 4o8o 0.16 11 2960 0.12 11 34o8 0.00 11 4496 0.00 12 4096 0.35 12 2160 0.15 12 3360 0.21 12 7728 0.01 13 3376 0.16 13 6544 0.15 13 4240 0.27 13 864 0.50 17 5872 0.16 17 4400 0.05 17 4720 0.00 17 4656 0.32 TREATMENT NUMBER TOTAL YIELD (kg/ha) SOD RESERVE INDEX (g/97.14 cm ) 18 3280 0 . 0 0 18 4640 0.14 18 3776 0.25 18 4656 0.14 APPENDIX F CLIPPING TREATMENT RAW DATA HEIGHT DAY OF CALCIUM: OF 1ST DAY OF CRUDE PHOS- PHOS- POTAS- MAGNE- MANGA-CLIP CLIP CLIP YIELD PROTEIN CALCIUM PHORUS PHORUS ZINC COPPER SIUM SIUM NESE IRON (cm) {% tissue)(# tissue)(# tis-(# t i s - (ppm) (ppm)(% t i s -{% tissue)(ppm) (ppm) sue) sue) sue) 8 May 20 May 20 608 8.63 0.42 0.11 3.8 31.2 7.3 1.01 0.16 379.5 135.8 8 May 20 May 20 96 18.16 0.54 0.22 2.5 39-0 8.2 1.28 0.20 288.6 253-4 8 May 20 May 20 752 9.33 0.53 0.16 3.3 45.2 49.8 1.03 0.26 370.0 171.1 8 May 20 May 20 944 8.57 0.51 0.13 3.9 31.8 8.5 0.78 0.19 415.5 234.3 8 May 20 May 20 1536 8.46 0.33 0.16 2.1 392.0 5.0 1.66 0.18 348.0 103.3 8 May 20 May 20 816 10.45 0.35 0.15 2.3 30.5 5.3 2.10 O.38 349.5 124.2 8 May 20 May 20 624 11.16 0.35 0.15 2.3 46.5 5.4 1.26 0.17 348.5 98.9 8 May 20 May 20 1296 8.34 0.46 0.13 3-5 41.7 9.4 1.00 0.20 353.3 160.4 8 May 20 May 31 160 16.44 0.33 0.24 1.4 27.4 8.3 1.86 0.19 151.6 113-2 8 May 20 May 31 912 13.67 0.32 0.19 1.7 36.6 4.6 2.40 0.19 377.0 97.8 8 May 20 May 31 608 15.09 0.29 0.20 1.5 43.6 7.0 2.54 0.16 206.8 71.9 8 May 20 May 31 368 12.12 0.33 0.19 1.7 39-0 4.6 2.09 0.19 247.5 88.2 8 May 31 May 31 960 11.44 0.35 0.17 2.1 34.2 4.5 1.69 0.16 336.5 133.7 8 May 31 May 31 320 14.77 0.41 0.23 1.8 31.0 7.2 1.87 0.21 229.2 148.1 8 May 31 May 31 1568 12.81 0.37 0.18 2.1 34.8 6.0 1.62 0.16 217.8 132.4 8 May 31 May 31 7056 12.62 0.33 0.19 1.7 54.1 85.7 1.76 0.19 316.0 76.7 8 May 20 May 31 304 11.66 0.29 0.23 1.3 41.8 5.3 2.37 0.23 209.3 70.7 8 May 20 May 31 512 11.59 0.35 0.18 1.9 38.3 4.7 2.32 0.20 381.O 123.5 8 May 20 May 31 576 10.39 O.36 0.18 2.0 42.9 6.7 2.04 0.19 336.0 70.4 8 May 20 May 31 368 11.75 0.30 0.20 1.5 40.2 3.7 2.12 0.18 236.5 73.7 8 May 20 June 15 320 14.04 0.32 0.24 1.3 42.4 5.2 2.73 0.19 292.5 64.6 8 May 20 June 15 320 17.46 0.35 0.24 1.5 29.3 10.3 1.82 0.19 116.7 95.5 8 May 20 June 15 1488 11.92 0.29 0.20 1.5 36.3 34.0 2.25 0.17 231.5 65.6 8 May 20 June 15 512 14.55 0.28 0.22 1.3 49.4 7.3 2.63 0.14 199.8 71.5 8 May 31 June 15 272 19.05 0.34 0.27 1.3 34.5 14.9 2.60 0.21 134.6 96.0 8 May 31 June 15 720 13.13 0.42 0.25 1.7 38.7 5.9 2.45 0.23 366.O 130.1 8 May 31 June 15 832 11.75 0.34 0.21 1.6 39-2 4.4 2.71 0.22 205.3 81.7 8 May 31 June 15 1216 8.60 0.24 0.18 1.3 43.5 6.0 2.64 0.19 225.2 65.7 8 June 15 June 15 5216 11.06 0.33 0.18 1.8 45.3 11.0 1.75 0.17 235.2 88.4 8 June 15 June 15 2352 13-39 0.28 0.17 1.6 36.4 6.9 1.66 0.24 252.7 71.3 8 June 15 June 15 4464 10.70 0.34 0.17 2.0 43.4 39.2 1.85 0.19 236.5 102.3 8 June 15 June 15 1664 12.73 0.36 0.17 2.1 31.7 5.9 1.84 0.18 239.7 81.7 HEIGHT OF CLIP (cm) DAY OF 1ST DAY OF CLIP CALCIUM: CRUDE PHOS- PHOS-CLIP YIELD PROTEIN CALCIUM PHORUS PHORUS {% tissue) (% tissue)(# tis-(# t i s -sue) sue) POTAS- MAGNE- MANGA-ZINC COPPER SIUM SIUM NESE IRON (ppm) (ppm)(% t i s - ( % tissue)(ppm) (ppm) sue) 8 May 20 June 15 304 12.29 O.30 0.23 1.3 53.1 5-9 8 May 20 June 15 368 14.97 0.33 O.23 1.4 46.7 4.7 8 May 20 June 15 1312 11.99 