Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Patuxent Research Refuge Laurel, Maryland

Home , Boehmeria cylindrica, Elk Neck State Forest, Liquidambar styraciflua, Vaccinium pallidum

Prepared For:

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 5 Contract Number: 501817D057

Prepared By:

April 2012

PATUXENT RESEARCH REFUGE, MARYLAND

Executive Summary

Woolpert and NatureServe, our subconsultant, were retained by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) under Contract 501817DO57 on 24 September 2010 to conduct a vegetation sampling, classification, and mapping project at the Patuxent Research Refuge (PRR). The objective of the project was to determine and map the plant communities at PRR using the National Vegetation Classification (NVC) system to the association level. The NVC is more thoroughly described in a later section of this report. Preparation of the vegetation mapping will better enhance PRR’s abilities to conduct other future inventories, monitor natural resources, and manage land resources.

Patuxent Research Refuge is located on the western shore of the Chesapeake Bay, on the Inner Coastal Plain of Maryland. It lies close to the “fall line”, the area of abrupt transition to the rolling hills of the Piedmont. Referred to as the Northern Atlantic Coastal Plain on the U.S. Forest Service ecoregion map (see below location map), this area is characterized by elements of both the Piedmont and Coastal Plain. Topography of this region ranges from flat to low hills reaching 250 feet above sea level, and as one reaches the Chesapeake Bay, the landscape becomes more sharply dissected. The refuge lies on the Patuxent Formation, characterized by sandy, well-drained soils that support vegetation sharing floristic elements with the pine barrens of New Jersey, most notably pitch pine (Pinus rigida).

Location of Patuxent Research Refuge on U.S. Forest Service Ecoregion Map

Woolpert held a project kickoff meeting at PRR with USFWS, NatureServe, and U.S. Geological Survey staff on 24 March 2011. The purposes of this meeting were to review the scope of services, be introduced to project staff, discuss the project schedule, obtain background data, and take an automobile tour of the refuge. Following the meeting, Woolpert staff prepared and distributed minutes to attendees.

Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Report 1 PATUXENT RESEARCH REFUGE, MARYLAND

At the data collection phase, base mapping was provided to Woolpert by the USFWS and other sources including:

. August 2010, digital true-color, aerial photography, including digital elevation model and color infrared photos by Dewberry . March 2007, leaf-off, aerial photography . Soil survey maps in digital form from the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey Geographic Database (SSURGO) . Refuge planimetrics, boundary, trails, roads, buildings, and hydrology Geographic Information System (GIS) files

Using a combination of the above information and ArcMap 9.3.1, Woolpert developed a draft vegetation map through standard photointerpretation techniques. The minimum vegetation mapping unit area is 0.5 hectares. However, smaller sized polygons were occasionally delineated for vegetation types that occur naturally in areas smaller than 0.5 hectares.

The draft polygons were attributed using a preliminary NVC classification list in the office. Developed areas (e.g., buildings, firing ranges, and roads) were delineated and classified using the Anderson Level II method. The Anderson Level II method is more thoroughly described in a later section of this report.

Following the development of draft maps, NatureServe conducted a field validation of the draft maps. Field locations were determined by selecting representative vegetation types, as well as areas with ambiguous photo signatures. Two different types of vegetation data, observation and quick-point data, were collected. Observation data included dominant and diagnostic species and the abundance of invasive species. Quick-point data included attribution to an NVC association or map class. Locations for both data types were recorded using Global Positioning System (GPS) equipment. At least one digital ground photograph was taken of each association sampled. These photographs are included in Appendix B. The data points were then used to modify the maps, as appropriate, to more accurately delineate the boundaries of vegetation association polygons. An overall list of the invasive species observed at the refuge was also prepared.

Final maps were provided in paper and digital format as a supplement to this report to the refuge for their use as the final deliverable. At completion of the project, 853 vegetation polygons and points for small-patch associations were delineated, supported by 108 field verification points. Vegetation polygons or points reflect 25 NVC associations; eight managed or modified vegetation map classes, and five Anderson Level II land use/land cover classes.

Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Report 2 PATUXENT RESEARCH REFUGE, MARYLAND

1.0 Overview of Map Classifications

The goal of this project was to determine and map the plant communities at PRR using the National Vegetation Classification (NVC). Some vegetated and non-vegetated areas not classified in the NVC were classified according to land use/land cover (Anderson, et. al., 1976) or project specific map classes. Several associations are listed in the classification that do not appear on the map except as part of a composite map unit (e.g.; COMP_WIMP). Some associations, usually those that have been heavily altered by human activity, are not discernible as discrete entities on aerial photography. For example, Successional Sweetgum Forest and Northeastern Modified Successional Forest are widely variable in composition and structure and closely resemble each other on aerial photos. Further, some associations occur together in a complex of small patches interspersed with each other. Intensive field survey is necessary to map these associations with confidence, so they are grouped together into a single map unit. Field workers may encounter one or more of these associations in any of the polygons marked with the corresponding map units, therefore, these associations are included in the key and descriptions in this report.

The NVC is a hierarchical system that successively divides the complex continuum of vegetation into conceptually discrete units. The hierarchy is comprised of seven levels, the base unit of which is the association. Table 1 illustrates the eight hierarchical levels and the criteria used to define them. An association is defined as a plant community with a definite floristic composition, uniform physiognomy, and occurring on uniform habitat. Although it is vegetation that is classified, vegetation is in fact a reflection of its environmental setting, including abiotic features, such as slope, elevation, degree of inundation, soils, bedrock, temperature, and other features. Vegetation also provides habitat for myriad organisms large and small, including vertebrate and invertebrate animals, nonvascular plants, fungi, and bacteria. Conservation of associations, then, provides a means to protect vegetation and all its associated biotic as well as abiotic features.

Table 1: National Vegetation Classification Hierarchy (from FGDC 2008) Hierarchy Level Criteria Upper: Physiognomy plays a predominant role. L1—Formation Class Broad combinations of general dominant growth forms that are adapted to basic temperature (energy budget), moisture, and substrate/aquatic conditions. L2—Formation Combinations of general dominant and diagnostic growth forms that reflect global Subclass macroclimatic factors driven primarily by latitude and continental position, or that reflect overriding substrate/aquatic conditions. L3—Formation Combinations of dominant and diagnostic growth forms that reflect global macroclimatic factors as modified by altitude, seasonality of precipitation, substrates, and hydrologic conditions. Middle: Floristics and physiognomy play predominant roles. L4—Division Combinations of dominant and diagnostic growth forms and a broad set of diagnostic plant species that reflect biogeographic differences in composition and continental differences in mesoclimate, geology, substrates, hydrology, and disturbance regimes. L5—Macrogroup Combinations of moderate sets of diagnostic plant species and diagnostic growth forms, that reflect biogeographic differences in composition and sub-continental to regional differences in mesoclimate, geology, substrates, hydrology, and disturbance regimes. L6—Group Combinations of relatively narrow sets of diagnostic plant species (including dominants and co-dominants), broadly similar composition, and diagnostic growth forms that reflect regional mesoclimate, geology, substrates, hydrology and disturbance regimes. Lower: Floristics plays a predominant role. L7—Alliance Diagnostic species, including some from the dominant growth form or layer, and moderately similar composition that reflect regional to subregional climate, substrates, hydrology, moisture/nutrient factors, and disturbance regimes. L8—Association Diagnostic species, usually from multiple growth forms or layers, and more narrowly similar composition that reflect topo-edaphic climate, substrates, hydrology, and disturbance regimes. Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Report 3 PATUXENT RESEARCH REFUGE, MARYLAND

The NVC was developed by ecologists of the Natural Heritage Program network and The Nature Conservancy after many years of literature review, data collection, and data analysis. This collaborative effort culminated in the publication of International Classification of Ecological Communities: Terrestrial Vegetation of the United States (Grossman et al., 1998). The International Classification of Ecological Communities, now known as the International Vegetation Classification, of which the NVC is a subset, has been revised and refined since 1998, and is now managed by NatureServe in continued collaboration with the network of member natural heritage programs. The classification is housed in the Biotics 4.0 database and is updated regularly. The upper levels of the NVC were adopted as a standard by the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) to support the production of uniform statistics on vegetation at the national level.

For a detailed description of the classification, see the publication Seeing the Forest and the Trees (Maybury, 1999). Key points include:

. Provides the first such consistent classification on a scale fine enough to be useful for the conservation of specific sites. . Allows useful classification of all vegetation, including upland, wetland, and aquatic vegetation, both natural and semi-natural (human-disturbed) types. . Includes more than 4,500 vegetation types. . Adopted by the FGDC for use by all U.S. federal agencies.

Key Uses of the Ecological Classification:

. Determining which community types are intrinsically rare or have been severely degraded by human activities. . Identifying the best remaining occurrences of natural communities across their geographic ranges. . Conservation planning at multiple scales—local, regional, ecoregional. . Mapping parks and natural areas in order to manage them more wisely. . Predicting species occurrences across entire ranges.

Development of the NVC has focused primarily on the classification of vegetation that has been minimally altered by human caused disturbance or disruption of natural processes. If new classification efforts are not conducted to target undescribed vegetation types, this vegetation (which may primarily consist of semi-natural, managed, and modified vegetation) is matched with the most similar existing NVC association, or classified according to project specific map classes.

Non-vegetated areas and Table 2: Example of Land Use/Land Cover Categories1 highly altered vegetation, Level I Level II such as lawns, median 1 Urban or Built-up Land 11 Residential 12 Commercial and Services strips, etc., were classified 13 Industrial according to the Anderson 14 Transportation, Communications, and Utilities et. al. (1976) land use/land 15 Industrial and Commercial Complexes cover classification. This 16 Mixed Urban or Built-up Land 17 Other Urban or Built-up Land classification provides a 1 standard set of land use Anderson et. al. 1976 categories that are not classified by the NVC. Table 2 illustrates a portion of the classification at the two hierarchical levels, simply referred to as Levels I and II.

Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Report 4 PATUXENT RESEARCH REFUGE, MARYLAND

2.0 Vegetation Mapping Methods

2.1 Remote Sensing Methods

The minimum mapping unit for this project was 0.5 hectares, but for vegetation occurring naturally in lower acreage, smaller polygons or point locations were used. Two sets of photography were used in photointerpretation: existing true-color, leaf-off photography supplied by the refuge, and color-infrared photography flown during full leaf-out. Leaf-off photography was acquired in 2007, and the color-infrared photo was flown by Dewberry in October 2010. Leaf-off, true-color photography was particularly useful in discriminating between deciduous and evergreen canopies, as well as identifying wetlands and disturbed areas otherwise obscured by leafed-out canopy. Color-infrared photography was used to delineate canopy closure, structure, and density. The Digital Elevation Model (DEM), provided by the refuge as part of production of the 2010 photography, was also used in conjunction with the photography to identify elevation differences and degree of slope.

A draft set of vegetation maps was developed using the leaf-off aerial photography, topographical data, and planimetric base mapping. “Heads-up” digitizing (i.e.; directly on a computer monitor) was used to capture the various vegetation types present on the leaf-off photography.

After the draft vegetation maps were developed, ecologists from NatureServe and the Maryland Natural Heritage Program used these maps to help guide field visit locations. Field data, including GPS locations, were submitted to Woolpert and used to refine the draft maps. Several teleconferences were conducted in which NatureServe provided further guidance in drafting the vegetation polygons.

Following completion of map revisions, NatureServe and Maryland Natural Heritage Program ecologists field checked the revised 25 paper maps to focus on additional areas with unique or ambiguous photo signatures. Manual mark-ups of paper maps, indicating suggested line changes and other edits, were provided to Woolpert following completion of fieldwork. Woolpert then used these mark-ups to edit the final set of polygons.

Upon completion of the final map revisions, the digital map files were provided to NatureServe in order to attribute polygons to the appropriate map class and edit delineations as needed. Three types of map classes were used in the attributions:

1. Natural vegetation, classified to NVC association, 2. Semi-natural, managed, or modified vegetation, highly altered from its native composition and form by human activity, and 3. Anderson Level II land use/land cover category.

When a polygon was interpreted to represent an existing NVC association, it was attributed with the appropriate NVC association. If a polygon was interpreted to represent semi-natural, managed, or modified vegetation not currently described in the NVC, or a composite of these vegetation types occurring in patches below the minimum mapping unit (0.5 ha), it was attributed with a project specific map class prefixed in the map attribute table by either a “COMP_” (for Complex) or “D” (for disturbed). Most disturbed or managed vegetation at PRR was mapped with one of the following project specific map classes: Successional Mixed Deciduous Forest, Successional Vine-Shrubland, Managed Herb/Shrub, Planted Evergreen, Disturbed Herbaceous Wetland, Disturbed Woody Wetland Impounded Herbaceous Wetland, and Impounded Woody Wetland. A complete list of all map classes is provided in Appendix C.

Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Report 5 PATUXENT RESEARCH REFUGE, MARYLAND

In some cases where the classification of a polygon or a vegetation type was ambiguous, or if a polygon was interpreted to potentially represent two vegetations types, a secondary NVC vegetation type was added to the map attribute table. The presence of a secondary vegetation type in the attribute table indicates that a polygon may represent either or both of the attributed types. In addition to primary and secondary vegetation types, polygons were also assigned a high, medium, or low level of confidence in the primary vegetation attribution.

2.2 Field Investigation Methods

NatureServe ecologists developed a preliminary vegetation classification for Patuxent Research Refuge by assembling a list of NVC associations known to occur in the region as a result of recent field studies. These included the National Park Service’s National Capital Region vegetation classification and mapping effort (Hazler et al., 2012) and the vegetation classification of the Upper Anacostia watershed (Teague et al., 2005). Other important sources included historic vegetation descriptions from the refuge (Hotchkiss and Stewart, 1947), historic vegetation descriptions of the state (Shreve, 1910), the Maryland vegetation classification (Harrison, 2011), the flora of the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center (Terrell et al., 2000), and a description of vegetation of the Anacostia watershed (Simmons et al., 2008). With the exception of Hotchkiss and Stewart (1974), data from these sources had been previously incorporated into the NVC. Additional potential NVC associations were added to the list from a report on the NVC associations of the Chesapeake Bay Lowland ecoregion (Sneddon and Neid, 2003). Additional field data from preliminary visits to the refuge at the start of the project also yielded potential NVC associations.

Referring to the preliminary vegetation classification, the ecologists studied the GIS data available for the refuge (e.g., aerial photos, topography, geology, soils, and hydrology) to target specific areas and photographic signatures to visit in the field for data collection. Sites were chosen based on location, perceived overstory composition, and distinctness. The goal was to visit a number of locations that represented all of the perceived vegetation types at the refuge. For the primary vegetation types at the refuge, ecologists recorded the dominant and diagnostic species and structure of the vegetation, environmental setting, landscape position, and adjacent vegetation. Inferred land use history and evidence of other human or unnatural disturbances, presence of invasive species, evidence of fire or flooding, and animal use were also described. All data were recorded on one of two standard forms developed for map class validation (Appendix A). The location of each point was obtained using a Trimble Juno ST GPS unit. Preliminary fieldwork was conducted on March 24, 2011, during the refuge tour following the kickoff meeting. Subsequent field visits to collect data were conducted on June 10, July 12-14, August 23-25, and September 27-29, 2011. Field form A was used initially, but eventually it was simplified (field form B) to facilitate collecting a greater number of observations. In addition to this more detailed observation data, field ecologists also collected quick-point data, which consisted of a GPS location, an attribution to NVC association, and notes as needed. A total of 20 observations and 88 quick-points were recorded. The observation points and quick-points are included in the PRR_Obs_final_DD GIS layer.

2.3 Vegetation Classification

A full classification assessment of the vegetation at PRR was not included in the scope of this project. Therefore, the vegetation associations that have been attributed to PRR only include existing associations that most closely match the vegetation at the refuge. To assign existing NVC associations to vegetation present at the refuge, each field data point was cross walked to the preliminary list of NVC types by comparing the species composition, structure, and environmental characteristics of the field data to those of the defined association. Ecologists from NatureServe and from the Maryland Natural Heritage Program collaborated on the final

Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Report 6 PATUXENT RESEARCH REFUGE, MARYLAND classification of data points to NVC associations, and a list of NVC types was finalized. This list includes associations that occurred in patches too small to map or that were mapped as part of a semi-natural, modified, or managed map class, but were not mapped individually. Descriptions of each association were generated from NatureServe’s Biotics 4 database and are included in Appendix C. In addition, a dichotomous key to the associations was written to aid any future work on the refuge, including accuracy assessment.

Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Report 7 PATUXENT RESEARCH REFUGE, MARYLAND

3.0 Results

3.1 Data Analysis

Twenty-five NVC associations were identified at the refuge, including eight upland forest types, nine wetland forest types, three shrub-dominated wetland types, four herbaceous wetland types, and one aquatic vegetation type. Only one forest, Virginia Pine Forest, is coniferous and one forest, Pitch Pine—Oak Forest, is mixed coniferous and deciduous, while the remainder are mostly deciduous. Successional Mixed Deciduous Forest is generally deciduous, but may have a component of evergreens as well. Three forest types are considered natural (although not old growth) and four are semi-natural or ruderal, indicating a more recent history of clearing or other anthropogenic disturbance. Nine wetland forest types occur on the refuge. These include five floodplain forest types and four swamps, of which two are ruderal, again indicating relatively recent disturbance. One shrub swamp type occurs in areas too small to map effectively as polygons and is therefore indicated as point locations. Table 4 lists the 25 associations, arranged within the NVC hierarchy and the acreage of the association present at the refuge.

Table 3: NVC Associations of Patuxent Research Refuge, Arranged in NVC Hierarchy 1. FOREST AND WOODLAND CLASS (C01) 1.B. Temperate and Boreal Forest Subclass (S15) 1.B.1. Warm Temperate Forest Formation (F018) 1.B.1.NA. SOUTHEASTERN NORTH AMERICAN WARM TEMPERATE FOREST DIVISION (D006) M305—Southeastern North American Ruderal Forest and Plantation Macrogroup G031—Southeast Hardwood and Conifer Ruderal Forest Group CEGL007221—Liriodendron tulipifera-Quercus spp. Forest (mapped as part of COMP_SMDF) CEGL007216—Liquidambar styraciflua Forest (mapped as part of COMP_SMDF ) 1.B.2. Cool Temperate Forest Formation (F008) 1.B.2.NA. EASTERN NORTH AMERICAN COOL TEMPERATE FOREST DIVISION (D008) M012—Central Oak-Hardwood and Pine Forest Macrogroup G015—Appalachian Oak-Chestnut Forest Group CEGL006299—Quercus prinus-(Quercus coccinea, Quercus rubra)/Kalmia latifolia/Vaccinium pallidum Forest (79 acres) G158—Northeastern and North-Central Oak-Hickory Forest Group CEGL006075—Fagus grandifolia-Quercus (alba, rubra)-Liriodendron tulipifera/(Ilex opaca var. opaca)/Polystichum acrostichoides Forest (560 acres) CEGL006269—Quercus alba-Quercus falcata-(Carya pallida)/Gaylussacia frondosa Forest (581 acres) M013—Eastern North American Ruderal Forest and Plantation Macrogroup G030—Northern and Central Hardwood and Conifer Ruderal Forest Group CEGL002591—-Pinus virginiana Successional Forest (1,088 acres) CEGL006599—Prunus serotina-Liriodendron tulipifera-Acer rubrum-Fraxinus Americana-(Robinia pseudoacacia) Forest (mapped as part of COMP_SMDF) M159—Northern and Eastern Pine-Oak Forest and Barrens Macrogroup G161—Pitch Pine Barrens Group CEGL006329—Pinus rigida-Quercus coccinea-Quercus falcata/(Quercus marilandica)/Gaylussacia frondosa Woodland (143 acres) 1.B.3. Temperate Swamp and Flooded Forest Formation (F026) 1.B.3.NA. EASTERN NORTH AMERICAN FLOODED and SWAMP FOREST DIVISION (D011) M029—Northern and Central Floodplain Forest and Scrub Macrogroup G040—Silver Maple-Green Ash-Sycamore Floodplain Group CEGL004073—Platanus occidentalis-Acer negundo-Juglans nigra/Asimina triloba/Mertensia virginica Forest (4 acres) CEGL006603—Platanus occidentalis-(Liquidambar styraciflua, Liriodendron tulipifera)/Asimina triloba Forest (138 acres)

Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Report 8 PATUXENT RESEARCH REFUGE, MARYLAND

Table 3: NVC Associations of Patuxent Research Refuge, Arranged in NVC Hierarchy 1. FOREST AND WOODLAND CLASS (C01)—CONTINUED M030—Northern and Central Swamp Forest Macrogroup G045—Northern and Central Conifer and Hardwood Acidic Swamp Group CEGL006406—Acer rubrum-Fraxinus (pennsylvanica, americana)/Lindera benzoin/Symplocarpus foetidus Forest (8 acres) CEGL006119—Acer rubrum/Carex stricta-Onoclea sensibilis Woodland (2 acres) CEGL006238—Acer rubrum-Nyssa sylvatica-Magnolia virginiana/Viburnum nudum var. nudum/Osmunda cinnamomea-Woodwardia areolata Forest (63 acres) CEGL006606—Acer rubrum-Fraxinus pennsylvanica/Saururus cernuus Forest (1 acre) 1.B.3.NB. SOUTHEASTERN NORTH AMERICAN FLOODED and SWAMP FOREST DIVISION (D062) M310—Southeastern North American Ruderal Flooded and Swamp Forest Macrogroup G553—Southeastern Ruderal Flooded and Swamp Forest Group CEGL007330—Liquidambar styraciflua-(Liriodendron tulipifera) Temporarily Flooded Forest (82 acres) M031—Southern Floodplain Hardwood Forest Macrogroup G034—Oak-Sweetgum Floodplain Forest Group CEGL006605—Quercus (phellos, palustris, michauxii)-Liquidambar styraciflua/Cinna arundinacea Forest (158 acres) CEGL004418—Liquidambar styraciflua-Liriodendron tulipifera/Lindera benzoin/Arisaema triphyllum Forest (292 acres) 2. SHRUBLAND AND GRASSLAND CLASS (C02) 2.B. Temperate and Boreal Grassland, Savanna and Shrubland Subclass (S18) 2.B.6. Temperate and Boreal Freshwater Shrubland, Wet Meadow and Marsh Formation (F013) 2.B.6.NA. EASTERN NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER WET MEADOW, RIPARIAN AND MARSH DIVISION (D030) M069—Eastern North American Wet Meadow and Marsh Macrogroup G112—Eastern North American Wet Meadow Group CEGL006461—Leersia oryzoides-Sagittaria latifolia Vegetation (3 acres) G125—Eastern North American Freshwater Marsh Group CEGL006153—Typha (angustifolia, latifolia)-(Schoenoplectus spp.) Eastern Herbaceous Vegetation (mapped a part of COMP_HIMP) M160—Northern and Central Tall Shrub Wetland Macrogroup G167—Northern and Central Shrub Swamp Group CEGL006499—Alnus serrulata-Magnolia virginiana/Andropogon glomeratus-Eupatorium pilosum- Rhynchospora gracilenta-Xyris torta Shrubland (<1 acres) CEGL006069—Cephalanthus occidentalis - Decodon verticillatus Shrubland (mapped as part of COMP_WIMP) CEGL005089—Decodon verticillatus Semipermanently Flooded Shrubland (mapped as part of COMP_WIMP) M303—Eastern North America Ruderal Wet Meadow and Marsh G556—Northern and Central Ruderal Wet Meadow and Marsh CEGL004141—Phragmites australis Eastern North America Temperate Semi-Natural Herbaceous Vegetation (mapped as part of COMP_WIMP) G557—Southeastern Ruderal Wet Meadow and Marsh CEGL004112—Juncus effusus Seasonally Flooded Herbaceous Vegetation (mapped as part of COMP_HIMP) 5.B.1.NA. NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER AQUATIC VEGETATION DIVISION (D049) M108—Eastern North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation Macrogroup G114—Eastern North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation Group CEGL002386—Nuphar advena-Nymphaea odorata Herbaceous Vegetation (mapped as part of COMP_HIMP)

Eight semi-natural vegetation Table 4: Semi-Natural Vegetation Map Classes types were mapped on the Class Description Acres refuge, including two COMP_HIMP Impounded Herbaceous Wetland 94 COMP_MANHS Managed Herb/Shrub 362 impoundment types (herbaceous COMP_SMDF Successional Mixed Deciduous Forest 907 and woody), three composite COMP_VISH Successional Vine-Shrubland 4 types, and two disturbed wetland COMP_WIMP Impounded Woody Wetland 76 types. Table 4 indicates map COMP_PLEV Planted Evergreen Forest 2 classes employed for semi- DHEWE Disturbed Herbaceous Wetland 2 natural vegetation. Five land DWOWE Disturbed Woody Wetland 18 use/land cover types were mapped using the Anderson Level II classification (Table 5). Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Report 9 PATUXENT RESEARCH REFUGE, MARYLAND

Table 5: Anderson Level II Land Use/Land Cover Map Classes Class Description 14 Transportation, Communications, and Utilities 17 Other Urban or Built-up Land 21 Cropland and Pasture 51 Streams and Canals 52 Lakes

During the fieldwork, invasive species were observed at the refuge and are listed in Table 6.

Table 6: Invasive Species Observed at Refuge Observation Points Scientific Name Common Name Family Berberis vulgaris Common barberry Berberidaceae Glechoma hederacea Ground ivy Lamiaceae Microstegium vimineum Japanese stiltgrass; Nepalese browntop Poaceae Phragmites australis Common reed Poaceae Polygonum perfoliatum Asiatic tearthumb; mile-a-minute weed Polygonaceae Rosa multiflora Multiflora rose Rosaceae

3.2 Refuge-Specific Vegetation Key

The following is a refuge-specific key based on the results of the vegetation mapping for the Patuxent Research Refuge. This is a dichotomous key, with numbered couplets. Each couplet (designated by a boxed number above it) has two statements to choose from. To use the key, the user should begin with couplet 1, decide which statement best applies to the observed setting, and proceed to the couplet indicated after that statement. The user then continues along the key and will eventually arrive at the type that should fit the setting. If it is unclear which choice is better, the user should make a note and try both directions from that couplet.

Vegetation, either natural or semi-natural ...... 2

Areas of heavy land use; vegetation essentially absent, or managed at least annually by mowing, cultivation, and other activities, or unvegetated open water ...... 30

Vegetation mostly woody; tallest layer dominated by trees or shrubs ...... 3

Trees lacking or sparse; vegetation made up of herbaceous plants or shrubs ...... 24

Upland Forests

Forests and woodlands; trees dominant ...... 4

Shrublands; shrubs, young saplings, stunted trees, and/or woody vines cover at least 25% of the area ...... 24

Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Report 10 PATUXENT RESEARCH REFUGE, MARYLAND

Upland forests: vegetation not influenced by flooding or groundwater seepage; occurring on relatively higher topographic position; may occur on non-flooded islands of floodplain ...... 5

Wetland forests: standing water may be present; if not obviously wet, occurring in floodplain or other low area and wet at least part of the growing season ...... 14

Needle-leaved trees make up at least 25% of the canopy; pure evergreen or mixed with deciduous trees ...... 6

Evergreen trees absent or less than 25% of the canopy ...... 8

Evergreen trees non native and/or native trees (pitch pine or Virginia pine), with evidence of planting ...... Planted Evergreen Forest (COMP_PLEV)

Evergreen trees native and no evidence of planting ...... 7

Virginia pine (Pinus virginiana) dominant; other pines, including pitch pine may be present; trunks may be closely spaced and of small diameter, or larger with scattered deciduous trees...... Successional Virginia Pine Forest (CEGL002591)

Pitch pine (Pinus rigida) makes up at least 50% of the canopy ...... Coastal Plain Pine-Oak Woodland (CEGL006329)

Upland oaks1 prevalent, making up at least 50% of the canopy; heaths (lowbush blueberries, huckleberries, mountain laurel) common in the understory ...... 9

Upland oaks not prevalent in canopy; heaths unimportant in understory ...... 10

Chestnut oak prevalent in canopy, usually dominant; mountain laurel usually common to dominant in the understory; substrate typically dry, gravelly sands .... Chestnut Oak Forest (CEGL006299)

Other upland oaks more prevalent than chestnut oak; heaths usually deciduous and patchy, mountain laurel absent or unimportant; occurs on upper slopes and knolls ...... Mixed Oak/Heath Forest (CEGL006269)

1Upland Oaks: white oak, scarlet oak, southern red oak, chestnut oak, and northern red oak Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Report 11 PATUXENT RESEARCH REFUGE, MARYLAND

Beech common, upland sites, but may also occur on floodplain islands; Christmas ferns and paw paw characteristic ...... Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest (CEGL006075)

Beech uncommon; tuliptree or sweetgum present in quantity ...... 11

Sweetgum strongly dominant ...... Successional Sweetgum Forest (CEGL007216)

Sweetgum may be present, but not strongly dominant ...... 12

Tulip poplar strongly dominant ...... Successional Tuliptree Forest (Typic Type) (CEGL007221)

Tulip poplar mixed with other trees ...... 13

Some combination of red maple, tuliptree, black cherry, white ash, and black locust on upland settings ...... Northeastern Modified Successional Forest (CEGL006599)

Forests of catastrophically disturbed sites, native or exotic vines usually dense in the understory and climbing into canopy; canopy gaps prevalent; upland sites; understory often dominated by invasive species ...... Successional Mixed Deciduous Forest (COMP_SMDF)

Wetland Forests

Forests of floodplains; sycamore usually present in quantity ...... 15

Wet forests of floodplains or other settings; sycamore absent ...... 16

Common streamside forest of Patuxent; river birch, sweetgum, red maple usually present in quantity; black walnut absent ...... Coastal Plain Streamside Forest (CEGL006603)

Uncommon streamside forest of Patuxent; black walnut and bitternut hickory present; rich indicators bloodroot, wild ginger, and golden ragwort present ...... Rich Floodplain Forest (CEGL004073)

Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Report 12 PATUXENT RESEARCH REFUGE, MARYLAND

Swamp chestnut oak and/or swamp white oak prevalent; floodplain forests of braided stream channels; sedges common ...... Oak Floodplain Swamp (CEGL006605)

Michaux oak or swamp white oak absent or unimportant ...... 17

Sweetgum present in quantity ...... 18

Sweetgum not dominant ...... 19

Sweetgum strongly dominant or co-dominant with tuliptree ...... Successional Sweetgum Floodplain Forest (CEGL007330)

Green ash and musclewood prevalent; black gum absent; forests of small streams ...... Coastal Plain—Piedmont Floodplain Forest (CEGL004418)

Vegetation obviously disturbed or impounded ...... 20

Vegetation not obviously disturbed; canopy some mixture of red maple, sweetgum green ash, black gum ...... 22

Woody vegetation of impoundments ...... Impounded Woody Wetland COMP_WIMP

Vegetation not obviously impounded ...... 21

Open canopy of red maple saplings or young trees; standing water usually present ...... Red Maple Wooded Marsh (CEGL006119)

Vegetation not as above ...... Disturbed Woody Wetland DWOWE

Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Report 13 PATUXENT RESEARCH REFUGE, MARYLAND

Lizard’s tail present in quantity in ground layer; substrate mucky ...... Red Maple/Lizard’s Tail Swamp (CEGL006606)

Lizard’s tail absent or unimportant ...... 23

More common seepage swamp (in topographic depressions or toe slopes); sweetbay present; sphagnum moss prominent, cinnamon fern usually present ...... Acidic Seepage Swamp (CEGL006238)

Seepage swamp with; pawpaw present in quantity; spicebush and skunk cabbage characteristic; uncommon at Patuxent ...... Southern New England/Northern Piedmont Red Maple Seepage Swamp (CEGL006406) 24

Vegetation dominated by shrubs or vines ...... 25

Vegetation dominated by herbaceous plants ...... 29

Vegetation of uplands, disturbed or heavily managed ...... 26

Wetlands dominated by shrubs ...... 27

Vegetation a tangle of vines and shrubs ...... Successional Vine-Shrubland (COMP_VISH)

Vegetation comprised of managed herbaceous vegetation that may include shrub encroachment or scattered trees; may include powerline rights-of-way, mowed fields, old fields ...... Managed Herb/Shrub (COMP_MANM)

Shrub swamp dominated or co-dominated by buttonbush or water willow; herbaceous plants usually sparse; sundews absent ...... 28

Small-patch wetland dominated by several shrub species, including alder; buttonbush absent; sundews common on substrate; confined to power line rights-of-way ...... Coastal Plain Seepage Bog (CEGL006499)

Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Report 14 PATUXENT RESEARCH REFUGE, MARYLAND

Shrub swamp dominated by buttonbush; may be patchy with scatterered herbaceous plants or mixed with swamp loosestrife ...... Northeastern Buttonbush Shrub Swamp (CEGL006069)

Buttonbush absent or unimportant; swamp loosestrife dominant ...... Swamp Loosestrife Shrub Swamp (CEGL005089)

Obviously disturbed wetland, exotic species usually present ...... Disturbed Herbaceous Wetland (DHEWE)

Vegetation of impoundments ...... Impounded Herbaceous Wetland2 (COMP_HIMP)

Anderson Level II Land Use/Land Cover Categories

Standing water present ...... 31

Water absent ...... 32

Water in defined channels ...... Streams and Canals

Water in defined basins ...... Reservoirs

Areas used for agriculture ...... Cropland and Pasture

Not as above ...... 33

2Wetlands associated with artificial impoundments (including impoundments due to beaver activity) dominated by herbaceous plants. Dominance is often patchy and many associations may be present in a single impoundment. Standing snags of dead or dying trees are often present. Potential associations may include (* = suspected to occur on the refuge, but not observed during the field season):

CEGL002386—Nuphar advena - Nymphaea odorata Herbaceous Vegetation CEGL004112—Juncus effusus Seasonally Flooded Herbaceous Vegetation CEGL005089—Decodon verticillatus Semipermanently Flooded Shrubland CEGL006153—Typha (angustifolia, latifolia)—(Schoenoplectus spp.) Eastern Herbaceous Vegetation *CEGL006461—Leersia oryzoides - Sagittaria latifolia Herbaceous Vegetation *CEGL004141— Phragmites australis Eastern North America Temperate Semi-natural Herbaceous Vegetation Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Report 15 PATUXENT RESEARCH REFUGE, MARYLAND

Other heavily managed vegetation, such as lawns, roadsides ... Other Urban or Built-up Land

Vegetation absent ...... 34

Roads and associated infrastructure ...... Transportation, Communication, and Utilities

Not as above; individual land uses intermixed ...... Mixed Urban or Built-up Land

Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Report 16 PATUXENT RESEARCH REFUGE, MARYLAND

4.0 Summary of Conclusions

4.1 Patuxent Research Refuge Plant Communities of Conservation Significance

A significant portion of the Patuxent Research Refuge landscape is characterized by deep, sandy soils of the Cretaceous-aged Patuxent formation (Potomac Group). In Maryland, this formation generally extends northeasterly from the Washington D.C. area east of the fall-line to just beyond Baltimore. These sandy deposits are considered excessively drained and extremely dry, and habitats are subject to periodic fires and droughts. Soils are extremely acidic, infertile, and found to commonly occupy upland flats, ridges, and knolls at the refuge. Combined, these characteristics support a flora and suite of natural communities more commonly associated with the Pine Barrens region in New Jersey. The following two plant communities found at the refuge are of conservation significance:

1. Pine Barrens Pine—Oak Woodland (CEGL006329): On the north and south tracts we documented several stands characterized by a mixture of pitch pine (Pinus rigida) and oaks (Quercus spp.), such as scarlet oak (Q. coccinea), southern red oak (Q. falcata), and white oak (Q. alba) over dry, sandy soils. These stands are species-poor and are also associated with black gum (Nyssa sylvatica), sassafras (Sassafras albidum), and shrubs of blueberries (Vaccinium spp.) and huckleberries (Gaylussacia spp.). Natural fires caused by lightning strikes are an important natural process in these habitats, allowing the regeneration of pitch pine and other fire-adapted species, while suppressing successional hardwoods, such as red maple (Acer rubrum), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), and fire-intolerant pines such as Virginia pine (Pinus virginiana). Stands on the north tract were found to be highly degraded, fire-suppressed, and susceptible to Virginia pine invasion following clearing. Stands on the south tract were better developed at the entrance to the Visitors Center. Recommended management objectives include researching the appropriate fire frequency, intensity, and application of this prescription to restore woodland vegetation. This natural community is known from coastal portions of the New Jersey Pine Barrens southward into portions of the Maryland inner coastal plain. Similar stands of this type have been documented at the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center and Elk Neck State Forest in Maryland. The natural structure of this vegetation is an open- canopy woodland, maintained in part by the dry nature of the soils, but also by historical fires. Management considerations may include the introduction of controlled fire, or thinning of the canopy, or both.

