Laserfiche WebLink
• zones of water accumulation, the sagebrush community surrounded the wet <br />meadow type. Sampling encompassed the range of variation present in the <br />wet meadow community. <br />3.8.1 Herbaceous Biomass <br />This community had the highest herbaceous biomass of an measured. On <br />ten clipped plots, average dry weight biomass was 345.7 ± 135.5 g/m3 <br />(Table WM.1). Due to differences in moisture availability biomass estimates <br />had a higher range of variation here than in the other community types, <br />standing crop ranged from 175-504 g/m=. The sedge-dominated areas had <br />highest biomass, those heavily dominated by rush had somewhat lower <br />biomass, and plots which had high percentages of grasses and forbs had <br />the lowest biomass. Overall, the two most abundant species were sedge <br />and rush, as they each contributed more than 30$ of the total standing <br />crop. <br />3.8.2 Herbaceous Cover <br />• Total vegetation cover was quite high in this community, as it averaged <br />78.0$ ± 13.9 (Table WM.2). Correspondingly, litter and bare ground <br />estimates were quite low, and averaged 15.0$ for litter and 7.0$• for bare <br />ground. Abundance of litter was high in the community, though the <br />measurement technique did not reflect this. Sedge, rush, and bluegrass <br />(Poa fendleriana) were by far the most abundant species in this com- <br />munity. No forbs were present in the wetter portions of the community; <br />they only occurred in the drier areas, as were sampled in transects four <br />and five. The forbs most often encountered were New Mexico Checker- <br />mallow (Sidalcea neomexicana), aster (Aster adscendens), and beauty <br />cinqueftoil (Potentilla pulcherrima). <br /> <br />