0.33 0.21 1.6 41.2 4.4 8 May 20 June 15 1056 10.79 0.31 0.19 1.6 43.8 5.6 8 May 20 June 27 176 14.25 0.34 0.20 1.7 26.4 62.6 8 May 20 June 27 288 15.29 0.35 0.24 1.6 55-8 7.9 8 May 20 June 27 832 9.80 0.43 0.18 2.4 40.9 5.3 8 May 20 June 27 496 13.12 0.33 0.19 1.7 49.1 26.4 8 May 31 June 27 208 15.14 0.34 0.24 1.4 46.8 7.4 8 May 31 June 27 80 17.26 0.32 0.32 1.0 37-9 11.5 8 May 31 June 27 368 13.65 0.44 0.19 2.3 44.7 10.3 8 May 31 June 27 1856 9.49 0.38 0.20 1.9 51.6 7.8 8 June 15 June 27 80 9.68 0.23 0.28 0.8 63.4 3.4 8 June 15 June 27 192 12.01 0.35 0.25 1.4 59.4 46.7 8 June 15 June 27 224 13.29 0.39 0.13 3.0 55.3 5.8 8 June 15 June 27 288 14.38 1.05 0.24 4.4 32.3 5.2 8 June 27 June 27 4640 8.98 0.28 0.15 1.9 39.1 6.5 8 June 27 June 27 6720 9.47 0.25 0.14 2.5 31.3 8.8 8 June 27 June 27 6640 9-33 0.46 0.14 3-3 31.3 46.5 8 June 27 June 27 3488 9.93 0.34 0.13 2.6 35-^ 32.6 8 May 20 June 27 336 13.97 0.28 0.25 1.1 46.6 6.1 8 May 20 June 27 560 10.48 0.33 0.23 1.4 45.3 6.4 8 May 20 June 27 400 13.69 0.4o 0.23 1.7 56.6 5.8 8 May 20 June 27 272 13.08 o.4o 0.22 1.8 57.8 3.0 8 May 20 July 18 528 12.25 0.37 0.17 2.1 18.9 4.9 8 May 20 July 18 1152 15.24 0.30 0.24 1.3 47.6 116.0 8 May 20 July 18 560 18.61 0.33 0.26 1.3 51.8 7.3 8 May 20 July 18 1056 13.73 0.32 0.20 1.6 41.4 7.4 8 May 31 July 18 1040 14.08 0.44 0.20 2.2 36.1 6.8 8 May 31 July 18 4oo 16.45 O.36 0.21 1.7 25.4 5.2 8 May 31 July 18 592 15.88 0.32 0.31 1.0 41.2 7.4 8 May 31 July 18 112 10.48 0.34 0.24 1.4 51.8 2.0 8 June 15 July 18 112 14.52 O.36 0.21 1.7 43.5 6.4 8 June 15 July 18 48o 13.62 O.38 0.28 1.4 54.7 1.0 2.77 2.63 2.35 2.57 1.45 2.35 1.86 1.44 2.46 2.12 2.41 7.57 3.14 3-27 2.74 2.90 1.46 1.57 1.41 1.75 2.64 2.53 2.43 2.70 1.33 2.12 2.32 1.57 1.76 1.78 2.55 2.94 2.05 2.44 0.20 0.17 0.20-0.17 0.17 0.17 0.21 0.20 0.16 0.15 0.20 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.26 0.37 0.18 0.18 0.21 0.17 0.21 0.24 0.23 0.22 0.19 0.20 0.22 0.21 0.19 0.21 0.24 0.30 0.19 0.26 214.1 218.5 315.0 220.9 60.3 342.0 96.6 219.5 179.0 100.9 337.5 357.5 183.2 180.3 337.0 496.8 193.7 205.5 171.7 228.4 200.8 300.0 323.5 260.6 89.6 253.9 168.7 195.2 290.5 143.5 212.8 250.8 256.7 215.8 72.6 94.0 745.0 86.6 102.6 97.0 117.7 103.3 85.6 115.9 150.1 119.6 78.4 87.3 96.4 85.7 53-3 74.8 84.5 64.4 60.0 86.0 104.8 125.8 77.9 85.4 100.5 76.7 157.8 94.6 111.6 165.0 89.3 128.1 HEIGHT DAY OF CALCIUM: OF 1ST DAY OF CRUDE PHOS- PHOS-CLIP CLIP CLIP YIELD PROTEIN CALCIUM PHORUS PHORUS ZINC (cm) {% tissue) (°/o t i s s u e ) ( % tis-(# t i s - (ppm) sue) sue) 8 June 15 July 18 1040 10.83 0.44 0.17 2.6 38.6 8 June 15 July 18 288 14.80 0.47 0.24 2.0 34.8 8 June 27 July 18 608 9.65 0.4o 0.20 2.0 43.0 8 June 27 July 18 336 12.68 0.38 0.14 2.7 17.4 8 June 27 July 18 272 10.24 0 . 4 6 0.20 2.3 47.8 8 June 27 July 18 544 14.11 O.38 0.19 2.0 4 6 . 1 8 May 20 July 18 4 4 8 14.51 0.34 0.26 1.3 44.1 8 May 20 July 18 432 13.83 0.30 0.27 1.1 44.1 8 May 20 July 18 608 14.47 0.31 0.29 1.1 59.3 8 May 20 July 18 752 12.88 0.32 0.23 1.4 51.1 8 May 31 July 28 608 13.20 0.49 0.20 2.5 38.3 8 May 31 July 28 416 14.52 O.38 0.17 2.2 26.0 8 May 31 July 28 192 16.01 0.33 0.24 1.4 51.1 8 May 31 July 28 80 12.31 - - - -8 June 15 July 28 144 16.49 0.37 0.31 1.2 70.1 8 June 15 July 28 416 15.20 0.49 0.27 1.8 58.9 8 June 15 July 28 384 13.95 0.30 0.19 1.6 44.6 8 June 15 July 28 224 14.87 O.51 0.20 2.6 45.0 8 June 27 July 28 288 11.77 0.34 0.17 2.0 54.9 8 June 27 July 28 192 13.56 0.42 0.23 1.8 53.0 8 June 27 July 28 384 8.90 0.50 0.15 3.3 45.2 8 June 27 July 28 576 8.27 0.56 0 . 