ecohydrological conditions associated with the...

117
Ecohydrological Conditions Associated With The Distribution And Phenology Of The Pima Pineapple Cactus Item Type text; Electronic Thesis Authors Kidder, Amí Lynne Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 21/05/2018 22:29:19 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/347323

Upload: vandien

Post on 22-Mar-2018

218 views

Category:

Documents


3 download

TRANSCRIPT

Ecohydrological Conditions Associated With TheDistribution And Phenology Of The Pima Pineapple Cactus

Item Type text; Electronic Thesis

Authors Kidder, Amí Lynne

Publisher The University of Arizona.

Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this materialis made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona.Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such aspublic display or performance) of protected items is prohibitedexcept with permission of the author.

Download date 21/05/2018 22:29:19

Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/347323

1 | P a g e

ECOHYDROLOGICAL CONDITIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE DISTRIBUTION

AND PHENOLOGY OF THE PIMA PINEAPPLE CACTUS

(Coryphantha scheeri var. robustispina)

by

Amí L. Kidder

____________________________

A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the

SCHOOL OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND THE ENVIRONMENT

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

For the Degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

In the Graduate College

THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA

2015

2 | P a g e

STATEMENT BY AUTHOR

This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an

advanced degree at the University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library

to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library.

Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission,

provided that an accurate acknowledgement of the source is made. Requests for

permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in

part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate

College when in his or her judgment the proposed use of the material is in the interests of

scholarship. In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained from the author.

SIGNED: Amí Lynne Kidder

APPROVAL BY THESIS DIRECTOR

This thesis has been approved on the date shown below:

______________________________________________01/13/2015 _____________

Shirley Anne Papuga Date

Professor, Watershed Management and Ecohydrology

______________________________________________01/13/2015______________

David D. Breshears Date

Professor, Watershed Management and Ecohydrology

3 | P a g e

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This research was possible due to project funding provided by the U.S. Air Force

Life Cycle Management Center environmental compliance team supporting Air Force

Plant 44. Additional support was provided by Raytheon Missile Systems Environmental,

Health, Safety, and Sustainability Department, as well as NSF Critical Zone Observatory

(NSF-EAR-1331408).

I would like to thank my advisors Dr. Shirley Papuga and Dr. David Breshears,

both of whom guided me through this project and were patient while I learned. I am also

thankful for my committee members Dr. Mitchel McClaran and Dr. Darin Law who each

provided me with unique guidance and were always willing to share their insights with

me. I would also like to thank Dr. D. Phillip Guertin and Dr. Prakash Dhakal for their

help when I needed to expand my programming and lab skills. Additional thanks to

Katherine Belzowski and Toni Flora for their review and advice on the final manuscript.

I owe special thanks to the members of the Papuga and Breshears labs for all their

help through the years in learning new skills and discussing new ideas: Cianna, Jason,

Juan, Mallory, Zulia, MaPilar, Zack, Bhaskar, Jessica, Daphne, Adam, Daniel, Matt,

Rachel, and Vanessa.

I would also like to thank the Raytheon Environmental and Industrial Hygiene

team for all their support through this project: Heather, Kate, David, Dianna, Katie,

Richard, and Christine.

4 | P a g e

DEDICATION

This thesis is dedicated to the many people who have helped me along the way,

and without whom I would not be who I am today. To my parents and siblings who love

me: I am ever thankful for your support, encouragement, and Jeep loans. To Tom, who

supported me through the rough patches and is the best field-companion I could ask for:

here’s to finding C. scheeri where it’s supposed to be and to bringing Irish Folk music to

the desert. And finally, to really good hiking boots: I could not have endured my many

crossings of the “Land of Cholla” without you.

5 | P a g e

Table of Contents

List of Figures .................................................................................................................................. 6

List of Tables ................................................................................................................................... 7

Abstract ............................................................................................................................................ 8

Chapter 1: Context ......................................................................................................................... 10

1.1 Climate Change .................................................................................................................... 10

1.2 Precipitation Pulse Dynamics .............................................................................................. 11

1.3 Phenology ............................................................................................................................ 13

1.4 Endangered Species ............................................................................................................. 13

1.5 Pima Pineapple Cactus ......................................................................................................... 14

1.6 Thesis Format ...................................................................................................................... 17

Chapter 2: Present Study ................................................................................................................ 19

2.1 Summary of Results ............................................................................................................. 20

2.2 Summary of Conclusions ..................................................................................................... 21

2.3 Future Research Opportunities............................................................................................. 22

2.3.1 Soil Moisture as an Indicator of Spatial Distribution ................................................... 22

2.3.2 Shifting Phenology as an Additional Threat to Endangered Species............................ 23

2.3.3 Shifting Phenology and Resource Distribution in Alternate Ecosystem Types ............. 23

References ...................................................................................................................................... 25

APPENDX A: CLASSIFICATION TREE ESTIMATION OF THE CLIMATE CHANGE

VELOCITY GAP FOR LITTLE-STUDIED, SLOW-DISPERSING ENDANGERED SPECIES

....................................................................................................................................................... 34

APPENDIX B: ECOHYDROLOGICAL CONTROLS ON CACTUS FLOWERING

PHENOLOGY AND PLANT REPRODUCTIVE CHARACTERISTICS: A TWO YEAR

OBSERVATIONAL STUDY OF AN ENDANGERED SPECIES .............................................. 72

APPENDIX C: SUPPLEMENTAL DATA FROM SANTA RITA EXPERIMENTAL RANGE

ON PLANT PHYISCAL CHARACTERISTICS AND ASSOCIATED ABIOTIC

CHARACTERISTICS ................................................................................................................. 106

6 | P a g e

List of Figures

Figure 1: Map of Coryphantha scheeri var. robustispina distribution, reproduced from:

Baker, Marc, 2004 USGS Report. Within this report, Coryphantha scheeri var.

robustispina is named Coryphantha robustispina var. robustispina…………………….14

Figure 2: Photo of C. scheeri flowering…………………………………………………15

7 | P a g e

List of Tables

Table 1: Journal publications and theses on C. scheeri and other species in the genus; also

included non-comprehensively are some relevant reports……………………………….33

8 | P a g e

Abstract

Climate changes in temperature and precipitation are already occurring and are

projected to further exhibit increasing temperature and precipitation extremes and

increasing variation. Such increased temperature variation and decreased precipitation are

likely to have a profound impact on vegetation communities, particularly in regions that

are dominated by extreme temperatures and strongly seasonal precipitation events. Both

temperature and precipitation are tightly linked to vegetation growth and distribution, and

in regions such as the U.S. desert southwest, there are a number of rare and endangered

species that have a particularly tight knit relationship with their environment. Here, I

examine the relationship between these ecohydrological drivers and a specific, little-

researched cactus: the Pima Pineapple Cactus (Coryphantha scheeri var. robustispina).

C. scheeri is a small, hemispherical cactus that resides in the Santa Cruz and Altar

Valleys of Southern Arizona, and very little is known about the conditions that promote

C. scheeri distribution and growth. To provide information that may aide in managing

this species, I investigate aspects of the distribution and the phenology of this species.

With respect to distribution, I hypothesize that (H1) C. scheeri locations are associated

with spatial physical and climatic data within its geographic limits. A framework

describing the climatic associations of C. scheeri would enable species managers to take

advantage of suitable habitat when opportunities arise. With respect to phenology, within

established C. scheeri habitat we lack a clear understanding of the impact

ecohydrological factors can have on reproduction and size. Therefore, I also hypothesize

(H2) that C. scheeri flowering phenology is triggered by available moisture, which may

be in the form of precipitation, humidity, or soil moisture. My results indicate that

9 | P a g e

through the use of the classification tree, C. scheeri habitat is strongly associated with

climatic and physical variables at a state-wide scale; these associations indicate large

losses of suitable habitat under future projected climate scenarios. Additionally, I find

that C. scheeri flowering phenology appears to be associated with precipitation and the

resulting increase of soil moisture; the data are also suggestive that bud formation might

be associated with water-year growing degree day. Because the results indicate a tight

coupling with climatic variables, with most suitable habitat within the current range in

Arizona projected to be lost under future climate, I suggest managers may be inclined to

increase monitoring C. scheeri in an ecohydrological context relative to the variables

identified here and to consider conditions and locations where supplemental watering or

microclimate amelioration could be beneficial for the species.

Key words: Classification tree, endangered species, phenology, spatial distribution

10 | P a g e

Chapter 1: Context

1.1 Climate Change

Changes in climate are already underway and projected to increase in the future

(Garfin et al., 2013; IPCC, 2013). Projected changes include atmospheric composition

(Isaksen et al., 2009), temperature (Crowley, 2000; Hansen et al., 2006; Karl et al., 1991;

Meehl et al., 2000), precipitation (Christensen & Christensen, 2002; Gorman &

Schneider, 2009; Meehl et al., 2000), and species composition and distribution (Hansen et

al., 2001). Increases in greenhouse gas concentrations are primarily evident in the

changes observed in temperature (Crowley, 2000; Hansen et al., 2006; Karl et al., 1991)

and precipitation (Christensen & Christensen, 2002; Gorman & Schneider, 2009).

Projected temperature changes include increasingly frequent and extreme heat and cold

events (Mearns et al., 1984; Meehl et al., 2000). Additionally, average temperature ranges

are observed to be increasing toward the poles, and are projected to continue to do so

(Seager et al., 2007; Walther et al., 2002). Precipitation changes are projected to exhibit

more extreme flooding and drought events (Meehl et al., 2000), altering the hydrologic

cycle and moisture availability globally.

These changes in temperature and precipitation are impacting species

distributions (IPCC, 2014; Kotwicki & Lauth, 2013; Stevenson & Lauth, 2012) and the

timing of life cycle events—phenology (Kotwicki & Lauth, 2013; Ma et al., 2013;

Stevenson & Lauth, 2012). The magnitude of response to these changes varies across

species and ecosystems, leading to a variety of challenging consequences for natural

resource managers. Additionally, climate conditions are projected to occur so quickly,

even under the least extreme scenarios, that biome shifts are predicted to out-pace the

11 | P a g e

species that exist therein (Sandel et al., 2011; Schloss et al., 2012). Species will require

dispersal and establishment rates to track climate-driven changes in suitable habitat if

they are to offset such losses (IPCC 2014).

Projected climate changes are expected to be particularly pronounced in the

Southwestern U.S. (Garfin et al., 2013). Both hotter and drier conditions are projected for

the Southwestern U.S. and associated deserts (Albright et al., 2010; Feng et al., 2014).

Additionally, greater variability in temperature and precipitation is projected (Albright et

al., 2010; Feng et al., 2014), as well a greater occurrence of extreme events including heat

waves and drought (Kharin et al., 2007; Welbergen et al., 2008). These climate changes

are expected to impact not only individual species, but also ecosystems, with respect to

factors such as nutrient availability and fire disturbance regimes (Hurteau et al., 2014;

Nitschke & Innes, 2007). Consequently, improved regional planning and management of

natural resources is needed to address this challenge.

1.2 Precipitation Pulse Dynamics

Of particular importance to Southwestern ecosystems and other drylands

worldwide is the spatiotemporal variability in available water resources (Cable &

Huxman, 2004; Huxman et al., 2004a; Huxman et al., 2004b), because in these locations

water is the dominant limiting factor for much of the year (Reynolds et al., 2004;

Rosenstock et al., 2005). The seasonal distribution of precipitation is important in the

Southwestern U.S., and varies along a gradient from the Mojave to Sonoran to

Chihuahuan deserts (Brutsaert, 2012; Cañón et al., 2011). The Sonoran desert,

intermediate between the Mojave and Chihuahuan, is characterized by precipitation

limited to a heavy monsoon season, variable winter precipitation, and long dry periods in

12 | P a g e

between (Cable & Huxman, 2004). Much of biological activity in the Sonoran desert and

other dryland ecosystems has been characterized as pulsed responses to precipitation

“pulses” (Cable & Huxman, 2004; Huxman et al., 2004a; Huxman et al., 2004b;

Schwinning et al., 2004; Schwinning & Sala, 2004).

Diverse biological responses to precipitation pulses span microbial responses,

biological soil crusts, and vegetation physiology, growth, phenology and distribution. For

example, microbial responses to precipitation pulses in biological soil crusts exhibit

carbon ecosystem exchange and nutrient cycling pulses (Huxman et al., 2004b).

Precipitation pulses trigger responses even when they are small in magnitude. For

instance, biological soil crusts contribute to both carbon and nitrogen cycling (Belnap,

2006; Cable & Huxman, 2004) as a result of precipitation pulses that are too small to

activate shallow plant roots (Cable & Huxman, 2004). Biological soil crust response to

precipitation pulses also enables small pulses to infiltrate down into the shallow root later

(Belnap, 2006). Similarly, vegetative responses to precipitation pulses are reflected in

observed patterns in distribution (Schmidt et al., 2013), transpiration (Huxman et al.,

2004b; Nagler et al., 2007; Yepez et al., 2005), and phenological events such as growth

(Wu et al., 2009) and frequency and duration of flowering events (Crimmins et al., 2014,

2011, 2013).

In addition to the amount of precipitation occurring in an ecosystem and the

specific pulse dynamics of that precipitation, the seasonal distribution of the precipitation

in drylands is important (DeBano et al., 1995). For example, shifts in the timing of

precipitation can alter timing of phenological events (Lesica & Kittelson, 2010; Neil et

al., 2010). Consequently, shifts in the seasonal patterns of precipitation pulses in

13 | P a g e

combination with other climatic variables (e.g. growing degree day) may impose

challenges for biota.

1.3 Phenology

Phenology examines the timing and magnitude of life-cycle events (Rathcke &

Lacey, 1985) and how they are triggered (Gunarathne & Perera, 2014; Ovaskainen et al.,

2013; Peñuelas et al., 2004). In the water-limited Southwestern U.S., phenological events

are often triggered by precipitation pulses (Angert et al., 2010; Miranda et al., 2014,

2009). Where precipitation pulses are seasonal, so then are the phenological responses

(Crimmins et al., 2014, 2013), which are proportionally greater with the size of the

precipitation pulse (Schwinning & Sala, 2004). The timing of phenological events is

often critical to the reproductive strategy of a species to reduce competition or take

advantage of prime reproductive conditions (Clements et al., 2010; Kaspari et al., 2001).

Understanding the phenology of dominant species is an important characterization of

landscapes (Kurc & Benton, 2010), and is particularly important for providing insight

into risks for threatened or endangered species, as well as identifying opportunities for

natural resource managers to take action (Neveu, 2009; Schiller et al., 2000; Ye et al.,

2006).

1.4 Endangered Species

Projected shifts in temperature and precipitation and associated shifts in suitable

habitat range can disproportionately affect threatened and endangered species (Hannah et

al., 2002; Sodhi et al., 2004; Wernberg et al., 2011). These species may already be more

susceptible to fluctuations in climatic conditions because their populations are typically

smaller, and may be less resilient to typical variations in climate and environment that

14 | P a g e

Figure 1: Map of Coryphantha scheeri var. robustispina

distribution, reproduced from: Baker, Marc, 2004 USGS Report.

Within this report, Coryphantha scheeri var. robustispina is

named Coryphantha robustispina var. robustispina.

induce fluctuation in healthy and robust species populations (Betini et al., 2014; Morita et

al., 2014). There are numerous threatened and endangered species in the Southwestern

U.S. (Dobson et al., 1997). Species in this region are often inherently sensitive to

precipitation and temperature changes, and therefore may be particularly impacted by

projected climate changes (Erickson & Waring, 2014).

1.5 Pima Pineapple Cactus

Of particular concern to natural resource managers are potential climate change

impacts on endangered species. An

additional challenge is that many

endangered species are little

studied, so key information on

basic biological characteristics

such as dispersal rates are lacking.

Vulnerability of an endangered

species to climate change can be

particularly great if dispersal rates

are slow, thereby limiting a species’

ability to track changes in in climate if suitable habitat is projected to be lost.

An example of a little-studied and likely slow-dispersing endangered species is

the Pima Pineapple Cactus (Coryphantha scheeri var. robustispina, here C. scheeri) of

the Sonoran desert. This species has been federally protected since 1993 (Roller, 1996;

Schmalzel et al., 2004; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2007) and within the U.S. is

located only in a limited region of the Southwest (Roller, 1996; Schmalzel et al., 2004;

15 | P a g e

Figure 2: Photo of C. scheeri flowering.

U.S. Depertment of Interior, 2001; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2007). Clusters of

Coryphantha scheeri subspecies are found within limited areas of Arizona, New Mexico,

and Texas, and small regions within Chihuahua and Sonora, Mexico (Figure 1; Baker,

2004; McDonald & McPherson, 2005; Roller,

1996; Schmalzel et al., 2004). There are only a few

published journal articles and theses on this species

and others in the genus, in addition to a limited

number of additional relevant reports (Table 1);

most of the studies focus on only a single aspect of

the species. C. scheeri are small (growing up to 46

cm), hemispherical cacti, with nodes referred to as

“tubercles” rather than the typical “ribs”

characteristic of many cactus species in the southwestern U.S. (McDonald, 2007; Roller,

1996; Sayre, 2005; Schmalzel et al., 2004; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2007). Other

closely related species are often mistaken for C. scheeri var. robustispina but a phenetic

analysis indicated it is distinct from variations valida, uncinata, and scheeri (Baker,

2004). Another characteristic of the C. scheeri var. robustispina is that the pups that grow

around the base of the parent, produced asexually, and are speculated to serve as an

opportunity to continue reproducing if the parent dies (McDonald, 2007; Roller, 1996). A

C. scheeri adult can have as many as 100 pups in a cluster, though very rare, but typically

have fewer than 10 (McDonald, 2007).

Current observations of C. scheeri within the U.S. are limited to small regions in

the Southwest between 700 and 1,500 m on slopes of 10% or less (McDonald &

16 | P a g e

McPherson, 2005; Roller, 1996; Schmalzel et al., 2004; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,

2007). Distribution is sparse, with existing literature indicating only a single individual

per ~10 ha (McDonald, 2007; McDonald & McPherson, 2005; Sayre, 2005), though they

can be found in much denser clusters (up to 8 plants per ~0.4 ha) (U.S. Depertment of

Interior, 2001; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2007). Habitat where C. scheeri is found is

characterized as gently sloping alluvial fans within desert scrubland and desert grassland

(McDonald, 2007; McDonald & McPherson, 2005; Roller, 1996; U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service, 2007).

C. scheeri var. robustispina exhibits varied growth rates, declining in the fall and

winter months and in the summer monsoon season, and increasing during the spring

(Roller, 1996). C. scheeri flowers following rain events and can produce multiple flowers

in each flowering event (McDonald & McPherson, 2005; Roller, 1996; U.S. Depertment

of Interior, 2001). Flower abortion can occur, and can increase in frequency through the

flowering season for unknown reasons (McDonald & McPherson, 2005). Each C. scheeri

flowers multiple times each year, producing large (6 - 10 cm in diameter) flowers that

range in color from almost white to bright, vivid yellow (McDonald, 2007; Roller, 1996).

C. scheeri tends to flower synchronously across similar sites, and when successfully

pollinated will form a fruit approximately 7.5 cm long that turns from dark to pale green

when ripe (McDonald, 2007; Roller, 1996). The species is an obligate outcrosser with a

strong relationship with its primary pollinator, the Diadasia rinconis, a medium sized bee

whose preferred habitat coincides with C. scheeri habitat (McDonald, 2007; Roller,

1996). Although less well documented, other bee species and ants also visit its flowers

(McDonald & McPherson, 2005). Because C. scheeri flower after many other desert

17 | P a g e

cactus, they offer pollen to Diadasia later in the year and are likely an important resource

to provide pollen to juvenile Diadasia (McDonald, 2007). Other potential competitors for

pollinator attention include prickly pear (Opuntia) and barrel cactus (Ferocactus), which

tend to flower in the spring and a few weeks after the monsoon season begins,

respectively (McDonald & McPherson, 2005). Distribution of seeds from developed fruit

is not well documented, though small mammals (e.g. rabbits, rodents) are thought to fill

this ecological role (Roller, 1996).

