Kobresia simpliciuscula - (Wahlenb.) Mackenzie
Simple Kobresia
Other English Common Names: Simple Bog Sedge
Other Common Names: simple bog sedge
Synonym(s): Carex simpliciuscula Wahlenberg
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Kobresia simpliciuscula (Wahlenb.) Mackenzie (TSN 503282)
French Common Names: carex simple
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.150630
Element Code: PMCYP0F030
Informal Taxonomy: Plants, Vascular - Flowering Plants - Sedge Family
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Plantae Anthophyta Monocotyledoneae Cyperales Cyperaceae Kobresia
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: Kobresia simpliciuscula
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G5
Global Status Last Reviewed: 15Jul2016
Global Status Last Changed: 03Oct1984
Ranking Methodology Used: Ranked by inspection
Rounded Global Status: G5 - Secure
Nation: United States
National Status: NNR
Nation: Canada
National Status: N5 (15Jul2016)

U.S. & Canada State/Province Status
United States Alaska (SNR), Colorado (S2), Idaho (S2), Montana (S3), Oregon (S1), Utah (S1), Wyoming (S1)
Canada Alberta (S3), British Columbia (S4), Labrador (SNR), Manitoba (S1), Newfoundland Island (S3), Northwest Territories (SNR), Nunavut (S4), Ontario (S4), Quebec (S3S4), Yukon Territory (S4)

Other Statuses

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Range Extent Comments: Circumpolar, in North America from Alaska to Greenland south to New Brunswick, N Ontario, Alberta, and in the Rocky Mountains south to Montana, Utah, NW Wyoming, and C Colorado.

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Distribution
Help
Global Range: Circumpolar, in North America from Alaska to Greenland south to New Brunswick, N Ontario, Alberta, and in the Rocky Mountains south to Montana, Utah, NW Wyoming, and C Colorado.

U.S. States and Canadian Provinces
Color legend for Distribution Map

U.S. & Canada State/Province Distribution
United States AK, CO, ID, MT, OR, UT, WY
Canada AB, BC, LB, MB, NF, NT, NU, ON, QC, YT

Range Map
No map available.


U.S. Distribution by County Help
State County Name (FIPS Code)
CO Park (08093), Teller (08119)
ID Clark (16033), Custer (16037), Lemhi (16059), Teton (16081)*
MT Beaverhead (30001), Carbon (30009), Glacier (30035), Granite (30039), Park (30067), Teton (30099)
OR Wallowa (41063)
UT Daggett (49009), Duchesne (49013)*, Emery (49015)*, Sanpete (49039)*
WY Park (56029), Sublette (56035)
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
09 St. Marys (09040001)+
10 Red Rock (10020001)+, Cut Bank (10030202)+, Teton (10030205)+, Upper Yellowstone (10070002)+, Clarks Fork Yellowstone (10070006)+, Big Horn Lake (10080010)+, South Platte Headwaters (10190001)+
11 Upper Arkansas (11020002)+
14 Upper Green (14040101)+, Upper Green-Flaming Gorge Reservoir (14040106)+, Duchesne (14060003)+*, San Rafael (14060009)+*
17 Flint-Rock (17010202)+, Teton (17040204)+*, Birch (17040216)+, Little Lost (17040217)+, Wallowa (17060105)+, Pahsimeroi (17060202)+, Lemhi (17060204)+
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
Ecology & Life History
Help
General Description: Simple Kobresia is a sedge-like plant that forms small bunches with triangular stems up to 15 cm tall. The leaves, which are confined to near the base of the plant, are flat or rolled and ca. 1 mm wide. Dried sheaths and blades persist at the base of the plant. The 3-12 small spikes are borne in a loosely congested inflorescence at the top of the stem. Each spike is 5-15 mm long, is subtended by a small, brown, papery bract, and consists of a few flowers; male flowers with anthers are located above female flowers. Each female flower is composed of a small bract and a scale that is loosely wrapped around the ovary.