1 4 4.0 42.2 8 May 20 July 28 480 14.44 0.33 0.25 1.3 47.2 8 May 20 July 28 288 15.19 0.31 0.25 1.2 4 8 . 6 8 May 20 July 28 336 12.79 0.38 0.22 1.7 53.4 8 May 20 July 28 4oo 15.78 0.38 0.23 1.7 52.7 8 June 15 August 16 400 15.53 0.36 0.24 1.5 43.9 8 June 15 August 16 560 16.79 0.39 0.22 1.8 45.2 8 June 15 August 16 352 16.34 0.34 0.20 1.7 39-1 8 June 15 August 16 256 15.77 0.33 0.19 1.7 29.3 8 June 27 August 16 432 14.80 0.35 0.20 1.8 49.9 8 June 27 August 16 288 18.18 0.35 0.21 1.6 4 8 . 2 8 June 27 August 16 672 15.96 0.37 0.23 1.6 45.2 POTAS- MAGNE- MANGA-COPPER SIUM SIUM NESE IRON (ppm)(% t i s - ( % tissue)(ppm) (ppm) sue) 8.3 1.90 0.23 352.0 210.6 8.6 2.31 0.29 239.0 100.1 4.9 2.37 0.27 193.8 112.5 4.4 1.13 0.18 105.0 53.3 4.2 2.51 0.23 237.2 150.9 4.1 1.67 0.24 129.4 76.9 6.1 2.38 0 . 2 4 225.3 102.8 6.1 2 . 4 6 0 . 2 4 301.0 114.4 7.1 2 . 2 4 0.22 258.1 80.8 16.5 2.15 0.20 210.9 106.9 9.9 2.00 0.25 329.0 190.9 4.8 1.55 0.22 132.7 108.2 4.9 2.98 0.20 173.0 106.0 6.0 2.76 0.21 2 4 2 . 3 123.9 6.8 2.94 O.36 226.6 156.0 5.0 2 . 4 0 0.22 2 4 7 . 9 107.2 7.9 2.49 0.21 167.7 133.3 4.6 2.60 0.25 3 4 2 . 0 163.O 6.0 2.70 0.24 221.4 180.2 4.8 2.27 0.25 261.2 2 4 4 . 7 9-1 1.39 0.33 406.0 298.4 6.0 3.18 0.25 193.8 102.2 7.3 2.63 0 . 2 4 252.5 119.7 4.2 2.73 0 . 2 7 254.6 149.7 6.2 2.63 0.21 197.2 115.5 7.1 2.49 0.20 166.8 100.1 6.1 2.28 0.20 166.2 123.9 10.3 2.33 0.18 228.1 120.9 6.9 2.13 0.19 221.2 75-9 5-9 2.39 0.20 251.4 106.4 10.1 2.71 0.16 114.5 144.0 6.8 2 . 4 1 0.18 197.7 97.2 HEIGHT DAY OF CALCIUM: OF 1ST DAY OF CRUDE PHOS- PHOS-CLIP CLIP CLIP YIELD PROTEIN CALCIUM PHORUS PHORUS (cm) i.% tissue) (# tissue)(# tis-(# t i s -sue ) sue) POTAS- MAGNE- MANGA-ZINC COPPER SIUM SIUM NESE IRON (ppm) (ppm)(# t i s - ( % tissue)(ppm) (ppm) sue) 8 June 27 August 16 256 17.52 o . 4 o 0.22 1.8 4 8 . 7 6.1 8 May 20 August 16 1824 10.17 0 . 4 1 0.21 2.0 38.7 4.5 8 May 20 August 16 544 16.62 0.26 0 . 2 4 1.1 42.0 10.4 8 May 20 August 16 272 18.56 0.32 0.25 1.3 51.0 5.7 8 May 20 August 16 304 18.60 0.33 0.21 1.6 37.6 5.0 8 June 27 August 29 2 2 4 10.20 0.39 0.16 2.4 58.9 4.1 8 June 27 August 29 1120 11.49 0.60 0.18 3.3 43.6 6.6 8 June 27 August 29 576 11.39 0 . 4 1 0.17 2.4 4 1 . 6 5-2 8 June 27 August 29 480 10.66 0 . 4 6 0.16 3.3 4 2 . 1 4.3 8 August 29 August 29 7472 7.85 0.43 0.09 4.8 18.3 6.4 8 August 29 August 29 8624 6.88 0 . 4 2 0.08 5-3 21.3 4.0 8 August 29 August 29 6560 6 . 8 4 0 . 4 6 0.08 5-8 19.8 5.2 8 August 29 August 29 3056 8 . 0 4 O.78 0.09 8.7 13.8 3.2 8 May 20 August 29 6 4 o 15.68 o . 4 o 0.21 1.9 35.0 5.7 8 May 20 August 29 896 10.95 0.45 0.17 2.6 38.8 5.8 8 May 20 August 29 592 11.57 0.58 0.13 4.5 55.3 9-4 8 May 20 August 29 832 15.02 0.36 0.23 1.6 38.3 6.7 23 May 20 May 20 416 12.63 0.36 0.22 1.6 4 1 . 1 6.7 23 May 20 May 20 528 12.78 0.33 0.21 1.6 39.2 7.7 23 May 20 May 20 768 12.01 0.44 0.16 2.8 39-9 6.2 23 May 20 May 20 1344 9.49 0.36 0.14 2.6 35-8 4.0 23 May 20 May 20 976 9.05 0.38 0.15 2.5 36.4 3.8 23 May 20 May 20 608 8.77 0.47 0 . 1 4 3.4 38.3 10.5 23 May 20 May 20 1120 1 1 . 