2. Southern Red Maple—Black Gum Swamp Forest (CEGL006238): We documented several acidic seepage swamp forests characterized by black gum (Nyssa sylvatica), red maple (Acer rubrum), sweetbay (Magnolia virginiana), and cinnamon fern (Osmunda cinnamomea) on the north tract. Many of these stands are small and positioned at the head of small stream drainages and toe-slopes of ancient floodplain terraces. An extensive seepage swamp was located north of the boardwalk towards Shangri-La, but appeared impacted by beaver activity. The hydrology of many stands did not appear intact, likely an artifact of anthropogenic disturbances associated with past land use. Disturbances noted that affect groundwater hydrology include road construction, culverts, and open water impoundments. This community type is globally rare due to a limited distribution ranging from southeastern New York and New Jersey to southeastern Virginia on the Coastal Plain. Management considerations for this vegetation may include restoration of natural hydrologic regimes such as protection of ground water, removal of culverts or impoundments, and strategic relocation of roads and trails as appropriate.

Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Report 17 PATUXENT RESEARCH REFUGE, MARYLAND

5.0 References

Anderson, J.R., E.E. Hardy, J.T. Roach, and R.E. Witmer. 1976. A land use and land cover classification system for use with remote sensor data. Geological Survey Professional Paper 964, United States Department of Interior, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

FGDC (Federal Geographic Data Committee). 2008. National Vegetation Classification Standard, Version 2 FGDC-STD-005-2008 (version 2). Vegetation Subcommittee, Federal Geographic Data Committee, FGDC Secretariat, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia, USA.

Harrison, J. W. 2011. The natural communities of Maryland: 2011 working list of ecological community groups and community types. Unpublished report. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife and Heritage Service, Natural Heritage Program, Annapolis. 33 pp.

Hazler, K., G. Fleming, K. Taverna, and J. Teague. 2012 (in prep) Vegetation classification and mapping for the National Park Service, National Capital Region Parks. Natural Resource Report.

Hotchkiss, N. and R.E. Stewart. 1947. Vegetation of the Patuxent Research Refuge, Maryland. The American Midland Naturalist 38: 1-75.

Maybury, K.P. (ed). 1999. Seeing the Forest and the Trees: Ecological Classification for Conservation. The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA. 37 pp.

McAtee, W. L. 1918. A sketch of the natural history of the District of Columbia. Bulletin of the Biological Society of Washington 1. Washington, DC. 142 pp.

NatureServe. 2005. Upper Anacostia watershed plant communities of conservation significance. Final report submitted to the Naomi and Nehemiah Cohen Foundation. NatureServe, Boston, MA.

Shreve, F., M. A. Chrysler, F. H. Blodgett, and F. W. Besley. 1910. The plant life of Maryland. Maryland Weather Service. Special Publication, Volume III. The Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, MD. 533 pp.

Simmons, R.H., J.M. Parrish, M.D. Tice, and M.T. Strong. 2008. Conservation priorities and selected natural communities of the Upper Anacostia watershed. Marilandica 12: 1-23.

Sneddon, L. and S. Neid. 2003. Vegetation of the Chesapeake Bay Lowlands: a key to the types. Final report submitted to the National Park Service and US Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 5.

Terrell, E.E., J.L. Reveal, R.W. Spjut, R.F. Whitcomb, J.H. Kirkbride Jr., M.T. Cimino, and M.T. Strong. 2000. Annotated list of the flora of the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center, Beltsville, Maryland. USDA, Agricultural Research Service. ARS-155.

Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Report 18 PATUXENT RESEARCH REFUGE, MARYLAND

APPENDICES

Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Report PATUXENT RESEARCH REFUGE, MARYLAND

Appendix A: Field Data Forms

Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Report PATUXENT RESEARCH REFUGE, MARYLAND

Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Report A-1 PATUXENT RESEARCH REFUGE, MARYLAND

Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Report A-2 PATUXENT RESEARCH REFUGE, MARYLAND

Appendix B: Photographs

Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Report PATUXENT RESEARCH REFUGE, MARYLAND

Photo 1: Successional Virginia Pine Forest Photo 2: Acidic Seepage Swamp (CEGL006238) (CEGL002591)

Photo 3: Rich Floodplain Forest (CEGL004073) Photo 4: Coastal Plain—Piedmont Floodplain Forest (CEGL004418)

Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Report B-1 PATUXENT RESEARCH REFUGE, MARYLAND

Photo 5: Northeastern Modified Successional Forest Photo 6: Oak Floodplain Swamp (CEGL006605) (CEGL006599)

Photo 7: Southern New England/Northern Piedmont Red Maple Seepage Swamp (CEGL006406)

Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Report B-2 PATUXENT RESEARCH REFUGE, MARYLAND

Appendix C: Vegetation Classification

Vegetation Sampling, Classification, and Mapping Report

INTERNATIONAL ECOLOGICAL CLASSIFICATION STANDARD:

TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGICAL CLASSIFICATIONS

Associations of Patuxent Research Refuge Maryland

15 February 2012

NatureServe

4600 North Fairfax Drive, 7th Floor Arlington, VA 22203

c/o University of Massachusetts at Boston Biology Department 100 Morrissey Blvd. Boston, MA 02125-3393

This subset of the International Ecological Classification Standard covers vegetation associations of Patuxent Research Refuge, Maryland. This classification has been developed in consultation with many individuals and agencies and incorporates information from a variety of publications and other classifications. Comments and suggestions regarding the contents of this subset should be directed to Mary J. Russo, Central Ecology Data Manager, Durham, NC and Lesley A. Sneddon, Senior Regional Ecologist, Boston, MA .

Copyright © 2012 NatureServe, 4600 North Fairfax Drive, 7th floor Arlington, VA 22203, U.S.A. All Rights Reserved. Citations: The following citation should be used in any published materials which reference ecological system and/or International Vegetation Classification (IVC hierarchy) and association data: NatureServe. 2012. International Ecological Classification Standard: Terrestrial Ecological Classifications. NatureServe Central Databases. Arlington, VA. U.S.A. Data current as of 15 February 2012.

Restrictions on Use: Permission to use, copy and distribute these data is hereby granted under the following conditions: 1. The above copyright notice must appear in all documents and reports; 2. Any use must be for informational purposes only and in no instance for commercial purposes; 3. Some data may be altered in format for analytical purposes, however the data should still be referenced using the citation above.

Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved by 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 data are provided as is without warranty as to the currentness, completeness, or accuracy of any specific data. The absence of data in any particular geographic area does not necessarily mean that species or ecological communities of concern are not present. NatureServe hereby disclaims all warranties and conditions with regard to these data, including but not limited to all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, and non-infringement. 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 of these data. Because the data in the NatureServe Central Databases are continually being updated, it is advisable to refresh data at least once a year after receipt.

NatureServe 4600 North Fairfax Drive, 7th floor Arlington, VA 22203

______These data are extracted from: NatureServe. 2012. International Ecological Classification Standard: Terrestrial Ecological Classifications. NatureServe Central Databases. Arlington, VA. U.S.A. Data current as of 15 February 2012.

______This document may be generally cited as follows: NatureServe1. 2012. International Ecological Classification Standard: Terrestrial Ecological Classifications. Associations of Patuxent Research Refuge, Maryland. NatureServe Central Databases. Arlington, VA. Data current as of 15 February 2012.

1 NatureServe is an international organization including NatureServe regional offices, a NatureServe central office, U.S. State Natural Heritage Programs, and Conservation Data Centres (CDC) in Canada and Latin America and the Caribbean. Ecologists from the following organizations have contributed the development of the ecological systems classification:

United States Central NatureServe Office, Arlington, VA; Eastern Regional Office, Boston, MA; Midwestern Regional Office, Minneapolis, MN; Southeastern Regional Office, Durham, NC; Western Regional Office, Boulder, CO; Alabama Natural Heritage Program, Montgomery AL; Alaska Natural Heritage Program, Anchorage, AK; Arizona Heritage Data Management Center, Phoenix AZ; Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission Little Rock, AR; Blue Ridge Parkway, Asheville, NC; California Natural Heritage Program, Sacramento, CA; Colorado Natural Heritage Program, Fort Collins, CO; Connecticut Natural Diversity Database, Hartford, CT; Delaware Natural Heritage Program, Smyrna, DE; District of Columbia Natural Heritage Program/National Capital Region Conservation Data Center, Washington DC; Florida Natural Areas Inventory, Tallahassee, FL; Georgia Natural Heritage Program, Social Circle, GA; Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Gatlinburg, TN; Gulf Islands National Seashore, Gulf Breeze, FL; Hawaii Natural Heritage Program, Honolulu, Hawaii; Idaho Conservation Data Center, Boise, ID; Illinois Natural Heritage Division/Illinois Natural Heritage Database Program, Springfield, IL; Indiana Natural Heritage Data Center, Indianapolis, IN; Iowa Natural Areas Inventory, Des Moines, IA; Kansas Natural Heritage Inventory, Lawrence, KS; Kentucky Natural Heritage Program, Frankfort, KY; Louisiana Natural Heritage Program, Baton Rouge, LA; Maine Natural Areas Program, Augusta, ME; Mammoth Cave National Park, Mammoth Cave, KY; Maryland Wildlife & Heritage Division, Annapolis, MD; Massachusetts Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program, Westborough, MA; Michigan Natural Features Inventory, Lansing, MI; Minnesota Natural Heritage & Nongame Research and Minnesota County Biological Survey, St. Paul, MN; Mississippi Natural Heritage Program, Jackson, MI; Missouri Natural Heritage Database, Jefferson City, MO; Montana Natural Heritage Program, Helena, MT; National Forest in North Carolina, Asheville, NC; National Forests in Florida, Tallahassee, FL; National Park Service, Southeastern Regional Office, Atlanta, GA; Navajo Natural Heritage Program, Window Rock, AZ; Nebraska Natural Heritage Program, Lincoln, NE; Nevada Natural Heritage Program, Carson City, NV; New Hampshire Natural Heritage Inventory, Concord, NH; New Jersey Natural Heritage Program, Trenton, NJ; New Mexico Natural Heritage Program, Albuquerque , NM; Maryland Natural Heritage Program, Latham, NY; North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, NC; North Dakota Natural Heritage Inventory, Bismarck, ND; Ohio Natural Heritage Database, Columbus, OH; Oklahoma Natural Heritage Inventory, Norman, OK; Oregon Natural Heritage Program, Portland, OR; Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory, PA; Rhode Island Natural Heritage Program, Providence, RI; South Carolina Heritage Trust, Columbia, SC; South Dakota Natural Heritage Data Base, Pierre, SD; Tennessee Division of Natural Heritage, Nashville, TN; Tennessee Valley Authority Heritage Program, Norris, TN; Texas Conservation Data Center, San Antonio, TX; Utah Natural Heritage Program, Salt Lake City, UT; Vermont Nongame & Natural Heritage Program, Waterbury, VT; Virginia Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond, VA; Washington Natural Heritage Program, Olympia, WA; West Virginia Natural Heritage Program, Elkins, WV; Wisconsin Natural Heritage Program, Madison, WI; Wyoming Natural Diversity Database, Laramie, WY

Canada Alberta Natural Heritage Information Centre, Edmonton, AB, Canada; Atlantic Canada Conservation Data Centre, Sackville, New Brunswick, Canada; British Columbia Conservation Data Centre, Victoria, BC, Canada; Manitoba Conservation Data Centre. Winnipeg, MB, Canada; Ontario Natural Heritage Information Centre, Peterborough, ON, Canada; Quebec Conservation Data Centre, Quebec, QC, Canada; Saskatchewan Conservation Data Centre, Regina, SK, Canada; Yukon Conservation Data Centre, Yukon, Canada

Latin American and Caribbean Centro de Datos para la Conservacion de Bolivia, La Paz , Bolivia; Centro de Datos para la Conservacion de Colombia, Cali,Valle, Columbia; Centro de Datos para la Conservacion de Ecuador, Quito, Ecuador; Centro de Datos para la Conservacion de Guatemala, Ciudad de Guatemala , Guatemala; Centro de Datos para la Conservacion de Panama, Querry Heights , Panama; Centro de Datos para la Conservacion de Paraguay, San Lorenzo , Paraguay; Centro de Datos para la Conservacion de Peru, Lima, Peru; Centro de Datos para la Conservacion de Sonora, Hermosillo, Sonora , Mexico; Netherlands Antilles Natural Heritage Program, Curacao , Netherlands Antilles; Puerto Rico-Departmento De Recursos Naturales Y Ambientales, Puerto Rico; Virgin Islands Conservation Data Center, St. Thomas, Virgin Islands.

NatureServe also has partnered with many International and United States Federal and State organizations, which have also contributed significantly to the development of the International Classification. Partners include the following The Nature Conservancy; Provincial Forest Ecosystem Classification Groups in Canada; Canadian Forest Service; Parks Canada; United States Forest Service; National GAP Analysis Program; United States National Park Service; United States Fish and Wildlife Service; United States Geological Survey; United States Department of Defense; Ecological Society of America; Environmental Protection Agency; Natural Resource Conservation Services; United States Department of Energy; and the Tennessee Valley Authority. Many individual state organizations and people from academic institutions have also contributed to the development of this classification.

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. FOREST TO OPEN WOODLAND ...... 3 1.B.1. Warm Temperate Forest ...... 3 M305. Southeastern North American Ruderal Forest & Plantation ...... 3 G031. Southeast Hardwood & Conifer Ruderal Forest ...... 3 Successional Sweetgum Forest (CEGL007216) ...... 3 Successional Tuliptree Forest (Typic Type) (CEGL007221) ...... 4 1.B.2. Cool Temperate Forest ...... 5 M012. Central Oak-Hardwood & Pine Forest ...... 5 G015. Appalachian Oak - Chestnut Forest ...... 5 Central Appalachian/Northern Piedmont Chestnut Oak Forest (CEGL006299) ...... 5 G158. Northeastern & North-Central Oak - Hickory Forest ...... 7 Mid-Atlantic Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest (CEGL006075) ...... 7 Northeastern Coastal Plain Mixed Oak/Heath Forest (CEGL006269) ...... 10 M013. Eastern North American Ruderal Forest & Plantation ...... 11 G030. Northern & Central Hardwood & Conifer Ruderal Forest...... 11 Successional Virginia Pine Forest (CEGL002591) ...... 11 Northeastern Modified Successional Forest (CEGL006599) ...... 14 M159. Northern & Eastern Pine - Oak Forest & Barrens ...... 15 G161. Pitch Pine Barrens ...... 15 Pine Barrens Pine - Oak Woodland (CEGL006329) ...... 15 1.B.3. Temperate Flooded & Swamp Forest...... 17 M029. Northern & Central Floodplain Forest & Scrub ...... 17 G040. Silver Maple - Green Ash - Sycamore Floodplain ...... 17 Coastal Plain Streamside Forest (CEGL006603) ...... 17 Piedmont/Central Appalachian Rich Floodplain Forest (CEGL004073) ...... 18 M030. Northern & Central Swamp Forest ...... 19 G045. Northern & Central Conifer & Hardwood Acidic Swamp ...... 19 Southern New England/Northern Piedmont Red Maple Seepage Swamp (CEGL006406) ...... 19 Chesapeake/Piedmont Red Maple/Lizard's-tail Swamp (CEGL006606) ...... 21 Southern Red Maple - Blackgum Swamp Forest (CEGL006238) ...... 23 Pine Barrens Lowland Forest (CEGL006926) ...... 25 Red Maple/Upright Sedge Wooded Marsh (CEGL006119) ...... 26 M310. Southeastern North American Ruderal Flooded & Swamp Forest ...... 27 G553. Southeastern Ruderal Flooded & Swamp Forest ...... 27 Successional Sweetgum Floodplain Forest (CEGL007330) ...... 27 M031. Southern Floodplain Hardwood Forest ...... 29 G034. Oak - Sweetgum Floodplain Forest ...... 29 Upper Southeast Small Stream Sweetgum - Tuliptree Forest (CEGL004418) ...... 29 Coastal Plain Oak Floodplain Swamp (CEGL006605) ...... 31 2. SHRUBLAND & GRASSLAND ...... 33 2.B.6. Temperate & Boreal Freshwater Marsh, Wet Meadow & Shrubland ...... 33 M303. Eastern North American Ruderal Wet Meadow & Marsh ...... 33 G557. Southeastern Ruderal Wet Meadow & Marsh...... 33 Common Rush Marsh (CEGL004112) ...... 33 M069. Eastern North American Wet Meadow & Marsh ...... 34 G125. Eastern North American Freshwater Marsh ...... 34 Eastern Cattail Marsh (CEGL006153) ...... 34 G112. Eastern North American Wet Meadow ...... 36 Central Appalachian Cutgrass Marsh (CEGL006461) ...... 36 M160. Northern & Central Tall Shrub Wetland ...... 37 G167. Northern & Central Shrub Swamp ...... 37 Hazel Alder - Sweetbay/Bushy Bluestem - Rough Boneset - Slender Beaksedge - Slender Yellow-eyed-grass Shrubland (CEGL006499) ...... 37 1 Vegetation of Patuxent 15 February2012 Copyright © 2012 NatureServe

Northeastern Buttonbush Shrub Swamp (CEGL006069) ...... 39 Swamp-loosestrife Shrub Swamp (CEGL005089) ...... 40 5. AQUATIC VEGETATION ...... 41 5.B.1. Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation ...... 41 M108. Eastern North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation...... 41 G114. Eastern North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation...... 41 Water-lily Aquatic Wetland (CEGL002386) ...... 41

1. FOREST TO OPEN WOODLAND 1.B.1. Warm Temperate Forest M305. Southeastern North American Ruderal Forest & Plantation G031. Southeast Hardwood & Conifer Ruderal Forest

SUCCESSIONAL SWEETGUM FOREST (CEGL007216) Liquidambar styraciflua Forest Sweetgum Forest

ELEMENT CONCEPT Summary: This early-successional upland forest of the southeastern U.S. occurs on a variety of environmental settings, resulting from succession following human activities such as logging and clearing or agriculture. Stands are dominated by Liquidambar styraciflua, sometimes to the exclusion of other species. Pinus taeda is a common associate. Other associated species are highly variable and depend on location and stand history. Environment: This association is found in uplands that have been heavily impacted by agriculture or other severe disturbances and are recovering. Vegetation: Stands are dominated by Liquidambar styraciflua, sometimes to the exclusion of other species. Dynamics: These communities represent successional stands of upland Liquidambar styraciflua. As the stands mature, they begin to assume the characteristics of more natural community types. Over time, Liquidambar styraciflua declines and is replaced by oaks, hickories, and/or pines. In addition, small stream bottomland sweetgum stands in the Piedmont may recover quickly from disturbance and begin to approximate the characters of Liquidambar styraciflua - Liriodendron tulipifera/Lindera benzoin/Arisaema triphyllum Forest (CEGL004418) 50 years or more after a stand-initiating disturbance. Patuxent Research Refuge: This forest type is common on the refuge, but restricted to the central portion between the two rivers. It occurs on lower slopes and toe slopes adjacent to alluvial floodplains. Similar Associations: • Liquidambar styraciflua - Liriodendron tulipifera/Lindera benzoin/Arisaema triphyllum Forest (CEGL004418) a later-successional bottomland association. • Liquidambar styraciflua - Quercus (alba, falcata) Forest (CEGL007217) of interior provinces. • Liquidambar styraciflua - Quercus (nigra, phellos) - Pinus taeda/Vaccinium elliottii - Morella cerifera Forest (CEGL007726) a more diverse successional forest of the Coastal Plain. Related Concepts: • sweet gum successional forest (Collins and Anderson 1994) =

CONSERVATION RANKING GRank: GNA (modified/managed) (2002-8-19) Reasons: This is an upland successional vegetation type composed of native species. Its conservation value is limited, but it may provide buffer for communities of greater conservation value.

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION Range: This association may be found throughout the southeastern United States, in the coastal plains and interior ecoregions. It is also attributed to New Jersey with the merger of CEGL006927. The status in intervening states (e.g., Delaware, Maryland) needs to be assessed. Nations: US Subnations: AL, AR?, DC?, DE, GA, KY, LA, MD, MS, NC, NJ, OK, SC, TN, VA TNC Ecoregions: 31:P, 32:P, 40:P, 41:C, 42:P, 43:C, 44:C, 50:C, 51:P, 52:C, 53:P, 56:P, 57:C, 58:C, 62:C USFS Ecoregions: 221Hc:CCC, 222Ef:CCC, 222Fa:CCP, 222Fb:CCC, 222Fe:CCP, 231Aa:CCP, 231Ab:CCC, 231Bh:CCC, 231Bi:CCC, 232Ab:CCC, 232Ac:CCC, 232Ad:CCC, 232Bd:CCC, 232Cb:CCC, M221Dc:???, M221Dd:??? Federal Lands: NPS (Big South Fork, Chickamauga-Chattanooga?, Colonial, Cowpens, George Washington Birthplace, Guilford Courthouse, Horseshoe Bend, Kings Mountain, Mammoth Cave, Moores Creek, Natchez Trace, National

Capital-East, Ninety Six, Petersburg, Shiloh, Thomas Stone, Vicksburg); USFS (Cherokee?, Oconee?, St. Francis?); USFWS (Cape May, E.B. Forsythe, Patuxent, Prime Hook, Supawna Meadows)

ELEMENT SOURCES References: Collins and Anderson 1994, McCrain and Church 1985, NatureServe Ecology - Southeastern U.S. unpubl. data, Patterson 2008c, Patterson 2008d, Schotz pers. comm., Southeastern Ecology Working Group n.d., TDNH unpubl. data, White and Pyne 2003

SUCCESSIONAL TULIPTREE FOREST (TYPIC TYPE) (CEGL007221) Liriodendron tulipifera - Quercus spp. Forest Tuliptree - Oak species Forest

ELEMENT CONCEPT Summary: This broadly defined semi-natural or successional community is one of several described upland associations dominated by Liriodendron tulipifera. It ranges from the southern Cumberland Plateau, Piedmont, and Interior Low Plateau of the southeastern U.S. north to the northern Piedmont of New Jersey. These successional forests often follow cropping, clearcut logging, or other severe disturbance, and are successional to mixed oak-hickory forests. Examples are common across large areas of the upland landscape which have previously been disturbed. Soils usually exhibit evidence of disturbance and may have little to no organic horizon development. They are typically acidic and well-drained, dry to moist sand, sandy loam, sandy clay loam, or silt loam. Environmental setting is variable, ranging from level to gently sloping uplands to well-drained floodplains and stream terraces. Species found in stands attributable to this type may include a fairly diverse and varied composition. Acer rubrum, Quercus spp., Betula lenta, Oxydendrum arboreum, Acer saccharum, and occasionally Liquidambar styraciflua, Ilex opaca, or Robinia pseudoacacia may be common in stands of this type. Where oaks are present, they are frequently multi-stemmed, resulting from coppicing. The conifer Tsuga canadensis is abundant in the understories of some stands. Shrub composition is variable but may include Sambucus canadensis, Rhododendron maximum, Hamamelis virginiana, and Vaccinium pallidum. Herbs are likewise variable; West Virginia samples feature Dioscorea quaternata, Lysimachia quadrifolia, Maianthemum racemosum, Solidago curtisii, Symphyotrichum prenanthoides, Polystichum acrostichoides, Dryopteris intermedia, Arisaema triphyllum ssp. triphyllum, Packera aurea, Amphicarpaea bracteata, Thelypteris noveboracensis, Lycopodium digitatum, and Geranium maculatum. Environment: These semi-natural upland deciduous forests are found primarily in areas which were once clearcuts, old fields, or were cleared by fire or other natural disturbances. These successional forests often follow cropping, clearcut logging, or other severe disturbance, and are successional to mixed oak-hickory forests. Examples are common across large areas of the upland landscape which have previously been disturbed. Soils usually exhibit evidence of disturbance and may have little to no organic horizon development. Environmental setting is variable, ranging from level to gently sloping uplands to well-drained floodplains and stream terraces. Vegetation: The canopy of this semi-natural upland association is dominated by Liriodendron tulipifera. Quercus species (Quercus alba, Quercus rubra, Quercus falcata, Quercus nigra, Quercus velutina) are often present; additional associates may include Acer barbatum, Acer rubrum, Carya spp., Fagus grandifolia, Nyssa sylvatica, Cornus florida, and Robinia pseudoacacia. Betula lenta is a common associate at the northern range limit. Shrub layers may include saplings of the canopy species and Acer pensylvanicum, Amelanchier arborea, Hamamelis virginiana, Lindera benzoin (in small amounts), and Vaccinium pallidum. Herbs vary across the range but may include Actaea racemosa, Dichanthelium clandestinum, Dioscorea quaternata, Galium circaezans, Geranium maculatum, Goodyera pubescens, Medeola virginiana, Potentilla simplex, Scutellaria serrata, Thelypteris noveboracensis, and Uvularia perfoliata. Lycopodium digitatum may be abundant in some stands. Dynamics: This community is widespread in areas that had stand-initiating disturbance such as heavy logging or plowing in the recent past. In areas that have been protected for more than 80 years, this community is uncommon. Similar Associations: • Liriodendron tulipifera - Acer negundo Forest (CEGL007184) a bottomland type. • Liriodendron tulipifera - Acer rubrum - Robinia pseudoacacia Forest (CEGL007219) is generally found on steeper slopes and/or shallow soils and with a more intense history of disturbance. • Liriodendron tulipifera/(Cercis canadensis)/(Lindera benzoin) Forest (CEGL007220) is generally found on calcareous or at least pH neutral soils. • Liriodendron tulipifera Forest (CEGL007218) more early-successional. • Prunus serotina - Liriodendron tulipifera - Acer rubrum - Fraxinus americana - (Robinia pseudoacacia) Forest (CEGL006599) • Prunus serotina - Sassafras albidum - (Fraxinus americana)/Juniperus virginiana Forest (CEGL004133) Related Concepts:

• Successional forest of low-elevation plateaus (Vanderhorst 2001a) > • Tulip Poplar Type (Schmalzer and DeSelm 1982) > • Yellow Poplar community (Ehrenfeld 1977) = Classification Comments: It differs from other described types within its range based on the lack of a significant pine component [see Liriodendron tulipifera - Pinus taeda Forest (CEGL007521)] and the absence of species affiliated with circumneutral conditions [see Liriodendron tulipifera/(Cercis canadensis)/(Lindera benzoin) Forest (CEGL007220)]; it is later successional and more diverse than Liriodendron tulipifera Forest (CEGL007218) and tends to be found on more stable soil substrates and less steep slopes than Liriodendron tulipifera - Acer rubrum - Robinia pseudoacacia Forest (CEGL007219). Other Comments: Common name changed from Interior Mid- to Late-Successional Tuliptree - Hardwood Upland Forest (Acidic Type) (GPF/LAS/MP 3-08). "Acidic Type" added back to common name to make more parallel with CEGL007220 (MP 4-09).

CONSERVATION RANKING GRank: GNA (ruderal) (2002-8-19) Reasons: This forest represents early-successional vegetation and is thus not a priority for conservation. This is a successional vegetation type composed of native species. Its conservation value is limited, but mature examples could provide buffer for communities of greater conservation value. It may also support rare animal and plant species.

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION Range: This association is known from the southern Cumberland Plateau, Piedmont, and Interior Low Plateau of the southeastern U.S. and may also occur in the Upper East Gulf Coastal Plain. It ranges north to the northern Piedmont of New Jersey and adjacent Pennsylvania. It is also known from Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia, Virginia, and possibly Delaware. Nations: US Subnations: AL, DC, DE?, GA, KY, MD, NC, NJ, PA, SC, TN, VA, WV TNC Ecoregions: 43:P, 44:C, 50:C, 51:C, 52:C, 58:C, 59:C, 61:C USFS Ecoregions: 221Hc:CCC, 221He:CCC, 222Cg:CCC, 222Dg:CCC, 222Eb:CCC, 222Eg:CCC, 222En:CCC, 222Eo:CCC, 231Aa:CCP, 231Ab:CCC, 231Ae:CCC, 231Ak:CCC, 231An:CCC, 231Bc:CCC, 231Bh:CCC, 231Cd:CCP, 231Dc:CCC, 232Ad:C??, 232Br:CCC, M221Bb:CCC, M221Ca:CCC, M221Cb:CCC, M221Cd:CCC, M221Dd:CCC Federal Lands: BIA (Eastern Band of Cherokee); DOD (Fort Benning); NPS (Appalachian Trail [Central Appalachians], Appalachian Trail [Southern Blue Ridge], Appomattox Court House, Big South Fork, Blue Ridge Parkway, Booker T. Washington, C&O Canal, Carl Sandburg Home, Catoctin Mountain, Chattahoochee River, Chickamauga-Chattanooga?, Cowpens, Cumberland Gap, Fredericksburg-Spotsylvania, Gauley River, George Washington Parkway, Guilford Courthouse, Horseshoe Bend, Kennesaw Mountain, Kings Mountain, Mammoth Cave, Morristown, Natchez Trace, National Capital-East, New River Gorge, Ninety Six, Obed River, Petersburg, Prince William, Richmond, Rock Creek, Shiloh, Valley Forge, Wolf Trap); USFS (Bankhead, Daniel Boone, Oconee?, Talladega, Talladega (Oakmulgee)?, Talladega (Talladega)); USFWS (Patuxent)

ELEMENT SOURCES References: Ehrenfeld 1977, Fleming 2002b, Fleming and Patterson 2003, Gallyoun et al. 1996, Keever 1973, NatureServe Ecology - Southeastern U.S. unpubl. data, Overlease 1987, Patterson 2008a, Patterson 2008b, Patterson 2008e, Patterson 2008f, Podniesinski et al. 2005b, Russell and Schuyler 1988, Schmalzer and DeSelm 1982, Schotz pers. comm., Southeastern Ecology Working Group n.d., TDNH unpubl. data, Taverna and Patterson 2008, Vanderhorst 2001a, Vanderhorst and Streets 2006, Vanderhorst et al. 2010, White and Pyne 2003

1.B.2. Cool Temperate Forest M012. Central Oak-Hardwood & Pine Forest G015. Appalachian Oak - Chestnut Forest

CENTRAL APPALACHIAN/NORTHERN PIEDMONT CHESTNUT OAK FOREST (CEGL006299) Quercus prinus - (Quercus coccinea, Quercus rubra)/Kalmia latifolia/Vaccinium pallidum Forest Chestnut Oak - (Scarlet Oak, Northern Red Oak)/Mountain Laurel/Hillside Blueberry Forest

ELEMENT CONCEPT Summary: This chestnut oak forest occurs at relatively low elevations (mostly <900 m) in the Central Appalachians and adjacent areas (e.g., northern Piedmont), in association with dry, acidic, infertile soils on middle and upper slopes. The canopy, which may be rather short, is strongly dominated by Quercus prinus. The most characteristic canopy associates are Quercus coccinea, which varies from sparse to codominant, and Quercus rubra. Minor associates frequently include Quercus velutina, Quercus alba, Nyssa sylvatica, Sassafras albidum, and/or Robinia pseudoacacia. Root sprouts of Castanea dentata are present in some areas. Acer rubrum and Nyssa sylvatica are often abundant in the understory tree layers. Tall shrubs include Kalmia latifolia (usually dominant), Viburnum acerifolium, and Rhododendron periclymenoides. The dwarf- or short-shrub layer is well-developed and includes Vaccinium pallidum, Vaccinium stamineum, and Gaylussacia baccata, any one of which can exhibit patch-dominance. The herb layer generally has sparse cover but sometimes includes scattered individuals of Aureolaria laevigata, Chimaphila maculata, Comandra umbellata, Cypripedium acaule, Danthonia spicata, Epigaea repens, Gaultheria procumbens, Hieracium venosum, Lysimachia quadrifolia, Medeola virginiana, Monotropa uniflora, Pteridium aquilinum, and/or Uvularia puberula. Strong dominance of Quercus prinus in the canopy, strong dominance of Kalmia latifolia in the tall-shrub layer, and Vaccinium pallidum present and often abundant as a dwarf-shrub are diagnostics for this type. Environment: This association is found on acidic, infertile soils on low-elevation (mostly <900 m), middle and upper slopes (occasionally on lower slopes). Sites are often exposed, or at least on convex slopes, and moisture potential is typically subxeric to xeric. Sandy loam soils, often stony, are typical. Some exposed bedrock is often present. Many sites have a history of occasional or frequent fires. Vegetation: The canopy is strongly dominated by Quercus prinus or, less frequently, by combinations of Quercus prinus and other oaks. The most frequent canopy associates are Quercus coccinea, which varies from sparse to codominant, and Quercus rubra. Minor associates frequently include Quercus velutina, Quercus alba, Nyssa sylvatica, Betula lenta, and Sassafras albidum. Acer rubrum and Nyssa sylvatica are usually abundant in the understory tree layers. Tall shrubs Kalmia latifolia (usually dominant), Viburnum acerifolium, and Rhododendron periclymenoides are often associated, sometimes at low cover. The dwarf- or short-shrub layer is well-developed and includes Vaccinium pallidum, Vaccinium stamineum, and Gaylussacia baccata, any one of which can exhibit patch-dominance. Occasional stands lack Kalmia latifolia and have an entirely deciduous, ericaceous shrub layer. The herb layer generally has sparse cover but sometimes includes Aureolaria laevigata, Chimaphila maculata, Comandra umbellata, Cypripedium acaule, Danthonia spicata, Epigaea repens, Gaultheria procumbens, Hieracium venosum, Lysimachia quadrifolia, Medeola virginiana, Monotropa uniflora, Pteridium aquilinum, and Uvularia puberula. Strong dominance of Quercus prinus in the canopy, strong dominance of Kalmia latifolia in the tall-shrub layer, and Vaccinium pallidum present and often abundant as a dwarf-shrub are diagnostics for this type. Dynamics: Windthrow, fire, and ice storms are common natural disturbances in these habitats. Evidence of past fires is present at many sites, and periodic fire appears to be an important ecological factor in oak regeneration. Development of Acer rubrum-dominated understories in these forests is widely considered to be the result of drastic reductions of fire frequencies or exclusion of fire altogether. Castanea dentata was formerly an important canopy species in these forests prior to chestnut blight. Patuxent Research Refuge: At Patuxent, this forest type may have a minor component of Pinus rigida or Pinus virginiana. It is confined to the northern section of the refuge, where it occurs on dry slopes and summits. Similar Associations: • Quercus (prinus, coccinea)/Kalmia latifolia/(Galax urceolata, Gaultheria procumbens) Forest (CEGL006271) of the Southern Appalachians. • Quercus alba - Quercus (coccinea, velutina, prinus)/Gaylussacia baccata Forest (CEGL008521) primarily of the Piedmont. • Quercus prinus - Quercus (rubra, velutina)/Vaccinium angustifolium Forest (CEGL006282) northern; at high elevations at the southern edge of its range. • Quercus prinus - Quercus rubra/Hamamelis virginiana Forest (CEGL006057) occurs on submesic sites. • Quercus prinus - Quercus rubra/Vaccinium pallidum - (Rhododendron periclymenoides) Forest (CEGL008523) occurs on subxeric sites. Related Concepts: • Quercus montana - (Quercus coccinea, Quercus velutina)/Kalmia latifolia - Vaccinium pallidum Forest (Fleming 2002b) = • Quercus montana - (Quercus coccinea, Quercus velutina)/Kalmia latifolia/Vaccinium pallidum Forest (Fleming 2002a) = • Quercus montana/Kalmia latifolia/Gaultheria procumbens Association (Rawinski et al. 1994) < • Quercus montana/Kalmia latifolia/Gaylussacia baccata Forest (Fleming and Moorhead 2000) < • Quercus montana/Kalmia latifolia/Vaccinium pallidum Association, pro parte (Rawinski et al. 1996) < • Quercus montana/Kalmia latifolia/Vaccinium pallidum Forest (Fleming and Patterson 2003) = 6 Vegetation of Patuxent 15 February2012 Copyright © 2012 NatureServe

• Quercus prinus/Kalmia latifolia - Rhododendron periclymenoides Forest (Fleming and Coulling 2001) < • Quercus prinus/Kalmia latifolia/Vaccinium pallidum Forest (Fleming and Patterson 2003) = • Quercus prinus/Smilax rotundifolia - Polypodium virginianum Subassociation (Fleming and Moorhead 1996) < • Mixed Oak - Heath Forest (Harrison 2004) > • Oak/Heath Forest (Fleming et al. 2001) > • Xeric oak - evergreen heath forest (Vanderhorst 2001a) ? Classification Comments: This community can be readily identified by its dry, infertile sites and quite species-poor vegetation overwhelmingly dominated by Quercus prinus and Kalmia latifolia (each averaging 25 to 50% cover in more than 80 Virginia and Maryland plot samples), with Acer rubrum and Nyssa sylvatica abundant in the subcanopy. Two variants of the type have been detected in quantitative analyses: (1) a variant with Quercus rubra as the principal associate of Quercus prinus, with Betula lenta and Hamamelis virginiana often important in the subcanopy and shrub layers, typically occurring on sheltered slopes, often with northerly aspects; and (2) a variant with Quercus coccinea as the principal associate of Quercus prinus, occurring with Gaylussacia baccata and Rhododendron periclymenoides, typically on warmer, more open and exposed sites, especially those with a more discernable history of heavy cutting and fire within the last 100 years. However, these variants and their habitats are fully intergradational and have few other floristic attributes that could be considered reliably "diagnostic." This association is the Central Appalachian analogue of Quercus (prinus, coccinea)/Kalmia latifolia/(Galax urceolata, Gaultheria procumbens) Forest (CEGL006271). It is compositionally similar but generally lacks Southern Appalachian species such as Galax urceolata, Oxydendrum arboreum, and Leucothoe recurva. At the southern end of its range, there is a transition zone and many stands could be assigned equally well to either type.