One of the many challenges facing C. scheeri is its proximity to the U.S./Mexico

border, and the resulting human impacts from border patrol and illegal immigration

activities (Marris, 2006). Much C. scheeri habitat is located within range of heavy traffic

from immigration and drug trafficking, which also increases the challenge in studying the

species safely (Marris, 2006). Another challenge to the success of C. scheeri is the

introduction of Lehmann Lovegrass (Eragrostis lehmanniana), which can subject C.

scheeri to increased resource competition and risk from fire damage (Roller, 1996; Sayre,

2005; U.S. Depertment of Interior, 2001; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2007).

Additional challenges include illegal collection, grazing, habitat fragmentation and loss

from anthropogenic activities such as mining, and development (U.S. Depertment of

Interior, 2001; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2007).

1.6 Thesis Format

In the following thesis, I present a summary of the key results and conclusions of

my research on ecohydrological associations for the distribution and phenology of C.

scheeri var. robustispina, followed by discussion of possibilities for future work.

Following the summary are two appendices which present manuscripts of papers

18 | P a g e

intended for publication, followed by a third appendix with supplemental data. The

manuscripts present the data collected and analyzed in response to hypotheses on

ecohydrological controls on C. scheeri var. robustispina distribution and on phenology.

19 | P a g e

Chapter 2: Present Study

In 2013, in effort to better understand how to manage the endangered species on

their property, the United States Air Force (hereafter referred to as Air Force) provided

support to study a relatively dense population of C. scheeri var. robustispina at a location

in southern Arizona. This endangered species has little information on many of its key

biological characteristics. In addition to providing an opportunity to study this rarely

examined endangered species, the Air Force study enables the study of C. scheeri var.

robustispina at a site with controlled public access, potentially minimizing the effects of

some factors that may be influencing the cactus associated land disturbances such as

grazing and recreational pedestrian traffic. To advance our understanding of factors

influencing the distribution and phenology of C. scheeri, I take a two-part

ecohydrological approach that considers climate drivers and soil influences, first focusing

on larger scale patterns of distribution and second focusing on specific phenological

responses.

At the larger scale considering distribution, a fundamental conservation challenge

is assessing potential climate change impacts and management options for endemic,

specialized, and rare species (including threatened and endangered species) (Caldow et

al., 2007), many of which have been little studied and for which key information on

dispersal rates are lacking. Of particularly concern are species for which dispersal rates

are expected (even if not robustly documented) to be slow relative to “climate velocity”,

or the speed at which a species must track climate change to remain within suitable

habitat (Loarie et al., 2009; Sandel et al., 2011; Schloss et al., 2012). Given the need for

maximal insights based on limited available information for little-studied and likely slow-

20 | P a g e

dispersing species, classification trees can be especially useful because they offer

potential for high predictive ability without a priori assumptions about functional

relationships between environmental variables used and species suitability (Bhattacharya,

2013; Pal & Mather, 2003). Here I develop classification trees for the little-studied

endangered desert cactus species, Coryphantha scheeri var. robustispina. I examine how

climatic and physical factors contribute to C. scheeri distribution across the landscape.

My hypothesis (H1) is that C. scheeri locations are associated with spatial physical and

climatic data within its geographic limits. Classification trees are developed both with

and without elevation, and with and without seasonal precipitation totals; these trees are

then used to predict current distribution and to project future distribution under climate

change scenarios. Based on functional type and limited literature, C. scheeri is likely a

relatively slow dispersing species and therefore may be particularly sensitive to changes

in suitable habitat associated with projected climate change.

At a smaller scale, I examine the climatic conditions associated with two key

phenological responses: budding and flowering. My hypothesis (H2) is that C. scheeri

flowering phenology is triggered by available moisture, which may be in the form of soil

moisture, humidity, or rainfall. I examine the physical site characteristics that coincide

with C. scheeri habitat including soil texture, infiltration rates, and incoming solar

radiation. I examine parameters associated with C. scheeri phenology, considering

attributes of precipitation, temperature, and soil moisture.

2.1 Summary of Results

For the distribution study, the classification trees correctly estimated either

predicted absence or predicted presence for > 95% of present distribution cases and were

21 | P a g e

most influenced by maximum temperature and average annual precipitation; average

summer precipitation was also a strong influence when included. Using climate

projections for 2050, a classification tree with elevation estimated > 99% loss of suitable

habitat within its current Arizona distribution and only a few locations of additional

suitable habitat in Arizona outside of current Arizona distribution. However, without an

elevation constraint, extensive additional suitable habitat in Arizona was projected

outside the current Arizona distribution. When seasonal precipitation patterns were

included (and elevation was not included), the classification tree estimated only very

limited additions in future suitable habitat elsewhere in Arizona outside the current

Arizona distribution. The data limitations (e.g. spatial resolution) associated with these

estimates should be considered in application of the results, and field surveys will likely

be required for site-specific determinations.

For the phenology study, flowering events are generally associated with

precipitation events > 10 mm and a corresponding increase in soil moisture. Flowering

events occur multiple times within a single monsoon season within 6 days of

precipitation pulses. Soil texture type for study locations were mostly either sandy loam

or sandy clay loam, with larger sized individuals associated with lower sand content.

Higher infiltration rates are associated with smaller cacti and lower node count. Direct

site factor (DSF) values, a measure of the amount of near-ground incoming solar

radiation over a cloudless year, were not associated with metrics of size.

2.2 Summary of Conclusions

Collectively my results indicate that (1) C. scheeri distribution is tightly

associated with climate conditions, (2) flowers can occur multiple times per year,

22 | P a g e

apparently in response to precipitation pulses, and (3) based on the developed

classification trees, this species is estimated to be at risk of large loss of suitable Arizona

habitat under future (2050) climate. Additionally, the classification trees estimate some

new suitable habitat in other parts of Arizona under projected future climate but this

habitat is mostly outside the species’ current range. Assuming that this species is a slow

disperser, the changes in suitable habitat could necessitate assisted migration for this

species to track climate change; however, any such assisted migration would have to

consider numerous complexities, including pollinator movement.

With respect to research approaches, my study highlights that classification tree

results for little-studied but likely slow-dispersing rare species can aide in assessing

species vulnerability, identifying locations within current range where climate velocity

might be tracked, and mapping candidate locations for assisted migration. My study also

highlights how phenological monitoring using time-series data can reveal important

aspects of species biology that are relevant for natural resource manager consideration.

2.3 Future Research Opportunities

Based on the results presented here and considering the relevant literature, I

identify three key possibilities for further research on C. scheeri in the context of its

surrounding environment and the phenology of the desert Southwest.

2.3.1 Soil Moisture as an Indicator of Spatial Distribution

Results from this study indicate the importance of soil moisture for C. scheeri

phenology, but soil moisture data is quite limited, especially relative to C. scheeri

locations. Work is currently underway to enable wide-scale, remotely-sensed spatial data

for soil moisture, which would enable the inclusion of soil moisture in a distribution

23 | P a g e

analysis. Because moisture is such a limiting resource in arid and semi-arid

environments, the inclusion of spatially explicit soil moisture data could strengthen a

future C. scheeri analysis, as well as more fully enable the examination of other species

distribution in relation to soil moisture as a resource.

2.3.2 Shifting Phenology as an Additional Threat to Endangered Species

Existing literature on C. scheeri from the 1990’s and early 2000’s indicates that

bud formation occurs in mid-May and flowering begins in June in response to monsoon

events in June and July (Roller, 1996, McDonald and McPherson, 2005). In this study,

phenological responses occurred later: bud formation was observed nearly 4 weeks later

in mid-June, and flowering events responded to monsoon events in July. A change of this

magnitude in the timing of phenology could potentially affect the ability of C. scheeri to

attract pollinators away from competitors and to attract fruit distributors if those species

do not exhibit similar changes in phenology. Because climate change can affect many

species across the landscape differently, phenological shifts could occur in many species

that desynchronize them from available resources and alter the ecological functional

relationships across the ecosystem. To better understand how these shifts may take shape,

a more comprehensive study on recorded shifts in desert phenology across taxa and

functional groups could be useful.

2.3.3 Shifting Phenology and Resource Distribution in Alternate Ecosystem Types

Such shifts in phenology and their consequences across the ecosystem in terms of

functional group interactions and nutrient redistribution are a topic that I wish to further

pursue my studies as a PhD student. I have gained much knowledge in the duration of

this project that is unrelated to the specifics of C. scheeri. This research experience has

24 | P a g e

given me valuable experience in designing a research project with limited means in order

to best evaluate a set of hypotheses. Related to this, I’ve gained experience in examining

data for a single species, and based on existing knowledge of natural processes,

understanding how the data relates to the broader ecosystem. Although field data and

tools used within the course of this project may be limited in scope, practice in being

methodical in data collections, observations, and field campaigns are useful skills across

disciplines. Specific methods that are cross-functional include the programming and GIS

skills I’ve established in the course of this project which are valuable tools in many

disciplines. It is with these skills that I hope to ask questions of phenological shifts and

the resulting effects on resource availability in other ecosystem types, such as aquatic

freshwater and marine ecosystems.

25 | P a g e

References

Albright, T. P., Pidgeon, A. M., Rittenhouse, C. D., Clayton, M. K., Wardlow, B. D.,

Flather, C. H., Culbert, P. D., Radeloff, V. C. 2010. Combined effects of heat waves

and droughts on avian communities across the conterminous United States.

Ecosphere, 1(5), 1-11. doi:10.1890/ES10-00057.1

Angert, A. L., Horst, J. L., Huxman, T. E., & Venable, D. L. 2010. Phenotypic plasticity

and precipitation response in Sonoran Desert winter annuals. American Journal of

Botany, 97(3), 405–11. doi:10.3732/ajb.0900242

Baker, M. 2004. Phenetic analysis of Coryphantha, section Robustispina (cactaceae),

part 1: stem characters.U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service report (pp. 1–21). Tempe,

Arizona.

Belnap, J. 2006. The potential roles of biological soil crusts in dryland hydrologic cycles.

Hydrological Processes, 20(15), 3159–3178. doi:10.1002/hyp.6325

Betini, G. S., Griswold, C. K., Prodan, L., & Norris, D. R. 2014. Body size, carry-over

effects and survival in a seasonal environment: consequences for population

dynamics. The Journal of Animal Ecology, 83, 1313–1321. doi:10.1111/1365-

2656.12225

Bhattacharya, M. 2013. Bioclimatic modelling: a machine learning perspective.

International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 4(2), 1–8.

Brutsaert, W. 2012. Are the North American deserts expanding? Some climate signals

from groundwater storage conditions. Ecohydrology, 5(5), 541–549.

doi:10.1002/eco.263

Cable, J. M., & Huxman, T. E. 2004. Precipitation pulse size effects on Sonoran Desert

soil microbial crusts. Oecologia, 141(2), 317–24. doi:10.1007/s00442-003-1461-7

Caldow, R. W. G., Stillman, R. A, le V. dit Durell, S. E. A., West, A. D., McGrorty, S.,

Goss-Custard, J. D., Wood, P. J., Humphreys, J. 2007. Benefits to shorebirds from

invasion of a non-native shellfish. Proceedings of the Royal Society Biological

Sciences, 274, 1449–1455. doi:10.1098/rspb.2007.0072

Cañón, J., Domínguez, F., & Valdes, J. B. 2011. Vegetation responses to precipitation

and temperature: a spatiotemporal analysis of ecoregions in the Colorado River

Basin. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 32(20), 5665–5687.

doi:10.1080/01431161.2010.507259

Christensen, J. H., & Christensen, O. B. 2002. Severe summertime flooding in Europe.

Nature, 421, 2002–2003.

26 | P a g e

Clements, M. N., Clutton-Brock, T. H., Albon, S. D., Pemberton, J. M., & Kruuk, L. E.

B. 2010. Getting the timing right: antler growth phenology and sexual selection in a

wild red deer population. Oecologia, 164(2), 357–68. doi:10.1007/s00442-010-

1656-7

Crimmins, T. M., Bertelsen, D. C., & Crimmins, M. a. 2014. Within-season flowering

interruptions are common in the water-limited Sky Islands. International Journal of

Biometeorology, 58(4), 419–26. doi:10.1007/s00484-013-0745-9

Crimmins, T. M., Crimmins, M. A., & Bertelsen, C. D. 2011. Onset of summer flowering

in a “Sky Island” is driven by monsoon moisture. The New Phytologist, 191(2),

468–79. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.2011.03705.x

Crimmins, T. M., Crimmins, M. A., & Bertelsen, C. D. 2013. Spring and summer

patterns in flowering onset, duration, and constancy across a water-limited gradient.

American Journal of Botany, 100(6), 1137–47. doi:10.3732/ajb.1200633

Crowley, T. J. 2000. Causes of climate change over the past 1000 years. Science,

289(5477), 270–277. doi:10.1126/science.289.5477.270

DeBano, L. F., Ffolliott, P. F., Ortega-Rubio, A., Gottfried, G. J., Hamre, R. H., &

Edminster, C. B. 1995. Biodiversity and management of the Madrean Archipelago:

The sky islands of Southwestern Untied States and Northwestern Mexico. In

Biodiversity and Management of the Madrean Archipelago (p. 669).

Dobson, A. P., Rodriguez, J. P., Roberts, W. M., & Wilcove, D. S. 1997. Geographic

distribution of endangered species in the United States. Science, 275, 16–19.

Erickson, C. C., & Waring, K. M. 2014. Old Pinus ponderosa growth responses to

restoration treatments, climate and drought in a southwestern US landscape. Applied

Vegetation Science, 17(1), 97–108. doi:10.1111/avsc.12056

Feng, W., Hardt, B. F., Banner, J. L., Meyer, K. J., James, E. W., Musgrove, M.,

Edwards, R. L., Cheng, H., & Min, A. 2014. Changing amounts and sources of

moisture in the U.S. southwest since the Last Glacial Maximum in response to

global climate change. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 401, 47–56.

doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2014.05.046

Garfin, G., Jardine, A., Merideth, R., Black, M., & LeRoy, S. 2013. Assessment of

climate change in the Southwest United States. (G. Garfin, A. Jardine, R. Merideth,

M. Black, & S. LeRoy, Eds.). Washington, DC: Island Press/Center for Resource

Economics. doi:10.5822/978-1-61091-484-0

Gorman, P. A. O., & Schneider, T. 2009. The physical basis for increases in precipitation

extremes in simulations of 21st-century climate change. Proceedings of the National

Academy of Science, 106(35), 14773–14777.

27 | P a g e

Gunarathne, R. M. U. K., & Perera, G. A. D. 2014. Climatic factors responsible for

triggering phenological events in Manilkara hexandra ( Roxb .) Dubard., a canopy

tree in tropical semi-deciduous forest of Sri Lanka. Tropical Ecology, 55(1), 63–73.

Hannah, L., Midgley, G. F., Lovejoy, T., Bond, W. J., Bush, M., Lovett, J. C., Scott, D.,

& Woodward, F. I. 2002. Conservation of biodiversity in a changing climate.

Conservation Biology, 16(1), 264–268. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.2002.00465.x

Hansen, A. J., Neilson, R. P., Dale, V. H., Flather, C. H., Iverson, L. R., Currie, D. J.,

Shafer, S., Cook, R., & Bartlein, P. J. 2001. Global change in forests: responses of

species, communities, and biomes. BioScience, 51(9), 765–779.

Hansen, J., Sato, M., Ruedy, R., Lo, K., Lea, D. W., & Medina-Elizade, M. 2006. Global

temperature change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United

States of America, 103(39), 14288–93. doi:10.1073/pnas.0606291103

Hurteau, M. D., Bradford, J. B., Fulé, P. Z., Taylor, A. H., & Martin, K. L. 2014. Climate

change, fire management, and ecological services in the southwestern US. Forest

Ecology and Management, 327, 280–289. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2013.08.007

Huxman, T. E., Cable, J. M., Ignace, D. D., Eilts, J. A., English, N. B., Weltzin, J., &

Williams, D. G. 2004. Response of net ecosystem gas exchange to a simulated

precipitation pulse in a semi-arid grassland: the role of native versus non-native

grasses and soil texture. Oecologia, 141(2), 295–305. doi:10.1007/s00442-003-

1389-y

Huxman, T. E., Snyder, K. A, Tissue, D., Leffler, A. J., Ogle, K., Pockman, W. T.,

Sandquist, D. R., Potts, D. L., & Schwinning, S. 2004. Precipitation pulses and

carbon fluxes in semiarid and arid ecosystems. Oecologia, 141(2), 254–68.

doi:10.1007/s00442-004-1682-4

IPCC, 2013: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working

Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung,

A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 1535 pp,

doi:10.1017/CBO9781107415324

IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A:

Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth

Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Field, C.B.,

V.R. Barros, D.J. Dokken, K.J. Mach, M.D. Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee,

K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S.

MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L. White (eds.)]. Cambridge University

Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 1132 pp.

28 | P a g e

Isaksen, I. S. a., Granier, C., Myhre, G., Berntsen, T. K., Dalsøren, S. B., Gauss, M.,

Klimont, Z., Benestad, R., Bousquet, P., Collins, W., Cox, T., Eyring, V., Fowler,

D., Fuzzi, S., Jockel, P., Laj, P., Lohmann, U., Maione, M., Monks, P., Prevot, A. S.

H., Raes, F., Richter, A., Rognerud, B., Schulz, M., Shindell, D., Stevenson, D. S.,

Storelvmo, T., Wang, W.-C., van Weele, M., & Wuebbles, D. 2009. Atmospheric

composition change: climate–chemistry interactions. Atmospheric Environment,

43(33), 5138–5192. doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.08.003

Karl, R., Change, J., & Ouayle, G. 1991. Global warming: evidence for asymmetric

diurnal temperature change. Geophysical Research Letters, 18(12), 2253–2256.

Kaspari, M., Pickering, J., Longino, J., & Windsor, D. 2001. The phenology of a

neotropical ant assemblage: evidence for continuous and overlapping reproduction.

Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 50(4), 382–390. doi:10.1007/s002650100378

Kharin, V. V., Zwiers, F. W., Zhang, X., & Hegerl, G. C. 2007. Changes in temperature

and precipitation extremes in the ipcc ensemble of global coupled model

simulations. Journal of Climate, 20(8), 1419–1444. doi:10.1175/JCLI4066.1

Kotwicki, S., & Lauth, R. R. 2013. Detecting temporal trends and environmentally-driven

changes in the spatial distribution of bottom fishes and crabs on the eastern Bering

Sea shelf. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 94, 231–

243. doi:10.1016/j.dsr2.2013.03.017

Kurc, S. A., & Benton, L. M. 2010. Digital image-derived greenness links deep soil

moisture to carbon uptake in a creosotebush-dominated shrubland. Journal of Arid

Environments, 74(5), 585–594. doi:10.1016/j.jaridenv.2009.10.003

Lesica, P., & Kittelson, P. M. 2010. Precipitation and temperature are associated with

advanced flowering phenology in a semi-arid grassland. Journal of Arid

Environments, 74(9), 1013–1017. doi:10.1016/j.jaridenv.2010.02.002

Loarie, S. R., Duffy, P. B., Hamilton, H., Asner, G. P., Field, C. B., & Ackerly, D. D.

2009. The velocity of climate change. Nature, 462(7276), 1052–5.

doi:10.1038/nature08649

Ma, T., Zhou, C., Pei, T., & Xie, Y. 2013. A comparative analysis of changes in the

phasing of temperature and satellite-derived greenness at northern latitudes. Journal

of Geographical Sciences, 23(1), 57–66. doi:10.1007/s11442-013-0993-y

Marris, E. 2006. Wildlife caught in crossfire of US immigration battle. Nature, 442(July).

McDonald, C. J. 2007, April. Pima pineapple cactus: a unique cactus hiding in plain

sight. The Plant Press, 1–4.