0 4 0.47 0 . 1 4 3.4 40.4 5-9 23 May 20 May 31 4oo 1 4 . 3 8 0.32 0.25 1.3 38.6 4.9 23 May 20 May 31 256 13.74 0.30 0.23 1.3 32.1 5-9 23 May 20 May 31 416 13.32 0.33 0.19 1.7 56.2 4.7 23 May 20 May 31 576 12.02 0.37 0.19 1.9 36.9 3.4 23 May 31 May 31 352 15.07 0.31 0.26 1.2 41.0 4.4 23 May 31 May 31 2256 13.06 0.38 0.20 1.9 50.0 6.0 23 May 31 May 31 768 12.95 0.38 0.18 2.1 35.1 4.5 23 May 31 May 31 1872 11.56 0.30 0.16 1.9 41.6 5.5 23 May 20 May 31 608 18.28 0.39 0.18 2.2 4 2 . 5 4.7 23 May 20 May 31 672 11.11 - - - - -2.44 2.35 2.80 1.75 2.43 2.16 1.92 2.25 1.92 0.94 1.34 1.02 0.95 2.33 2.01 2.28 1.50 1.37 1.81 0.99 1.34 1.05 1.00 0.95 2 . 4 6 2.55 2.03 2.09 2.04 1.53 1.34 1.66 2.16 0.19 0.25 0.20 0.19 0.18 0.23 0 . 4 0 0.25 0.25 0.28 0.25 0.28 0.32 0 . 2 4 0.26 0.37 0.20 0.17 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.20 0.21 0.19 0.17 0.17 0.19 0.16 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.21 173.7 383.0 165.2 151.7 131.4 469.5 319.0 2 0 4 . 1 371.0 144.0 171.0 196.3 113.9 210.6 354.0 367.0 149.3 322.0 300.0 365.0 403.0 324.0 416.0 299.0 287.5 187.1 324.5 256.5 294.0 430.5 735.6 254.1 417.0 94.0 109.6 89.O 8 4 . 8 101.1 139.8 265.7 228.2 210.9 49.7 50.3 55.1 73.3 122.2 196.3 225.0 85.5 79.3 116.1 179-6 115.2 130.5 148.7 157.7 118.3 77-3 71.4 81.4 88.2 106.6 89.9 83.5 88.1 HEIGHT OF CLIP (cm) DAY OF 1 S T DAY OF CLIP CLIP CALCIUM: CRUDE PHOS- PHOS-YIELD PROTEIN CALCIUM PHORUS PHORUS tissue){ % t i s s u e ) ( % t i s - ( % t i s -sue) sue) 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 15 15 15 May 20 May 20 May 20 May 20 May 20 May 20 May 31 May 31 May 31 May 31 June June June June 15 May 20 May 20 May 20 May 20 May 20 May 20 May 20 May 20 May 31 May 31 May 31 May 31 June 15 June 15 June June June 27 June 27 June 27 15 15 May 31 May 31 June 15 June 15 June 15 June 15 June 15 June 15 June 15 June 15 June 15 June 15 June 15 June 15 June 15 June 15 June 15 June 15 June 27 June 27 June 27 June 27 June 27 June 27 June 27 June 27 June 27 June 27 June 27 June 27 June 27 June 27 June 27 368 800 320 160 1280 944 240 736 576 720 1616 1120 1616 2880 4 6 4 784 640 8 4 8 416 256 752 416 480 8 4 8 640 512 672 592 800 672 2784 1104 1616 11.07 13.98 15.13 15.72 15.52 13.83 17.45 14.61 1 4 . 8 8 12.78 13.29 12.47 10.96 12.47 1 4 . 6 0 13.65 14.97 15.15 16.53 12.63 11.91 14.75 17.02 15.06 13.88 9 .00 12.35 12.10 13.16 9.44 12.47 6.72 13.39 0 . 4 o 0.38 0 . 3 3 0.26 0.26 0.30 0 . 2 1 0.28 0.28 0 . 2 7 0 . 3 9 0.31 0 . 3 8 0 . 3 3 0.29 0 . 3 7 0.30 0.28 0 . 3 5 0 . 3 5 O.31 O.38 0.36 0.32 0 . 3 5 0 . 3 4 O.38 O.36 0 . 4 3 0 . 3 4 0.32 O.38 0 . 6 4 0.18 0.28 0.23 0 . 2 4 0.20 0.22 0.27 0.23 0.18 0 .20 0.18 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.23 0 .20 0 .20 0.20 0.21 0.23 0.25 0.18 0.19 0.19 0.15 0.23 0.18 0 . 1 4 0.16 0.19 2.2 1.4 1.4 1.2 1.3 1.4 0 . 8 1.2 1.6 1.4 2.2 2.1 2.4 1.9 1.5 1.9 1.4 1.2 1.8 1.8 1.6 1.8 1.6 1.3 1.9 1.8 2.0 2.4 1.9 1.9 2.3 2.4 3 . 4 ZINC (ppm) 4 4 . 1 63.O 4 0 . 7 2 7 . 4 51.9 4 1.1 4 2 . 3 5 0.1 3 8 . 7 4 8 . 7 3 4 . 4 26.9 4 1.6 3 7 - 7 4 2 . 4 5 2 . 5 4 6 . 5 4 5 . 2 2 7 - 7 2 8 . 7 5 5 - 2 4 4 . 3 4 5 . 2 5 0 . 8 3 5 . 6 4 3 . 0 3 6 . 7 31.6 4 5 . 4 4 1 . 1 2 5-3 2 4 . 6 25.2 POTAS- MAGNE- MANGA-COPPER SIUM SIUM NESE IRON (ppm)(% t i s - ( % tissue)(ppm) (ppm) sue) 4.3 8.9 5.6 4 .6 7.5 3-7 6.3 13.6 5-9 5 . 