Gilia tenuis - F.G. Sm. & Neese
Mussentuchit Gilia
Synonym(s): Aliciella tenuis (F.G. Sm. & Neese) J.M. Porter
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Gilia tenuis F.G. Sm. & Neese (TSN 502776)
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.130996
Element Code: PDPLM041X0
Informal Taxonomy: Plants, Vascular - Flowering Plants - Phlox Family
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Plantae Anthophyta Dicotyledoneae Solanales Polemoniaceae Gilia
Check this box to expand all report sections:
Concept Reference
Help
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.
Concept Reference Code: B94KAR01HQUS
Name Used in Concept Reference: Gilia tenuis
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G1
Global Status Last Reviewed: 29Jan2009
Global Status Last Changed: 19Jul1991
Rounded Global Status: G1 - Critically Imperiled
Reasons: A local endemic of Emery and immediately adjacent Sevier counties, Utah. Known from 7 populations across a 45 km-stretch of somewhat discontinuous habitat.
Nation: United States
National Status: N1

U.S. & Canada State/Province Status
Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
United States Utah (S1)

Other Statuses

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Range Extent Comments: Restricted to the western slope of the San Rafael Swell, in extreme eastern Sevier County and western Emery County, Utah.

Area of Occupancy: 1-25 4-km2 grid cells
Area of Occupancy Comments: 353 acres (143 hectares) (Clark 2005 cited by USFWS 2006).

Number of Occurrences: 1 - 20
Number of Occurrences Comments: 6 occurrences.

Population Size Comments: The total population is estimated at 15,400 individuals (9,774 counted) (Clark 2005 cited by USFWS 2006).

Overall Threat Impact: Very high - medium
Overall Threat Impact Comments: Threatened by oil and gas exploration and development, off-road vehicle use and recreational impacts, sand and gravel quarrying, road construction and maintenance, pesticide use, collection by rock garden enthusiasts, grazing and trampling by livestock, competition from noxious weeds, and climate change (Porter and Heil 1994; SUWA 2003 cited by Franklin 2005).

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Distribution
Help
Global Range: Restricted to the western slope of the San Rafael Swell, in extreme eastern Sevier County and western Emery County, Utah.

U.S. States and Canadian Provinces

Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
Color legend for Distribution Map

U.S. & Canada State/Province Distribution
United States UT

Range Map
No map available.


