Ontologia

Yucca jaegeriana

(McKelvey) L.W.Lenz

LCLR Monde (IUCN)
  1. Plante
  2. Tracheophyta
  3. Liliopsida
  4. Asparagales
  5. Asparagaceae
Pays · région · aire protégée · écorégion · biome
Chargement du graphe…

Indicateurs du réseau écologique

Comment lire ce graphe

Ce graphe représente les interactions écologiques documentées entre Yucca jaegeriana et d'autres espèces, à partir de la base GloBI (Global Biotic Interactions, agrégation mondiale de la littérature scientifique) — source principale, complétée par d'autres jeux de données d'interactions agrégés par Ontologia. Il faut le comprendre comme une carte du savoir documenté, pas une carte de la réalité écologique exhaustive.

Limites principales

  • Incomplet. La majorité des interactions écologiques en milieu naturel n'ont jamais été publiées. Une espèce sans liens visibles n'est pas isolée — elle est probablement mal étudiée.
  • Biais publication pharmaco-agronomique. La littérature des interactions est polarisée par les enjeux économiques et sanitaires : parasitism / pathogen sur-pondéré sur les mammifères (recherche zoonoses, vecteurs), herbivory sur-pondéré sur les insectes phytophages (entomologie agronomique). À l'inverse, mutualisms, commensalisms et interactions sol/microbiote sont sous-cités. Conseil de lecture : sur les hubs mammifères ou les insectes ravageurs de culture, lire les arêtes parasitism / herbivory dominantes relativement au contexte de littérature, pas comme une mesure d'intensité écologique brute. Détails §10.1.
  • Biaisé vers les espèces étudiées. Quelques espèces (oiseaux communs, abeille mellifère, espèces modèles) concentrent disproportionnellement plus d'interactions documentées. Notre score composite ajoute un malus aux hubs de littérature pour atténuer cette dominance visuelle.
  • Interactions documentées globalement. Toutes les espèces affichées sont observées en France métropolitaine (les observations sont filtrées sur le territoire métropolitain), mais les interactions entre elles proviennent de la littérature scientifique mondiale. Une interaction documentée à l'étranger peut ne pas se réaliser à l'identique sur votre territoire. Le filtre « restreindre à ma commune » tient compte de la co-occurrence spatiale locale mais ne garantit pas l'interaction effective.
  • Sans dimension temporelle. Les variations saisonnières (migration, floraison, cycle de vie) ne sont pas modélisées.
  • Force d'interaction approximative. L'épaisseur des liens reflète le nombre de fois où l'interaction a été rapportée dans la littérature, pas son importance écologique réelle.

Comment nous sélectionnons les espèces affichées

Le graphe affiche au plus 31 nœuds par fiche (1 centre + 15 bulles depth=1 + 15 partenaires depth=2). Le serveur sélectionne intelligemment :

  • Bulles famille créées si une cascade taxonomique existe ou si ≥3 espèces directement documentées partagent une même famille — les espèces sont absorbées dans la bulle (pas de doublon visuel)
  • Espèces individuelles uniquement quand <3 dans une famille (sans cascade) — relations directes documentées
  • Pas d'espèces inférées affichées en doublon — les cascades sont représentées via les bulles famille uniquement
  • Partenaires depth=2 sélectionnés via algo priorité : candidat partagé par ≥2 docs de la famille (food web central) → reliant entre bulles → top sum_obs en dernier recours
  • Sous-types GloBI traduits en français au survol de la flèche (chasse, parasite, parasitoïde, mycorhize…)

Le toggle Profondeur 1 ↔ 2 client-side cache ou affiche les partenaires depth=2 sans refetch. Filtres règne, type d'interaction, ordres/familles, patrimoniales et commune recalculent côté serveur (slow path live ~1-2 s).

Indicateurs avancés (mode expert) : Modularité Q (Newman 2006, PNAS), communautés (Louvain, Blondel et al. 2008, J. Stat. Mech.), nestedness NODF (Almeida-Neto et al. 2008, Oikos).

Source : GloBI · TAXREF v18 (INPN/MNHN) · BDC-Statuts · Wikidata

4 partenaires écologiques documentés directement dans GloBI.