0 4 .5 5 .3 7 .0 4 .4 7 .0 5 .3 5-0 6.2 8.0 8.6 5.6 23.3 6.1 6.9 6.3 7 .0 5-1 5 .5 6.9 3 . 9 5 .3 5.6 5 .6 2 . 4 6 2.34 2.22 2.34 2.50 2.52 2.55 2.55 2.24. 2.53 1.79 1 . 6 4 1.59 1.73 2.34 1.99 2.35 2 - 5 9 1.83 2.07 2.34 2.30 1.57 2 . 2 4 2.08 2.06 2.27 1.91 1.85 2.17 1.37 1.57 1.49 0.22 0.27 0.18 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.16 0.17 0.15 0.16 0.15 0 . 1 4 0.19 0.17 0.17 0.19 0.16 0.14 0.17 0.18 0.22 0.18 0.22 0 . 2 0 0.18 0.26 0 . 2 0 0.17 0 . 2 4 0.22 0.17 0.17 0.27 4 4 6 . 0 233.9 232.0 135.4 258.1 226.8 205.9 313.5 172.6 2 0 4 . 6 214.2 191.4 347.0 2 4 9 . 9 3 4 8 . 0 298.O 314.0 190.5 161.1 179.7 258.8 190.5 332.0 258.5 200.6 253.9 257.0 204.3 214.5 260.4 191.1 151.2 118.0 101.7 162.7 85 .3 100.2 82.4 6 9 . 2 8 0 . 3 6 6 . 4 7 0 . 3 63.7 73.9 6 2 . 2 105.0 70.1 72 .4 6 5 . 2 59.6 75-2 111.9 81.8 78.7 96.1 9 2 . 3 6 3 . 8 8 3 . 3 125-3 9 9 . 2 90.6 7 8 . 8 93 .9 67 .4 6 9 . 0 73 .2 HEIGHT DAY OF CALCIUM: OF 1ST DAY OF CRUDE PHOS- PHOS- POTAS- MAGNE- MANGA-CLIP CLIP CLIP YIELD PROTEIN CALCIUM PHORUS PHORUS ZINC COPPER SIUM SIUM NESE IRON (cm) {% t i s s u e ) ( % tissue! ) ( % tis-(# t i s - (ppm) (ppm)(% t i s - ( $ tissue)(ppm) (ppm) sue) sue) sue) 23 June 27 June 27 6144 9-25 0.49 0.13 3.8 33.8 6.7 1.26 0.19 334.0 135.2 23 May 20 June 27 144 13.29 0.30 0.21 1.4 51.6 4.2 2.20 0.16 321.2 78.0 23 May- 20 June 27 704 12.35 0.40 0.19 2.1 53.7 5.6 1.44 0.22 330.0 83.8 23 May 20 June 27 576 13-83 0.32 0.20 1.6 45.2 5.8 2.37 0.20 305.0 78.8 23 May 20 June 27 592 13.76 0.33 0.25 1.3 46.5 6.4 2.59 0.19 183.7 76.7 23 May 20 July 18 736 14.73 0.32 0.23 1.4 29.9 6.4 1.85 0.20 163.2 90.8 23 May 20 July 18 352 15.32 0.33 0.21 1.6 24.0 21.1 1.47 0.18 149.2 94.4 23 May 20 July 18 784 14.21 0.29 0.21 1.4 45.7 6.1 2.16 0.21 211.9 81.7 23 May 20 July 18 416 16.89 0.31 0.23 1.5 36.6 5 .2 1.67 0.18 159.3 85.6 23 May 31 July 18 320 16.13 0.29 0.20 1.5 32.1 3.9 1.48 0.19 190.4 76.5 23 May 31 July 18 1168 17.35 0.31 0.24 1.3 44.4 84.6 1.93 0.20 291.5 81.8 23 May 31 July 18 384 14.15 0.33 0.18 1.8 37.4 6.8 1.69 0.19 166.0 98.3 23 May 31 July 18 704 14.97 0.37 0.18 2.1 34.4 4.4 1.69 0.21 195.8 94.2 23 June 15 July 18 704 15.32 0.31 0.20 1.6 38.6 7.1 1.97 0.21 171.4 83.1 23 June 15 July 18 336 15.69 0.36 0.20 1.8 32.5 179-5 1.75 0.19 170.6 104.5 23 June 15 July 18 528 14.48 0.47 0.23 2.0 45.8 7-5 1.63 0.25 195.7 77.2 23 June 15 July 18 448 12.90 0.35 0.19 1.8 35.0 4.3 2.03 0.17 207.3 109.0 23 June 27 July 18 656 13.17 0.31 0.18 1.7 28.6 5-5 1.61 0.16 168.7 65.4 23 June 27 July 18 448 13.78 0.35 0.18 1.9 26.8 8.1 1.85 0.17 109.8 69.6 23 June 27 July 18 896 11.33 0.40 0.17 2.4 25.6 4.4 1.51 0.21 109.3 67.5 23 June 27 July 18 160 12.46 0.38 0.19 2.0 52.6 3.6 2.80 0.18 169.6 97.0 23 May 20 July 18 336 14.27 - - - - - - - - -23 May 20 July 18 816 13.98 0.38 0.19 2.0 42.9 5.7 1.54 0.22 225.4 76.9 23 May 20 July 18 720 14.63 0.32 0.22 1.5 45.4 6.0 2.12 0.19 259.0 81.5 23 May 20 July 18 576 15.29 0.31 0.25 1.2 45.3 10.6 2.32 0.18 159.8 93.2 23 May 31 July 28 272 17.52 0.30 0.20 1.7 30.8 9.8 1.68 0.19 174.5 77.6 23 May 31 July 28 496 13.35 0.34 0.21 1.6 49.4 4.4 2.35 0.22 299-5 101.7 23 May 31 July 28 224 15.71 0.50 0.12 4.2 28.1 5.7 1.66 0.24 147.3 91.2 23 May 31 July 28 208 13.76 0.36 0.18 2.0 48.3 5.2 1.94 0.24 188.8 