Search Field Guide
Advanced Search
Montana Animal Field Guide

Montana Field Guides

Smooth Fleabane - Erigeron leiomerus

Google for more images Google for web pages
Species of Concern

Global Rank: G4
State Rank: S2 * (see reason below)

Agency Status
USFWS:
USFS:
BLM:
MNPS Threat Rank: 3

External Links






State Rank Reason
Rare in Montana, where it is currently known from only a couple of alpine sites in the southwest portion of the state. Current population levels and trends are unknown. However, its high-elevation habitat is relatively inaccessible, and there are no obvious threats. Additional sites are likely to be documented if surveys were to be conducted.
 

General Description
Smooth Fleabane is an herbaceous perennial. Its unbranched, lax stems reach up to 15 cm high and arise from a branched rootcrown that surmounts a taproot. The basal leaves are up to 7 cm long and have a petiole and a narrowly elliptic to lance-shaped blade; those of the upper stem are smaller and narrower. Foliage is glabrous to sparsely hairy. A single flower head is borne at the top of each stem. Heads have a single series of narrowly lance-shaped, glandular involucral bracts that are 4-6 mm long. There are 15-60 white to blue rays, 6-11 mm long, and numerous yellow disk flowers, ca. 3-4 mm long. The achenes have 15-25 fine, long bristles and a few short ones, forming a pappus on top.

Phenology
Flowering in July.

Diagnostic Characteristics
There are many species of ERIGERON in our area; a hand lens and technical manual are needed for positive identification.

General Distribution
Mapped Occurrences

 


Summary of Observations Submitted for Montana
Number of Occurrences: 2

(Click on the following maps and charts to see full sized version) Map Help and Descriptions
Relative Density

Recency

 

(Records associated with a range of dates are excluded from time charts)


Distribution Comments
Central ID and adjacent MT, south to UT, CO, and NM. Peripheral.


Habitat
Rocky soil or talus in the alpine zone.

Ecological Systems Associated with this Species
  • Details on Creation and Suggested Uses and Limitations
    How Associations Were Made
    We associated the use and habitat quality (high, medium, or low) of each of the 82 ecological systems mapped in Montana for vertebrate animal species that regularly breed, overwinter, or migrate through the state by:
    1. Using personal observations and reviewing literature that summarize the breeding, overwintering, or migratory habitat requirements of each species (Dobkin 1992, Hart et al. 1998, Hutto and Young 1999, Maxell 2000, Foresman 2001, Adams 2003, and Werner et al. 2004);
    2. Evaluating structural characteristics and distribution of each ecological system relative to the species’ range and habitat requirements;
    3. Examining the observation records for each species in the state-wide point database associated with each ecological system;
    4. Calculating the percentage of observations associated with each ecological system relative to the percent of Montana covered by each ecological system to get a measure of “observations versus availability of habitat”.
    Species that breed in Montana were only evaluated for breeding habitat use, species that only overwinter in Montana were only evaluated for overwintering habitat use, and species that only migrate through Montana were only evaluated for migratory habitat use.  In general, species were associated as using an ecological system if structural characteristics of used habitat documented in the literature were present in the ecological system or large numbers of point observations were associated with the ecological system.  However, species were not associated with an ecological system if there was no support in the literature for use of structural characteristics in an ecological system, even if point observations were associated with that system.  High, medium, and low habitat quality was assigned based on the degree to which the structural characteristics of an ecological system matched the preferred structural habitat characteristics for each species in the literature.  The percentage of observations associated with each ecological system relative to the percent of Montana covered by each ecological system was also used to guide assignments of habitat quality.  If you have any questions or comments on species associations with ecological systems, please contact Bryce Maxell at bmaxell@mt.gov or (406) 444-3655.

    Suggested Uses and Limitations
    Species associations with ecological systems should be used to generate potential lists of species that may occupy broader landscapes for the purposes of landscape-level planning.  These potential lists of species should not be used in place of documented occurrences of species (this information can be requested at: http://mtnhp.org/requests/default.asp) or systematic surveys for species and evaluations of habitat at a local site level by trained biologists.  Users of this information should be aware that the land cover data used to generate species associations is based on imagery from the late 1990s and early 2000s and was only intended to be used at broader landscape scales.  Land cover mapping accuracy is particularly problematic when the systems occur as small patches or where the land cover types have been altered over the past decade.  Thus, particular caution should be used when using the associations in assessments of smaller areas (e.g., evaluations of public land survey sections).  Finally, although a species may be associated with a particular ecological system within its known geographic range, portions of that ecological system may occur outside of the species’ known geographic range.

    Literature Cited
    • Adams, R.A.  2003.  Bats of the Rocky Mountain West; natural history, ecology, and conservation.  Boulder, CO: University Press of Colorado.  289 p.
    • Dobkin, D. S.  1992.  Neotropical migrant land birds in the Northern Rockies and Great Plains. USDA Forest Service, Northern Region. Publication No. R1-93-34.  Missoula, MT.
    • Foresman, K.R.  2001.  The wild mammals of Montana.  Special Publication No. 12.  Lawrence, KS: The American Society of Mammalogists.  278 p.
    • Hart, M.M., W.A. Williams, P.C. Thornton, K.P. McLaughlin, C.M. Tobalske, B.A. Maxell, D.P. Hendricks, C.R. Peterson, and R.L. Redmond. 1998.  Montana atlas of terrestrial vertebrates.  Montana Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit, University of Montana, Missoula, MT.  1302 p.
    • Hutto, R.L. and J.S. Young.  1999.  Habitat relationships of landbirds in the Northern Region, USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station RMRS-GTR-32.  72 p.
    • Maxell, B.A.  2000.  Management of Montana’s amphibians: a review of factors that may present a risk to population viability and accounts on the identification, distribution, taxonomy, habitat use, natural history, and the status and conservation of individual species.  Report to U.S. Forest Service Region 1.  Missoula, MT: Wildlife Biology Program, University of Montana.  161 p.
    • Werner, J.K., B.A. Maxell, P. Hendricks, and D. Flath.  2004.  Amphibians and reptiles of Montana.  Missoula, MT: Mountain Press Publishing Company. 262 p.

References
Login Logout
Citation for data on this website:
Smooth Fleabane — Erigeron leiomerus.  Montana Field Guide.  Montana Natural Heritage Program.  Retrieved on February 9, 2012, from http://FieldGuide.mt.gov/detail_PDAST3M290.aspx
 
There are currently 26 active users in the Montana Field Guide.