Partenaires
4
Espèces avec interactions documentées
Types d'interactions
1
Prédation, pollinisation, parasitisme…
Connectance
0.167
Densité des liens dans le sous-graphe affiché
Rang plantae
54 %
Percentile vs ensemble des plantae

Liste rouge IUCN

LC · Préoccupation mineure↘Décroissante
Évaluation complète
Évaluation
2020 · v3.1
Altitude
560 – 2133 m
Profondeur
– m
État de la populationExpert

This is a fairly common species where it occurs. Yucca brevifolia and Y. jaegeriana are mostly allopatric, occurring in discrete, disjunct subpopulations of variable size except for a small area of overlap in Tikaboo Valley (Lincoln County), Nevada (Rowlands 1978, Smith et al. 2009) and possibly other areas in southeastern Nevada (W. Hodgson pers. comm. 2019).

Given the similarity of Yucca jaegeriana and Y. brevifolia on growth rate, survival and ecology we are using the generation length calculated for Y. brevifolia. The age of first reproduction of Y. brevifolia is estimated to be 60 years, based on an average growth rate of 3–4 cm per year (Esque et al. 2015, Comanor and Clark 2000) and the observed height of the plants when they first produce flowers (W. Hodgson and K. Clary pers. comm. 2019). The annual survival of the species is 0.992 (Gilliland et al. 2006). Therefore, the generation length of Y. brevifolia is calculated to be 185 years, using the following formula: generation length = 1/(1-annual survival) + age of first reproduction = 1/(1-0.992) + 60 = 185.

Yucca jaegeriana covers an area of 70, 813 km2 of which ~ 4,991 km2 has been damaged by fire in the past 115 years resulting in approximately 7.04 % of the extant habitat being burned. This was calculated by generating a fire footprint using data on fires from 1904 to 2019. The data was digitised resulting in a total of 1,073 polygons of areas affected by fire, 280 of which are prior 1980 and 513 are from 1980 to 2019, indicating a substantial increase in long-term fire frequency, which seems to be sustained by fire events in 2020. The fire footprint was overlaid with the species' range map to calculated the percentage of the range affected by fires. To calculate the decline we considered 115 years in the past, from the first records of fires in 1904, to 2089 for one generation (generation time = 185 years) and 30 years in the future to 2119 for the second generation, to meet the 100 years in future caveat from 2019. Therefore, considering 1.16 generations in the past and future, a 13.2% decline on the species range is predicted assuming fire events continue the same trend. This percentage decline, however, is likely an underestimate as fire events are increasing and droughts are predicted to worsen with climate change.

The study area in Gilliland et al. (2006) corresponds to the northeast Mojave Desert (even though the title of the paper says northwestern Mojave Desert) and therefore the species referred to in this study corresponds to Yucca jaegeriana (T.C. Esque pers. comm. 2020)

Menaces identifiées(5 menaces classées CMP-IUCN)

  • 2_2_2
    Agro-industry plantations
    Ongoing
  • 7_1_1
    Increase in fire frequency/intensity
    Ongoing
  • 8_2
    Problematic native species/diseases
    Ongoing
  • 8_2_2
    Named species
    Ongoing
  • 8_2_2
    Named species
    Ongoing
Description complète des menacesExpert

The main threats to this species are habitat loss and destruction of plants as a result of urbanisation and agriculture expansion, mainly of pistachio orchards (e.g. near the Kingman area in Arizona). One of greatest threats to Yucca brevifolia and Y. jaegeriana subpopulations is high intensity and more frequent fires fuelled by exotic non-native annual grasses that can kill or severely damage the plants, especially the smaller younger (shorter) individuals. While Y. jaegeriana is adapted to low intensity fires and can resprout from stems and rhizomes,  the hotter and more frequent fires coupled with a unique life history strategy makes it difficult for Y. jaegeriana to colonise burned landscapes.

