DOCSLIB.ORG

Addendum to the Guide to the Natural Communities of the Delaware Estuary

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Addendum to the Guide to the Natural Communities of the Delaware Estuary ADDENDUM TO THE UIDE TO THE ATURAL OMMUNITIES G N C OF THE DELAWARE ESTUARY SEPTEMBER0 2009 Citation: Largay, E. and L. Sneddon. 2009. Addendum to the Guide to the Ecological Systems and Vegetation Communities of the Delaware Estuary. NatureServe. Arlington, Virginia. Partnership for the Delaware Estuary, Report #09-XX. 112 pp. PDE Report No. 09-XX Copyright © 2009 NatureServe COVER PHOTOS Top L: Overwash Dunes, photo from Delaware Natural Heritage Program Top R: Coastal Plain Muck Pondshore, photo by Kathleen Strakosch Walz, New Jersey Natural Heritage Program Bottom L: Dry Oak Hickory Forest, photo by Tony Davis, Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program Bottom R: Inland Dune and Ridge Forest/Woodland, Kathleen Strakosch Walz, New Jersey Natural Heritage Program ADDENDUM TO THE GUIDE TO THE NATURAL COMMUNITIES OF THE DELAWARE ESTUARY Ery Largay Lesley Sneddon September 2009 Acknowledgements: This work was made possible through funding from the Delaware Estuary Program (EPA 320 Funding). Kristin Snow and Mary Russo from NatureServe provided essential data management services to develop this report and report format. Robert Coxe and Bill McAvoy from the Delaware Natural Heritage Program, Kathleen Strakosch Walz from the New Jersey Natural Heritage Program, Tony Davis from the Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program, Linda Kelly and Karl Anderson, independent botanists, provided ecological expertise, energy and insight. Mark Anderson and Charles Ferree from The Nature Conservancy developed ecological systems maps to accompany this work. Danielle Kreeger, Laura Whalen, and Martha-Maxwell Doyle from the Partnership for the Delaware Estuary provided support and guidance throughout this project. We thank everyone who helped us with this effort. Established in 1996, the Partnership for the Delaware Estuary is a non-profit organization based in Wilmington, Delaware. The Partnership manages the Delaware Estuary Program (DELEP), one of 28 estuaries recognized by the U.S. Congress for its national significance under the Clean Water Act. DELEP is the only tri-state, multi-agency National Estuary Program in the country. In collaboration with a broad spectrum of governmental agencies, non-profit corporations, businesses, and citizens, the Partnership works to implement the Delaware Estuary’s Comprehensive Conservation Management Plan to restore and protect the natural and economic resources of the Delaware Estuary and its tributaries. Lead agency partners include: Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control; Delaware River Basin Commission; New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection; Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection; City of Philadelphia; National Park Service; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Regions II and III; and, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. NatureServe is a non-profit conservation organization that provides scientific information and tools needed to help guide effective conservation action. NatureServe and its network of Natural Heritage programs are the leading source for information about rare and endangered species and threatened ecosystems. NatureServe represents an international network of biological inventories—known as natural heritage programs or Conservation Data Centers—operating in all 50 U.S. states, Canada, Latin America and the Caribbean. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 10 CLASSIFICATION APPROACH ......................................................................................... 11 International Terrestrial Ecological Systems Classification .........................................................11 U.S. National Vegetation Classification System ..........................................................................11 DATA COLLECTION & MAINTENANCE ............................................................................. 12 NatureServe ................................................................................................................................12 Data Gaps...................................................................................................................................12 FORMAT OF THIS REPORT ............................................................................................. 13 Ecological Systems .....................................................................................................................13 Vegetation Communities .............................................................................................................14 Ecological System: Northern Atlantic Coastal Plain Hardwood Forest ................................ 