29 | P a g e

McDonald, C., & McPherson, G. 2005. Pollination of pima pineapple cactus

(Coryphantha scheeri var. robustispina): does pollen flow limit abundance of this

endangered species. USDA Forest Service Proceedings, 529–532.

Mearns, L., Katz, R. W., & Schneider, S. H. 1984. Extreme high-temperature events:

changes in their probabilities with changes in mean temperature. American

Meteorological Society, 23, 1601–1613.

Meehl, G. A., Zwiers, F., Evans, J., Knutson, T., Mearns, L., & Whetton, P. 2000. Trends

in extreme weather and climate events : issues related to modeling extremes in

projections of future climate change*. Bulletin of the American Meteorological

Society, 81(3), 427–436.

Miranda, J. de D., Jorquera, M. J., & Pugnaire, F. I. 2014. Phenological and reproductive

responses of a semiarid shrub to pulsed watering. Plant Ecology, 215(7), 769–777.

doi:10.1007/s11258-014-0354-7

Miranda, J. de D., Padilla, F. M., Lazaro, R., & Pugnaire, F. I. 2009. Do changes in

rainfall patterns affect semiarid annual plant communities? Journal of Vegetation

Sciencce, 20, 269–276.

Morita, K., Tamate, T., Kuroki, M., & Nagasawa, T. 2014. Temperature-dependent

variation in alternative migratory tactics and its implications for fitness and

population dynamics in a salmonid fish. The Journal of Animal Ecology, 83, 1268–

1278. doi:10.1111/1365-2656.12240

Nagler, P. L., Glenn, E. P., Kim, H., Emmerich, W., Scott, R. L., Huxman, T. E., &

Huete, A. R. 2007. Relationship between evapotranspiration and precipitation pulses

in a semiarid rangeland estimated by moisture flux towers and MODIS vegetation

indices. Journal of Arid Environments, 70(3), 443–462.

doi:10.1016/j.jaridenv.2006.12.026

Neil, K. L., Landrum, L., & Wu, J. 2010. Effects of urbanization on flowering phenology

in the metropolitan phoenix region of USA: findings from herbarium records.

Journal of Arid Environments, 74(4), 440–444. doi:10.1016/j.jaridenv.2009.10.010

Neveu, A. 2009. Incidence of climate on common frog breeding: long-term and short-

term changes. Acta Oecologica, 35(5), 671–678. doi:10.1016/j.actao.2009.06.012

Nitschke, C. R., & Innes, J. L. 2007. Climatic change and fire potential in South-Central

British Columbia, Canada. Global Change Biology, 14(4), 841–855.

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2007.01517.x

Ovaskainen, O., Skorokhodova, S., Yakovleva, M., Sukhov, A., Kutenkov, A.,

Kutenkova, N., Shcherbakov, A., Meyke, E., & Delgado, M. del M. 2013.

Community-level phenological response to climate change. Proceedings of the

30 | P a g e

National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110(33), 13434–

13439. doi:10.1073/pnas.1305533110/-

/DCSupplemental.www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1305533110

Pal, M., & Mather, P. M. 2003. An assessment of the effectiveness of decision tree

methods for land cover classification. Remote Sensing of Environment, 86(4), 554–

565. doi:10.1016/S0034-4257(03)00132-9

Peñuelas, J., Filella, I., Zhang, X., Llorens, L., Ogaya, R., Lloret, F., Comas, P., Estiarte,

M., & Terradas, J. 2004. Complex spatiotemporal phenological shifts as a response

to rainfall changes. New Phytologist, 161, 837–846. doi:10.1111/j.1469-

8137.2003.01003.x

Rathcke, B., & Lacey, E. P. 1985. Phenological patterns of terrestrial plants. Annual

Review of Ecology and Systematics, 16(1), 179–214.

doi:10.1146/annurev.es.16.110185.001143

Reynolds, J. F., Kemp, P. R., Ogle, K., & Fernández, R. J. 2004. Modifying the “pulse-

reserve” paradigm for deserts of North America: precipitation pulses, soil water, and

plant responses. Oecologia, 141(2), 194–210. doi:10.1007/s00442-004-1524-4

Roller, P. 1996. Distribution, growth, and reproduction of Pima pineapple cactus

(Coryphantha scheeri Kuntz var robustispina Schott). University of Arizona.

Rosenstock, S. S., Bleich, V. C., Rabe, M. J., & Reggiardo, C. 2005. Water quality at

wildlife water sources in the Sonoran Desert, United States. Rangeland Ecology

Management, 58(6), 623–627.

Sandel, B., Arge, L., Dalsgaard, B., Davies, R. G., Gaston, K. J., Sutherland, W. J., &

Svenning, J.-C. 2011. The influence of late quaternary climate-change velocity on

species endemism. Science, 334(6056), 660–4. doi:10.1126/science.1210173

Sayre, N. F. 2005. Interacting effects of landownership, land use, and endangered species

on conservation of Southwestern U. S. Rangelands. Conservation Biology, 19(3),

783–792.

Schiller, J. R., Zedler, P. H., & Black, C. H. 2000. The effect of density-dependent insect

visits, flowering phenology, and plant size on seed set of the endangered vernal pool

plant Pogogyne abramsii (Lamiaceae) in natural compared to created vernal pools.

Wetlands, 20(2), 386–396. doi:10.1672/0277-

5212(2000)020[0386:TEODDI]2.0.CO;2

Schloss, C. A., Nuñez, T. A., & Lawler, J. J. 2012. Dispersal will limit ability of

mammals to track climate change in the Western Hemisphere. Proceedings of the

National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109(22), 8606–

31 | P a g e

8611. doi:10.1073/pnas.1116791109/-

/DCSupplemental.www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1116791109

Schmalzel, R. J., Nixon, R. T., Best, A. L., & Jr, J. A. T. 2004. Morphometric Variation

in Coryphantha robustispina (Cactaceae). Systematic Botany, 29(3), 553–568.

Schmidt, M., Traoré, S., Ouédraogo, A., Mbayngone, E., Ouédraogo, O., Zizka, A.,

Kirchmair, I., Kabore, E., Thiombiano, A., Hahn, K., & Zizka, G. 2013.

Geographical patterns of woody plants ’ functional traits in Burkina Faso.

Candollea, 68(2), 197–207.

Schwinning, S., & Sala, O. E. 2004. Hierarchy of responses to resource pulses in arid and

semi-arid ecosystems. Oecologia, 141(2), 211–20. doi:10.1007/s00442-004-1520-8

Schwinning, S., Sala, O. E., Loik, M. E., & Ehleringer, J. R. 2004. Thresholds, memory,

and seasonality: understanding pulse dynamics in arid/semi-arid ecosystems.

Oecologia, 141(2), 191–3. doi:10.1007/s00442-004-1683-3

Seager, R., Ting, M., Held, I., Kushnir, Y., Lu, J., Vecchi, G., Huang, H.-P., Hamik, N.,

Leetmaa, A., Lau, N.-C., Li, C., Velez, J., & Naik, N. 2007. Model projections of an

imminent transition to a more arid climate in southwestern North America. Science,

316(5828), 1181–4. doi:10.1126/science.1139601

Sodhi, N. S., Koh, L. P., Brook, B. W., & Ng, P. K. L. 2004. Southeast Asian

biodiversity: an impending disaster. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 19(12), 654–

60. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2004.09.006

Stevenson, D. E., & Lauth, R. R. 2012. Latitudinal trends and temporal shifts in the catch

composition of bottom trawls conducted on the eastern Bering Sea shelf. Deep Sea

Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 65-70, 251–259.

doi:10.1016/j.dsr2.2012.02.021

U.S. Depertment of Interior. 2001. United States Department of the Interior, U. S. Fish

and Wildlife Service AESO/SE 2-21-01-F-271 (pp. 1–16). Phoenix, Arizona.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. U . S . Fish & Wildlife Service 5-Year Review

Determination Pima Pineapple Cactus. 70 FR 5460. Region 2 Regional Office (pp.

1–17).

Walther, G., Post, E., Convey, P., Menzel, A., Parmesan, C., Beebee, T. J. C., Fromentin,

J.-M., hoegh-Guldberg, O., & Bairlein, F. 2002. Ecological responses to recent

climate change. Nature, 416, 389–395.

Welbergen, J. A, Klose, S. M., Markus, N., & Eby, P. 2008. Climate change and the

effects of temperature extremes on Australian flying-foxes. Proceedings of the

Royal Society Biological Sciences 275, 419–425. doi:10.1098/rspb.2007.1385

32 | P a g e

Wernberg, T., Russell, B. D., Moore, P. J., Ling, S. D., Smale, D. A., Campbell, A.,

Coleman, M., Steinberg, P. D., kendrick, G. A., & Connell, S. D. 2011. Impacts of

climate change in a global hotspot for temperate marine biodiversity and ocean

warming. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 400(1-2), 7–16.

doi:10.1016/j.jembe.2011.02.021

Wu, J. B., Xiao, X. M., Guan, D. X., Shi, T. T., Jin, C. J., & Han, S. J. 2009. Estimation

of the gross primary production of an old‐ growth temperate mixed forest using

eddy covariance and remote sensing. International Journal of Remote Sensing,

30(2), 463–479. doi:10.1080/01431160802372143

Ye, Q.-G., Yao, X.-H., Zhang, S.-J., Kang, M., & Huang, H.-W. 2006. Potential risk of

hybridization in ex situ collections of two endangered species of Sinojackia Hu

(Styracaceae). Journal of Integrative Plant Biology, 48(7), 867–872.

doi:10.1111/j.1744-7909.2006.00260.x

Yepez, E. A., Huxman, T. E., Ignace, D. D., English, N. B., Weltzin, J. F., Castellanos,

A. E., & Williams, D. G. 2005. Dynamics of transpiration and evaporation following

a moisture pulse in semiarid grassland: A chamber-based isotope method for

partitioning flux components. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 132(3-4), 359–

376. doi:10.1016/j.agrformet.2005.09.006

33 | P a g e

Author

Focus (*C. scheeri is focus, ^

C. scheeri is mentioned, "G

enus related only)

Bak

er, 2004

*A

naly

sis of taxo

nom

ic relationsh

ips b

etween

cory

phan

tha ro

bustisp

ina v

ariations, co

nsid

ers C. sch

eeri var. ro

bustisp

ina

separate.

Mills, 1

991

*D

escriptio

n o

f C. sch

eeri surv

ey, d

escriptio

n o

f hab

itat, phy

sical descrip

tion, an

d n

otes o

n sp

ecific pop

ulatio

ns th

rough

vario

us b

iolo

gical

surv

eys, in

cludes sp

eculatio

ns o

n cau

se of lo

w d

ensity

and th

reats(e.g. fire, weev

les, hab

itat loss)

Roller, 1

996

*E

xtensiv

e phy

sical descrip

tion o

f C. sch

eeri, germin

ation p

rocess, gro

wth

rates, and flo

werin

g

Phillip

s et al, 1981

*E

xtensiv

e phy

sical descrip

tion, as w

ell as descrip

tion o

f typ

ical hab

itat, and k

now

n (at th

e time) in

form

ation o

n flo

werin

g and rep

roductio

n,

McD

onald

& M

cPherso

n,

2005

*C

. scheeri m

ore lik

ely to

be p

ollin

ated if n

ear anoth

er, but n

ot p

ollin

ator lim

ited

USF

WS 5

-year rev

iew, 2

007

*D

etermin

ation C

. scheeri sh

ould

remain

listed as en

dan

gered, th

oro

ugh

overv

iew o

f existing literatu

re. Accep

ts Bak

er, 2004 sp

ecies delin

eation

over S

chm

alzel et al, 2

004 b

ased o

n co

mm

ents o

f review

ers.

Sch

malz

el et al, 2004

*C

. scheeri sp

ecies distin

ctions are q

uestio

nab

le, does n

ot th

ink d

istinctio

ns b

etween

subsp

ecies are significan

t.

McD

onald

, 2007

*U

ndergo

ne 9

nam

e chan

ges (robus v

ar robus @

time o

f article), extensiv

e phy

sical descrip

tion o

f C. sch

eeri.

Fox &

Nin

o-M

urcia, 2

0006

^Im

pacts to

threaten

ed an

d en

dan

gered sp

ecies is one o

f the stro

ngest d

rivers o

f conserv

ation b

ankin

g and stro

ng en

forcem

ent o

f regulatio

ns

increases th

e dem

and fo

r cconserv

ation b

ankin

g.

US D

OI C

onsu

ltation, 2

001

^O

verv

iew o

f PP

C h

abitat, th

reats, and k

now

n p

op

ulatio

n d

ynam

ics with

in rep

ort to

dev

elop

er

Say

re, 2005

^P

rivate lan

ds an

d lan

ds w

ith tem

porary

grazin

g exclusio

ns are easier to

restore after fire; th

reatened

and en

dan

gered sp

ecies mak

e restoratio

n

and o

ther activ

ities on state an

d fed

eral lands m

ore ch

allengin

g.

Marris, E

mm

a^T

here is ad

ditio

nal d

anger in

field stu

dies w

ithin

South

ern A

rizona d

ue to

illegal imigran

t crossin

gs and d

rug traffick

ing.

Man

dujan

o et al, 2

002

"Cory

phan

tha p

allida in

cluded

in stu

dy

on asso

ciation w

ith n

urse p

lants. R

elationsh

ip fo

und, b

ut statistically

not ro

bust.

Guad

alup

e et al, 2005

"Cory

phan

tha leu

chten

bergia, geo

rgii, glanduligera, gu

erkean

a, macro

var. m

acrom

eris, vau

pelian

a, ocatcan

tha, p

ullein

eana, d

elicata, nick

elsiae,

radian

s, salinen

sis, sulcata, an

d w

ohlsch

lageri inclu

ded

in rep

resented

species in

ven

tory

of stu

dy

of v

arious lo

cations to

evalu

ate species

div

ersity an

d d

etermin

e where co

nserv

ation actio

ns w

ill be m

ost effectiv

e.

Martin

ez-B

erdja &

Valv

erde, 2

008

"Cory

phan

tha w

erderm

annii in

cluded

in stu

dy

of relatio

nsh

ip b

etween

cactus gro

wth

, soil m

oistu

re, solar red

iation (as th

e noted

contrib

utio

ns

of a n

urse p

lant). A

ll species in

cluded

responded

to so

il moistu

re, no stro

ng resp

onse (if an

y) to

differen

t levels o

f solar rad

iation.

Nobel, 1

981

"Cory

phan

tha v

ivip

ara studied

for freez

ing effects. F

ound n

octu

rnal tem

ps b

elow

-15C

kill so

me, w

hile tem

ps b

elow

-20C

kill all o

bserv

ed

indiv

iduals. C

old

nigh

t temp

s app

ear to affect C

O2 u

ptak

e prio

r to cellu

lar dam

age.

Portilla-A

lonso

and

Marto

rell, 2011

"Cory

phan

tha w

erderm

annii stu

died

for effects o

f chro

nic an

thro

pogen

ic distu

rban

ce at differen

t study

locatio

ns. E

stablish

men

t and fecu

ndity

seems to

positiv

ley relate to

chro

nic d

isturb

ance, w

hereas gro

wth

seems n

egatively

related, in

dicatin

g that C

. werd

erman

nii is relativ

ely

distu

rban

ce-toleran

t.

Thom

as, 2005

"Cory

phan

tha v

ivip

ara inclu

ded

in stu

dy

of resilian

ce to fire d

amage. C

. viv

ipara w

as found to

hav

e 3.7

x high

er mortality

rate and fire d

amage

observ

ed to

decrease b

reedin

g pop

ulatio

n, th

ough

re-establish

men

t app

eared to

restore so

me o

f the p

revio

usly

observ

ed sp

p. d

ensity

.

Yearsley

, 2004

"Cory

phan

tha ro

bbin

soru

m p

resented

as study

species fo

r study

examin

ing th

e robustn

ess and effectiv

eness o

f transien

t dy

nam

ic modellin

g on

short-term

transien

t pop

ulatio

n d

ynam

ics, as com

pared

to lo

ng-term

. Resu

lts expan

d sco

pe o

f model to

inclu

de n

ear-term sen

sitivity

to gro

wth

rate and segregate m

odel in

to co

mp

onen

ts that rem

ove n

eed fo

r species age stru

cture an

d a co

mp

onen

t that co

rrects for th

e removal o

f the age-

structu

re assum

ptio

n.

Table 1

: Jou

rnal p

ub

lication

s and

these

s on

C. sch

eeri and

oth

er species in

the gen

us; also

inclu

ded

no

n-

com

preh

ensively are so

me relevan

t repo

rts..

34 | P a g e

APPENDX A: CLASSIFICATION TREE ESTIMATION OF THE CLIMATE

CHANGE VELOCITY GAP FOR LITTLE-STUDIED, SLOW-DISPERSING

ENDANGERED SPECIES

Amí L. Kidder1,2, Shirley A. Papuga1, David D. Breshears1,3 and Darin J. Law1

Targeted for publication in Conservation Biology

1School of Natural Resources and the Environment, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ

85721 USA 3Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ

85721 USA 1Present address: School of Natural Resources and the Environment, University of Arizona,

Tucson, AZ [email protected]

35 | P a g e

Abstract

A fundamental conservation challenge is assessing potential climate change

impacts and management options for endemic, specialized, and rare species (including

threatened and endangered species), many of which have been little studied and for which

key information on dispersal rates is lacking. Of particularly concern are species for

which dispersal rates may be undocumented but are expected to be slow relative to

“climate velocity”, or speed at which a species must track climate change to remain

within suitable habitat. Given the need for maximal insights based on limited available

information for little-studied and likely slow-dispersing species, classification trees can

be especially useful because they offer potential for high predictive ability without a

priori assuming functional relationships between environmental variables used and

species suitability. Here we develop classification trees for a little-studied endangered

desert cactus species, Pima Pineapple Cactus (Coryphantha scheeri var. robustispina)

that, based on limited literature and functional type, is likely a relatively slow-dispersing

species. The classification trees correctly estimated either predicted absence or predicted

presence for >95% of present distribution cases and were most influenced by maximum

temperature and average precipitation. Using 2050 climate projections, a classification

tree with elevation estimated > 99% loss of current suitable habitat with little suitable

habitat added. Classification tree results for little-studied but likely slow-dispersing rare

species can highlight species vulnerability, identify locations within current range where

climate velocity might be tracked, and map candidate locations for assisted migration.

Key Words: Coryphantha scheeri var. robustispina, environmental modeling

36 | P a g e

1.0 Introduction

A fundamental conservation challenge is assessing potential climate change

impacts and management options for endemic, specialized, and rare species (including

threatened and endangered species), many of which have been little studied and for which

key information on reproduction and dispersal rates are often lacking. Particularly

important is the potential spatiotemporal lag between the rate of climate change and the

reproductive and dispersal rates of species, described as a “velocity gap” between current

and projected suitable habitat (Loarie et al., 2009; Sandel et al., 2011; Schloss et al.,

2012, IPCC, 2014). Such velocity gaps are further affected by other factors that influence

species movement rates (Robinet & Roques, 2010; Schloss et al., 2012), such as barriers

related to development and urban areas, agricultural lands, and elevational barriers, in

addition to biotic barriers such as those related to competition or pollination (Cassidy &

Grue, 2000; Fischer & Lindenmayer, 2005; Harrison & Rasplus, 2006; Walther et al.,

2009). The uncertainty surrounding the ability of particular plant species and associated

vegetative communities to mobilize in response to their current climate creates a

significant challenge for natural resource managers, particularly in assessing risks for rare

species (Caldow et al., 2007). Rare species often have population sizes too small to

remain resilient to environmental stressors and as such, are suffering disproportionate

loss with increased effects of climate change (Bro-Jørgensen, 2014; Cahill et al., 2013;

Convertino & Valverde, 2013).

