Astragalus desereticus

Barneby

Deseret Milkvetch

G1Critically Imperiled Found in 2 roadless areas NatureServe Explorer →
G1Critically ImperiledGlobal Rank
Very highThreat Impact
Identity
Unique IDELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.159222
Element CodePDFAB0F2S0
Record TypeSPECIES
ClassificationSpecies
Classification StatusStandard
Name CategoryVascular Plant
Endemicendemic to a single state or province
KingdomPlantae
PhylumAnthophyta
ClassDicotyledoneae
OrderFabales
FamilyFabaceae
GenusAstragalus
Other Common Names
deseret milkvetch (EN)
Concept Reference
Kartesz, J.T. 1994. A synonymized checklist of the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. 2nd edition. 2 vols. Timber Press, Portland, OR.
Conservation Status
Rank Method Rank calculation - Biotics v2
Review Date2021-09-23
Change Date1984-11-29
Edition Date2021-09-23
Edition AuthorsOliver, L. (2018), rev. Treher (2021)
Threat ImpactVery high
Range Extent<100 square km (less than about 40 square miles)
Number of Occurrences1 - 5
Rank Reasons
Astragalus desereticus is a narrowly restricted endemic of Utah County, Utah in the western United States. There is single occurrence with multiple, nearly continuous suboccurrences. The global population in 2020 was between 181,460 and 254,705 individuals but an ongoing drought in the west was reported to cause declines in population size in 2018. Most of the anthropogenic threats are minimized by a 30 year conservation agreement signed by the primary landholders within the occurrence. As of 2018, this species was delisted from the U.S. Endangered Species Act due to efforts to protect this species. Drought is a serious ongoing threat that causes signification fluctuations and declines in population size. Monitoring should continue to document population sizes, especially during and after drought, and to detect emerging threats.
Range Extent Comments
Astragalus desereticus is endemic to central Utah, U.S.A., and known from only one occurrence in the Thistle Creek Valley near the town of Birdseye in Utah County. It was first collected "below Indianola" in 1893 by Marcus E. Jones. Another collection, later designated by Barneby (1964) as the type specimen, was made in 1909 by Ivar Tidestrom on "slopes near Indianola." Despite numerous attempts to relocate the species (e.g., Barneby 1964), it remained obscure until its rediscovery in 1981 by Elizabeth Neese at its currently known location (Welsh et al. 1987, Franklin 1990). The town of Indianola is actually in Sanpete County near the Utah County line, but whether the Jones and Tidestrom collections were made in Sanpete County is open to question. The Jones collection in particular is labeled "below" Indianola, presumably placing it downstream along the Thistle Creek drainage and therefore in Utah County (Franklin 1991). There are no recent collections or known occurrences of Astragalus desereticus from Sanpete County, and it is likely that the two historical collections were made near the known location at Birdseye.
Occurrences Comments
Astragalus desereticus is known from a single occurrence which was last surveyed in 2018. It is composed of five suboccurrences that are in close proximity, less than 1 km apart (USFWS 2018)
Threat Impact Comments
As of 2018, the population of this species has declined likely due to drought. In the past, the species has recovered after drought but more oppressive and frequent drought may show different recovery results. Additionally, a portion of the land where the species occurs is for sale and could be sub-divided for summer homes (R. Fitts, pers. comm., 2018). Roadside traffic and access through unauthorized roads may be a threat. In a conservation agreement the state committed to reducing this threat by closing the unauthorized roads (USFWS 2018). Road and roadside maintenance was a threat but the Utah Department of Transportation has agreed to avoid herbicide use and disturbance towards the species during various maintenance activities (USFWS 2018). Junipers can compete with the Astragalus, however they are challenging to remove due to the terrain (USFWS 2018).