CONSERVATION RANKING GRank: G5 (2004-1-29) Reasons: Extensive examples occur in Virginia, Maryland, and West Virginia.

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION Range: This association is currently described from the Central Appalachians and northern part of the Piedmont in Pennsylvania, Virginia, Maryland, and West Virginia. In northern Virginia, the District of Columbia, and Maryland, it occasionally occurs at the extreme western edge of the Coastal Plain on steep ravine slopes of the fall zone. It also occurs at the northern periphery of the Southern Blue Ridge near Roanoke, Virginia. Nations: US Subnations: DC, DE, MD, PA, VA, WV TNC Ecoregions: 51:C, 52:C, 58:C, 59:C, 61:C USFS Ecoregions: 221Db:CCC, 231Aa:CCC, 231Ad:CCC, 231Af:CCC, 231Ak:CCC, 231Al:CCC, 232Ad:CCC, M221Aa:CCC, M221Ab:CCC, M221Ba:CCC, M221Bb:CCC, M221Bd:CCP, M221Da:CCC, M221Db:CCC Federal Lands: NPS (Appalachian Trail [Central Appalachians], Blue Ridge Parkway, C&O Canal, Catoctin Mountain, George Washington Parkway, Harpers Ferry, National Capital-East, Rock Creek, Shenandoah, Wolf Trap); USFS (George Washington, Jefferson); USFWS (Patuxent)

ELEMENT SOURCES References: Allard and Leonard 1943, Coxe 2009, Eastern Ecology Working Group n.d., Fleming 2002a, Fleming 2002b, Fleming 2007, Fleming and Coulling 2001, Fleming and Moorhead 1996, Fleming and Moorhead 2000, Fleming and Patterson 2003, Fleming and Patterson 2009a, Fleming and Patterson 2009b, Fleming and Patterson 2011a, Fleming and Taverna 2006, Fleming et al. 2001, Fleming et al. 2007b, Harrison 2004, Lea 2003, Lea 2004, Rawinski et al. 1994, Rawinski et al. 1996, Vanderhorst 2001a, Vanderhorst and Streets 2006, Young et al. 2006, Young et al. 2007, Young et al. 2009

G158. Northeastern & North-Central Oak - Hickory Forest

MID-ATLANTIC MESIC MIXED HARDWOOD FOREST (CEGL006075) Fagus grandifolia - Quercus (alba, rubra) - Liriodendron tulipifera/(Ilex opaca var. opaca)/Polystichum acrostichoides Forest American Beech - (White Oak, Northern Red Oak) - Tuliptree/(American Holly)/Christmas Fern Forest

ELEMENT CONCEPT Summary: This forest of mesic to submesic, well-drained soils occurs in the Piedmont and Coastal Plain of Virginia and Maryland, extending north to southern New England on the Coastal Plain. It also occurs occasionally at low elevations of the Blue Ridge and adjacent Ridge and Valley in Virginia and Maryland. It is characteristically a mixed forest dominated 7 Vegetation of Patuxent 15 February2012 Copyright © 2012 NatureServe

by Fagus grandifolia, Quercus alba, Quercus rubra, and Liriodendron tulipifera in various proportions. Overstory associates over the range include Quercus velutina, Quercus falcata, Quercus coccinea, Liquidambar styraciflua, Acer rubrum, Nyssa sylvatica, Carya alba, Carya glabra, and Fraxinus americana. The subcanopy is characterized by young Fagus grandifolia, Acer rubrum, Carpinus caroliniana, Cornus florida, and Sassafras albidum. Ilex opaca is particularly characteristic and abundant on the Coastal Plain. The shrub layer varies from very sparse to well-developed and can include Asimina triloba, Viburnum acerifolium, Viburnum dentatum, and Euonymus americanus. Heath shrubs, such as Vaccinium corymbosum and Vaccinium pallidum, may be common but not abundant. Vines are common, including Parthenocissus quinquefolia, Smilax glauca, and Toxicodendron radicans. In the southern part of the range, Oxydendrum arboreum and Vitis rotundifolia may be conspicuous members of the understory. The herb layer is comprised of Polystichum acrostichoides, Thelypteris noveboracensis, Uvularia perfoliata, Cypripedium acaule, Mitchella repens, Tipularia discolor, Goodyera pubescens, Eurybia divaricata (= Aster divaricatus), Chimaphila maculata, Carex swanii, Medeola virginiana, Athyrium filix-femina, Carex digitalis, Carex willdenowii, Epifagus virginiana, Maianthemum canadense, Desmodium nudiflorum, Polygonatum biflorum, Podophyllum peltatum, Arisaema triphyllum, and Maianthemum racemosum (= Smilacina racemosa). Environment: This forest association occurs on mesic to submesic slopes or gentle gradients. Ravines in dissected topography are particularly typical sites in the Piedmont and parts of the Inner Coastal Plain. The type also occupies rolling uplands with deep soils. Soils are typically well-drained, acidic sandy and silt loams derived from parent material of low to moderate fertility. This association is found throughout the Piedmont from south-central Virginia to New Jersey and Pennsylvania, and on the Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain from southeastern Virginia northward. Vegetation: Rangewide, this vegetation type is characteristically a mixed mesophytic forest dominated by Fagus grandifolia, Quercus alba, Quercus rubra, and Liriodendron tulipifera in various proportions. Overstory associates over the range include Carya alba, Carya glabra, Quercus velutina, Quercus falcata, Quercus coccinea, Liquidambar styraciflua, Acer rubrum, Nyssa sylvatica, and Fraxinus americana. The subcanopy is characterized by young Fagus grandifolia, Acer rubrum, Carpinus caroliniana, Cornus florida, Ilex opaca, and Sassafras albidum. The shrub layer varies from very sparse to well-developed and can include Asimina triloba, Viburnum acerifolium, Viburnum dentatum, and Euonymus americanus. Heath shrubs, such as Vaccinium corymbosum and Vaccinium pallidum, may be common but not abundant. Vines are common, including Parthenocissus quinquefolia, Smilax glauca, and Toxicodendron radicans. The herb layer is comprised of Polystichum acrostichoides, Uvularia perfoliata, Cypripedium acaule, Mitchella repens, Tipularia discolor, Goodyera pubescens, Eurybia divaricata (= Aster divaricatus), Chimaphila maculata, Carex swanii, Medeola virginiana, Athyrium filix-femina, Carex digitalis, Carex willdenowii, Epifagus virginiana, Maianthemum canadense, Desmodium nudiflorum, Polygonatum biflorum. Podophyllum peltatum, Arisaema triphyllum, and Maianthemum racemosum (= Smilacina racemosa).

Several intergrading compositional variants have been noted in regional and local landscape analyses. On more submesic, convex slopes, Fagus grandifolia, Quercus alba, Cornus florida, and Vaccinium pallidum tend to be prominent, while pronounced mesophytes such as Carpinus caroliniana and herbaceous species in general are usually sparse. Coastal Plain stands tend to have understories heavily dominated by Ilex opaca, while Piedmont stands generally have only scattered Ilex opaca as well as slightly higher herbaceous richness. Patuxent Research Refuge: At Patuxent, this forest type was observed on lower slopes, sloping drainages, dry flat channels, old river meanders, and occasionally on islands within the river floodplain. Fagus grandifolia and Liriodendron tulipifera are dominant, but in more disturbed stands, Acer rubrum may also be a co-dominant. Carpinus caroliniana, Quercus alba, Quercus rubra, Carya spp., and Asimina triloba may form a subcanopy. The herbaceous layer is characterized by Medeola virginiana, Uvularia sessilifolia, Dennstaedtia punctilobula, Galium circaezans, Arisaema triphyllum, Phegopteris hexoganoptera. In lands within a few km of the refuge, this forest type also supports Ilex opaca, Cornus florida, Nyssa sylvatica, Sassafras albidum, Viburnum acerifolium, Parthenocissus quinquefolia, Viburnum dentatum, Polystichum acrostichoides, Kalmia latifolia, and Quercus prinus.This forest type is widespread in the coastal plain of the mid-Atlantic, often forming the matrix of forested vegetation. It is variable in herbaceous cover, often reflecting the degree of white-tailed deer herbivory. Similar Associations: • Fagus grandifolia - Betula lenta - Quercus (alba, rubra)/Carpinus caroliniana Forest (CEGL006921) • Fagus grandifolia - Quercus alba - (Acer barbatum)/Mixed Herbs Forest (CEGL007206) • Fagus grandifolia - Quercus alba - Quercus rubra Forest (CEGL006377) • Fagus grandifolia - Quercus rubra/Cornus florida/Polystichum acrostichoides - Hexastylis virginica Forest (CEGL008465) • Quercus alba - Carya glabra/Mixed Herbs Coastal Plain Forest (CEGL007226) Related Concepts: 8 Vegetation of Patuxent 15 February2012 Copyright © 2012 NatureServe

• Fagus grandifolia - Carya alba/Symplocos tinctoria - Cornus florida/Euonymus americana - Botrychium virginianum Forest (Walton et al. 2001) = • Fagus grandifolia - Liriodendron tulipifera - Quercus (alba, rubra)/Polystichum acrostichoides - Aster divaricatus Forest (Fleming 2002a) = • Fagus grandifolia - Liriodendron tulipifera - Quercus (alba, rubra)/Polystichum acrostichoides - Aster divaricatus Forest (Fleming 2001a) ? • Fagus grandifolia - Liriodendron tulipifera - Quercus rubra/Polystichum acrostichoides - Carex laxiculmis Forest (Fleming 2002b) = • Fagus grandifolia - Liriodendron tulipifera - Quercus rubra/Polystichum acrostichoides Forest (Fleming and Patterson 2003) = • Fagus grandifolia - Liriodendron tulipifera/Asimina triloba/Botrychium virginianum Forest (McCoy and Fleming 2000) = • Fagus grandifolia - Liriodendron tulipifera/Carpinus caroliniana Forest (McCoy and Fleming 2000) = • Fagus grandifolia - Liriodendron tulipifera/Polystichum acrostichoides Forest (Young et al. 2007) = • Fagus grandifolia - Quercus (alba, rubra) - Liriodendron tulipifera/Ilex opaca var. opaca - (Asimina triloba) Forest (Fleming 2002a) = • Fagus grandifolia - Quercus (alba, rubra) - Liriodendron tulipifera/Ilex opaca var. opaca - (Asimina triloba) Forest (Patterson pers. comm.) ? • Fagus grandifolia - Quercus alba - Liriodendron tulipifera - Carya spp. Forest (Harrison 2004) = • Fagus grandifolia - Quercus alba - Liriodendron tulipifera - Carya spp. Forest (Coulling 1999) = • Fagus grandifolia - Quercus alba - Liriodendron tulipifera - Liquidambar styraciflua Forest (Clancy 1996) = • Fagus grandifolia - Quercus alba - Liriodendron tulipifera - Liquidambar styraciflua Forest (Bartgis 1986) ? • Fagus grandifolia - Quercus alba - Liriodendron tulipifera/Cornus florida Forest (Fleming and Patterson 2003) = • Fagus grandifolia - Quercus alba/Ilex opaca - (Oxydendrum arboreum)/Vitis rotundifolia Forest (Fleming and Patterson 2003) = • Quercus spp. - Carya spp./Cornus florida - Ilex opaca Mesic Forest (Clancy 1993b) ? • CNE Mesic hardwood Forest on acidic bedrock/till (Rawinski 1984) ? • Coastal Plain Forest (Smith 1983) > • Maritime forest (Rawinski 1984) ? • Mesic Coastal Plain mixed oak forest, mixed oak - beech forest subtype (Breden 1989) ? • Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest (Fleming et al. 2001) > • Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest (Harrison 2004) > • Mixed oak forest of the south Jersey mesic uplands (Robichaud and Buell 1973) ? • Southern New England oak/pine forest on sandy/gravelly soils (Rawinski 1984) ? Classification Comments: The regional circumscription of this type is very robust and supported by 170 plots from Virginia, Maryland, and the District of Columbia. These were analyzed by VDNH with a 1300-plot regional dataset compiled for the NCR and Mid-Atlantic national parks vegetation mapping projects.

CONSERVATION RANKING GRank: G5 (2007-1-31) Reasons: This association is common and widespread on the northeastern Coastal Plain and the Piedmont in Virginia and Maryland.

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION Range: This association is currently described from Virginia northward to Long Island, New York. The type is characteristic of the Coastal Plain throughout its range and of the Piedmont from south-central Virginia through much of Maryland. Small outliers of this vegetation occur at low elevations on both flanks of the Blue Ridge in Virginia and Maryland. Nations: US Subnations: DC, DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, VA TNC Ecoregions: 52:C, 57:C, 58:C, 59:C, 61:C, 62:C USFS Ecoregions: 221Db:CCC, 231Ae:CCC, 231Af:CCP, 231Ak:CCC, 231Al:CCC, 231An:CCC, 231Ao:CCP, 231Ap:CCC, 232Ac:CCC, 232Ad:CCC, 232Br:CCC, 232Bt:CCC, 232Bx:CCP, 232Bz:CCC, 232Ch:CCC, 232Cj:CCC, M221Da:CCC Federal Lands: DOD (Fort A.P. Hill, Fort Belvoir, Kerr Reservoir, Yorktown); NPS (Appomattox Court House, C&O Canal, Colonial, Fredericksburg-Spotsylvania, George Washington Parkway, Monocacy, National Capital-East, Petersburg, Prince William, Richmond, Rock Creek, Sagamore Hill, Thomas Stone, Wolf Trap); USFWS (James River, Patuxent, Prime Hook)

ELEMENT SOURCES References: Bartgis 1986, Berdine 1998, Bernard and Bernard 1971, Bowman 2000, Breden 1989, Breden et al. 2001, Clancy 1993b, Clancy 1996, Coulling 1999, Davis et al. 1992, Eastern Ecology Working Group n.d., Edinger et al. 2002, 9 Vegetation of Patuxent 15 February2012 Copyright © 2012 NatureServe

Edinger et al. 2008b, Fleming 2001a, Fleming 2002a, Fleming 2002b, Fleming 2007, Fleming and Coulling 2001, Fleming and Patterson 2003, Fleming and Patterson 2011a, Fleming and Taverna 2006, Fleming et al. 2001, Fleming et al. 2007b, Fleming pers. comm., Harrison 2004, Harrison 2011, Lea 2003, McCoy and Fleming 2000, Metzler and Barrett 2001, Patterson 2008a, Patterson 2008c, Patterson 2008e, Patterson 2008f, Patterson pers. comm., Rawinski 1984, Robichaud and Buell 1973, Rossell et al. 2007, Smith 1983, Soil Conservation Service 1987, Taverna and Patterson 2008, Walton et al. 2001, Young et al. 2007

NORTHEASTERN COASTAL PLAIN MIXED OAK/HEATH FOREST (CEGL006269) Quercus alba - Quercus falcata - (Carya pallida)/Gaylussacia frondosa Forest White Oak - Southern Red Oak - (Sand Hickory)/Blue Huckleberry Forest

ELEMENT CONCEPT Summary: This oak forest of the unglaciated northeastern Coastal Plain generally occurs on well-drained acidic soils, primarily loamy sands, sandy loams and silty/clay loams. Occasional stands occur on imperfectly drained, alternately wet and dry upland flats with hardpan subsoils. The canopy is dominated by a mixture of oaks, especially Quercus alba, Quercus falcata, and Quercus velutina. Associates include Sassafras albidum, Quercus coccinea, Quercus stellata, Liquidambar styraciflua, Nyssa sylvatica, and Pinus taeda, with Acer rubrum, Ilex opaca, and Cornus florida often forming a subcanopy. Liriodendron tulipifera may be a canopy component in mature, fire-suppressed stands. Carya pallida may also be present in the canopy. The shrub layer is well-developed and dominated by the deciduous ericads Gaylussacia frondosa, Gaylussacia baccata, Vaccinium pallidum, Vaccinium stamineum, and occasionally Lyonia mariana. The vines Smilax rotundifolia and Vitis rotundifolia may be important in some stands. The herbaceous layer is generally sparse and characterized by dry-site species such as Pteridium aquilinum, Cypripedium acaule, Chimaphila maculata, and Gaultheria procumbens. Environment: This community generally occurs on well-drained acidic soils, primarily loamy sands, sandy loams and silty/clay loams. Occasional stands occur on imperfectly drained, alternately wet and dry, upland flats with hardpan subsoils. Even on the latter, moisture potential of most sites supporting this vegetation can be characterized as subxeric to xeric. Soil samples collected from plots of this vegetation type in Virginia are extremely acidic, with very low base cation levels and total base saturation. Vegetation: Physiognomy is generally a closed to somewhat open forest. The overstory of mid- to late-successional stands is dominated by a mixture of oaks, especially Quercus alba, Quercus falcata, and Quercus velutina. Early-successional stands recovering from recent logging or agricultural conversion usually have a strong admixture of Pinus taeda, Pinus rigida, or Pinus virginiana. Other canopy associates include Sassafras albidum, Quercus coccinea (occasionally codominant), Quercus stellata, Liquidambar styraciflua, Nyssa sylvatica, Carya alba, Carya glabra, and Carya pallida (occasionally codominant). Acer rubrum, Ilex opaca, and Cornus florida are the principal subcanopy trees. In the southern part of the range, Oxydendrum arboreum and scrambling vines of Vitis rotundifolia can be important in the understory. The shrub layer is well-developed and dominated by the deciduous ericads Gaylussacia frondosa, Gaylussacia baccata, Vaccinium pallidum, Vaccinium stamineum, and occasionally Lyonia mariana. The herbaceous layer is generally sparse and characterized by dry-site species such as Pteridium aquilinum, Cypripedium acaule, Chimaphila maculata, and Gaultheria procumbens. Dynamics: Periodic fire is presumably an important natural disturbance in this type that encourages oak regeneration. Many Virginia stands of this type now have poor oak recruitment and understories dominated by young Acer rubrum and/or Fagus grandifolia, presumably because of fire exclusion. The relative cover of Pinus taeda is likely related to disturbance history, with higher pine cover suggesting more recent disturbance. Patuxent Research Refuge: At Patuxent, this forest type was observed on upper slopes and hilltops. It may be associated with Central Appalachian / Northern Piedmont Chestnut Oak Forest, but is more widely distributed within the refuge. Some ocurrences of this forest type at the refuge approach a mixed evergreen / deciduous physiognomy, with a strong component of Pinus rigida and or Pinus virginiana. The abundance of pine in this type in some occurrences at the refuge may be a result of past anthropogenic disturbance, but may also be a result of past fire regimes which favored Pinus rigida and fire adapted oaks. Other associated trees may include Liquidambar styraciflua, Fagus grandifolia, Quercus velutina, Carya glabra, and Ilex opaca. Heath shrubs are usually prominent, and dominated by Vaccinium pallidum. Gaylussacia frondosa is also an associated shrub. The herbaceous layer is of variable cover, and includes Chimaphila maculata, Medeola virginiana, uvularia sessilifolia, and Mitchella repens. Similar Associations: • Pinus rigida - Quercus coccinea - Quercus falcata/(Quercus marilandica)/Gaylussacia frondosa Woodland (CEGL006329) 10 Vegetation of Patuxent 15 February2012 Copyright © 2012 NatureServe

• Quercus alba - Quercus (coccinea, velutina, prinus)/Gaylussacia baccata Forest (CEGL008521) Piedmont analogue of CEGL006269; has more Quercus prinus, less Quercus falcata, and lacks Gaylussacia frondosa and other species more characteristic of the Coastal Plain. Related Concepts: • Quercus (falcata, alba, velutina)/Gaylussacia baccata - Vaccinium pallidum Forest (Harrison 2004) = • Quercus alba - Quercus falcata - (Pinus taeda)/Gaylussacia frondosa Forest (Fleming pers. comm.) = • Quercus alba - Quercus falcata - Pinus taeda/Gaylussacia frondosa Forest (Fleming 2002a) = • Quercus alba - Quercus falcata/Gaylussacia frondosa Forest (Fleming and Patterson 2003) = • Quercus alba - Quercus velutina - Quercus coccinea/Gaylussacia baccata - Vaccinium stamineum Forest (VDNH 2003) = • Quercus falcata - Pinus taeda/Gaylussacia frondosa Forest (Clancy 1996) ? • Dry Oak-Pine Forest, mixed oak-pine forest subtype (Breden 1989) ? • Mixed Oak - Heath Forest (Harrison 2004) > • Oak/Heath Forest (Fleming et al. 2001) > • Pine - oak association (Shreve et al. 1910) > Classification Comments: Classification is supported by analysis of a 1250-plot regional dataset assembled for the NCR and Mid-Atlantic national parks vegetation mapping projects. In that classification, this association was represented by 18 plots. (Pinus taeda) - Quercus falcata/Gaylussacia frondosa Forest (CEGL006169) has been archived and incorporated into this type by Gary Fleming.

CONSERVATION RANKING GRank: G4G5 (1997-12-1) Reasons: The type is common and widespread on the Coastal Plain from New Jersey to Virginia. Mature examples are uncommon, and all stands are vulnerable to logging disturbances and fire suppression.

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION Range: This association occurs on the Coastal Plain from New Jersey to Virginia and possibly northeastern North Carolina. In central and southeastern Virginia, it extends slightly into the eastern portion of the Piedmont. Nations: US Subnations: DE, MD, NC?, NJ, VA TNC Ecoregions: 52:C, 58:C, 62:C USFS Ecoregions: 231Ae:CCC, 231Ak:CCC, 231An:CCC, 232Ab:CCC, 232Ac:CCC, 232Ad:CCC, 232Br:CCC, 232Bt:CCC, 232Bx:CCC, 232Bz:CCC, 232Ch:CCC Federal Lands: DOD (Fort A.P. Hill, Yorktown); NPS (Fredericksburg-Spotsylvania, Petersburg, Richmond); USFWS (Blackwater, Cape May, Chesapeake Marshlands, E.B. Forsythe, Patuxent, Prime Hook)

ELEMENT SOURCES References: Breden 1989, Breden et al. 2001, Clancy 1996, Eastern Ecology Working Group n.d., Fleming 2002a, Fleming 2002b, Fleming and Patterson 2003, Fleming and Patterson 2011a, Fleming et al. 2001, Fleming et al. 2007b, Fleming pers. comm., Harrison 2004, Harrison 2011, Patterson 2008e, Patterson 2008f, Shreve et al. 1910, Sneddon et al. 1996, Taverna and Patterson 2008, VDNH 2003

M013. Eastern North American Ruderal Forest & Plantation G030. Northern & Central Hardwood & Conifer Ruderal Forest

SUCCESSIONAL VIRGINIA PINE FOREST (CEGL002591) Pinus virginiana Successional Forest Virginia Pine Successional Forest

ELEMENT CONCEPT Summary: This successional Virginia pine forest of the southeastern states occurs in areas where canopy removal has created dry, open conditions and bare mineral soil, allowing for the establishment of Pinus virginiana. These habitats include old fields, old pastures, clearcuts, and eroded areas; soils are typically dry, acidic, and infertile. It is common on abandoned farmland. This forest typically has a very dense canopy of Pinus virginiana and little understory vegetation. The dense canopy may also include admixtures of other Pinus species (e.g., Pinus taeda, Pinus echinata, Pinus rigida, Pinus strobus) or other early-successional deciduous trees (e.g., Acer rubrum, Liquidambar styraciflua, Prunus serotina, Liriodendron tulipifera, Fraxinus americana, Nyssa sylvatica). Associated woody and herbaceous species vary with

geography but are typically ruderal or exotic species. Shrub and herb layers are frequently very sparse. Stands are short-lived, generally less than 75 years. Environment: This community occurs in areas where canopy removal has created open conditions and bare mineral soil, allowing for the establishment of Pinus virginiana. These conditions can include old fields, old pastures, clearcuts, and eroded areas. In the Ridge and Valley of Tennessee, northeastern Monroe County, early successional forests with Pinus virginiana dominance were found on low slopes in areas that were cleared for agriculture prior to the 1970s, when Tellico Lake was created (Andreu and Tukman 1995). In the Central Appalachians, this vegetation occurs where soft shales have been farmed (in valleys or on plateaus), resulting in stands with nothing but successional species in the understory. Soils underlying these communities are of two general types, i.e., those derived in residuum from calcareous shale and calcareous sandstone of the Middle Ordovician and those of some other origin. Series of the former type include Dandridge (Lithic Ruptic-Alfic Eutrochrepts), Tellico (Typic Rhododults), and Steekee (Ruptic-Ultic Dystrochrepts). Other soil series that this forest type may occur on include Litz, Dewey, Alcoa, Bland, Etowah, Lobdell and Neubert. All of these soils are well-drained and range in pH from moderate acidic to very strongly acidic. Vegetation: This forest typically has a very dense canopy of Pinus virginiana and little understory vegetation. Pinus taeda, Pinus echinata, or Pinus strobus may co-occur with Pinus virginiana in the canopy. The canopy can also have significant admixtures of early-successional deciduous trees (e.g., Acer rubrum, Liquidambar styraciflua, Prunus serotina, Liriodendron tulipifera, Fraxinus americana, Oxydendrum arboreum, Betula lenta, Nyssa sylvatica). Older stands on abandoned farmland may have tall canopies (>20 m) of decadent Pinus virginiana overtopping the shade-tolerant Tsuga canadensis, which often dominates the subcanopy and shrub layers. Scattered Pinus rigida may be mixed in these stands. Associated woody and herbaceous species vary with geography but are typically ruderal or exotic species; Lonicera japonica and Rosa multiflora are common. The herb layer is characterized by weedy natives and exotics such as Lycopodium digitatum, Achillea millefolium var. occidentalis, Hieracium caespitosum, and Lespedeza cuneata. Shrub and herb strata, where present at all, are usually sparse in coverage. In eastern Tennessee, the subcanopy may contain Acer saccharum and Cornus florida; other associated species may include Cercis canadensis, Parthenocissus quinquefolia, Lonicera japonica, and Microstegium vimineum (Andreu and Tukman 1995). In the Central Appalachians, associates include Pinus strobus, Pinus echinata, and Pinus rigida. Some stands may have a dense ericaceous shrub stratum containing Vaccinium spp., Gaylussacia spp., Kalmia latifolia, and Rhododendron spp. This community contains many exotics species such as Albizia julibrissin, Lonicera japonica, and Pueraria montana var. lobata. Lonicera japonica when present has an average cover of 27%. Dynamics: This is an early-successional forest type. Damage from ice storms was the main disturbance observed in these stands in the Tellico Pilot Project study area. In addition, fire and insect infestation are likely damaging agents. Patuxent Research Refuge: This successional forest is common on the refuge, usually on rolling topography. Pinus virginiana is usually strongly dominant, or may be mixed with deciduous trees including Quercus coccinea, Quercus falcata, Nyssa sylvatica, Liquidambar styraciflua, Quercus prinus, or Fagus grandifolia. Ilex opaca may also be present. The growth form of this forest type may be characterized by unusually densely distributed, small-stemmed trees forming a “dog-hair” appearance. Other associated species include Vaccinium pallidum, Smilax rotundifolia, Gaylussacia baccata, Carex pensylvanica, Chimaphila maculata, Mitchella repens, and Danthonia spicata. This vegetation was also described from the nearby Beltsville Agricultural Research Center (NatureServe 2005), where it occurs on dry, sandy loams with a deep cover of pine needles on the surface. Pinus rigida is often an associated tree. Other species noted there included Vaccinium fuscatum, Vaccinium stamineum, Lyonia mariana, Smilax glauca, Cypripedium acaule, and Epigaea repens, Similar Associations: • Pinus echinata Early-Successional Forest (CEGL006327) occurs in similar environments but is dominated (>50% of canopy) by Pinus echinata instead of Pinus virginiana. • Pinus taeda - Liquidambar styraciflua Semi-natural Forest (CEGL008462) is commonly found in the same area as CEGL002591 in the Piedmont. CEGL008462 contains at least 50% Pinus taeda in the canopy, whereas CEGL002591 is mostly Pinus virginiana. • Pinus taeda/Liquidambar styraciflua - Acer rubrum var. rubrum/Vaccinium stamineum Forest (CEGL006011) occurs in similar environments with similar disturbance histories but is dominated by (>50% of canopy) Pinus taeda instead of Pinus virginiana. • Pinus virginiana - Juniperus virginiana var. virginiana - Ulmus alata Forest (CEGL007121) on more calcareous or circumneutral substrates. • Pinus virginiana - Pinus (rigida, echinata) - (Quercus prinus)/Vaccinium pallidum Forest (CEGL007119) can have a very similar canopy in the Piedmont and Blue Ridge ecoregions, but CEGL007119 is generally created and maintained by fire and/or logging but not heavy plowing and/or erosion. CEGL002591 generally has signs of heavy agricultural use such as sparse herbaceous or shrub layers, large percentage of invasive exotics such as Lonicera japonica in the herbaceous layer, old plowlines, human debris, and extremely even-aged canopy, whereas CEGL007119 generally has a more intact herbaceous/shrub layer (especially Vaccinium pallidum) and less signs of severe human disturbance. 12 Vegetation of Patuxent 15 February2012 Copyright © 2012 NatureServe

Related Concepts: • Pinus virginiana - Juniperus virginiana Forest (Fleming and Weber 2003) = • Pinus virginiana forest (Vanderhorst 2001b) = • IA7c. Xeric Virginia Pine Ridge Forest (Allard 1990) > • Pine-Oak Association of the Western Shore District (Shreve et al. 1910) > • Successional/Modified Terrestrial Forest (Fleming et al. 2006) > • Successional Forest (Harrison 2004) > • Unclassified Old-Field Successional Forest (Fleming and Moorhead 2000) ? • Virginia Pine - Oak: 78 (Eyre 1980) > • Virginia Pine Type (Schmalzer and DeSelm 1982) > • Virginia Pine, RV (Pyne 1994) > • Virginia Pine: 79 (Eyre 1980) > • Virginia pine successional forest (Collins and Anderson 1994) = • Xeric Pine Forest (Ambrose 1990a) > Classification Comments: Early-successional Pinus virginiana vegetation occurring over calcareous substrates is classed in Pinus virginiana - Juniperus virginiana var. virginiana - Ulmus alata Forest (CEGL007121) and has species indicative of calcareous substrates. Like many successional USNVC communities, this community has a wide geographic range and vegetation composition of associated species varies over this range.

After conducting fieldwork on Maryland's inner coastal plain during the USFWS Patuxent Research Refuge vegetation mapping project, it was determined that near pure stands of Pinus rigida and stands mixed with Pinus virginiana or early-successional deciduous trees such as Acer rubrum need to be reflected in the global concept of this type. It is unclear how these stands have developed or been managed, but contemporary fire suppression is an obvious factor as are signs of historical clearing for agriculture and military use (J. Harrison pers. comm. 2011).

CONSERVATION RANKING GRank: GNA (ruderal) (2000-6-13) Reasons: This forest represents early-successional vegetation and is thus not of high conservation concern.