18 Inland Dune Ridge Forest ...........................................................................................................19 Mixed Oak-Pine Forest ...............................................................................................................20 Shortleaf Pine / (Southern Red Oak, Water Oak) / Hillside Blueberry Forest .............................21 Ecological System: Northern Atlantic Coastal Plain Maritime Forest ................................... 24 Mid-Atlantic Coastal Maritime Forest ..........................................................................................25 Loblolly Pine / Wax-myrtle / Saltmeadow Cordgrass Tidal Woodland .........................................27 Coastal Loblolly Pine Wetland Forest .........................................................................................28 North Atlantic Coast Maritime Post Oak Forest ..........................................................................29 Maritime Holly Forest ..................................................................................................................31 Maritime Red-cedar Woodland ...................................................................................................32 Successional Maritime Forest .....................................................................................................34 Chesapeake Bay Tall Maritime Shrubland ..................................................................................35 Northern Tall Maritime Shrubland ...............................................................................................37 Ecological System: Northern Atlantic Coastal Plain Basin Swamp & Wet Hardwood Forest .............................................................................................................................................. 40 Red Maple - Sweetgum Swamp .................................................................................................41 Central Coastal Plain Basin Swamp ...........................................................................................42 Pond Pine Woodland ..................................................................................................................44 Swamp Cottonwood Coastal Plain Pond ....................................................................................45 Ecological System: Northern Atlantic Coastal Plain Basin Peat Swamp ............................. 48 Twig-rush Peat Mat .....................................................................................................................49 Ecological System: Northern Atlantic Coastal Plain Pitch Pine Barrens ............................. 52 4 Pine Barrens Pine – Oak Woodland ...........................................................................................53 Ecological System: Northern Atlantic Coastal Plain Pitch Pine Lowland ............................. 56 Pine Barrens Lowland Forest ......................................................................................................57 Ecolgical System: Northern Atlantic Coastal Plain Stream and River .................................. 58 Chesapeake/ Piedmont Red Maple / Lizard's-tail Swamp ..........................................................59 Coastal Plain Atlantic White-cedar - Red Maple Swamp ............................................................60 Atlantic White-cedar / Seaside Alder Swamp ..............................................................................61 Southern Red Maple - Blackgum Swamp Forest ........................................................................62 Red Maple - Sweetgum Swamp .................................................................................................64 Swamp-loosestrife Shrub Swamp ...............................................................................................66 Ecological System: Northern Atlantic Coastal Plain Pond .................................................. 68 Smartweed - Cutgrass Beaver Pond ..........................................................................................70 Swamp Cottonwood Coastal Plain Pond ....................................................................................71 Chainfern Small Depression Pond ..............................................................................................72 Ecological System: Northern Atlantic Coastal Plain Fresh and Oligohaline Tidal Marsh .... 74 Brackish Tidal Creek Shrubland .................................................................................................75 Oligohaline Mixed Forbs Tidal Marsh .........................................................................................76 Ecological System: Northern Atlantic
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Plant List Bristow Prairie & High Divide Trail