From CNHP Wetland Guide 2012: Growth Habit: strongly rhizomatous. Culms: 5-35 cm.
Leaves: basal sheaths dull, base of blade usually persistent. Blades: 2-20 cm x 0.2-1.5 mm
Inflorescence: usually compound, 10-35 x 3-8 mm.
Bracts: brown, margins hyaline, ovate to oblong-ovate.
Spikelets: proximal spikelet 1 flowered and pistillate or 2 flowered and androgynous; terminal and distal spikelets 1-flowered, staminate.
Pistillate Scales: brown, ovate, 2-3 mm, margins hyaline, midvein distinct almost to tip, apex obtuse to sub-acute.
Perigynia: brown, 2.5-3.2 mm, margins free to base, smooth.

Diagnostic Characteristics: This species could easily be mistaken for a true sedge (Carex), but is distinguished by having a bract wrapped around the ovary, rather than a closed perigynium. Kobresia myosuroides, which can occur in the same habitat, is distinguished by having a narrower inflorescence.

From CNHP Wetland Guide 2012: Main Characteristics:
·Spikelets unisexual, 1-flowered
·Spikes several, lower one is distinct

Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary Not yet assessed
Help
Population/Occurrence Delineation
Help
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: An element occurrence consists of all the small patches of Phacelia submutica habitat where the plant has been observed, and that are not separated from other small habitat patches by a major ridge with inappropriate habitat, a major drainage, distance over one mile, or other significant geolocical feature.
Separation Barriers: Not separated from other small habitat patches by a major ridge with inappropriate habitat, a major drainage, distance over one mile, or other significant geolocical feature.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 1.6 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 1.6 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 populations will eventually be found to be more closely connected; these are best regarded as suboccurrences. No information on mobility of pollen and propagules is available on which to base the separation distance for this species.
Author: Colorado NHP
Population/Occurrence Viability
Help
Excellent Viability: SIZE: There are no quantitative / spatial 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. This includes the presence of the appropriate, very specific edaphic requirements of this species, i.e., boggy, mostly calcareous meadows.
Good Viability: SIZE: There are no quantitative / spatial data available for this species. CONDITION: There are no quantitative / spatial 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 no quantitative / spatial 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 no quantitative / spatial 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
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 21Nov1994
Element Ecology & Life History Author(s): KAJ

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
  • Andersen, M.D. and B. Heidel. 2011. HUC-based species range maps. Prepared by Wyoming Natural Diversity Database for use in the pilot WISDOM application operational from inception to yet-to-be-determined date of update of tool.

  • Ball, P. W. and A. A. Reznicek. 2002. Carex. Pages 254-572 in Flora of North America Editorial Committee, editor. Flora of North America North of Mexico. Vol. 23. Magnoliophyta: Commelinidae (in part): Cyperaceae. Oxford University Press, New York, NY.

  • Decker, K., D. R. Culver, and D. G. Anderson. 2006. Kobresia simpliciuscula (Wahlenberg) Mackenzie (simple bog sedge): A Technical Conservation Assessment. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/Kobresiasimpliciuscula.pdf.

  • Dorn, R. D. 2001. Vascular Plants of Wyoming, third edition. Mountain West Publishing, Cheyenne, WY.

  • Evert, E. F. 2010. Vascular Plants of the Greater Yellowstone Area: Annotated Catalog and Atlas. Park Ridge, IL.

  • Evert, E.F. 1986. The Yellowstone region: endemics and other interesting plants. IN: Williams, J., ed. Rocky Mountain Alpines. American Rock Garden Society and Denver Botanic Gardens.

  • Fertig, W. 2000. State Species Abstract: Kobresia simpliciuscula. Wyoming Natural Diversity Database. Available on the internet at www.uwyo.edu/wyndd.

  • Fertig, W. 1998. The status of rare plants on Shoshone National Forest: 1995-97 survey results. Unpublished report prepared for the Shoshone National Forest by the Wyoming Natural Diversity Database, Laramie, WY.

  • Fertig, W. 2000. Rare vascular plant species in the Wyoming portion of the Utah-Wyoming Rocky Mountains Ecoregion. Prepared for the Wyoming Nature Conservancy by the Wyoming Natural Diversity Database, Laramie, WY.

  • Fertig, W. and G. Jones. 1992. Plant communities and rare plants of the Swamp Lake Botanical Area, Clarks Fork Ranger District, Shoshone National Forest. Unpublished report prepared for the Shoshone National Forest by the Wyoming Natural Diversity Database, Laramie, WY.