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION Range: This successional community is possible in the Piedmont from Pennsylvania south to Alabama and ranges west into the Appalachians, Ridge and Valley, the Cumberland Plateau, and in scattered locales of the Interior Low Plateau. Nations: US Subnations: AL, DC, DE, GA, IN, KY, MD, NC, NJ, PA, SC, TN, VA, WV TNC Ecoregions: 43:C, 44:C, 49:P, 50:C, 51:C, 52:C, 58:C, 59:C, 61:C USFS Ecoregions: 221Da:CCC, 221Ha:CCC, 221Hc:CCC, 221He:CCC, 221J:CC, 222Cg:CCC, 222Dg:CCC, 222Eg:CCC, 222Ej:CCC, 222En:CCC, 222Eo:CCC, 231Ae:CCC, 231Ak:CCC, 231An:CCC, 231Be:CCC, 231Cc:CCC, 231Cd:CCC, 232Ad:???, 232Br:?CC, 232Bt:?CC, M221Aa:CCC, M221Ab:CCC, M221Ac:CCC, M221Be:CCC, M221Ca:CCC, M221Cb:CCC, M221Cc:CCP, M221Cd:CCC, M221Ce:CCP, M221Da:CCC, M221Db:CCC, M221Dc:CCC, M221Dd:CCC Federal Lands: BIA (Eastern Band of Cherokee); NPS (Abe Lincoln Birthplace, Appalachian Trail [Central Appalachians], Appalachian Trail [Southern Blue Ridge], Appomattox Court House, Big South Fork, Blue Ridge Parkway?, Bluestone, Booker T. Washington, C&O Canal, Cumberland Gap, Fredericksburg-Spotsylvania, Gauley River, George Washington Parkway, Gettysburg, Great Smoky Mountains, Guilford Courthouse, Kings Mountain, Little River Canyon, Mammoth Cave, Manassas, Natchez Trace, National Capital-East, New River Gorge, Obed River, Prince William, Rock Creek, Shenandoah, Shiloh, Thomas Stone, Wolf Trap); TVA (Tellico); USFS (Bankhead, Chattahoochee, Chattahoochee (Piedmont), Chattahoochee (Southern Blue Ridge), Cherokee, Daniel Boone, George Washington, Jefferson, Monongahela, Sumter, Sumter (Mountains), Sumter (Piedmont), Uwharrie?); USFWS (Patuxent)

ELEMENT SOURCES References: Allard 1990, Ambrose 1990a, Andreu and Tukman 1995, Burns and Honkala 1990a, Collins and Anderson 1994, Coxe 2009, Eyre 1980, Faller 1975, Fike 1999, Fleming and Coulling 2001, Fleming and Moorhead 2000, Fleming and Patterson 2011a, Fleming and Weber 2003, Fleming et al. 2006, Hall and Mathews 1974, Harrison 2004, J. Harrison pers. comm., Nelson 1986, Patterson 2008a, Patterson 2008b, Patterson 2008e, Patterson et al. 1999, Perles et al. 2006c, Pyne 1994, Schmalzer and DeSelm 1982, Schotz pers. comm., Shreve et al. 1910, Southeastern Ecology Working Group n.d., TDNH unpubl. data, TNC 1998c, Vanderhorst 2001b, Vanderhorst et al. 2007, Vanderhorst et al. 2008, Vanderhorst et al. 2010, White and Pyne 2003, Young et al. 2006, Young et al. 2009

NORTHEASTERN MODIFIED SUCCESSIONAL FOREST (CEGL006599) Prunus serotina - Liriodendron tulipifera - Acer rubrum - Fraxinus americana - (Robinia pseudoacacia) Forest Black Cherry - Tuliptree - Red Maple - White Ash - (Black Locust) Forest

ELEMENT CONCEPT Summary: This early-successional woody vegetation of the northeastern United States occurs on sites that are becoming reforested after having been cleared for agriculture or otherwise heavily modified in the past. Environmental setting varies, but generally sites are dry-mesic to mesic, with small seepage inclusions in some examples. Physiognomy of this vegetation is highly variable, ranging from closed forest, open forest, tall dense shrubland, to more open tall shrubland. Early-successional woody species dominate the canopy in a widely variable mix, depending on geographic location. In the Central Appalachians and Mid-Atlantic Piedmont, many stands represent decadent forests that were once dominated by Robinia pseudoacacia but are now mixed with various mid-successional hardwoods; other stands in this region regenerated as mixed stands. Tree species often include some combination of Prunus serotina, Liriodendron tulipifera, Fraxinus americana, Robinia pseudoacacia, and Acer rubrum. Other associates can include Juglans nigra, Sassafras albidum, Betula populifolia, Juniperus virginiana, Acer negundo, Acer saccharinum, Ailanthus altissima, Ulmus americana, Quercus spp., Betula lenta, Amelanchier spp., Pinus strobus, and Populus grandidentata. Other woody species may contribute to the canopy or form a tall-shrub layer, including Lindera benzoin and Carpinus caroliniana. The low-shrub layer, if present, is usually characterized by the presence of Rubus spp. such as Rubus flagellaris, Rubus allegheniensis, Rubus phoenicolasius, or Rubus hispidus. This layer is often dominated by exotic species such as Lonicera tatarica, Lonicera morrowii, Rhamnus cathartica, Crataegus spp., Rosa multiflora, and Berberis thunbergii. The herbaceous layer is variable, often containing grasses and forbs of both native and exotic origin. Common species include Ageratina altissima var. altissima, Polygonum persicaria, Impatiens capensis, Glechoma hederacea, Polystichum acrostichoides, Calystegia sepium ssp. sepium, Galium aparine, Oxalis stricta, Polygonum virginianum, Dennstaedtia punctilobula, Arisaema triphyllum, Allium vineale, and Veronica officinalis, among many others. The invasive species Alliaria petiolata, Microstegium vimineum, and Polygonum caespitosum can be abundant in this disturbed forest type. Vines can be absent or abundant. In stands with high vine cover, the vegetation structure can be altered by the weight of the vines pulling down trees and shrubs. Common vines include Parthenocissus quinquefolia, Toxicodendron radicans, Vitis labrusca, and the invasive vines Celastrus orbiculata and Lonicera japonica. These forests are often young and resulted from the colonization of old agricultural fields by woody species. Recent disturbance or abundant invasive species give these forest stands a weedy character. It is unlikely that these stands will succeed to a natural plant community dominated by native species. Environment: This vegetation occurs on sites that have been cleared for agriculture or otherwise heavily modified in the past. Generally sites are dry-mesic and may have small seepage inclusions in some examples. Occasionally this type may occur in formerly agricultural bottomlands, in which case the soils may be temporarily flooded or saturated. Vegetation: Early-successional woody species dominate the canopy in a widely variable mix, depending on geographic location. In the Central Appalachians and Mid-Atlantic Piedmont, many stands represent decadent forests that were once dominated by Robinia pseudoacacia but are now mixed with various mid-successional hardwoods; other stands in this region regenerated as mixed stands. Tree species often include some combination of Prunus serotina, Liriodendron tulipifera, Fraxinus americana, Robinia pseudoacacia, and Acer rubrum. Other associates can include Juglans nigra, Sassafras albidum, Betula populifolia, Juniperus virginiana, Acer negundo, Acer saccharinum, Ailanthus altissima, Ulmus americana, Quercus spp., Betula lenta, Amelanchier spp., Pinus strobus, and Populus grandidentata. Other woody species may contribute to the canopy or form a tall-shrub layer, including Lindera benzoin and Carpinus caroliniana. The low-shrub layer, if present, is usually characterized by the presence of Rubus spp. such as Rubus flagellaris, Rubus allegheniensis, Rubus phoenicolasius, or Rubus hispidus. This layer is often dominated by exotic species such as Lonicera tatarica, Lonicera morrowii, Rhamnus cathartica, Crataegus spp., Rosa multiflora, and Berberis thunbergii. The herbaceous layer is variable, often containing grasses and forbs of both native and exotic origin. Common species include Ageratina altissima var. altissima, Polygonum persicaria, Impatiens capensis, Glechoma hederacea, Polystichum acrostichoides, Calystegia sepium ssp. sepium, Galium aparine, Oxalis stricta, Polygonum virginianum, Dennstaedtia punctilobula, Arisaema triphyllum, Allium vineale, and Veronica officinalis, among many others. The invasive species Alliaria petiolata, Microstegium vimineum, and Polygonum caespitosum can be abundant in this disturbed forest type. Vines can be absent or abundant. In stands with high vine cover, the vegetation structure can be altered by the weight of the vines pulling down trees and shrubs. Common vines include Parthenocissus quinquefolia, Toxicodendron radicans, Vitis labrusca, and the invasive vines Celastrus orbiculata and Lonicera japonica.

Dynamics: These forests are often young and resulted from the colonization of old agricultural fields by woody species. Recent disturbance or abundant invasive species give these forest stands a weedy character. It is unlikely that these stands will succeed to a natural plant community dominated by native species. Patuxent Research Refuge: This forest type is an indicator of heavy disturbance and is widely variable in both structure and composition. At the refuge, Acer rubrum is often the dominant tree. Other associated trees include Prunus serotina, Liquidambar sytraciflua, Robinia pseudoacacia,and Quercus rubra. Smilax rotundifolia and Microstegium vimineum may be abundant. Similar Associations: • Juglans nigra/Verbesina alternifolia Forest (CEGL007879) • Liriodendron tulipifera - Quercus spp. Forest (CEGL007221) is more strongly dominated by Liriodendron and is generally in a later successional state as evidenced by taller trees and more closed canopy. • Prunus serotina - Sassafras albidum - (Fraxinus americana)/Juniperus virginiana Forest (CEGL004133) • Robinia pseudoacacia Forest (CEGL007279) Related Concepts: • Fraxinus americana - Robinia pseudoacacia/Alliaria petiolata Successional Forest (Young et al. 2007) = • Successional/Modified Terrestrial Forest (Fleming et al. 2006) > Classification Comments: This vegetation is broadly defined and varies widely in composition across its range, presenting a classification challenge at the alliance level.

CONSERVATION RANKING GRank: GNA (ruderal) (2004-11-29) Reasons: This vegetation is modified by human activity and not of conservation concern.

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION Range: This vegetation is currently described from Pennsylvania, New York, and New Jersey but is of broader distribution in the northeastern U.S. Nations: US Subnations: CT, DE, IN, MA, MD, NJ, NY, PA, VA TNC Ecoregions: 48:C, 49:C, 52:?, 58:C, 59:C, 60:C, 61:C, 62:C USFS Ecoregions: 212Fc:CCC, 212G:C?, 221Aa:CCC, 221Ae:CCC, 221Af:CCC, 221Ag:CCC, 221Ah:CCC, 221Ai:CCC, 221Al:CCC, 221Am:CCC, 221Ba:CCC, 221Bb:CCC, 221Bc:CCC, 221Bd:CCC, 221Da:CCC, 221Db:CCC, 221Dc:CCC, 221Fa:CCC, 222Ic:CCC, 222Jj:CCC, 231A:??, 232Aa:CCC, 232Ab:CCC, 232Ac:CCC, 232Ad:CCC, 232B:C?, 232C:C?, M212Bc:CCC, M212Bd:CCC, M212Cb:CCC, M212E:C?, M221Aa:CCC, M221Ab:CCC, M221Ac:CCC, M221Ad:CCC, M221Ba:CCC, M221Bb:CCC, M221Bc:CCC, M221Bd:CCC, M221Da:CCC Federal Lands: NPS (Allegheny Portage Railroad, Appalachian Trail [Central Appalachians], Appalachian Trail [Lower New England], Boston Harbor Islands, C&O Canal, Catoctin Mountain, Delaware Water Gap, Fort Necessity, Friendship Hill, Gateway, George Washington Parkway, Gettysburg, Harpers Ferry, Indiana Dunes, Johnstown Flood, Manassas, Morristown, National Capital-East, Prince William, Sagamore Hill, Saratoga, Saugus Iron Works, Shenandoah, Upper Delaware, Valley Forge, Weir Farm, Wolf Trap); USFWS (Cape May, E.B. Forsythe, Erie, Great Meadows?, Montezuma, Patuxent, Prime Hook, Supawna Meadows)

ELEMENT SOURCES References: Eastern Ecology Working Group n.d., Edinger et al. 2008a, Edinger et al. 2008b, Ehrenfeld 1977, Fike 1999, Fleming and Patterson 2011a, Fleming et al. 2006, Hop et al. 2009, Largay and Sneddon 2008, Metzler et al. 2009, NRCS 2001b, NRCS 2004a, Perles et al. 2006b, Perles et al. 2006c, Perles et al. 2006d, Perles et al. 2007, Perles et al. 2008, Podniesinski et al. 2005b, Soil Conservation Service 1987, Young et al. 2006, Young et al. 2007, Young et al. 2009

M159. Northern & Eastern Pine - Oak Forest & Barrens G161. Pitch Pine Barrens

PINE BARRENS PINE - OAK WOODLAND (CEGL006329) Pinus rigida - Quercus coccinea - Quercus falcata/(Quercus marilandica)/Gaylussacia frondosa Woodland Pitch Pine - Scarlet Oak - Southern Red Oak/(Blackjack Oak)/Blue Huckleberry Woodland

ELEMENT CONCEPT Summary: This pitch pine - oak woodland of dry sandy soils occurs in portions of the New Jersey Pine Barrens and the Cape May peninsula, with outliers occurring south of the Delaware Bay on the Maryland inner Coastal Plain. Dominant trees include Pinus rigida mixed with tree oaks, most frequently Quercus falcata and Quercus coccinea. Other associated oaks include Quercus velutina and Quercus alba. Pinus virginiana sometimes occurs, and in New Jersey, Pinus echinata may be an associate. Maryland occurrences may also include Nyssa sylvatica and Liquidambar styraciflua in the canopy. The tall-shrub layer is characterized by Quercus marilandica, Quercus prinoides, Ilex opaca, Sassafras albidum, and occasionally Kalmia latifolia. Maryland occurrences also support Castanea pumila, Lyonia mariana, and Vaccinium fuscatum in this layer. A short-shrub layer is dominated by Gaylussacia frondosa, Gaylussacia baccata, and Vaccinium pallidum. The herbaceous or field layer is usually sparse and may include Smilax glauca, Chimaphila maculata, Gaultheria procumbens, Carex pensylvanica, and Cypripedium acaule. Environment: This community is associated with xeric, sublevel, sandy uplands. In Maryland, soils are unconsolidated sands of the Patuxent Formation and are extremely acidic with exceedingly low base cation and base saturation levels, indicating extreme infertility. Vegetation: Current examples of this community vary from woodlands to open forests. The overstory consists of Pinus rigida mixed with tree oaks, most frequently Quercus falcata and Quercus coccinea. Other associated oaks include Quercus velutina and Quercus alba. Pinus virginiana sometimes occurs, and in New Jersey, Pinus echinata may be an associate. Maryland occurrences may also include Nyssa sylvatica and Liquidambar styraciflua in the canopy. The tall-shrub layer is characterized by Quercus marilandica, Quercus prinoides, Ilex opaca, Sassafras albidum, Castanea pumila, and occasionally Kalmia latifolia. Maryland occurrences also support Castanea pumila, Lyonia mariana, and Vaccinium fuscatum in this layer. A short-shrub layer is dominated by Gaylussacia frondosa, Gaylussacia baccata, and Vaccinium pallidum. The herbaceous or field layer is usually sparse and may include Smilax glauca, Chimaphila maculata, Gaultheria procumbens, Carex pensylvanica, and Cypripedium acaule. Dynamics: Edaphic conditions (xeric, rapidly drained soils) are undoubtedly an important influence on vegetation composition. In New Jersey, and likely in Maryland, periodic fires once contributed to the woodland physiognomy and ensured long-term recruitment of the strongly fire-adapted Pinus rigida. Exclusion of fires for many decades (especially in Maryland) may have contributed to the closure of some stands and the presence of fire-intolerant species such as Pinus virginiana and Acer rubrum. Patuxent Research Refuge: At Patuxent, this vegetation is a mixed forest of variable canopy closure, It occurs on well-drained soils of knolls and hills of the southwestern portion, and to a lesser degree, the northeastern portion of the refuge.The canopy is dominated by Quercus alba, Quercus prinus, Quercus coccinea,and Pinus rigida, with other associated trees including Fagus grandifolia, Nyssa sylvatica, Sassafras albidum. The shrub layer is characterized Gaylussacia frondosa, Vaccinium pallidum, and Quercus marilandica. Smilax rotundifolia is a common vine. This forest type is also known from outside the refuge adjacent to the Baltimore-Washington Parkway and the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center. Additional species noted in these locations include Smilax glauca, Gaylussacia baccata, Castanea pumila, and Pinus virginiana. Quercus falcata is an important associate in these locations. Similar Associations: • Quercus (alba, coccinea, falcata, velutina) - Pinus (rigida, echinata)/Ilex opaca/Gaylussacia frondosa Woodland (CEGL006929) • Quercus alba - Quercus falcata - (Carya pallida)/Gaylussacia frondosa Forest (CEGL006269) dry oak/heath forest of the northeastern Coastal Plain from NJ to VA; occupies somewhat less xeric sites and is a true forest, lacking Pinus rigida and Quercus prinoides. Related Concepts: • Pinus rigida - Pinus virginiana/Vaccinium fuscatum/Epigaea repens Forest (NatureServe 2005) < • Pinus rigida - Quercus coccinea/Gaylussacia baccata - Vaccinium pallidum - Castanea pumila Forest (NatureServe 2005) < • Pinus rigida/Sassafras albidum - Quercus prinoides/Gaylussacia baccata - Vaccinium pallidum Forest (NatureServe 2005) < • Coastal Plain Pine - Oak Woodland (Harrison 2004) > • Pine Oak Woodland (POW9) (Windisch 1995b) ? Classification Comments: Classification of this association at the southern end of its range is supported by analysis of plot data for the NCR vegetation mapping project. In that analysis, a group of six Maryland plots sampled from areas of the Patuxent Formation proved distinct from related oak/heath vegetation and matched this type closely.

CONSERVATION RANKING GRank: G2G3 (2006-1-18) Reasons:

Nations: US Subnations: DC, MD, NJ TNC Ecoregions: 58:C, 62:C USFS Ecoregions: 232Ab:CCC, 232Ad:CCC Federal Lands: DOD (Fort Meade); NPS (National Capital-East); USFWS (Cape May, Patuxent, Beltsville Agricultural, Goddard)

ELEMENT SOURCES References: Eastern Ecology Working Group n.d., Harrison 2004, Harrison 2011, NatureServe 2005, Windisch 1995b

1.B.3. Temperate Flooded & Swamp Forest M029. Northern & Central Floodplain Forest & Scrub G040. Silver Maple - Green Ash - Sycamore Floodplain

COASTAL PLAIN STREAMSIDE FOREST (CEGL006603) Platanus occidentalis - (Liquidambar styraciflua, Liriodendron tulipifera)/Asimina triloba Forest American Sycamore - (Sweetgum, Tuliptree)/Pawpaw Forest

ELEMENT CONCEPT Summary: This Inner Coastal Plain streamside forest of the Mid-Atlantic region occurs along braided and intermittent streams on active and former stream channels. Flooding frequency is annual, and soils are alluvial clay loams or sandy clay loams. The tree canopy is dominated by Platanus occidentalis, Liquidambar styraciflua, Betula nigra, Liriodendron tulipifera, and Acer rubrum. Less frequent associates may include Quercus michauxii, Ulmus americana, and Quercus phellos. The subcanopy is of variable cover and is characterized by Asimina triloba, Carpinus caroliniana, Lindera benzoin, and Ilex opaca, with Cornus florida found less frequently. Typical vines include Toxicodendron radicans, Parthenocissus quinquefolia, and Smilax rotundifolia. The most abundant herbs are Boehmeria cylindrica and Arisaema triphyllum. Other herbaceous associates include Geum virginianum, Carex debilis, Lycopus virginicus, Impatiens capensis, Pilea pumila, Claytonia virginica, Ranunculus abortivus, and Cardamine concatenata. The vine Campsis radicans may also be present. Patuxent Research Refuge: This floodplain forest is thought to be common on the refuge, occuring on both the Patuxent and Little Patuxent rivers, Similar Associations: • Betula nigra - Platanus occidentalis/Impatiens capensis Forest (CEGL006184) • Fraxinus pennsylvanica - Platanus occidentalis - Celtis laevigata/Chasmanthium latifolium Piedmont River Levee Forest (CEGL007013) • Platanus occidentalis - Liquidambar styraciflua/Carpinus caroliniana - Asimina triloba Forest (CEGL007340) formerly attributed to ECO58. Related Concepts: • Platanus occidentalis - (Liquidambar styraciflua - Liriodendron tulipifera)/Asimina triloba Forest (Bartgis 1986) ?

CONSERVATION RANKING GRank: G3G4 (2000-3-21) Reasons: This community is newly proposed and requires further evaluation. Global rank based on state rank.

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION Range: This forest is found in the Inner Coastal Plain of the Chesapeake Bay region, in the Upper Coastal Plain and Piedmont of Delaware, and in New Jersey. Nations: US Subnations: DC, DE?, MD, NJ, PA?, VA TNC Ecoregions: 58:C, 62:C USFS Ecoregions: 232Ac:CCC, 232Ad:CCC, 232Br:CCC Federal Lands: NPS (National Capital-East); USFWS (Patuxent)

ELEMENT SOURCES References: Bartgis 1986, Eastern Ecology Working Group n.d., Fleming et al. 2001, Harrison 2004, Harrison 2011, Thomson et al. 1999

PIEDMONT/CENTRAL APPALACHIAN RICH FLOODPLAIN FOREST (CEGL004073) Platanus occidentalis - Acer negundo - Juglans nigra/Asimina triloba/Mertensia virginica Forest American Sycamore - Box-elder - Black Walnut/Pawpaw/Virginia Bluebells Forest

ELEMENT CONCEPT Summary: This association occupies the higher elevations of floodplains, floodplain berms, and low terraces of major Mid-Atlantic rivers (e.g., Potomac, Shenandoah, Monocacy, James) and as the main floodplain vegetation on medium-sized rivers draining areas of nutrient-rich substrates (e.g., Antietam Creek, Bull Run). Soil texture is variable, ranging from silty-clay loams to loams over much of the range, and samples collected from plots had high base status. This vegetation type is a closed forest with mixed overstory dominance by Platanus occidentalis, Juglans nigra, Carya cordiformis, Celtis occidentalis, Ulmus americana, and, locally, Fraxinus pennsylvanica, Liriodendron tulipifera, and Quercus shumardii. Acer saccharinum is codominant in a minority of stands but absent or unimportant in many others. Acer negundo is strongly dominant in the subcanopy. Asimina triloba and/or Lindera benzoin dominate a moderately dense to dense shrub layer. The herb layer is rich in spring ephemerals and other nutrient-demanding species, including Mertensia virginica, Asarum canadense, Chaerophyllum procumbens, Hydrophyllum canadense, Viola striata, Phlox divaricata, Podophyllum peltatum, Erythronium americanum, Dicentra canadensis, Sanicula odorata, Packera aurea (= Senecio aureus), Claytonia virginica, Festuca subverticillata, Carex jamesii, Carex grisea, Floerkea proserpinacoides, Osmorhiza longistylis, and Ranunculus abortivus. Invasive exotics, especially Alliaria petiolata, Veronica hederifolia, Duchesnea indica, Urtica dioica ssp. dioica, Microstegium vimineum, and Glechoma hederacea, are usually abundant. Environment: This association occupies the higher elevations of floodplains, floodplain berms, and low terraces of major Mid-Atlantic rivers (Potomac, Shenandoah, Monocacy) and as main floodplain vegetation on medium-sized rivers draining areas of nutrient-rich substrates (e.g., Antietam Creek, Bull Run). In the Potomac Gorge, average flood-return interval was from about 3 to 15 years. Soil texture is variable, ranging from silty-clay loams to loams over much of the range, but it can be sandy loams or sands along high-gradient reaches. Soil samples collected from plots have a mean pH of 6.1, high calcium content (mean about 2200 ppm), and 80-100% total base saturation. Vegetation: This vegetation type is a closed forest with mixed overstory dominance by Platanus occidentalis, Juglans nigra, Carya cordiformis, Celtis occidentalis, Ulmus americana, and, locally, Fraxinus pennsylvanica, Liriodendron tulipifera, and Quercus shumardii. Acer saccharinum is codominant in a minority of stands but absent or unimportant in many others. Acer negundo is strongly dominant in the subcanopy. Asimina triloba (usually on sites with coarser soil textures) and /or Lindera benzoin (on finer-textured substrates) dominate a moderately dense to dense shrub layer. Vines are common, with Parthenocissus quinquefolia, Vitis vulpina, and Toxicodendron radicans most frequent. The herb layer is rich in spring ephemerals and other nutrient-demanding species, including Mertensia virginica, Asarum canadense, Chaerophyllum procumbens, Hydrophyllum canadense, Viola striata, Phlox divaricata, Podophyllum peltatum, Erythronium americanum, Dicentra canadensis, Sanicula odorata (= Sanicula gregaria), Packera aurea (= Senecio aureus), Claytonia virginica, Festuca subverticillata, Carex jamesii, Carex grisea, Floerkea proserpinacoides, Osmorhiza longistylis, and Ranunculus abortivus. Invasive exotics may be abundant and are represented by Alliaria petiolata, Veronica hederifolia, Duchesnea indica, Urtica dioica ssp. dioica, Microstegium vimineum, and Glechoma hederacea. Patuxent Research Refuge: At Patuxent, this rich floodplain forest was observed at a single location on a terrace of the Little Patuxent floodplain, but may be found elsewhere. It is characterized by a mixture of trees including Liriodendron tulipifera, Liquidambar styracifllua, Fraxinus pennsylvanica, Juglans nigra, Ulmus americana, and Platanus occidentalis. Viburnum prunifolium and Asimina triloba make up the shrub layer. The herbaceous layer includes Packera aurea, Boehmeria cylindrica, Sanguinarea canadensis, and Elymus villosus. Similar Associations: • Acer saccharinum - Acer negundo/Ageratina altissima - Laportea canadensis - (Elymus virginicus) Forest (CEGL006217) • Liriodendron tulipifera - Acer (rubrum, negundo) - (Platanus occidentalis)/Carpinus caroliniana/Polygonum virginianum Forest (CEGL006492) • Platanus occidentalis - Acer saccharinum - Juglans nigra - Ulmus rubra Forest (CEGL007334) covers rich floodplain forest west of the Appalachians. • Platanus occidentalis - Fraxinus pennsylvanica/Carpinus caroliniana/Verbesina alternifolia Forest (CEGL006458) Related Concepts: • Acer saccharinum - Acer negundo/Mertensia virginica Association (Rawinski et al. 1996) = 18 Vegetation of Patuxent 15 February2012 Copyright © 2012 NatureServe

• Platanus occidentalis - Acer negundo - Juglans nigra - Celtis occidentalis/Asimina triloba/Mertensia virginica Forest (Fleming and Patterson 2003) = • Platanus occidentalis - Acer negundo - Juglans nigra/Asimina triloba/Mertensia virginica Forest (Fleming et al. 2004) = • Platanus occidentalis - Acer negundo/Asarum canadense Forest (Thomson et al. 1999) = • Platanus occidentalis - Acer negundo/Asimina triloba - Lindera benzoin/Mertensia virginica - Asarum canadense Forest (Fleming and Coulling 2001) = • Platanus occidentalis - Acer negundo/Asimina triloba/Asarum canadense Forest (Lea 2000) < • Platanus occidentalis - Acer negundo/Asimina triloba/Carex jamesii Forest (Lea 2000) < • Platanus occidentalis - Acer negundo/Asimina triloba/Mertensia virginica Forest (Lea 2000) < • Platanus occidentalis - Acer negundo/Hydrophyllum canadense - Laportea canadensis Forest (Lea 2000) < • Platanus occidentalis - Fraxinus pennsylvanica Floodplain Forest (Vanderhorst 2000b) = • Ulmus americana - Acer negundo - (Platanus occidentalis)/Asimina triloba - Lindera benzoin/Asarum canadense Forest (Fleming and Weber 2003) = • Montane - Piedmont Bottomland Forest (Harrison 2004) > • Piedmont/Central Appalachian Rich Floodplain Forest (Fleming et al. 2004) = • Piedmont/Mountain Floodplain Forest (Fleming et al. 2001) > Classification Comments: This type was defined to cover rich large-stream floodplain forests of the Mid-Atlantic Piedmont and Central Appalachians. It was split off from the more broadly defined Platanus occidentalis - Acer saccharinum - Juglans nigra - Ulmus rubra Forest (CEGL007334). This type was classified through analysis of 36 plot samples from Virginia and Maryland and through consultation with ecologists from those states and West Virginia. It has also been confirmed for Pennsylvania.

CONSERVATION RANKING GRank: G4 (2005-1-25) Reasons: The type is not rare but has a restricted geographic range, is confined to larger rivers in the Mid-Atlantic region, and is subject to continuing degradation by invasive species.

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION Range: This community occurs on floodplains of large and medium-sized Mid-Atlantic rivers, including the Potomac, Shenandoah, James, Rappahannock, Monocacy, Clinch, and possibly others northward. Nations: US Subnations: MD, PA, VA, WV TNC Ecoregions: 49:C, 52:C, 58:C, 59:C, 61:C USFS Ecoregions: 221Da:CCC, 221Ea:CCC, 231Aa:CCP, 231Ae:CCP, 231Ak:CCP, 231Al:CCC, 231Ap:CCC, 232Ad:CCC, M221A:CC, M221D:CC Federal Lands: NPS (Antietam, Appalachian Trail [Central Appalachians], C&O Canal, Eisenhower, Friendship Hill, George Washington Parkway, Gettysburg, Harpers Ferry, Manassas, Monocacy, National Capital-East); USFS (George Washington, Jefferson?); USFWS (National Conservation Training Center, Patuxent)

ELEMENT SOURCES References: Burns and Honkala 1990b, Eastern Ecology Working Group n.d., Fleming 2002b, Fleming 2007, Fleming and Coulling 2001, Fleming and Patterson 2003, Fleming and Patterson 2011a, Fleming and Taverna 2006, Fleming and Weber 2003, Fleming et al. 2001, Fleming et al. 2004, Harrison 2004, Harrison 2011, Lea 2000, Lea 2003, Lea 2004, Luken 2003, Perles et al. 2006b, Perles et al. 2006c, Pyle 1995, Rawinski et al. 1996, Sigafoos 1976, Thomson et al. 1999, VDNH 2003, Vanderhorst 2000b, Zimmerman 2011l, Zimmerman 2011m, Zimmerman et al. 2012

M030. Northern & Central Swamp Forest G045. Northern & Central Conifer & Hardwood Acidic Swamp

SOUTHERN NEW ENGLAND/NORTHERN PIEDMONT RED MAPLE SEEPAGE SWAMP (CEGL006406) Acer rubrum - Fraxinus (pennsylvanica, americana)/Lindera benzoin/Symplocarpus foetidus Forest Red Maple - (Green Ash, White Ash)/Northern Spicebush/Skunk-cabbage Forest

ELEMENT CONCEPT Summary: This association is a seepage swamp dominated by Acer rubrum and ranging from southern New England south to the Piedmont of Virginia. It generally occurs in saturated situations on slightly sloping hillsides, along small streams, or in basins that receive overland flooding in addition to groundwater influence. In general, these swamps are moderately acidic to moderately basic and have some seepage indicators but are not particularly species-rich. Soils are 19 Vegetation of Patuxent 15 February2012 Copyright © 2012 NatureServe

shallow to moderately deep mucks over mineral soils. Acer rubrum dominates the canopy; Fraxinus pennsylvanica or Fraxinus americana are usually also found in the canopy. Fraxinus nigra is not generally associated with this type at the northern portion of the range, and, if present, occurs only as scattered individuals, but this species does occur in this type in Pennsylvania. Other canopy or subcanopy associates may include Liriodendron tulipifera, Quercus bicolor, Quercus palustris, Prunus serotina, Fagus grandifolia, Betula lenta, Ulmus americana, and Ulmus rubra. Conifers such as Tsuga canadensis or Pinus strobus are generally absent or occur in very low abundance. The shrub layer may be fairly open to quite dense, depending on the amount of canopy closure. Shrub species commonly include Ilex verticillata, Rhododendron viscosum, Clethra alnifolia, Lindera benzoin, Cornus amomum, Alnus serrulata, and less commonly Vaccinium corymbosum, Lyonia ligustrina, Ilex montana, Toxicodendron vernix, Viburnum dentatum, and Viburnum nudum var. cassinoides (= Viburnum cassinoides). The herbaceous layer is variable in cover; Symplocarpus foetidus and Osmunda cinnamomea are nearly always present. In some areas, tall ferns (Osmunda cinnamomea, Onoclea sensibilis, Osmunda regalis, Thelypteris palustris, Thelypteris noveboracensis) form an herbaceous canopy within which other species are scattered. Microtopography is generally pronounced, resulting from tip-ups. Tree seedlings and Sphagnum mosses are common on hummocks but do not in general form extensive carpets. Additional nonvascular species can include Plagiomnium cuspidatum (= Mnium cuspidatum) and Calliergon spp. Invasive shrubs and herbs, including Berberis thunbergii, Rosa multiflora, Lonicera morrowii, Alliaria petiolata, and Microstegium vimineum, may be abundant. Environment: This association is a seepage swamp dominated by Acer rubrum and ranging from southern New England to Virginia. It generally occurs in saturated soils on slightly sloping hillsides, along small headwater streams, or in depressions at the edges of floodplains that receive overland flooding in addition to groundwater inputs. In general, these swamps are moderately acidic to moderately basic and have some seepage indicators but are not particularly species-rich. Soils are shallow to moderately deep mucks over mineral soils. Microtopography is generally pronounced, resulting from tip-ups and the braided character of the drainage. Soil samples collected from 18 Maryland and Virginia plot samples are "intermediate" in chemistry, i.e., mean pH = 5.2, mean Ca = 1071 ppm, mean Mg = 195 ppm, mean total base saturation = 57%, but are more "basic" than "acidic" in their calcium and magnesium content. Vegetation: Acer rubrum dominates the canopy; Fraxinus pennsylvanica or Fraxinus americana are usually also found in the canopy. Fraxinus nigra is not generally associated with this type and, if present, occurs only as scattered individuals. Other canopy or subcanopy associates may include Liriodendron tulipifera, Quercus bicolor, Quercus palustris, Prunus serotina, Fagus grandifolia, Betula lenta, Ulmus americana, and Ulmus rubra. Conifers such as Tsuga canadensis or Pinus strobus are generally absent or occur in very low abundance. The shrub layer may be fairly open to quite dense, depending on the amount of canopy closure. Shrub species commonly include Ilex verticillata, Rhododendron viscosum, Clethra alnifolia, Lindera benzoin, Cornus amomum, Alnus serrulata, Carpinus caroliniana, and less commonly Vaccinium corymbosum, Lyonia ligustrina, Ilex montana, Toxicodendron vernix, Viburnum dentatum, and Viburnum nudum var. cassinoides (= Viburnum cassinoides). The herbaceous layer is variable in cover; Symplocarpus foetidus and Osmunda cinnamomea are nearly always present. In some areas, tall ferns (Osmunda cinnamomea, Onoclea sensibilis, Osmunda regalis, Thelypteris palustris, Thelypteris noveboracensis) form an herbaceous canopy within which other species are scattered. These other herbaceous species include Impatiens capensis, Galium aparine, Geum canadense, Arisaema triphyllum, Carex stricta, Carex gracillima, Carex intumescens, Carex radiata, Carex laevivaginata, Veratrum viride, Boehmeria cylindrica, Chelone glabra, Cardamine pensylvanica, Pilea pumila, and Glyceria spp. At the southern end of the range in Maryland and Virginia, Symplocarpus foetidus is usually greatly dominant (>50% cover) early in the growing season, with Saururus cernuus frequently assuming patch-dominance during the summer. Tree seedlings and Sphagnum mosses are common on hummocks but do not in general form extensive carpets. Additional nonvascular species can include Plagiomnium cuspidatum (= Mnium cuspidatum) and Calliergon spp. Invasive shrubs and herbs, including Berberis thunbergii, Rosa multiflora, Lonicera morrowii, Alliaria petiolata, and Microstegium vimineum, may be abundant. Patuxent Research Refuge: This swamp was observed at a single location just south of the Little Patuxent river, where it occurs on the upland edge of an old meander, but it could occur elsewhere on the refuge. Acer rubrum and Nyssa sylvatica are dominant, with Fraxinus pennsylvanica in association. Asimina triloba and Magnolia virginiana occur in the understory, and the shrubs Clethra alnifolia and Toxicodendron vernix are important components; Sambucus canadensis is also present. The herbaceous layer is comprised of Cinna arundinacea, Symplocarpus foetidus, and Boehmeria cylindrica. This community was not observed as often as the Southern Red Maple – Blackgum Swamp Forest (CEGL006238). The relationship between between these two seepage swamps at the the refuge needs more study.

Similar Associations: • Acer rubrum - Betula alleghaniensis/Lindera benzoin Forest (CEGL006936) • Acer rubrum - Fraxinus nigra - (Tsuga canadensis)/Tiarella cordifolia Forest (CEGL006502) • Acer rubrum - Fraxinus pennsylvanica - Liquidambar styraciflua/Carex laevivaginata - Carex stricta - Glyceria septentrionalis - (Symplocarpus foetidus) Forest [Provisional] (CEGL006965) • Acer rubrum/Nemopanthus mucronatus - Vaccinium corymbosum Forest (CEGL006220) • Acer rubrum/Rhododendron viscosum - Clethra alnifolia Forest (CEGL006156) Related Concepts: • Acer rubrum - Fraxinus (pennsylvanica, americana)/Lindera benzoin/Symplocarpus foetidus Forest (Harrison 2004) = • Acer rubrum - Fraxinus pennsylvanica/Lindera benzoin/Symplocarpus foetidus Forest (Fleming and Patterson 2003) = • Acer rubrum/Lindera benzoin community (Metzler and Barrett 2001) = • Coastal Plain - Piedmont Basic Seepage Swamp (Harrison 2004) > • Coastal Plain/Piedmont Basic Seepage Swamp (Fleming et al. 2001) > • Inland Red Maple Swamp (Breden 1989) > • Palustrine Broad-leaved Deciduous Forested Wetlands (PFO1) (Cowardin et al. 1979) ? • Red Maple - Black-gum Palustrine Forest (Fike 1999) > • Red or Silver Maple-Green Ash Swamp (Thompson 1996) ? • Southern New England stream bottom forest (Rawinski 1984) ? Classification Comments: Classification of this type at the southern end of the range is supported by analysis of a 1250-plot regional dataset compiled for the NCR and Mid-Atlantic national parks vegetation mapping project. In that analysis, this association was represented a group of 18 Maryland and Virginia plots.