91.9 23 June 15 July 28 448 13.81 0.46 0.18 2.6 95.2 10.1 2.21 0.25 227-0 115.9 23 June 15 July 28 240 13-42 0.39 0.18 2.2 39.8 122.7 2.17 0.22 176.5 148.4 23 June 15 July 28 240 13.26 0.45 0.17 2.6 49.4 4.3 1.88 0.23 221.9 136.7 HEIGHT OF CLIP (cm) DAY OF 1ST DAY OF CLIP CLIP CALCIUM: CRUDE PHOS- PHOS-YIELD PROTEIN CALCIUM PHORUS PHORUS (,% t i s s u e ) ( % tissue) (% t i s - ( % t i s -sue) sue) 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 June June June June June May-May May May June June June June June June June June May May May May June June June June 23 August 23 August 23 August 23 August 23 May 23 May 23 May 23 May July 28 July 28 July 28 July 28 July 28 July 28 July 28 July 28 15 27 27 27 27 20 20 20 20 July 28 15 August 16 15 August 16 15 August 16 15 August 16 27 August 16 27 August 16 27 August 16 27 August 16 20 August 16 20 August 16 20 August 16 20 August 16 27 August 29 27 August 29 27 August 29 27 August 29 29 August 29 29 August 29 29 August 29 29 August 29 20 August 29 20 August 29 20 August 29 20 August 29 1 6 0 2 4 0 208 512 5 4 4 176 288 4 0 0 352 256 272 96 2 4 0 240 1 1 2 288 720 128 288 3 2 0 2 2 4 176 288 4 8 160 3 3 7 6 6 5 4 4 4 2 4 0 8 6 4 80 1 1 2 1 4 4 144 11.42 13.27 12.05 9.62 9.90 12.97 12.05 11.80 14.80 17.14 1 4 . 40 15.20 13.82 13.92 14.28 1 1 . 2 4 16.58 15.77 13-88 9.74 14.79 11.51 10.79 8.47 15-40 7.96 7.43 7.06 10.74 12.65 9.63 11.94 13.62 0.28 0.32 O.36 0.51 O.38 O.36 0.55 0.39 0 . 4 6 0.35 0.38 0 . 4 8 0.4o 0.31 0.32 0.37 0.32 0.47 0.38 0.39 0.32 0.44 0.47 0 . 4 6 O.56 0.47 0 . 4 6 O.76 0 . 4 8 O.50 0.42 0.53 0.17 0.17 0.18 0 . 1 4 0.16 0.21 0.15 0.17 0.20 0.20 0.17 0.23 0.18 0.16 0.18 0.13 0.17 0.20 0.16 0.18 0.19 0.21 0.12 0.17 0.08 0.09 0.07 0.10 0.17 0.16 0.19 0.14 1.6 1.9 2.0 3.6 2.4 1.7 3.7 2.3 2.3 1.8 2.2 2.1 2.2 1.9 1.8 2.8 1.9 2.4 2.4 2.2 1.7 2.1 3.9 2.7 7.0 5.2 6.9 7.6 2.8 3.1 2.2 3.8 ZINC (ppm) 4 2 . 8 29 . 2 31 . 7 30 . 6 4 7 . 2 4 6 . 8 50.5 4 8 . 2 4 6 . 2 36 . 7 30 . 4 4 7 . 3 4 1 . 9 2 3 . 8 32 . 8 2 3 . 8 3 5 - 9 38.1 3 9 - 0 4 7 . 3 3 9 - 0 30 . 2 28 . 8 29 . 5 2 0 . 6 19.8 2 0 . 1 14 . 5 36.8 36.7 60.6 4 6 . 1 POTAS- MAGNE- MANGA-COPPER SIUM SIUM NESE IRON (ppm)(% t i s - ( % tissue)(ppm) (ppm) 192.8 5.2 4.6 7.0 6.1 28.4 3.8 5.0 7.0 6.4 3.6 31.8 175.0 5-9 15-2 4.5 7.2 2.5 6.6 5.9 9-9 2.2 5.8 4.0 2.8 5.4 10.0 3.1 71.0 33.6 3.6 28.8 sue) 2.16 1.70 1.94 1 . 6 4 2.54 2 . 2 4 1.59 2.40 2.22 2.30 2.16 2.53 2.26 1.74 1.96 1.61 2.58 2.08 2.06 2.29 2.28 1.60 1.73 1.67 1.13 0.99 1.10 0 . 8 4 1.74 1.77 1.94 1.70 0.20 0.18 0.20 0.23 0.25 0.18 0.25 0.25 0.28 0.20 0.19 0.23 0.16 0.21 0.18 0.20 0.19 0.22 0.19 0.15 0.19 0.22 0.23 0.23 0.26 0.25 0.26 0.28 0.26 0.25 0.20 0.29 197.4 213-7 134.8 172.9 2 2 4 . 9 261.0 364.5 237.3 189.8 99-5 163.9 139.3 216.8 131.4 80.6 75.3 259.8 175.3 139.5 156.9 96.O 230.8 158.5 198.4 209.3 202.9 1 4 6 . 4 105.2 121 . 4 80.7 78.7 131.0 105.0 98.2 1 2 4 . 6 95.0 99 . 4 93.3 92.8 119.3 110.7 65 . 4 160 . 4 6 4 . 1 79-8 119.2 138.1 90.1 90.6 118.8 92.6 105.6 75.0 50.8 61.7 95.5 2 3 3 . 6 112 . 2 3 8 8 . 0 119 . 6 2 5 4 . 0 133 . 4 2 4 8 . 