Lagomorph and rodent herbivory can cause superficial damage to the periderm of trees during acute drought periods. Climate variability due to climate change can negatively affect several life history stages and may be significant future threat (DeFalco et al. 2010, Esque et al. 2015). Seed production does not occur as masts (Borchert and DeFalco 2016) every year and depends on one known moth pollinator. Ripe seeds must be freed from indehiscent fruits by small mammals to be dispersed and planted (Vander Wall et al. 2006, Waitman et al. 2012). The seeds germinate only under exacting rainfall and temperature conditions and quickly lose viability in soil if conditions are not met (Reynolds et al. 2012). Young plants are eaten by lagomorphs and rodents (Esque et al. 2015), so seedlings are afforded protection growing in association with native shrubs (Brittingham and Walker 2000), but these are also decimated by fires. In conjunction with other stressors, including drought-induced increases in herbivory following wildfire and predicted higher temperatures from climate change, these factors collectively may contribute to population declines through time (DeFalco et al. 2010, St. Clair and Hoines 2018, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2018).

Habitats préférentiels (classification IUCN)

  • 1_4Forest - Temperate
  • 3_5Shrubland - Subtropical/Tropical Dry
  • 4_4Grassland - Temperate
Mesures de conservation recommandéesExpert
This species occurs in several protected areas such as Grand Canyon National Park, Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument, Hualapai Reservation, Mojave National Preserve, and Lake Mead National Recreation Area. Gold Butte National Monument, Desert National Wildlife Refuge, and Yucca jaegeriana is also protected on other public lands already protected as Critical Habitat of the Mojave Desert Tortoise, and other Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) such as the Grapevine Mesa Joshua Tree Forest National Natural Landmark.

NatureServe (2020) include Y. jaegeriana within the broader taxonomic concept of Y. brevifolia for the national assessment This broader concept was determined on 2 January 2003 (and last reviewed) as having a Global Status level of G4, G5, with a Rounded Global Status of G4, being "Apparently Secure" according to NatureServe; the National Status: NNR, is N4.

A proposal to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to consider listing the Joshua Tree (i.e. the broader concept) under the U.S. Endangered Species Act was not successful (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2019).

Yucca jaegeriana  and Y. brevifolia are distinctly different species. Recognising them as such has significant implications for their management and conservation as they occupy different habitats and are mostly allopatric (W. Hodgson pers. comm. 2019).
Usage & commerce (2)Expert
  • 1Food - human
    subsistance
  • 8Fibre
    subsistance
Niche IUCN globaleExpert

Royaumes biogéographiques

Nearctic

Systèmes (terrestre/eau douce/marin)