Many species of Astragalus in the Intermountain region are poisonous to livestock and therefore of concern to ranchers (Barneby 1989). However, there is no evidence of any past attempts to eradicate or control A. desereticus for this reason. With respect to potential grazing threats, Franklin (1990) noted that "[i]mpacts of grazing to the habitat, in the form of trails and trampling, are more apparent on the southern end of the [Birdseye] occurrence." However, in late May 1992 there were no signs of recent grazing in the occurrence area. Livestock grazing largely ceased in the area by 2002 and future grazing is unlikely due to the terrain (USFWS 2018).
Ecology & Habitat

Diagnostic Characteristics

ASTRAGALUS is one of the largest and most complex genera of flowering plants, with about 1,500 species primarily of the Northern Hemisphere (Barneby 1989). ASTRAGALUS DESERETICUS has been assigned to section Argophylli, a group of 36 species of western North America, all xerophytic perennials (Barneby 1964). Among experts, however, there is some disagreement over whether it should be placed nearer to A. ARGOPHYLLUS of the subsection Argophylli (Barneby 1964, 1989) or to A. PURSHII of the closely related subsection Eriocarpi (Welsh and others 1987). A. DESERETICUS differs from the parapatric A. ARGOPHYLLUS var. MARTINII in that the pods are densely longhirsute and tomentulose (vs. strigulose to strigose, the vesture not concealing the surface of the valves), relatively small (10-12 mm vs. 13-32 mm long), and with fewer ovules (1416 vs. 25-44 in number).

Occurring sympatrically with A. DESERETICUS are the less closely related A. UTAHENSIS (foliage more closely silvery pubescent, flowers lavender, pods larger and densely shaggy villous with hairs 4-8 mm long) and A. CALYCOSUS (foliage more closely silvery-pubescent, leaflets smaller, pods with short appressed hairs).

Barneby (1989), who has seen only pressed specimens of A. DESERETICUS, erroneously observed that it "differs ... from all near relatives ... in the stiff peduncles which carry the ripe pods aloft in a ring around the central tuft of leaves." In fact, A. DESERETICUS in the wild resembles its closest congeners in having fruiting peduncles that are humistrate (spreading over the ground surface) due to the weight of the pods.

Habitat

This species occurs within juniper-sagebrush communities on open, steep, naturally disturbed south and west (rarely north) facing slopes of sandy-gravelly soils of the Moroni Formation between 1,645 and 1,740 m elevation. It grows well on immediately adjacent, west-facing road cuts, where the plants are typically larger.

Ecology

The period of vegetative growth and reproductive activity begins after the annual snowmelt, usually by about mid-April (Swenson and others 1981). Flowering and seed set occur in May and June (Barneby 1989). The pods are deciduous at maturity, and while lying on the ground they dehisce at the apex to release the seeds. Even plants that are well established begin to lose many of their lower leaves as soil moisture becomes critical with the onset of hot, dry summer weather. As the current season's stems die back, either in response to late summer drought or cold weather in the fall, new vegetative buds are initiated at the caudex, just at soil level. Insulated by snow cover from rare episodes of severe cold, these buds generally survive the winter to emerge and elongate into new shoots the following spring.

Several widespread species of ASTRAGALUS (namely, A. CIBARIUS, A. UTAHENSIS, A. PECTINATUS, A. KENTROPHYTA var. TEGETARIUS, and A. MISER var. BLONGIFOLIUS) are highly self- incompatible and appear to be obligate outcrossers (Green and Bohart 1975; Karron 1987a, 1989; Geer and Tepedino 1993). The breeding system of ASTRAGALUS DESERETICUS presently is not known, but species with restricted ranges and few individuals are likely to be self compatible, according to evolutionary theory (Harper 1979; Karron 1989, 1991). Self- compatibility has been demonstrated for A. ROBBINSII var. JESUPII, an endemic of the Connecticut River banks in New Hampshire and Vermont (Thompson 1991); for two restricted ASTRAGALUS taxa from western Colorado, A. OSTERHOUTII and A. LINIFOLIUS (Karron 1987a, 1989); and for A. MONTII, a high elevation limestone endemic on the Wasatch Plateau of central Utah (Geer and Tepedino 1993). However, the rare A. TENNESSEENSIS and A. MONOENSIS (an eastern California endemic) are both obligate outcrossers (Baskin and others 1972, Sugden 1985). ASTRAGALUS TEGETARIOIDES and the newly described A. ANXIUS (both local endemics in the western Great Basin) are similarly incapable of setting seed without pollinators and are likely self-incompatible (Meinke and Kaye 1992).