  • Flora of North America Editorial Committee. 2002b. Flora of North America north of Mexico. Vol. 23. Magnoliophyta: Commelinidae (in part): Cyperaceae. Oxford Univ. Press, New York. xxiv + 608 pp.

  • Heidel, B. 2013. Sensitive plant survey in the Dickinson Park area, Shoshone National Forest. Prepared for Shoshone National Forest. Wyoming Natural Diversity Database. Laramie, WY.

  • Heidel, B. 2013. Status of Antennaria arcuata (Meadow pussytoes) in Sublette County, Wyoming. Prepared for the USDI Bureau of Land Management - Pinedale and Rock Springs Field Offices by the Wyoming Natural Diversity Database - University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming.

  • Heidel, B. and S. Laursen. 2003. Botanical and ecological inventory of peatland sites on the Shoshone National Forest. Unpublished report prepared for Shoshone National Forest by the Wyoming Natural Diversity Database, Laramie, WY.

  • Hitchcock, C. L., A. Cronquist and M. Ownbey. 1969. Vascular Plants of the Pacific Northwest, Part 1: Vascular Cryptograms, Gymnosperms and Monocotyledons. University of Washington Press, Seattle, WA.

  • Hulten, E. 1968. Flora of Alaska and Neighboring Territories. Stanford University Press. Palo Alto, CA. 1008 pp.

  • 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.

  • Kartesz, J.T. 1996. Species distribution data at state and province level for vascular plant taxa of the United States, Canada, and Greenland (accepted records), from unpublished data files at the North Carolina Botanical Garden, December, 1996.

  • Lesica, P. & J. S. Shelly. 1991. Sensitive, Threatened and Endangered Vascular Plants of Montana. Montana Natural Heritage Program, Occ. Publ. No. 1. Helena, MT.

  • Lesica, P. 1991. The rare vascular plants of Pine Butte Preserve. Unpublished report to The Nature Conservancy, Montana Field Office, Helena. 15 pp.

  • Lesica, P. 1991d. The rare vascular plants of Pine Butte Preserve. Unpublished report to The Nature Conservancy, Montana Field Office, Helena. 15 pp.

  • Meades, S.J. & Hay, S.G; Brouillet, L. 2000. Annotated Checklist of Vascular Plants of Newfoundland and Labrador. Memorial University Botanical Gardens, St John's NF. 237pp.

  • Porsild, A.E. and W.J. Cody. 1980. Vascular Plants of Continental Northwest Territories, Canada. National Museums of Canada, Ottawa.

  • Porter, C.L. 1965. A Flora of Wyoming: Part IV. Bulletin 434:1-88. Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Wyoming.

  • Sanderson, J. and M. March. 1996. Extreme rich fens of South Park, Colorado: their distribution, identification, and natural heritage significance. Unpublished report prepared for Park County, the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, and the US Environmental Protection Agency by the Colorado Natural Heritage Program, Ft. Collins, CO.

  • USDA, NRCS. 2013. The PLANTS Database. National Plant Data Team, Greensboro, NC 27401-4901 USA.

  • Weber, W. A. and R. C. Wittmann. 2012. Colorado Flora, Eastern Slope, A Field Guide to the Vascular Plants, Fourth Edition. Boulder, Colorado. 555 pp.

  • Weber, W. A. and R. C. Wittmann. 2012. Colorado Flora, Western Slope, A Field Guide to the Vascular Plants, Fourth Edition. Boulder, Colorado. 532 pp.

  • Weber, W. and R. Wittmann. 2001. Colorado Flora: Eastern Slope. Third edition. University Press of Colorado, Niwot, CO.

  • Weber, W.A. and R.C. Wittmann. 2001. Colorado Flora: Western Slope, Third Edition. University Press of Colorado, Niwot, CO.

  • Welp, L., W.F. Fertig, G.P. Jones, G.P. Beauvais, and S.M. Ogle. 2000. Fine filter analysis of the Bighorn, Medicine Bow, and Shoshone National Forests in Wyoming. Wyoming Natural Diversity Database, Laramie, WY.

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 November 2016.
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 © 2017 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. 2017. 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.