CONSERVATION RANKING GRank: G4G5 (2007-1-30) Reasons: Although this is a small-patch community, its environmental requirements are quite general, and it occurs where acidic groundwater seepage emerges on the headwaters of stream drainages. The range extent crosses several ecoregions and 10 states. The major threat to this community is housing development, with disruption of groundwater source a lesser threat.

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION Range: This vegetation occurs in southern New England south through the mid-Atlantic states to Virginia. Nations: US Subnations: CT, DC, DE, IN, MA, MD, NH, NJ, NY, PA, RI, VA TNC Ecoregions: 48:C, 52:C, 58:C, 59:C, 60:C, 61:C, 62:C USFS Ecoregions: 212Fa:CCP, 212Fb:CCP, 212Fc:CCC, 212Fd:CCP, 221Aa:CCP, 221Ab:CCC, 221Ac:CCC, 221Ad:CCC, 221Ae:CCC, 221Af:CCC, 221Ag:CCC, 221Ai:CCC, 221Ak:CCC, 221Al:CCC, 221Ba:CCC, 221Bc:CCC, 221Bd:CCC, 221Da:CCC, 221Db:CCC, 221Dc:CCC, 222Ib:CCC, 222Ic:CCC, 222Jj:CCC, 231Ae:CCC, 231Ak:CCC, 232Aa:CCP, 232Br:CCC, M221Ac:CCC Federal Lands: NPS (Appalachian Trail [Central Appalachians], Appalachian Trail [Lower New England], Appomattox Court House, C&O Canal, Delaware Water Gap, Gateway, George Washington Parkway, Indiana Dunes, Minute Man, Morristown, Prince William, Rock Creek, Saratoga, Upper Delaware, Weir Farm, Wolf Trap); USFWS (Great Meadows?, Iroquois, Montezuma, Patuxent)

ELEMENT SOURCES References: Breden 1989, Breden et al. 2001, Cowardin et al. 1979, Davis 2011f, Eastern Ecology Working Group n.d., Edinger et al. 2002, Edinger et al. 2008a, Ehrenfeld 1977, Enser 1993, Fike 1999, Fleming 2007, Fleming and Patterson 2003, Fleming and Patterson 2011a, Fleming et al. 2001, Fleming et al. 2007b, Golet et al. 1993, Harrison 2004, Harrison 2011, Hop et al. 2009, Lea and Riley 2005, Metzler and Barrett 2001, Metzler et al. 2009, NRCS 2001b, NRCS 2004a, Patterson 2008a, Perles et al. 2007, Perles et al. 2008, Rawinski 1984, Reschke 1990, Sperduto and Nichols 2004, Swain and Kearsley 2001, Thompson 1996, Thompson and Sorenson 2000, Zimmerman et al. 2012

CHESAPEAKE/PIEDMONT RED MAPLE/LIZARD'S-TAIL SWAMP (CEGL006606) Acer rubrum - Fraxinus pennsylvanica/Saururus cernuus Forest Red Maple - Green Ash/Lizard's-tail Forest

ELEMENT CONCEPT Summary: This red maple swamp community of the Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain of the Chesapeake Bay and Piedmont regions occurs on poorly drained to very poorly drained soils on flats and along watercourses that are seasonally to semipermanently flooded. The organic horizon is of variable depth and overlies sandy or silt clay loam soils. This swamp

has pronounced hummock-and-hollow microtopography. The tree canopy is closed to partially open and dominated by Acer rubrum and Fraxinus pennsylvanica. Other canopy associates may include Nyssa sylvatica, Liquidambar styraciflua, Ulmus americana, Quercus lyrata, Quercus phellos, Quercus lyrata, and Populus heterophylla. The shrub layer includes Lindera benzoin, Leucothoe racemosa, Ilex verticillata, Viburnum spp., and Fraxinus pennsylvanica saplings. The herb layer is characterized by Saururus cernuus, Peltandra virginica, Boehmeria cylindrica, Triadenum walteri, Cinna arundinacea, Pilea pumila, Impatiens capensis, Osmunda regalis, Leersia oryzoides, Leersia virginica, Glyceria striata, Commelina virginica, Rumex verticillatus, Carex spp., and Polygonum arifolium. Environment: This swamp forest occurs in backswamps, watercourses, flats and depressions that are flooded for significant portions of the growing season. These areas receive some nutrient inputs from adjacent uplands or overland flooding and have soils that are moderately calcareous. The substrate is deep muck with a pronounced hummock-and-hollow microtopography. Vegetation: This forest type is characterized by a well-developed tree canopy codominated by Acer rubrum and Fraxinus pennsylvanica in variable proportions. Other canopy associates may include Nyssa sylvatica, Quercus phellos, Quercus lyrata, Ulmus americana, and Populus heterophylla. At the southern end of the range, Nyssa biflora and Taxodium distichum may be minor associates. The shrub layer is of variable cover but usually not dense. The most common species are Lindera benzoin, Leucothoe racemosa, Vaccinium corymbosum, Ilex verticillata, Carpinus caroliniana, Rosa palustris, and Viburnum dentatum. Other shrub associates may include Rhododendron viscosum, Cephalanthus occidentalis, Alnus serrulata, and Cornus amomum. The herb layer is diverse and generally characterized by abundant Saururus cernuus, typically in hollows. Other associates are many and varied but generally include Peltandra virginica, Impatiens capensis, Pontederia cordata, Boehmeria cylindrica, Glyceria spp., Cinna arundinacea, Bidens connata, Thelypteris palustris, Onoclea sensibilis, Osmunda regalis, Carex stricta, Carex lurida, Carex crinita, Triadenum walteri, Lobelia cardinalis, Lycopus virginicus, Pilea pumila, Carex tribuloides, Polygonum punctatum, Polygonum arifolium, Cicuta maculata, Leersia oryzoides, Galium obtusum, Commelina virginica, and others. Vines may include Toxicodendron radicans, Smilax rotundifolia, Campsis radicans, and Parthenocissus quinquefolia. Mosses are generally sparse to absent, except on logs and tree bases above the high-water line. Patuxent Research Refuge: This swamp forest is mapped at a single location at Patuxent, in a small channel to the north of the Patuxent River, bordered by Mid-Atlantic Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest. Similar Associations: • Acer (rubrum, saccharinum) - Fraxinus pennsylvanica - Ulmus americana/Boehmeria cylindrica Forest (CEGL006548) • Acer rubrum/Alnus serrulata - Lindera benzoin/Glyceria striata - Impatiens capensis Seep Forest (CEGL007031) Related Concepts: • Acer rubrum - Fraxinus pennsylvanica/Impatiens capensis - Saururus cernuus Forest (Bowman 2000) ? • Fraxinus pennsylvanica - Acer rubrum/Cinna arundinacea - Saururus cernuus - Boehmeria cylindrica Forest (Fleming and Patterson 2003) = • Fraxinus pennsylvanica - Acer rubrum/Cinna arundinacea - Saururus cernuus - Boehmeria cylindrica Forest (VDNH 2003) = • Fraxinus pennsylvanica/Asimina triloba - Lindera benzoin - Ilex (decidua, verticillata)/Triadenum walteri - Saururus cernuus Forest (Walton et al. 2001) = • Fraxinus pennsylvanica/Boehmeria cylindrica - Saururus cernuus Forest (Fleming 2002a) = • Fraxinus pennsylvanica/Cinna arundinacea - Poa trivialis Semipermanently Flooded Forest (McCoy and Fleming 2000) = • Coastal Plain - Piedmont Bottomland Forest (Harrison 2004) > • Coastal Plain/Piedmont Swamp Forest (Fleming et al. 2006) > Classification Comments: Classification is supported by analysis of a 1250-plot regional dataset compiled for the NCR and MAR national parks vegetation mapping projects. In that analysis, this association was represented by 22 Maryland and Virginia plots.

CONSERVATION RANKING GRank: G3G4 (2012-2-14) Reasons: This association is geographically restricted to the Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain and in limited areas of the Piedmont. It occurs in small patches, generally less than 20 acres. As of December 2011, it is ranked as S3 in Maryland and S3S4 in Virginia, where it is reportedly widespread in the backswamps of the Coastal Plain. In New Jersey, this type is documented from Great Swamp on the transition from Inner Coastal Plain to Piedmont. This type also is likely to occur in Delaware but its classification requires further resolution there. Beaver impoundments have been observed to threaten this vegetation.

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION Range: This red maple - green ash swamp community occurs in the Coastal Plain of the Chesapeake Bay region and rarely in the adjacent Piedmont from New Jersey to North Carolina. 22 Vegetation of Patuxent 15 February2012 Copyright © 2012 NatureServe

Nations: US Subnations: DC, DE, MD, NC, NJ, VA TNC Ecoregions: 52:C, 57:C, 58:C, 61:C, 62:C USFS Ecoregions: 232Ad:CCC, 232Br:CCC, 232Bt:CCC, 232Bx:CCC, 232Ch:CCC, 232Cj:CCC Federal Lands: DOD (Fort Belvoir); NPS (Colonial, National Capital-East); USFWS (Chesapeake Marshlands, Great Swamp, Patuxent, Supawna Meadows)

ELEMENT SOURCES References: Bowman 2000, Breden et al. 2001, Eastern Ecology Working Group n.d., Fleming 2001a, Fleming 2002a, Fleming 2002b, Fleming and Moorhead 1998, Fleming and Patterson 2003, Fleming and Patterson 2011a, Fleming and Patterson 2011b, Fleming et al. 2006, Fleming et al. 2007b, Harrison 2004, Harrison 2011, Harrison and Stango 2003, McCoy and Fleming 2000, Meininger 1998, Patterson 2008c, Schafale 2011, Thomson et al. 1999, VDNH 2003, Walton et al. 2001

SOUTHERN RED MAPLE - BLACKGUM SWAMP FOREST (CEGL006238) Acer rubrum - Nyssa sylvatica - Magnolia virginiana/Viburnum nudum var. nudum/Osmunda cinnamomea - Woodwardia areolata Forest Red Maple - Blackgum - Sweetbay/Possumhaw/Cinnamon Fern - Netted Chainfern Forest

ELEMENT CONCEPT Summary: This acidic swamp forest of the eastern middle-latitude states is a nutrient-poor wetland forest occurring in groundwater-saturated stream bottoms and poorly drained depressions. Soils are typically moderately deep to deep muck over mineral soil, with pools of standing water at the surface. Acidic waters originate from groundwater seepage, with little to no overland seasonal flooding. Most sites can be characterized as "groundwater slope wetlands" (sensu Golet et al. 1993) with a flow-through hydrology. This community is characterized by Acer rubrum and Nyssa sylvatica in the canopy, which may be quite open in some examples. Canopy associates include Magnolia virginiana, Liquidambar styraciflua, and Persea palustris, plus occasional incidental Liriodendron tulipifera or Pinus taeda. Upland trees may occur on drier hummocks. The shrub layer is characterized by Vaccinium corymbosum, as well as Clethra alnifolia, Ilex verticillata, Ilex opaca, Viburnum nudum var. nudum, Lindera benzoin, and Rhododendron viscosum. The herbaceous layer varies from dense to sparse and may include Symplocarpus foetidus, Triadenum virginicum, Osmunda regalis var. spectabilis, Woodwardia areolata, Carex folliculata, Carex lonchocarpa, Carex collinsii, Carex atlantica, Bartonia paniculata, Parnassia asarifolia, Helonias bullata, Chelone glabra, Oxypolis rigidior, and Osmunda cinnamomea. Sphagnum spp. and other mosses are common. Environment: This association is generally restricted to groundwater-saturated stream bottoms, seeping toeslopes, and poorly drained depressions with seepage inputs. Most sites can be characterized as "groundwater slope wetlands" (sensu Golet et al. 1993) with a flow-through hydrology. Sites typically have hummock-and-hollow microtopography with braided channels, Sphagnum-covered hummocks, mucky depressions, and areas of exposed sand and gravel. Soils are extremely acidic and low in base status. Vegetation: Canopy closure ranges from closed to quite open. Plot data from 38 Virginia and Maryland stands indicate that Acer rubrum and Nyssa sylvatica are consistently dominant overstory species. Liriodendron tulipifera is a frequent but minor overstory associate, and Pinus taeda or Liquidambar styraciflua is occasional in the canopy. Magnolia virginiana is a frequent overstory associate and usually dominant in a subcanopy layer or codominant with Ilex opaca. Trees tend to be slow-growing and of less than optimal stature in the wet, unstable habitats. Shrub layers tend to be dense and diverse, characteristically containing Viburnum nudum var. nudum, Vaccinium corymbosum, Smilax rotundifolia, Ilex verticillata, and Lindera benzoin. In parts of the range, Clethra alnifolia is a dominant shrub, while in New Jersey, Chamaedaphne calyculata and Gaylussacia frondosa are present. Additional, less constant shrub associates are Rhododendron viscosum, Leucothoe racemosa, Chionanthus virginicus, Viburnum dentatum, Toxicodendron vernix, and Carpinus caroliniana. The herb layer varies from dense to sparse. Osmunda cinnamomea and Woodwardia areolata are generally the most constant and abundant herbs, but Symplocarpus foetidus is a patch-dominant in approximately two-thirds of the Virginia and Maryland stands. Additional characteristic herbs occurring at low cover include Arisaema triphyllum ssp. pusillum, Carex atlantica, Carex debilis var. debilis, Carex folliculata, Carex intumescens, Carex lonchocarpa, Carex seorsa, Carex styloflexa, Chelone glabra, Impatiens capensis, Lycopus virginicus, Mitchella repens, Osmunda regalis var. spectabilis, Platanthera clavellata, Viola cucullata, and Viola X primulifolia. Regionally uncommon or rare species that may be locally abundant in this type include Helonias bullata, Parnassia asarifolia, Carex collinsii, and Bartonia paniculata.

Patuxent Research Refuge: At Patuxent, this deciduous swamp forest occurs on braided stream channels on mucky soils with hummock and hollow microtopography. It is almost exclusively confined to low-lying areas between the Patuxent and Little Patuxent rivers, where it is common. Acer rubrum and Nyssa sylvatica are dominant with few other associates except occasional Pinus rigida. Magnolia virginiana is ran important component of the understory. Shrubs include Clethra alnifolia, Rhododendron viscosum, Viburnum nudum, and Toxicodendron vernix. The herbaceous layer is characterized by the ferns Osmunda cinnamomea and Woodwardia aereolata. Other associates of this layer include Symplocarpus foetidus, Carex folliculata, and Carex atlantica. This swamp forest also occurs at the nearby Beltsville Agricultural Research Center, where it also supports Ilex opaca, Cornus florida, Liquidambar styraciflua, Cinna arundinacea, Chasmanthium laxum, and Pinus rigida. Additional study is warranted to better discern the relationship of this seepage swamp to Southern New England/Northern Piedmont Red Maple Seepage Swamp (CEGL006406) on the refuge, as well as the related Pine Barrens Lowland Forest (CEGL006926).documented at the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center. The presence of Pinus rigida in the seepage swamps at Patuxent suggests the possibility that some examples should be reclassified to Pine Barrens Lowland Forest. This is a globally rare type, and we applied the classification conservatively until further research can be undertaken. For referenc, the description of the Pine Barrens Lowland Forest is also included in this report.

Dynamics: Trees tend to be slow-growing and of less than optimal stature in the wet, unstable habitats. Additionally, these swamps tend to border dry, sandy uplands supporting fire-prone oak/heath forests. Occasional fires, burning into the swamps from the uplands during dry periods, may have once influenced the composition and physiognomy of this type. However, fire has now been excluded from almost all areas within the range. An exception is at Fort A.P. Hill Military Reservation, where military training results in frequent incendiary fires in a roughly 5000-ha area. Stands of this community are very susceptible to flooding from beaver activities, which usually results in the destruction or extreme alteration of a stand. In New Jersey, this community is often situated adjacent to Chamaecyparis thyoides-dominated swamp and may replace it after logging. Similar Associations: • Acer rubrum - Fraxinus pennsylvanica - Liquidambar styraciflua/Carex laevivaginata - Carex stricta - Glyceria septentrionalis - (Symplocarpus foetidus) Forest [Provisional] (CEGL006965) • Acer rubrum - Nyssa sylvatica - Betula alleghaniensis/Sphagnum spp. Forest (CEGL006014) • Acer rubrum - Nyssa sylvatica/Ilex verticillata - Vaccinium fuscatum/Osmunda cinnamomea Forest (CEGL007853) • Pinus taeda/Morella cerifera/Osmunda regalis var. spectabilis Forest (CEGL006137) Related Concepts: • Acer rubrum - Liquidambar styraciflua - Nyssa sylvatica Swamp Forest (Clancy 1996) > • Acer rubrum - Nyssa sylvatica - Magnolia virginiana/Viburnum nudum/Osmunda cinnamomea - Woodwardia areolata Forest (Fleming et al. 2006) = • Acer rubrum - Nyssa sylvatica - Magnolia virginiana/Viburnum nudum var. nudum/Osmunda cinnamomea - Woodwardia areolata Forest (Fleming and Patterson 2003) = • Acer rubrum - Nyssa sylvatica - Magnolia virginiana/Viburnum nudum var. nudum/Osmunda cinnamomea - Woodwardia areolata Forest (Fleming pers. comm.) = • Acer rubrum - Nyssa sylvatica - Magnolia virginiana Forest (Harrison 2004) = • Acer rubrum - Nyssa sylvatica/Magnolia virginiana/Woodwardia areolata - Symplocarpus foetidus Forest (Fleming 2002a) = • Acer rubrum - Nyssa sylvatica/Magnolia virginiana/Woodwardia areolata - Symplocarpus foetidus Saturated Forest (Patterson pers. comm.) ? • Acer rubrum - Quercus nigra - Nyssa sylvatica swamp (Harvill 1967) ? • Acer rubrum/Magnolia virginiana/Symplocarpus foetidus - Osmunda cinnamomea Saturated Forest (McCoy and Fleming 2000) = • Broadleaf swamp forest (Heckscher 1994) ? • Cape May lowland swamp (Breden 1989) > • Coastal Plain - Piedmont Acidic Seepage Swamp (Harrison 2004) > • Coastal Plain/Piedmont Acidic Seepage Swamp (Fleming et al. 2001) = • Coastal Plain/Piedmont Acidic Seepage Swamp (Fleming et al. 2006) = • Inland red maple swamp (Breden 1989) ? • Pine barrens hardwood swamp (Breden 1989) > • Red Maple - Magnolia Coastal Plain Palustrine Forest (Fike 1999) ? • Woodland fresh marsh community (Hill 1986) ?

CONSERVATION RANKING GRank: G3? (2004-3-30) Reasons: The type is restricted to an uncommon wetland habitat in a limited region. It is vulnerable to alteration or destruction by beavers and various anthropogenic activities, including hydrologic modifications.

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION Range: This community ranges from southeastern New York and New Jersey to southeastern Virginia on the Coastal Plain. In Virginia, it extends into the extreme eastern portion of the Piedmont. Nations: US Subnations: DC, DE, MD, NJ, PA, VA TNC Ecoregions: 52:C, 58:C, 59:C, 61:C, 62:C USFS Ecoregions: 221Am:CCC, 221Da:CCC, 221Db:CCC, 231Ae:CCC, 231Ak:CCC, 231An:CCC, 232Aa:CCP, 232Ab:CCC, 232Ac:CCC, 232Ad:CCC, 232Ae:CCC, 232Br:CCC, 232Bt:CCC, 232Bz:CCC, 232Ch:CP?, M221Da:CCC Federal Lands: DOD (Fort A.P. Hill, Fort Belvoir); NPS (Assateague Island, Fredericksburg-Spotsylvania, George Washington Birthplace, National Capital-East, Petersburg, Prince William, Richmond, Thomas Stone); USFWS (Cape May, E.B. Forsythe, Patuxent)

ELEMENT SOURCES References: Breden 1989, Breden et al. 2001, Clancy 1996, Eastern Ecology Working Group n.d., Ehrenfeld and Gulick 1981, Eichelberger 2011o, Fike 1999, Fleming 2002a, Fleming 2002b, Fleming and Coulling 2001, Fleming and Patterson 2003, Fleming and Patterson 2011a, Fleming et al. 2001, Fleming et al. 2006, Fleming et al. 2007b, Fleming pers. comm., Golet et al. 1993, Harrison 2004, Harrison 2011, Harrison and Stango 2003, Harvill 1967, Heckscher 1994, Hill 1986, McCormick 1979, McCoy and Fleming 2000, Patterson 2008d, Patterson 2008e, Patterson 2008f, Patterson pers. comm., Robichaud and Buell 1973, Sipple and Klockner 1984, Taverna and Patterson 2008, VDNH 2003, Windisch 1995b, Zimmerman et al. 2012

3 PINE BARRENS LOWLAND FOREST (CEGL006926) Pinus rigida - Nyssa sylvatica / Clethra alnifolia - Leucothoe racemosa Forest Pitch Pine - Blackgum / Coastal Sweet-pepperbush - Swamp Doghobble Forest ELEMENT CONCEPT Summary: This Pine Barrens lowland forest occurs on saturated sandy soils along braided streams or in depressions in southern New Jersey and on the Coastal Plain of Maryland. The canopy is a mixture of Pinus rigida, Acer rubrum, Nyssa sylvatica, with Liquidambar styraciflua in New Jersey. The canopy ranges from mixed deciduous-evergreen to deciduous. The subcanopy is characterized by Magnolia virginiana, with occasional Ilex opaca. Typical shrubs include Clethra alnifolia, Leucothoe racemosa, Gaylussacia frondosa, and Vaccinium corymbosum. There is often significant cover of Smilax rotundifolia vines. The herbaceous stratum includes Osmunda cinnamomea and Gaultheria procumbens. Other species of the herbaceous layer may include Woodwardia areolata, Chasmanthium laxum, Carex folliculata, Bartonia paniculata, Carex atlantica, Carex seorsa, Glyceria striata, and Lycopus virginicus. Environment: This association is restricted to groundwater seepage areas associated with sandy uplands of the Pine Barrens of New Jersey and the inner Coastal Plain of Maryland. Vegetation: The canopy is a mixture of Pinus rigida, Acer rubrum, Nyssa sylvatica, with Liquidambar styraciflua in New Jersey. The canopy ranges from mixed deciduous-evergreen to deciduous. The subcanopy is characterized by Magnolia virginiana, with occasional Ilex opaca. Typical shrubs include Clethra alnifolia, Leucothoe racemosa, Gaylussacia frondosa, and Vaccinium corymbosum. There is often significant cover of Smilax rotundifolia vines. The herbaceous stratum includes Osmunda cinnamomea and Gaultheria procumbens. Other species of the herbaceous layer may include Woodwardia areolata, Chasmanthium laxum, Carex folliculata, Bartonia paniculata, Carex atlantica, Carex seorsa, Glyceria striata, and Lycopus virginicus. Patuxent Research Refuge: While this association is not mapped at Patuxent, it does occur at the nearby Beltsville Agricultural Research Center. Relationship of this type to Southern Red Maple – Black Gum Swamp Forest and Southern New England / Northern

Piedmont Red Maple Seepage Swamp will require further study. It is possible that some occurrences of the two latter types at the refuge may be reclassified to this globally rare type after further detailed classification work. Similar Associations: • Nyssa sylvatica - Magnolia virginiana - (Pinus rigida) / Rhododendron viscosum - Toxicodendron vernix / Smilax pseudochina Woodland (CEGL006219)--fall-line terrace-gravel bog of the MD-DC-northern VA region. Compared to CEGL006926, this type is (or at least was) more open, developed on gravel (rather than sand) deposits, and has a somewhat different composition; Pinus rigida is less important, Clethra alnifolia is absent, and a number of other species not found in CEGL006926 (e.g., Toxicodendron vernix) are present. CONSERVATION RANKING GRank: G2G3 GReasons: Ranking Author: L.A. Sneddon Version: 18-Jan-2006 ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION Range: This community is limited in range to the Pine Barrens of New Jersey and the Inner Coastal Plain of Maryland. Nations: US Subnations: DC, MD, NJ TNC Ecoregions: 58:C, 62:C USFS Ecoregions: 232Ab:CCC, 232Ac:CCC, 232Ad:CCC Federal Lands: DOD (Fort Meade); NPS (National Capital-East?); USFWS (Cape May, E.B. Forsythe, Patuxent, Beltsville Agricultural, Goddard) ELEMENT HISTORY Predecessors: Obsolete Names/Codes: Pinus rigida - Nyssa sylvatica / Gaylussacia frondosa - Leucothoe racemosa Forest, Pinus rigida - Quercus (alba, falcata, coccinea) - Acer rubrum - Nyssa sylvatica - Liquidambar styraciflua / Leucothoe racemosa Forest, Pinus rigida - Quercus (alba, falcata, coccinea) - Acer rubrum - Nyssa sylvatica - Liquidambar styraciflua / Leucothoe racemosa Forest [Provisional] Obsolete Alliances: ELEMENT SOURCES Eastern Ecology Working Group n.d.,NatureServe 2005

RED MAPLE/UPRIGHT SEDGE WOODED MARSH (CEGL006119) Acer rubrum/Carex stricta - Onoclea sensibilis Woodland Red Maple/Upright Sedge - Sensitive Fern Woodland

ELEMENT CONCEPT Summary: This association is a partly wooded, deciduous-canopy wetland of the northeastern United States. It occurs on muck soils or mineral soils with a surface organic layer in poorly drained depressions influenced by groundwater. It is also common in those streamside and lakeside settings where the hydrology is that of a basin setting rather than a floodplain. The community is typically flooded in spring, with pools and small streams persisting throughout much of the growing season; soils may remain saturated or may become dry on the surface over the course of the growing season. Hummock-and-hollow topography may be pronounced. The canopy consists of scattered trees, with as little as 25% overall cover. The shrub layer is patchy and may be extensive in places. The herb layer is typically well-developed, with ferns and graminoids dominant. The bryophyte cover is variable. Acer rubrum is dominant in the canopy, often with many standing dead trees, and may be the only canopy species present. Associated trees may include Fraxinus nigra, Ulmus americana, and occasional Pinus strobus, Tsuga canadensis, or Picea rubens. The shrub layer is characterized by Vaccinium corymbosum, Spiraea alba var. latifolia (= Spiraea latifolia), and Ilex verticillata. The herbaceous layer is typically dominated by the graminoids or the ferns. Sphagnum spp. are the characteristic bryophytes, with non-sphagnous mosses as associates. These woodlands are ecologically similar to both Acer rubrum/Nemopanthus mucronatus - Vaccinium corymbosum Forest (CEGL006220) and Picea rubens - Acer rubrum/Nemopanthus mucronatus Forest (CEGL006198), but those are closed-canopy wetlands. This association does not include red maple wooded wetlands on deeper peat soils [see Acer rubrum/Alnus incana - Ilex verticillata/Osmunda regalis Woodland (CEGL006395) and Fraxinus nigra - Acer rubrum - (Larix laricina)/Rhamnus alnifolia Forest (CEGL006009)]. 26 Vegetation of Patuxent 15 February2012 Copyright © 2012 NatureServe

Environment: This association is a partly wooded, deciduous-canopy wetland of central and northern New England. It occurs on muck soils or mineral soils with a surface organic layer, in poorly drained depressions influenced by groundwater. It is also common in those streamside and lakeside settings where the hydrology is that of a basin setting rather than a floodplain. The community is typically flooded in spring, with pools and small streams persisting throughout much of the growing season; soils may remain saturated, or may become dry on the surface over the course of the growing season. Hummock-and-hollow topography may be pronounced. Vegetation: The canopy consists of scattered trees, with as little as 25% overall cover. The shrub layer is patchy and may be extensive in places. The herb layer is typically well-developed, with ferns and graminoids dominant. The bryophyte cover is variable. Acer rubrum is dominant in the canopy, often with many standing dead trees. Associated trees may include Fraxinus nigra, Ulmus americana, and occasional Pinus strobus, Tsuga canadensis, or Picea rubens. The shrub layer is characterized by Vaccinium corymbosum, Spiraea alba var. latifolia (= Spiraea latifolia), and Ilex verticillata. Other shrubs may be locally common, including Nemopanthus mucronatus, Viburnum nudum var. cassinoides, Viburnum dentatum, Lyonia ligustrina, Alnus incana, Ilex laevigata, and the creeping Rubus hispidus. The herbaceous layer is typically dominated by the graminoids Carex stricta, Carex lacustris, or Calamagrostis canadensis or the ferns Onoclea sensibilis, Osmunda cinnamomea, or Osmunda claytoniana. Less abundant herbs include Carex intumescens, Carex folliculata, Carex canescens, Carex trisperma, Glyceria striata, Osmunda regalis, Dryopteris cristata, Thelypteris palustris, Lycopus uniflorus, Symplocarpus foetidus, Galium palustre, Cicuta bulbifera, Caltha palustris, and Impatiens capensis. Sphagnum spp. are the characteristic bryophytes, with non-sphagnous mosses as associates. Similar Associations: • Acer rubrum/Carex lacustris Woodland (CEGL006105) • Acer rubrum/Nemopanthus mucronatus - Vaccinium corymbosum Forest (CEGL006220) • Acer rubrum/Rhododendron viscosum - Clethra alnifolia Forest (CEGL006156) Related Concepts: • Acer rubrum/Carex stricta community (Metzler and Barrett 2001) = • Acer rubrum/Vaccinium corymbosum/Carex intumescens Alluvial Forest (Barrett and Enser 1997) ? • Palustrine Broad-leaved Deciduous Forested Wetlands (PFO1) (Cowardin et al. 1979) ? • Red Maple - Sensitive Fern Swamp (Gawler 2002) > • Red Maple: 108 (Eyre 1980) > • Red maple wooded sedge/fern marsh (CAP pers. comm. 1998) ? • Southern New England stream bottom forest (Rawinski 1984) ?

CONSERVATION RANKING GRank: G3G5 (1997-12-1) Reasons:

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION Range: This wetland is found in central and northern New England, south to Pennsylvania and New Jersey. Nations: CA, US Subnations: CT, DE, MA, MD, ME, NH, NJ, NY, PA, QC, RI, VT TNC Ecoregions: 49:C, 58:C, 59:C, 60:C, 61:C, 62:C, 63:C USFS Ecoregions: 212Fa:CCC, 212Fb:CCC, 212Fc:CCC, 212Fd:CCC, 212Ga:CCC, 212Gb:CCC, 221Aa:CCP, 221Ab:CCC, 221Ae:CCC, 221Ai:CCC, 221Bd:CCC, 221Da:CCC, 221Fa:CCC, M212C:CC, M212Ea:CCC, M212Eb:CCC, M221Ac:CCC, M221Ad:CCC, M221Ba:CCC, M221Bb:CCC, M221Bf:CCC Federal Lands: NPS (Appalachian Trail [Lower New England], Cape Cod, Minute Man); USFWS (Erie, Great Meadows, Great Swamp, Moosehorn, Oxbow, Patuxent)

ELEMENT SOURCES References: Barrett and Enser 1997, CAP pers. comm. 1998, Cowardin et al. 1979, Eastern Ecology Working Group n.d., Edinger et al. 2002, Eyre 1980, Fike 1999, Gawler 2002, Golet et al. 1993, Hunt 1999, Metzler and Barrett 2001, Moore and Taylor 1927, Rawinski 1984, Sperduto 2000a, Sperduto 2000b, Sperduto and Nichols 2004, Swain and Kearsley 2001, Thompson and Sorenson 2000

M310. Southeastern North American Ruderal Flooded & Swamp Forest G553. Southeastern Ruderal Flooded & Swamp Forest

SUCCESSIONAL SWEETGUM FLOODPLAIN FOREST (CEGL007330) Liquidambar styraciflua - (Liriodendron tulipifera) Temporarily Flooded Forest 27 Vegetation of Patuxent 15 February2012 Copyright © 2012 NatureServe

Sweetgum - (Tuliptree) Temporarily Flooded Forest

ELEMENT CONCEPT Summary: This widespread association of the southeastern United States is dominated by Liquidambar styraciflua, but can be dominated by Liriodendron tulipifera in some cases, and occurs on heavily disturbed sites such as wetland old fields that have been recovering for the past 10-60 years. This is a successional community that develops following clearcutting or other disturbance along floodplains of major creeks and other temporarily flooded areas. As this community ages, it often begins to approach the composition of more natural Liquidambar styraciflua - Liriodendron tulipifera/Lindera benzoin/Arisaema triphyllum Forest (CEGL004418). This association is known from the Piedmont, Interior Low Plateau, Inner South Atlantic Coastal Plain, Upper East Gulf Coastal Plain, and possibly other provinces. Acer rubrum may be a major component of the canopy and subcanopy and may even partially dominate in some instances. In more mature examples, other canopy/subcanopy species which may occur to a lesser extent and often as scattered emergents are Quercus alba, Quercus phellos, Quercus nigra, Nyssa sylvatica, and Cornus florida. Stands in the Inner Coastal Plain of South Carolina typically contain Persea palustris and Magnolia virginiana. Some stands, as on the Chattahoochee River in Georgia, may contain Acer negundo as a codominant canopy/subcanopy component. The shrub layer can contain Carpinus caroliniana, Itea virginica, Vitis rotundifolia, Parthenocissus quinquefolia, Smilax rotundifolia, and/or Rubus sp., in addition to canopy/subcanopy species. Lonicera japonica is often abundant in the understory. On disturbed sites, the shrub layer is often dominated by Ligustrum sinense, and the ground layer is typically solid Microstegium vimineum or a tangle of Smilax rotundifolia and Rubus sp. The herbaceous layer may include Chasmanthium laxum, Carex spp., Boehmeria cylindrica, and Botrychium biternatum, sometimes growing on hummocks in standing water. Environment: This association occurs on disturbed sites such as wetland old fields. This is a successional community that develops following clearcutting or other disturbance along floodplains of major creeks and other temporarily flooded areas. These are productive stream terraces subject to occasional flooding (Jones et al. 1981b). Vegetation: The canopy of this association is dominated by Liquidambar styraciflua but can be dominated by Liriodendron tulipifera in some cases. Acer rubrum may be a major component of the canopy and subcanopy and may even partially dominate in some instances (TNC 1998a). In more mature examples, other canopy/subcanopy species which may occur to a lesser extent and often as scattered emergents are Quercus alba, Quercus phellos, Quercus nigra, Fraxinus americana, Carya spp., Nyssa sylvatica, and Cornus florida. Stands in the Inner Coastal Plain of South Carolina typically contain Persea palustris and Magnolia virginiana (Jones et al. 1981b). The shrub layer contains Carpinus caroliniana, Itea virginica, Vitis rotundifolia, Parthenocissus quinquefolia, Smilax rotundifolia, and Rubus sp., in addition to canopy/subcanopy species. Lonicera japonica is often abundant in the understory. On disturbed sites, the shrub layer is often dominated by Ligustrum sinense, and the ground layer is typically solid Microstegium vimineum or a tangle of Smilax rotundifolia and Rubus sp. The herbaceous layer may include Chasmanthium laxum, Carex spp., Boehmeria cylindrica, and Botrychium biternatum, sometimes growing on hummocks in standing water. Various Carex species may be present. Patuxent Research Refuge: This floodplain forest is common at Patuxent, where it occurs on numerous small tributaries of both rivers. These stands are classified as such due to their hydrological setting in small stream floodplains, and are characterized by successional early successional species in addition to Liquidambar styraciflua. The dominant trees are Quercus phellos, Nyssa sylvatica and Quercus palustris. Acer rubrum and Liquidambar styraciflua are also common. Dennstaedtia punctilobula, Smilax rotundifolia, and Carex crinita are common species in the herbaceous layer. Similar Associations: • Liquidambar styraciflua - Liriodendron tulipifera/Lindera benzoin/Arisaema triphyllum Forest (CEGL004418) may be difficult to distinguish from older versions of this community; trees are older, uneven-aged, and the herbaceous layer more diverse in this association (CEGL004418). • Liriodendron tulipifera - Quercus alba - (Liquidambar styraciflua)/Ilex opaca/Polystichum acrostichoides Piedmont Small Stream Forest (CEGL004900) • Quercus alba - Carya (alba, ovata) - Liriodendron tulipifera - (Quercus phellos)/Cornus florida Forest (CEGL007709) • Quercus phellos - Quercus alba/Vaccinium fuscatum - (Viburnum nudum)/Carex (barrattii, intumescens) Forest (CEGL007364) Related Concepts: • Sweet gum-red maple-red bay community (Jones et al. 1981b) ? Classification Comments: At Arnold Air Force Base (Tennessee), this community is found primarily in the vicinity of Hunt Creek, Heron Pond, and Sinking Pond in areas that have experienced logging. Prior to logging, these areas would probably have had canopies dominated by Quercus phellos or Quercus alba, with the overall community structure being that of Quercus alba - Carya (alba, ovata) - Liriodendron tulipifera - (Quercus phellos)/Cornus florida Forest 28 Vegetation of Patuxent 15 February2012 Copyright © 2012 NatureServe

(CEGL007709) or possibly Quercus phellos - Quercus alba/Vaccinium fuscatum - (Viburnum nudum)/Carex (barrattii, intumescens) Forest (CEGL007364). The sweet gum-red maple-red bay community of Jones et al. (1981b) (2 stands sampled) is included here.