The structure of the ASTRAGALUS flower, like that of other papilionaceous legumes, indicates an adaptation to pollination primarily by large bees, which land on the keel petals and "trip" the flower while pressing under the banner (also known as "standard") to reach a nectary located at the base of the ovary. Based on previous studies of both widespread and rare ASTRAGALUS species in the Great Basin and elsewhere (Baskin and others 1972, Green and Bohart 1975, Sugden 1985, Karron 1987b, Thompson 1991), the most frequent pollinators are bumblebees (BOMBUS spp.) and other polylectic bees (i.e., generalists capable of using a variety of floral resources). According to Karron (1987b), there are two possible explanations for the association between generalist pollinators and restricted ASTRAGALUS species: (1) pollinator specialization is unlikely to evolve or be maintained since a small plant population can only sustain a limited number of forager individuals; and (2) the rare ASTRAGALUS taxa speciated from widespread taxa that are themselves generalist pollinated.

Seed set in the rare ASTRAGALUS LINIFOLIUS is limited by low rates of pollinator visitation (Karron 1987b), suggesting that livestock grazing and other land management practices that reduce the size of pollinator populations may adversely affect reproductive success in A. DESERETICUS. Sugden (1985), studying pollination biology of the restricted A. MONOENSIS, noted that bumblebees (BOMBUS spp.) usually nest in abandoned rodent burrows and concluded that grazing may decrease the number of existing and potential nest sites by causing these burrows to collapse. Pesticides used in statewide programs to control grasshoppers and other insect herbivores may also be harmful to bee populations (Harper 1979, Senft 1990). Because bees have low fecundity, their populations may not recover for many years following such episodes (Karron 1987b).

Pre-dispersal predation of ASTRAGALUS seeds by several types of insect larvae has been reported (Green and Bohart 1975). High seed parasitism has also been noted in A. SCAPHOIDES, a local species of southwestern Montana and adjacent Idaho (Lesica 1987), and in the rare A. OSTERHOUTII (Karron 1989). Preliminary field observations in late May 1992 indicate that seed predation occurs infrequently in A. DESERETICUS, but insect populations probably fluctuate from year to year in relation to climatic and other factors.

Seeds of ASTRAGALUS DESERETICUS evidently lay dormant over the winter and germinate in the spring when soil moisture and temperature conditions are optimal for germination and seedling establishment. Many legume seeds possess a hard outer coat which prevents germination by inhibiting water absorption. Baskin and Quarterman (1969) planted untreated seeds of A. TENNESSEENSIS and found that very few had germinated after one year. Maximum seed germination was obtained only after: (1) mechanical scarification of both the impermeable outer seed coat and a tough inner seed coat; and (2) leaching of an inhibitory substance(s) from the embryo. Similar seed germination requirements have been reported for other ASTRAGALUS species, including A. LENTIGINOSUS var. MICANS (Pavlik 1987a) and A. LINIFOLIUS and A. LONCHOCARPUS (Karron 1989). Assuming that seed dormancy is well developed in A. DESERETICUS and a large seed bank exists at the Birdseye site, these factors would: (1) increase the effective size of the population; and (2) ensure continuation of the population (without immigration) if seed set or seedling establishment fails in any given year (Baskin and Quarterman 1969, Baskin and Baskin 1978).

ASTRAGALUS DESERETICUS undoubtedly depends on favorable weather and soil moisture conditions during the growing season, especially in the critical period of initial seedling establishment. Seedling mortality is probably high, and establishment may be completely unsuccessful in some years. Baskin and others (1972) reported that only 21.5 percent of wild A. TENNESSEENSIS seedlings survived their first summer due to soil moisture stress in their open, rocky habitat. They also found that established plants required several years to reach reproductive maturity, leading them to conclude that very few seedlings reach the adult stage. Another study (Pavlik 1987a) determined a 95 percent mortality rate for germinules of A. LENTIGINOSUS var. MICANS (a threatened dune endemic in eastern California), with anecdotal observations suggesting successful establishment on the order of once every 2 to 4 years. Seed dormancy was well developed in this taxon, and the half-life of established plants was 2.7 years, suggesting an adaptive strategy whereby high seedling mortality is offset by long-lived seeds and high adult survivorship.

