Advertisement

Economic Botany

, Volume 41, Issue 3, pp 433–445 | Cite as

The prickly-pears (Opuntia spp., Cactaceae): A source of human and animal food in semiarid regions

  • Charles E. Russell
  • Peter Felker
Article

Abstract

The Cactaceae contain many economically promising species primarily in the genus Opuntia. This genus appears to have its center of genetic diversity in Mexico where it is widely used as fodder, forage, fruit, and a green vegetable. In southwestern United States, the prickly-pears have been considered as both weeds and valuable forage plants. During the frequent, unpredictable droughts, propane torches known as “pear burners” are used to singe the spines off cactus pads so that they can be eaten by livestock. Although spineless varieties of Opuntia can be consumed directly by domestic livestock, they are extremely susceptible to herbivory by wildlife. The Cactaceae possess Crassulacean Acid Metabolism, which can be four- to five-fold more efficient in converting water to dry matter than the most efficient grasses. Some Opuntia strains grow rapidly with fresh-fruit yields of 8,000–12,000 kg/ha/ yr or more and dry-matter vegetative production of 20,000–50,000 kg/ha/yr.

Keywords

Economic Botany Cold Tolerance Semiarid Region Prickly Pear Opuntia Species 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Andres, L. A., and R. D. Goeden. 1971. The biological control of weeds by introduced natural enemies. Pages 143-164in C. B. Huffaker, ed., Biological control. AAAS symposium on biological control, Boston, MA, Dec 30–31, 1969.Google Scholar
  2. Anonymous. 1981. El nopal. Publicación Especial 34. Comisión Nacional de Las Zonas Aridas y el Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Mexico [D.F.].Google Scholar
  3. Arnold, L. A., and D. L. Drawe. 1979. Seasonal food habits of white-tailed deer in the South Texas Plains. J. Range Managern. 32:175–178.Google Scholar
  4. Benson, L. 1982. The cacti of the United States and Canada. Stanford Univ. Press, Stanford, CA.Google Scholar
  5. Brewbaker, J. L., and B. M. Hutton. 1979.Leucaena: versatile tropical tree legume. Pages 207–259in G. A. Ritchie, ed., New agricultural crops. Amer. Assoc. Advancem. Sci. Symp. Vol. 38. Westview Press, Boulder, CO.Google Scholar
  6. Crosswhite, F. S. 1980. The annual saguaro harvest and crop cycle of the Papago with reference to ecology and symbolism. Desert Pl. 2(1):2–61.Google Scholar
  7. Díaz del Castillo, B. 1956. The discovery and conquest of Mexico. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York.Google Scholar
  8. Domingues, O. 1963. Origem e introdução da palma forrageira no Nordeste. Instituto Joaquim Nabuco de Pesquisas Sociais, Recife, Pernambuco.Google Scholar
  9. Evans, E. H.1967. They color things red. Pacific Disc. 20:24–25.Google Scholar
  10. Everitt, J. H., and C. L. Gonzalez. 1981. Seasonal nutrient content in food plants of white-tailed deer on the South Texas Plains. J. Range Managern. 34:506;-510.Google Scholar
  11. Felger, R. S. 1979. Ancient crops for the twenty-first century. Pages 5–20in G. A. Ritchie, ed., New agricultural crops. Amer. Assoc. Advancem. Sci. Symp. Vol. 38. Westview Press, Boulder, CO.Google Scholar
  12. Felker, P., and P. R. Clark. 1982. Position of mesquite (Prosopis spp.) nodulation and nitrogen fixation (acetylene reduction) in 3-m long phraeatophytically simulated soil columns. Pl. & Soil 64:297–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fisher, R. A., and N. C. Turner. 1978. Plant productivity in the arid and semi-arid zones. Annual Rev. Pl. Physiol. 29:277–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Glumac, E. L. 1985. Biomass production, survival and cold tolerance of three species ofLeucaena in South Texas. M.S. thesis, Texas A&I University, Kingsville, TX.Google Scholar
  15. Griffiths, D. 1905. The prickly pear and other cacti as food for stock. U.S.D.A. Bur. PL Industr. Bull. 74.Google Scholar
  16. -.Griffiths, D. 1906. Feeding prickly pear to stock. U.S.D.A. Bur. Pl. Industr. Bull. 91.Google Scholar
  17. -. 1908. The prickly pear as a farm crop. U.S.D.A. Bur. Pl. Industr. Bull. 124.Google Scholar
  18. -. 1915. Yields of native prickly pear in southern Texas. U.S.D.A. Bur. Pl. Industr. Bull. 208.Google Scholar
  19. -, and R. F. Hare. 1907. The tuna as food for man. U.S.D.A. Bur. Pl. Industr. Bull. 116.Google Scholar
  20. Hernández X., E. 1970. The Mexican experience. Pages 336–339in H. Dregne, ed., Arid lands in transition. Amer. Assoc. Advance. Sci. Publ. 90. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  21. Kluge, M., and I. P. Ting. 1978. Crassulacean Acid Metabolism: an ecological analysis. Ecological Studies Series, Vol. 30. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
  22. Lehmann, V. W. 1984. Bobwhites of the Rio Grande Plain of Texas. Texas A&M Univ. Press, College Station, TX.Google Scholar
  23. -. n.d. Prickly pear, a plant of many possibilities. Unpubl. ms. King Ranch, Kingsville, TX.Google Scholar
  24. Monjauze, A., and H. N. Le Houérou. 1965. Le rôle desOpuntia dans l’économie agricole nord africaine. Bull. École Natl. Supér. Agric. Tunis 8–9:85–164.Google Scholar
  25. Moss, E. H. 1983. Flora of Alberta. 2nd ed.; revised by J. G. Packer. Univ. Toronto Press, Toronto.Google Scholar
  26. Norwine, J. 1981. Precipitation trends and variability in the vicinity of northwest gulf coast: 1900–1980. Pages 322–333in R. D. Cross and D. L. Williams, ed., Proceedings of the national symposium on freshwater inflow to estuaries, Vol. II. Office of Biological Services, Fish &Wildlife Service, FWS/OBS-81/04, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  27. Ramsey, C. W. 1965. Potential economic returns from deer as compared with livestock in the Edwards Plateau region of Texas. J. Range Managern. 18:247–250.Google Scholar
  28. Russell, C. E. 1986. Cactus, ecology and range management during drought. Pages 59–69in R. D. Brown, ed., Proceedings of a symposium on livestock and wildlife management during drought. Caesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute, Texas A&I Univ., Kingsville, TX.Google Scholar
  29. Teer, J. C. 1975. Commercial uses of game animals on rangelands of Texas. J. Anim. Sci. 40:1000–1008.Google Scholar
  30. Toroni C, F., and X. Zúñiga O. 1983. Aspectos tecnologicos y socioeconomicos de la produccion de tunas en las comúnas de Til-Til y Pudahuel, Region Metropolitana. Tesis para optar al grado de Licenciado en Ciencias Agrícolas (Especialidad: Fruiticultura). Univ. de Chile, Santiago.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The New York Botanical Garden 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Charles E. Russell
  • Peter Felker
    • 1
  1. 1.Caesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute, College of AgricultureTexas A&I UniversityKings-ville

Personalised recommendations