U.S. Distribution by County Help
State County Name (FIPS Code)
UT Emery (49015), Sevier (49041), Wayne (49055)
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
14 San Rafael (14060009)+, Muddy (14070002)+, Fremont (14070003)+
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
Ecology & Life History
Help
Basic Description: A tufted, short to long-lived perennial herb, 0.5-1.5 dm tall, with lobed basal leaves. Forms mounds with age. The plant is densenly covered with glandular hairs that are often covered with adhering sand grains. Flowers (May-July) are pale blue.
Terrestrial Habitat(s): Bare rock/talus/scree, Desert, Forest/Woodland, Shrubland/chaparral, Woodland - Conifer
Habitat Comments: Restricted to sandstone outcrops and sandy detrital slopes in association with a curious mixture of mountain brush, pinyon-juniper, and cushion plants. Largest concentrations are on sandstone (including mudstone and siltstone) with interbedded gypsum, on ledges, in cracks, and on talus slopes. Most populations are on steep terrain.
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary Not yet assessed
Help
Population/Occurrence Delineation
Help
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: A natural occurrence of one or more plants.
Separation Barriers: EOs are separated by either: 1 kilometer or more across unsuitable habitat or altered and unsuitable areas; or 2 kilometers or more across apparently suitable habitat not known to be occupied.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 1 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 2 km
Separation Justification: The rationale for this large a separation distance across suitable but apparently unoccupied habitat is that it is likely additional research will find this habitat to be occupied. It can often be assumed that apparently unconnected occurrences will eventually be found to be more closely connected. No information on mobility of pollen and propagules is available on which to base the separation distance for this species.
Date: 19Mar2002
Author: Ben Franklin
Population/Occurrence Viability
Help
Excellent Viability: SIZE: There are insufficient quantitative data available for this species. CONDITION: The occurrence has an excellent likelihood of long-term viability as evidenced by the presence of multiple age classes and evidence of flowering and fruiting, indicating that the reproductive mechanisms are intact. This occurrence should be in a high-quality site with less than 1% cover of exotic plant species and/or no significant anthropogenic disturbance. LANDSCAPE CONTEXT: The occurrence is surrounded by an area that is unfragmented and includes the ecological processes needed to sustain this species.
Good Viability: SIZE: There are insufficient quantitative data available for this species. CONDITION: There are insufficient quantitative data available for this species. LANDSCAPE CONTEXT: The occurrence should have a good likelihood of long-term viability as evidenced by the presence of multiple age classes and evidence of flowering and fruiting, indicating that the reproductive mechanisms are intact. Anthropogenic disturbance within the occurrence is minimal. If exotic species are present, they comprise less than 10% of the total ground cover.
Fair Viability: SIZE: The surrounding landscape should contain the ecological processes needed to sustain the occurrence but may be fragmented and/or impacted by humans. CONDITION: There are insufficient quantitative data available for this species. LANDSCAPE CONTEXT: The occurrence may be less productive than the above situations, but is still viable, with multiple age classes and evidence of flowering and fruiting, indicating that the reproductive mechanisms are intact. The occupied habitat is somewhat degraded (exotic plant species make up between 10-50% of the total ground cover and/or there is a moderate level of anthropogenic disturbance).
Poor Viability: SIZE: There may be significant human disturbance, but the ecological processes needed to sustain the species are still intact. CONDITION: There are insufficient quantitative data available for this species. LANDSCAPE CONTEXT: Little or no evidence of successful reproduction is observed (poor seedling recruitment, no flowering or fruiting observed, or poor age class distribution). Exotic plant species make up greater than 50% of the total ground cover, and/or there is a significant level of human disturbance.
Justification: SIZE: Large populations in high quality sites are presumed to contain a high degree of genetic variability, to have a low susceptibility to the effects of inbreeding depression, and to be relatively resilient. EOs not meeting "C"-rank criteria are likely to have a very high probability of inbreeding depression and extirpation due to natural stochastic processes and/or occur in degraded habitat with low long-term potential for survival. CONDITION: Large populations in high quality sites are presumed to contain a high degree of genetic variability, to have a low susceptibility to the effects of inbreeding depression, and to be relatively resilient. EOs not meeting "C"-rank criteria are likely to have a very high probability of inbreeding depression and extirpation due to natural stochastic processes and/or occur in degraded habitat with low long-term potential for survival. LANDSCAPE CONTEXT: Large populations in high quality sites are presumed to contain a high degree of genetic variability, to have a low susceptibility to the effects of inbreeding depression, and to be relatively resilient. EOs not meeting "C"-rank criteria are likely to have a very high probability of inbreeding depression and extirpation due to natural stochastic processes and/or occur in degraded habitat with low long-term potential for survival.
Key for Ranking Species Element Occurrences Using the Generic Approach (2008).
U.S. Invasive Species Impact Rank (I-Rank) Not yet assessed
Help
Authors/Contributors
Help
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Edition Date: 07Aug1995
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author: Ben Franklin, rev. B. Franklin (1996), rev. A. Tomaino (2009)

Botanical data developed by NatureServe and its network of natural heritage programs (see Local Programs), The North Carolina Botanical Garden, and other contributors and cooperators (see Sources).

References
Help
  • Clark, D. 1997. Progress report-July 1997: "Expedition Into The Parks" rare plant survey at Capitol Reef National Park.

  • Clark, D.J. 2004. 2004 rare plant survey results. Fishlake National Forest, Supervisor's Office, BLM Richfield Field Office, Capital Reef National Park, and Dixie National Forest, Teasdale Ranger District, UT. 16 pp.

  • Clark, S. 1989. Field notes for Gilia tenuis survey. Utah State office, Bureau of Land Management.

  • Franklin, M.A. 2005. Plant information compiled by the Utah Natural Heritage Program: A progress report. Publication Number 05-40. Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, Salt Lake City, Utah. 341 pp. [http://dwrcdc.nr.utah.gov/ucdc/ViewReports/plantrpt.htm]

  • Groebner, C. M., G. L. Lenhart and C. L. Craig. 2004. 2004 survey results for Mussentuchit gilia (Aliciella tenuis). Capitol Reef National Park, Torrey, BLM Richfield Field Office, Richfield, and Price Field Office, Price. 7 pp. [Unpaginated]

  • 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.

  • Kass, R. J. 1990. Challenge cost share report for threatened, endangered and candidate plant species, Environmental Consulting, Springville, UT. Prepared for Bureau of Land Management, Utah State Office, Salt Lake City, UT. August 15, 1990.

  • Kass, R. J. 1990. Final report of habitat inventory of threatened, endangered and candidate plant species in the San Rafael Swell, Utah. Environmental Consulting, Springville, Utah. 87 pp.

  • Porter, J. M., and K. D. Heil. 1994. The status of Gilia tenuis Smith & Neese. Prepared for USDI Bureau of Land Management, Richfield District Office. 25 pp. + appendices.

  • Porter, J.M. 1998. Aliciella, a recircumscribed genus of Polemoniaceae. Aliso 17(1):23-46.

  • Porter, J.M., and K.D. Heil. 1994. The status of Gilia tenuis. Report prepared for the Bureau of Land Management, Utah State Office, Salt Lake City. 25 pp.

