DOCSLIB.ORG

Growth and Recovery of Oak-Saw Palmetto Scrub Through Ten Years After Fire Paul A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Growth and Recovery of Oak-Saw Palmetto Scrub Through Ten Years After Fire Paul A Growth and Recovery of Oak-Saw Palmetto Scrub through Ten Years After Fire Paul A. SChmalzer RESEARCH ARTICLE ABSTRACT: Oak-saw palmetto scrub, a shrub community of acid, sandy, well-drained soils in Florida, is maintained by periodic, intense fIre. Understanding the direction and rates of changes in scrub composition and structure after fire is important to management decisions. We followed changes in vegeta.tion along 15Cm linecintercepttransects that were established in 1983. Two stands (8 transects) burned in a prescribed fire in December 1986; the stands had previously burned 11 y (N=4) and 7 y (N=4) before. We sampled transects at 6, 12, 18, and 24 rna and then annually through 10 y after the • 1986 fire. We measured cover by species in two height classes, > 0.5 m and < 0.5 m, and measured height at four points (0, 5, 10, and 15 m) along each transect. Saw palmetto cover equaled preburn values by· one year postburn and changed little after that. Cover of oaks > 0.5 m (Quercus myrtifolia, Q. Growth and geminata, Q. chapmanii) equaled preburn values by 5 y postburn and changed little by 10 Y postburn. Height growth continued, increasing from a mean of 84.0 cm at 5 y to 125.9 cm at 10 y postburn. Bare ground declined to <2% by 3 Y postburn. Plant species richness increased slightly after fire and then Recovery of Oak­ gradually declined. These vegetation changes alter habitat conditions for threatened and endangered Saw Pal metto Scrub animals and plants. Crecimiento y Recuperaci6n del 'Oak-Saw Palmetto Scrub' Durante Diez Anos through Ten Years Despues del Fuego RESUMEN: EI 'Oak-saw palmetto scrub' es una comunidad de arbustos de suelos :kidos, arenosos y After Fire bien drenados en Florida, mantenidos por fuegos peri6dicos e intensos. Conocer la direcci6n y las tasa de cambio en la composici6n y la estructura del matorral despues del fuego es. irnportante para las decisiones de manejo. Seguimos los cambios en la vegetaci6n a 10 largo de transectas de intersecci6n linear de 15 m que fueron establecidas en 1983. Dos lotes (8 transectas) quemadas en un fuego Paul A. Schmalzerl programado en Diciembre 1986; los lotes fueron quemados previamente hacia 11 afios (N=4) y 7 afios Dynamac Corporation (N=4). Muestreamos las transectas a los 6, 12, 18 Y 24 meses y luego anualmente durante 10 afios Mail Code DYN-2 despues del fuego de 1986. Medimos la cobertura de las especies en dos c1ases de altura, >0,5m y <0,5 m, y medimos la altura en cuatro puntos (0, 5, 10 y 15 m) a 10 largo de cada transecta. La cobertura post Kennedy Space Center, FL 32899 USA fuego de 'saw palmetto' se igua16 a la cobertura pre quema al afio y cambi6 poco despues de eso. La cobertura de robles >0,5 m (Quercus myrtifolia, Q. geminata, Q. chapmanii) igual6 los valores previos a las 5 afios y cambi6 muy poco hasta los 10 afios posteriores a la quema. EI crecimiento en altura • continuR aumentando, de una media de 84 cm a los 5 afios a 125,9 cm a los 10 afios posteriores a la quema. El suelo descubierto disminuy6 a <2% durante 3 afios posteriores a la quema. La riqueza de especies de plantas aument6 levemente despues del fuego y luego gradualmente disminuy6. Estos cambios en la vegetaci6n alteraron las condiciones para los animales y plantas amenazados 0 en peligro. Index terms: Florida scrub, prescribed burning, vegetation recovery INTRODUCTION ment of presuppression conditions in all landscapes (Abrahamson and Abraham­ Florida scrub is a rare and declining eco­ son 1996a, 1996b; Duncan et al. 1999). system (Myers 1990, Menges 1999) and is Long-unbmned scrub may become fIre­ habitat for a number of threatened and resistant and require combinations of me­ endangered plant and animal species chanical treatment and bmning for resto­ (Christman and Judd 1990, Stout and ration (Schmalzer and Boyle 1998, Marion 1993, Stout 2001). Management Schmalzer and Adrian 2001). of remaining scrub is critical to the surviv­ al of these species. Scrub is. a fIre-main- Florida scrub is characterized by evergreen, . tainedsystem (Myers-1990, Menges 1999), xeromorphic shrubs including oaks (QueT" . but landscape fragmentation and fIre sup­ cus L. spp.), repent palms (Serenoa repens pression have reduced fIre size and fre­ [W. Bartram] Small, Sabal etonia Swingle quency (Myers 1990, Duncan and ex Nash), and ericaceous shrubs (Lyonia 1 Author e-mail: Schmalzer 2001). Prescribed burning is spp., Vaccinium spp.). Scrub ecosystems [email protected] the primary management technique for vary regionally (Myers 1990, Schmalzer scrub reserves (Menges 1999); however, et al. 1999) and along local environmental Natilral Areas Journal 23:5-13 prescribed burning after decades of fIre gradients (Abrahamson et al. 1984, suppression does not result in reestablish- Schmalzer and Hinkle 1992b). Specific Volume 23 (1),2003 Natural Areas Journal 5 types of scrub include sand pine scrub, anN '<1"1.0«: r<)t-r<)0\ 00 oak scrub, rosemary scrub, and scrubby t- Ic.ic<i I INN I-Dtri...:t...:tc.ic.i flatwoods (Myers 1990, Abrahamson and ......-4 ,.....-4 ('f') ('1") Hartnett 1990). r<)~ O\anO\an "! OONO Recovery of oak scrub and scrubby flat­ Ic<i-D_ 1-D-D...:t00r<) r<) I - INN t.--= woods after fire is primarily through sprout­ -N - ing and, in some species, clonal spread of the dominant shrubs (Abrahamson 1984a, r<)OON t-r<)0 00\"'<f;~ o t- Ic.iNc.i~N:dN It.--=trir<)­ 0\ 1984b; Schmalzer and Hinkle 1992a; - r<) r<) Menges and Hawkes 1998). An understanding of the direction and rates an r<) r<)~'<I" t-t"-:anan NNNr<)O 0\ 00 I c.iN c<ian...:t Itrian-D-D 'c.ic.ifi8t.--= 0\ of changes in scrub composition and struc­ '!""""I '!""""I M ('1j ture after fIre is important to management -- decisions. In this study, we examined "'<f;'<I" t-O\V"J 000\'<1"0 '<I" r<)l.Oan an changes in scrub community composition 00 I c<i I I c<i-Dr<) l...:ttrit.--=t.--= c.ic.i~~t.--= c.i and structure with data from permanent '!""""I '!""""I C"f') ("t") - transects sampled for 10 y after burning. - Previously, we reported on the fIrst 3 y of Or<) ~~'<I" oot"-:O\'<I" 1.0 o recovery (Schmalzer and Hinkle 1992a). 00 I...:tN I c.ir<)OON I ...:tanNN_ r<) r<) I c.i c.i- STUDY AREA NOOt- oot-anO\ 1c<ir<)N Ic<iN-Do\ Ic.i This study was conducted in an inland '!""""I '!""""I N C't area on the central part of Kennedy Space CenterlMerritt Island National Wildlife Refuge (KSCIMINWR) on the east coast ~ t- "'<f;'<I"1.O 1.0 1.0 I-NN I c<i-t.--=-D I c.i ItriO\-D of central Florida (28°38' N, 80°42' W). The ......-4 '!""""I '!""""I C"l 00 1.0 climate is warm and humid; precipitation averages 131 cm y-l, but year-to-year vari­ '<1"1.0 0\ ability is high (Mailander 1990). Summer ooc.iNc.i I 0\ thunderstorms are common. Scrub at this site occurs on Pomello sand (Arenie Hap­ lohumod), a moderately well drained, t-r<)t"-:8,,!r<)t-'<I" sandy, acid soil (Huckle et al. 1974) low in Ic.ic<i c.i t.--=t.