Among the more vulnerable are species for which dispersal rates are expected to

be slow relative to the velocity gap (Fordham et al., 2012; Hiddink et al., 2012, IPCC,

2014). Many endemic, specialized, and rare species (including threatened and endangered

37 | P a g e

species) have been little studied and lack key information on dispersal rates. However,

limited information associated with a given rare species, along with related literature such

as that for the genus or functional type, can provide preliminary indications that a species

may be slow dispersing. Information on population dynamics and dispersal requirements

are often lacking in the literature due to the rare nature inherent to endangered species,

with the exception of the charismatic and economically important endangered species

that tend to be more fully researched (Bried & Mazzacano, 2010; Clucas et al., 2008;

Cove et al., 2013; Di Minin et al., 2013). In addition to challenges associated with

locating rare individuals, experiments and data collection possibilities are often limited

by the need for non-destructive methods (Ellender et al., 2012; Metcalf & Swearer,

2005). Additionally, access to existing data may be regulated in effort to protect the

species from interference.

Nonetheless managers need to obtain timely assessments of potential climate

impacts and management options despite data limitations. Expected ecosystem changes

potentially influencing rare species include expansion of invasive species (Pyke et al.,

2008; Rahel & Olden, 2008; Van Klinken et al., 2009), species density changes (Bertrand

et al., 2011; Rubidge et al., 2011; Thaxter et al., 2010), and species distribution shifts

(Chen et al., 2011; Parmesan & Yohe, 2003). In effort to understand the magnitude of

these changes, managers often turn to species distribution modeling, also referred to as

“environmental niche modeling” (Elith & Leathwick, 2009; Segurado & Araujo, 2004)

using an approach also referred to as “Machine Learning” (Bhattacharya, 2013).

Although there is no universally best approach to species distribution modelling (Austin,

38 | P a g e

2007; Bhattacharya, 2013), there are a variety of tools are used for predictive modeling,

each with specific advantages and disadvantages.

Notable tools include the generalized linear model (GLM), the generalized

additive model (GAM), the Genetic Algorithm for Rule Set Production (GARP),

classification and regression trees (CART), artificial neural networks (ANN), and a

variety of specialized interpolation and niche analysis tools typically designed to

accommodate multi-faceted climate space (Anderson et al., 2003; Austin, 2007;

Bhattacharya, 2013; Elith & Leathwick, 2009; Segurado & Araujo, 2004; Stockwell &

Peterson, 2002). With the availability of so many different techniques, it is important to

examine (1) the available data and (2) the desired outcome to select the best suited model

for the species distribution analysis (Austin, 2002; Austin, 2007). One tool, the

classification tree, has specific strengths which are particularly useful in predicting

potential range for an under-informed species. Primarily, classification trees make no a

priori assumptions between the variables used and the species’ preference, or frequency

of species positive relationship to any particular variable (Bhattacharya, 2013; Pal &

Mather, 2003). They also allow for a predictive model to be created with only a few

variables while maintaining predictive accuracy (Aitken et al., 2007). This gives

classification trees additional flexibility when assessing variables that may have a non-

linear relationship with the species (Pal & Mather, 2003). Classification tree results are

such that step-wise rules are given to enable ease of decision making (Hannöver &

Kordy, 2005; Pal & Mather, 2003; Segurado & Araujo, 2004; Yeh et al., 2009).

Weaknesses of the classification tree include over-fitness, which in species distribution

models may translate to an over-abundance of predicted suitable habitat for the given

39 | P a g e

species and variables (Van Ewijk et al., 2014); appropriate spatial scales for analysis and

sufficient number of verified presence locations relative to randomly determined

locations increase classification tree effectiveness (Aitken et al., 2007). Additionally,

since there is no assumption regarding the relationship between variables, the resulting

classification tree can give no indication of the potential probability of arriving at any

given branch of the tree (Haizhou & Chong, 2009). Despite these limitations, given the

need for maximal insights based on limited available information for little-studied and

likely slow-dispersing species, classification trees can be especially useful because they

offer potential for high predictive ability without assuming a priori functional

relationships between environmental variables used and species suitability.

Here we illustrate the functionality and usefulness of environmental modelling

with classification trees via an example endangered desert species: the Pima Pineapple

Cactus (Coryphantha scheeri var. robustispina), hereafter referred to as C. scheeri,

located in the southwestern U.S. and northern Mexico. We focus on the Arizona portion

of the distribution using available data sets. Based on limited literature and functional

type reviewed below, C. scheeri is likely a relatively slow-dispersing species, making

identification of projected changes in potential suitable habitat particularly useful.

Management of this desert species requires consideration of extreme heat in the summer

months in addition to great variability in rainfall patterns between localized heavy

summer monsoons and broad-scale winter rainfall. Because there is no clear

understanding of the climate envelope C. scheeri exists within, land managers are left

guessing at the best way to manage C. scheeri habitat. As projected climate change

scenarios take effect, a better understanding of the climate envelope for C. scheeri could

40 | P a g e

aid in the management of protected lands and surrounding resources to promote the

success of this and other threatened and endangered species.

Highlighting the more general problem where little information is available on the

parameters that contribute to the distribution of a rare species, we use classification trees

to explore associations between climate and environmental (elevation, soil texture)

variables with C. scheeri distribution in both current and projected future climate

conditions. More specifically, our objectives are to: (1) identify the primary factors

associated with C. scheeri distribution, and (2) project how suitable C. scheeri habitat

may shift in response to climate change. More generally, we highlight the utility of

classification trees in determining the spatiotemporal gap between climate change and

species distribution changes, particularly for little-studied and likely slow-dispersing

species.

2. Methods

2.1 Study Species.

C. scheeri is a small, hemispherical species characterized by their tubercles,

which differs from the typical ribs of most cactus species in the southwestern U.S., as

well as by their starburst spine formation that includes a single spine protruding directly

out from the top of the node (Roller, 1996; Schmalzel et al., 2004; U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service, 2007). C. scheeri are located in the Santa Cruz and Altar Valleys in southern

Arizona (Baker, 2004; McDonald & McPherson, 2005; Roller, 1996; Schmalzel et al.,

2004) and are federally protected within the United States; their distribution does extend

into northern Mexico (Baker, 2004). C. scheeri is small and difficult to detect, especially

in grassy areas, and as a result, has not been widely surveyed across its range (U.S. Fish

41 | P a g e

and Wildlife Service, 2007). Previous research provides some description of the physical

landscape characteristics that C. scheeri is found in, such as on slopes <10% (U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service, 2007), but there is very little information published and available to

the general public on the effects of climatic factors such as temperature and precipitation

(Table 1). The species depends on a specific pollinator bee species (Diadasia), and a

trace study of pollination patterns suggested pollination may not be limiting, but average

pollination distance was limited and less than the pollination area visited by individual

Diadasia (1 km; McDonald & McPherson, 2005). Little other data regarding

reproduction and dispersal rates exist, but in general cacti as a functional group are

expected to disperse relatively slowly (Butler et al., 2012; Gibbs et al., 2008; Godínez-

Alvarez & Valiente-Banuet, 2004); cacti species may have even slower dispersal rates

than trees, which were the slowest functional group relative to velocity gaps in a recent

synthesis (IPCC, 2014).

2.2 Spatial Data Sets

We conducted a spatial analysis with geographic information systems (GIS)

location data of the C. scheeri, along with shapefiles of environmental variables, to

quantify the association of these factors with the species’ distribution. The Arizona

Heritage Data Management System (AHDMS) group maintains spatial data for both

invasive and endangered species across Arizona as part of the state’s land management

and planning. The spatial data was first submitted to Arizona Game and Fish Department

through various land surveys completed by environmental consultants, development

agencies, land management agencies, and others as guided by the endangered species

management program in the state, and was then managed by AHDMS. Spatial location

42 | P a g e

data for all known C. scheeri in Arizona (6905 individuals, alive and dead) was provided

by AHDMS for this study. This spatial data on the distribution of C. scheeri within

Arizona was combined with spatial data for each environmental factor to identify

parameters associated with C. scheeri.

Spatial data for climate and environmental data used for this analysis was

collected from a variety of sources and loaded into ArcMap 10.2. We identified six

environmental factors for use in our analysis: (1) elevation (Fig. 1a), (2) soil texture type

(Fig. 1b), (3) precipitation (Fig. 1c), (4) maximum annual temperature (Fig. 1d), (5)

minimum annual temperature (Fig. 1e), and (6) annual temperature range (Fig. 1f).

Elevation data (Elev) for the state of Arizona was obtained from the U.S. Geological

Survey (USGS) National Map Viewer (http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/) at a

resolution of one-third arcsecond. The map was highlighted to select Arizona as the

desired range within the National Map Viewer, which was then sent from USGS as 62

shapefiles. These files were imported into ArcMap and combined into a single raster; the

extraneous data outside of Arizona was clipped and removed from the raster.

Information on soil texture was obtained from the U.S.D.A Natural Resources

Conservation Service SSURGO (http://sdmdataaccess.nrcs.usda.gov/), which is a digital

soil survey database at a 1:24,000 resolution. The data were downloaded as a package

containing several different soil characteristics for the state of Arizona. The SSURGO

polygon shapefile was imported into ArcMap, and the polygon file was joined using the

map unit key field (MUKEY) to join the polygons with the soil texture data, identifying

the soil texture type for each polygon.

43 | P a g e

The PRISM climate group (http://www.prism.oregonstate.edu/) maintains a

dataset of 30-year normal averages for precipitation (ppt) and maximum and minimum

temperature (Tmax and Tmin, respectively), each at a resolution of 800m. The shapefiles

were downloaded for each of these parameters and imported into ArcMap. Each file

contained data for the entirety of the United States and was clipped down to the extent of

Arizona. Using the raster calculator, Tmin was subtracted from Tmax to identify Trange as a

6th factor to evaluate as a contributor to C. scheeri distribution. In addition, the effect of

seasonal ppt was examined by using the raster calculator in ArcMap to sum monthly ppt

data into six-month totals; winter ppt consisted of October – March data (Fig. 1g) and

summer ppt consisted of April – August data (Fig. 1h).

Climate projection spatial data was obtained from WorldClim.org, a collection of

different data layers available for ecological and modeling research (IPCC, 2013). For

this analysis, projection data for the year 2050 via the CCSM4 model at 30 seconds

resolution was used due to the robustness of the model and its inclusion of factors that

directly impact the southwestern U.S., such as the El Nino Southern Oscillation (Gent et

al., 2011). Projections for Tmax, Tmin, and ppt were downloaded for the four available

climate change scenarios: R26, R45, R60, and R85. Each of these scenarios refer to a

representative concentration pathway (RCP), which each respectively indicate an

increasing level of climate change severity. R26 projections assume the maximum

abatement efforts of greenhouse gases (GHG) leading to peak levels of GHG in between

2010-2020 and decreasing after; R45 and R60 each indicate longer durations of GHG

concentration increases (approximately 2040 and 2060, respectively); and R85 assumes

GHG levels increase through the end of the century (IPCC, 2007). The monthly average

44 | P a g e

data from each RCP scenario were averaged to create an annual average, spatially

projected in GCS North American 1983 coordinate system, and clipped to the same

extent as the current data projections.

2.3 Classification Tree Validation/Verification

Classification trees created in MATLAB R2014a were then developed to estimate

predicted presence or predicted absence of C. scheeri under specified environmental

conditions. Spatial data for all six environmental factors (Tmax, Tmin, Trange, ppt, Elev, and

soil texture) were imported as shapefiles into ArcMap along with C. scheeri location

data. All layers originated in GCS North American 1983 except soil texture, which was

transformed for consistency. In addition to verified presence data points specific to C.

scheeri location, we also selected 7000 randomly-generated location points within the

boundaries of Arizona for our analysis. Using a spatial analyst tool in ArcMap, the values

for the six predictors for each C. scheeri verified presence point and random location

point were extracted and exported into data tables.

Using a split sample design, we trained a classification tree in MATLAB with a

data set that combined 75% of points for both C. scheeri verified presence and for

random locations. Using the remaining 25% of the points of each type, we tested the

predictive ability of the tree (Iverson & Prasad, 1998). Points that the tree predicted

presence of C. scheeri (value = TRUE/1) were compared to points with verified presence

of C. scheeri, while points that the tree predicted absence of C. scheeri (value =

FALSE/0), were compared to random locations. To validate our method we randomly

shuffled the data five times, and each time recreated a classification tree.

45 | P a g e

2.4 Classification Tree Model Prediction

To look at the potential distribution of C. scheeri within Arizona, we rasterized

the state into six grids of 695 x 742 pixels each. Using a single classification tree (Fig. 2),

we established the predicted presence or predicted absence of C. scheeri for each pixel.

To do this, environmental factors for the entire state of Arizona (see Section 2.4) were

exported as rasterized grids from ArcMap and loaded into MATLAB. The grids were

reshaped into column vectors, and the values throughout Arizona were evaluated with the

classification tree for C. scheeri habitat suitability. The resulting evaluation was then

reshaped back to the original grid and, with cell sizes identified, imported into ArcMap

displaying the state of Arizona.

Building on projected current suitable C. scheeri habitat, we next evaluated how

that spatial distribution might shift under future climate change scenarios. The climate

projection data (Tmin, Tmax, Trange, ppt) were also exported from ArcMap as rasterized

grids and loaded into MATLAB. Elevation and soil texture type are not expected to

change within this time scale, and as such, current spatial data was used to project future

C. scheeri habitat for 2050. Each future projection scenario was evaluated through the

classification tree, and a projection of suitable C. scheeri habitat was created for each

scenario.

Our initial classification tree included elevation as an important variable, but

because elevation is considered within PRISM climate data calculations, it is removed to

avoid redundancy. Additionally, in regards to plant distribution, elevation restrictions are

due to climate variables, and as such, future climate change might remove elevation

constraints associated with the first model (Beckage et al., 2008; Chen et al., 2011).

46 | P a g e

Therefore, to consider future projected suitable habitat not constrained by elevation, we

developed another classification tree for current distribution that did not include

elevation; we subsequently used this tree to estimate another set of projected changes

under future climate. Finally, because seasonal precipitation distribution within the

species distribution range has been shown to impact growth and distribution of local

species (Cable & Huxman, 2004), we developed a classification tree that included totals

for winter and for summer precipitation (in addition to the annual total previously

considered; this tree also excluded elevation).

3. Results

The classification tree created as the predictor for C. scheeri distribution analysis

was evaluated for accuracy between iterations to review for sampling bias within the

creation data subset. All iterations of the classification tree (Table 2) demonstrate high

accuracy in predicting both verified presence locations and random locations. In creating

the second classification tree without elevation included as a predictor, the same review

of sampling bias was conducted, and again, all iterations of the classification tree

demonstrate high accuracy (Table 3). The third classification tree including winter and

summer precipitation was subject to the same review (Table 4).

The classification tree created in the analysis with elevation (Fig. 2) indicates that

Tmax is the primary predictor in determining suitable C. scheeri habitat, followed by ppt

and Elev as secondary predictors. These three predictors remain the dominant factors

through the top tiers of the classification tree. Tmin and Trange appear as tertiary predictors

with soil texture type as the least common predictor. In the classification tree created for

the second analysis (Fig. 3) without Elev as a predictor, Tmax and ppt remain the primary

47 | P a g e

and secondary predictors, respectively. Trange and Tmin remain the tertiary predictors,

though in this analysis they are contributing factors notably higher on the classification

tree. The least common predictor remains soil texture type in this analysis. The

classification tree created in the third analysis (Fig. 4) that included winter and summer

precipitation indicates that Tmax and summer precipitation are the primary predictors, with

winter precipitation and Tmin as secondary predictors; Trange and ppt occur further down

on this classification tree.

The projections of suitable C. scheeri habitat under current conditions (Fig. 5) are

very similar between the analyses with and without elevation, and both are consistent

with the current known distribution of C. scheeri. The projections indicate that current

suitable C. scheeri habitat extends north and west of the currently observed C. scheeri

habitat at the southern extent of the projections. The projection of suitable habitat in the

analysis including seasonal precipitation (Fig. 5c) is consistent with current known

distribution, though this tree projects less suitable habitat to the north and west than the

first two analyses.

Projections of future C. scheeri habitat differ visibly between analyses with

elevation, without elevation, and including seasonal precipitation. In analysis of future

climate scenarios R26, R45, R60, and R85 with Elev as a predictor, there appears to be

little C. scheeri habitat within the boundaries of Arizona (Fig. 6). In the analysis without

Elev as a variable, each future climate scenario indicates that while little C. scheeri

habitat remains within the current range, there are extensive new areas with potential

suitable habitat in northern and eastern Arizona (Fig. 7). Future projections including

seasonal precipitation display some habitat loss within the current range, with sparse

48 | P a g e

suitable habitat extending north and west of the current distribution (Fig. 8). For all

analyses, projections were consistent across all climate scenarios, indicating little change

between R26, R45, R60, and R85.

4. Discussion

Methodologically, the high accuracy of the classification tree as a model to

predict C. scheeri suitable habitat is notable. This type of model typically has good

results in habitat projection among species that exhibit a tight relationship with their

environment, as highlighted here by a prediction rate over 95% for all iterations of the

model for C. scheeri. The high reliability of the classification tree for current distribution

increases our confidence in its utility for projections for 2050.

It is important to note that these results are evaluating the conditions of C. scheeri

versus the current distribution. Location data for C. scheeri provided by AHDMS is often

collected as a result of development and land use activities such that known locations

may not indicate the full distribution of the species. Given the available resolutions of the

data used here (see section 2.2), projections are sufficient for estimating general suitable

C. scheeri habitat, but where detailed site-specific information is needed, thorough

surveys (e.g. using the approach detailed by Roller, 1996) should be completed to

confirm presence or absence.

An additional caveat is that the spatial data used for this evaluation are mean

values, and are not meant to indicate extreme climate conditions or events. Projections of

suitable habitat displayed here are estimates of where C. scheeri may exist; they are not

verified locations within the whole of the projected range. Results displayed are

indicative of suitable habitat, but these associations with average climate conditions may

49 | P a g e

not correspond to specific conditions determining plant mortality, which may be more

related to extreme events (McDowell et al., 2008).

From a conservation perspective, the classification trees (with and without

elevation, and without or including winter and summer precipitation) all project an

enormous loss of suitable habitat within the species current range. This projection

reinforces the need for protection, active management, and DNA archival of the species

as climate change progresses. Given the severe loss projected, those actions may be

insufficient to conserve the species. The classification tree without elevation as a

constraint also highlights that large portions of Arizona outside the current C. scheeri

range could become suitable habitat. However, given the likely slow dispersal rate of this

species and its dependence on a specific pollinator bee species, the likelihood of this

species tracking the velocity gap of climate change seems low. Also, these additional

areas are not identified as suitable habitat when seasonal precipitation is considered.

Consequently, managers may need to actively intervene through microclimate

manipulations that reduce the maximum temperature and add soil moisture to help

preserve the species. Additionally or alternatively, managers could evaluate

implementing assisted migration to new suitable habitat, but would need to account for

pollinator issues, as well as uncertainties associated with several other aspects of the

species’ biology.

A further challenge to management includes trans-border issues since the

distribution of C. scheeri spans into northern Mexico. We expect that C. scheeri in

Mexico will be subject to the same climatic pressures as the population in southern

Arizona, without the protections assured by U.S. Federal regulations. As is the case for

50 | P a g e

all species distributed across international borders, there is a matrix of land management

and land use practices that contribute to overall species health and distribution. In regards

to conservation efforts, international collaboration is often required from both

governmental and independent agencies to maintain robust ecosystems across political

boundaries.

More generally, our study illustrates how classification tree results for little-

studied but likely slow-dispersing rare species can be useful in a variety of contexts:

predicting existing suitable habitat within the current range of a rare species where other

individuals are most likely to be located; identifying future potential habitat and

associated vulnerabilities, including where climate velocity might be tracked, and

mapping candidate locations for consideration in the context of assisted migration.