CONSERVATION RANKING GRank: GNA (ruderal) (2000-8-8) Reasons: This is a successional community which develops following clearcutting or other disturbance along floodplains of major creeks and other temporarily flooded areas.

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION Range: This association is known from the Piedmont, Interior Low Plateau, Inner South Atlantic Coastal Plain, and possibly other provinces. Nations: US Subnations: AL, DC, GA, KY, MD, MS, NC, NJ, SC, TN, VA TNC Ecoregions: 43:C, 44:C, 50:C, 52:C, 56:C, 57:C, 58:C USFS Ecoregions: 221Hc:CCC, 222Cg:CCC, 222Dg:CCC, 222Eb:CCC, 222Eg:CCC, 231Aa:CCC, 231Ab:CCC, 231Ae:CCC, 231Ak:CCC, 231An:CCC, 231Ba:CCC, 231Bd:CCC, 231Be:CCC, 231Bg:CCC, 231Bi:CCC, 231Bk:CCC, 231Cc:CCC, 231Cd:CCC, 231D:CC, 232Ad:CCC, 232Bd:CCC, 232Br:CCC, 232Cg:CCC Federal Lands: DOD (Arnold, Fort Benning?); DOE (Savannah River Site); NPS (Big South Fork, Chattahoochee River, Chickamauga-Chattanooga?, Cowpens, Fort Donelson, Fredericksburg-Spotsylvania, George Washington Parkway, Horseshoe Bend, Kings Mountain, Little River Canyon, Mammoth Cave, Natchez Trace, National Capital-East, Shiloh); USFS (Bankhead?, Bienville?, Daniel Boone, De Soto?, Delta?, Francis Marion?, Holly Springs?, Homochitto?, Oconee?, St. Francis, Sumter (Piedmont)?, Talladega (Oakmulgee)?, Talladega?, Tombigbee?, Tuskegee?); USFWS (Patuxent)

ELEMENT SOURCES References: Jones et al. 1981b, NatureServe Ecology - Southeastern U.S. unpubl. data, Patterson 2008e, Schotz pers. comm., Southeastern Ecology Working Group n.d., TDNH unpubl. data, TNC 1998a, Taverna and Patterson 2008

M031. Southern Floodplain Hardwood Forest G034. Oak - Sweetgum Floodplain Forest

UPPER SOUTHEAST SMALL STREAM SWEETGUM - TULIPTREE FOREST (CEGL004418) Liquidambar styraciflua - Liriodendron tulipifera/Lindera benzoin/Arisaema triphyllum Forest Sweetgum - Tuliptree/Northern Spicebush/Jack-in-the-Pulpit Forest

ELEMENT CONCEPT Summary: These low-elevation forests develop along relatively acidic soils on small streams in the Coastal Plain of Maryland and Virginia, extending west across the Virginia and North Carolina Piedmont to the Cumberland Plateau and Ridge and Valley. The topographic features of floodplains can heavily influence the makeup of individual examples of this association. The canopy, subcanopy, shrub, and herbaceous layers often are well-developed. Dominant canopy species always include Liquidambar styraciflua and Liriodendron tulipifera, while Acer barbatum (in the eastern part of the range), Platanus occidentalis, and Acer rubrum var. rubrum may also make up significant amounts of the canopy. This community type exists as a continuum between two subtypes, i.e., the tuliptree subtype and the sweetgum subtype. In some examples, only one or the other dominates the canopy, but in many examples, both are equally dominant. Common species in the canopy and understory include Ilex opaca var. opaca, Aesculus sylvatica, Betula nigra, Carpinus caroliniana ssp. caroliniana, Cornus florida, Carya cordiformis, Fagus grandifolia, Fraxinus americana, Fraxinus pennsylvanica, Halesia tetraptera var. tetraptera, Juglans nigra, Juniperus virginiana var. virginiana, Morus rubra var. rubra, Nyssa sylvatica, Ostrya virginiana var. virginiana, Oxydendrum arboreum, Pinus echinata, Prunus serotina var. serotina, Quercus alba, Quercus rubra var. rubra, Ulmus rubra, Ulmus americana, and Ulmus alata. Euonymus americanus, Asimina triloba, Lindera benzoin var. benzoin, and Corylus americana are common in the shrub layer. The herbaceous layer is species-rich and often has good sedge development. The exotics Microstegium vimineum, Glechoma hederacea, Rosa multiflora, Ligustrum sinense, and Lonicera japonica are common in this community. Environment: These forests develop along small streams or in small patches on river floodplains. Soils are relatively acidic and relatively well-drained. Topographic differences from one floodplain to another, such as gradient and height above the creek, as well as floodplain microtopography (i.e., depositional landforms such as natural levees and sloughs) may influence the variation of vegetation within this association. However, in most floodplains supporting this type, the

distinct alluvial landforms are poorly developed or occur at very small scales. At some sites, evidence of infrequent flooding includes fluvial topography, mixed exposed sand, light flotsam and leaf litter accumulations, and lack of soil horizon development. Vegetation: The canopy, subcanopy, shrub, and herbaceous layers of stands of this association are often well-developed. Dominant canopy species always include Liquidambar styraciflua and Liriodendron tulipifera, while Acer barbatum (in the southern part of the range), Platanus occidentalis, and Acer rubrum var. rubrum may also make up significant amounts of the canopy. This community type exists as a continuum between two subtypes, i.e., the tuliptree subtype and the sweetgum subtype. In some examples, only one or the other dominates the canopy. However, in many examples, both are equally dominant. Other common species in the canopy and understory include Ilex opaca var. opaca, Aesculus sylvatica, Carpinus caroliniana ssp. caroliniana, Carya cordiformis, Cornus florida, Fagus grandifolia, Juglans nigra, Betula nigra, Morus rubra var. rubra, Ostrya virginiana var. virginiana, Oxydendrum arboreum, Pinus echinata, Prunus serotina var. serotina, Quercus alba, Quercus rubra var. rubra, Ulmus rubra, Ulmus americana, Ulmus alata, Juniperus virginiana var. virginiana, Nyssa sylvatica, Fraxinus americana, Halesia tetraptera var. tetraptera, Arundinaria gigantea ssp. gigantea, and Fraxinus pennsylvanica. Euonymus americanus, Lindera benzoin var. benzoin, and Corylus americana are common and dominant in the shrub layer. Other shrub species that may be present include Viburnum acerifolium, Viburnum nudum var. nudum, Viburnum prunifolium, Viburnum rufidulum, Hamamelis virginiana, Asimina triloba, and Ilex decidua, among others. On the most acidic sites of the Maryland Coastal Plain, Clethra alnifolia, Vaccinium corymbosum, and Magnolia virginiana may be present. Vines are prominent and include Vitis rotundifolia, Apios americana, Campsis radicans, Aristolochia macrophylla, Bignonia capreolata, Dioscorea quaternata, Gelsemium sempervirens, Parthenocissus quinquefolia (= var. quinquefolia), Passiflora lutea, Smilax bona-nox, Smilax glauca, Smilax hugeri, Smilax rotundifolia, and Toxicodendron radicans ssp. radicans. The herbaceous layer is species-rich and often has good sedge development. Common species in this layer include Thalictrum thalictroides, Trillium cuneatum, Arisaema triphyllum, Asplenium platyneuron var. platyneuron, Botrychium virginianum, Carex spp., Carex impressinervia, Carex striatula, Cinna arundinacea, Collinsonia canadensis, Deparia acrostichoides, Dichanthelium clandestinum, Elymus virginicus, Eurybia divaricata, Galium circaezans, Geum canadense, Medeola virginiana, Packera aurea, Poa alsodes, Polygonatum pubescens, Polystichum acrostichoides, Rudbeckia laciniata, Scutellaria integrifolia, Symphyotrichum prenanthoides, and Viola striata. Thelypteris noveboracensis is a common patch-dominant in the northern part of the range and the Uwharrie Mountains of North Carolina. Carex kraliana, which is evidently near the northern limit of its (primarily southeastern United States) range and is presently known from only two Maryland sites, has been found in this vegetation type at Thomas Stone NHS. A specimen collected at Thomas Stone NHS was cited as a paratype in the description of the species (Naczi et al. 2002). The exotics Microstegium vimineum, Glechoma hederacea, Rosa multiflora, Ligustrum sinense, and Lonicera japonica are common in this community. Other exotics that colonize quickly in disturbed and fragmented versions of this association include Wisteria sinensis, Clematis terniflora, Hedera helix, and Elaeagnus sp. Dynamics: The topographic features characteristic of larger-stream floodplains are poorly differentiated in the small-stream habitats of this type, and vegetation zonation is absent to poorly defined. It is unclear what processes create pure sweetgum versus pure tuliptree forests, but dominance is most likely a factor of seed source and amount of flooding (sweetgum may be able to tolerate higher water levels than tuliptree). Liquidambar styraciflua - (Liriodendron tulipifera) Temporarily Flooded Forest (CEGL007330) is very similar to this community but is usually less than 40 years old and very even-aged with a heavy infestation of invasive exotics and fewer native species in the shrub and herb layer. Patuxent Research Refuge: This wetland forest is common at the refuge, and occurs extensively on the floodplains of the Patuxent and Little Patuxent rivers. Dominant trees are Liquidambar styraciflua and Fraxinus pennsylvanica. Other associated trees include Acer rubrum, Liriodendron tulipifera, and Ulmus rubra. Carpinus caroliniana is an important and characteristic understory tree. The herbaceous layer is characterized by Cinna arundinacea, Boehmeria cylindrica, and Pilea pumila. Similar Associations: • Betula nigra - Acer rubrum - (Liquidambar styraciflua, Platanus occidentalis) Successional Forest (CEGL006976) • Fraxinus pennsylvanica - Platanus occidentalis - Celtis laevigata/Chasmanthium latifolium Piedmont River Levee Forest (CEGL007013) • Liquidambar styraciflua - (Liriodendron tulipifera) Temporarily Flooded Forest (CEGL007330) occurs in the same habitat but is a highly impacted version of this forest that occurs on old farm fields and other second-growth areas. • Liquidambar styraciflua - Quercus (phellos, nigra, alba)/Carpinus caroliniana Forest (CEGL007006) • Liquidambar styraciflua Forest (CEGL007216) • Liriodendron tulipifera - Acer (rubrum, negundo) - (Platanus occidentalis)/Carpinus caroliniana/Polygonum virginianum Forest (CEGL006492)

• Liriodendron tulipifera - Quercus alba - (Liquidambar styraciflua)/Ilex opaca/Polystichum acrostichoides Piedmont Small Stream Forest (CEGL004900) Related Concepts: • Liquidambar styraciflua - Liriodendron tulipifera/Lindera benzoin/Arisaema triphyllum Forest (Fleming et al. 2006) = • Liquidambar styraciflua - Liriodendron tulipifera/Lindera benzoin Temporarily Flooded Forest (McCoy and Fleming 2000) = • Liquidambar styraciflua - Quercus palustris/Carpinus caroliniana/Carex intumescens Forest (Meininger and McCarthy 1998) ? • Liquidambar styraciflua/Lindera benzoin/Arisaema triphyllum ssp. triphyllum Temporarily Flooded Forest (Coulling 1999) = • Liriodendron tulipifera - Fagus grandifolia/Thelypteris noveboracensis Forest (Fleming and Patterson 2003) = • Coastal Plain - Piedmont Bottomland Forest (Harrison 2004) > • Coastal Plain/Piedmont Floodplain Forest (Fleming et al. 2006) > • Maple-Gum Association of the Western Shore District (Shreve et al. 1910) > • Piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest (Schafale and Weakley 1990) > Classification Comments: Low-quality occurrences of this type may look very similar to some occurrences of Liquidambar styraciflua - (Liriodendron tulipifera) Temporarily Flooded Forest (CEGL007330). The presence of higher quality patches of native herbs and stands of native shrubs such as Lindera benzoin is the best way to distinguish these two types. In addition, stands of CEGL007330 will generally be more even-aged and single species-dominated than this association (CEGL004418). Other Comments: At Chickamauga-Chattanooga National Military Park, this association was observed on Lookout Creek, but no plot data were taken.

CONSERVATION RANKING GRank: G4 (2011-2-14) Reasons: GReasons: This community is widespread from the Coastal Plain of Maryland and Virginia through the Piedmont of Virginia and North Carolina to the Cumberland Plateau. Very few streams supporting this type have impoundments or diversions, and most are protected by wetland regulations. However, few, if any, pristine examples remain, and all are highly threatened by invasive exotic species that have colonized most of the remaining examples of this association. Most of these communities, at least in the Piedmont, would probably not be treated as jurisdictional wetlands and would not be protected by wetland regulations. They aren't flooded or saturated for that long. They are still somewhat protected by the probability of flooding, and might be subject to riparian or floodplain restrictions in some places. Some are too small to have been attractive for cultivation but others were cleared long ago. Most probably are too small to be attractive for major impoundments or diversions, though smaller impoundments are common. Many of them were impounded to power mills in the past several centuries. Gary Fleming (pers. comm.) noted that in the Virginia Piedmont it is hard to find good examples that aren't heavily altered. Fairly decent examples do not seem that hard to find in the North Carolina Piedmont.

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION Range: This association is found in the Chesapeake Bay Lowlands, the Piedmont, and other low-elevation interior ecoregions (e.g., parts of the Cumberland Plateau and Ridge and Valley). It is defined as being absent from the Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain of southeastern Virginia, the Carolinas, and Georgia. Its status in the Upper East Gulf Coastal Plain is unknown. Nations: US Subnations: DC, GA, MD, NC, SC?, TN, VA, WV TNC Ecoregions: 50:C, 52:C, 58:C USFS Ecoregions: 231Ad:CCC, 231Ae:CCC, 231Af:CCC, 231Ak:CCC, 231An:CCC, 231Cc:CCC, 232Ad:CCC, 232Br:CCC, M221Ca:CCC Federal Lands: DOD (Fort Belvoir); NPS (Chickamauga-Chattanooga, Colonial, Cowpens, Fredericksburg-Spotsylvania, Gauley River, Guilford Courthouse, Kennesaw Mountain, Kings Mountain, National Capital-East, Petersburg, Prince William, Richmond, Thomas Stone); USFS (Uwharrie); USFWS (Patuxent)

ELEMENT SOURCES References: Coulling 1999, Fleming 2002b, Fleming and Patterson 2003, Fleming and Patterson 2011a, Fleming et al. 2001, Fleming et al. 2006, Fleming et al. 2007b, Fleming pers. comm., Harrison 2004, McCoy and Fleming 2000, Meininger and McCarthy 1998, Naczi et al. 2002, Patterson 2008c, Patterson 2008e, Patterson 2008f, Peet et al. unpubl. data, Schafale 2011, Schafale and Weakley 1990, Shreve et al. 1910, Southeastern Ecology Working Group n.d., Taverna and Patterson 2008, Vanderhorst et al. 2010, White and Pyne 2003

COASTAL PLAIN OAK FLOODPLAIN SWAMP (CEGL006605) Quercus (phellos, palustris, michauxii) - Liquidambar styraciflua/Cinna arundinacea Forest 31 Vegetation of Patuxent 15 February2012 Copyright © 2012 NatureServe

(Willow Oak, Pin Oak, Swamp Chestnut Oak) - Sweetgum/Sweet Woodreed Forest

ELEMENT CONCEPT Summary: This floodplain swamp forest occurs in backswamps and topographic depressions within alluvial floodplains of large streams and small rivers. Along smaller headwater streams, it may occur in low, poorly drained floodplains with braided channels and depressions. Standing water is present for much of the year on loam or clay loam soils. The overstory is dominated by variable mixtures of Quercus phellos, Quercus palustris, Quercus michauxii, Liquidambar styraciflua, and Acer rubrum. The proportion of the latter two species typically increases with disturbance. The understory is commonly quite open and contains young Acer rubrum, several climbing vines, Carpinus caroliniana, Ilex opaca var. opaca, Asimina triloba, Viburnum dentatum, Ilex verticillata, and other species. The herb layer is usually well-developed, with a prominent graminoid component. Common herbaceous patch-dominants include Cinna arundinacea, Carex debilis var. debilis, Carex intumescens, Glyceria striata, and Carex tribuloides. Environment: This floodplain swamp forest occurs in backswamps and topographic depressions within alluvial floodplains of large streams and small rivers. Along smaller headwater streams, it may occur in low, poorly drained floodplains with braided channels and depressions. Sites are probably overflowed annually, and depressions retain standing water well into the growing season. Soils are somewhat to very poorly drained loams or clay loams that are strongly to extremely acidic and infertile. Vegetation: The overstory is dominated by variable mixtures of Quercus phellos, Quercus palustris, Quercus michauxii, Liquidambar styraciflua, and Acer rubrum. The proportion of the latter two species typically increases with disturbance. Other canopy associates include Fraxinus pennsylvanica, Nyssa sylvatica, Ulmus americana, Quercus pagoda, Quercus lyrata, and Betula nigra. Climbing vines of Smilax rotundifolia, Parthenocissus quinquefolia, Toxicodendron radicans, and Campsis radicans are common and characteristic. The subcanopy and shrub layers tend to be open and composed of young recruitment of Acer rubrum, along with Carpinus caroliniana (usually dominant), Ilex opaca var. opaca, Asimina triloba, Euonymus americanus, Viburnum dentatum, Ilex verticillata, and Lindera benzoin. The herb layer is usually well-developed, with a prominent graminoid component. Common herbaceous patch-dominants include Cinna arundinacea, Carex debilis var. debilis, Carex intumescens, Glyceria striata, and Carex tribuloides. Additional characteristic herbs include Boehmeria cylindrica, Arisaema triphyllum, Lycopus virginicus, Athyrium filix-femina ssp. asplenioides, Impatiens capensis, Leersia virginica, Onoclea sensibilis, Symphyotrichum lateriflorum, and Rubus hispidus. Many other species occur at low constancy and cover. Mean species richness of 47 Maryland and Virginia plot samples was 38 taxa per 400 square meters. Patuxent Research Refuge: At Patuxent, this floodplain forest occurs at the base of slopes in the broad alluvial floodplain of both the Patuxent and Little Patuxent rivers and is sustained by a longer hydroperiod than are stands of Successional Sweetgum Floodplain Forests. As such, it is characterized by hummocks and swales. Dominant trees are oaks, and include Quercus michauxii and Quercus bicolor; other associated trees are Quercus palustris, Acer rubrum, Quercus phellos, Nyssa sylvatica, and Liquidambar styraciflua. Clethra alnifolia and Vaccinium corymbosum form the shrub layer, and the herbaceous layer is characterized by sedges and ferns, most notably Carex crinita and Thelypteris noveboracensis. Other herbaceous associates include Carex intumescens, Symplocarpus foetidus, Uvularia sessilifolia, Polygonum arifolium, and Cinna arundinacea. Similar Associations: • Quercus phellos - Quercus (palustris, lyrata)/Ilex decidua/Carex typhina - (Carex grayi) Forest (CEGL006498) Related Concepts: • Acer rubrum - Liquidambar styraciflua - Quercus (palustris, phellos) Forest (Fleming 2002a) = • Acer rubrum - Liquidambar styraciflua - Quercus (palustris, phellos) Seasonally Flooded Forest (Patterson pers. comm.) ? • Acer rubrum - Quercus (phellos, palustris)/Cinna arundinacea Forest (Fleming and Patterson 2003) = • Quercus (palustris, phellos) - Acer rubrum/Campsis radicans - Aster lateriflorus Seasonally Flooded Forest (McCoy and Fleming 2000) = • Quercus (palustris, phellos) - Acer rubrum/Cinna arundinacea Forest (Harrison 2004) = • Quercus michauxii - Ulmus americana/Bignonia capreolata/Athyrium filix-femina - Rubus flagellaris - Carex tribuloides Forest (Walton et al. 2001) = • Coastal Plain - Piedmont Bottomland Forest (Harrison 2004) > • Coastal Plain/Piedmont Swamp Forest (Fleming et al. 2006) > Classification Comments: This association is supported by analysis of a 1250-plot regional dataset assembled for the NCR and Mid-Atlantic national parks vegetation mapping project. In that analysis, this type was represented by a group of 37 Maryland and 10 northern Virginia plots.

CONSERVATION RANKING GRank: G3G4 (2007-2-23) Reasons: This is a moderately-well-distributed forest type. Some examples are at least partly protected in national parks. More information on threats is needed.

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION Range: This community is found in the Chesapeake Bay region. It is most characteristic of the Coastal Plain but also extends into the extreme eastern part of the Piedmont. Nations: US Subnations: DC, DE, MD, NJ, PA, VA TNC Ecoregions: 52:C, 58:C, 62:C USFS Ecoregions: 231Ae:CCC, 231Ak:CCC, 231An:CCC, 231Ap:CCC, 232Ac:CCC, 232Ad:CCC, 232Br:CCC Federal Lands: DOD (Fort Belvoir); NPS (Fredericksburg-Spotsylvania, George Washington Parkway, National Capital-East, Petersburg, Prince William); USFWS (Patuxent)

ELEMENT SOURCES References: Eastern Ecology Working Group n.d., Fleming 2002a, Fleming 2002b, Fleming and Patterson 2003, Fleming and Patterson 2011a, Fleming and Patterson 2011b, Fleming et al. 2001, Fleming et al. 2006, Fleming et al. 2007b, Harrison 2004, Harrison 2011, Harrison and Stango 2003, McCoy and Fleming 2000, Patterson 2008e, Patterson pers. comm., Taverna and Patterson 2008, Thomson et al. 1999, Walton et al. 2001

2. SHRUBLAND & GRASSLAND 2.B.6. Temperate & Boreal Freshwater Marsh, Wet Meadow & Shrubland M303. Eastern North American Ruderal Wet Meadow & Marsh G557. Southeastern Ruderal Wet Meadow & Marsh

COMMON RUSH MARSH (CEGL004112) Juncus effusus Seasonally Flooded Herbaceous Vegetation Common Rush Seasonally Flooded Herbaceous Vegetation

ELEMENT CONCEPT Summary: This broadly defined type represents freshwater marsh vegetation dominated by Juncus effusus. Additional types may be developed as more information becomes available. This vegetation may occur in natural or artificial ponds, including beaver-enhanced ones. In various parts of its broad range as currently defined, associated species may include Andropogon glomeratus, Cyperus spp., Typha latifolia, Scirpus cyperinus, Triadenum walteri, Apios americana, and Galium aparine. This type includes seasonally to temporarily flooded vegetation dominated or codominated by Juncus effusus in the central and southern Appalachians. Environment: This is a seasonally (to temporarily) flooded marsh vegetation type; it may occur in natural or artificial ponds, including beaver-enhanced ponds, artificial waterways (wet ditches), and disturbed wet fields. Vegetation: This type is currently broadly and literally defined, based on dominance by Juncus effusus. In various parts of its broad range as currently defined, associated species may include Andropogon glomeratus, Carex spp., Cyperus spp., other Juncus spp., Typha latifolia, Scirpus cyperinus, Triadenum walteri, Apios americana, and Galium aparine. In Georgia, Wharton (1978) cites Carex rostrata, Carex stipata, Schoenoplectus pungens (= Scirpus americanus), and Sagittaria latifolia as associates of beaver pond vegetation containing Juncus effusus. Related Concepts: • Carex stricta - Juncus effusus - Carex lurida Semipermanently Flooded Herbaceous Vegetation (McCoy and Fleming 2000) = • Beaver Dam Type (Wharton 1978) ? • Disturbed Bog (Wichmann 2009) > • IID6a. Natural Impoundment Pond (Allard 1990) > • Semipermanent Impoundment (Fleming pers. comm.) > Classification Comments: Though this association was not seen at the Bankhead National Forest, it is expected to occur there. 33 Vegetation of Patuxent 15 February2012 Copyright © 2012 NatureServe

CONSERVATION RANKING GRank: G5 (2001-3-28) Reasons: This is a broadly defined, widely distributed, and reasonably secure vegetation type.

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION Range: The range of this broadly defined association has not been fully described. It is confirmed as occurring in the Central Appalachians and is thought to occur in the Interior Low Plateau, Cumberland Plateau, Southern Ridge and Valley, Southern Blue Ridge, Piedmont, Chesapeake Bay Lowlands, and the Coastal Plain from the Mid-Atlantic to the Upper East Gulf Coastal Plain. Nations: US Subnations: AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, LA, MD, MS, NC, OK, SC, TN, TX, VA, WV TNC Ecoregions: 43:C, 44:C, 50:P, 51:C, 52:C, 53:P, 56:P, 57:P, 58:P, 59:C USFS Ecoregions: 222Eb:CCC, 231Bg:CCC, 231Bi:CCC, 231Ca:CPP, 231Cd:CPP, 231Db:CCC, 232Ce:PPP, M221Ab:CCC, M221Dc:CCC, M221Dd:CCC Federal Lands: BIA (Eastern Band of Cherokee); DOD (Arnold, Fort Benning); NPS (Blue Ridge Parkway, Carl Sandburg Home, Chattahoochee River, Chickamauga-Chattanooga?, Cumberland Island?, Great Smoky Mountains, Mammoth Cave?, Natchez Trace); USFS (Bankhead, Cherokee?, Nantahala, Oconee?, Pisgah, Talladega, Talladega (Oakmulgee), Talladega (Talladega)?); USFWS (Patuxent)

ELEMENT SOURCES References: Allard 1990, Fleming and Patterson 2011a, Fleming et al. 2001, Fleming pers. comm., Hoagland 1998c, Hoagland 2000, McCoy and Fleming 2000, Peet et al. unpubl. data, Schotz pers. comm., Southeastern Ecology Working Group n.d., TDNH unpubl. data, TNC 1998a, Wharton 1978, Wichmann 2009

M069. Eastern North American Wet Meadow & Marsh G125. Eastern North American Freshwater Marsh

EASTERN CATTAIL MARSH (CEGL006153) Typha (angustifolia, latifolia) - (Schoenoplectus spp.) Eastern Herbaceous Vegetation (Narrowleaf Cattail, Broadleaf Cattail) - (Clubrush species) Eastern Herbaceous Vegetation

ELEMENT CONCEPT Summary: These tall emergent marshes are common throughout the northeastern United States and adjacent Canadian provinces. They occur in permanently flooded basins, often as part of a larger wetland mosaic and associated with lakes, ponds, or slow-moving streams. The substrate is muck over mineral soil. Lacustrine cattail marshes typically have a muck-bottom zone bordering the shoreline, where cattails are rooted in the bottom substrate, and a floating mat zone, where the roots grow suspended in a buoyant peaty mat. Tall graminoids dominate the vegetation; scattered shrubs are often present (usually totaling less than 25% cover) and are frequently shorter than the graminoids. Trees are absent. Bryophyte cover varies and is rarely extensive; bryophytes are mostly confined to the hummocks. Typha angustifolia, Typha latifolia, or their hybrid Typha X glauca dominate, either alone or in combination with other tall emergent marsh species. Associated species vary widely; sedges, such as Carex aquatilis, Carex lurida, Carex rostrata, Carex pellita (= Carex lanuginosa), Carex stricta, Scirpus cyperinus, and bulrushes, such as Schoenoplectus americanus (= Scirpus americanus) and Schoenoplectus acutus (= Scirpus acutus), occur along with patchy grasses, such as Calamagrostis canadensis. Broad-leaved herbs include Thelypteris palustris, Asclepias incarnata, Onoclea sensibilis, Symplocarpus foetidus, Calla palustris, Impatiens capensis, Sagittaria latifolia, Scutellaria lateriflora, Sparganium eurycarpum, and Verbena hastata. Floating aquatics, such as Lemna minor, may be common in deeper zones. Shrub species vary across the geographic range of this type; in the northern part of its range, Myrica gale, Ilex verticillata, and Spiraea alba are common. The invasive exotic plants Lythrum salicaria and Phragmites australis may be abundant in parts of some occurrences. This association is distinguished from other northeastern freshwater marshes by the strong dominance of Typha spp. Environment: These tall emergent marshes are common throughout the northeastern United States and adjacent Canadian provinces. They occur in permanently flooded basins, often as part of a larger wetland mosaic and associated with lakes, ponds, or slow-moving streams. The substrate is muck over mineral soil. Lacustrine cattail marshes typically have a muck-bottom zone bordering the shoreline, where cattails are rooted in the bottom substrate, and a floating mat zone, where the roots grow suspended in a buoyant peaty mat. This association is often found in impounded waters.

Vegetation: Tall graminoids dominate the vegetation; scattered shrubs are often present (usually totaling less than 25% cover) and are frequently shorter than the graminoids. Trees are absent. Bryophyte cover varies and is rarely extensive; bryophytes are mostly confined to the hummocks. Typha angustifolia, Typha latifolia, or their hybrid Typha X glauca dominate, either alone or in combination with other tall emergent marsh species. Associated species vary widely; sedges, such as Carex aquatilis, Carex lurida, Carex rostrata, Carex pellita (= Carex lanuginosa), Carex stricta, Scirpus cyperinus, and bulrushes, such as Schoenoplectus americanus (= Scirpus americanus) and Schoenoplectus acutus (= Scirpus acutus), occur along with patchy grasses, such as Calamagrostis canadensis. Broad-leaved herbs include Thelypteris palustris, Asclepias incarnata, Onoclea sensibilis, Symplocarpus foetidus, Calla palustris, Impatiens capensis, Sagittaria latifolia, Scutellaria lateriflora, Sparganium eurycarpum, and Verbena hastata. Floating aquatics, such as Lemna minor, may be common in deeper zones. Shrub species vary across the geographic range of this type; in the northern part of its range, Myrica gale, Ilex verticillata, and Spiraea alba are common. The invasive plants Lythrum salicaria and Phragmites australis may be abundant in parts of some occurrences. Dynamics: This association is often found in impounded waters. Similar Associations: • Typha latifolia Southern Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL004150) • Typha spp. - Schoenoplectus acutus - Mixed Herbs Midwest Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL002229) • Typha spp. - Schoenoplectus tabernaemontani - Mixed Herbs Southern Great Lakes Shore Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL005112) • Typha spp. Midwest Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL002233) Related Concepts: • Typha (angustifolia, latifolia) - (Schoenoplectus spp.) Eastern Herbaceous Vegetation (Harrison 2004) = • Typha latifolia semipermanently-flooded grasslands (Metzler and Barrett 2001) = • Typha (angustifolia, latifolia) - (Scirpus spp.) Herbaceous Vegetation (Clancy 1996) = • Cattail Marsh (Thompson 1996) ? • Cattail Marsh (Gawler 2002) = • Cattail marsh (CAP pers. comm. 1998) ? • Palustrine Narrow-leaved Persistent Emergent Wetland, Permanently Flooded (PEM5H) (Cowardin et al. 1979) ? • Robust Emergent Marsh (Breden 1989) ? • Southern New England nutrient-poor streamside/lakeside marsh (Rawinski 1984) ? • Southern New England nutrient-rich streamside/lakeside marsh (Rawinski 1984) ? Classification Comments: Typha angustifolia can grow in deeper water compared to Typha latifolia, although both species reach maximum growth at a water depth of 50 cm (Grace and Wetzel 1981). Typha often occurs in pure stands and can colonize areas recently exposed by either natural or human causes.