--=c<ir<) nutrients (Schmalzer and Hinkle 1992b, 1996; Schmalzer et al. 2001). The scrub type represented here is oak-saw palmetto scrub-the predominant scrub type on KSCIMINWR, along with scrubby flat­ woods that have an open pine (Pinus el­ liottii Engelm. var. densa Little & Dor­ '<I" an an 00 I Ic.i IN c.i man) canopy (Schrnalzer et al. 1999). The - stands we studied lack pine. Myrtle oak (Quercus myrtifolia Willd.), sand live oak 0\ 00 (Quercus geminata Small), Chapman oak O\~I.O NO,,!V"J an Nanc.i Itri...:tr<)-_ r<) r<) I '88-D 00 (Quercus chapmanii Sarg.), saw palmetto, -- and erieaceous shrubs such as fetterbush (e.g., Lyonia spp.) are the dominant spe­ cies (Schmalzer and Hinkle 1992a, 1992b). METHODS A December 1986 prescribed fIre burned 10 transects in two scrub stands. We had 6 Natural Areas Journal Volume 23 (1),2003 established 15-m line-intercept 8N~8 r-"" transects in these stands origi­ ION 0 I 0 0 nally in January 1983 and resa­ mpled them in January 1985. The two stands were 11 y (N=4) and 00 1.0 0\ 7 y (N=6) from the previous fire. I~O I 10 We sampled cover of vascular plants by species on the burned transects at 6, 12, 18, and 24 mo ~c-r: tr) 0 ........... 1100 IN I postfire and then annually through ten years after the 1986 fire. Cover by species was sam­ pled in 0-0.5 m and 0.5 m ...... > 001 lvi height layers (Muelller-Dombois and Ellenberg 1974); cover was estimated to the nearest 5 cm. o <,)""""",,8 V) "" Bare ground was recorded when e 000 0000 I~O there was no plant cover in ei­ ~ ther height strata. Nonvascular plants (mosses, lichens) were "" ...... 8r-~N ...... ~o ............ ~ uncommon at this site. We re­ 001 10000 NO I ...... N000 I corded vegetation height at four points (0, 5, 10, and 15 m) along each transect. Previous analysis ~N ...... r-'N 1.0 Nerioocio I leri (Schmalzer and Hinkle 1992a, 1992b) indicated that two transects were wetter and had ~ little or no cover of scrub oaks; Nr-Or-O 1.0 1.0 V) V) 000~0""'00 I 0 I leri 100\ those transects are not consid­ V) ered here.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Lake Harney Wilderness Area Land Management Plan
    Lake Harney Wilderness Area Land Management Plan 2010 LAKE HARNEY WILDERNESS AREA LAND MANAGEMENT PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 WILDERNESS AREA OVERVIEW .............................................................................................................................. 1 REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE .................................................................................................................................................. 1 ACQUISITION HISTORY ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 NATURAL RESOURCES OVERVIEW ......................................................................................................................... 4 NATURAL COMMUNITIES.................................................................................................................................................. 4 FIRE ............................................................................................................................................................................. 5 WILDLIFE ...................................................................................................................................................................... 5 EXOTICS .......................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Louisiana Certified Habitat Plant List Native Woody Plants (Trees