Approaches such as this are needed to aide conservation managers in making the best

decisions possible for rare species in a timely manner despite substantial data limitations

on dispersal rates and other aspects of species biology.

Acknowledgements

Support for this project was provided by the Raytheon Company Missile Systems

Environmental, Health, Safety, and Sustainability Department. Additional support was

provided by NSF Critical Zone Observatory (NSF-EAR-1331408). We would like to

acknowledge and thank the members of the Papuga and Breshears labs at the University

of Arizona, School of Natural Resources and the Environment. Additionally, D. P.

Guertin and M. King have provided valuable advice in the approach of this study. A

special thanks to J. Crawford with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and S. Tonn with the

51 | P a g e

Arizona Game and Fish Department for assistance in obtaining C. scheeri spatial location

data.

52 | P a g e

References:

Aitken, M., Roberts D. W., & Shultz, L. M. 2007. Modeling distribution of rare plants in

the great basin, western North America. Western North American Naturalist, 67(1),

26-38.

Anderson, R. P., Lew, D., & Peterson, A. T. 2003. Evaluating predictive models of

species’ distributions: criteria for selecting optimal models. Ecological Modelling,

162(3), 211–232. doi:10.1016/S0304-3800(02)00349-6

Austin, M. 2007. Species distribution models and ecological theory: A critical assessment

and some possible new approaches. Ecological Modelling, 200(1-2), 1–19.

doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.07.005

Austin, M. 2002. Spatial prediction of species distribution: an interface between

ecological theory and statistical modelling. Ecological Modelling, 157(2-3), 101–

118. doi:10.1016/S0304-3800(02)00205-3

Baker, M. 2004. Phenetic analysis of Coryphantha, section Robustispina (cactaceae),

part 1: stem characters.U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service report (pp. 1–21). Tempe,

Arizona

Beckage, B., Osborne, B., Gavin, D. G., Pucko, C., Siccama, T., & Perkins, T. 2008. A

rapid upward shift of a forest ecotone during 40 years of warming in the Green

Mountains of Vermont. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the

United States of America, 105(11), 4197–202. doi:10.1073/pnas.0708921105

Bertrand, R., Lenoir, J., Piedallu, C., Riofrío-Dillon, G., de Ruffray, P., Vidal, C., Pierrat,

J.-C., & Gégout, J.-C. 2011. Changes in plant community composition lag behind

climate warming in lowland forests. Nature, 479(7374), 517–20.

doi:10.1038/nature10548

Bhattacharya, M. 2013. Bioclimatic modelling: a machine learning perspective.

International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 4(2), 1–8.

Bried, J. T., & Mazzacano, C. A. 2010. National review of state wildlife action plans for

Odonata species of greatest conservation need. Insect Conservation and Diversity,

3(2), 61–71. doi:10.1111/j.1752-4598.2010.00081.x

Bro-Jørgensen, J. 2014. Will their armaments be their downfall? Large horn size

increases extinction risk in bovids. Animal Conservation, 17(1), 80–87.

doi:10.1111/acv.12062

53 | P a g e

Butler, C. J., Wheeler, E. A., Stabler, L. B., The, S., & Society, B. 2012. Distribution of

the threatened lace hedgehog cactus (Echinocereus reichenbachii) under various

climate change scenarios. Journal of the Torrey botanical Society, 139(1), 46–55.

Cable, J. M., & Huxman, T. E. 2004. Precipitation pulse size effects on Sonoran Desert

soil microbial crusts. Oecologia, 141(2), 317–24. doi:10.1007/s00442-003-1461-7

Cahill, A. E., Aiello-Lammens, M. E., Fisher-Reid, M. C., Hua, X., Karanewsky, C. J.,

Ryu, H. Y., Sbeglia, G. C., Spagnolo, F., Waldron, J. B., Warsi, O., & Wiens, J. J.

2013. How does climate change cause extinction? Proceedings. Biological Sciences

/ The Royal Society, 280(1750), 20121890. doi:10.1098/rspb.2012.1890

Caldow, R. W. G., Stillman, R. A, le V. dit Durell, S. E. A., West, A. D., McGrorty, S.,

Goss-Custard, J. D., Wood, P. J., Humphreys, J. 2007. Benefits to shorebirds from

invasion of a non-native shellfish. Proceedings of the Royal Society Biological

Sciences, 274, 1449–1455. doi:10.1098/rspb.2007.0072

Cassidy, K. M., & Grue, C. E. 2000. The role of private and public lands in in

conservation of vertebrates State Washington. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 28(4),

1060–1076.

Chen, I.-C., Hill, J. K., Ohlemüller, R., Roy, D. B., & Thomas, C. D. 2011. Rapid range

shifts of species associated with high levels of climate warming. Science, 333(6045),

1024–6. doi:10.1126/science.1206432

Clucas, B., McHugh, K., & Caro, T. 2008. Flagship species on covers of US conservation

and nature magazines. Biodiversity and Conservation, 17(6), 1517–1528.

doi:10.1007/s10531-008-9361-0

Convertino, M., & Valverde, L. J. 2013. Portfolio decision analysis framework for value-

focused ecosystem management. PloS One, 8(6), e65056.

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0065056

Cove, M. V., Pardo Vargas, L. E., de la Cruz, J. C., Spínola, R. M., Jackson, V. L.,

Saénz, J. C., & Chassot, O. 2013. Factors influencing the occurrence of the

Endangered Baird’s tapir Tapirus bairdii: potential flagship species for a Costa

Rican biological corridor. Oryx, 48(03), 402–409. doi:10.1017/S0030605313000070

Di Minin, E., Fraser, I., Slotow, R., & MacMillan, D. C. 2013. Understanding

heterogeneous preference of tourists for big game species: implications for

conservation and management. Animal Conservation, 16(3), 249–258.

doi:10.1111/j.1469-1795.2012.00595.x

Elith, J., & Leathwick, J. R. 2009. Species distribution models: ecological explanation

and prediction across space and time. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and

Systematics, 40(1), 677–697. doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.110308.120159

54 | P a g e

Ellender, B. R., Becker, A., Weyl, O. L. F., & Swartz, E. R. 2012. Underwater video

analysis as a non-destructive alternative to electrofishing for sampling imperilled

headwater stream fishes. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems,

22(1), 58–65. doi:10.1002/aqc.1236

Fischer, J., & Lindenmayer, D. B. 2005. The sensitivity of lizards to elevation: A case

study from south-eastern Australia. Diversity and Distributions, 11(3), 225–233.

doi:10.1111/j.1366-9516.2005.00139.x

Fordham, D. a, Watts, M. J., Delean, S., Brook, B. W., Heard, L. M. B., & Bull, C. M.

2012. Managed relocation as an adaptation strategy for mitigating climate change

threats to the persistence of an endangered lizard. Global Change Biology, 18(9),

2743–55. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2012.02742.x

Gent, P. R., Danabasoglu, G., Donner, L. J., Holland, M. M., Hunke, E. C., Jayne, S. R.,

Lawrence, D. M., Neale, R. B., Rasch, P. J., Vertenstein, M., Worley, P. H., Yang,

Z.-L., & Zhang, M. 2011. The Community Climate System Model Version 4.

Journal of Climate, 24(19), 4973–4991. doi:10.1175/2011JCLI4083.1

Gibbs, J. P., Marquez, C., & Sterling, E. J. 2008. The role of endangered species

reintroduction in ecosystem restoration: tortoise–cactus interactions on Española

Osland, Galápagos. Restoration Ecology, 16(1), 88–93. doi:10.1111/j.1526-

100X.2007.00265.x

Godínez-Alvarez, H., & Valiente-Banuet, A. 2004. Demography of the columnar cactus

Neobuxbaumia macrocephala: a comparative approach using poipulation projection

matricies. Plant Ecology, 174, 109–118.

Haizhou, D., & Chong, M. 2009. Study on constructing generalized decision tree by

using DNA coding genetic algorithm. 2009 International Conference on Web

Information Systems and Mining, 163–167. doi:10.1109/WISM.2009.41

Hannöver, W., & Kordy, H. 2005. Predicting outcomes of in-patient psychotherapy using

quality management data: comparing classification and regression trees with logistic

regression and linear discriminant analysis. Psychotherapy Research : Journal of the

Society for Psychotherapy Research, 15(3), 236–47.

doi:10.1080/10503300512331334995

Harrison, R. D., & Rasplus, J.-Y. 2006. Dispersal of fig pollinators in Asian tropical rain

forests. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 22(06), 631. doi:10.1017/S0266467406003488

Hiddink, J. G., Ben Rais Lasram, F., Cantrill, J., & Davies, a. J. 2012. Keeping pace with

climate change: what can we learn from the spread of Lessepsian migrants? Global

Change Biology, 18(7), 2161–2172. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2012.02698.x

55 | P a g e

IPCC, 2007: Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I,

II and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on

Climate Change [Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R.K and Reisinger, A. (eds.)].

IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 104 pp.

IPCC, 2013: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working

Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung,

A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 1535 pp,

doi:10.1017/CBO9781107415324

IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A:

Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth

Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Field, C.B.,

V.R. Barros, D.J. Dokken, K.J. Mach, M.D. Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee,

K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S.

MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L. White (eds.)]. Cambridge University

Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 1132 pp.

Loarie, S. R., Duffy, P. B., Hamilton, H., Asner, G. P., Field, C. B., & Ackerly, D. D.

2009. The velocity of climate change. Nature, 462(7276), 1052–1055.

doi:10.1038/nature08649

McDonald, C., & McPherson, G. 2005. Pollination of pima pineapple cactus

(Coryphantha scheeri var. robustispina): does pollen flow limit abundance of this

endangered species. USDA Forest Service Proceedings, 529–532.

McDowell, N., Pockman W. T., Allen C. D., Breshears D. D., Cobb N., Kolb T., Plaut J.,

Sperry J., West A., Williams D. G., & Yepez, E.. 2008. Mechanisms of plant

survival and mortality during drought: why do some plants survive while others

succumb to drought? New Phytologist 178(4), 719-739

Metcalf, S. J., & Swearer, S. E. 2005. Non-destructive ageing in Notolabrus tetricus

using dorsal spines with an emphasis on the benefits for protected, endangered and

fished species. Journal of Fish Biology, 66, 1740–1747. doi:10.1111/j.1095-

8649.2005.00704.x

Pal, M., & Mather, P. M. 2003. An assessment of the effectiveness of decision tree

methods for land cover classification. Remote Sensing of Environment, 86(4), 554–

565. doi:10.1016/S0034-4257(03)00132-9

Parmesan, C., & Yohe, G. 2003. A globally coherent fingerprint of climate change

impacts across natural systems. Nature, 421(6918), 37–42. doi:10.1038/nature01286

56 | P a g e

Pyke, C. R., Thomas, R., Porter, R. D., Hellmann, J. J., Dukes, J. S., Lodge, D. M., &

Chavarria, G. 2008. Current practices and future opportunities for policy on climate

change and invasive species. Conservation Biology : The Journal of the Society for

Conservation Biology, 22(3), 585–92. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.00956.x

Rahel, F. J., & Olden, J. D. 2008. Assessing the effects of climate change on aquatic

invasive species. Conservation Biology : The Journal of the Society for

Conservation Biology, 22(3), 521–33. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.00950.x

Robinet, C., & Roques, A. 2010. Direct impacts of recent climate warming on insect

populations. Integrative Zoology, 5(2), 132–42. doi:10.1111/j.1749-

4877.2010.00196.x

Roller, P. 1996. Distribution, growth, and reproduction of Pima pineapple cactus

(Coryphantha scheeri Kuntz var robustispina Schott). University of Arizona.

Rubidge, E. M., Monahan, W. B., Parra, J. L., Cameron, S. E., & Brashares, J. S. 2011.

The role of climate, habitat, and species co-occurrence as drivers of change in small

mammal distributions over the past century. Global Change Biology, 17(2), 696–

708. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2010.02297.x

Sandel, B., Arge, L., Dalsgaard, B., Davies, R. G., Gaston, K. J., Sutherland, W. J., &

Svenning, J.-C. 2011. The influence of late quaternary climate-change velocity on

species endemism. Science, 334(6056), 660–4. doi:10.1126/science.1210173

Schloss, C. A., Nuñez, T. A., & Lawler, J. J. 2012. Dispersal will limit ability of

mammals to track climate change in the Western Hemisphere. Proceedings of the

National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109(22), 8606–

8611. doi:10.1073/pnas.1116791109/-

/DCSupplemental.www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1116791109

Schmalzel, R. J., Nixon, R. T., Best, A. L., & Jr, J. A. T. 2004. Morphometric Variation

in Coryphantha robustispina ( Cactaceae ). Systematic Botany, 29(3), 553–568.

Segurado, P., & Araujo, M. B. 2004. An evaluation of methods for modelling species

distributions. Journal of Biogeography, 31, 1555–1568.

Sodhi, N. S., Koh, L. P., Brook, B. W., & Ng, P. K. L. 2004. Southeast Asian

biodiversity: an impending disaster. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 19(12), 654–

60. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2004.09.006

Stockwell, D. R., & Peterson, A. T. 2002. Effects of sample size on accuracy of species

distribution models. Ecological Modelling, 148(1), 1–13. doi:10.1016/S0304-

3800(01)00388-X

57 | P a g e

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. U . S . Fish & Wildlife Service 5-Year Review

Determination Pima Pineapple Cactus. 70 FR 5460. Region 2 Regional Office (pp.

1–17).

Van Ewijk, K. Y., Randin, C. F., Treitz, P. M., & Scott, N. a. 2014. Predicting fine-scale

tree species abundance patterns using biotic variables derived from LiDAR and high

spatial resolution imagery. Remote Sensing of Environment, 150, 120–131.

doi:10.1016/j.rse.2014.04.026

Van Klinken, R. D., Lawson, B. E., & Zalucki, M. P. 2009. Predicting invasions in

Australia by a neotropical shrub under climate change: the challenge of novel

climates and parameter estimation. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 18(6), 688–

700. doi:10.1111/j.1466-8238.2009.00483.x

Walther, G.-R., Roques, A., Hulme, P. E., Sykes, M. T., Pysek, P., Kühn, I., Zobel, M.,

Bacher, S., Botta-Dukat, Z., Bugmann, H., Czucz, B., Dauber, J., Hickler, T.,

Jarosik, V., Kenis, M., Klotz, K., Minchin, D., Moora, M., Nentwig., Ott, J., Panov,

V. E., Reineking, B., Robinet, C., Semenchenko, V., Solarz, W., Thuiller, W., Vila,

M., Vohland, K., & Settele, J. 2009. Alien species in a warmer world: risks and

opportunities. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 24(12), 686–93.

doi:10.1016/j.tree.2009.06.008

Yeh, D.-Y., Cheng, C.-H., & Hsiao, S.-C. 2009. Classification knowledge discovery in

mold tooling test using decision tree algorithm. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing,

22(4), 585–595. doi:10.1007/s10845-009-0321-7

58 | P a g e

List of Tables:

Table 1: Journal publications and theses on C. scheeri and other species in the genus; also

included non-comprehensively are some relevant reports……………………………….60

Table 2: An evaluation of the classification tree created with elevation for consistency

and accuracy and to determine any bias in the data selected to create the tree………….61

Table 3: An evaluation of the classification tree built without elevation as a predictor for

consistency and accuracy and to determine any bias in the data selected to create the

tree………………………………………………………………………………………62

Table 4: An evaluation of the classification tree built including seasonal precipitation as a

predictor (without elevation included) for consistency and accuracy and to determine any

bias in the data selected to create the

tree………………………………………………...63

59 | P a g e

List of Figures:

Figure 1: Environmental factors evaluated in CART model of C. scheeri distribution:

elevation (a), soil texture type (b), precipitation (c), maximum annual temperature (d),

minimum annual temperature (e), annual temperature range (f), winter precipitation (g),

and summer precipitation (h)…………………………………………………………….64

Figure 2: The classification tree created in MATLAB® used to evaluate environmental

factors for C. scheeri predicted presence or predicted absence………………………….65

Figure 3: The classification tree created in MATLAB® without elevation to evaluate

environmental factors for C. scheeri predicted presence or predicted absence………….66

Figure 4: The classification tree created in MATLAB® including seasonal precipitation

to evaluate environmental factors for C. scheeri predicted presence or predicted

absence…………………………………………………………………………………...67

Figure 5: Projected suitable C. scheeri habitat under current climate conditions

throughout the state of Arizona, with elevation as variable (a), excluding elevation from

the analysis (b), and including winter and summer precipitation as a variable (c)………68

Figure 6: Projected suitable C. scheeri habitat under 2050 climate projections, with

elevation included, for scenarios R26 (a), R45 (b), R60 (c), and R85 (d)……………….69

Figure 7: Projected suitable C. scheeri habitat under 2050 climate projections, without

elevation included, for scenarios R26 (a), R45 (b), R60 (c), and R85 (d)……………….70

Figure 8: Projected suitable C. scheeri habitat under 2050 climate projections, with

seasonal precipitation included, for scenarios R26 (a), R45 (b), R60 (c), and R85 (d)….71

60 | P a g e

Author

Focus (*C. scheeri is focus, ^

C. scheeri is mentioned, "G

enus related only)

Bak

er, 2004

*A

naly

sis of taxo

nom

ic relationsh

ips b

etween

cory

phan

tha ro

bustisp

ina v

ariations, co

nsid

ers C. sch

eeri var. ro

bustisp

ina

separate.

Mills, 1

991

*D

escriptio

n o

f C. sch

eeri surv

ey, d

escriptio

n o

f hab

itat, phy

sical descrip

tion, an

d n

otes o

n sp

ecific pop

ulatio

ns th

rough

vario

us b

iolo

gical

surv

eys, in

cludes sp

eculatio

ns o

n cau

se of lo

w d

ensity

and th

reats(e.g. fire, weev

les, hab

itat loss)

Roller, 1

996

*E

xtensiv

e phy

sical descrip

tion o

f C. sch

eeri, germin

ation p

rocess, gro

wth

rates, and flo

werin

g

Phillip

s et al, 1981

*E

xtensiv

e phy

sical descrip

tion, as w

ell as descrip

tion o

f typ

ical hab

itat, and k

now

n (at th

e time) in

form

ation o

n flo

werin

g and rep

roductio

n,

McD

onald

& M

cPherso

n,

2005

*C

. scheeri m

ore lik

ely to

be p

ollin

ated if n

ear anoth

er, but n

ot p

ollin

ator lim

ited

USF

WS 5

-year rev

iew, 2

007

*D

etermin

ation C

. scheeri sh

ould

remain

listed as en

dan

gered, th

oro

ugh

overv

iew o

f existing literatu

re. Accep

ts Bak

er, 2004 sp

ecies delin

eation

over S

chm

alzel et al, 2

004 b

ased o

n co

mm

ents o

f review

ers.

Sch

malz

el et al, 2004

*C

. scheeri sp

ecies distin

ctions are q

uestio

nab

le, does n

ot th

ink d

istinctio

ns b

etween

subsp

ecies are significan

t.

McD

onald

, 2007

*U

ndergo

ne 9

nam

e chan

ges (robus v

ar robus @

time o

f article), extensiv

e phy

sical descrip

tion o

f C. sch

eeri.

Fox &

Nin

o-M

urcia, 2

0006

^Im

pacts to

threaten

ed an

d en

dan

gered sp

ecies is one o

f the stro

ngest d

rivers o

f conserv

ation b

ankin

g and stro

ng en

forcem

ent o

f regulatio

ns

increases th

e dem

and fo

r cconserv

ation b

ankin

g.

US D

OI C

onsu

ltation, 2

001

^O

verv

iew o

f PP

C h

abitat, th

reats, and k

now

n p

op

ulatio

n d

ynam

ics with

in rep

ort to

dev

elop

er

Say

re, 2005

^P

rivate lan

ds an

d lan

ds w

ith tem

porary

grazin

g exclusio

ns are easier to

restore after fire; th

reatened

and en

dan

gered sp

ecies mak

e restoratio

n

and o

ther activ

ities on state an

d fed

eral lands m

ore ch

allengin

g.