    *Non-native Bristow Prairie & High Divide Trail Plant List as of 7/12/2016 compiled by Tanya Harvey T24S.R3E.S33;T25S.R3E.S4 westerncascades.com FERNS & ALLIES Pseudotsuga menziesii Ribes lacustre Athyriaceae Tsuga heterophylla Ribes sanguineum Athyrium filix-femina Tsuga mertensiana Ribes viscosissimum Cystopteridaceae Taxaceae Rhamnaceae Cystopteris fragilis Taxus brevifolia Ceanothus velutinus Dennstaedtiaceae TREES & SHRUBS: DICOTS Rosaceae Pteridium aquilinum Adoxaceae Amelanchier alnifolia Dryopteridaceae Sambucus nigra ssp. caerulea Holodiscus discolor Polystichum imbricans (Sambucus mexicana, S. cerulea) Prunus emarginata (Polystichum munitum var. imbricans) Sambucus racemosa Rosa gymnocarpa Polystichum lonchitis Berberidaceae Rubus lasiococcus Polystichum munitum Berberis aquifolium (Mahonia aquifolium) Rubus leucodermis Equisetaceae Berberis nervosa Rubus nivalis Equisetum arvense (Mahonia nervosa) Rubus parviflorus Ophioglossaceae Betulaceae Botrychium simplex Rubus ursinus Alnus viridis ssp. sinuata Sceptridium multifidum (Alnus sinuata) Sorbus scopulina (Botrychium multifidum) Caprifoliaceae Spiraea douglasii Polypodiaceae Lonicera ciliosa Salicaceae Polypodium hesperium Lonicera conjugialis Populus tremuloides Pteridaceae Symphoricarpos albus Salix geyeriana Aspidotis densa Symphoricarpos mollis Salix scouleriana Cheilanthes gracillima (Symphoricarpos hesperius) Salix sitchensis Cryptogramma acrostichoides Celastraceae Salix sp. (Cryptogramma crispa) Paxistima myrsinites Sapindaceae Selaginellaceae (Pachystima myrsinites)
    [Show full text]
  • Tree Mycorrhizal Type Predicts Within‐Site Variability in the Storage And
    Received: 6 December 2017 | Accepted: 8 February 2018 DOI: 10.1111/gcb.14132 PRIMARY RESEARCH ARTICLE Tree mycorrhizal type predicts within-site variability in the storage and distribution of soil organic matter Matthew E. Craig1 | Benjamin L. Turner2 | Chao Liang3 | Keith Clay1 | Daniel J. Johnson4 | Richard P. Phillips1 1Department of Biology, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA Abstract 2Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Forest soils store large amounts of carbon (C) and nitrogen (N), yet how predicted Balboa, Ancon, Panama shifts in forest composition will impact long-term C and N persistence remains 3Key Laboratory of Forest Ecology and Management, Institute of Applied Ecology, poorly understood. A recent hypothesis predicts that soils under trees associated Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenyang, with arbuscular mycorrhizas (AM) store less C than soils dominated by trees associ- China ated with ectomycorrhizas (ECM), due to slower decomposition in ECM-dominated 4Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM, USA forests. However, an incipient hypothesis predicts that systems with rapid decom- position—e.g. most AM-dominated forests—enhance soil organic matter (SOM) sta- Correspondence Matthew E. Craig, Department of Biology, bilization by accelerating the production of microbial residues. To address these Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA. contrasting predictions, we quantified soil C and N to 1 m depth across gradients of Email: [email protected] ECM-dominance in three temperate forests. By focusing on sites where AM- and Funding information ECM-plants co-occur, our analysis controls for climatic factors that covary with myc- Biological and Environmental Research, Grant/Award Number: DE-SC0016188; orrhizal dominance across broad scales.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016
    Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016 Revised February 24, 2017 Compiled by Laura Gadd Robinson, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org C ur Alleghany rit Ashe Northampton Gates C uc Surry am k Stokes P d Rockingham Caswell Person Vance Warren a e P s n Hertford e qu Chowan r Granville q ot ui a Mountains Watauga Halifax m nk an Wilkes Yadkin s Mitchell Avery Forsyth Orange Guilford Franklin Bertie Alamance Durham Nash Yancey Alexander Madison Caldwell Davie Edgecombe Washington Tyrrell Iredell Martin Dare Burke Davidson Wake McDowell Randolph Chatham Wilson Buncombe Catawba Rowan Beaufort Haywood Pitt Swain Hyde Lee Lincoln Greene Rutherford Johnston Graham Henderson Jackson Cabarrus Montgomery Harnett Cleveland Wayne Polk Gaston Stanly Cherokee Macon Transylvania Lenoir Mecklenburg Moore Clay Pamlico Hoke Union d Cumberland Jones Anson on Sampson hm Duplin ic Craven Piedmont R nd tla Onslow Carteret co S Robeson Bladen Pender Sandhills Columbus New Hanover Tidewater Coastal Plain Brunswick THE COUNTIES AND PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCES OF NORTH CAROLINA Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016 Compiled by Laura Gadd Robinson, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org This list is dynamic and is revised frequently as new data become available. New species are added to the list, and others are dropped from the list as appropriate.