CONSERVATION RANKING GRank: G5 (1997-12-1) Reasons:

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION Range: This association occurs throughout the northeastern U.S. from Maine to North Carolina. Nations: US Subnations: CT, DC?, DE, MA, MD, ME, NC?, NH, NJ, NY, PA, RI, VA, VT, WV TNC Ecoregions: 48:C, 49:C, 51:C, 52:C, 58:P, 59:C, 60:C, 61:C, 62:C, 63:C, 64:C USFS Ecoregions: 212Cb:CCC, 212Da:CCC, 212Db:CCC, 212Fa:CCC, 212Fb:CCC, 212Fc:CCC, 212Fd:CCC, 212Ga:CCC, 212Gb:CCC, 221Aa:CCP, 221Ab:CCC, 221Ae:CCC, 221Ai:CCC, 221Al:CCC, 221Ba:CCP, 221Bb:CCC, 221Bc:CCC, 221Bd:CCC, 221Da:CCC, 221Fa:CCC, 222Ib:CCC, 222Ic:CCC, 231:C, 232Ab:CCC, 232Ac:CCC, 232Ad:CCC, M212A:CP, M212Bb:CCC, M212C:CP, M212D:CC, M212Ea:CCC, M212Eb:CCC, M221Aa:CCC, M221Ab:CCC, M221Ac:CCC, M221Ad:CCC, M221Ba:CCC, M221Bb:CCC, M221Bc:CCC, M221Bd:CCC, M221Be:CCC, M221Bf:CCC, M221Da:CCC, M221Db:CCP, M221Dc:CCP, M221Dd:CCP Federal Lands: NPS (Acadia, Appalachian Trail [Central Appalachians], Appalachian Trail [Lower New England], Appalachian Trail [Northern Appalachians], Blue Ridge Parkway?, Boston Harbor Islands, C&O Canal, Cape Cod, Delaware Water Gap, Harpers Ferry, Johnstown Flood, Manassas, Minute Man, National Capital-East, Saint-Gaudens, Saratoga, Upper Delaware); USFS (Nantahala?, Pisgah?); USFWS (Aroostook, Assabet River, Carlton Pond?, E.B. Forsythe, Erie, Great Meadows, Great Swamp, Iroquois, Monomoy, Montezuma, Moosehorn, Nulhegan Basin, Oxbow, Patuxent, Pondicherry?, Prime Hook)

ELEMENT SOURCES References: Breden 1989, Breden et al. 2001, CAP pers. comm. 1998, Clancy 1996, Cowardin et al. 1979, Eastern Ecology Working Group n.d., Edinger et al. 2002, Fike 1999, Gawler 2002, Grace and Wetzel 1981, Harrison 2004,

Harrison 2011, Lubinski et al. 2003, Metzler and Barrett 2001, NRCS 2004a, Northern Appalachian Ecology Working Group 2000, Perles et al. 2007, Perles et al. 2008, Rawinski 1984, Sperduto and Nichols 2004, Swain and Kearsley 2001, Thompson 1996, Thompson and Sorenson 2000

G112. Eastern North American Wet Meadow

CENTRAL APPALACHIAN CUTGRASS MARSH (CEGL006461) Leersia oryzoides - Sagittaria latifolia Herbaceous Vegetation Rice Cutgrass - Broadleaf Arrowhead Herbaceous Vegetation

ELEMENT CONCEPT Summary: This community occupies wet alluvial bottomlands and beaver ponds in the Central Appalachians and adjacent ecoregions. Parent materials are alluvium derived mainly from acidic sandstones and shales. Surface soils are poorly drained, acidic clay loams. This small-patch wetland community is dominated by grasses and forbs, with scattered trees and shrubs. The dominant grasses are Leersia oryzoides and Phalaris arundinacea with Leersia strongly dominant at most sites. Sagittaria latifolia has high constancy and cover, except at higher elevations. Scirpus cyperinus has high constancy. Additional characteristic herbs include Boehmeria cylindrica, Carex gynandra, Carex intumescens, Carex baileyi, Dichanthelium clandestinum, Dulichium arundinaceum, Eupatorium fistulosum, Galium tinctorium, Impatiens capensis, Juncus effusus, Lobelia siphilitica, Ludwigia palustris, Lycopus uniflorus, Lycopus virginicus, Lysimachia terrestris, Mimulus ringens, Polygonum sagittatum, Scirpus atrovirens, and Typha latifolia. Areas with longer standing water may have aquatic species, including Callitriche heterophylla and Sparganium spp. Scattered small trees include Robinia pseudoacacia, Salix nigra, and Fraxinus pennsylvanica. The exotic shrub Rosa multiflora is sometimes invasive in this community. Cornus amomum is a characteristic native shrub. Environment: This community occupies wet alluvial bottomlands, beaver ponds, and disturbed flats in the Central Appalachians and adjacent ecoregions. Parent materials at documented sites are alluvium derived mainly from acidic sandstones and shales. Surface soils described from sampled plots are somewhat to very poorly drained clay, clay loam, muck, sandy clay, sandy loam, or silty clay. Hydric soil indicators include Histosols, histic epipedon, depleted matrix, and redox depressions. Soil pH averages 4.0 (n=2). The unvegetated surface is predominantly litter, with small amounts of downed wood and standing water, and frequent patches of bare soil. Elevations of documented stands range up to 1300 m. Vegetation: This small-patch wetland community is dominated by grasses and forbs, with scattered trees and shrubs. The dominant grasses are Leersia oryzoides and Phalaris arundinacea. Both of these are native species, however, introduction of Eurasian ecotypes and cultivars of Phalaris arundinacea and subsequent hybridization with native stock have been blamed for the current invasive capacity of this species. Leersia is strongly dominant at most sites. Sagittaria latifolia has high constancy and cover but drops out at the highest elevations. Scirpus cyperinus has high constancy. Additional characteristic herbs include Boehmeria cylindrica, Carex gynandra, Carex intumescens, Carex baileyi, Dichanthelium clandestinum, Dulichium arundinaceum, Eupatorium fistulosum, Galium tinctorium, Impatiens capensis, Juncus effusus, Lobelia siphilitica, Ludwigia palustris, Lycopus uniflorus, Lycopus virginicus, Lysimachia terrestris, Mimulus ringens, Polygonum sagittatum, Scirpus atrovirens, and Typha latifolia. Cover by nonvascular plants is generally insignificant. Scattered small trees include Robinia pseudoacacia, Salix nigra, and Fraxinus pennsylvanica. The exotic shrub Rosa multiflora may be invasive in this community. Cornus amomum and Cephalanthus occidentalis are characteristic native shrubs. Areas with longer standing water may have aquatic species, including Callitriche heterophylla and Sparganium spp. Mean species richness of vascular plants in 19 WV plots was 16 taxa per 400 square meters. Dynamics: These wetlands have been highly impacted by developments, including roads, railroads, drainage for agriculture, hay harvests, and industrial use. It is likely that these herbaceous wetlands were forested prior to clearing for agriculture. Some of these wetlands have been influenced by beaver activity; it may also develop on wetland sites disturbed by human activities. It is an early-successional wetland type and patches may be ephemeral, but it is likely to be present on the landscape as long as beaver-influenced and human-caused disturbance regimes persist. Patuxent Research Refuge: This marsh type is mapped in two small patches on the refuge, and likely occurs elsewhere in impoundments and other successional wetlands. In one location, it formed in a stream channel with drainage impeded by the adjacent road. The vegetation is primarily herbaceous, with Leersia oryzoides an prominent component, but scattered young trees such as Acer rubrum and Liquidambar styraciflua, as well as snags of other species, often occur. Other associates include Scirpus cyperinus, Polygonum arifolium, and Typha angustifolia. Similar Associations:

• Leersia oryzoides - Boehmeria cylindrica - Ranunculus flabellaris Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL006903) sinkhole ponds in New Jersey. Related Concepts: • Leersia oryzoides - Phalaris arundinacea - Juncus effusus herbaceous wetland (Vanderhorst and Streets 2006) = • Leersia oryzoides community (Walbridge 1982) < • Leersia oryzoides herbaceous wetland (Vanderhorst 2001b) = • Herbaceous wetland (Vanderhorst 2001a) ? • Rice cutgrass marsh (Putnam 1995) = Classification Comments: This association is based on 19 plots and anecdotal data from West Virginia, but it is likely wider ranging.

CONSERVATION RANKING GRank: GNR (2006-6-5) Reasons: Need more complete information on range and occurrences before ranking.

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION Range: This association is currently documented from several areas in West Virginia; it is likely in other parts of the Central Appalachians from Pennsylvania to Virginia. Nations: US Subnations: DE, MA, MD, NY, PA, VA, WV TNC Ecoregions: 48:C, 49:C, 50:C, 58:C, 59:C, 61:C USFS Ecoregions: 221Ae:CCC, 221Db:CCC, 221E:CC, 222Ic:CCC, M221Bb:CCC, M221Cb:CCC Federal Lands: NPS (New River Gorge); USFS (Monongahela); USFWS (Canaan Valley, Montezuma, Patuxent)

ELEMENT SOURCES References: Byers et al. 2007, Eastern Ecology Working Group n.d., Grafton and Eye 1982, Putnam 1995, Vanderhorst 2001a, Vanderhorst 2001b, Vanderhorst and Streets 2006, Vanderhorst et al. 2007, Walbridge 1982, Walbridge and Lang 1982, Walton et al. 1996

M160. Northern & Central Tall Shrub Wetland G167. Northern & Central Shrub Swamp

HAZEL ALDER - SWEETBAY/BUSHY BLUESTEM - ROUGH BONESET - SLENDER BEAKSEDGE - SLENDER YELLOW-EYED-GRASS SHRUBLAND (CEGL006499) Alnus serrulata - Magnolia virginiana/Andropogon glomeratus - Eupatorium pilosum - Rhynchospora gracilenta - Xyris torta Shrubland

ELEMENT CONCEPT Summary: This seepage bog is currently known from the inner Coastal Plain from central and southern Maryland to southeastern Virginia. It occurs in saturated swales and headwater streams with extremely acidic, infertile soils, through which a constant supply of groundwater is discharged. The most "natural" occurrences of this vegetation are now restricted to military base impact areas and dedicated natural areas that are burned frequently. Compositionally identical vegetation is more common where artificially maintained powerline rights-of-way intersect small streams and swales. The vegetation is usually a patchy shrubland, although scattered small trees of Acer rubrum, Nyssa sylvatica, and Pinus taeda occur at a few sites. The principal shrubs are Alnus serrulata, Magnolia virginiana, Toxicodendron vernix, Viburnum nudum var. nudum, Clethra alnifolia, and Photinia pyrifolia (= Aronia arbutifolia). Small to large, graminoid-dominated herbaceous openings occur among the shrubs. Characteristic herbaceous patch-dominants are Rhynchospora gracilenta, Rhynchospora capitellata, Andropogon glomeratus, Dichanthelium dichotomum var. dichotomum (= Dichanthelium lucidum), Scleria muehlenbergii, Eleocharis tortilis, Calamagrostis coarctata, Xyris torta, Fuirena squarrosa, Juncus canadensis, and Juncus longii. Characteristic ferns and forbs include Lycopodiella alopecuroides, Osmunda cinnamomea, Eupatorium pilosum, Viola primulifolia, Rhexia spp., Triadenum virginicum, Polygala lutea, Polygala cruciata, and Pogonia ophioglossoides. Areas of bare mineral soil are frequently carpeted by Drosera rotundifolia var. rotundifolia, Drosera capillaris, and Utricularia subulata. Environment: This seepage "bog" occurs in saturated swales and headwater streams of the inner Coastal Plain and outer Piedmont. It is associated with extremely acidic, infertile soils through which a constant supply of groundwater is discharged. The most "natural" occurrences of this vegetation are now restricted to military base impact areas and

dedicated natural areas that are burned frequently. Compositionally identical vegetation is more common where artificially maintained powerline rights-of-way intersect small streams and swales. Vegetation: This association is usually a patchy shrubland, although scattered small trees of Acer rubrum, Nyssa sylvatica, and Pinus taeda occur at a few sites. The principal shrubs are Alnus serrulata, Magnolia virginiana, Toxicodendron vernix, Viburnum nudum var. nudum, Clethra alnifolia, and Photinia pyrifolia (= Aronia arbutifolia). Small to large, graminoid-dominated herbaceous openings occur among the shrubs. Characteristic herbaceous patch-dominants are Rhynchospora gracilenta, Rhynchospora capitellata, Andropogon glomeratus, Dichanthelium dichotomum var. dichotomum (= Dichanthelium lucidum), Scleria muehlenbergii, Eleocharis tortilis, Calamagrostis coarctata, Xyris torta, Fuirena squarrosa, Juncus canadensis, and Juncus longii. Characteristic ferns and forbs include Lycopodiella alopecuroides, Osmunda cinnamomea, Eupatorium pilosum, Viola X primulifolia, Rhexia spp., Triadenum virginicum, Polygala lutea, Polygala cruciata, and Pogonia ophioglossoides. Areas of bare mineral soil are frequently carpeted by Drosera rotundifolia var. rotundifolia, Drosera capillaris, and Utricularia subulata. Among the less frequent plants that are strongly or exclusively associated with this vegetation in Virginia are Asclepias rubra, Calamovilfa brevipilis, Carex venusta, Cleistes divaricata, Ctenium aromaticum, Eriocaulon decangulare, Juncus caesariensis, Lobelia amoena var. glandulifera (= Lobelia georgiana), Ludwigia hirtella, Platanthera blephariglottis var. conspicua, Rhynchospora cephalantha, Rhynchospora rariflora, Sarracenia flava, Sarracenia purpurea, and Xyris platylepis. Dynamics: The remarkably consistent composition of this community type in scattered powerlines over much of eastern Virginia suggests that this vegetation is a close analogue to natural bogs that occurred in the presettlement landscape. This hypothesis is supported by the extraordinarily large patches that are found in frequently burned "impact areas" at Fort A.P. Hill, Fort Pickett, and the Quantico Marine Base. Several sites at which similar bog communities were reported by Fernald and others in the early to mid-20th century are now entirely overgrown by forests. Most remaining occurrences of this type are now "semi-natural" and maintained by mowing and herbicide treatment. Patuxent Research Refuge: This small bog occurs in one location in the powerline right-of-way on the southeastern edge of the refuge. It is presumably maintained in its open state by powerline maintenance activities. Alnus serrulata and Drosera spp. were noted to occur here. Similar Associations: • Acer rubrum var. trilobum/Morella caroliniensis - Gaylussacia frondosa/Andropogon glomeratus - (Sarracenia flava) Woodland (CEGL004781) southern analogue; hillside seepage bog of the NC Piedmont. Related Concepts: • Alnus serrulata - Magnolia virginiana/Rhynchospora gracilenta - Andropogon glomeratus - Xyris torta Shrub Herbaceous Vegetation (Fleming 2002b) = • Alnus serrulata - Magnolia virginiana/Rhynchospora gracilenta -Andropogon glomeratus - Eupatorium pilosum - Xyris torta Shrub Herbaceous Vegetation (Fleming and Patterson 2003) = • Alnus serrulata - Magnolia virginiana/Rhynchospora gracilenta -Andropogon glomeratus - Xyris torta Shrub Herbaceous Vegetation (Fleming 2002a) = • Coastal Plain - Piedmont Acidic Seepage Fen (Harrison 2004) > • Coastal Plain/Piedmont Seepage Bog (Fleming and Patterson 2004) > Classification Comments: This community was originally described based on a classification of Virginia Coastal Plain and Piedmont data (468 plots). Its current classification is based on analysis of a 1250-plot regional dataset for the NCR and Mid-Atlantic national parks vegetation mapping projects. It was represented by 7 Virginia plots and one Maryland plot.

CONSERVATION RANKING GRank: GNR (2007-5-31) Reasons: This is potentially a very rare community type, but it is difficult to rank given its semi-natural status at most occurrences. Additional review is needed.

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION Range: This association is currently known from the inner Coastal Plain from central and southern Maryland to southeastern Virginia. Nations: US Subnations: MD, VA TNC Ecoregions: 52:C, 57:C, 58:C USFS Ecoregions: 231Ae:CCC, 232Br:CCC Federal Lands: DOD (Fort A.P. Hill, Fort Pickett, Quantico); USFWS (Patuxent)

ELEMENT SOURCES References: Eastern Ecology Working Group n.d., Fleming 2002a, Fleming 2002b, Fleming and Patterson 2003, Fleming and Patterson 2004, Fleming and Patterson 2011a, Fleming et al. 2007b, Harrison 2004

NORTHEASTERN BUTTONBUSH SHRUB SWAMP (CEGL006069) Cephalanthus occidentalis - Decodon verticillatus Shrubland Common Buttonbush - Swamp-loosestrife Shrubland

ELEMENT CONCEPT Summary: This buttonbush swamp occurs in the northeastern United States. These swamps experience prolonged or semipermanent flooding for much of the growing season, with water tables receding below the soil surface only during drought or very late in the growing season. They occur in a variety of environmental settings, including backwater sloughs or oxbow ponds, wet swales in floodplains, pond and lake borders, and small, isolated depressions where water levels recede very slowly, such as those with perched water tables. The substrate is typically loose muck. Cephalanthus occidentalis is dominant and often monotypic. Occasional associates depend on the environmental setting and most often occur in drier areas. They include Vaccinium corymbosum, Rhododendron viscosum, Acer rubrum, Cornus spp. closer to upland borders, or Acer saccharinum, Fraxinus pennsylvanica, and Viburnum dentatum where adjacent to floodplains, or Decodon verticillatus, Chamaedaphne calyculata, and Spiraea alba var. latifolia in more stagnant basins. Herbaceous species tend to be sparse but can include Glyceria canadensis, Dulichium arundinaceum, Carex stricta, Scirpus cyperinus, Thelypteris palustris, Leersia oryzoides, Acorus calamus, Alisma plantago-aquatica, Polygonum spp., Sparganium spp., and floating or submerged aquatic species such as Lemna minor, Potamogeton natans, and Nuphar variegata (= Nuphar lutea ssp. variegata). Bryophytes, if present, cling to shrub bases and include Warnstorfia fluitans (= Drepanocladus fluitans), Drepanocladus aduncus, or Sphagnum fallax. In disturbed areas, these wetland may be invaded by Lythrum salicaria. Environment: This association includes buttonbush swamps that experience prolonged or semipermanent flooding for much of the growing season with water tables receding below the soil surface only during drought or very late in the growing season. They occur in a variety of environmental settings including backwater sloughs or oxbow ponds, wet swales in floodplains, pond and lake borders, and small, isolated depressions where water levels recede very slowly, such as those with perched water tables. Soils are often organic mucks or silt loams. Vegetation: This association includes buttonbush swamps of the eastern and northeastern United States. These swamps experience prolonged or semipermanent flooding for much of the growing season with water tables receding below the soil surface only during drought or very late in the growing season. They occur in a variety of environmental settings including backwater sloughs or oxbow ponds, wet swales in floodplains, pond and lake borders, and small isolated depressions where water levels recede very slowly, such as those with perched water tables. Cephalanthus occidentalis is dominant and often monotypic. Scattered Acer rubrum trees may be present in the wetland. Occasional associates depend on the environmental setting, and some only occur in drier areas. They include Vaccinium corymbosum, Rhododendron viscosum, Acer rubrum, Salix spp., Cornus amomum or Cornus sericea closer to upland borders, or Acer saccharinum, Fraxinus pennsylvanica, or Viburnum dentatum where adjacent to floodplains, or Decodon verticillatus, Chamaedaphne calyculata, and Spiraea alba var. latifolia in more stagnant basins. Herbaceous species tend to be sparse but can include Glyceria canadensis, Dulichium arundinaceum, Carex stricta, Scirpus cyperinus, Osmunda regalis, Thelypteris palustris, Bidens spp., Sium suave, Scutellaria lateriflora, Alisma plantago-aquatica, Polygonum spp., Sparganium spp., and floating or submerged aquatic species such as Lemna minor, Potamogeton natans, and Nuphar variegata (= Nuphar lutea ssp. variegata). Bryophytes, if present, cling to shrub bases and include Warnstorfia fluitans (= Drepanocladus fluitans), Drepanocladus aduncus, or Sphagnum fallax. Similar Associations: • Cephalanthus occidentalis - (Leucothoe racemosa)/Carex joorii Shrubland (CEGL004075) • Cephalanthus occidentalis/Carex spp. - Lemna spp. Southern Shrubland (CEGL002191) • Cephalanthus occidentalis/Carex spp. Northern Shrubland (CEGL002190) Related Concepts: • Cephalanthus occidentalis/Glyceria canadensis Shrubland (Harrison 2004) = • Cephalanthus occidentalis/Glyceria canadensis community (Metzler and Barrett 2001) = • Cephalanthus occidentalis Semi-permanently Flooded Shrubland (Clancy 1996) ? • Buttonbush Swamp (Kettle Basin Shrub Swamp) (Thompson 1996) ? • Buttonbush semipermanently flooded shrub swamp (CAP pers. comm. 1998) ? • Mixed Graminoid - Shrub Marsh (Gawler 2002) > • Palustrine Broad-leaved Deciduous Scrub-Shrub Wetland, Seasonally Flooded (PSS1C) (Cowardin et al. 1979) ? 39 Vegetation of Patuxent 15 February2012 Copyright © 2012 NatureServe

• Scrub/Shrub Wetland, Cephalanthus occidentalis variant (Enser 1999) ? Classification Comments: This type may be synonymous with Cephalanthus occidentalis/Carex spp. Northern Shrubland (CEGL002190), although it also ranges south of the glaciation boundary in the east. CEGL002190 is distributed from the Western Allegheny Plateau (TNC Ecoregion 49) and Great Lakes (TNC Ecoregion 48) west to the Central Tallgrass Prairie (TNC Ecoregion 36), while this type occurs from the Central Appalachian Forest (TNC Ecoregion 59) and High Allegheny Plateau (TNC Ecoregion 60) east. Other Comments: J. Harrison (pers. comm. 2006) states: "In the Chesapeake Marshlands National Wildlife Refuge complex, an example of this community occurs at the Buttons Creek headwater swamp. It is a nontidal shrub swamp characterized by Rosa palustris, Cephalanthus occidentalis, and Decodon verticillatus. Associates include Acer rubrum, Polygonum spp., Leucothoe racemosa, Smilax rotundifolia, and Cyperus sp. Distinct hummock-and-hollow microtopography is apparent throughout the swamp. Along the upland edge interface species such as Carex crinita, Osmunda regalis, Thelypteris palustris, and Ilex verticillata grow beneath a canopy of Liquidambar styraciflua, Acer rubrum , Nyssa sylvatica, and Quercus spp. Chamaedaphne calyculata, Acer saccharinum, and Spiraea alba var. latifolia do not occur in the Chesapeake Marshlands examples of this community."

CONSERVATION RANKING GRank: G4G5 (2007-1-31) Reasons: This association is widely distributed in the northeastern U.S. and relatively common in its small-patch setting. It is vulnerable to groundwater disruption, agricultural runoff, and adjacent forest clearing.

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION Range: This association is found throughout the northeastern United States (an estimated 450,000 square km based on subsection attribution). Nations: CA, US Subnations: CT, DC, DE, MA, MD, ME, NH, NJ, NY, PA, QC, RI, VA, VT, WV? TNC Ecoregions: 58:C, 59:C, 60:C, 61:C, 62:C, 63:C USFS Ecoregions: 212Dc:CCC, 212Fa:CCC, 212Fb:CCC, 212Fc:CCC, 212Fd:CCC, 212Ga:CCC, 212Gb:CCC, 221Aa:CCP, 221Ab:CCC, 221Ae:CCC, 221Af:CCC, 221Ag:CCC, 221Ah:CCC, 221Ai:CCC, 221Al:CCC, 221Ba:CCC, 221Bb:CCC, 221Bc:CCC, 221Bd:CCC, 221Da:CCC, 221E:CP, 231:C, 232Ad:CCC, 232Bt:CCC, 232C:CC, 234:C, M212A:CP, M212Bb:CCC, M212Bd:CCC, M212Cb:CCC, M212Cc:CCC, M212De:CCC, M212Ea:CCC, M212Eb:CCC, M221Aa:CCC, M221Ab:CCC, M221Ac:CCC, M221Ad:CCC, M221Bb:CCC, M221Bd:CCC, M221Be:CCC, M221Bf:CCP, M221Da:CCC Federal Lands: NPS (Appalachian Trail [Lower New England], Boston Harbor Islands, C&O Canal, Cape Cod, Delaware Water Gap, Minute Man, National Capital-East, Saratoga, Weir Farm); USFWS (Assabet River?, Chesapeake Marshlands, Great Meadows, Great Swamp, Monomoy, Nomans Land Island, Oxbow, Patuxent)

ELEMENT SOURCES References: Bowman 2000, Breden et al. 2001, CAP pers. comm. 1998, Clancy 1996, Cowardin et al. 1979, Eastern Ecology Working Group n.d., Edinger et al. 2002, Elliman 2003, Enser 1999, Fike 1999, Fleming and Patterson 2011a, Fleming et al. 2001, Gawler 2002, Harrison 2004, Harrison 2011, Hopping 2000, J. Harrison pers. comm., Karanaukas 2001, Metzler and Barrett 2001, Metzler et al. 2009, NRCS 2004a, Nichols et al. 2001, Perles et al. 2007, Sperduto 2000b, Swain and Kearsley 2001, Thompson 1996, Thompson and Sorenson 2000

SWAMP-LOOSESTRIFE SHRUB SWAMP (CEGL005089) Decodon verticillatus Semipermanently Flooded Shrubland Swamp-loosestrife Semipermanently Flooded Shrubland

ELEMENT CONCEPT Summary: This shrub border occurs as a fringe along aquatic edges of lakes and streams in the northeastern states. Decodon verticillatus forms a dense, often monotypic, tangle. Cephalanthus occidentalis can occur, but with less abundance than Decodon verticillatus. Herbaceous species vary widely, but may include Nuphar variegata (= Nuphar lutea ssp. variegata), Nymphaea odorata, Peltandra virginica, Pontederia cordata, Utricularia spp., and Potamogeton spp. Where Decodon-dominated vegetation occurs adjacent to bog mats, it is considered a part of Chamaedaphne calyculata - (Gaylussacia dumosa) - Decodon verticillatus/Woodwardia virginica Dwarf-shrubland (CEGL006008). Environment: Vegetation forms as a fringe along aquatic edges of lakes and streams. Vegetation: Decodon verticillatus forms a dense, often monotypic, tangle. Cephalanthus occidentalis can occur, but with less abundance than Decodon verticillatus. Herbaceous species vary widely, but may include Nuphar variegata (= 40 Vegetation of Patuxent 15 February2012 Copyright © 2012 NatureServe

Nuphar lutea ssp. variegata), Nymphaea odorata, Peltandra virginica, Pontederia cordata, Utricularia spp., and Potamogeton spp. Similar Associations: • Decodon verticillatus Seasonally Flooded Shrubland (CEGL003905) Related Concepts: • Decodon verticillatus Semipermanently Flooded Shrubland (Harrison 2004) = • Decodon verticillatus Shrubland (Clancy 1996) ? • Decodon verticillatus semi-permanently flooded shrublands (Metzler and Barrett 2001) =

CONSERVATION RANKING GRank: GNR (1994-12-15) Reasons:

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION Nations: CA, US Subnations: CT, DE, MA, MD, NH, NJ, NY, ON, PA, QC, WV TNC Ecoregions: 49:C, 58:?, 59:C, 60:C, 61:C, 62:C USFS Ecoregions: 212Fa:CCC, 212Fb:CCC, 212Fc:CCC, 212Fd:CCC, 221Ab:CCC, 221Ai:CCC, 221Al:CCC, 221Ea:CCC, 221Fa:CCC, 232Ab:CCC, 232Ac:CCC, M221Ac:CCC, M221Ad:CCC, M221Da:CCC Federal Lands: NPS (Appalachian Trail [Lower New England], Cape Cod); USFWS (Cape May, E.B. Forsythe, Patuxent, Prime Hook)

ELEMENT SOURCES References: Bowman 2000, Breden et al. 2001, Clancy 1996, Eastern Ecology Working Group n.d., Edinger et al. 2002, Fike 1999, Harrison 2004, Harrison 2011, Metzler and Barrett 2001, Swain and Kearsley 2001

5. AQUATIC VEGETATION 5.B.1. Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation M108. Eastern North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation G114. Eastern North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation

WATER-LILY AQUATIC WETLAND (CEGL002386) Nuphar advena - Nymphaea odorata Herbaceous Vegetation Broadleaf Pond-lily - American White Water-lily Herbaceous Vegetation

ELEMENT CONCEPT Summary: This rooted aquatic or open marsh community occupies shallow-water depressions, oxbow ponds, backwater sloughs of river floodplains, slow-moving streams, ponds, and small lakes throughout the central and eastern United States. It is dominated by rooted, floating-leaved aquatic species, with both submergent and emergent aquatics also present. Nuphar advena (= Nuphar lutea ssp. advena) and Nymphaea odorata are dominants, either in combination together, or each singly. Other species present include Brasenia schreberi, various Potamogeton and Stuckenia spp., Eleocharis robbinsii and other Eleocharis spp., Polygonum amphibium, Polygonum amphibium var. emersum (= Polygonum coccineum), Sparganium americanum, Lemna spp., Spirodela polyrrhiza, Typha latifolia, and Saururus cernuus. Submerged aquatics more common in the southern part of the range include Cabomba caroliniana, Ceratophyllum demersum, and Heteranthera dubia. Environment: This community occupies shallow-water depressions, oxbow ponds, sluggish streams, and backwater sloughs of river floodplains, ponds (natural and artificial), and small lakes. In pools and slow-flowing stretches of river, at Obed River (TN), Nuphar advena is rooted in sandy substrate (Schmalzer and DeSelm 1982). Vegetation: This community is dominated by rooted, floating-leaved aquatic species, with both submergent and emergent aquatics also present. Nuphar advena (= Nuphar lutea ssp. advena) and Nymphaea odorata are dominants, either in combination together, or each singly. Other species present include Brasenia schreberi, various Potamogeton and Stuckenia spp., Eleocharis robbinsii and other Eleocharis spp., Polygonum amphibium, Polygonum amphibium var. emersum (= Polygonum coccineum), Sparganium americanum, Lemna spp., Spirodela polyrrhiza, Typha latifolia, and Saururus cernuus (Anderson 1982, G. Fleming pers. comm.). Submerged aquatic species more common in the southern 41 Vegetation of Patuxent 15 February2012 Copyright © 2012 NatureServe

part of the range include Cabomba caroliniana, Ceratophyllum demersum, and Heteranthera dubia. This broadly conceived type may include ponds, or zones of ponds, dominated by Nymphaea odorata, with or without Nuphar advena. Similar Associations: • Equisetum fluviatile - (Eleocharis palustris) Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL005258) • Nuphar advena Tidal Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL004472) • Nuphar polysepala Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL002001) • Semipermanent Impoundment (CEGL006581) Related Concepts: • Nuphar advena - Nymphaea odorata Herbaceous Vegetation (Clancy 1996) = • Nuphar lutea ssp. advena - Nymphaea odorata Herbaceous Vegetation (Harrison 2004) = • Delmarva Bay (Harrison 2004) > • Floodplain Pond/Pool (Fleming et al. 2001) > • Freshwater Marsh (Nelson 1985) > • Inland Emergent Marsh (Chapman et al. 1989) > • L5D2aI1a. Nuphar lutea (Foti et al. 1994) ? • Lake Bed (MNNHP 1993) > • New England coastal plain pondshore (Rawinski 1984) ? • Open Water/Aquatic Bed Veg., Natural Impoundment Pond (Ambrose 1990a) > • Open water marsh with floating-leaved plants (NAP pers. comm. 1998) ? • Small Depression Pond (Schafale and Weakley 1990) > • Spatterdock - Water Lily Wetland (Fike 1999) = • Submerged Aquatic Water Lily Subtype (Faber-Langendoen 2001) = • Submergent/Floating Vascular Vegetation (Smith 1996a) > • Water-lily - Macrophyte Aquatic Bed (Gawler 2002) > Classification Comments: Can occur in mostly natural ponded wetlands as well as artifactual ones such as borrow pits. On the Conecuh National Forest (Alabama), vegetation of this association occurs in Gum Pond and Open Pond as a mix of Nymphaea odorata and Nuphar advena. Other Comments: GPF 6-07: Although this habitat is pretty unusual, I've seen similar Nuphar-dominated stands in sluggish Piedmont streams, deep floodplain sloughs, and artificial ponds. Other species associated include Sparganium americanum, Potamogeton spp., Lemna spp., Spirodela polyrrhiza, Typha latifolia, Saururus cernuus, etc. In VA, Nymphaea odorata is mostly restricted, and definitely most abundant, in the Coastal Plain. There, we do have mixed Nuphar-Nymphaea stands fairly commonly in old millponds, beaver ponds, etc.

CONSERVATION RANKING GRank: G4G5 (2002-10-15) Reasons: The dominant species in stands of this vegetation are widespread across the eastern and central United States and adjacent Canada. This is not a rare or imperiled vegetation type, even though its occurrence is poorly documented. Stands may occur in natural lakes and ponds or in artificial impoundments.

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION Range: This rooted aquatic community occupies shallow, quiet waters throughout the central and eastern United States, extending from Maine to Ontario and Minnesota, south to Oklahoma and east to Georgia. Nations: CA, US Subnations: AL, AR, CT, DE, FL, GA, IA, IL, IN, KY, LA, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MS, NC, NH, NJ, NY, OH, OK, ON, PA, RI, SC, TN, TX, VA, VT, WI, WV TNC Ecoregions: 31:C, 32:P, 36:C, 37:C, 39:C, 40:P, 41:C, 42:C, 43:C, 44:C, 45:C, 46:C, 47:C, 48:C, 49:C, 50:C, 51:C, 52:C, 53:C, 55:P, 56:C, 57:C, 58:C, 59:C, 60:C, 61:C, 62:C, 63:C USFS Ecoregions: 212Aa:CCC, 212Ba:CCC, 212Bb:CCC, 212Ca:CCC, 212Cb:CCC, 212Da:CCC, 212Db:CCP, 212Dc:CCC, 212Fa:CCP, 212Fb:CCP, 212Fc:CCP, 212Fd:CCP, 212Ga:CCP, 212Gb:CCP, 212Hb:CPP, 212Ja:CCP, 212Jb:CCP, 212Jc:CCP, 212Je:CCP, 212Jf:CCP, 212Jj:CCP, 212Jl:CCP, 212Jm:CCC, 212Ka:CPP, 221Aa:CCP, 221Ab:CCC, 221Ah:CCC, 221Ai:CCC, 221Al:CCC, 221Am:CCC, 221Bd:CCP, 221Da:CCC, 221Db:CCC, 221Ea:CCC, 221Ed:CC?, 221Ef:CCC, 221Fa:CCC, 221Hc:CCC, 221He:CCC, 222Ch:CCC, 222Db:CCC, 222Gc:C??, 222Ha:CCC, 222Ja:CCC, 222Jb:CCC, 222Ji:CCC, 222Jj:CCC, 222Kf:CCC, 222Kg:CCC, 222Kh:CCC, 222Kj:CCC, 222L:CC, 231Bc:CCC, 231Bd:CCC, 231Ga:CCC, 231Gb:CCC, 231Gc:CCC, 232Bf:CCC, 232C:CC, 232D:CC, 234Aa:CCC, 234Ac:CCC, 234Ad:CCC, 234Af:CCC, 234Ag:CCC, 234Ai:CCC, 234Al:CCC, 234Am:CCC, 234An:CCC, 251Cf:CCC, 251Dd:CCC, 251Dg:CCC, 251Eb:CCC, M212Af:CCC, M212Bb:CCC, M212Bc:CCC, M212Bd:CCC, M212Cb:CCC, M212Cc:CCC, M212Ea:CCP, M212Eb:CCP, M221Aa:CCC, M221Ab:CCC, M221Ac:CCC, M221Ad:CCC,

M221Ba:CCC, M221Bb:CCC, M221Bc:CCC, M221Bd:CCC, M221Be:CCC, M221Bf:CCC, M221Da:CCC, M221Dc:CCC Federal Lands: DOD (Fort Benning); NPS (Acadia, C&O Canal, Carl Sandburg Home, Cuyahoga Valley, Effigy Mounds, George Washington Parkway, Indiana Dunes, Minute Man, Natchez Trace, Obed River, Ozark Riverways, Saint Croix, Saint-Gaudens, Shiloh); USFS (Angelina, Chequamegon, Chequamegon-Nicolet, Conecuh, Davy Crockett, Kisatchie, Nicolet, Ocala, Ozark, Sabine, Sam Houston?, Talladega, Talladega (Oakmulgee), Talladega (Talladega)); USFWS (Back Bay, Erie, Great Swamp, Monomoy, Patuxent, Reelfoot)

ELEMENT SOURCES References: Ambrose 1990a, Anderson 1982, Breden et al. 2001, Chapman et al. 1989, Clancy 1996, Eichelberger 2011a, FNAI 1990, Faber-Langendoen 2001, Fike 1999, Fleming 2007, Fleming and Coulling 2001, Fleming and Patterson 2011a, Fleming et al. 2001, Foti et al. 1994, Gawler 2002, Harrison 2004, Harrison 2011, Hoagland 2000, Hop et al. 2005, Hop et al. 2009, INAI unpubl. data, Lubinski et al. 2003, MNNHP 1993, Midwestern Ecology Working Group n.d., NAP pers. comm. 1998, NatureServe Ecology - Southeastern U.S. unpubl. data, Nelson 1985, Peet et al. unpubl. data, Penfound 1953, Rawinski 1984, Schafale and Weakley 1990, Schmalzer and DeSelm 1982, Schotz pers. comm., Smith 1996a, Sperduto and Nichols 2004, Swain and Kearsley 2001, TDNH unpubl. data, Thompson and Jenkins 1992, WNHIP unpubl. data, Zanoni et al. 1979, Zimmerman et al. 2012