Marris, E

mm

a^T

here is ad

ditio

nal d

anger in

field stu

dies w

ithin

South

ern A

rizona d

ue to

illegal imigran

t crossin

gs and d

rug traffick

ing.

Man

dujan

o et al, 2

002

"Cory

phan

tha p

allida in

cluded

in stu

dy

on asso

ciation w

ith n

urse p

lants. R

elationsh

ip fo

und, b

ut statistically

not ro

bust.

Guad

alup

e et al, 2005

"Cory

phan

tha leu

chten

bergia, geo

rgii, glanduligera, gu

erkean

a, macro

var. m

acrom

eris, vau

pelian

a, ocatcan

tha, p

ullein

eana, d

elicata, nick

elsiae,

radian

s, salinen

sis, sulcata, an

d w

ohlsch

lageri inclu

ded

in rep

resented

species in

ven

tory

of stu

dy

of v

arious lo

cations to

evalu

ate species

div

ersity an

d d

etermin

e where co

nserv

ation actio

ns w

ill be m

ost effectiv

e.

Martin

ez-B

erdja &

Valv

erde, 2

008

"Cory

phan

tha w

erderm

annii in

cluded

in stu

dy

of relatio

nsh

ip b

etween

cactus gro

wth

, soil m

oistu

re, solar red

iation (as th

e noted

contrib

utio

ns

of a n

urse p

lant). A

ll species in

cluded

responded

to so

il moistu

re, no stro

ng resp

onse (if an

y) to

differen

t levels o

f solar rad

iation.

Nobel, 1

981

"Cory

phan

tha v

ivip

ara studied

for freez

ing effects. F

ound n

octu

rnal tem

ps b

elow

-15C

kill so

me, w

hile tem

ps b

elow

-20C

kill all o

bserv

ed

indiv

iduals. C

old

nigh

t temp

s app

ear to affect C

O2 u

ptak

e prio

r to cellu

lar dam

age.

Portilla-A

lonso

and

Marto

rell, 2011

"Cory

phan

tha w

erderm

annii stu

died

for effects o

f chro

nic an

thro

pogen

ic distu

rban

ce at differen

t study

locatio

ns. E

stablish

men

t and fecu

ndity

seems to

positiv

ley relate to

chro

nic d

isturb

ance, w

hereas gro

wth

seems n

egatively

related, in

dicatin

g that C

. werd

erman

nii is relativ

ely

distu

rban

ce-toleran

t.

Thom

as, 2005

"Cory

phan

tha v

ivip

ara inclu

ded

in stu

dy

of resilian

ce to fire d

amage. C

. viv

ipara w

as found to

hav

e 3.7

x high

er mortality

rate and fire d

amage

observ

ed to

decrease b

reedin

g pop

ulatio

n, th

ough

re-establish

men

t app

eared to

restore so

me o

f the p

revio

usly

observ

ed sp

p. d

ensity

.

Yearsley

, 2004

"Cory

phan

tha ro

bbin

soru

m p

resented

as study

species fo

r study

examin

ing th

e robustn

ess and effectiv

eness o

f transien

t dy

nam

ic modellin

g on

short-term

transien

t pop

ulatio

n d

ynam

ics, as com

pared

to lo

ng-term

. Resu

lts expan

d sco

pe o

f model to

inclu

de n

ear-term sen

sitivity

to gro

wth

rate and segregate m

odel in

to co

mp

onen

ts that rem

ove n

eed fo

r species age stru

cture an

d a co

mp

onen

t that co

rrects for th

e removal o

f the age-

structu

re assum

ptio

n.

Table 1

: Jou

rnal p

ub

lication

s and

these

s on

C. sch

eeri and

oth

er species in

the gen

us; also

inclu

ded

no

n-

com

preh

ensively are so

me relevan

t repo

rts.

61 | P a g e

Trial

Predicted

Presence Correct

Predicted

Presence

Incorrect

Predicted

Absence Correct

Predicted

Absence

Incorrect

1 86% 14% 99% 1%

2 99% 1% 100% 0%

3 99% 1% 100% 0%

4 99% 1% 98% 2%

5 99% 1% 98% 2%

Mean 96% 4% 99% 1%

SD 0.0513 0.0513 0.0082 0.0082

Table 2: An evaluation of the classification tree created with elevation for consistency

and accuracy and to determine any bias in the data selected to create the tree.

62 | P a g e

Trial

Predicted

Presence Correct

Predicted

Presence

Incorrect

Predicted

Absence Correct

Predicted

Absence

Incorrect

8 90% 10% 100% 0%

9 99% 1% 99% 1%

10 99% 1% 99% 1%

11 99% 1% 97% 3%

12 98% 2% 97% 3%

Mean 97% 3% 98% 2%

SD 0.0346 0.0346 0.0100 0.0100

Table 3: An evaluation of the classification tree built without elevation as a predictor for

consistency and accuracy and to determine any bias in the data selected to create the tree.

63 | P a g e

Trial

Predicted

Presence Correct

Predicted

Presence

Incorrect

Predicted

Absence Correct

Predicted

Absence

Incorrect

14 92% 8% 98% 2%

15 99% 1% 99% 1%

16 99% 1% 98% 2%

17 99% 1% 98% 2%

18 99% 1% 99% 1%

Mean 98% 2% 99% 1%

SD 0.0275 0.0275 0.0019 0.0019

Table 4: An evaluation of the classification tree built including seasonal precipitation as a

predictor (without elevation included) for consistency and accuracy and to determine any

bias in the data selected to create the tree.

64 | P a g e

Figure 1: Environmental factors evaluated in CART model of C. scheeri distribution:

elevation (a), soil texture type (b), precipitation (c), maximum annual temperature (d),

minimum annual temperature (e), annual temperature range (f), winter precipitation (g),

and summer precipitation (h).

a b

c d

e f

g h

65 | P a g e

Fig

ure 2

. Th

e classification tree created

in M

AT

LA

used

to ev

aluate

enviro

nm

ental facto

rs for C

. scheeri p

redicted

presen

ce or p

redicted

absen

ce.

66 | P a g e

Fig

ure 3

. Th

e classification

tree created in

MA

TL

AB

® w

ithout elev

ation to

evalu

ate

enviro

nm

ental facto

rs for C

. scheeri p

redicted

presen

ce or p

redicted

absen

ce.

67 | P a g e

Fig

ure 4

: The classificatio

n tree created

in M

AT

LA

inclu

din

g seaso

nal

precip

itation

to ev

aluate en

viro

nm

ental facto

rs for C

. scheeri p

redicted

presen

ce or

pred

icted ab

sence.

68 | P a g e

Figure 5: Projected suitable C. scheeri habitat under current climate conditions

throughout the state of Arizona, with elevation as variable (a), excluding elevation from

the analysis (b), and including winter and summer precipitation as a variable (c).

b

a

69 | P a g e

Figure 6: Projected suitable C. scheeri habitat under 2050 climate projections, with

elevation included, for scenarios R26 (a), R45 (b), R60 (c), and R85 (d).

a

b

c

d

70 | P a g e

Figure 7: Projected suitable C. scheeri habitat under 2050 climate projections, without

elevation included, for scenarios R26 (a), R45 (b), R60 (c), and R85 (d).

a

d

c

b

71 | P a g e

Figure 8: Projected suitable C. scheeri habitat under 2050 climate projections, with

seasonal precipitation included, for scenarios R26 (a), R45 (b), R60 (c), and R85 (d).

a

d

c

b

72 | P a g e

APPENDIX B: ECOHYDROLOGICAL CONTROLS ON CACTUS FLOWERING

PHENOLOGY AND PLANT REPRODUCTIVE CHARACTERISTICS: A TWO YEAR

OBSERVATIONAL STUDY OF AN ENDANGERED SPECIES

Amí L. Kidder1, Shirley A. Papuga1, David D. Breshears1, Darin J. Law1

1School of Natural Resources and the Environment, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ

85721 USA

Targeted for publication in Ecohydrology

73 | P a g e

Abstract

Flowering is a phenological event that plays a critical role in reproductive success, and

therefore influences the health and success of plant populations. Flowering phenology

can be particularly sensitive to changes in climate, especially in water-limited

environments. However, cactus phenology has been little studied and may be relatively

independent of pulse-dependent soil moisture dynamics because cacti are able to store

water in their tissues, or, alternatively, could use their stored moisture to regulate

reproductive phenology. Therefore an improved understanding of cactus phenology is

needed, especially for rare and endangered cactus species that drive natural resource

management decisions and associated economic costs. Our objective was to identify

ecohydrological controls on the flowering phenology and associated plant reproductive

characteristics of Pima Pineapple Cactus (Coryphantha scheeri var. robustispina), an

endangered species inhabiting a limited region of the Sonoran Desert. We focused on a

relatively healthy and dense population located at the northern limit of its range. Over a

two year study period (2013 and 2014), we used this dense population to quantify the

temporal dynamics of flowering phenology and link these dynamics to climate variables.

We examine the relationships between other abiotic factors such as soil texture and

patterns of solar radiation and C. scheeri plant characteristics such as size and number of

nodes. Both bud formation and flowering tended to be synchronous across plants.

Flowering events tended to occur within two to six days of precipitation and associated

peak soil moisture, usually after events larger than 10 mm. C. scheeri were located

mostly on sandy loam or sandy clay loam soils. Fraction of potential annual solar

radiation input near the ground (DSF) was relatively high (>0.95). Higher infiltration

74 | P a g e

rates where soils had greater sand content tended to be associated with smaller

individuals and fewer nodes. These observations provide critical information for natural

resource managers on ecohydrological controls on the variability of flowering phenology

and associated plant physical characteristics for this endangered species. More generally,

our results suggest that cactus flowering phenology can be sensitive to precipitation

pulses, despite water stored within the individual.

75 | P a g e

1.0 Introduction

Phenology has been defined as the study of the seasonal timing, duration, and

abundance of recurring life-cycle events (e.g. Morisette et al. 2009, Rathcke & Lacey

1985) including plant reproductive events such as budding, flowering, fruiting, seed

dispersal and germination. Flowering is a phenological event that plays a critical role in

reproductive success (e.g. Giménez-Benavides 2007, Rathcke & Lacey 1985). Because

reproduction is one of the key processes that influences the health and success of plant

populations, understanding controls on flowering phenology and associated plant

characteristics is essential for effective conservation and management of rare, endemic,

and endangered species (e.g. Kaye 1999, Lara-Romero et al., 2014, Walck et al., 1999).

Flowering phenology can be particularly sensitive to changes in climate

(Borchert, 1983; Inouye, 2008; Pfeifer et al., 2006), especially in water-limited

environments (Bowers, 2007; Crimmins et al., 2010; Liancourt et al., 2012). In water-

limited environments, vegetation is particularly responsive to precipitation pulses that

deliver moisture to the soil (Holmgren et al., 2006; Huxman et al., 2004; Schwinning et

al., 2004; Schwinning & Sala, 2004). In most semiarid ecosystems, these strongly

seasonal precipitation pulses are characterized by brief, sometimes intense, rainfall

events, segregated by periods of drought (Cable & Huxman, 2004). The primary abiotic

factor affecting flowering phenology in water-limited ecosystems has been shown to be

the dynamic soil water availability associated with these precipitation pulses (Borchert

1994, Borchert et al. 2004, Bowers & Dimmitt 1994).

Despite providing essential resources for a numerous insect and animal species

within water-limited desert ecosystems (e.g. Fleming & Holland 1998, Grant et al. 1979,

76 | P a g e

Valiente-Banuet et al. 1996), cacti and other succulents are underrepresented in studies of

precipitation pulse effects on phenological activity. Cactus phenology may be relatively

independent of pulse-dependent soil moisture dynamics because they are able to store

water in their tissues (Pavón & Briones, 2001). Alternatively, this stored moisture could

provide a means to regulate reproductive phenological activity such as flowering and fruit

production. In some cactus species, increases in moisture has been associated with

improved reproductive phenology (Bowers, 1996; De La Barrera & Nobel, 2004),

whereas other cactus species appear to be insensitive to or negatively impacted by

increases in moisture (Petit, 2001; Ruiz et al., 2000). Overall, research identifying

climatic controls on cactus phenology is scarce (Bustamante & Búrquez, 2008), and this

is especially true for rare and endangered cactus species.

The Pima Pineapple Cactus (Coryphantha scheeri var. robustispina, hereafter C.

scheeri), is an endangered species inhabiting a limited region of the southwestern United

States restricted to elevations between 700 m and 2000 m with slopes less than 10%

(Roller, 1996; Schmalzel et al., 2004; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2007). These

populations are all located in Santa Cruz and Altar Valleys of Arizona with a small

region within Sonora, Mexico (Baker, 2004; McDonald & McPherson, 2005; Roller,

1996; Schmalzel et al., 2004). C. scheeri is a small, hemispherical cactus, with nodes

(also referred to as “tubercles”) rather than ribs that are characteristic of many other

cactus species (Roller, 1996; Schmalzel et al., 2004; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,

2007). Because of the limited range and the difficulty in locating individuals, C. scheeri

research is limited, resulting in vague management options. Understanding the controls

on phenological activity for this species is critically important because current

77 | P a g e

populations are at risk from mining and expanding anthropogenic activities that degrade

the habitat currently recorded and restrict new growth (Sayre, 2005; U.S. Depertment of

Interior, 2001; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2007).

The objective of our study was to identify ecohydrological controls on flowering

phenology and associated plant characteristics of the endangered C. scheeri. We focused

on a relatively healthy and dense population located at the northern limit of the C.

scheeri range on United States Air Force Plant 44. Over a two year study period (2013

and 2014), we used this dense population to quantify the temporal dynamics of flowering

phenology and link these dynamics to climate variables. We examined the relationships

between other abiotic factors such as soil texture, infiltration, and patterns of solar

radiation associated with C. scheeri characteristics, including size, number of nodes, and

pup count.

2.0 Methods

2.1 Site Description

The study site was located at the 567 hectare Air Force Plant 44 (AFP44),

approximately 13 km south of Tucson, Arizona. According to a 2010 survey, the AFP44

property hosts a relatively dense population of 308 C. scheeri (alive and dead) (Harrison

Environmental Report, 2010). The C. scheeri population at AFP44 is at the northern

boundary of the population range (Figure 1). AFP44 and the surrounding area is

predominantly industrial with Tucson International Airport residing to the north and east,

and undeveloped land owned by the Tohono O’odham Nation and private property

owners to the south and west. The landscape is dominated by creosotebush with patches

of mesquite, cholla, and barrel cacti (Harris Environmental Report, 2010). AFP44 is

78 | P a g e

dominated by sandy loam soils with variation is evident across the site. Mean annual

temperatures range from 13.2oC - 28.4°C and, based on 33 years of data, AFP44 receives

294 mm of annual precipitation (http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/twc/climate/tus.php) with over

half falling between July and September (http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/twc/climate/tus.php).

Using location data from the Arizona Heritage Data Management System

(http://www.azgfd.gov/w_c/edits/species_concern.shtml; AHDMS), a map of C. scheeri

within the study areas was generated in ArcMap v10.2 (Figure 1). Using this map, at

AFP44, three study sites (AFP44 1, 2 and 3) were randomly selected and also had to meet

the following minimum criteria: (1) three or more C. scheeri could be identified together

within a 5 m2 area, and (2) the site had to be greater than five meters from any paved

roads or structures. All data were carefully gathered at AFP44 with the guidance of U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) so as not to harm or disturb the endangered C.

scheeri plants.

2.2 Climate Data

Daily precipitation (precip, mm) and daily air temperature (temp, oC ) data were

obtained from the nearby Tucson International Airport (TIA) meteorological station

(http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo-web/search). The TIA property is adjacent to AFP44, and

the meteorological station is located near enough that measurements are representative of

conditions at the three AFP44 sites.

Using the TIA air temperature data, growing degree days (GDDs), a measure of

heat accumulation traditionally used by horticulturalists, were calculated as:

𝐺𝐷𝐷 = 𝑇𝑚𝑎𝑥 + 𝑇𝑚𝑖𝑛

2− 𝑇𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒

79 | P a g e

where Tmax and Tmin are the maximum and minimum daily temperatures in oC respectively

and Tbase is a species-specific base temperature, which for C. scheeri we assumed to be

10oC, as assumed for other plant species (Mix et al., 2012). Traditionally GDD is

calculated as an accumulation of heat by summing of all of the preceding GDD for each

day for that calendar year. In our study, we began the accumulation of heat at the start of

the water year (October 1) as opposed to the start of the calendar year (January 1).

2.3 Soil Moisture Data

In both years, soil moisture measurements were made daily at AFP44 from June

into September to capture the moisture conditions both before and throughout the

flowering season using a handheld Fieldscout TDR soil moisture probe (Spectrum

Technologies, Aurora, IL). By inserting the 12 cm probe vertically into the ground, soil

moisture measurements reflected an averaged value for the top 12 cm of soil. At each

individual C. scheeri, four soil moisture measurements were made at a 45° offset from

the cardinal directions (NW, SW, SE and NE; Figure 2). These measurements were made

1 m away from the C. scheeri to prevent the probe from damaging any C. scheeri roots.

Daily average soil moisture at AFP44 was calculated by first averaging all four

measurements made at each individual C. scheeri, then averaging those averages for each

of the three individuals at each site, and finally averaging together the values for each of

the three sites.

2.4 Phenological Data

Daily visual observations of buds and flowering events were made from June into

September for both years. Additionally, Moultrie I60 game cameras (Moultrie, Calera,

AL) were installed at each of the three AFP44 sites. These cameras were programmed to

80 | P a g e

take hourly photos to capture the phenological activity of the three C. scheeri at each site

and the surrounding vegetation. Each photo is stamped with barometric pressure,

temperature, and time. Memory cards were switched out every 30 – 60 days, and batteries

were changed every 120 – 150 days.

2.5 Other Abiotic Data

Measurements of infiltration rates were made around each individual in each of

the cardinal directions (N, S, E, and W; Figure 2). For each infiltration measurement, a 15

cm-diameter ring infiltrometer was filled with water to a height of 7 cm and allowed to

infiltrate into the soil. Infiltration rates were calculated by using the total time necessary

for the entire 638.5 mL to infiltrate into the soil. Infiltration measurements were made 1

m away from each C. scheeri plant under the guidance of USFWS so as to protect the C.

scheeri root structure from any potential damage by the infiltrometer. These

measurements were obtained once during the dry season within the two-year study

period. An average infiltration was calculated for each C. scheeri plant by averaging all

four measurements made at each individual C. scheeri.

A 5-cm diameter soil core was extracted from the upper 10 cm, located 1 m south

of each C. scheeri plant (9 total; Figure 2). Each soil sample was sieved to remove any

gravel > 2 cm in diameter. The remaining soil was analyzed for soil texture via Particle

Size Analysis by the Center for Environmental Physics and Mineralogy (CEPM) lab at

the University of Arizona.

Direct Site Factor (DSF) is an estimate of potential incoming solar radiation for a

cloudless year that ranges from 0.0 to 1.0, where a value of 1.0 indicates complete

exposure to incoming solar radiation and 0.0 indicates complete shading (Rich, 1989;

81 | P a g e

Rich et al., 1999). The fractional reductions are determined by nearby vegetation

obstructions, as well as topographical effects (the latter are usually relatively small unless

in close proximity to tall topographic features). In our study, we derived DSF using

images taken with a Nikon Coolpix camera instrumented with a fish-eye lens to capture a

full 180° image directly south of each C. scheeri plant (Figure 2). We took images at each

C. scheeri plant (9 total) using the fish-eye lens either at dawn or dusk when there was

still daylight but when the sun was not in the sky to avoid the sun appearing in the photo.