Many species of ASTRAGALUS in the Intermountain region are poisonous to livestock (Barneby 1989). Some ASTRAGALI are primary selenophytes (i.e., species which concentrate the toxic element selenium in their tissues and return it to the soil in soluble form that can be taken up by preferred forage plants). Many others synthesize nitrotoxins to which cattle and sheep are particularly susceptible. In addition, a few species produce an alkaloid compound (known as locoine or swainsonine) causing the disease called "locoism" found primarily in horses. The lack of the characteristic "snakelike" odor in A. DESERETICUS and the absence of other primary selenophytes in the area of the Birdseye occurrence indicate that the species is not a selenium accumulator (M. Ralphs, pers. comm. 1992). A recent assay for swainsonine in seeds of A. DESERETICUS also yielded negative results (Ralphs 1993). Both A. ARGOPHYLLUS and A. PURSHII contain low levels of nitrotoxins (Williams and Barneby 1977), and A. DESERETICUS probably contains them also, based on its phylogenetic relationships (Ralphs 1993).

The apparent restriction of ASTRAGALUS DESERETICUS to a single locality raises the question of whether it is a relatively "new" species on the scale of geologic time or a relict population of an older species that was once more widely distributed. Barneby (1989) noted that "proliferation [of ASTRAGALUS] by adaptive radiation into arid and otherwise hostile microhabitats appears to be a relatively recent phenomenon that has not yet run its course. An ability to colonize new unstable habitats in progressively dry climates has hastened evolution of the genus and incidentally given rise to many sharply differentiated but geographically restricted genotypes." Thus, based on the pattern of speciation in the genus as a whole, A. DESERETICUS is most likely a localized neoendemic.

Many endemics in ASTRAGALUS are restricted to inhospitable substrate conditions or limited by the abundance or absence of some particular soil mineral such as selenium, gypsum, or lime (Barneby 1964). One wonders then if A. DESERETICUS is restricted to some confining ecological niche or whether it is for some reason unable (or perhaps has not had sufficient time) to expand into other areas of suitable habitat. The absence of primary selenophytes such as STANLEYA PINNATA, ASTRAGALUS BISULCATUS, and XYLORHIZA spp. from the area of the Birdseye occurrence indicates that seleniferous soils are not a factor. A nearby site (east side of U.S. Highway 89 about 1 mile south of Birdseye) with surface geology mapped as the Moroni Formation (Witkind and Weiss 1985) has soils that are "strongly calcareous" (Swenson and others 1981, p. 77). However, soil pH at the A. DESERETICUS site has not been tested. Franklin (1990; pers. comm. 1992) reports that A. DESERETICUS is apparently specific to the Moroni Formation and that soils on other outcrops in the vicinity are more clay-rich and not as sandy as those at the Birdseye site.

Upper slopes within the Birdseye occurrence are steep and dominated by outcrops of poorly consolidated bedrock. ASTRAGALUS DESERETICUS occurs very sparsely on these slopes, as the erosion rate generally exceeds the rate of soil formation and there is little available rooting substrate. Middle slopes are moderately steep and have a thin mantle of loose, sandy soil overlying the parent material. ASTRAGALUS is more abundant in this topographic position, but erosion rates are high, creating an element of habitat instability which appears to limit the size (and probably the life span) of individual plants. Lower slopes (i.e., those closest to the highway) are more gradual and also more stable, with deeper soils. Here A. DESERETICUS cover is at its maximum, and the plants are generally much larger (and probably longer-lived) than on midslopes. Large and vigorous plants are also found on the adjoining west-facing road cuts above the highway.

Intolerance of shade is very common in the genus ASTRAGALUS (Barneby 1964), and A. DESERETICUS is seemingly excluded from the denser pinyon-juniper tracts characteristic of slopes in the vicinity of the Birdseye site. Within its area of occurrence the species is only rarely found on north-facing exposures (Franklin 1990). However, there appears to be little likelihood that the Birdseye population would ever decline significantly via competitive exclusion by the woodland dominants, since its habitat exists in a state of "perpetual succession" due to high soil erosion rates on steep slopes.

Reproduction

This species is a short-lived perennial with no means of vegetative propagation, therefore, perpetuation of the species depends on successful sexual reproduction. Its breeding system is unknown. Based on floral structure, the species likely pollinated by large bees (Bombus spp.).