    Louisiana Certified Habitat Plant List Native Woody Plants (trees, shrubs, woody vines) Common name Scientific name Stewartia Gum, Swamp Black Nyssa biflora Camellia, Silky malacodendron Acacia, Sweet Acacia farnesiana Catalpa Gum, Tupelo Nyssa aquatica Liquidambar Alder, Black/Hazel Alnus rugosa Catalpa, Southern bignonioides Gum, Sweet styriciflua Allspice, Carolina/ Cedar, Eastern Red Juniperus virginiana Sweet Shrub Calycanthus floridus Cedar, Hackberry Celtis laevigata Ashes, Native Fraxinus spp. Atlantic/Southern Chamaecyparis Hawthorn, Native Crataegus spp. White thyoides Hawthorn, Barberry- Ash, Green F. pennsylvanicum Cherry, Black Prunus serotina leaf C. berberifolia Ash, Carolina F. caroliniana Hawthorn, Cherry, Choke Aronia arbutifolia Ash, Pumpkin F. profunda Blueberry C. brachycantha Cherry-laurel Prunus caroliniana Hawthorn, Green C. viridis Ash, White F. americana Chinquapin Castanea pumila Hawthorn, Mayhaw C. aestivalis/opaca Rhododendron Coralbean, Azalea, Pink canescens Eastern/Mamou Erythrina herbacea Hawthorn, Parsley C. marshallii Azalea, Florida Rhododendron Crabapple, Southern Malus angustifolia Hickories, Native Carya spp. Flame austrinum Creeper, Trumpet Campsis radicans Hickory, Black C. texana Anise, Star Illicium floridanum Parthenocissus Anise, Hickory, Bitternut C. cordiformes Creeper, Virginia quinquefolia Yellow/Florida Illicium parviflorum Hickory, Mockernut C. tomentosa Azalea, Florida Rhododendron Crossvine Bignonia capreolata Flame austrinum Hickory, Nutmeg C. myristiciformes Cucumber Tree Magnolia acuminata Rhododendron Hickory, PECAN C. illinoensis Azalea, Pink canescens Cypress, Bald Taxodium distichum Hickory, Pignut C. glabra Rhododendron Cypress, Pond Taxodium ascendens serrulatum, Hickory, Shagbark C. ovata Cyrilla, Swamp/Titi Cyrilla racemiflora viscosum, Hickory, Azalea, White oblongifolium Cyrilla, Little-leaf Cyrilla parvifolia Water/Bitter Pecan C. aquatica Baccharis/ Groundsel Bush Baccharis halimifolia Devil’s Walkingstick Aralia spinosa Hollies, Native Ilex spp. Baccharis, Salt- Osmanthus Holly, American I.
    [Show full text]
  • Oaks (Quercus Spp.): a Brief History
    Publication WSFNR-20-25A April 2020 Oaks (Quercus spp.): A Brief History Dr. Kim D. Coder, Professor of Tree Biology & Health Care / University Hill Fellow University of Georgia Warnell School of Forestry & Natural Resources Quercus (oak) is the largest tree genus in temperate and sub-tropical areas of the Northern Hemisphere with an extensive distribution. (Denk et.al. 2010) Oaks are the most dominant trees of North America both in species number and biomass. (Hipp et.al. 2018) The three North America oak groups (white, red / black, and golden-cup) represent roughly 60% (~255) of the ~435 species within the Quercus genus worldwide. (Hipp et.al. 2018; McVay et.al. 2017a) Oak group development over time helped determine current species, and can suggest relationships which foster hybridization. The red / black and white oaks developed during a warm phase in global climate at high latitudes in what today is the boreal forest zone. From this northern location, both oak groups spread together southward across the continent splitting into a large eastern United States pathway, and much smaller western and far western paths. Both species groups spread into the eastern United States, then southward, and continued into Mexico and Central America as far as Columbia. (Hipp et.al. 2018) Today, Mexico is considered the world center of oak diversity. (Hipp et.al. 2018) Figure 1 shows genus, sub-genus and sections of Quercus (oak). History of Oak Species Groups Oaks developed under much different climates and environments than today. By examining how oaks developed and diversified into small, closely related groups, the native set of Georgia oak species can be better appreciated and understood in how they are related, share gene sets, or hybridize.