Terrestrial

Formes de croissance

Succulent - tree
Références bibliographiques (20)Expert
  1. IUCN. 2020. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2020-3. Available at: <a href="www.iucnredlist.org">www.iucnredlist.org</a>. (Accessed: 10 December 2020).
  2. SEINet. 2019. SEINet Portal Network. Available at: <a href="http//:swbiodiversity.org/seinet/index.php">http//:swbiodiversity.org/seinet/index.php</a>. (Accessed: 1 April 2019).
  3. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2019. Iconic Joshua Tree Does Not Require Protection Under the Endangered Species Act. Available at: <a href="https://www.fws.gov/carlsbad/NR/JTree_12M_Finding_NR_final_20190814.pdf">https://www.fws.gov/carlsbad/NR/JTree_12M_Finding_NR_final_20190814.pdf</a>. (Accessed: August 14, 2019).
  4. St. Clair, S.B. and Hoines, J. 2018. Reproductive ecology and stand structure of Joshua tree forests across climate gradients of the Mojave Desert. <i>PLoS ONE </i> 13(2): e0193248. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0193248.
  5. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2018. Joshua Tree Species Status Assessment. US Fish and Wildlife Service.
  6. Borchert, M.I. and DeFalco, L.A. 2016. <i>Yucca brevifolia</i> fruit production, predispersal seed predation, and fruit removal by rodents during two years of contrasting reproduction. <i>American Journal of Botany</i> 103(5): 830–836.
  7. Esque, T., Medica, D., Shryock, L., Webb, R. and Hunter, R. 2015. Direct and indirect effects of environmental variability on growth and survivorship of pre-reproductive Joshua trees, <i>Yucca brevifolia<i> Englem. (Agavaceae). <i>American Journal of Botany </i> 102(1): 85–91.
  8. Waitman, B.A , Vander Wall, S.B. and Esque, T.C. 2012. Seed dispersal and seed fate in Joshua tree (<i>Yucca brevifolia</i>). <i>Journal of Arid Environments</i> 81: 1–8.
  9. Reynolds, M.B.J., DeFalco, L.A. and Esque, T.C. 2012. Short seed longevity, variable germination conditions, and infrequent establishment events provide a narrow window for <i>Yucca</i> brevifolia (Agavaceae) recruitment. <i>American Journal of Botany </i> 99(10): 1647–1654.
  10. DeFalco, L., Esque, T., Scoles-Sciulla, S. and Rodgers, J. 2010. Desert wildfire and severe drought diminish survivorship of the long-lived Joshua tree (<i>Yucca brevifolia<i>; Agavaceae). <i>American Journal of Botany</i> 97(2): 243–250.
  11. Smith, C.I., Yoder, J.B., Godsoe, W. and Pellmyr O. 2009. Host specifi city and reproductive success of yucca moths (<i>Tegeticula</i> spp. Lepidoptera: Prodoxidae) mirror patterns of gene fl ow between host plant varieties of Joshua tree (<i>Yucca brevifolia</i>: Agavaceae). <i>Molecular Ecology </i> 18: 5218–5229.
  12. Smith, C.I., Drummonds, C.S., Godsoe, W.K., Yoder, J.B. and Pellmyr, O. 2009. Host specificity and reproductive success of yucca moths (<i>Tegeticula</i> spp. Lepidoptera: Prodoxidae) mirror patterns of gene flow between host plant varieties of Joshua tree (Yucca brevifolia: Agavaceae). <i>Molecular Ecology</i> 18: 5218-5229.
  13. Lenz, L.W. 2007. Reassessment of Yucca brevifolia and Recognition of Y. jaegeriana as a Distinct Species. <i>Aliso: Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Botany</i> 24(1): 97-104.
  14. Gilliland, K.D., Huntly, N.J. and Anderson, J.E. 2006. Age and Population Structure of Joshua Trees (<i>Yucca brevifolia</i>) in the northwestern Mojave Desert. <i>Western North American Naturalist</i> 66(2): 202-208.
  15. Vander Wall, S.B., Esque, T., Haines, D., Garnett, M. and Waitman, B.A. 2006. Joshua tree (<i>Yucca brevifolia</i>) seeds are dispersed by seed-caching rodents. <i>Ecoscience </i> 13(4): 539–543.
  16. Hodgson, W.C. 2001. <i>Food Plants of the Sonoran Desert</i>. University of Arizona Press.
  17. Hodgson, W.C. 2001. <i>Food Plants of the Sonoran Desert.</i> University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
  18. Brittingham, S. and Walker, L.R. 2000. Facilitation of <i>Yucca brevifolia</i> recruitment by Mojave Desert shrubs. <i>Western North American Naturalist </i> 60(4): 374–383.
  19. Comanor, P.L. and Clark, W.H. 2000. Preliminary growth rates and a proposed age‐form classification for the Joshua tree, <i>Yucca brevifolia</i> (Agavaceae). <i>Haseltonia</i> 7(7): 37– 46.
  20. Rowlands, P. 1978. The vegetation dynamics of the Joshua tree (<i>Yucca brevifolia</i> Engelmann) in the southwestern United States. University of California, Riverside.
Évaluateurs & contributeurs (4)Expert
assessor
Esque, T.C., DeFalco, L.A., Hodgson, W., Salywon, A., Puente, R. & Clary, K.
contributor
Chen, F.C. & Berry, G.A.
evaluator
Goettsch, B. & Hilton-Taylor, C.
facilitators
Goettsch, B.

Esque, T.C., DeFalco, L.A., Hodgson, W., Salywon, A., Puente, R. & Clary, K. 2020. Yucca jaegeriana. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2020: e.T162386466A162386497. Accessed on 05 May 2026.

Consulter sur les bases externes

Observations & statuts

iNaturalist

Bibliographie

BHLOpenAlex
Note nomenclaturale & synonymesExpert

Note nomenclaturale

TAXREF v18 — INPN/MNHN

Synonymes (3)— redirigent vers cette page

  • Yucca brevifolia subsp. jaegeriana(McKelvey) Hochstätter
  • Yucca brevifolia var. jaegerianaMcKelvey
  • Yucca brevifolia var. jaegerianaEngelm.

Sources : Catalogue of Life Cross-References (synonymes) · TAXREF v18 INPN/MNHN (commentaires FR).