  • Smith, F.J. and E.C. Neese. 1989. A new perennial species of Gilia (Polemoniaceae) from Utah. Great Basin Naturalist 49: 461-465.

  • Smith, F.J., and E.C. Neese. 1989. A new perennial species of Gilia (Polemoniaceae) from Utah. Great Basin Naturalist 49(3): 461-465.

  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2006. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: 90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Mussentuchit Gilia as Threatened or Endangered. Federal Register 71(17): 4337.

  • 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.

  • Wosten, Mireille. 1997. The San Rafael Swell; the impact of off-road vehicle use. Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance. Salt Lake City, Utah.

Use Guidelines & Citation

Use Guidelines and Citation

The Small Print: Trademark, Copyright, Citation Guidelines, Restrictions on Use, and Information Disclaimer.

Note: All species and ecological community data presented in NatureServe Explorer at http://explorer.natureserve.org were updated to be current with NatureServe's central databases as of March 2018.
Note: This report was printed on

Trademark Notice: "NatureServe", NatureServe Explorer, The NatureServe logo, and all other names of NatureServe programs referenced herein are trademarks of NatureServe. Any other product or company names mentioned herein are the trademarks of their respective owners.

Copyright Notice: Copyright © 2018 NatureServe, 4600 N. Fairfax Dr., 7th Floor, Arlington Virginia 22203, U.S.A. All Rights Reserved. Each document delivered from this server or web site may contain other proprietary notices and copyright information relating to that document. The following citation should be used in any published materials which reference the web site.

Citation for data on website including State Distribution, Watershed, and Reptile Range maps:
NatureServe. 2018. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org. (Accessed:

Citation for Bird Range Maps of North America:
Ridgely, R.S., T.F. Allnutt, T. Brooks, D.K. McNicol, D.W. Mehlman, B.E. Young, and J.R. Zook. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Birds of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Bird Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Robert Ridgely, James Zook, The Nature Conservancy - Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International - CABS, World Wildlife Fund - US, and Environment Canada - WILDSPACE."

Citation for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
Patterson, B.D., G. Ceballos, W. Sechrest, M.F. Tognelli, T. Brooks, L. Luna, P. Ortega, I. Salazar, and B.E. Young. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Mammals of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Bruce Patterson, Wes Sechrest, Marcelo Tognelli, Gerardo Ceballos, The Nature Conservancy-Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International-CABS, World Wildlife Fund-US, and Environment Canada-WILDSPACE."

Citation for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe. 2004. Global Amphibian Assessment. IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe, Washington, DC and Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
"Data developed as part of the Global Amphibian Assessment and provided by IUCN-World Conservation Union, Conservation International and NatureServe."

NOTE: Full metadata for the Bird Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/birdDistributionmapsmetadatav1.pdf.

Full metadata for the Mammal Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/mammalsDistributionmetadatav1.pdf.

Restrictions on Use: Permission to use, copy and distribute documents delivered from this server is hereby granted under the following conditions:
  1. The above copyright notice must appear in all copies;
  2. Any use of the documents available from this server must be for informational purposes only and in no instance for commercial purposes;
  3. Some data may be downloaded to files and altered in format for analytical purposes, however the data should still be referenced using the citation above;
  4. No graphics available from this server can be used, copied or distributed separate from the accompanying text. Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved by NatureServe. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring by implication, estoppel, or otherwise any license or right under any trademark of NatureServe. No trademark owned by NatureServe may be used in advertising or promotion pertaining to the distribution of documents delivered from this server without specific advance permission from NatureServe. Except as expressly provided above, nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring any license or right under any NatureServe copyright.
Information Warranty Disclaimer: All documents and related graphics provided by this server and any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server are provided "as is" without warranty as to the currentness, completeness, or accuracy of any specific data. NatureServe hereby disclaims all warranties and conditions with regard to any documents provided by this server or any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, including but not limited to all implied warranties and conditions of merchantibility, fitness for a particular purpose, and non-infringement. NatureServe makes no representations about the suitability of the information delivered from this server or any other documents that are referenced to or linked to this server. In no event shall NatureServe be liable for any special, indirect, incidental, consequential damages, or for damages of any kind arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information contained in any documents provided by this server or in any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, under any theory of liability used. NatureServe may update or make changes to the documents provided by this server at any time without notice; however, NatureServe makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. Since the data in the central databases are continually being updated, it is advisable to refresh data retrieved at least once a year after its receipt. The data provided is for planning, assessment, and informational purposes. Site specific projects or activities should be reviewed for potential environmental impacts with appropriate regulatory agencies. If ground-disturbing activities are proposed on a site, the appropriate state natural heritage program(s) or conservation data center can be contacted for a site-specific review of the project area (see Visit Local Programs).

Feedback Request: NatureServe encourages users to let us know of any errors or significant omissions that you find in the data through (see Contact Us). Your comments will be very valuable in improving the overall quality of our databases for the benefit of all users.