    [Show full text]
  • Plant Succession on Burned Areas in Okefenokee Swamp Following the Fires of 1954 and 1955 EUGENE CYPERT Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge U.S
    Plant Succession on Burned Areas in Okefenokee Swamp Following the Fires of 1954 and 1955 EUGENE CYPERT Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge U.S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and 'Wildlife Waycross, GA 31501 INTRODUCTION IN 1954 and 1955, during an extreme drought, five major fires occurred in Okefenokee Swamp. These fires swept over approximately 318,000 acres of the swamp and 140,000 acres of the adjacent upland. In some areas in the swamp, the burning was severe enough to kill most of the timber and the understory vegetation and burn out pockets in the peat bed. Burns of this severity were usually small and spotty. Over most of the swamp, the burns were surface fires which generally killed most of the underbrush but rarely burned deep enough into the peat bed to kill the larger trees. In many places the swamp fires swept over lightly, burning surface duff and killing only the smaller underbrush. Some areas were missed entirely. On the upland adjacent to the swamp, the fires were very de­ structive, killing most of the pine timber on the 140,000 acres burned over. The destruction of pine forests on the upland and the severe 199 EUGENE CYPERT burns in the swamp caused considerable concern among conservation­ ists and neighboring land owners. It was believed desirable to learn something of the succession of vegetation on some of the more severely burned areas. Such knowl­ edge would add to an understanding of the ecology and history of the swamp and to an understanding of the relation that fires may have to swamp wildlife.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. National Vegetation Classification: Advancing The
    U.S. National Vegetation Classification: Advancing the Description and Management of the Nation’s Ecosystems Use of the NVC hierarchy to scale the GAP/LANDFIRE National Ecosystems Map Legend Don Long (U.S. Forest Service), Anne Davidson (GAP, BSU) Todd Earnhardt (GAP , NSCU) Alexa McKerrow (U.S. Geological Survey) . Background Methods Results A national inventory of the existing vegetation across the There are 551 natural vegetation classes represented in the 6 Classes 13 Subclasses 22 Formations U.S. has been central to the missions of both the GAP/LANDFIRE National Terrestrial Ecosystems Map for the a Landscape Fire and Resource Management Planning Tools conterminous U.S. The crosswalk allows for the Project (LANDFIRE) and the National Gap Analysis Program aggregation of the mapped classes into the hierarchical b (GAP). Over the past several years these two programs structure of the USNVC; specifically, the ecological systems a. Forest & Woodland a. Temperate & Boreal Forest & Woodland a. Temperate Flooded & Swamp Forest b. Desert & Semi-Desert b. Warm Desert & Semi-Desert Woodland, b. Warm Desert & Semi-Desert Scrub & have come together to collaborate on the next generation are crosswalked to the middle and upper levels of the Scrub & Grassland Grassland highly detailed existing vegetation maps for the U.S. This USNVC. Relationships between the two classification 51 Divisions 112 Macrogroups 240 Groups collaboration leverages the mapping and inventory to systems developed by NatureServe ecologists were used to meet needs for both fire and fuels management, as well link the mapped Ecological Systems to the Group level of as for wildlife habitat conservation planning. the USNVC.