The camera was placed on a small bean bag to level the camera and oriented with a

marker to indicate North in the photo. The image height was at approximately 25 cm

above the ground surface. The photographer was positioned on the north side of each C.

scheeri plant so as not to shade the C. scheeri plant in any way. Each image was

processed in Delta-T Devices HemiView v. 2.1 software to adjust the contrast so that the

sky is white and all other objects which would create shade are black. DSF is the percent

of the image that is white (open). We took these images once at each C. scheeri plant in

the two-year study period, which, based on the path of the sun in the sky at that location,

yields an annual value of DSF.

2.6 C. scheeri Plant Physical Characteristics

The height and diameter of each individual C. scheeri was measured with a

measuring tape; for circumference, a string was used to measure around the C. scheeri

between the spines. Height and diameter were multiplied together to calculate a C.

scheeri size; this size was normalized by dividing by the largest size in our dataset.

Additionally, the nodes on each individual C. scheeri were counted, as well as the

number of pups. Number of nodes and number of pups were also normalized by dividing

82 | P a g e

by the largest number of nodes and largest number of pups in our dataset. C. scheeri were

classified as clusters if they had multiple heads and many more pups than a typical C.

scheeri. The height, diameter, and circumference of the entire cluster were measured,

though nodes were only counted on the C. scheeri heads, excluding the pups.

3.0 Results

3.1 Climate

Throughout the study period, temperature ranged from approximately -10°C in

the winter to 40°C in the summer. In both years, temperature increased in mid-late spring

(~DOY 100) until mid-summer (~DOY 180), when temperatures leveled off after the

summer wet season began (Figure 3a, b). Average temperature for during the warmer half

of the year (here designated as April 1 – September 7) was 28oC for both 2013 and 2014

(www.ncdc.noaa.gov). In both 2013 and 2014, GDD increased relatively steadily each

year, with a slight inflection occurring between May 20 and June 9 (Figure 3c, d).

Winter precipitation was greater in 2013 – 2014 (93 mm; Table 1) than in 2012 –

2013 (73 mm; Table 1). This difference between years was further amplified in total

water year precipitation (248 mm in 2014 versus 170 mm in 2013) due in part to

contributions from a late summer hurricane in 2014. Within the warmer half of the year,

precipitation was sparse prior to the wet season in both years, which began around July 1

(Figure 3e, f). Summer 2013 received fewer large (> 10 mm) storms than summer 2014

(Figure 3e, f).

3.2 Soil Moisture

Prior to the wet season (measured in 2014 only, Figure 3f), soil moisture (upper

12 cm) was low. Soil moisture responded rapidly to precipitation events, reflected in

83 | P a g e

increased water content in same-day measurements, when feasible. Subsequently, soils

dried rapidly, progressing to background soil moisture levels unless altered by additional

precipitation within only a couple of days (Figure 3e, f). Temporal variation in soil

moisture was most influenced by a few large events, which generally yielded longer

subsequent intervals of above-background soil moisture (Figure 3e, f).

3.3 Flowering Phenology

Bud formation (observed only in 2014) tended to be synchronous across plants.

The initial bud event (5 of 9 plants) occurred on single day (June 10; Table 1), with three

of the remaining four plants budding within the next 22 days. This initial bud event was

associated with an inflection point in GDD while temperature was increasing (Figure 3b,

d) and was prior to the onset of the wet season (Figure 3f). For this initial bud event,

GDD reached 2858 and water year precipitation accumulated to 93 mm (Table 1).

Flowering resulting from this bud event occurred on July 11 (8 of 8 budded plants; Table

1), two days following a large 9 mm precipitation event. A second synchronous bud event

(7 of 9 plants; July 15) occurred during a large (14 mm) precipitation event. The majority

of the flowering resulting from this second bud event occurring only five days later (6 of

7 budded plants; July 20; Table 1); the final budded plant flowering the next day (July

21). Three days after the second flowering event, a third bud event occurred (4 of 9

plants; July 23) with no associated precipitation within eight days. Flowering resulting

from this third bud event occurred on August 6 (4 of 4 budded plants), five days

following a large 11 mm precipitation event.

Flowering events (observed in both years) occurred in mid-summer after onset of

the wet season (Figure 3e, f; Table 1). In both years, the first flowering event occurred

84 | P a g e

after the first large (>10 mm) event. Flowering events tended to occur within two to six

days of precipitation and peak soil moisture (Figure 3e, f), usually after events larger than

10 mm (an exception was the August 11, 2013 flowering event following a 4 mm

precipitation event). Consequently, flowering generally occurred while soil moisture was

above baseline levels (Figure 3e, f). No clear relationship was observed between

flowering and temperature or GDD. Each individual bud flowered for only one day.

Some plants had a single lagging flower that opened one or two days after the flowering

date of other buds on that same individual. Duration between initial and final flowering

events was 30 to 40 days for both years, within which up to four unique flowering events

occurred per individual cactus.

3.4 C. scheeri Plant Physical Characteristics

The three C. scheeri plant physical characteristics—size, number of nodes, and

number of pups—all exhibited skewed frequency distributions with many more

individuals in the smallest size class of each and few individuals being in the largest class

(Figure 4). C. scheeri at our study site ranged from 12.9 – 28.7cm tall and 10.5 – 45.0 cm

diameter. Node count ranged from 47 to 462 nodes. For non-cluster C. scheeri

individuals, number of pups ranged from two individual C. scheeri having no pups, to

five individual C. scheeri having between one and ten pups. The smaller of the two C.

scheeri clusters had 18 pups and the largest had 33 pups.

3.5 Abiotic Factors Influencing C. scheeri Plant Physical Characteristics

C. scheeri individuals spanned a range of the three plant physical characteristics

(size, # of nodes, and # of pups) for three abiotic factors: two soil related metrics

85 | P a g e

(infiltration rate and % sand) and a radiation input metric (fraction of potential incoming

solar radiation at a location; DSF).

Both size and node count appear to be related to infiltration, with higher

infiltration rates associated with both smaller and larger individuals, creating a concave-

up relationship (Figure 5a, d). Maximum pup count appears to decrease with infiltration

rate (Figure 5g). At the scale of an individual (for which there were 4 measurements of

infiltration surrounding it; Figure 2), there was little variation in infiltration (0.017 SD)

although the point most downslope of any individual C. scheeri plant tended to exhibit

the slowest rates (personal observation). C. scheeri individuals spanned soil texture types,

but were mostly found on sandy loam (7 sites) or sandy clay loam (2 sites). Sand ranged

from 54-76% across individual C. scheeri locations; associated silt and clay composition

each ranged from approximately 10-30%. Sand composition did not appear to relate to

any of the three size metrics (Figure 5b, e, h). Fraction of potential solar radiation input

near the ground (DSF) was relatively high for all sites ranging from 0.95 to 0.99 (Figure

5c, f, i).

When each of the three the size metrics are aggregated into three size categories,

additional patterns were suggested. There is not a distinct trend with DSF but higher

infiltration rates (Figure 6a, b, c) and sand content (Figure 6d, e, f) appear to be

associated with larger individuals, more nodes, and high pup counts.

4.0 Discussion

4.1 Ecohydrological Controls on C. scheeri Flowering Phenology

The appearance of the first bud of the season in 2014 was associated with an

inflection in the accumulation of GDDs (Figure 3d). Though this observation was only

86 | P a g e

made during a single year, the onset of budding and thus the initiation of the flowering

season for C. scheeri appears to be associated with an accumulation of energy.

Conversely, based on the observations of our two-year study, C. scheeri flowering events

do not appear to be associated with energy or temperature triggers (Figure 3a, b, d).

Instead, flowering events appear to have a moisture trigger associated with large rainfall

events and their associated peak in soil moisture (Figure 3e, f). This is not a surprise since

previous research has shown that C. scheeri flower in response to the monsoon

precipitation pulses (Baker, 2004; McDonald & McPherson, 2005; Roller, 1996;

Schmalzel et al., 2004). However, our research specifically shows that while repeat bud

events tend to occur soon after the C. scheeri plants recover from their last flowering

event, C. scheeri appear to wait to flower until specific moisture conditions are met.

These conditions seem to occur two to six days following a large (> 10 mm) precipitation

event and associated peak in soil moisture. While the flowering phenology of some

cactus species has been shown to be associated with the onset of increasing spring

temperatures (Bustamante & Búrquez, 2008; Crimmins et al., 2010; Fleming et al., 2001),

our results are consistent with other cactus species that flower in the summer (Crimmins

et al., 2011). Notably, our study indicates cactus flowering occurring within a fixed

window of days following a precipitation event that exceeded a minimum threshold (10

mm). This relationship has important implications for climate change impacts. For

reproductive success of C. scheeri precipitation events will need to include appropriately

timed, larger events (generally >10 mm). Current projections indicate precipitation will

be reduced in the future (Garfin et al., 2013), but information on the distribution and

timing of event sizes remains uncertain.

87 | P a g e

4.2 Ecohydrological Controls on Plant Physical Characteristics

In this study, we examined the associations between three physical plant

characteristics—plant size, number of nodes, and number of pups—and three abiotic

factors—infiltration, %sand, and potential incoming solar radiation. All C. scheeri

individuals were located on loam soils, generally sandy. Capillary forces tend to be the

major contributor to matric potential in these coarser-grained soils, as opposed to finer-

textured soils where adsorptive surface forces dominate. These types of soils tend to have

low runoff potential and high infiltration rates even when thoroughly wetted (NRCS

Hydrologic Soil Groups). Interestingly, for our study populations higher infiltration rates

and sandier soils tend to be associated with smaller cactus and with less nodes (Figure 6).

While counterintuitive, this may be a result of quick draining soils decreasing the amount

of plant available moisture for C. scheeri, as reported in studies with other plant species

(Borchert et al. 2004).

For all C. scheeri locations, the fraction of potential solar radiation input near the

ground (DSF) was relatively high (> 0.95; Figure 5c, f, i). At AFP44, creosotebush and

cholla are the dominant plant species, with bare ground between cactus and shrubs

(Harris Environmental Report, 2010). We suspect that because of the lack of grass cover

at AFP44, C. scheeri have more full sun exposure and reduced competition for shallow

soil moisture resources. This is consistent with other studies in water-limited areas where

cactus are competing with other species for limited water resources (Coffin & Lauenroth,

1990).

88 | P a g e

4.3 Implications for Management and Conservation Practices

Although previous research has suggested that precipitation pulses trigger

responses in C. scheeri (McDonald & McPherson, 2005; Roller, 1996), there is still a

paucity of knowledge related to the size and distribution of the pulse needed to trigger

these responses. This leaves species managers without a sufficient understanding of the

conditions C. scheeri require for reproductive success. Our study suggests that C. scheeri

are larger on loamy soils with some sand, perhaps because infiltration can occur but not

too quickly. Soil texture may also be important in the context of its effect on evaporation

loss. Additionally, we show that individuals in this high-density population of C. scheeri

were located in sparsely vegetated and sunny locations, especially those with minimal

competition for surface water resources. With this knowledge, locations that host known

C. scheeri with these abiotic conditions could be preferentially protected to maximize

successful conservation. For reproductive success, our study also suggests that C. scheeri

is dependent on large (> 10 mm) precipitation events that occur in the warm summer

season. With this knowledge, managers could focus on conservation strategies associated

with harvesting seeds (Fox & Nino-Murcia, 2005) in years with good precipitation.

Additionally, this understanding could be used to focus on relocation management

strategies (Bouzat et al., 2008; Massei et al., 2010) in which individuals could be

relocated to areas with ideal abiotic conditions which may be converting to a

precipitation regime conducive to C. scheeri establishment.

We note that the results of this study are based on only 1 year of bud data and two

years of flowering data, both within one population of C. scheeri within the known size

and distribution of this species. Data collected here present C. scheeri response to climate

89 | P a g e

events within the study period and are not indicative of species response to extreme

climate events. Furthermore, results describing flowering phenology and individual site

characteristics presented here do not indicate the health or distribution of the overall

population across its range.

5.0 Conclusions

Here we identify ecohydrological controls on the flowering phenology and

associated plant physical characteristics of an endangered cactus species inhabiting a

limited region of the Sonoran Desert. We used a dense population to quantify the

temporal dynamics of flowering phenology and link these dynamics to climate variables

and examine the relationships between abiotic conditions such as soil texture and patterns

of solar radiation and the reproductive plant characteristics such as size and number of

nodes. We show that while bud events appear to be unassociated with moisture,

flowering events are preceded by large rainfall events and their associated peaks in soil

moisture. We also show that C. scheeri prefer loamy soils, with some sand so that

infiltration can occur but not too quickly and that C. scheeri prefer sparse sunny

locations, especially those with minimal competition for surface water resources. With

this knowledge, locations that host known C. scheeri with these ecohydrological controls

should be preferentially protected to maximize successful conservation.

Acknowledgements

Support for this project was provided in part by the U.S. Air Force Life Cycle

Management Center and Raytheon Company Missile Systems Environmental, Health,

Safety, and Sustainability Department. Soil moisture data collection was made possible

thanks to Dr. Michael Crimmins, and soil particle size analysis measurements were

90 | P a g e

greatly aided by Dr. Prakash Dhakal and the CEPM lab (Center for Environmental

Physics and Mineralogy). Special thanks to Thomas Hafkemeyer, Dianna Holgate, Katie

Merems, and Heather Spitzer for additional assistance for the field campaign. We would

like to acknowledge and thank the members of the Papuga and Breshears labs at the

University of Arizona, School of Natural Resources and the Environment for their

insights and support. A special thanks to Julie Crawford with U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service and Sabra Tonn with the Arizona Game and Fish Department for assistance in

obtaining PPC spatial location data.

91 | P a g e

References

Baker, M. 2004. Phenetic analysis of Coryphantha, section Robustispina (cactaceae),

part 1: stem characters.U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service report (pp. 1–21). Tempe,

Arizona

Borchert, R. 1983. Phenology and control of flowering in tropical trees. Biotropica, 15,

81–89. doi:10.2307/2387949

Borchert, R. 1994. Induction of rehydration and bud break by irrigation or rain in

deciduous trees of a tropical dry forest in costa-rica. Trees-Structure and Function,

8, 198–204. doi:10.1007/BF00196847

Borchert, R., Meyer, S. A., Felger, R. S., & Porter-Bolland, L. 2004. Environmental

control of flowering periodicity in Costa Rican and Mexican tropical dry forests.

Global Ecology and Biogeography, 13, 409–425. doi:10.1111/j.1466-

822X.2004.00111.x

Bouzat, J. L., Johnson, J. A., Toepfer, J. E., Simpson, S. A, Esker, T. L., & Westemeier,

R. L. 2008. Beyond the beneficial effects of translocations as an effective tool for

the genetic restoration of isolated populations. Conservation Genetics, 10(1), 191–

201. doi:10.1007/s10592-008-9547-8

Bowers, J. E. 1996. More flowers or new cladodes? environmental correlates and

biological consequences of sexual reproduction in a Sonoran Desert prickly pear

cactus, Opuntia engelmannii. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club, 123, 34–40.

Bowers, J. E. 2007. Has climatic warming altered spring flowering date of sonoran desert

shrubs? The Southwestern Naturalist, 52(3), 347–355.

Bowers, J. E., & Dimmitt, M. A. 1994. Flowering phenology of six woody plants in the

northern sonoran desert. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club, 121(3), 215–229.

Bustamante, E., & Búrquez, A. 2008. Effects of plant size and weather on the flowering

phenology of the organ pipe cactus (Stenocereus thurberi). Annals of Botany, 102,

1019–1030. doi:10.1093/aob/mcn194

Cable, J. M., & Huxman, T. E. 2004. Precipitation pulse size effects on Sonoran Desert

soil microbial crusts. Oecologia, 141(2), 317–24. doi:10.1007/s00442-003-1461-7

Coffin, D. P., & Lauenroth, W. K. 1990. A gap dynamics simulation model of succession

in semiarid grassland. Ecological Modelling, 49, 229–266.

92 | P a g e

Crimmins, T. M., Crimmins, M. A, & Bertelsen, C. D. 2011. Onset of summer flowering

in a “Sky Island” is driven by monsoon moisture. The New Phytologist, 191(2),

468–79. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.2011.03705.x

Crimmins, T. M., Crimmins, M. A., & David Bertelsen, C. 2010. Complex responses to

climate drivers in onset of spring flowering across a semi-arid elevation gradient.

Journal of Ecology, 98, 1042–1051. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2745.2010.01696.x

De La Barrera, E., & Nobel, P. S. 2004. Carbon and water relations for developing fruits

of Opuntia ficus-indica (L.) Miller, including effects of drought and gibberellic acid.

Journal of Experimental Botany, 55, 719–729. doi:10.1093/jxb/erh084

Fleming, T. H., & Holland, J. N. 1998. The evolution of obligate pollination mutualisms:

Senita cactus and senita moth. Oecologia, 114, 368–375.

doi:10.1007/s004420050459

Fox, J., & Nino-Murcia, A. 2005. Status of species conservation banking in the united

states. Conservation biology, 19(4), 996–1007. doi:10.1111/j.1523-

1739.2005.00231.x

Garfin, G., Jardine, A., Merideth, R., Black, M., & LeRoy, S. 2013. Assessment of

Climate Change in the Southwest United States. (G. Garfin, A. Jardine, R. Merideth,

M. Black, & S. LeRoy, Eds.). Washington, DC: Island Press/Center for Resource

Economics. doi:10.5822/978-1-61091-484-0

Giménez-Benavides, L., Escudero, A., & Iriondo, J. M. 2007. Reproductive limits of a

late-flowering high-mountain Mediterranean plant along an elevational climate

gradient. New Phytologist, 173, 367–382. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.2006.01932.x

Grant, V., Grant, K. A., & Hurd, P. D. 1979. Pollination of Opuntia lindheimeri and

related species. Plant Systematics and Evolution, 132, 313–320.

doi:10.1007/BF00982393

Holmgren, M., Stapp, P., Dickman, C. R., Gracia, C., Graham, S., Gutiérrez, J. R., Hice,

C., Jaksic, F,. Kelt, D. A., Letnic, M., Lima, M., Lopez, B. C., Meserve, P. L.,

Milstead, W. B., Polis, G. A., Previtali, M. A., Richter, M., Sabate, S., & Squeo, F.

A. 2006. Extreme climatic events shape arid and semiarid ecosystems. Frontiers in

Ecology and the Environment, 4(2), 87–95.

Huxman, T. E., Cable, J. M., Ignace, D. D., Eilts, J. A., English, N. B., Weltzin, J., &

Williams, D. G. 2004. Response of net ecosystem gas exchange to a simulated

precipitation pulse in a semi-arid grassland: the role of native versus non-native

grasses and soil texture. Oecologia, 141(2), 295–305. doi:10.1007/s00442-003-

1389-y

93 | P a g e

Inouye, D. W. 2008. Effects of climate change on phenology, frost damage, and floral

abundance of montane wildflowers. Ecology, 89, 353–362. doi:10.1890/06-2128.1

Kaye, T. N. 1999. From flowering to dispersal: Reproductive ecology of an endemic

plant, Astragalus australis var. olympicus (Fabaceae). American Journal of Botany,

86, 1248–1256. doi:10.2307/2656772

Lara-Romero, C., García-Camacho, R., Escudero, A., & Iriondo, J. M. 2014. Genetic

variation in flowering phenology and reproductive performance in a Mediterranean

high-mountain specialist, Armeria caespitosa (Plumbaginaceae). Botanical Journal

of the Linnean Society, 176(3), 384–395. doi:10.1111/boj.12208

Liancourt, P., Spence, L. A., Boldgiv, B., Lkhagva, A., Helliker, B. R., Casper, B. B., &

Petraitis, P. S. 2012. Vulnerability of the northern Mongolian steppe to climate

change: insights from flower production and phenology. Ecology, 93, 815–824.

doi:10.1890/11-1003.1

Massei, G., Quy, R. J., Gurney, J., & Cowan, D. P. 2010. Can translocations be used to

mitigate humanwildlife conflicts? Wildlife Research, 37, 428–439.

doi:10.1071/WR08179

McDonald, C., & McPherson, G. 2005. Pollination of pima pineapple cactus

(Coryphantha scheeri var. robustispina): does pollen flow limit abundance of this

endangered species. USDA Forest Service Proceedings, 529–532.