Bibliography for Patuxent (element references) Allard, D. J. 1990. Southeastern United States ecological community classification. Interim report, Version 1.2. The Nature Conservancy, Southeast Regional Office, Chapel Hill, NC. 96 pp. Allard, H. A., and E. C. Leonard. 1943. The vegetation and floristics of Bull Run Mountain, Virginia. Castanea 8:1-64. Ambrose, J. 1990a. Georgia's natural communities--A preliminary list. Unpublished document. Georgia Natural Heritage Inventory. 5 pp. Anderson, D. M. 1982. Plant communities of Ohio: A preliminary classification and description. Division of Natural Areas and Preserves, Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Columbus, OH. 182 pp. Andreu, M. G., and M. L. Tukman. 1995. Forest communities of the Tellico Lake Area, East Tennessee. M.F. project report, Duke University, School of the Environment. Durham, NC. 66 pp. plus appendices. Barrett, N., and R. Enser. 1997. Alluvial plant communities within the Wood-Pawcatuck Major Basin, Rhode Island, May 12, 1997. The Nature Conservancy, Connecticut Field office, Middletown, CT, and The Rhode Island Natural Heritage Program, Department of Environmental Management, Providence, RI. Bartgis, R. 1986. Natural community descriptions. Unpublished draft. Maryland Natural Heritage Program, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis. Berdine, M. A. 1998. Maryland vegetation classification. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD. Bernard, J. M., and F. A. Bernard. 1971. Mature upland forests of Cape May County, New Jersey. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club 98:167-171. Bowman, P. 2000. Draft classification for Delaware. Unpublished draft. Delaware Natural Heritage Program. Breden, T. F. 1989. A preliminary natural community classification for New Jersey. Pages 157-191 in: E. F. Karlin, editor. New Jersey's rare and endangered plants and animals. Institute for Environmental Studies, Ramapo College, Mahwah, NJ. 280 pp. Breden, T. F., Y. R. Alger, K. S. Walz, and A. G. Windisch. 2001. Classification of vegetation communities of New Jersey: Second iteration. Association for Biodiversity Information and New Jersey Natural Heritage Program, Office of Natural Lands Management, Division of Parks and Forestry, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Trenton. Burns, R. M., and B. H. Honkala, technical coordinators. 1990a. Silvics of North America: Volume 1. Conifers. Agriculture Handbook 654. USDA Forest Service, Washington, DC. 675 pp. Burns, R. M., and B. H. Honkala, technical coordinators. 1990b. Silvics of North America. Volume 2: Hardwoods. Agriculture Handbook 654. USDA Forest Service, Washington, DC. 877 pp. Byers, E. A., J. P. Vanderhorst, and B. P. Streets. 2007. Classification and conservation assessment of high elevation wetland communities in the Allegheny Mountains of West Virginia. West Virginia Natural Heritage Program, West Virginia Division of Natural Resources, Elkins. CAP [Central Appalachian Forest Working Group]. 1998. Central Appalachian Working group discussions. The Nature Conservancy, Boston, MA. Chapman, K. A., D. A. Albert, and G. A. Reese. 1989. Draft descriptions of Michigan's natural community types. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Lansing, MI. 35 pp. Clancy, K. 1993b. A preliminary classification of the natural communities of Delaware. Unpublished draft, Delaware Natural Heritage Inventory, Division of Parks and Recreation, Dover. 30 pp. Clancy, K. 1996. Natural communities of Delaware. Unpublished review draft. Delaware Natural Heritage Program, Division of Fish and Wildlife, Delaware Division of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Smyrna, DE. 52 pp. Collins, B. R., and K. H. Anderson. 1994. Plant communities of New Jersey. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, NJ. 287 pp. Coulling, P. P. 1999. Eastern hemlock inventory and assessment for Prince William Forest Park, Virginia. Natural Heritage Technical Report 99-08. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. 68 pp. plus appendices. Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS-79/31. USDI Fish & Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services, Washington, DC. 103 pp. Coxe, R. 2009. Guide to Delaware vegetation communities. Spring 2009 edition. State of Delaware, Division of Fish and Wildlife, Delaware Natural Heritage Program, Smyrna. Davis, A. F., S. B. Andersen, J. A. Lundgren, A. M. Wilkinson, J. R. Belfonti, J. R. Kunsman, and J. C. Stanosz. 1992. A natural areas inventory of Delaware County, Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Science Office of The Nature Conservancy, Middletown, PA. 110 pp. Davis, T. 2011f. Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program. Red Maple - Mixed Shrub Palustrine Woodland Factsheet. [http://www.naturalheritage.state.pa.us/Community.aspx?=16048] (accessed January 31, 2012)

Eastern Ecology Working Group of NatureServe. No date. International Ecological Classification Standard: International Vegetation Classification. Terrestrial Vegetation. NatureServe, Boston, MA. Edinger, G. J., A. L. Feldmann, T. G. Howard, J. J. Schmid, E. Eastman, E. Largay , and L. A. Sneddon. 2008a. Vegetation classification and mapping at Gateway National Recreation Area. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2008/107. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 283 pp. Edinger, G. J., A. L. Feldmann, T. G. Howard, J. J. Schmid, E. Eastman, E. Largay, and L. A. Sneddon. 2008b. Vegetation classification and mapping at Sagamore Hill National Historic Site, New York. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2008/124. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 126 pp. Edinger, G. J., D. J. Evans, S. Gebauer, T. G. Howard, D. M. Hunt, and A. M. Olivero, editors. 2002. Ecological communities of New York state. Second edition. A revised and expanded edition of Carol Reschke's ecological communities of New York state. (Draft for review). New York Natural Heritage Program, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Albany, NY. Ehrenfeld, J. G. 1977. Vegetation of Morristown National Historical Park: Ecological analysis and management alternatives. Final Report. USDI National Park Service Contract No. 1600-7-0004. 166 pp. Ehrenfeld, J. G., and M. Gulick. 1981. Structure and dynamics of hardwood swamps in the New Jersey Pine Barrens: Contrasting patterns in trees and shrubs. American Journal of Botany 68:471-481. Eichelberger, B. 2011a. Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program. Spatterdock - Water-lily Emergent Wetland Factsheet. [http://www.naturalheritage.state.pa.us/Community.aspx?=15996] (accessed February 13, 2012) Eichelberger, B. 2011o. Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program. Red Maple - Magnolia Palustrine Forest Factsheet. [http://www.naturalheritage.state.pa.us/Community.aspx?=16024] (accessed February 15, 2012) Elliman, T. 2003. Boston Harbor Islands plant communities. Report submitted to Massachusetts Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program, Massachusetts Division of Fisheries & Wildlife, Westborough. Enser, R. 1993. Natural community classification for Rhode Island (draft). Rhode Island Natural Heritage Program. Providence, RI. Enser, R. 1999. Natural communities of Rhode Island. Unpublished draft, December 1999. 22 pp. Eyre, F. H., editor. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and Canada. Society of American Foresters, Washington, DC. 148 pp. Faber-Langendoen, D., editor. 2001. Plant communities of the Midwest: Classification in an ecological context. Association for Biodiversity Information, Arlington, VA. 61 pp. plus appendix (705 pp.). Faller, A. 1975. The plant ecology of Mammoth Cave National Park, Kentucky. Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana State University, Terre Haute. Fike, J. 1999. Terrestrial and palustrine plant communities of Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory. Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Recreation, Bureau of Forestry, Harrisburg, PA. 86 pp. Fleming, G. P. 2001a. Community types of Coastal Plain calcareous ravines in Virginia. Preliminary analysis and classification. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond, VA. 4 pp. Fleming, G. P. 2002a. Ecological communities of the Bull Run Mountains, Virginia: Baseline vegetation and floristic data for conservation planning and natural area stewardship. Natural Heritage Technical Report 02-12, Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. Unpublished report prepared for Virginia Outdoors Foundation. 274 pp. plus appendices. Fleming, G. P. 2002b. Preliminary classification of Piedmont & inner Coastal Plain vegetation types in Virginia. Natural Heritage Technical Report 02-14. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. 29 pp. Fleming, G. P. 2007. Ecological communities of the Potomac Gorge in Virginia: Composition, floristics, and environmental dynamics. Natural Heritage Technical Report 07-12. Unpublished report submitted to the National Park Service. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. 341 pp. plus appendices. Fleming, G. P., and J. T. Weber. 2003. Inventory, classification, and map of forested ecological communities at Manassas National Battlefield Park, Virginia. Unpublished report submitted to the National Park Service. Natural Heritage Technical Report 03-07. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. 101 pp. plus appendix. Fleming, G. P., and K. D. Patterson. 2003. Preliminary vegetation classification for the National Capitol Region parks. Regional (VA-WVA-MD-DC) analysis prepared for NatureServe and USGS-NPS Vegetation Mapping Program, March 2003. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. Fleming, G. P., and K. D. Patterson. 2004. Natural community inventory of selected areas in the Northern Virginia Culpeper Basin, Fairfax, Loudoun, Prince William, Fauquier, and Culpeper counties. Unpublished report submitted to the Virginia Native Plant Society, Potowmack Chapter. Natural Heritage Technical Report 04-07. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. 21 pp. plus appendices.

Fleming, G. P., and K. D. Patterson. 2009a. A vegetation classification for the Appalachian Trail: Virginia south to Georgia. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage. In-house analysis, March 2009. Fleming, G. P., and K. D. Patterson. 2009b. Classification of selected Virginia montane wetland groups. In-house analysis, December 2009. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. Fleming, G. P., and K. D. Patterson. 2011a. Natural communities of Virginia: Ecological groups and community types. Natural Heritage Technical Report 11-07. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. 34 pp. Fleming, G. P., and K. D. Patterson. 2011b. Analysis of Coastal Plain/Outer Piedmont bottomlands and non-alluvial wetlands in Virginia, 400 plots. In-house analysis, January 2011. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. Fleming, G. P., and K. Taverna. 2006. Vegetation classification for the National Capitol Region parks, western region. Regional (VA-WVA-MD-DC) analysis prepared for NatureServe and USGS-NPS Vegetation Mapping Program, March 2006. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. Fleming, G. P., and P. P. Coulling. 2001. Ecological communities of the George Washington and Jefferson national forests, Virginia. Preliminary classification and description of vegetation types. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond, VA. 317 pp. Fleming, G. P., and W. H. Moorhead, III. 1996. Ecological land units of the Laurel Fork Area, Highland County, Virginia. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage. Natural Heritage Technical Report 96-08. Richmond. 114 pp. plus appendices. Fleming, G. P., and W. H. Moorhead, III. 1998. Comparative wetlands ecology study of the Great Dismal Swamp, Northwest River, and North Landing River in Virginia. Natural Heritage Technical Report 98-9. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. Unpublished report submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 181 pp. plus appendices. Fleming, G. P., and W. H. Moorhead, III. 2000. Plant communities and ecological land units of the Peter's Mountain area, James River Ranger District, George Washington and Jefferson national forests, Virginia. Natural Heritage Technical Report 00-07. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. Unpublished report submitted to the USDA Forest Service. 195 pp. plus appendices. Fleming, G. P., K. Taverna, and P. P. Coulling. 2007b. Vegetation classification for the National Capitol Region parks, eastern region. Regional (VA-MD-DC) analysis prepared for NatureServe and USGS-NPS Vegetation Mapping Program, March 2007. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. Fleming, G. P., P. P. Coulling, D. P. Walton, K. M. McCoy, and M. R. Parrish. 2001. The natural communities of Virginia: Classification of ecological community groups. First approximation. Natural Heritage Technical Report 01-1. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond, VA. Unpublished report. January 2001. 76 pp. Fleming, G. P., P. P. Coulling, K. D. Patterson, and K. M. McCoy. 2004. The natural communities of Virginia: Classification of ecological community groups. Second approximation. Natural Heritage Technical Report 04-01. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond, VA. [http://www.dcr.virginia.gov/dnh/ncintro.htm] Fleming, G. P., P. P. Coulling, K. D. Patterson, and K. Taverna. 2006. The natural communities of Virginia: Classification of ecological community groups. Second approximation. Version 2.2. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. [] Fleming, Gary P. Personal communication. Ecologist, Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond, VA. FNAI [Florida Natural Areas Inventory]. 1990. Guide to the natural communities of Florida. Florida Natural Areas Inventory and Florida Department of Natural Resources, Tallahassee. 111 pp. Foti, T., M. Blaney, X. Li, and K. G. Smith. 1994. A classification system for the natural vegetation of Arkansas. Proceedings of the Arkansas Academy of Science 48:50-53. Gallyoun, M., G. Meyer, A. Andreu, and W. Slocumb. 1996. Mapping vegetation communities with The Nature Conservancy's vegetation classification system on five small national parks in the southeastern USA. Unpublished report. The Nature Conservancy, Southeast Regional Office, Conservation Science Department, Chapel Hill, NC. Gawler, S. C. 2002. Natural landscapes of Maine: A guide to vegetated natural communities and ecosystems. Maine Natural Areas Program, Department of Conservation, Augusta, ME. Golet, F. C., A. J. K. Calhoun, W. R. DeRagon, D. J. Lowry, and A. J. Gold. 1993. Ecology of red maple swamps in the glaciated Northeast: A community profile. USDI Fish & Wildlife Service, Washington, DC. 151 pp. Grace, J. B., and R. G. Wetzel. 1981. Habitat partitioning and competitive displacement in cattail (Typha): Experimental field studies. The American Midland Naturalist 118:463-474. 46 Vegetation of Patuxent 15 February2012 Copyright © 2012 NatureServe

Grafton, W. N., and O. L. Eye. 1982. Vascular flora of eight selected West Virginia wetlands with special reference to rare species. Pages 107-115 in: Proceedings of the Symposium on Wetlands of the Unglaciated Appalachian Region. West Virginia University, Morgantown. Hall, R. L., and E. D. Mathews. 1974. Soil survey of Charles County, Maryland. U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. Washington, DC. Harrison, J. W. 2011. The natural communities of Maryland: 2011 working list of ecological community groups and community types. Unpublished report. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife and Heritage Service, Natural Heritage Program, Annapolis. 33 pp. Harrison, J. W., and P. Stango, III. 2003. Shrubland tidal wetland communities of Maryland's Eastern Shore: Identification, assessment and monitoring. Maryland Natural Heritage Program, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis. 118 pp. Harrison, J. W., compiler. 2004. Classification of vegetation communities of Maryland: First iteration. A subset of the International Classification of Ecological Communities: Terrestrial Vegetation of the United States, NatureServe. Maryland Natural Heritage Program, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis. 243 pp. Harrison, Jason W. Personal communication. State Community Ecologist, Maryland Wildlife and Heritage Division, Department of Natural Resources, Tawes State Office Building, E-1, Annapolis, MD 21401. Harvill, A. M., Jr. 1967. The vegetation of Assateague Island, Virginia. Castanea 32:105-108. Heckscher, S. 1994. The vegetation of the Glades Region, Cumberland County, New Jersey. Bartonia 58:101-113. Hill, S. R. 1986. An annotated checklist of the vascular flora of Assateague Island (Maryland and Virginia). Castanea 5:265-305. Hoagland, B. 2000. The vegetation of Oklahoma: A classification for landscape mapping and conservation planning. The Southwestern Naturalist 45(4):385-420. Hoagland, B. W. 1998c. Oklahoma riparian vegetation. In: A. Fallon and M. Smolen, editors. Riparian area management handbook. Publication number E-952. Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater. Hop, K., S. Lubinski, and S. Menard. 2005. U.S. Geological Survey-National Park Service Vegetation Mapping Program, Effigy Mounds National Monument, Iowa. USDI U.S. Geological Survey, La Crosse, WI. 202 pp. Hop, K., S. Lubinski, J. Dieck, J. Drake, and S. Menard. 2009. National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program: Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, Indiana. USDI U.S. Geological Survey, La Crosse, WI, and NatureServe, St. Paul, MN. 312 pp. Hopping, R. 2000. Property Profile (World's End). The Trustees of Reservations. Beverly, MA. Hunt, D. M. 1999. Natural community descriptions and specifications: Communities known or suspected from Adirondack Nature Conservancy. Unpublished report. New York Natural Heritage Program, Albany, NY. 272 pp. INAI [Iowa Natural Areas Inventory]. No date. Vegetation classification of Iowa. Iowa Natural Areas Inventory, Iowa Department of Natural Resources, Des Moines. Jones, S. M., D. H. Van Lear, and S. K. Cox. 1981b. Major forest community types of the Savannah River Plant: A field guide. USDE Savannah River Plant, National Environmental Research Park Program. Report No. SRO-NERP-9. 79 pp. plus 24 illustrations. Karanaukas, M. 2001. A survey of the aquatic invertebrates of the Boston Harbor Islands. Report to the Island Alliance, National Park Service, and the Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program. Keever, C. 1973. Distribution of major forest species in southeastern Pennsylvania. Ecological Monographs 43:303-327. Largay, E. F., and L. A. Sneddon. 2008. Vegetation classification and mapping at Saugus Iron Works National Historic Site. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2008/123. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 111 pp. Lea, C. 2000. Plant communities of the Potomac Gorge and their relationship to fluvial factors. M.S. thesis, George Mason University. Fairfax, VA. 219 pp. Lea, C. 2003. Vegetation types in the National Capital Region Parks. Draft for review by NatureServe, Virginia Natural Heritage, West Virginia Natural Heritage, Maryland Natural Heritage, and National Park Service. March 2003. 140 pp. Lea, C. 2004. Draft vegetation types in National Capital Region Parks. Edited by S.C. Gawler and J. Teague. Working draft for review by NatureServe, Virginia Natural Heritage, West Virginia Natural Heritage, Maryland Natural Heritage, and National Park Service. July 2004. 157 pp. Lea, C., and E. T. Riley. 2005. Relationship of groundwater pH to floristic composition of seepage swamps in the Blue Ridge, Piedmont, and inner Coastal Plain of Maryland, the District of Columbia, and northern Virginia. Unpublished report submitted to the National Park Service, National Capital Region. 9 pp. plus appendices. Lubinski, S., K. Hop, and S. Gawler. 2003. Vegetation Mapping Program: Acadia National Park, Maine. Report produced by U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center, and Maine Natural Areas Program in conjunction with M. Story (NPS Vegetation Mapping Coordinator) NPS, Natural Resources Information Division, Inventory and Monitoring Program, and K. Brown (USGS Vegetation Mapping Coordinator), USGS, Center for Biological Informatics and NatureServe. [http://biology.usgs.gov/npsveg/ftp/vegmapping/acad/reports/acadrpt.pdf] 47 Vegetation of Patuxent 15 February2012 Copyright © 2012 NatureServe

Luken, J. O. 2003. Invasions of forests in the eastern United States. Pages 283-301 in: F. S. Gilliam and M. R. Roberts, editors. The herbaceous layer in forests of eastern North America. Oxford University Press, New York. McCormick, J. 1979. The vegetation of the New Jersey Pine Barrens. In: R. T. T. Formann, editor. Pine Barrens: Ecosystem and landscape. Academic Press, New York. McCoy, K. M., and G. P. Fleming. 2000. Ecological communities of U.S. Army Garrison, Fort Belvoir, Fort Belvoir, Virginia. Natural Heritage Technical Report 00-08, Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. Unpublished report submitted to the U.S. Army. 156 pp. plus appendices. McCrain, G. R., and B. H. Church. 1985. An analysis of past and present plant community patterns in Moores Creek National Battlefield along with associated impacts affecting distribution and restoration. Prepared by Resource Management Co., Raleigh, NC, under Purchase Order Number PX-5550-3-0062 for the USDI, National Park Service, Southeast Regional Office, Atlanta, GA. Meininger, J. 1998. Forest communities of Zekiah Swamp Nontidal Wetland of Special State Concern. Wildlife and Heritage Division, Maryland Department of Natural Resources. Annapolis, MD. Meininger, J., and K. McCarthy. 1998. Forest communities of Zekiah Swamp nontidal wetland of special state concern. Unpublished report. Maryland Department of Natural Resources Wildlife and Heritage Division, Annapolis. Metzler, K. J., and J. P. Barrett. 2001. Vegetation classification for Connecticut. Draft 5/21/2001. Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Natural Resources Center, Natural Diversity Database, Hartford. Metzler, K. J., J. P. Barrett, T. E. Nosal, W. A. Millinor, and L. A. Sneddon. 2009. Vegetation classification and mapping at Weir Farm National Historic Site, Connecticut. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2008/130. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 128 pp. Midwestern Ecology Working Group of NatureServe. No date. International Ecological Classification Standard: International Vegetation Classification. Terrestrial Vegetation. NatureServe, Minneapolis, MN. MNNHP [Minnesota Natural Heritage Program]. 1993. Minnesota's native vegetation: A key to natural communities. Version 1.5. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Natural Heritage Program, St. Paul, MN. 110 pp. Moore, B., and N. Taylor. 1927. An ecological study of the vegetation of Mount Desert Island, Maine. Brooklyn Botanical Garden Memoirs 3:1-151. Naczi, R. F. C., C. T. Bryson, and T. S. Cochrane. 2002. Seven new species and one new combination in Carex (Cyperaceae) from North America. Novon 12:508-532. NAP [Northern Appalachian-Boreal Forest Working Group]. 1998. Northern Appalachian-Boreal Working group discussions. The Nature Conservancy, Boston, MA. NatureServe Ecology - Southeastern United States. No date. Unpublished data. NatureServe, Durham, NC. NatureServe. 2005. Upper Anacostia Watershed: Plant communities of conservation significance. Unpublished report. NatureServe, Arlington, VA. 12 pp. plus appendices. Nelson, J. B. 1986. The natural communities of South Carolina: Initial classification and description. South Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources Department, Division of Wildlife and Freshwater Fisheries, Columbia, SC. 55 pp. Nelson, P. W. 1985. The terrestrial natural communities of Missouri. Missouri Natural Areas Committee, Jefferson City. 197 pp. Revised edition, 1987. Nichols, W. F., J. M. Hoy, and D. D. Sperduto. 2001. Open riparian communities and riparian complexes in New Hampshire. New Hampshire Natural Heritage Inventory, DRED Division of Forests and Lands, Concord, NH. 82 pp. plus appendices. Northern Appalachian Ecology Working Group. 2000. Northern Appalachian/Boreal Ecoregion community classification (Review Draft). The Nature Conservancy, Eastern Conservation Science Center, Boston, MA. 117 pp. plus appendices. NRCS [Natural Resources Conservation Service]. 2001b. Soil survey of Gateway National Recreation Area, New York and New Jersey. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service and USDI National Park Service, Gateway National Recreation Area in partnership with Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station and New York City Soil and Water Conservation District. NRCS [Natural Resources Conservation Service]. 2004a. Soil survey of Saratoga County, New York. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service. 590 pp. Overlease, W. R. 1987. 150 years of vegetation change in Chester County, Pennsylvania. Bartonia 53:1-12. Patterson, K. D. 2008a. Vegetation classification and mapping at Appomattox Court House National Historical Park, Virginia. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2008/125. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. Patterson, K. D. 2008b. Vegetation classification and mapping at Booker T. Washington National Monument, Virginia. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2008/100. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 173 pp. Patterson, K. D. 2008c. Vegetation classification and mapping at Colonial National Historical Park, Virginia. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2008/129. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 369 pp.

Patterson, K. D. 2008d. Vegetation classification and mapping at George Washington Birthplace National Monument, Virginia. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2008/099. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 231 pp. Patterson, K. D. 2008e. Vegetation classification and mapping at Petersburg National Battlefield, Virginia. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2008/127. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 235 pp. Patterson, K. D. 2008f. Vegetation classification and mapping at Richmond National Battlefield Park, Virginia. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2008/128. National Park Service. Philadelphia, PA. 244 pp. Patterson, K. D., C. J. Ulrey, and J. Drake. 1999. Vegetation classification of Great Smoky Mountains National Park: Cades Cove and Mount Le Conte quadrangles. Unpublished report submitted to BRD-NPS Vegetation Mapping Program. The Nature Conservancy, Chapel Hill, NC. Patterson, Karen D. Personal communication. Ecologist, Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond, VA. Peet, R. K., T. R. Wentworth, M. P. Schafale, and A.S. Weakley. No date. Unpublished data of the North Carolina Vegetation Survey. University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Penfound, W. T. 1953. Plant communities of Oklahoma lakes. Ecology 34:561-583. Perles, S. J., G. S. Podniesinski, E. A. Zimmerman, E. Eastman, and L. A. Sneddon. 2006d. Vegetation classification and mapping at Allegheny Portage Railroad National Historic Site. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2006/079. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. Perles, S. J., G. S. Podniesinski, E. A. Zimmerman, W. A. Millinor, and L. A. Sneddon. 2006b. Vegetation classification and mapping at Friendship Hill National Historic Site. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2006/041. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 113 pp. Perles, S. J., G. S. Podniesinski, E. Eastman, L. A. Sneddon, and S. C. Gawler. 2007. Classification and mapping of vegetation and fire fuel models at Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2007/076. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 2 volumes. Perles, S. J., G. S. Podniesinski, M. Furedi, B. A. Eichelberger, A. Feldmann, G. Edinger, E. Eastman, and L. A. Sneddon. 2008. Vegetation classification and mapping at Upper Delaware Scenic and Recreational River. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2008/133. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 370 pp. Perles, S. J., G. S. Podniesinski, W. A. Millinor, and L. A. Sneddon. 2006c. Vegetation classification and mapping at Gettysburg National Military Park and Eisenhower National Historic Park. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2006/058. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. Podniesinski, G. S., L. A. Sneddon, J. Lundgren, H. Devine, B. Slocumb, and F. Koch. 2005b. Vegetation classification and mapping of Valley Forge National Historical Park. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2005/028. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 129 pp. Putnam, N. [1995]. Plant communities of the Meadow River wetlands. Final report submitted to the West Virginia Division of Natural Resources. Pyle, L. L. 1995. Effects of disturbance on herbaceous exotic plant species on floodplain of the Potomac River. American Midland Naturalist 134:244-253. Pyne, M. 1994. Tennessee natural communities. Unpublished document. Tennessee Department of Conservation, Ecology Service Division, Nashville. 7 pp. Rawinski, T. 1984. Natural community description abstract - southern New England calcareous seepage swamp. Unpublished report. The Nature Conservancy, Boston, MA. 6 pp. Rawinski, T. J., G. P. Fleming, and F. V. Judge. 1994. Forest vegetation of the Ramsey's Draft and Little Laurel Run Research Natural Areas, Virginia: Baseline ecological monitoring and classification. Natural Heritage Technical Report 94-14. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. 45 pp. plus appendices. Rawinski, T. J., K. N. Hickman, J. Waller-Eling, G. P. Fleming, C. S. Austin, S. D. Helmick, C. Huber, G. Kappesser, F. C. Huber, Jr., T. Bailey, and T. K. Collins. 1996. Plant communities and ecological land units of the Glenwood Ranger District, George Washington and Jefferson national forests, Virginia. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage. Natural Heritage Technical Report 96-20. Richmond. 65 pp. plus appendices. Reschke, C. 1990. Ecological communities of New York State. New York Natural Heritage Program. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Latham, NY. 96 pp. Robichaud, B., and M. F. Buell. 1973. Vegetation of New Jersey. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, NJ. 340 pp.

Rossell, C. R., Jr., S. Patch and S. Salmons. 2007. Effects of deer browsing on native and non-native vegetation in a mixed oak-beech forest on the Atlantic Coastal Plain. Northeastern Naturalist 14(1):61-72. [http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3845/is_200701/ai_n19198307 ] (accessed March 3, 2009). Russell, E. W. B., and A. E. Schuyler. 1988. Vegetation and flora of Hopewell Furnace National Historic Site, eastern Pennsylvania. Bartonia 54:124-143. Schafale, M. P. 2011. Classification of the natural communities of North Carolina, 4th Approximation. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Division of Parks and Recreation, Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh. Schafale, M. P., and A. S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the natural communities of North Carolina. Third approximation. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Division of Parks and Recreation, Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh. 325 pp. Schmalzer, P. A., and H. R. DeSelm. 1982. Vegetation, endangered and threatened plants, critical plant habitats and vascular flora of the Obed Wild and Scenic River. Unpublished report. USDI National Park Service, Obed Wild and Scenic River. 2 volumes. 369 pp. Schotz, Al. Personal communication. Community Ecologist. Alabama Natural Heritage Program. Huntingdon College, Massey Hall, 1500 East Fairview Avenue, Montgomery, AL 36106-2148. Shreve, F., M. A. Chrysler, F. H. Blodgett, and F. W. Besley. 1910. The plant life of Maryland. Maryland Weather Service. Special Publication, Volume III. The Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, MD. 533 pp. Sigafoos, R. S. 1976. Relations among surficial materials, light intensity, and sycamore-seed germination along the Potomac River near Washington, D.C. Journal of Research of the U.S. Geological Survey 4:733-736. Sipple, W. S., and W. A. Klockner. 1984. Uncommon wetlands in Coastal Plain of Maryland. Pages 111-137 in: A. W. Norden, et al., editors. Threatened and endangered plants and animals of Maryland. Special Publication 84-I. Maryland Natural Heritage Program. Smith, L. M., compiler. 1996a. Natural plant communities in Louisiana currently recognized by the Louisiana Natural Heritage Program. Unpublished document. Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, Natural Heritage Program, Baton Rouge. 2 pp. Smith, T. L. 1983. Natural ecological communities of Pennsylvania. Draft, revised 1991. Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory, Middletown, PA. Sneddon, L., M. Anderson, and K. Metzler. 1996. Community alliances and elements of the Eastern Region. Unpublished report. The Nature Conservancy, Eastern Heritage Task Force, Boston, MA. 235 pp. Soil Conservation Service. 1987. Soil survey of Nassau County, New York. USDA Soil Conservation Service. 156 pp. Southeastern Ecology Working Group of NatureServe. No date. International Ecological Classification Standard: International Vegetation Classification. Terrestrial Vegetation. NatureServe, Durham, NC. Sperduto, D. D. 2000a. Natural communities of New Hampshire: A guide and classification. Near final unformatted draft without pictures and illustrations; includes upland classification. New Hampshire Natural Heritage Inventory, DRED Division of Forests and Lands, Concord, NH. 127 pp. Sperduto, D. D. 2000b. A classification of wetland natural communities in New Hampshire. New Hampshire Natural Heritage Inventory, Department of Resources and Economic Development, Division of Forests and Lands. Concord, NH. 156 pp. Sperduto, D. D., and W. F. Nichols. 2004. Natural communities of New Hampshire: A guide and classification. New Hampshire Natural Heritage Inventory, DRED Division of Forests and Lands, Concord. 242 pp. Swain, P. C., and J. B. Kearsley. 2001. Classification of natural communities of Massachusetts. September 2001 draft. Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program, Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife. Westborough, MA. Taverna, K. and K. D. Patterson. 2008. Vegetation classification and mapping at Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park, Virginia. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR-2008/126. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 277 pp. TDNH [Tennessee Division of Natural Heritage]. No date. Unpublished data. Tennessee Division of Natural Heritage, 14th Floor, L&C Tower, 401 Church Street, Nashville, TN 37243-0447. 615-532-0431 Thompson, E. 1996. Natural communities of Vermont uplands and wetland. Nongame and Natural Heritage Program, Department of Fish and Wildlife in cooperation with The Nature Conservancy, Vermont chapter. 34 pp. Thompson, E. H., and E. R. Sorenson. 2000. Wetland, woodland, wildland: A guide to the natural communities of Vermont. The Nature Conservancy and the Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife. University Press of New England, Hanover, NH. 456 pp. Thompson, E., and J. Jenkins. 1992. Summary of field data from Minuteman National Park plant communities study. A report prepared under a contract with the Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program for the National Park Service. 39 pp. 50 Vegetation of Patuxent 15 February2012 Copyright © 2012 NatureServe

Thomson, D., A. M. Gould, and M. A. Berdine. 1999. Identification and protection of reference wetland natural communities in Maryland: Potomac watershed floodplain forests. The Biodiversity Program, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife and Heritage Division. Annapolis. 119 pp. TNC [The Nature Conservancy]. 1998a. An investigation and assessment of the vegetation of Arnold Air Force Base. Coffee and Franklin counties, Tennessee. The Nature Conservancy, Tennessee Field Office, Nashville. 37 pp. plus appendices. TNC [The Nature Conservancy]. 1998c. Vegetation Classification of Rock Creek Park. Report for the NBS/NPS Vegetation Mapping Program. The Nature Conservancy, Boston. 50 pp. Vanderhorst, J. 2000b. Plant communities of Harper's Ferry National Historical Park: Analysis, characterization, and mapping. West Virginia Natural Heritage Program, West Virginia Division of Natural Resources, Elkins, WV. 37 pp. Vanderhorst, J. 2001a. Plant community classification and mapping of the Camp Dawson Collective Training Area, Preston County, West Virginia. West Virginia Natural Heritage Program, West Virginia Division of Natural Resources, Elkins. 101 pp. Vanderhorst, J. 2001b. Plant communities of the New River Gorge National River, West Virginia: Northern and southern thirds. Non-game Wildlife and Natural Heritage Program, West Virginia Division of Natural Resources. Elkins. 146 pp. Vanderhorst, J. P., B. P. Streets, J. Jeuck, and S. C. Gawler. 2008. Vegetation classification and mapping of Bluestone National Scenic River, West Virginia. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2008/106. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. Vanderhorst, J. P., B. P. Streets, Z. Arcaro, and S. C. Gawler. 2010. Vegetation classification and mapping at Gauley River National Recreation Area. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2010/148. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. Vanderhorst, J. P., J. Jeuck, and S. C. Gawler. 2007. Vegetation classification and mapping of New River Gorge National River, West Virginia. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR-2007/092. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 396 pp. Vanderhorst, J., and B. P. Streets. 2006. Vegetation classification and mapping of Camp Dawson Army Training Site, West Virginia: Second approximation. Natural Heritage Program, West Virginia Division of Natural Resources, Elkins. 83 pp. VDNH [Virginia Division of Natural Heritage]. 2003. The natural communities of Virginia: Hierarchical classification of community types. Unpublished document, working list of November 2003. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Ecology Group, Richmond. Walbridge, M. R. 1982. Vegetation patterning and community distribution in four high-elevation headwater wetlands in West Virginia. M.S. thesis, West Virginia University, Morgantown. Walbridge, M. R., and G. E. Lang. 1982. Major plant communities and patterns of community distribution in four wetlands of the unglaciated Appalachian region. In: R. B. MacDonald, editor. Proceedings of the Symposium on Wetlands of the Unglaciated Appalachian Region. West Virginia University, Morgantown. Walton, D. P., C. M. Jesse, and N. J. Putnam. 1996. Plant communities of the Ohio River riparian zone. Natural Heritage Program, West Virginia Division of Natural Resources, Elkins. Walton, D. P., P. P. Coulling, J. Weber, A. Belden, Jr., and A. C. Chazal. 2001. A plant community classification and natural heritage inventory of the Pamunkey River floodplain. Unpublished report submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Natural Heritage Technical Report 01-19. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. 200 pp. plus appendices. Wharton, C. H. 1978. The natural environments of Georgia. Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Atlanta. 227 pp. White, R. D., Jr., and M. Pyne. 2003. Vascular plant inventory and plant community classification for Guilford Courthouse National Military Park. Prepared for the National Park Service. NatureServe, Southeast Regional Office, Durham, NC. 124 pp. Wichmann, B. 2009. Vegetation of geographically isolated montane non-alluvial wetlands of the Southern Blue Ridge of North Carolina. Masters thesis, North Carolina State, Raleigh. [http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/theses/available/etd-05152009-120239/unrestricted/etd.pdf] Windisch, A. G. 1995b. Natural community inventory of Fort Dix, New Jersey. The Nature Conservancy report. New Jersey Natural Heritage Program, Office of Natural Lands Management. Trenton, NJ. 81 pp. WNHIP [Wisconsin Natural Heritage Inventory Program]. No date. Vegetation classification of Wisconsin and unpublished data. Wisconsin Natural Heritage Program, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Madison. Young, J., G. Fleming, P. Townsend, and J. Foster. 2006. Vegetation of Shenandoah National Park in relation to environmental gradients. Final Report v.1.1. Research technical report prepared for USDI, National Park Service. USGS/NPS Vegetation Mapping Program. 92 pp. plus appendices. Young, J., G. Fleming, P. Townsend, and J. Foster. 2007. Vegetation of Shenandoah National Park in relation to environmental gradients. Final Report, volume 1.1. Unpublished report submitted to the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 103 pp. plus appendices and GIS products. Young, J., G. Fleming, W. Cass, and C. Lea. 2009. Vegetation of Shenandoah National Park in relation to environmental gradients, Version 2.0. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2009/142. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA. 389 pp. Zanoni, T. A., P. G. Risser, and I. H. Butler. 1979. Natural areas for Oklahoma. Oklahoma Natural Heritage Program, Norman. 72 pp. 51 Vegetation of Patuxent 15 February2012 Copyright © 2012 NatureServe

Zimmerman, E. A. 2011l. Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program. Sycamore - Mixed Hardwood Floodplain Forest Factsheet. [http://www.naturalheritage.state.pa.us/Community.aspx?=30019] (accessed January 31, 2012) Zimmerman, E. A. 2011m. Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program. Sycamore Floodplain Forest Factsheet. [http://www.naturalheritage.state.pa.us/Community.aspx?=16025] (accessed January 31, 2012) Zimmerman, E. A., T. Davis, M. A. Furedi, B. Eichelberger, J. McPherson, S. Seymour, G. Podniesinski, N. Dewar, and J. Wagner, editors. 2012. Terrestrial and palustrine plant communities of Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program, Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Harrisburg, PA.