    [Show full text]
  • USDA Forest Seroice Research Note S E- 177 July 1971
    USDA Forest Seroice Research Note S E- 177 July 1971 CHOPPING AND WEBBING CONTROL SAW-PALMETTO IN SOUTH FLORIDA1 Abstract.--Saw-palmetto is one of the more troublesome plants growing in south Florida, and its control is often desirable in programs of range and timber management. Both cross-chopping and webbing (root plowing) proved to be ef­ fective control measures, but webbing appeared to be less effective on a moist site. Many other shrubs were also effectively reduced by these treatments. Saw-palmetto (Serenoa repens (Bartr.) Small) is the major under­ story shrub over much of the pine flatwoods. It is the dominant shrub on some 8.5 million acres of grazed forest land and 9 million acres of com­ mercial, nongrazed forest land in Florida (4) and is commonly associated with other shrubs over most of the pine-;Iregrass type. These shrubs are important competitors with forage and trees for soil moisture, nutri­ ents, light, and space. In dense stands of shrubs, particularly palmetto, yield and availability of forage is decreased, and cattle handling is more difficult. Wildfire is especially damaging to trees where shrubs contrib­ ute a large amount of combustible material. Most shrubs also impede planting and harvesting of pines. For these reasons, most land managers seek practical methods of shrub control. Fire has been used in the South for many years to alleviate these problems (6). Although burning temporarily reduces the size of saw­ palmetto, the plants are not killed but readily begin sprouting. These re­ sponses to fire are also true of most other southern shrubs.
    [Show full text]
  • Suncoast Grapevine
    www.ficuswww.suncoastnps.org.usf.edu/orgs/suncoast The Suncoast Grapevine Newsletter of the Suncoast Native Plant Society, Inc. Volume 36 Number 2 February 2019 FEBRUARY CHAPTER MEETING --- At the Seminole Heights Library --- 4711 Central Ave. Tampa, Florida 33603-3905 Dispersion and Impacts of Texas Phoenix Palm decline on Sabal palmetto at the Golden Aster Preserve Presented by Chris Hanni Wednesday, February 20 at 7 PM Texas Phoenix Palm Decline (TPPD) is a new disease in Florida, first appearing between Tampa and Sarasota in 2006-2008. Hillsborough County has been an epicenter for the disease which has spread to 22 Florida counties and which affects several species of date palm as well as our state tree, the cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto). The disease is fatal and there is presently no cure. About the Speaker: Chris is a graduate student at the school of GeoSciences, University of South Florida. His goal is to increase awareness of the disease and how it’s impacting the Sabal palmetto (our state tree). Chris and his wife Rebekah are combat veterans (6 deployments). They have 2 children and have lived in Hills- borough County since 2007. He has an A.S. in Computer Science, a B.S. in Environmental Microbiology and a Masters in Geography (GIS and Spatial Analysis). He is planning a PhD in Geography and Environmental Science Policy to start this fall. In his spare time he writes music and works on his 1977 CJ5. Light refreshments will not be served at the library, a native plant donation auction follows the presentation. - submitted by Virginia Overstreet Note - The Suncoast Chapter’s Board of Directors has designated February’s regular monthly meeting to elect officers and the 2019 Board of Directors.
    [Show full text]
  • Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- ERICACEAE
    Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- ERICACEAE ERICACEAE (Heath Family) A family of about 107 genera and 3400 species, primarily shrubs, small trees, and subshrubs, nearly cosmopolitan. The Ericaceae is very important in our area, with a great diversity of genera and species, many of them rather narrowly endemic. Our area is one of the north temperate centers of diversity for the Ericaceae. Along with Quercus and Pinus, various members of this family are dominant in much of our landscape. References: Kron et al. (2002); Wood (1961); Judd & Kron (1993); Kron & Chase (1993); Luteyn et al. (1996)=L; Dorr & Barrie (1993); Cullings & Hileman (1997). Main Key, for use with flowering or fruiting material 1 Plant an herb, subshrub, or sprawling shrub, not clonal by underground rhizomes (except Gaultheria procumbens and Epigaea repens), rarely more than 3 dm tall; plants mycotrophic or hemi-mycotrophic (except Epigaea, Gaultheria, and Arctostaphylos). 2 Plants without chlorophyll (fully mycotrophic); stems fleshy; leaves represented by bract-like scales, white or variously colored, but not green; pollen grains single; [subfamily Monotropoideae; section Monotropeae]. 3 Petals united; fruit nodding, a berry; flower and fruit several per stem . Monotropsis 3 Petals separate; fruit erect, a capsule; flower and fruit 1-several per stem. 4 Flowers few to many, racemose; stem pubescent, at least in the inflorescence; plant yellow, orange, or red when fresh, aging or drying dark brown ...............................................Hypopitys 4 Flower solitary; stem glabrous; plant white (rarely pink) when fresh, aging or drying black . Monotropa 2 Plants with chlorophyll (hemi-mycotrophic or autotrophic); stems woody; leaves present and well-developed, green; pollen grains in tetrads (single in Orthilia).