Pre-dispersal predation of Astragalus seeds by several types of insect larvae has been reported (Green and Bohart 1975). Preliminary field observations in late May 1992 indicate that seed predation occurs infrequently in A. desereticus, but insect populations probably fluctuate from year to year in relation to climatic and other factors.

Seeds of this species evidently lay dormant over the winter and germinate in the spring when soil moisture and temperature conditions are optimal for germination and seedling establishment.
Terrestrial Habitats
Forest/WoodlandWoodland - ConiferShrubland/chaparralSavanna
Other Nations (1)
United StatesN1
ProvinceRankNative
UtahS2Yes
Threat Assessments
ThreatScopeSeverityTiming
1 - Residential & commercial developmentRestricted (11-30%)Serious or 31-70% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
1.1 - Housing & urban areasRestricted (11-30%)Serious or 31-70% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
2 - Agriculture & aquacultureSmall (1-10%)Slight or 1-10% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
2.3 - Livestock farming & ranchingSmall (1-10%)Slight or 1-10% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
4 - Transportation & service corridorsSmall (1-10%)Slight or 1-10% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
4.1 - Roads & railroadsSmall (1-10%)Slight or 1-10% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
6 - Human intrusions & disturbanceRestricted (11-30%)Slight or 1-10% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
6.1 - Recreational activitiesNegligible (<1%)Negligible or <1% pop. declineLow (long-term)
6.3 - Work & other activitiesRestricted (11-30%)Slight or 1-10% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
11 - Climate change & severe weatherPervasive (71-100%)Extreme or 71-100% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
11.2 - DroughtsPervasive (71-100%)Extreme or 71-100% pop. declineHigh (continuing)