Mix, K., Lopes, V. L., & Rast, W. 2012. Growing season expansion and related changes

in monthly temperature and growing degree days in the Inter-Montane Desert of the

San Luis Valley, Colorado. Climate Change, 114, 723-744 doi 10.1007/s10584-012-

0448-y.

Morisette, J. T., Richardson, A. D., Knapp, A. K., Fisher, J. I., Graham, E. A.,

Abatzoglou, J., Wilson, B. E., Breshears, D. D., Henebry, g. M., Hanes, J. M., &

Liang, L. 2009. Tracking the rhythm of the seasons in the face of global change:

Phenological research in the 21 st century. Frontiers in Ecology and the

Environment.7(5), 253-260 doi:10.1890/070217

Pavón, N. P., & Briones, O. 2001. Phenological patterns of nine perennial plants in an

intertropical semi-arid Mexican scrub. Journal of Arid Environments, 49, 265–277.

doi:10.1006/jare.2000.0786

Petit, S. 2001. The reproductive phenology of three sympatric species of columnar cacti

on Curaçao. Journal of Arid Environments, 49, 521–531.

doi:10.1006/jare.2001.0801

94 | P a g e

Pfeifer, M., Heinrich, W., & Jetschke, G. 2006. Climate, size and flowering history

determine flowering pattern of an orchid. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society,

151, 511–526. doi:10.1111/j.1095-8339.2006.00539.x

Rathcke, B., & Lacey, E. P. 1985. Phenological patterns of terrestrial plants. Annual

Review of Ecology and Systematics, 16(1), 179–214.

doi:10.1146/annurev.es.16.110185.001143

Rich P. M. (1989) A Manual for Analysis of Hemispherical Canopy Photography. Los

Alamos National Laboratory Report LA-11733-M. Los Alamos National

Laboratory, Los Alamos.

Rich P. M.,Wood J., Vieglais D. A., Burek K. & Webb N. (1999) Guide to Hemiview:

Software for Analysis of Hemispherical Photography. Delta-T Devices, Cambridge.

Roller, P. 1996. Distribution, growth, and reproduction of Pima pineapple cactus

(Coryphantha scheeri Kuntz var robustispina Schott). University of Arizona.

Ruiz, A., Santos, M., Cavelier, J., & Soriano, P. J. 2000. Phenological study of Cactaceae

in the dry enclave of Tatacoa, Colombia. Biotropica, 32, 397–407.

Sayre, N. F. 2005. Interacting effects of landownership, land use, and endangered species

on conservation of Southwestern U. S. Rangelands. Conservation Biology, 19(3),

783–792.

Schmalzel, R. J., Nixon, R. T., Best, A. L., & Jr, J. A. T. 2004. Morphometric variation in

Coryphantha robustispina (Cactaceae). Systematic Botany, 29(3), 553–568.

Schwinning, S., & Sala, O. E. 2004. Hierarchy of responses to resource pulses in arid and

semi-arid ecosystems. Oecologia, 141(2), 211–20. doi:10.1007/s00442-004-1520-8

Schwinning, S., Sala, O. E., Loik, M. E., & Ehleringer, J. R. 2004. Thresholds, memory,

and seasonality: understanding pulse dynamics in arid/semi-arid ecosystems.

Oecologia, 141(2), 191–3. doi:10.1007/s00442-004-1683-3

U.S. Depertment of Interior. 2001. United States Department of the Interior, U. S. Fish

and Wildlife Service AESO/SE 2-21-01-F-271 (pp. 1–16). Phoenix, Arizona.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. U . S . Fish & Wildlife Service 5-Year Review

Determination Pima Pineapple Cactus. 70 FR 5460. Region 2 Regional Office (pp.

1–17).

Valiente-Banuet, A., Arizmendi, M. D. C., Rojas-Martínez, A., & Domínguez-Canseco,

L. 1996. Ecological relationships between columnar cacti and nectar-feeding bats in

Mexico. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 12, 103. doi:10.1017/S0266467400009330

95 | P a g e

Walck, J. L., Baskin, J. M., & Baskin, C. C. 1999. Ecology of the endangered species

Solidago shortii. VII. Survivorship and flowering, and comparison with common,

geographically-widespread Solidago species. Journal of the Torrey Botanical

Society, 126, 124–132. doi:10.2307/2997288

96 | P a g e

List of Figures:

Figure 1: C. scheeri habitat range with AFP44 highlighted. Distribution of C. scheeri is

presented in dark grey and study site is indicated by black area………………………...99

Figure 2: Diagram indicating the measurement design for field data collected.

Measurements depicted here include volumetric water content, infiltration, soil texture

type, and hemispherical photos. Per guidance from Arizona Fish and Wildlife, invasive

measurements were made 1m away from the C. scheeri so as not to risk damaging the

root structure……………………………………………………………………………100

Figure 3: Daily measurements of temperature (a, b), growing degree days (GDD) (c, d),

precipitation and volumetric water content (e, f) are presented here in conjunction with

phenological events (e.g. bud formation, square, and bloom events, diamonds) for both

study years……………………………………………………………………………...101

Figure 4: A histogram of C. scheeri size indicators: size (a), node count (b), and pup

count (c) frequencies……………………………………………………………………102

Figure 5: Physical C. scheeri habitat characteristics as they related to C. scheeri size

indicators. Site characteristics include infiltration rate (a, d, g), % sand as an indicator of

soil texture type (b, e, h), and Direct Site Factor (DSF) for fraction of potential annual

radiation input (c, f, i). Size indicators are normalized for context, and include size (a, b,

c), node count (d, e, f), and pup count (g, h, i)………………………………………….103

Figure 6: C. scheeri histograms of grouped data for infiltration (a, b c), % sand (d, e, f),

and Direct Site Factor (DSF) for fraction of potential annual radiation input (g, h, i); each

as related to size (a, d, g), node count (b, e, h), and pup count (c, f, i). Different letters

above bars indicate significant differences within a given panel; significance was

97 | P a g e

determined by the Friedman’s Rank Test, and is set at P<0.10. Size is determined to be

effected by infiltration (a) and %sand (d) at p=0.096. Node count is determined to be

effected by infiltration (b) and %sand (e) at p=0.079. Other trends are determined to be

non-significant………………………………………………………………………….105

98 | P a g e

List of Tables:

Table 1: Data describing chronology of climatic events and phenological response which

enhances the time series data presented.

99 | P a g e

Figure 1: C. scheeri habitat range with AFP44 highlighted. Distribution of C. scheeri is

presented in dark grey and study site is indicated by black area.

100 | P a g e

Figure 2: Diagram indicating the measurement design for field data collected.

Measurements depicted here include volumetric water content, infiltration, soil texture

type, and hemispherical photos. Per guidance from Arizona Fish and Wildlife, invasive

measurements were made 1m away from the C. scheeri so as not to risk damaging the

root structure.

1m

1m

Soil Moisture

Soil Core

Infiltration

Hemi photo

45°

N

W

S

E

Soil core

101 | P a g e

Figure 3: Daily measurements of temperature (a, b), growing degree days (GDD) (c, d),

precipitation and volumetric water content (e, f) are presented here in conjunction with

phenological events (e.g. bud formation, square, and bloom events, diamonds) for both

study years.

102 | P a g e

Figure 4: A histogram of C. scheeri size indicators: size (a), node count (b), and pup

count (c) frequencies.

0-355 355-710 710-1065

5

10

AF

P44

Fre

quency

a.

Size (cm2)

0-160 160-320 320-480

b.

Nodes (#)0-15 15-30 30-45

c.

Pups (#)

103 | P a g e

Figure 5: Physical C. scheeri habitat characteristics as they related to C. scheeri size

indicators. Site characteristics include infiltration rate (a, d, g), % sand as an indicator of

soil texture type (b, e, h), and Direct Site Factor (DSF) for fraction of potential annual

radiation input (c, f, i). Size indicators are normalized for context, and include size (a, b,

c), node count (d, e, f), and pup count (g, h, i).

0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.0

a.

Norm

aliz

ed

Siz

e

0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.0

d.

Norm

aliz

ed

Node C

ount

.03 .04 .05 .06

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.0

g.

Norm

aliz

ed

Pup C

ount

Infiltration Rate (mm/s)

40 50 60 70 80

b.

40 50 60 70 80

e.

40 50 60 70 80

h.

%Sand

0.9 0.92 0.94 0.96 0.98

c.

0.9 0.92 0.94 0.96 0.98

f.

.90 .92 .94 .96 .98

i.

DSF

104 | P a g e

Figure 6: C. scheeri histograms of grouped data for infiltration (a, b c), % sand (d, e, f),

and Direct Site Factor (DSF) for fraction of potential annual radiation input (g, h, i); each

as related to size (a, d, g), node count (b, e, h), and pup count (c, f, i). Different letters

above bars indicate significant differences within a given panel; significance was

determined by the Friedman’s Rank Test, and is set at P<0.10. Size is determined to be

effected by infiltration (a) and %sand (d) at p=0.096. Node count is determined to be

effected by infiltration (b) and %sand (e) at p=0.079. Other trends are determined to be

non-significant.

1 2 3

0.02

0.04

0.06a.

a

b

Infiltra

tion (

mm

/s)

1 2 3

b.

a

b

1 2 3

c.

a

a

a

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

d.

a

b%S

and

e.

a

b

f.

aa

a

Small Med Large

0.90

0.92

0.94

0.96

0.98

1.00

g.a a

Size

DS

F

Low Med High

h.a a

Node Count

None Yes Cluster

i.a a a

Pups

105 | P a g e

Y2013 Y2014

# of unique bud/flower events 4/4 3/3

Date of 1st bud June 10

Date of 1st flower July 10 July 11

Water year GDD at 1st bud 2187

Water year GDD at 1st flower 2830 2858

Water year precip 1st bud 75 mm 93 mm

Water year precip 1st flower 100 mm 111 mm

Temp at 1st bud 32.5°C

Temp at 1st flower 30.3°C 31.4°C

Table 1: Data describing chronology of ecohydrological events and phenological

response which enhances the time series data presented.

106 | P a g e

APPENDIX C: SUPPLEMENTAL DATA FROM SANTA RITA EXPERIMENTAL

RANGE ON PLANT PHYISCAL CHARACTERISTICS AND ASSOCIATED

ABIOTIC CHARACTERISTICS

107 | P a g e

1.0 Methods

1.1 Site Description

The Santa Rita Experimental Range (SRER) is a large, multi-use area located

approximately 40 km south of Tucson, Arizona and covers about 21043 hectares (Figure

1). The area is used for camping, grazing, hunting, and has been a location for study and

experiments for over 100 years, managed initially by the U.S. Forest Service in 1902, and

transferring authority to the University of Arizona in 1987 (http://cals.arizona.edu/srer/).

Soil types and vegetation cover vary greatly within the SRER as a consequence of an

elevational gradient and a variety of different anthropogenic activities (e.g. grazing)

(http://cals.arizona.edu/srer/). Mean annual temperature at the SRER is 18.44°C

(McClaran & Wei, 2014) and based on 80 years of data, mean annual precipitation ranges

between 275 mm – 450 mm across the range (McClaran, 2010).

Using location data from the Arizona Heritage Data Management System

(http://www.azgfd.gov/w_c/edits/species_concern.shtml; AHDMS), maps of C. scheeri

within the study areas were generated in ArcMap v10.2 (Figure 1). Maps generated using

AHDMS data were used to identify locations of C. scheeri within the SRER. However,

because the small C. scheeri are very sparse within the SRER, individuals were difficult

to locate. In the end, our study made use of the randomly selected C. scheeri individuals

that could be successfully located within the SRER (11 total). All data were carefully

gathered with the guidance of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) so as not to harm

or disturb the endangered C. scheeri plants.

108 | P a g e

1.2 Abiotic Data

A 5-cm diameter soil core was extracted from the upper 10 cm, located 1 m south

of each C. scheeri plant (11 total). Each of these soil samples was sieved to remove any

gravel > 2 cm in diameter. The remaining soil was analyzed for soil texture via Particle

Size Analysis by the Center for Environmental Physics and Mineralogy (CEPM) lab at

the University of Arizona.

Direct Site Factor (DSF) is an estimate of potential incoming solar radiation for a

cloudless year that ranges from 0.0 to 1.0, where a value of 1.0 indicates complete

exposure to incoming solar radiation and 0.0 indicates complete shading (Rich, 1989;

Rich et al., 1999). The fractional reductions are determined by nearby vegetation

obstructions, as well as topographical effects (the latter are usually relatively small unless

in close proximity to tall topographic features). In our study, we derived DSF using

images taken with a Nikon Coolpix camera instrumented with a fish-eye lens to capture a

full 180° image directly south of each C. scheeri plant. We took images at each C.

scheeri plant (11 total) using the fish-eye lens either at dawn or dusk when there was still

daylight but when the sun was not in the sky to avoid the sun appearing in the photo. The

camera was placed on a small bean bag to level the camera and oriented with a marker to

indicate North in the photo. The image height was at approximately 25 cm above the

ground surface. The photographer was positioned on the north side of each C. scheeri

plant so as not to shade the C. scheeri plant in any way. Each image was processed in

Delta-T Devices HemiView v. 2.1 software to adjust the contrast so that the sky is white

and all other objects which would create shade are black. DSF is the percent of the image

that is white (open). We took these images once at each C. scheeri plant in the two-year

109 | P a g e

study period, which, based on the path of the sun in the sky at that location, yields an

annual value of DSF.

1.3 C. scheeri Plant Physical Characteristics

The height and diameter of each individual C. scheeri was measured with a

measuring tape; for circumference, a string was used to measure around the C. scheeri

between the spines. Height and diameter were multiplied together to calculate a C.

scheeri size; this size was normalized by dividing by the largest size in our dataset.

Additionally, the nodes on each individual C. scheeri were counted, as well as the

number of pups. Number of nodes and number of pups were also normalized by dividing

by the largest number of nodes and largest number of pups in our dataset, which included

data from Appendix B.

2.0 Results

2.1 C. scheeri Plant Physical Characteristics

The three C. scheeri plant physical characteristics—size, number of nodes, and

number of pups—all varied substantially among individuals (Figure 2) and exhibited

skewed frequency distributions with many more individuals in the smallest size class of

each and few individuals being in the largest class (Figure 3). C. scheeri at our study sites

ranged from 3.5 -12.0 cm tall and 6.3 -12.5 cm diameter. Node count ranged from 20 to

56 nodes. Number of pups ranged from five individual C. scheeri having no pups, to six

individual C. scheeri having between one and ten pups.

2.2 Abiotic Factors Influencing C. scheeri Plant Physical Characteristics

C. scheeri individuals spanned a range of the three plant physical characteristics

(size, # of nodes, and # of pups) for two abiotic factors: a soil metric (% sand) and a

110 | P a g e

radiation input metric (fraction of potential incoming solar radiation at a location; DSF).

C. scheeri individuals spanned soil texture types, but were mostly found on sandy loam

(6 sites) or sandy clay loam (4 sites), with one individual on clay loam. Sand ranged from

40-78% across individual C. scheeri locations; associated silt and clay composition each

ranged from approximately 10-30%. Sand composition did not appear to relate to any of

the three size metrics (Figure 4b, e, h). Fraction of potential solar radiation input near the

ground (DSF) was relatively high for all sites ranging from 0.90 to 0.99, with most >

0.95.

When each of the three the size metrics are aggregated into three size categories

relative to C. scheeri size values studied at another site (Appendix B), additional patterns

were suggested. Higher DSF values (Figure 4f) appear to be associated lack of pups.

There were not pronounced differences in size with % sand (Figure 4c).

111 | P a g e

References

McClaran, M.P., D.M. Browning, and C. Huang. 2010 Temporal dynamics and spatial

variability in desert grassland vegetation. In R.H. Webb, D.E. Boyer, and R.M.

Turner (eds.). Repeat Photography: Methods and Applications in the Natural

Sciences. Island Press. Pages 145-166.

McClaran, M. P., & Wei, H. Y. 2014. Recent drought phase in a 73-year record at two

spatial scales: implications for livestock production on rangelands in the

Southwestern United States. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 197, 40-51. doi:

10.1016/j.agformet.2014.06.004

Rich P. M. (1989) A Manual for Analysis of Hemispherical Canopy Photography. Los

Alamos National Laboratory Report LA-11733-M. Los Alamos National

Laboratory, Los Alamos.

Rich P. M.,Wood J., Vieglais D. A., Burek K. & Webb N. (1999) Guide to Hemiview:

Software for Analysis of Hemispherical Photography. Delta-T Devices, Cambridge.

112 | P a g e

List of Figures:

Figure 1: C. scheeri habitat range with SRER highlighted. Distribution of C. scheeri is

demonstrated in dark grey and study sites are indicated by black area………………...113

Figure 2: Physical C. scheeri habitat characteristics as they related to C. scheeri size

indicators. Site characteristics include % sand as an indicator of soil texture type (a, c, e),

and Direct Site Factor (DSF) for fraction of potential annual radiation input (b, d, f). Size

indicators are normalized for context, and include size (a, b), node count (c, d), and pup

count (e, f)………………………………………………………………………………114

Figure 3: A histogram of C. scheeri size indicators: size (a), node count (b), and pup

count (c) frequencies……………………………………………………………………115

Figure 4: C. scheeri histograms of grouped data for % sand (a, b, c), and Direct Site

Factor (DSF) for fraction of potential annual radiation input (d, e, f); each as related to

size (a, d), node count (b, e), and pup count (c, f). Different letters above bars indicate

significant differences within a given panel; significance was determined by the

Friedman’s Rank Test, and is set at P<0.10. DSF is determined to have a relationship

with pup count with a p-value of 0.054. Other trends are determined to be non-

significant……………………………………………………………………………….116

113 | P a g e

Figure 1: C. scheeri habitat range with SRER highlighted. Distribution of C. scheeri is

demonstrated in dark grey and study sites are indicated by black area.

114 | P a g e

Figure 2: Physical C. scheeri habitat characteristics as they related to C. scheeri size

indicators. Site characteristics include % sand as an indicator of soil texture type (a, c, e),

and Direct Site Factor (DSF) for fraction of potential annual radiation input (b, d, f). Size

indicators are normalized for context, and include size (a, b), node count (c, d), and pup

count (e, f).

40 50 60 70 80

0.25

0.50

a.N

orm

aliz

ed

Siz

e

40 50 60 70 80

0.25

0.50

c.

Norm

aliz

ed

Node C

ount

40 50 60 70 800

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

e.

%Sand

Norm

aliz

ed

Pup C

ount

0.9 0.92 0.94 0.96 0.98

b.

0.9 0.92 0.94 0.96 0.98

d.

.90 .92 .94 .96 .98

f.

DSF

115 | P a g e

Figure 3: A histogram of C. scheeri size indicators: size (a), node count (b), and pup

count (c) frequencies.

0-355 355-710 710-1065

5

10a.

SR

ER

Fre

quency

Size (cm2)

0-160 160-320 320-480

b.

Nodes (#)0-15 15-30 30-45

c.

Pups (#)

116 | P a g e

Figure 4: C. scheeri histograms of grouped data for % sand (a, b, c), and Direct Site

Factor (DSF) for fraction of potential annual radiation input (d, e, f); each as related to

size (a, d), node count (b, e), and pup count (c, f). Different letters above bars indicate

significant differences within a given panel; significance was determined by the

Friedman’s Rank Test, and is set at P<0.10. DSF is determined to have a relationship

with pup count with a p-value of 0.054. Other trends are determined to be non-

significant.

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

a.

%S

and

b.

c.

aa

Small Med Large

0.90

0.92

0.94

0.96

0.98

1.00d.

Size

DS

F

Low Med High

e.

Node Count

None Yes Cluster

f.a

b

Pups