    [Show full text]
  • The Natural Communities of South Carolina
    THE NATURAL COMMUNITIES OF SOUTH CAROLINA BY JOHN B. NELSON SOUTH CAROLINA WILDLIFE & MARINE RESOURCES DEPARTMENT FEBRUARY 1986 INTRODUCTION The maintenance of an accurate inventory of a region's natural resources must involve a system for classifying its natural communities. These communities themselves represent identifiable units which, like individual plant and animal species of concern, contribute to the overall natural diversity characterizing a given region. This classification has developed from a need to define more accurately the range of natural habitats within South Carolina. From the standpoint of the South Carolina Nongame and Heritage Trust Program, the conceptual range of natural diversity in the state does indeed depend on knowledge of individual community types. Additionally, it is recognized that the various plant and animal species of concern (which make up a significant remainder of our state's natural diversity) are often restricted to single natural communities or to a number of separate, related ones. In some cases, the occurrence of a given natural community allows us to predict, with some confidence, the presence of specialized or endemic resident species. It follows that a reasonable and convenient method of handling the diversity of species within South Carolina is through the concept of these species as residents of a range of natural communities. Ideally, a nationwide classification system could be developed and then used by all the states. Since adjacent states usually share a number of community types, and yet may each harbor some that are unique, any classification scheme on a national scale would be forced to recognize the variation in a given community from state to state (or region to region) and at the same time to maintain unique communities as distinctive.
    [Show full text]
  • Lyonia Preserve Plant Checklist
    Lyonia Preserve Plant Checklist Volusia County, Florida Aceraceae (Maple) Asteraceae (Aster) Red Maple Acer rubrum Bitterweed Helenium amarum Blackroot Pterocaulon virgatum Agavaceae (Yucca) Blazing Star Liatris sp. Adam's Needle Yucca filamentosa Blazing Star Liatris tenuifolia Nolina Nolina brittoniana Camphorweed Heterotheca subaxillaris Spanish Bayonet Yucca aloifolia Cudweed Gnaphalium falcatum Dog Fennel Eupatorium capillifolium Amaranthaceae (Amaranth) Dwarf Horseweed Conyza candensis Cottonweed Froelichia floridana False Dandelion Pyrrhopappus carolinianus Fireweed Erechtites hieracifolia Anacardiaceae (Cashew) Garberia Garberia heterophylla Winged Sumac Rhus copallina Goldenaster Pityopsis graminifolia Goldenrod Solidago chapmanii Annonaceae (Custard Apple) Goldenrod Solidago fistulosa Flag Paw paw Asimina obovata Goldenrod Solidago spp. Mohr's Throughwort Eupatorium mohrii Apiaceae (Celery) Ragweed Ambrosia artemisiifolia Dollarweed Hydrocotyle sp. Saltbush Baccharis halimifolia Spanish Needles Bidens alba Apocynaceae (Dogbane) Wild Lettuce Lactuca graminifolia Periwinkle Catharathus roseus Brassicaceae (Mustard) Aquifoliaceae (Holly) Poorman's Pepper Lepidium virginicum Gallberry Ilex glabra Sand Holly Ilex ambigua Bromeliaceae (Airplant) Scrub Holly Ilex opaca var. arenicola Ball Moss Tillandsia recurvata Spanish Moss Tillandsia usneoides Arecaceae (Palm) Saw Palmetto Serenoa repens Cactaceae (Cactus) Scrub Palmetto Sabal etonia Prickly Pear Opuntia humifusa Asclepiadaceae (Milkweed) Caesalpinceae Butterfly Weed Asclepias