Plant Characteristics
DurationPERENNIAL
Economic Value (Genus)Yes
Roadless Areas (2)
Utah (2)
AreaForestAcres
Cedar KnollManti-Lasal National Forest22,502
Dairy ForkManti-Lasal National Forest30,222
References (54)
  1. Atwood, D., J. Holland, R. Bolander, B. Franklin, D.E. House, L. Armstrong, K. Thorne, and L. England. 1991. Utah endangered, threatened and sensitive plant field guide. Forest Service, Intermountain Region, Ogden, UT.
  2. Barneby, R.C. 1964. Atlas of North American Astragalus. 2 Vols. New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, New York. 1188 pp.
  3. Barneby, R.C. 1989. Fabales. In A. Cronquist, A.H. Holmgren, N.H. Holmgren, J.L. Reveal, and P.K. Holmgren (eds.). Intermountain flora: Vascular plants of the Intermountain West, U.S.A. Vol. 3, Part B. New York Botanical Garden, Bronx. 279 pp.
  4. Barrett, S.C.H. and J.R. Kohn. 1991. Genetic and evolutionary consequences of small populations size in plants: implications for conservation. Pages 39-43 in Falk, D.A. and K.E. Holsinger, editors. Genetics and conservation of rare plants. Oxford University Press, New York.
  5. Baskin, C.C. and E. Quarterman. 1969. Germination requirements of seeds of Astragalus tennesseensis. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club 96: 315-321.
  6. Baskin, C. C., J. M. Baskin and E. Quarterman. 1972. Observations on the ecology of <i>Astralagus tennesseensis</i>. The American Midland Naturalist 88(1):167-181.
  7. Baskin, J.M., and C.C. Baskin. 1978c. The seed bank in a population of an endemic plant species and its ecological significance. Biological Conservation 14:125-130.
  8. Callister, D.C. and N.V. Pelt. 1992. Element Stewardship Abstract for PHACELIA ARGILLACEA[,] clay phacelia. The Nature Conservancy. 21 pp.
  9. England, Larry. Personal communication. 1997. Staff Botanist, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Endangered Species Office, Salt Lake City, Utah.
  10. Ewens, W.J., P.J. Brockwell, J.M. Gani, and S.I. Resnick. 1987. Minimum viable population size in the presence of catastrophes. Pages 59-68 in Soule, M.E., editor. Viable populations for conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.
  11. Fairchild, John. Habitat Manager, Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, Springville, Utah. Personal communication.
  12. Fitts, Robert. Botanist. Utah Natural Heritage Program, Salt Lake City, Utah.
  13. Franklin, B. 1991. Desert [sic] milkvetch. Sego Lily (Newsletter of the Utah Native Plant Society) 14(6): 6-8.
  14. Franklin, Ben. Botanist, Utah Natural Heritage Program, Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, Salt Lake City, Utah
  15. Franklin, I.A. 1980. Evolutionary change in small populations. Pages 135-149 in Soule, M.E. and B.A. Wilcox, editors. Conservation biology: an evolutionary-ecological perspective. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts.
  16. Franklin, M.A. 1990. Report for 1990 Challenge Cost Share project Manti-La Sal National Forest. Target species: <i>Astragalus desereticus</i> Barneby (Deseret milkvetch). Utah Natural Heritage Program, Utah Department of Natural Resources. 5 pp.+ appendices.
  17. Geer, S.M. and V.J. Tepedino. 1993. Breeding systems of the rare Heliotrope milkvetch (Astragalus montii Welsh: Fabaceae) and two common congeners. Pages 334-344 in R. Sivinski and K. Lightfoot, editors. Southwestern rare and endangered plants. New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department, Forestry and Resources Conservation Division, Miscellaneous Publication Number 2.
  18. Goodman, D. 1987. The demography of chance extinction. Pages 11-34 in Soule, M.E., editor. Viable populations for conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.
  19. Green, T.W. and G.E. Bohart. 1975. The pollination ecology of Astragalus cibarius and Astragalus utahensis (Leguminosae). American Journal of Botany 62:379-386.
  20. Hales, B.D. 1991. Appraisal report of the Francis Oberhansley property located near Birdseye, Utah. Prepared for Great Basin Field Office, The Nature Conservancy, Salt Lake City, Utah, by The Appraisers, Provo, Utah. 27 pages and addenda.
  21. Harper, K.T. 1979. Some reproductive and life history characteristics of rare plants and implications of management. Pages 129-137 in Wood, S.L., editor. The endangered species: a symposium. Great Basin Naturalist Memoirs No. 3. Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah.
  22. Holsinger, K.E. and L.D. Gottlieb. 1991. Conservation of rare and endangered plants: principles and prospects. Pages 195-208 in Falk, D.A. and K.E. Holsinger, editors. Genetics and conservation of rare plants. Oxford University Press, New York.
  23. Karron, J.D. 1987a. A comparison of levels of genetic polymorphism and self-compatibility in geographically restricted and widespread plant cogeners. Evolutionary Ecology 1:47-58.
  24. Karron, J.D. 1987b. The pollination ecology of co-occurring geographically restricted and widespread species of <i>Astragalus </i>(Fabaceae). Biological Conservation 39:79-193.
  25. Karron, J.D. 1989. Breeding systems and levels of inbreeding depression in geographically restricted and widespread species of Astragalus (Fabaceae). American J. of Botany 76(3):331-340.
  26. Karron, J. D. 1991. Patterns of genetic variation and breeding systems in rare plant species. In Conservation of rare plants: Biology and genetics, eds. D. Faulk and K. Holsinger. Oxford University Press, Oxford, U. K.