    [Show full text]
  • Erigenia : Journal of the Southern Illinois Native Plant Society
    ERIGENIA THE LIBRARY OF THE DEC IS ba* Number 13 UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS June 1994 ^:^;-:A-i.,-CS..;.iF/uGN SURVEY Conference Proceedings 26-27 September 1992 Journal of the Eastern Illinois University Illinois Native Plant Society Charleston Erigenia Number 13, June 1994 Editor: Elizabeth L. Shimp, U.S.D.A. Forest Service, Shawnee National Forest, 901 S. Commercial St., Harrisburg, IL 62946 Copy Editor: Floyd A. Swink, The Morton Arboretum, Lisle, IL 60532 Publications Committee: John E. Ebinger, Botany Department, Eastern Illinois University, Charleston, IL 61920 Ken Konsis, Forest Glen Preserve, R.R. 1 Box 495 A, Westville, IL 61883 Kenneth R. Robertson, Illinois Natural History Survey, 607 E. Peabody Dr., Champaign, IL 61820 Lawrence R. Stritch, U.S.D.A. Forest Service, Shawnee National Forest, 901 S. Commercial Su, Harrisburg, IL 62946 Cover Design: Christopher J. Whelan, The Morton Arboretum, Lisle, IL 60532 Cover Illustration: Jean Eglinton, 2202 Hazel Dell Rd., Springfield, IL 62703 Erigenia Artist: Nancy Hart-Stieber, The Morton Arboretum, Lisle, IL 60532 Executive Committee of the Society - April 1992 to May 1993 President: Kenneth R. Robertson, Illinois Natural History Survey, 607 E. Peabody Dr., Champaign, IL 61820 President-Elect: J. William Hammel, Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, Springfield, IL 62701 Past President: Jon J. Duerr, Kane County Forest Preserve District, 719 Batavia Ave., Geneva, IL 60134 Treasurer: Mary Susan Moulder, 918 W. Woodlawn, Danville, IL 61832 Recording Secretary: Russell R. Kirt, College of DuPage, Glen EUyn, IL 60137 Corresponding Secretary: John E. Schwegman, Illinois Department of Conservation, Springfield, IL 62701 Membership: Lorna J. Konsis, Forest Glen Preserve, R.R.
    [Show full text]
  • Barcoding the Asteraceae of Tennessee, Tribe Coreopsideae
    Schilling, E.E., N. Mattson, and A. Floden. 2014. Barcoding the Asteraceae of Tennessee, tribe Coreopsideae. Phytoneuron 2014-101: 1–6. Published 20 October 2014. ISSN 2153 733X BARCODING THE ASTERACEAE OF TENNESSEE, TRIBE COREOPSIDEAE EDWARD E. SCHILLING, NICHOLAS MATTSON, AARON FLODEN Herbarium TENN Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology University of Tennessee Knoxville, Tennessee 37996 [email protected]; [email protected] ABSTRACT Results from barcoding studies of tribe Coreopsideae for the Tennessee flora using the nuclear ribosomal ITS marker are presented and include the first complete reports for 2 of the 20 species of the tribe that occur in the state, as well as updated reports for several others. Sequence data from the ITS region separate most of the species of Bidens in Tennessee from one another, but species of Coreopsis, especially those of sect. Coreopsis, have ITS sequences that are identical (or nearly so) to at least one congener. Comparisons of sequence data to GenBank records are complicated by apparent inaccuracies of older sequences as well as potentially misidentified samples. Broad survey of C. lanceolata from across its range showed little variability, but the ITS sequence of a morphologically distinct sample from a Florida limestone glade area was distinct in lacking a length polymorphism that was present in other samples. Tribe Coreopsideae is part of the Heliantheae alliance and earlier was often included in an expanded Heliantheae (Anderberg et al. 2007) in which it was usually treated as a subtribe (Crawford et al. 2009). The tribe shows a small burst of diversity in the southeastern USA involving Bidens and Coreopsis sect.