5 85.7 -120 APPENDIX G Study A r e a - Spermatophyta S p e c i e s L i s t F a m i l y B o t a n i c a l Name B e t u l a c e a e B e t u l a g l a n d u l o s a v a r g l a n d u l o s a M i c h x . C a p r i f o l i a c e a e L i n n a e a b o r e a l i s L. C a r y o p h y l l a c e a e C e r a s t i u m a r v e n s e L. S t e l l a r i a c a l y c a n t h a v a r b o n g a r d i a n a F e r n . S t e l l a r i a l o n g i p e s v a r a l t o c a u l i s ( H u l t e n ) H i t c h c . Compositae A c h i l l e s m i l l i f o l i u m ssp l a n u l o s a v a r l a n u l o s a ( N u t t . ) P i p e r A g r o s e r i s g l a u c a v a r g l a u c a ( P u r s h ) R af. A n t e n n a r i a a n a p h a l o i d e s Rydb. A n t e n n a r i a m i c r o p h y l l a Rydb. A n t e n n a r i a n e g l e c t a v a r a t t e n u a t a ( F e r n . ) Cronq. A n t e n n a r i a n e g l e c t a v a r h o w e l l i i (Greene) Cronq. A r n i c a c o r d i f o l i a v a r c o r d i f o l i a Hook. A s t e r c i l i o l a t u s L i n d l . A s t e r j u n c i f o r m i s Rydb. A s t e r s i b i r i c u s v a r m e r i t u s (A. N e l s . ) Raup E r i g e r o n l o n c h o p h y l l u s Hook. P e t a s i t e s f r i g i d u s v a r pa l m a t u s ( A i t . ) Cronq. P e t a s i t e s s a g i t t a t u s (Banks) Gray S e n e c i o i n t e g e r r i m u s v a r e x a l t a t u s ( N u t t . ) Cronq. . S e n e c i o p a u p e r c u l u s M i c h x . S e n e c i o s t r e p t a n t h i f o l i u s Greene S o l i d a g o c a n a d e n s i s v a r s a l e b r o s a ( P i p e r ) Jones S o l i d a g o c a n a d e n s i s v a r s p a t h u l a t a DC. Taraxacum o f f i c i n a l e Weber C r u c i f e r a e A r a b i s drummondii Gray Cyperaceae C a r e x a q u a t i l i s Wahl. Ca r e x a r c t a B o o t t Common Name Bog B i r c h T w i n f l o w e r F i e l d Mouse-ear Chickweed N o r t h e r n S t e l l a r i a L o n g s t a l k S t e l l a r i a Y a r r o w S h o r t - b e a k e d A g r o s e r i s T a l l P u s s y t o e s Rosy P u s s y t o e s F i e l d P u s s y t o e s F i e l d P u s s y t o e s H e a r t - l e a v e d A r n i c a L i n d l e y A s t e r Rush A s t e r A r c t i c A s t e r S p e a r - l e a v e d F l e a b a n e Sweet C o l t s f o o t W e stern G r o u n d s e l G r o u n d s e l C l e f t - l e a v e d G r o u n d s e l Canada G o l d e n r o d Dune G o l d e n r o d Common D a n d e l i o n Drummond 1s Ro c k c r e s s -Water Sedge N o r t h e r n C l u s t e r e d Sedge •121 Family B o t a n i c a l Name Cyperaceae con't Common Name Carex a l t h e r o i d e s Spreng. Awned Sedge Carex concinna R. Br. Low Northern Sedge Carex concinnoides Mack. Northwestern Sedge Carex c u s i c k i i Mack. Cusick's Sedge Carex l a s i o c a r p a Ehrh. Slender Sedge Carex pachystachya Cham. Thick-headed Sedge Carex p r a e g r a c i l i s W. Boott C l u s t e r e d F i e l d Sedge Carex r o s t r a t a Stokes Beaked Sedge Cupressaceae Juniperus communis var montana A i t . Elaeagnaceae Shepherdia canadensis (L.) Nutt. Ericaceae Arctostaphylos u v a - u r s i (L.) Sprenf. P y r o l a minor L. P y r o l a p i c t a Smith Gentianaceae Gentiana amarella L. Mountain Juniper S o o p o l a l l i e K i n n i k i n n i c k Lesser Wintergreen White Vein P y r o l a Northern Gentian Gramineae A g r o s t i s scabra W i l l d . Agropyron repens (L.) Beauv. Agropyron subsecundum (Link) H i t c h c . Agrophron trachycaulum (Link) Malte. Beckmania syzigachne (Steud.) Fern. Bromus