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Summary Report
    Ecological Summary Report 56.8-acre Ameratrail Property Section 14, Township 26 South, Range 31 East Osceola County, Florida Prepared for: Snow Construction, Inc. 1136 New York Avenue St Cloud, FL 34769 October 2018 Table of Contents 1.0 Property Location 1 2.0 Survey Methodology 1 3.0 Soils 1 4.0 Vegetative Communities 2 5.0 Listed Wildlife Species 3 5.1 Bald Eagle 3 5.2 Gopher Tortoise 3 5.3 Red Cockaded Woodpecker 3 5.4 Florida Scrub-Jay 3 5.5 Eastern Indigo Snake 3 6.0 Ecological Impact Analysis 4 7.0 Conclusion 4 List of Figures: Figure 1 – Location Map Figure 2 – Aerial Photograph Figure 3 – USDA Soils Map Figure 4 – FLUCFCS Map This report presents the results of an ecological impact analysis for the Ameratrail project. The purpose of this analysis is to document existing site conditions, and the extent of impacts to jurisdictional wetlands and surface waters, as well as state and federally-listed species and their habitats. This information is intended to support Environmental Resource Permitting through the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). 1.0 PROPERTY LOCATION The property consists of approximately 56.8 acres and is located southeast of the intersection of Old Melbourne Highway and US Highway 192 within Section 14, Township 26 South, Range 31 East, in Osceola County. The property consists of Osceola County tax parcel 14-26-31-0000-0010-0000. A location map and an aerial photograph have been provided as Figures 1 and 2, respectively. 2.0 SURVEY METHODOLOGY Prior to visiting the site, Austin Environmental Consultants, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • ISB: Atlas of Florida Vascular Plants
    Longleaf Pine Preserve Plant List Acanthaceae Asteraceae Wild Petunia Ruellia caroliniensis White Aster Aster sp. Saltbush Baccharis halimifolia Adoxaceae Begger-ticks Bidens mitis Walter's Viburnum Viburnum obovatum Deer Tongue Carphephorus paniculatus Pineland Daisy Chaptalia tomentosa Alismataceae Goldenaster Chrysopsis gossypina Duck Potato Sagittaria latifolia Cow Thistle Cirsium horridulum Tickseed Coreopsis leavenworthii Altingiaceae Elephant's foot Elephantopus elatus Sweetgum Liquidambar styraciflua Oakleaf Fleabane Erigeron foliosus var. foliosus Fleabane Erigeron sp. Amaryllidaceae Prairie Fleabane Erigeron strigosus Simpson's rain lily Zephyranthes simpsonii Fleabane Erigeron vernus Dog Fennel Eupatorium capillifolium Anacardiaceae Dog Fennel Eupatorium compositifolium Winged Sumac Rhus copallinum Dog Fennel Eupatorium spp. Poison Ivy Toxicodendron radicans Slender Flattop Goldenrod Euthamia caroliniana Flat-topped goldenrod Euthamia minor Annonaceae Cudweed Gamochaeta antillana Flag Pawpaw Asimina obovata Sneezeweed Helenium pinnatifidum Dwarf Pawpaw Asimina pygmea Blazing Star Liatris sp. Pawpaw Asimina reticulata Roserush Lygodesmia aphylla Rugel's pawpaw Deeringothamnus rugelii Hempweed Mikania cordifolia White Topped Aster Oclemena reticulata Apiaceae Goldenaster Pityopsis graminifolia Button Rattlesnake Master Eryngium yuccifolium Rosy Camphorweed Pluchea rosea Dollarweed Hydrocotyle sp. Pluchea Pluchea spp. Mock Bishopweed Ptilimnium capillaceum Rabbit Tobacco Pseudognaphalium obtusifolium Blackroot Pterocaulon virgatum
    [Show full text]