    [Show full text]
  • Native Woody Plants of Montgomery County, Maryland
    Native Woody Plants of Montgomery County, Maryland ~ John Mills Parrish, 2002 Plant List State Where Latin Name Common Name Rank/Status Occurrence Found GYMNOSPERMAE - GYMNOSPERMS Cupressaceae - Cypress Family Juniperus Red Cedar C virginiana Pinaceae - Pine Family Pinus strobus White Pine VR Patuxent St. Park; Northwest Br. Park Pinus rigida Pitch Pine UC Scattered throughout county Pinus echinata Yellow/Shortleaf Pine UC Scattered throughout county Pinus pungens Table-mountain Pine VR NW Branch Pk; Blockhouse Pt. Park Pinus Virginia Pine C virginiana Tsuga Hemlock VR Patuxent St. canadensis Pk; Seneca Ck. St. Park ANGIOSPERMAE - MONOCOTS Smilacaceae - Catbrier Family Smilax glauca Glaucous Greenbrier C Smilax hispida Bristly Greenbrier UC/R Potomac (syn. S. River & Rock tamnoides) Ck. floodplain Smilax Common Greenbrier C rotundifolia ANGIOSPERMAE - DICOTS Salicaceae - Willow Family Salix nigra Black Willow C Salix Carolina Willow S3 R Potomac caroliniana River floodplain Salix interior Sandbar Willow S1/E VR/X? Plummer's & (syn. S. exigua) High Is. (1902) (S.I.) Salix humilis Prairie Willow R Travilah Serpentine Barrens Salix sericea Silky Willow UC Little Bennett Pk.; NW Br. Pk. (Layhill) Populus Big-tooth Aspen UC Scattered grandidentata across county - (uplands) Populus Cottonwood FC deltoides Myricaceae - Bayberry Family Myrica cerifera Southern Bayberry VR Little Paint Branch n. of Fairland Park Comptonia Sweet Fern VR/X? Lewisdale, peregrina (pers. com. C. Bergmann) Juglandaceae - Walnut Family Juglans cinerea Butternut S2S3 R
    [Show full text]
  • Buzz-Pollination and Patterns in Sexual Traits in North European Pyrolaceae Author(S): Jette T
    Buzz-Pollination and Patterns in Sexual Traits in North European Pyrolaceae Author(s): Jette T. Knudsen and Jens Mogens Olesen Reviewed work(s): Source: American Journal of Botany, Vol. 80, No. 8 (Aug., 1993), pp. 900-913 Published by: Botanical Society of America Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2445510 . Accessed: 08/08/2012 10:49 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Botanical Society of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to American Journal of Botany. http://www.jstor.org American Journalof Botany 80(8): 900-913. 1993. BUZZ-POLLINATION AND PATTERNS IN SEXUAL TRAITS IN NORTH EUROPEAN PYROLACEAE1 JETTE T. KNUDSEN2 AND JENS MOGENS OLESEN Departmentof ChemicalEcology, University of G6teborg, Reutersgatan2C, S-413 20 G6teborg,Sweden; and Departmentof Ecology and Genetics,University of Aarhus, Ny Munkegade, Building550, DK-8000 Aarhus,Denmark Flowerbiology and pollinationof Moneses uniflora, Orthilia secunda, Pyrola minor, P. rotundifolia,P. chlorantha, and Chimaphilaumbellata are describedand discussedin relationto patternsin sexualtraits and possibleevolution of buzz- pollinationwithin the group. The largenumber of pollengrains are packedinto units of monadsin Orthilia,tetrads in Monesesand Pyrola,or polyadsin Chimaphila.Pollen is thesole rewardto visitinginsects except in thenectar-producing 0.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Appalachian Forest Planning Team Considered Information from the Nature Conservancy’S Population Viability Assessment Workshop (Morris Et Al