pumpellianus S c r i b n . Calamagrostis canadensis (Michx.) Beauv. Calamagrostis inexpansa var inexpansa Gray Calamagrostis rubescens Buckl. Danthonia intermedia Vasey Festuca ovina L. G l y c e r i a grandis Wats. Hierochloe odorata (L.) Beauv. Hordeum jubatum L. K o e l e r i a c r i s t a t a (L.) Pers. Muhlenbergia r i c h a r d s o n i a (Trin.) Rydb. Oryzopsis hymenoides (Roem. & Schult.) R i c k e r Poa p r a t e n s i s L. Schizachne purpurascens (Torr.) Swallen S t i p a r i c h a r d s o n i L i n k Trisetum spicatum (L.) R i c h t . Winter Bentgrass Couch Grass Bearded Wheatgrass Slender Wheatgrass Sloughgrass Pumpelly Brome B l u e j o i n t Northern Reedgrass Pinegrass Timber Oatgrass Sheep Fescue Reed Mannagrass ' Seneca Grass F o x t a i l B a r l e y Junegrass Mat Muhly Indian Ricegrass Kentucky Bluegrass F a l s e M e l i c Richardson's Needle-grass Spike Trisetum 122 Family Botanical Name Juncaceae Juncus bal t i c u s var balt i c u s W i l l d . Leguminosae Lathyrus ochroleucus Hook. V i c i a americana var truncata (Nutt.) Brew. Lil i a c e a e Smilacina s t e l l a t a (L.) Desf. Onagraceae Epilobium angustifolium L. Epilobium palustre L. Orchidaceae Habenaria hyperborea (L.) R. Br. Spiranthes romanzoffiana var romanzoffiana Cham. Pinaceae Picea glauca (Moench) Voss Pinus contorta Dougl. Polemoniaceae Polemonium puleherrimum var pucherrimum Hook. Polygonaceae Rumex occidentalis var occidentalis Wats. Ranunculaceae Anemone mu l t i f i d a var multifida P o i r . Ranunculus gmelinii var hookeri (G. Don) Benson Ranunculus inamoenus Greene Ranunculus macounii var macounii B r i t t . Thalictrum occidentale Gray Rosaceae Fragaria virginiana var platypetala (Rydb.) H a l l .-.Potentiihla'j. g r a c i l i s var permollis (Rydb. ) Hitchc. Rosa a c i c u l a r i s L i n d l . Common Name B a l t i c Rush Cream-flowered Pea-vine American Vetch Star-flowered False Solomon's Seal Fireweed Swamp Willow-weed Northern Green Bog-orchid Hooded Ladies-tresses White Spruce Lodgepole Pine Showy Polemonium Western Dock P a c i f i c Anemone Gmelin's Buttercup Unlovely Buttercup Macoun's Buttercup Western Meadowrue Broadpetal Strawberry Slender Cinquefoil P r i c k l y Rose 123 Family Botanical Name Eosaceae Rubus acaulis Michx. Spiraea b e t u l i f o l i a P a l l . Rubiaceae Galium boreale L. Galium trifidum var pacificum Wieg. Salicaceae Populus tremuloides Michx. S a l i x brachycarpa ssp niphoclada (Rydb.) Argus S a l i x maccalliana Rowlee S a l i x m y r t i l l i f o l i a var pseudomyrsinites (Andersson) B a l l Saxifragaceae Parnassia p a l u s t r i s var montanensis (Fern & Rydb.) Hitchc. Schrophulariaceae C a s t i l l e j a minata var minata Dougl. Pedicularis groenlandica Retz. Penstemon procerus var procerus Dougl. Sparganiaceae Sparganium angustifolium Michx. Valerianceae Valeriana dioica L. Common Name Nagoonberry Shiny-leaved Spiraea Northern Bedstraw Small Bedstraw Trembling Aspen Willow Willow Willow Marsh Grass - of -Parnassus Scarlet Indian Paint-brush Elephant 1s Head Small-flowered Pen-stemon Narrow-leaved Bur-weed Northern Valerian Violaceae V i o l a adunca var b e l l i d i f o l i a (Greene) Harr. Early Blue V i o l e t 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0094534/manifest

Comment

Related Items