  27. Karron, J.D., Y.B. Linhart, C.A. Chaulk and C.A. Robertson. 1988. Genetic structure of populations of geographically restricted and widespread species of Astragulus (Fabaceae). American J. of Botany 75(8):1114-1119.
  28. Kartesz, J.T. 1994. A synonymized checklist of the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. 2nd edition. 2 vols. Timber Press, Portland, OR.
  29. Lande, R. and G.F. Barrowclough. 1987. Effective population size, genetic variation, and their use in population management. Pages 87-123 in Soule, M.E., editor. Viable populations for conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.
  30. Lesica, P. 1987. A technique for monitoring nonrhizomatous, perennial plant species in permanent belt transects. Natural Areas Journal 7:65-68.
  31. McCormick, Meghan. Personal communication. Natural Heritage Botany Intern, USU Department of Wildland Resources, Salt Lake City, UT.
  32. Meinke, R.J. and T.N. Kaye. 1992. Taxonomic assessment of Astragalus tegetarioides (Fabaceae) and a new related species from northern California. Madrono 39:193-204.
  33. Menges, E.S. 1986. Predicting the future of rare plant populations: Demographic monitoring and modeling. Natural Areas Journal 6: 13-25.
  34. Menges, E.S. 1991. The application of minimum viable population theory to plants. Pages 45-61 in Falk, D.A. and K.E. Holsinger, editors. Genetics and conservation of rare plants. Oxford University Press, New York.
  35. Pavlik, B.M. 1987a. Attributes of plant populations and their management implications. Pages 311-319 in Elias, T.S., editor. Conservation and management of rare and endangered plants. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California.
  36. Pavlik, B.M. 1987b. Autecological monitoring of endangered plants. Pages 385-390 in Elias, T.S., editor. Conservation and management of rare and endangered plants. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California.
  37. Phillips, W.R. 1962. Igneous rocks of north central Utah. Brigham Young University Geological Studies 9:65-69.
  38. Ralphs, Michael H. Range Scientist, USDA Agricultural Research Service, Poisonous Plant Research Laboratory, Logan, Utah. Personal communication.
  39. Senft, D. 1990. Protecting endangered plants. Agricultural Research 38:16-18.
  40. Shaffer, M. 1987. Minimum viable populations: Coping with uncertainty. In M.E. Soule (ed.). Viable populations for conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Great Britain.
  41. Soule, M.E. 1980. Thresholds for survival: maintaining fitness and evolutionary potential. Pages 151-169 in M.E. Soule and B.A. Wilcox, editors. Conservation Biology: an Evolutionary Ecological Perspective. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts.
  42. Soule, M.E. and D. Simberloff. 1986. What do genetics and ecology tell us about the design of nature reserves? Biological Conservation 35:19-40.
  43. Stokes, W.L. 1986. Geology of Utah. Utah Museum of Natural History, Univ. of Utah, and Utah Geological and Mineral Survey Dept. of Natural Resources, Salt Lake City. 280 pp.
  44. Stone, R. D. 1992. Draft Element Stewardship Abstract for <i>Astragalus desereticus</i> (Deseret milk-vetch). Prepared for TNC/GBFO (last update 1992-12-04).
  45. Sugden, E.A. 1985. Pollinators of <i>Astragalus monoensis</i> Barneby (Fabaceae); new host records; potential impact of sheep grazing. Great Basin Naturalist 45:299-312.
  46. Swenson, J.L. et al. 1981. Soil survey of Sanpete Valley area, Utah [including] parts of Sanpete and Utah Counties. Published by the USDA Soil Conservation Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management in cooperation with the Utah Agricultural Experiment Station and Utah Department of Wildlife Resources. 179 pages + maps.
  47. Thompson, E.H. 1991h. Element Stewardship Abstract for ASTRAGALUS ROBBINSII var. JESUPII (Jesup's milk-vetch). Eastern Heritage Task Force, The Nature Conservancy, Boston, Massachusetts. 8 pp.
  48. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2016. 90-Day Findings on 29 Petitions. Federal Register 81(51): 14058-14072.
  49. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2017. Removing <i>Astragalus desereticus</i> (Deseret Milkvetch) from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Plants. Proposed rule and 12-month petition finding; request for comments. Federal Register 82(189): 45779-45793.
  50. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2018. Removing Deseret Milkvetch (<i>Astragalus desereticus</i>) from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Plants. Final Rule. Federal Register 83(202): 52775-52786.
  51. Welsh, S.L., N.D. Atwood, L.C. Higgins, and S. Goodrich, eds. 1987. A Utah Flora. Great Basin Naturalist Memoir 9: 1- 894. Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah. 894 pp.
  52. Welsh, S.L., N.D. Atwood, S. Goodrich, and L.C. Higgins (eds.) 1993. A Utah flora. 2nd edition. Brigham Young Univ., Provo, Utah. 986 pp.
  53. Williams, M.C. and R.C. Barneby. 1977. The occurrence of nitro-toxins in North American <i>Astragalus </i>(Fabaceae). Brittonia 29:310-326.
  54. Witkind, I.J. and M.P. Weiss. 1985. Preliminary geologic map of the Nephi 30' X 60' quadrangle, Carbon, Emery, Juab, Sanpete, Utah, and Wasatch counties, Utah. U.S. Geological Survey, Openfile Report 85-466.