    Central Appalachian Forest Ecoregional Plan February 2001 The Nature Conservancy EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Central Appalachian Forest Ecoregional Plan The Nature Conservancy The Nature Conservancy’s Central Appalachian Forest ecoregion encompasses the Blue Ridge Mountains, the Great Valley, the Ridge and Valley, and the Allegheny Mountains of Virginia, West Virginia, Maryland, and Pennsylvania. Valleys are mostly settled with farms and, more recently, urban and suburban development, but the vast majority of the hills and mountains of this ecoregion are forested. Lying so close to the major East Coast metropolitan areas of Philadelphia, Baltimore, and Washington, DC, the region represents a tremendous natural resource for both the local people and these urbanites. The high mountains, the lack of past glacial coverage, and the environmental diversity of this ecoregion have combined to make this area one of the most ecologically diverse regions of the eastern United States. This ecoregional plan has identified plants, animals, natural communities, and ecological systems that represent the most urgent conservation priorities for The Nature Conservancy and its partners. Using an exceptional Natural Heritage database and sound science, this plan recommends protection of 467 sites. Within this set of sites, The Nature Conservancy has selected 122 sites for immediate conservation action. The approximate area covered by the portfolio is 3,011,000 acres. Of this area, 2,530,000 acres occurs within large, roadless forest areas. Therefore, smaller sites cover an additional 481,000 acres. The Federal government manages approximately 46% of roadless forest area acreage and various state governments an additional 18%. The majority of the remaining area of roadless forest areas is privately owned.
    [Show full text]
  • State of New York City's Plants 2018
    STATE OF NEW YORK CITY’S PLANTS 2018 Daniel Atha & Brian Boom © 2018 The New York Botanical Garden All rights reserved ISBN 978-0-89327-955-4 Center for Conservation Strategy The New York Botanical Garden 2900 Southern Boulevard Bronx, NY 10458 All photos NYBG staff Citation: Atha, D. and B. Boom. 2018. State of New York City’s Plants 2018. Center for Conservation Strategy. The New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, NY. 132 pp. STATE OF NEW YORK CITY’S PLANTS 2018 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6 INTRODUCTION 10 DOCUMENTING THE CITY’S PLANTS 10 The Flora of New York City 11 Rare Species 14 Focus on Specific Area 16 Botanical Spectacle: Summer Snow 18 CITIZEN SCIENCE 20 THREATS TO THE CITY’S PLANTS 24 NEW YORK STATE PROHIBITED AND REGULATED INVASIVE SPECIES FOUND IN NEW YORK CITY 26 LOOKING AHEAD 27 CONTRIBUTORS AND ACKNOWLEGMENTS 30 LITERATURE CITED 31 APPENDIX Checklist of the Spontaneous Vascular Plants of New York City 32 Ferns and Fern Allies 35 Gymnosperms 36 Nymphaeales and Magnoliids 37 Monocots 67 Dicots 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report, State of New York City’s Plants 2018, is the first rankings of rare, threatened, endangered, and extinct species of what is envisioned by the Center for Conservation Strategy known from New York City, and based on this compilation of The New York Botanical Garden as annual updates thirteen percent of the City’s flora is imperiled or extinct in New summarizing the status of the spontaneous plant species of the York City. five boroughs of New York City. This year’s report deals with the City’s vascular plants (ferns and fern allies, gymnosperms, We have begun the process of assessing conservation status and flowering plants), but in the future it is planned to phase in at the local level for all species.
    [Show full text]
  • The 1700 Native Plants of Bucks County, PA
    The 1700 Native Plants of Bucks County, PA Bucks County, PA is blessed with an enormous range of physiographic regions, soil types, and hydrological conditions. Habitats range from the diabase areas of the Upper Bucks to the coastal plains of Lower Bucks, high palisades of the Delaware River to bog remnants, pristine freshwater ponds to tidal areas. These varied conditions host a dizzying array of species, sub‐species, and naturally‐occurring varieties. Common species are regularly available from ArcheWild; many can be grown under contract. Call ArcheWild at 855‐752‐6862 or e‐mail us for more information at: [email protected] Symbol Scientific Name Common Name ACGR2 Acalypha gracilens slender threeseed mercury ACRH Acalypha rhomboidea common threeseed mercury ACVI Acalypha virginica Virginia threeseed mercury ACNE2 Acer negundo boxelder ACNEN Acer negundo var. negundo boxelder ACPE Acer pensylvanicum striped maple ACRU Acer rubrum red maple ACRUR Acer rubrum var. rubrum red maple ACRUT Acer rubrum var. trilobum red maple ACSA2 Acer saccharinum silver maple ACSA3 Acer saccharum sugar maple ACSAS Acer saccharum var. saccharum sugar maple ACSP2 Acer spicatum mountain maple ACMI2 Achillea millefolium common yarrow ACPA Actaea pachypoda white baneberry ACRA7 Actaea racemosa black baneberry ACRAR Actaea racemosa var. racemosa black bugbane ADPE Adiantum pedatum northern maidenhair ADFU Adlumia fungosa allegheny vine AEFL Aesculus flava yellow buckeye AGAU3 Agalinis auriculata earleaf false foxglove AGPU5 Agalinis purpurea purple false foxglove
    [Show full text]
  • Plant Breading
    SNA Research Conference Vol. 52 2007 Plant Breeding and Evaluation Tom Ranney Section Editor and Moderator Plant Breeding and Evaluation Section 326 SNA Research Conference Vol. 52 2007 New Callicarpa Species with Breeding Potential Ryan N. Contreras and John M. Ruter University of Georgia, Dept. of Horticulture, Tifton, GA 31793 [email protected] Index Words: beautyberry, species evaluation, ornamental plant breeding Significance to Industry: There is a great deal of available Callicarpa L. germplasm that has yet to be utilized by the nursery industry in the U.S. Taxa currently being evaluated are likely to have potential as breeding material or direct commercial marketability. With new breeding material and selections for introduction the number of beautyberry cultivars for use in southeastern gardens has the potential to expand greatly. Nature of Work: Callicarpa L. is a genus of ~150 species of shrubs and trees distributed throughout the world including warm-temperate and tropical America, SE Asia, Malaysia, Pacific Islands, and Australia (5) with the greatest concentration of species found in SE Asia, specifically the Philippine Islands (1). Of the New World species the highest concentration occurs in Cuba, with ~20 native species (1). There are currently four species commonly found in cultivation in the U.S.: C. americana L., C. bodinieri Lév., C. dichotoma (Lour.)K.Koch, and C. japonica Thunb. with a limited number of varieties or cultivars of each to choose from (3). Beautyberries, desired primarily for their handsome berries produced in fall, have been selected for white-fruiting varieties, finer textured varieties, increased berry production, and variegated foliage.
    [Show full text]
  • Pages 121-166
    Cost Analysis Figure 21. Estimated Unit Costs for Installation and Maintenance Procedures (2004) Costs are based on average conditions calculated from research plot applications. Costs can vary considerably depending on specific site conditions. These examples are intended for comparison purposes and should not be used as bid prices. Note: Estimated costs do not include bark mulch applied as a continuous bed. If that is the desired treatment, an additional mulch materials and application cost would apply. Estimated costs do not include plant or installation warranties. Enhancing Delaware Highways Cost Analysis 122 Figure 21. Estimated Costs for Installation and Maintenance, for comparison (2004) Drilling holes prior to planting quart containers. Note: Estimated costs do not include bark mulch applied as a continuous bed. If that is the desired treatment, an additional mulch materials and application cost would apply. Estimated costs do not include plant or installation warranties. Enhancing Delaware Highways Cost Analysis 124 Appendix A: Checklists–Inventory of Site Conditions 2. Roadway Limitations Checklist Check the roadside zone(s) included in the location to be landscaped: J Back slope or cut slope J Swale or ditch zone 1. Climate and Growth Conditions Checklist J Approach or shoulder zone J Edge or border zone J Front or fill slope Check the appropriate clear zone requirement: Check the appropriate cold hardiness zone: J Standard 30 feet J Other ( feet) J Zone 6 or J Zone 7 Presence of guard rail and/or barrier curb: Guard rail
    [Show full text]